Stainless Steel As A Structural Material: State Of Review

ABSTRACT
Stainless steels have not traditionally been widely used as structural materials in
building and civil engineering. Where the steels have been used for this purpose
there has been some other imperative driving the design, usually corrosion
resistance or architectural requirements rather than the inherent structural
properties of the steel. The primary reason for this low use in structural
applications is usually the perceived and actual cost of stainless steel as a material.
Developments over the last 10 years, both in available materials and attitudes to
durability, are now offering a new opportunity for stainless steels to be considered
as primary structural materials. This paper introduces stainless steel alloys and
briefly discusses the important properties and commercial aspects of these alloys
relevant to structural designers. The paper also considers recent developments,
particularly with respect to available alloys and considers obstacles to the wider
use of stainless steels in structural engineering that are related to both supply
chain costs and efficiency of design. Keywords Austenitic, Corrosion, Plasticity,
Stress-strain, Toughness.

I.

INTRODUCTION
Stainless steel sections have
been
increasingly
used
in
architectural
and
structural
applications because of their superior
corrosion
resistance,
ease
of
maintenance
and
pleasing
appearance.
The
mechanical
properties of stainless steel are quite
different from those of carbon steel.
For carbon and low-alloy steels, the
proportional limit is assumed to be at
least 70 % of the yield point, but for
stainless steel the proportional limit
ranges from approximately 36 % - 60
% of the yield strength [1]. Therefore
the lower proportional limits would
affect the buckling behaviour of
stainless steel structural members.
Stainless steel structural members are
more expensive than carbon steel.
Therefore, more economic design and
the use of high strength stainless steel
could offset some of the costs.

Stainless steel can be a

confusing
material
to
those
unfamiliar with the alloys as the term
stainless steel refers to a large family
of material types and alloys. The
commonest grades of SSs utilized for
structural
applications
include
austenitic (ASS), ferritic (FSS), and
austeniticferritic (AFSS) or duplex.
This classification is based on the
amount of chromium (Cr) present in
the alloy considered. Several
applications already exist worldwide
for structural and non-structural
components made of SSs, All these
steels are alloys of iron, chromium,
nickel and to varying degrees
molybdenum. The characteristic
corrosion resistance of stainless steel
is dependent on the chromium
content and is enhanced by additions
of molybdenum and nitrogen. Nickel
is added, primarily, to ensure the
mechanical properties and the correct
microstructure of the steel. Other
alloying elements may be added to
improve particular aspects of the

stainless steel such as high

temperature properties, enhanced
strength or to facilitate particular
processing routes [4].
Several applications already
exist worldwide for structural and nonstructural components made of SSs, All
these steels are alloys of iron,
chromium, nickel and to varying
degrees
molybdenum.
The
characteristic corrosion resistance of
stainless steel is dependent on the
chromium content and is enhanced by
additions of molybdenum and nitrogen.
Nickel is added, primarily, to ensure
the mechanical properties and the
correct microstructure of the steel.
Other alloying elements may be added
to improve particular aspects of the
stainless steel such as high temperature
properties, enhanced strength or to
facilitate particular processing routes
[4].
Austenitic stainless steels are
the steels most architects, engineers
and lay people think of stainless steels.
The term austenitic refers to the
microstructure of the steel. Designation
and compositions are given in TABLE
1. Recent developments in alloy
technology relevant, to structural
engineering, have seen the introduction
of newer low alloy duplex steels, often
referred as duplex steels. Designation
and compositions of the same are given
in TABLE 2.

Fig.1 Structural (left) and Non-structural (right) Applicati

Buildings

Table 1 Major Alloy Element Compositions of

Steel designation
Alloy composition
ASTM
EN10088
Chromium
N
International
1.4301
304
17
1.4404
316 L
16.5
1.4435
316 L
17
(Source: Graham Gedge et. a

Table 2 Major Alloy Element Compositions

Steel designation
Alloy composition (M
Chromium
Nickel
(EN10088)
1.4462
21
4.5
1.4410
24
6
1.4362
22
3.5
1.4162 (LDX2101)
21.5
1.5
(Source: Graham Gedge et. a
These
steels are
characterized by comparable
strength to established duplex grades
but lesser resistance to localized
corrosion although comparable to
established austenitic steels [4].
1.1 Mechanical Properties of
Stainless Steels
The stress-strain behaviour of
duplex and austenitic steels in a
tensile test differs from that of carbon
steels. Stainless steels are also
characterized by:
A high degree of plasticity
between the proof stress and the
ultimate tensile stress.
Very good low temperature
toughness.
A degree of anisotropy
Given the relatively recent
emergence of stainless steel as a
structural material, efforts have been
made to maintain consistency with

Carbon
steel
design
guidance.
However, unlike carbon steel, stainless
steel exhibits a rounded non-linear
stressstrain relationship with no strictly
defined yield point (Fig. 2). Hence, no
sharp behavioural transition occurs at
any specified stress [5]. This
complexity is overcome by defining
the yield point as the stress level
corresponding to 0.2 % permanent
strain 0.2, and assuming bilinear stressstrain behavior for stainless steel as for
carbon
steel.
The
substantial
differences in the structural response
between the two materials are
neglected in favour of simplicity,
generally resulting in conservative
slenderness limits for stainless steel
cross-sections. Stainless steel exhibits a
rounded stress-strain relationship with
no sharply defined yield point as
illustrated in Fig. 2. Traditionally its
stressstrain relationship has been
described by RambergOsgood model.
Ramberg and Osgood proposed the
expression given in (1) for the
description of material stress-strain
behavior, where Eo is Youngs modulus
and K and n are constants.
(1)
This basic expression was
later modified by Hill to give (2)
where Rp is a proof stress and c is the
corresponding plastic strain.
(2)
In both expressions, the total
strain is expressed as the summation
of elastic and plastic strains which are
treated separately. The power
function is applied only to the plastic
strain.
The
Ramberg-Osgood
expression is a popular material
model for non-linear materials since
its
constants
have
physical
significance and it also provides a

smooth curve for all values of strain

with no discontinuities [8].

Fig. 2 Indicative Stainless Steel

and Carbon Steel
Stress-Strain Behavior
(Source: Mahmud Ashraf et. al.(2006))

The proof stress was taken as

the value corresponding to the 0.2%

1.3 Corrosion Resistance of

Stainless Steels

to the alloy content for a given environment

expression as given by (3).

Fig
. Comparison
3
between the Measured
Stress
Fig. Stress
4
Strain
Curve using EN
-1-21993
Strain Curve and the Ramberg
-Osgood
Material
guidelines for an Austenitic Grade 1.430

plastic strain giving the most familiar

form of the Ramberg-Osgood

(3)
This equation has been found to give
excellent predictions of stainless steel
material stressstrain behaviour up to
0.2 % proof stress 0.02 but greatly
over-predicts the stress beyond that
level. Fig. 3 shows a typical
comparison between a measured
stainless steel stress-strain curve and
the RambergOsgood equation (3).
1.2 Behaviour at Elevated
Temperature
At both room temperature and
elevated temperature, the material
characteristics of stainless steel differ
from those of carbon steel due to the
high alloy content. At room
temperature, stainless steel displays a
more rounded stress-strain response

than carbon steel and no sharply

defined yield point, together with a

higher ratio of ultimate to yield stress
and greater ductility (Fig. 4). At
elevated temperatures, stainless steel
generally exhibits better retention of
strength and stiffness in comparison to
carbon steel [6].

There are two broad categories

of corrosion that need to be considered:
General or uniform corrosion which
refers to a general corrosion and loss of
section over the entire surface of the
metal. All austenitic and duplex
stainless steel are resistant to this type
of corrosion in atmospheric conditions
and water (sea or fresh) immersion.
Model for an Austenitic Grade 1.4301
at Ele
(Source: L. Gardner et. a
Localized corrosion which refers to
surface straining, pitting, crevice
corrosion and stress corrosion cracking
(SCC). Stainless steel has varying
resistance to these forms of corrosion
and in broad terms, the resistance can
be related Designers should also be
aware that factors other than simply the
alloy content have an effect on
corrosion performance [4]. These
include:
The quality of surface finish
The presence of welds and heat tint
around welds
Contamination of the surface with
debris from other materials, most
notably carbon steel swarf.

II.

STAINLESS STEEL COSTS

The mill price of stainless
steels is comprised of two parts:
The base production cost that is set by
the steel maker
The Alloy Adjustment Factor (AAF)
that relates to the current price of the
alloy elements. The AAF is not directly
controlled by the steelmaker. The
actual cost of stainless steel fabrication
is clearly not related solely to the ex
mill price of base material, the final
cost will be dependent on other factors
and parts of the supply chain [4]. These
include:
The procurement route mill, mill
service centre, stockiest or trader.
The supply condition base plate, cut
and prepared plate, specified surface
finish quality etc.
The cost of fabrication fabrication
costs are likely to be somewhat higher
than carbon steel due to higher
consumable costs and lower production
rates.
The requirement for a finisharchitectural finishes add significant
cost.
The workmanship standard specified
for the work.
III.

OUTLINE OF RESEARCH

ACTIVITIES
In order to accumulate the
basic data for applying stainless steel
to buildings as a structural material,
research papers from various reputed
journals were studied.
L. Di Sarno et. al. [5] assess the
feasibility of the application of SSs
for seismic retrofitting of framed
structures, either braced (CBFs) or
moment resisting (MRFs) frames.
Number of experimental tests carried
out primarily in Europe [6,7] and

Japan [5] on austenitic (304 and 316)

and austeniticferritic grades of SSs
have demonstrated that:
Experimental tests on SS beams,
columns and beam to- column
connections have shown large plastic
deformation capacity and energy
redistribution at section and member
levels.
The ultimate elongation (u) and the
ultimate-toproof tensile strength ratios
(fu/ fy) are on average higher than for
Carbon Steel. For austenitic plates with
thicknesses less than 3 mm the values
of u range between 35% and 40%
(S220), while a value of 4555% was
found for greater thicknesses;
SS generally exhibits rather greater
increases in strengths at fast rates of
loading [1,3]. The initial stress state of
the material has an effect on the strain
rate.
Austenitic SSs possess greater
toughness than mild steels. The former
are less susceptible to brittle fracture
than the later for service temperatures
down to 40 C.
The above properties render SS
an attractive metal for applications in
plastic and seismic design, particularly
for seismic retrofitting of steel,
concrete and composite structures. The
suitability of the application of SSs for
seismic retrofitting is analyzed herein
with regard to multi-storey framed
structures, either MRFs or CBFs.
Eunsoo Choi et. al. [3] have studied
the bond behavior between steel
reinforcing bars and concrete confined
via steel wrapping Jackets. Lateral
bending tests are conducted for the
reinforced concrete columns with
continuous longitudinal reinforcement
or lap-spliced longitudinal bars
confined by the steel wrapping jackets.
In this study, the specimens of
concrete cylinders prepared were

expected to induce splitting bond

failure in an unconfined state; concrete
cylinders with dimensions of 100 mm x
200 mm were used. Stainless steel
jackets with the dimensions of 324 mm
x 200 mm were prepared in order to
confine the concrete cylinders; the
width was 10 mm larger than the
perimeter of the cylinder in order to
create the welding overlap. Steel jacket
thicknesses of 1.0 mm and 1.5 mm
were chosen to assess how the amount
of confinement has an effect on the
bond behavior. There were three types
of specimens for the splitting failure
mode: (1) unconfined, (2) confined by
a 1 mm jacket, and (3) confined by a
1.5 mm jacket. Each type had two
specimens, and a total of six specimens
were prepared for the bonding tests.
It is found that the jackets
increase the bond strength and ductile
behavior due to the transfer of splitting
bonding failure to pull-out bonding
failure. In the column tests, the steel
wrapping jackets increase the flexural
strength and ultimate drift for the lapspliced column. The bond strength of
the lapspliced bar in the jacketed
column was estimated as 6.5 MPa that
was 1.52 times as large as that of the
lap-spliced bar in the unjacketed
column. The flexural strength of the
jacketed lap-spliced column was 1.32
times as large as that of the unjacketed
column. Consequently, it was reasoned
that the increment of the flexural
strength of the lap-spliced column was
due to the increment of the bond stress
in the lap-spliced bars providing lateral
confining pressure of the steel jacket.
Steel and fiber reinforced polymer
(FRP) jacketing methods possess
critical drawbacks such as grouting
for steel jackets or bonding for FRP
jackets. The grouting of the steel
jackets increases the crosssectional
area and creates the discontinuity in

the column surface. Also, the

grouting bonds the steel jacket to the
concrete surface. The bonding of the
FRP jackets with an adhesive such as
epoxy causes a problem of wrinkles
in the FRP sheet surface. These
wrinkles inhibit the confining action
on the concrete and reduce the
effectiveness of the FRP jacket.
IV. TESTING OF STAINLESS
STEEL
SPECIMEN
Mechanical testing plays an
important
role
in
evaluating
fundamental
properties
of
engineering materials as well as in
developing new materials and in
controlling the quality of materials
for use in design and construction. If
a material is to be used as part of an
engineering structure that will be
subjected to a load, it is important to
know that the material is strong
enough and rigid enough to withstand
the loads that it will experience in
service.
The most common type of test
used to measure the mechanical
properties of a material is the
Tension Test. Tension test is widely
used to provide basic design
information on the strength of
materials and is an acceptance test for
the specification of materials. The
major parameters that describe the
stress-strain curve obtained during
the tension test are the tensile
strength (UTS), yield strength or
yield point (y), elastic modulus (E),
percent elongation (L%) and the
reduction in area (RA%). In this test,
a specimen is prepared suitable for
gripping into the jaws of the testing
machine type that will be used. The
specimen used is approximately
uniform over a gage length (the

length within which elongation

measurements are done).
A tensile load is applied to the
specimen until it fractures. During the
test, the load required to make a certain
elongation on the material is recorded.
A load-elongation curve is to be
plotted, so that the tensile behavior of
the material can be obtained. An
engineering stress-strain curve can be

constructed from this load-elongation

curve by making the required
calculations. Then the mechanical
parameters that we search for can be
found by studying on this curve [10].
A standard specimen is prepared in a
round or a square section along the
gauge length as shown in Fig.7 a) and
b) respectively, depending on the
standard used [10].

Fig.
7
Standard Tensile Test Specimen for (a) Cylindrical Bar (b) Sheet Specimen
(Source: Standard Test Methods for Tension Testing of Metallic Materials
(ASTM))
Both ends of the specimens should have
sufficient length and a surface condition such
that they are firmly gripped during testing.
The initial gauge length Lo is standardized
(in several countries) and varies with the
diameter (Do) or the crosssectional area (Ao)
of the specimen. This is because if the gauge
length is too long, the % elongation might

be underestimated in this case. Any heat

treatments should be applied on to the
specimen prior to machining to produce the
final specimen readily for testing. This has
been done to prevent surface oxide scales
that might act as stress concentration which
might subsequently affect the final tensile
properties due to premature failure.

(b) Specimen casted fromhaving

SS 304thickness of (c)
3 mm
Failure pattern of SS Specimen
Fig.Details
8
of SS Specimen for Tension
and its Test
Failure Pattern

(a) Dimesion Details

Three specimens are prepared from SS
304
and SS316L having thickness of 3 mm
following the standard dimensions. They
were tested using universal testing machine
in order to determine the

ultimate tensile strength, strain, stress-strain

curve and modulus of elasticity. Fig. 8 (c)
indicates the failure pattern of SS304
specimen.

Table 3 Mechanical Properties of Stainless steel (304)

Gauge
Final
Fracture
Stress
Strain
Modulus of
2
Elongation
(N/mm )
Elasticity E
length Lo
Load (N)
(mm)
(mm)
(N/mm2)
1.
50
78.20
21000
560.00
0.564
992.90
2.
50
77.50
20000
533.33
0.555
969.70
machine are shown in TABLE 3.
Necking has been observed
However, more authentic and accurate
before the specimen failed. Concaveresults can be obtained by conducting
convex shape is developed after
repetition of tension tests. So, same
necking with further increase in load
procedure will be repeated for getting
but clear cup and cone failure is not
higher accuracy.
observed. Results obtained from the
tension test using universal testing

Specimen
No.

V.

CONCLUDING REMARKS
From the past research work,
suitability and material properties of
stainless steel as a structural material[4]
is studied with reference to
mechanical properties like stressstrain behavior, thermal resistance,
corrosion resistance and cost. In this
research, SS plates of grade SS304[5]
and SS316L will be used. 3.0 mm
thickness of SS304 shows the tensile
strength of 550 MPa and elastic
modulus of 992.9 MPa.

[1]

[2]

[3]

circular RC
columns",
Engineering
Structures 48 (2013) 4354.
Graham Gedge, "Structural uses of
stainless steel - buildings and civil
engineering",
Journal
of
Constructional Steel Research 64
(2008) 1194-1198.
L. Di Sarno, A.S. Elnashai, D.A.
Nethercot,
"Seismic retrofitting of framed
structures with stainless steel",
Journal of
Constructional Steel Research
62 (2006) 93 104.
[6] L. Gardner, A. Insausti, K.T.Ng,
M.Ashraf, "Elevated temperature
material properties of stainless steel
alloys", Journal of Constructional
Steel Research 66 (2010) 634-647.
[7] L. Gardner, M. Theofanous, "Discrete
and continuous treatment of local
REFERENCES
buckling in stainless steel elements",
Journal of Constructional Steel
Ben Young, "Experimental and
Research 64 (2008) 1207-1216.
numerical investigation of high
strength stainless steel structures",[8] Mahmud Ashraf, Leroy Gardner,
Journal of Constructional Steel
David Nethercot, "Finite element
Research 64 (2008) 1225-1230.
modelling of structural stainless steel
cross-sections",
Thin-walled
E.L. Salih, L. Gardner, D.A.
Structures 44(2006)1048-1062.
Nethercot, " Numerical study of
stainless
steel
gusset
plate[9] S.M. Zahurul Islama, Ben Young,
connections", Engineering Structures
"Strengthening
of
ferritic
49 (2013) 448464.
stainless steel tubular structural
Eunsoo
Choi, Young-Soo
members using FRP subjected to
Two-Flange-Loading",
Chung,
ThinWalled Structures 62 (2013)
Kyoungsoo Park, Jong-Su
179190.
Jeon, "Effect of steel wrapping
jackets on the bond strength [10] Standard Test Methods for Tension
Testing
of
Metallic
Materials
of concrete and the lateral
Designation: E 8/E 8M 08 by
performance of
ASTM.