I am guessing the origin of the gage size series for steel, stainless
steel, brass, and aluminum, which IIRC all use different thicknesses in
their series, is work hardening.

That is, one gage size is likely about 90% of what can be accomplished
without so much work hardening further rolling is uneconomical.

This is just a WAG and I was wondering what you all thought.

Doug

wrote:
I am guessing the origin of the gage size series for steel, stainless
steel, brass, and aluminum, which IIRC all use different thicknesses in
their series, is work hardening.

That is, one gage size is likely about 90% of what can be accomplished
without so much work hardening further rolling is uneconomical.

This is just a WAG and I was wondering what you all thought.

Doug


That was what I always figured, or it could have something to do with
weight of a certain area of the steel (lbs. per sqaure foot or something).

John

AFAIK, all U.S. guages are based on maximum reduction of diameter, thickness
or area per pass. I don't know where annealing enters, if it does.

Tim

--
"California is the breakfast state: fruits, nuts and flakes."
Website: http://webpages.charter.net/dawill/tmoranwms

wrote in message
oups.com...
I am guessing the origin of the gage size series for steel, stainless
steel, brass, and aluminum, which IIRC all use different thicknesses in
their series, is work hardening.

That is, one gage size is likely about 90% of what can be accomplished
without so much work hardening further rolling is uneconomical.

This is just a WAG and I was wondering what you all thought.

Doug

wrote:
I am guessing the origin of the gage size series for steel, stainless
steel, brass, and aluminum, which IIRC all use different thicknesses in
their series, is work hardening.

That is, one gage size is likely about 90% of what can be accomplished
without so much work hardening further rolling is uneconomical.

This is just a WAG and I was wondering what you all thought.

Doug


While looking for something on sheet thickness gage, I found this one
for AWG wi

----------

The first attempt to adopt a geometrical system was made by Messrs Brown
& Sharpe in 1855. They established a regular progression of thirty-nine
steps between the English sizes, No. 0000 (460 mils or about 12 mm) and
No. 36 (5 mils or about 0.13 mm). Each diameter was multiplied by
0.890526 to give the next lower size. This is now the American wire
gauge, and is used to a considerable extent in the U.S.A.

---------

I also found this comment with respect to AWG:

----------

In addition to being used to measure wire thickness, this gauge (AWG) is
used to measure the thickness of sheets of aluminum, copper, and most
metals other than steel, iron and zinc.

----------

And a bit about the gauge for steel sheet:

----------

The following is from the Appendix to ASTM B258

*****

For example, in U.S. gage, the standard for sheet metal is based on the
weight of the metal, not on the thickness. 16-gage is listed as
approximately .0625 inch thick and 40 ounces per square foot (the
original standard was based on wrought iron at .2778 pounds per cubic
inch; steel has almost entirely superseded wrought iron for sheet use,
at .2833 pounds per cubic inch). Smaller numbers refer to greater
thickness. There is no formula for converting gage to thickness or weight.

*****

It's rather unclear from the passage above whether the plate gauge
values are therefore wrong if steel is being used. Reference [15]
states that steel is in fact measured using this gauge (under the name
Manufacturers' Standard Gauge) with a density of 501.84 lb/ft3 = 0.2904
lb/in3 used for steel. But this doesn't seem to be the correct density
of steel (.2833 lb/in3 is closer).

-----------

Hope this didn't add to the confusion. G

Jeff
--
Jeffry Wisnia

(W1BSV + Brass Rat '57 EE)

"Truth exists; only falsehood has to be invented."

Which work out to a change of 3 numbers halves or doubles the cross
section. 6 numbers halves or doubles the diameter.

Dan

Jeff Wisnia wrote:


The first attempt to adopt a geometrical system was made by Messrs Brown
& Sharpe in 1855. They established a regular progression of thirty-nine
steps between the English sizes, No. 0000 (460 mils or about 12 mm) and
No. 36 (5 mils or about 0.13 mm). Each diameter was multiplied by
0.890526 to give the next lower size. This is now the American wire
gauge, and is used to a considerable extent in the U.S.A.

---------

Hope this didn't add to the confusion. G

Jeff
--
Jeffry Wisnia

(W1BSV + Brass Rat '57 EE)

"Truth exists; only falsehood has to be invented."

wrote:
Which work out to a change of 3 numbers halves or doubles the cross
section. 6 numbers halves or doubles the diameter.

Well, then it must be a musical scale based on the sixth root of two.

The equal tempered scale is, of course, based on the twelvth root of
two.

For sizing xylophone bars and piano wires, I would guess.

Doug