钢铁紧固件-终裁

I

(Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is obligatory)

REGULATIONS

COUNCIL REGULATION(EC)No91/2009

of26January2009

imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain iron or steel fasteners originating in

the People's Republic of China

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation(EC)No384/96of 22December1995on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community(1) (the basic Regulation),and in particular Article9thereof,

Having regard to the proposal submitted by the Commission after having consulted the Advisory Committee,

Whereas:

A.PROCEDURE

1.Initiation

(1)On26September2007,the Commission received a

complaint lodged pursuant to Article5of Council Regu-

lation(EC)No384/96on protection against dumped

imports from countries not members of the European

Community(the basic Regulation)by the European

Industrial Fasteners Institute(EIFI,the complainant)on

behalf of producers representing a major proportion,in

this case more than25%,of the total Community

production of certain iron or steel fasteners.

(2)This complaint contained evidence of dumping of certain

iron or steel fasteners from the People's Republic of

China(PRC)and of material injury resulting therefrom,

which was considered sufficient to justify the opening of

a proceeding.(3)On9November2007,the proceeding was initiated by

the publication of a notice of initiation(2)in the Official

Journal of the European Union(the Notice of Initiation).

2.Non-imposition of provisional measures

(4)Given the need to further examine certain aspects of the

investigation,it was decided to continue the investigation

without the imposition of provisional measures on

imports of certain iron or steel fasteners from the PRC.

(5)On4August2008,all interested parties were provided

with an information document detailing the preliminary

findings of the investigation at that stage of the investi-

gation(the information document)and inviting the

parties to comment on those findings.

(6)Subsequent to that date,the investigation was continued

with regard to,inter alia,Community interest aspects and

a detailed analysis of the product scope/product compar-

ability carried out,as it had been disputed by various

interested parties.

3.Parties concerned by the proceeding

(7)The complainant Community producers,other

Community producers,the exporting producers,the

importers,users,associations known to be concerned

and representatives of the government of the PRC were

officially advised of the initiation of the proceeding.

Interested parties were given an opportunity to make

their views known in writing and to request a hearing

within the time limit set in the notice of initiation.

(1)OJ L56,6.3.1996,p.1.(2)OJ C267,9.11.2007,p.31.

(8)A number of interested parties made their views known

in writing,in particular concerning the choice of

analogue country,the type and quality differences

between Chinese fasteners and those produced and sold

by the Community producers,standing of the

complainants and injury and Community interest

aspects.Moreover,all interested parties who so

requested and showed that there were particular

reasons why they should be heard,were granted a

hearing.

(9)All interested parties(Community producers,Community

importers and Chinese exporting producers)that had

made submissions regarding the product scope attended

an adversarial meeting organised in accordance with

Article6(6)of the basic Regulation under the auspices

of the Hearing Officer on18September2008(adver-

sarial meeting).

(10)Given the large number of known exporting producers in

the PRC,as well as the large number of known

Community producers and importers,sampling for the

determination of dumping and injury was provided for in

the Notice of Initiation,in accordance with Article17of

the basic Regulation.

4.Sampling

4.1.Sampling of exporting producers in the PRC

(11)As stated above,in view of the large number of

exporting producers in the PRC,sampling was

proposed in the Notice of Initiation in accordance with

Article17(1)of the basic Regulation.

(12)In order to enable the Commission to decide whether

sampling would be necessary and,if so,to select a

sample,exporting producers were requested to make

themselves known within15days from the date of the

initiation of the investigation and to provide basic infor-

mation on their exports and domestic sales,and the

names and activities of all their related companies

involved in the production and/or selling of the

product concerned.The authorities in the PRC were

also consulted.

(13)A total of120companies or groups of companies in the

PRC came forward and provided the requested infor-

mation within the given deadline.However,it appeared

from the data provided that some of these companies or

groups did not produce fasteners themselves and some

reported exports to the Community of fasteners

produced by related companies.Those companies or

groups that produced and exported the product

concerned to the Community during the investigation

period and expressed a wish to be included in the

sample were considered as cooperating companies and

were taken into account in the selection of the sample.

These companies accounted for110out of the total of

120companies or groups that made themselves known

after initiation.

(14)Exporting producers which did not make themselves

known within the aforesaid period were considered as

not cooperating with the investigation.

(15)According to Article17(1)of the basic Regulation,the

exporters with the largest exported volume to the

Community were selected so as to achieve the largest

representative volume of exports which could reasonably

be investigated within the time available.

(16)On this basis,a sample of nine Chinese exporting

producers or groups was selected.The selected

companies represented61%of the exports,by the coop-

erating companies,of the product concerned to the

Community,and39%of the total exports from the PRC.

(17)In accordance with Article17(2)of the basic Regulation,

the cooperating exporting producers and the authorities

of the PRC were given an opportunity to comment on

the selection of the sample.

(18)A number of Chinese exporters argued that they should

have been included in the sample because of particular

circumstances regarding their companies,such as the fact

that they manufactured specific product types allegedly

not produced by the companies selected for the sample.

However,the types of the iron or steel fasteners manu-

factured by exporters were not part of the criteria used to

select the sample.As stated in recital15,the criterion

used was the exporters with the largest exported volume

to the Community.This is in line with the requirements

of Article17(1)of the basic Regulation.

(19)Questionnaires were sent for completion to the sampled

companies and replies from all of them were received

within the given deadlines.

(20)Five companies not selected in the sample submitted

replies to the questionnaire with a view to requesting

individual examination in application of Articles9(6)

and17(3)of the basic Regulation.Four of these

requests were accepted.Since the other company did

not produce the product concerned itself,its request

was refused.

(21)Following the definitive disclosure,one exporter argued

that the companies which were individually investigated

should be counted as part of the sample for the appli-

cation of Article9(5)of the basic Regulation.Another

exporter argued that the Commission should have

enlarged the original sample,rather than accepting

requests for individual examination under Article17(3).

In this respect,it should be noted that the sample is still

considered sufficiently representative.Even after four of

the sampled companies failed to cooperate,as mentioned

in recital62,the remaining sampled companies represen-

ted54%of the total exports by cooperating companies

of the product concerned to the Community.Moreover,

it is considered appropriate,for reasons of objectivity and

transparency,to select a sample at the beginning of the

proceeding,and maintain it throughout the proceeding

unless there are grounds to consider that this sample is

no longer representative.Finally,for the same reasons the

sampling exercise should be considered as distinct and

separate from the granting of individual examination

under Article17(3)of the basic Regulation.

4.2.Sampling of Community producers

(22)As stated,in view of the large number of producers in

the Community,sampling was proposed in the Notice of

Initiation in accordance with Article17(1)of the basic

Regulation.

(23)In order to enable the Commission to decide whether

sampling would be necessary and if so to select a

sample,Community producers were requested to make

themselves known within15days from the date of the

initiation of the investigation and to provide basic infor-

mation on their production and sales,and the names and

activities of all their related companies involved in the

production and/or selling of the product concerned.

(24)A total of46Community producers that produced the

product concerned in the Community during the inves-

tigation period and expressed a wish to be included in

the sample within the aforesaid period were considered

as cooperating companies and were taken into account

in the selection of the sample.

(25)These Community producers represented over30%of

the estimated production in the Community in2006.

These producers are considered to constitute the

Community industry as mentioned in recital114.

(26)The issue of the standing of the Community industry was

questioned by some importers in the Community and

also by some exporting producers.Indeed,certain

interested parties provided,after the publication of the

Notice of Initiation,lists of Community producers that

allegedly had not been consulted as to their support or

otherwise for the proceeding.A questionnaire was subse-

quently sent to all such producers.Moreover,several

companies came forward on their own initiative

without having received a questionnaire.However,none

of the responses received from these producers has

reduced the level of standing mentioned in the

preceding recital.In fact,many of these companies

supported the complaint.

(27)In accordance with Article17(1)of the basic Regulation,

the Community producers,from among those that

constitute the Community industry,with the largest

production volume were selected in the sample so as

to achieve the largest representative volume of

production of the like product produced in the

Community which could reasonably be investigated

within the time available.

(28)On this basis,a sample of seven producers was selected.

The selected companies accounted for around70%of

the production of the Community industry.After one

sampled producer was considered as not cooperating,

this percentage decreased to around65%.

(29)In accordance with Article17(2)of the basic Regulation,

the cooperating Community producers were given the

opportunity to comment on the selection of the

sample.No comments were received that warranted

changes to the sample.

(30)Questionnaires were sent for completion to the sampled

companies and replies from all of them were received

within the given deadlines.

4.3.Sampling of Community importers

(31)As stated above,in view of the large number of

importers in the Community,sampling was proposed

in the Notice of Initiation in accordance with

Article17(1)of the basic Regulation.

(32)In order to enable the Commission to decide whether

sampling would be necessary and if so to select a

sample,Community importers were requested to make

themselves known within15days from the date of the

initiation of the investigation and to provide basic infor-

mation on their imports and sales,and the names and

activities of all their related companies involved in the

production and/or selling of the product concerned.

(33)A total of45companies or groups of companies in the

Community came forward and provided the requested

information within the given deadline representing

close to29%of the total imported volume in the

Community.

(34)According to Article17(1)of the basic Regulation,the

Community importers with the largest sales volume were

selected so as to achieve the largest representative volume

which can reasonably be investigated.Therefore,the

seven largest importers in terms of volumes of sales

were selected to be part of the sample.Questionnaires

were sent for completion to the sampled companies and

replies from all of them were received within the given

deadlines.

5.Market economy treatment(MET)and individual

treatment(IT)

(35)In order to allow exporting producers in the PRC to

submit a claim for MET or IT,if they so wished,claim

forms were sent to the Chinese exporting producers

known to be concerned,to the known associations of

exporters and to the authorities of the PRC.106

exporting producers requested MET pursuant to

Article2(7)of the basic Regulation.All these

companies also claimed IT should the investigation

establish that they did not meet the conditions for

MET.Two other companies claimed only IT.All the

nine companies selected in the sample claimed MET

and IT.

6.Questionnaires and verification visits

(36)Questionnaires were sent to the sampled exporting

producers in the PRC and the four exporting producers

in the PRC who requested and were granted individual

examination,the sampled Community producers and

importers as well as to users in the Community.

Replies were received from all9sampled exporting

producers in the PRC,the4exporting producers

granted individual examination,one exporter in the

PRC not selected in the sample who requested but was

eventually refused individual examination as mentioned

in recital20,seven sampled Community producers,

seven sampled unrelated importers,three users,and

two producers in the analogue country,India.

(37)The Commission sought and verified all the information

deemed necessary for a determination of dumping,

resulting injury and Community interest and carried

out verifications at the premises of the following

companies:

(a)Community producers

—A.Agrati SpA,Milano,(Italy)

—Societa Bulloneria Europea SpA,Monfalcone and Reggio Emilia,(Italy)

—Fontana Luigi SpA and LOBO SpA,Milano,(Italy)

—Finnveden Bulten,AB G?teborg,(Sweden)

—Srubex Fabryca Lancut S.A,Lancut,(Poland)

—Growermetal SRL,Lecco,(Italy)

—Invitea SpA,Milano,(Italy)

(b)Exporting producers and their related companies in

the PRC

—Changshu City Standard Parts Factory and Changshu British Shanghai International Fastener

Co.Ltd,Changshu

—Zhangjiagang City Jinli Standard Fastener Co.Ltd, Zhangjiagang,and

—Ningbo Yonghong Fasteners Co.,Ltd,Ningbo

—Ningbo Jinding Fastening Piece Co.,Ltd,Ningbo

—Kunshan Chenghe Standard Component Co.,Ltd, Kunshan

—Pol Shin Fastener(ZheJiang)Co.,Ltd,Jiashan

—Biao Wu Tensile Fasteners Co.,Ltd and Shanghai Prime Machinery Co.,Ltd,Shanghai

—Zhejiang Zhapu Industrial Co.,Ltd,Jiaxing Washan Fasteners Co.,Ltd and Zhejiang WB

Auto Fasteners Co.,Ltd,Jiaxing

—Eastport Fastener Manufacturing Co.,Ltd,Ningbo

—CELO Suzhou Precision Fasteners Co.,Ltd, Taicang

—Golden Horse(Dong Guan)Metal Manufactory Co.,Ltd,Dongguan City

—Yantai Agrati Fasteners Co.,Ltd,Yantai

—Zhejiang Guanglong Hardware and Plastic Co., Ltd,and Zhejiang Guanglong Plating Machinery

&Product Co.,Ltd,Anji

(c)Related companies in the Community

—Celo S.A.,Barcelona,Spain

(d)Related company in Taiwan

—Sunny Corp.,Taipei

(e)Unrelated importers in the Community

—Adolf Würth GmbH,Kunzelsau,Germany

—Chaves Bilbao,S.A.,Larrabetzu,Spain

—FM Bulloneria Viterie SpA,Reggio Emilia,Italy

—F.Reyher Nchfg.GmbH&CO KG,Hamburg, Germany

—Hexstone Ltd t/a Owlett Jaton,Stone,UK

—VIPA SpA,Reggio Emilia,Italy

(38)In view of the need to establish a normal value for

exporting producers in the PRC to which MET might

not be granted,a verification to establish normal value

on the basis of data from the analogue country(India)

took place at the premises of the following companies:

(f)Producers in the analogue country,India

—Pooja Forge Ltd,Faridabad

—Mohindra Fasteners Ltd,New Delhi

7.Investigation period

(39)The investigation of dumping and injury covered the

period from1October2006to30September2007

(investigation period or IP).With respect to the trends

relevant for the injury assessment,data covering the

period from1January2003to the end of the investi-

gation period(period considered)was analysed.

B.PRODUCT CONCERNED AND LIKE PRODUCT

1.Product concerned

(40)The product concerned is certain iron or steel fasteners,

other than of stainless steel,i.e.wood screws(excluding

coach screws),self-tapping screws,other screws and bolts

with heads(whether or not with their nuts or washers,

but excluding screws turned from bars,rods,profiles or

wire,of solid section,of a shank thickness not exceeding

6mm and excluding screws and bolts for fixing railway

track construction material),and washers,originating in

the People's Republic of China(all together hereinafter

referred to as fasteners or product concerned).

(41)The product concerned is normally declared within CN

codes73181290,73181491,73181499,

73181559,73181569,73181581,73181589,

ex73181590,ex73182100and ex73182200.

(42)Fasteners are used to mechanically join two or more

elements in construction,engineering,etc.,and are used

in a wide variety of industrial sectors,as well as by

consumers.Based on their basic physical and technical

characteristics and end uses,all fasteners are considered

to constitute a single product for the purpose of the

proceeding.Within the same national or international

standards,fasteners should comply with the same basic

physical and technical characteristics including notably

strength,tolerance,finishing and coating.

(43)During the investigation,and in particular at the adver-

sarial meeting,a number of importers or exporting

producers in the PRC argued that some types of

screws,washers,or bolts with low resistance grades

should be excluded from the product scope of the inves-

tigation,on the grounds that they are neither being

produced by the Community industry nor similar to

the typical products of the Community industry.In this

respect,the investigation found that there is significant

production by the Community industry of the same or

similar types of fasteners.Moreover,the basic Regulation

does not require that exported products be identical in all

respects in order to be considered as a single product for

the purpose of the investigation.These arguments had

therefore to be dismissed.

(44)One Community distributor,in particular,argued that

wood screws should be excluded from the scope of the

investigation as allegedly they(i)were not manufactured

in large quantities by the Community industry,and(ii)

those Community producers who specialise in wood

screws were not in support of the proceeding.

However,the investigation has shown that there is

significant production of wood screws among

Community producers,including some of those

supporting the proceeding.Moreover,it is recalled that

the minimum level of support stipulated in the basic

Regulation is not required for each product type,and

that this cannot serve as a basis for defining the

product scope of the investigation.Therefore,the

arguments above had to be dismissed.

(45)Another Community distributor argued that fasteners

destined for the do-it-yourself(DIY)market segment

should be excluded from the scope of the investigation

as allegedly they were not substitutable with fasteners

produced by the Community industry,and are the

product of a separate‘industry branch’.Following the

disclosure,this distributor requested and was granted

an additional hearing,during which they reiterated their

arguments that DIY fasteners can clearly be separated

from the other products,and that they are of no

interest to the Community industry.Firstly,it should

be noted that DIY fasteners are not fundamentally

different from other fasteners destined for a more profes-

sional use,and fasteners used in DIY,professional or

industrial uses are to some extent overlapping categories.

The same distributor described some of the typical

characteristics of the so-called DIY fasteners,such as

packaging,resistance,markings or coating and argued

that on this basis,fasteners for the DIY segment of the

market could be distinguished from fasteners intended

for use in other segments.However,it was considered

that those characteristics were not sufficient to draw a

clear line distinguishing the fasteners destined for the DIY

market segment,from other types of fasteners.Finally,

during the investigation and in particular the adversarial

meeting,the representatives of the Community industry

also provided examples of Community companies which

are producing screws and standard fasteners,in which

the so-called DIY fasteners should be included.It has

also been ascertained that the remaining Community

producers have the technical capacity to produce those

fasteners if the market conditions so allowed.The

arguments of this distributor had therefore to be

dismissed.

(46)A Community producer of anchors imported,from the

PRC,nail-screws used in the production of anchors and

argued that,to the best of their knowledge,there is no

production capacity of those nail-screws in the

Community.They further claimed that nail-screws

should not be included in the product scope as they

cannot be used as a normal screw.However,the inves-

tigation has shown that nail-screws share the same basic

physical characteristics as other fasteners and are also

being produced by the Community industry.These

findings have not been disputed by the company in

question.Accordingly,there were no reasons to exclude

these products from the product scope.

(47)Two Community producers argued that fasteners without

heads,and‘female’fasteners should be included in the

scope of the investigation,on the grounds they have

similar physical characteristics to those of the product

concerned,and are also subject to injury from imports

originating in the PRC.In this respect,it should be

pointed out that those products were not included in

the scope of the complaint mentioned in recital1and

that,as a consequence,there is no information about

these products in the investigation file.Therefore,it is

not possible to accept at this stage such changes to the

product scope of the investigation.

2.Like product

(48)A number of parties claimed that the fasteners manu-

factured in the PRC for export to the Community were

not comparable to those manufactured by the

Community industry,and that the latter are used in

applications which differed from fasteners produced in

the PRC,thus not being in direct competition with

them.In particular,they claimed that the majority of

fasteners produced in the PRC:(i)are standard products

(mainly ranging between4.8and8.8class of resistance)

having no special characteristics regarding raw material,

resistance,coating,or certification/safety related aspects;

(ii)they are destined for lower-end applications(non-

professional use and general distribution)as opposed to

high-tech applications;and(iii)they do not meet the

strict requirements of specific end-users such as the auto-

motive,chemical or aerospace industry.Those claims

were stated in a number of written submissions and in

the adversarial meeting.They were also stated in a

written submission received from the PRC authorities.

(49)Some importers and their associations also claimed,

during the adversarial meeting,that fasteners manu-

factured in the PRC were sold at consistently lower

price levels compared to those produced by the

Community industry,and that this demonstrated that

the Chinese and Community-produced fasteners were

destined for different applications.Also to support their

claim,they noted that the Community industry had been

able to increase the volume of its sales and the average

unit selling price,even though the imports from the PRC

had increased significantly during the same period.

(50)In that respect it is recalled that during the adversarial

meeting it was recognised by all parties that there is an

important distinction in the fasteners industry between

standard and so-called‘special’fasteners.Standard

products are described in detail by industry standards

such as,for example,Deutsches Institut für Normung

(DIN)or German Institute for Standardisation standards.

These standards ensure that the products manufactured

by different suppliers in different countries are essentially

interchangeable from a user point of view.Special

fasteners,on the other hand,conform to a particular

user's design and/or requirements.It is also generally

recognised that special fasteners tend to be used in

more demanding applications such as the automotive,

chemical and other industries and are,on average,signifi-

cantly more expensive to produce and sell than standard

fasteners.

(51)Although the distinction between standard and special

fasteners was not originally part of the product type

classification(product control numbers or PCN)used in

the investigation,it was decided after the adversarial

meeting that it should be added to the product charac-

teristics being considered for the dumping and injury

margin calculations.Given that the vast majority of the

exports of the product concerned by the investigated

companies were of standard products,this means that

in most cases the comparison made are between

standard products produced in the PRC,the analogue

country and the Community.

(52)The submission from the PRC authorities mentioned in

recital48enclosed an analysis report detailing alleged

quality differences between fasteners of a given

standard(DIN933is used as an example)manufactured

in the Community and the PRC.This analysis took into

account variations in geometry,hardness and chemical

composition.It was claimed that,although both

products tested conformed to the DIN standard,the

Community-produced fasteners had a greater consistency,

i.e.less variation with respect to all parameters analysed,

than the PRC-produced fasteners.On this basis,the PRC

authorities concluded that the Community-produced

product,given its superior quality,could not be

compared to the PRC product.In that respect,it

should be noted that the purpose of DIN and other

widely accepted standards is to ensure that products

satisfy certain essential user requirements.Any residual

variation must be within limits which do not substan-

tially affect the fastener's quality and function.Therefore,

a fastener which is marketed as a DIN933bolt must be

essentially comparable to another fastener marketed

under the same standard.Any perceived differences in

quality,which may subsist from a user's point of view,

can be dealt with through an adjustment for physical

differences(see recital103)but do not mean that the

two products are not comparable.

(53)In the same submission it was also argued that the

fasteners manufactured by the Community industry

benefit from superior coating techniques which are not

available to manufacturers in the PRC and that therefore

those products cannot be considered alike.However,the

differences in types of coating have been taken into

account by the PCN used in the investigation,and do

not imply that the fasteners manufactured by the

Community industry and those manufactured in the

PRC are not alike within the meaning of Article1(4)

of the basic Regulation.Indeed,this article requires

only that the like product has characteristics closely

resembling those of the product under consideration.

This argument could therefore not be accepted.

(54)In summary,as far as the alleged differences in physical

and technical characteristics are concerned,the investi-

gation showed that despite the wide range of product

types on the market,many of the types manufactured

in the PRC for export to the Community and those

manufactured by the Community industry were largely

marketed under similar industry standards.Furthermore,

for the purpose of the investigation,price comparisons

were made almost exclusively between fasteners of the

‘standard’types.In this respect,it is recalled that fasteners

manufactured and classified under the same standards

must,in principle,satisfy all requirements in terms of

the mechanical properties of the raw material used,

form,tolerances etc.While it is recognised that not all

types of fasteners can be used for all applications,and

that this is particularly the case for‘special’fasteners and

high-end applications,it was found that,within the same

standard,all types of fasteners were found to be inter-

changeable for most of the other applications.Moreover,

notwithstanding the lower prices observed in the PRC,

the European Association of the Iron and Steel Industry

(Eurofer)confirmed that there is no major quality

difference between the steel produced in the PRC and

the steel produced in the Community when the steel

corresponds to a standardised grade.As a result,it is

concluded that raw material quality differences do not

affect the comparability between fasteners exported

from the PRC and those produced and sold in the

Community.

(55)As far as the different price levels are concerned,it is

considered that price differences between products per se

do not justify the conclusion that a certain product type

should be considered as a different product.As it has

been found that all types of fasteners within the same

standard had similar basic characteristics and end-uses,

the above argument had to be rejected.

(56)It was also argued by several importers and exporting

producers that the fasteners produced in the analogue

country,India,are mostly high-value product types

destined for the automotive industry and similar appli-

cations,and therefore are not alike to the fasteners

exported to the Community by the PRC producers.The

investigation has shown,however,that both special and

standard products are also produced and sold in India.As

explained above those fasteners have been found to have

the same basic physical and technical characteristics as

products exported from the PRC.

(57)It is therefore concluded that the fasteners produced and

sold by the Community industry in the Community,

fasteners produced and sold on the domestic market in

the PRC and those produced and sold on the domestic

market in India,which served as an analogue country,

and fasteners produced in the PRC and sold to the

Community are alike within the meaning of

Article1(4)of the basic Regulation.

C.DUMPING

1.Market economy treatment(MET)

(58)Pursuant to Article2(7)(b)of the basic Regulation,in

anti-dumping investigations concerning imports originat-

ing in the PRC,normal value is determined in accordance

with paragraphs1to6of the said Article for those

producers which are found to meet the criteria laid

down in Article2(7)(c)of the basic Regulation.

(59)Briefly,and for ease of reference only,the MET criteria

are set out in summarised form below:

1.business decisions and costs are made in response to

market conditions and without significant State inter-

ference;

2.firms have one clear set of basic accounting records

which are independently audited in line with inter-

national accounting standards and are applied for all

purposes;

3.there are no significant distortions carried over from

the former non-market economy system;

4.bankruptcy and property laws guarantee legal

certainty and stability;and

5.exchange rate conversions are carried out at market

rates.

1.1.Sampled companies

(60)As mentioned in recital35,106exporting producers,

including all the nine sampled companies claimed MET.

(61)The Commission verified all information submitted in

these companies'or groups'MET applications at the

premises of the nine sampled companies or groups.

(62)Of the nine companies or groups inspected for MET,four

were deemed to have provided false or misleading infor-

mation.The four companies or groups concerned were

notified of this and given an opportunity to comment in

accordance with Article18of the basic Regulation.

However,no new evidence or information was received

from any of the four companies that would prevent the

application of Article18of the basic Regulation to these

companies.Given the application of the said article to

these four companies,no MET determination was made.(63)All five of the remaining sampled companies or groups

were denied MET on the grounds that the costs of the

major input,steel wire rod,did not substantially reflect

market values,as required by Article2(7)(c)of the basic

Regulation.It was found that the prices of steel wire rod,

or in some cases,drawn steel wire,charged on the

Chinese market were significantly lower than those

charged on other markets,such as Europe,India,North

America and Japan(1).Given that China has to import

the majority of its iron ore at international market prices,

it is clear that it does not benefit from any natural

comparative advantage,which would explain these

abnormally low prices of steel wire rod on the Chinese

domestic market.At the same time various studies(2),

and even the annual reports of some large steel wire

rod producers(3)(which supply producers of fasteners

with their raw material,albeit mostly via traders)point

to significant State interference in this sector.For

instance according to the audited financial statements

of the producers referred to above,both of them

obtained significant Government subsidies in2006and

2007.Moreover,thanks to various tax concessions and

grants one of the above companies paid only around

4,5%of tax on its profit of CNY2,8billion in2007

instead of the standard corporate income tax of33%.

One of the reports referred to above,‘Money for Metal’,

summarises the various types and amounts of

Government subsidies received by the major Chinese

steel producers over the last decade.The same report

identifies more than CNY393billion in subsidies

granted to Chinese steel producers and concludes that

this has resulted in artificial growth of China's steel

capacity and production at the expense of its inter-

national competitors.

(64)The interested parties were given an opportunity to

comment on the above findings.

(65)Several exporting producers argued that the decision to

refuse MET to all sampled companies under

Article2(7)(c)of the basic Regulation,based on

distorted raw material costs,was a misinterpretation of

this Article,which they claimed should be understood to

apply to companies individually,rather than to the sector

in general.In addition some companies argued that

market values referred to in the said article should be

interpreted as market values in the PRC rather than inter-

national market values.

(1)Source:Steel Bulletin Board and data obtained from and verified at

the companies investigated.

(2)For instance‘Money for Metal:A detailed Examination of Chinese

Government Subsidies to its Steel Industry’by Wiley Rein LLP,July 2007,‘China Government Subsidies Survey’by Anne Stevenson-Yang,February2007,‘Shedding Light on Energy Subsidies in China:An Analysis of China's Steel Industry from2000-2007’by Usha C.V.Haley,‘China's Specialty Steel Subsidies:Massive,Pervasive and Illegal’by the Specialty Steel Industry of North America and ‘The China Syndrome:How Subsidies and Government Intervention Created the World's Largest Steel Industry’by Wiley Rein&Fielding LLP,July2006.

(3)Annual Reports2007of Maanshan Iron&Steel Co.,Ltd and

Baoshan Iron&Steel Co.,Ltd.

(66)In reply to these arguments,it is noted that

Article2(7)(c)of the basic Regulation requires,inter

alia,that the costs of major inputs substantially reflect

market values.The main input of fasteners,steel wire

rod,accounts for around50%of the cost of manufac-

turing.Based on data obtained and verified during the

investigation as well as from independent market sources,

such as the‘Steel Bulletin Board’,it is undisputable that

prices of steel wire rod on the Chinese domestic market

are significantly below prices on other markets.Given

that the PRC does not benefit from any natural

comparative advantage with regard to iron ore,which

it imports at international market prices,it is considered

that there is no justification for the abnormally low

prices of steel wire rod,which do not substantially

reflect market values.This conclusion applies equally to

the sector as a whole as well as individually to all of the

investigated sampled companies.Therefore criterion1of

Article2(7)(c)is not considered to be met.

(67)As regards the interpretation of‘market value’,‘market

value’has to be understood as a non-distorted market

price.In this regard,as mentioned above,there are

several sources and studies which point to State inter-

ference in the Chinese steel sector.Moreover,as

mentioned above,some of the largest Chinese

producers of steel wire rod received various types of

subsidies in2006and2007,as evidenced by their

audited financial statements.It should also be borne in

mind that it is up to the exporting producers to demon-

strate that they operate under market economy

conditions and that the costs of their major inputs

substantially reflect market values.This has not been

demonstrated in this case.

(68)Some exporting producers have also argued that even if

there was a price difference between raw material prices

on the Chinese domestic market and other international

markets,this difference could be explained by quality

differences.It is clear however,that even if some

quality differences existed,they could not explain the

huge price gap found for steel of similar grades used

by the Chinese exporting producers and the

Community and Indian producers.Moreover,the

difference between Chinese prices of steel wire rod and

prices on other markets,as apparent from published

sources,and referring to the same type of wire rod is

very significant;according to data published by the Steel

Bulletin Board,Chinese domestic prices of steel wire rod

were in the range of EUR300-350/tonne in the IP

whereas prices in North America,Europe and Japan

ranged between EUR400-500/tonne for the same

quality.Data obtained and verified during the investi-

gation at the sampled exporting producers and

Community producers is in line with the above

published data.Therefore it is maintained,that,even if

there were any quality differences,these could not

explain the huge price difference between raw material

prices found on the Chinese domestic market and those

charged on other international markets.(69)Some exporting producers also argued that any

distortions in raw material prices should be dealt with

by adjusting the normal value in the dumping calculation

rather than denying MET.However,in this case,given

the high proportion of steel wire rod in the total cost,it

is clear that Article2(7)(c),which requires,inter alia,that

the‘costs of major inputs substantially reflect market

values’is not met.Hence,any adjustment in the

dumping calculations in order to address the distorted

input costs would render Article2(7)(c)largely mean-

ingless.

(70)One exporting producer group disputed the conclusion

that MET should be refused also because it was found

that the Chinese State(with a47,18%shareholding)was

in a position to either significantly influence or block any

decisions regarding the company,and submitted evidence

in this regard.In particular,it argued that decisions on

prices,costs and inputs were taken by the general

manager and vice general managers,appointed by the

Board of Directors and not by the shareholders.

Therefore it claimed that the fact that certain decisions

were adopted by the shareholder meeting with a2/3

majority was irrelevant,as none of those decisions

concerned business decisions regarding prices,costs and

inputs.

(71)It is considered that the fact that the Board of Directors,

appointed by the controlling shareholder,remained

unchanged during the privatisation process casts doubts

over the independence of the Board members vis-à-vis

the State.It is also noteworthy that the composition of

the Board of Directors did not reflect the proportion of

shareholding in the group following the privatisation.

Therefore it cannot be excluded that business decisions

were indirectly influenced by the State and the company

was unable to provide any evidence to the contrary.

(72)Therefore the initial finding that MET should be denied

to this group also on this ground is maintained.

(73)A second exporting producer which was denied MET

disputed the Commission's conclusions regarding its

accounting standards and distortions carried over from

the former non-market economy system and submitted

arguments that these findings should not be a basis to

deny them MET.These findings have been analysed in

detail.As regards the accounting standards,it is still

undisputed that the company did not comply with inter-

national and Chinese accounting standards with regard to

the depreciation of a fixed asset.As regards the

distortions carried over from the former non-market

economy system linked to the privatisation of the

company prior to the IP,the company did not submit

any new evidence which would allow the Commission to

alter its conclusions as to the privatisation process.

(74)Therefore the initial finding that MET should be denied

to this company on these further two grounds is main-

tained.

(75)A third exporting producer argued that the fact that a

majority of its capital was controlled through a Trade

Union did not imply that the first MET criterion was

not fulfilled.However,the company could not demon-

strate how the shareholders were able to exert control

over the company freely and according to their share

capital,as is the case in a market economy environment.

Therefore,State interference cannot be excluded.The

same company disputed the finding that it had received

financial support from the State on especially favourable

conditions,given that its debts to the State carried a

certain interest rate which was close to the prevailing

market rates.However,not only was the agreed interest

rate below market levels,but also the debts to the State

had not been serviced in accordance with the agreed

schedules.This company also claimed that only

Chinese accounting standards should be used as a

criterion for granting MET.

(76)However,Article2(7)(c)of the basic Regulation requires

that companies are audited in line with international

accounting standards,as mentioned above.Moreover,

this company's accounting practices were also found

not to be in line with Chinese accounting regulations.

Their claims therefore had to be dismissed.

https://www.doczj.com/doc/3d60203.html,panies granted individual examination

(77)As mentioned above,four exporting producers not

selected in the sample requested and were granted indi-

vidual examination in accordance with Article17(3)of

the basic Regulation.

(78)One producer group provided misleading information

and thus the provisions of Article18(1)of the basic

Regulation were applied.MET was denied to two of

the remaining three companies on the same grounds as

described above for the sampled companies,i.e.they did

not meet the first MET criterion under Article2(7)(c)of

the basic Regulation as costs of their major input,steel

wire,did not substantially reflect international market

values.As for the fourth company,MET was denied as

this company did not fulfil the second and third MET

criteria.

(79)One of the companies granted individual examination

disputed the Commission's finding that MET should be

refused to it based on the failure to fulfil the first MET

criterion,claiming that steel wire was not a main input in

its production process and in addition,part of it had

been sourced from sources other than Chinese steel

mills.However,this company's costs in the IP were

inflated by start-up costs,hence making the proportion

of steel wire in the total cost appear less significant than

it would be in normal circumstances.As regards the

proportion of steel wire sourced from Chinese steel

mills,it accounted for the majority of steel wire

purchased in the IP.These claims were therefore rejected.

2.Individual treatment(IT)

2.1.Sampled companies

(80)Pursuant to Article2(7)(a)of the basic Regulation,a

countrywide duty(if any)is established for countries

falling under that Article,except in those cases where

companies are able to demonstrate,in accordance with

Article9(5)of the basic Regulation,that their export

prices and quantities as well as the conditions and

terms of sales are freely determined;that exchange

rates are carried out at market rates;and that any State

interference is not such as to permit circumvention of

measures if exporters are given different rates of duty.

(81)All five exporting producers in the sample which were

denied MET also claimed IT in the event that they were

not granted MET.On the basis of the information

available it was initially found that four of these

companies met all of the requirements to be granted IT

in accordance with Article9(5)of the basic Regulation.

(82)As disclosed to the interested parties in the information

document setting out the preliminary findings of the

investigation,it was initially intended not to grant IT

to the fifth company on the grounds that it could not

demonstrate that foreign shareholders were free to

repatriate capital and profits,as required by the basic

Regulation.Following disclosure of the preliminary

findings,however,the company submitted additional

explanations,which were confirmed during a hearing

with a representative of the foreign shareholder.It is

therefore accepted that there were no restrictions to the

repatriation of capital and profits,and the company can

thus be granted IT.

(83)It was therefore concluded that of the nine sampled

exporting producers in the PRC,IT should be granted

to the following ones:

—Ningbo Yonghong Fasteners Co.,Ltd

—Ningbo Jinding Fastener Co.,Ltd

—Biao Wu Tensile Fasteners Co.,Ltd

—Kunshan Chenghe Standard Components Co.,Ltd

—Changshu City Standard Parts Factory and Changshu British Shanghai International Fastener Co.,Ltd

https://www.doczj.com/doc/3d60203.html,panies granted individual examination

(84)All of the three exporting producers denied MET also

claimed IT in the event that they were not granted

MET.On the basis of the information available it was

found that they met all of the requirements to be granted

IT in accordance with Article9(5)of the basic Regu-

lation.

(85)It was therefore concluded that IT should be granted to

the following three exporting producers in the PRC:

—CELO Suzhou Precision Fasteners Co.,Ltd

—Golden Horse(Dong Guan)Metal Manufactory Co., Ltd

—Yantai Agrati Fasteners Co.,Ltd

3.Determination of normal value for the exporting

producers in the PRC not granted MET

3.1.Analogue country

(86)According to Article2(7)(a)of the basic Regulation,

normal value for the exporting producers not granted

MET has to be established on the basis of the prices or

constructed value in an analogue country.

(87)In the Notice of Initiation,the intention was indicated to

use India as an appropriate analogue country for the

purpose of establishing normal value for the PRC and

interested parties were invited to comment on this.

(88)Several importers in the Community and exporting

producers in the PRC opposed the choice of India,

arguing that its product range is not comparable with

that of the Chinese exporting producers.Most of those

parties suggested using Taiwan instead.

(89)The Commission actively sought cooperation from

known producers of fasteners worldwide,including in

Taiwan.However,none of the Taiwanese producers

agreed to cooperate.Neither did any other third

country producers offer to cooperate in the proceeding.

By contrast,two Indian producers agreed to cooperate by

replying to the questionnaire intended for producers in

the analogue country.The data submitted in their ques-

tionnaire replies were verified at the premises of these

two companies.However only one of the companies

provided sufficiently detailed data to be used as a basis

for establishing normal value.(90)Following the definitive disclosure,a number of

importers and exporters questioned the appropriateness

of using the data from the latter Indian producer on the

grounds that(i)the quantity produced and sold in the

Indian domestic market by this producer would allegedly

not be representative of the quantity exported from the

PRC to the Community;and(ii)this Indian producer has

alleged commercial links with one of the Community

producers supporting the complaint.In this respect,it

should be noted that(i)the sales volume of the Indian

producer were considered sufficiently representative to

allow for the establishment of reliable normal,values;

and(ii)the fact that the analogue country producer has

links to a Community producer supporting the

complaint does not make the choice of that analogue

country unreasonable.It was also noted that these links

were established after the IP.Given the above and the

absence of cooperation from other third country

producers,the choice of India as analogue country was

considered reasonable.

(91)In view of the foregoing,considering the conditions of

competition and openness of the Indian market,and the

fact that cooperating Indian producer sold product types

comparable to those exported by the PRC exporting

producers,it was concluded that India was a suitable

market economy third country within the meaning of

Article2(7)of the basic Regulation.

3.2.Normal value

(92)Pursuant to Article2(7)(a)of the basic Regulation,

normal value for the exporting producers not granted

MET was established on the basis of verified information

received from the producer in the analogue country as

set out below.

(93)It was examined whether each type of the product

concerned sold in representative quantities on the

Indian domestic market could be considered as being

sold in the ordinary course of trade pursuant to

Article2(4)of the basic Regulation.This was done by

establishing for each product type the proportion of pro-

fitable sales to independent customers on the domestic

market during the investigation period.

(94)Where the sales volume of a product type,sold at a net

sales price equal to or above the calculated cost of

production,represented more than80%of the total

sales volume of that type,and where the weighted

average price of that type was equal to or above the

cost of production,normal value was based on the

actual domestic price.This price was calculated as a

weighted average of the prices of all domestic sales of

that type made during the IP,irrespective of whether

these sales were profitable or not.

(95)Where the volume of profitable sales of a product type

represented80%or less of the total sales volume of that

type,or where the weighted average price of that type

was below the cost of production,normal value was

based on the actual domestic price,calculated as a

weighted average of profitable sales of that type only.

(96)Depending on the product type,normal value was estab-

lished based on weighted average sales prices of all sales

or weighted average sales prices of profitable sales only,

on the domestic market of the analogue country based

on the verified data of one producer in that country.

(97)One of the companies granted individual examination

and some importers claimed that the normal value

obtained from a single producer in India,which

allegedly does not produce similar types of fasteners as

the company in question,would not provide for the best

basis for a proper comparison.Therefore it suggested

that,as provided for by Article2(7)(a)of the basic regu-

lation,the normal value should be calculated‘on any

other reasonable basis’,in this case on the basis of the

exporters'own figures,adjusted for the alleged

distortions in raw material costs.

(98)The above claim was rejected,since it was found that the

Indian producer,as mentioned in recital91,also sold

types of fasteners which were comparable to those

exported by the PRC exporting producers.In addition,

as explained in recital103,appropriate adjustments

affecting price comparability were made to the normal

value.

3.3.Export prices

(99)In all cases where the product concerned was exported to

independent customers in the Community,the export

price was established in accordance with Article2(8)of

the basic Regulation,namely on the basis of export

prices actually paid or payable.

(100)As regards two exporting producers,all or part of their export sales to the Community were made via related

companies located in the Community and subsequently

resold to unrelated companies in the Community.In

these cases the export price was constructed,pursuant

to Article2(9)of the basic Regulation,on the basis of

the price at which the imported products were first

resold to an independent buyer,duly adjusted for all

costs incurred between importation and resale,and

profits.The profit margin was established on the basis

of the information available from cooperating unrelated

importers.

https://www.doczj.com/doc/3d60203.html,parison

(101)The normal value and export prices were compared on an ex-works basis.For the purpose of ensuring a fair

comparison between the normal value and the export

price,due allowance in the form of adjustments was

made for differences affecting prices and price compar-

ability in accordance with Article2(10)of the basic

Regulation.

(102)The price comparison between the fasteners exported from the PRC and those sold on the Indian market by

the Indian cooperating producer was made by distin-

guishing between standard and special fastener types.

(103)In addition,based on evidence collected on the spot,the quality control procedures applied by the Indian

producer whose data was used for establishing the

normal value were more advanced than those observed

at the Chinese cooperating exporting producers who

produced and exported mainly standard types of

fasteners.In these cases an adjustment based on the

cost of quality control found at the Indian producer

was made to the Indian normal value

(104)In addition to the above,appropriate adjustments concerning transport,insurance,handling and ancillary

costs,packing,credit,and bank charges were granted

in all cases where they were found to be reasonable,

accurate and supported by verified evidence.

4.Dumping margins

4.1.For the sampled cooperating exporting producers granted

IT

(105)For the five sampled companies granted IT,dumping margins were established by comparing the weighted

average normal value established for the Indian

producer who cooperated fully with each company's

weighted average export price to the Community,as

provided for in Article2(11)of the basic Regulation.

(106)The sample average was calculated as a weighted average of the dumping margins of all five cooperating sampled

companies,in accordance with Article9(6)of the basic

Regulation.

(107)The

definitive dumping margins,expressed as a percentage of the cif import price at the Community border,duty unpaid,are the following:

4.2.For the cooperating exporting producers granted indi-

vidual examination

(108)Dumping margins were established as described above,in

recital 107.

(109)The

definitive dumping margins,expressed as a percentage of the cif import price at the Community border,duty unpaid,are the following:

4.3.For all other exporting producers

(110)In order to calculate the countrywide dumping margin

applicable to all other exporters in the PRC,the level of cooperation was first established.The degree of cooper-ation can be considered low,i.e.approximately 53%of total imports from the PRC.Therefore the dumping

margin for the non-cooperating companies was estab-lished as an average of the value found from Eurostat data and the highest margins found for product types sold in a representative quantity by the cooperating exporting producer with the highest dumping margin.

(111)On this basis the countrywide dumping margin amounts

to 115,4%of the cif Community frontier price,duty unpaid.

D.INJURY

https://www.doczj.com/doc/3d60203.html,munity production

(112)The investigation established that the like product is

manufactured by a high number of producers in the Community,estimated at over 300mostly small and medium-sized enterprises but including a few larger companies.A majority of Community producers did not make themselves known following the publication of the Notice of Initiation.The complaining producers on whose behalf the complaint was lodged cooperated with the investigation,although one of the companies,selected in the sample,did not provide sufficient infor-mation during the on-spot verification to be considered as cooperating.This company was therefore excluded from the data relating to the Community industry.A number of other producers,either supporting or opposing the complaint,supplied general data on their volume of production and sales.Since many producers in the Community,mostly small enterprises,did not cooperate with the investigation,it was not possible to define precisely the total volume of Community production on the basis of individual company data.

(113)Consequently,the volume of Community production has

been estimated by using Eurostat industrial production data.Based on this data,the total Community production in 2006was found to be 1431602tonnes.

2.Definition of the Community industry

(114)The production of the Community producers that

supported the complaint and fully cooperated in the investigation represents 27,0%of the production of the product concerned in the Community.It is therefore considered that these companies constitute the Community industry within the meaning of Articles 4(1)and 5(4)of the basic Regulation.

(115)It was alleged by some Community importers and

exporting producers,and confirmed by the investigation,that a number of the cooperating Community producers,in addition to their own manufacturing facilities in the Community had also imported significant quantities of the product concerned from the PRC for resale on the Community market.

(116)Moreover,it was argued that three of the cooperating

Community producers had partly relocated their production by establishing production sites in the PRC and that,therefore,should be excluded from the standing calculation.However,it was found that the Chinese subsidiaries of these producers were established predom-inantly to serve the PRC market and the centre of interest of these companies had remained in the Community.

(117)As far as the volume of imports by the cooperating

manufacturers in the Community is concerned,the inves-tigation revealed that some companies imported rela-tively low quantities of the product concerned originating in the PRC,when compared to the sales of their own production in the Community.Those sales,through related and unrelated companies,were in much lower quantities than what was alleged by the aforementioned parties.

(118)The investigation revealed that the centre of interest of these companies was undoubtedly in the Community,and that despite their imports from the PRC they should all be considered as part of the Community production.

https://www.doczj.com/doc/3d60203.html,munity consumption

(119)Community consumption in 2006was established on

the basis of the total production volume reported to Eurostat by the Member States authorities,plus imports and minus exports.The apparent consumption was found to be in line with that mentioned in the complaint.Therefore,in the absence of any other infor-mation,the data found in the complaint for 2004-2005were also used.For the years between 2003and the IP the import and export volumes were based on Eurostat data.For 2003no data were available and therefore an estimate of the Community consumption and market shares was not possible.

(120)On the basis of these data,it was found that between

2004and the IP demand for the product concerned in the Community increased by 29%.

Sources :Eurostat,Comext,complaint.

4.Imports into the Community from the country concerned 4.1.Volume and market share of imports concerned

(121)The volume of imports from the PRC was obtained from Eurostat data.In terms of volume and

market share,the evolution of imports from the PRC has been the following:

Source :Eurostat.

(122)While consumption of the product concerned increased by 29%between 2004and the IP,imports

from the PRC rose continuously,by 103%during the same period.Consequently,the market share of the PRC during the period considered increased from 17%to 26%in the same period.

4.2.Prices of imports and undercutting

(123)The following table shows the development of average import prices from the PRC.Over the period considered,these prices remained fairly stable,with a slight increase until2005and a decrease in 2006.

Source:Eurostat.

(124)Concerning the selling price on the Community market of the product concerned during the IP,a comparison was made between the prices of the sampled Community producers and those of the sampled exporting producers in the PRC.The relevant sales prices of the Community industry were those to independent customers,adjusted where necessary to an ex-works level,i.e.excluding freight costs in the Community and after deduction of discounts and rebates.These prices were compared with the sales prices charged by the Chinese exporting producers net of discounts and adjusted where necessary to cif Community frontier prices with an appropriate adjustment for the customs clearance costs and post-importation costs.Given that the Community industry sells its production both to distributors and end-users,whereas the Chinese goods are sold via related or unrelated importers and/or traders,an adjustment to the import price was made where appropriate to ensure that the comparison is made at the same level of trade.

(125)As mentioned,Community importers and exporting producers submitted that the Chinese products are mostly standard fasteners of basic quality,while the Community industry tends to cater to the most expensive fasteners market segments.Therefore,it was claimed that any price comparisons based on average prices would be misleading.In this respect,it should be noted that the undercutting margin was established on the basis of company data by product type,which takes into consideration the characteristics of the products being compared.In particular,a similar method was used as the one described in recitals102and103and standard fasteners,which constitute the vast majority of the Chinese exports,were distinguished from special fastener types.

(126)The comparison shows that,during the IP,imports of the product concerned were sold in the Community at prices which undercut the Community industry's prices,when expressed as a percentage of the latter,by an average of more than40%.

5.Situation of the Community industry

(127)In accordance with Article3(5)of the basic Regulation,the examination of the impact of the dumped imports from the PRC on the Community industry included an analysis of all economic factors and indices having a bearing on the state of the industry from2003to the IP.The analysis of the situation of the Community industry was carried out for the sampled companies as mentioned above, except for production,production capacity,capacity utilisation,sales,market share,employment and productivity,where the figures are for the total Community industry and are based on the infor-mation provided by the cooperating Community producers.

5.1.Production,production capacity and capacity utilisation

(128)The evolution of production,production capacity and capacity utilisation for the Community industry was the following:

(129)Despite the significant increase in demand of29%between2004and the IP,the Community industry's production volume fluctuated throughout the period considered and was only6% higher in the IP compared to2003.

(130)Production capacity grew only slightly over the period considered,which means that capacity utilisation remained at a very low level of52to53%throughout the period.Some Community importers claimed that the figures regarding production capacities had been overestimated,for example by assuming continuous production(24hours/365days)or by underestimating the time necessary to switch the tooling for new production types or by including old equipment.However, capacity was calculated on the basis of3shifts on220days,with due regard to the production bottlenecks which in most cases were found to be in the heat treatment line.The number of cold forging machines available has been verified,and the average time needed to adapt the tooling to new production batches(which can range between2and12hours)has been taken into account in the calculation of the capacity available.

(131)The evolution of production and capacity indicators of the Community industry can be explained as follows:

—The Community industry maintained or tried to improve its presence into the market segments of higher quality product(special products),which command a higher unit price,but are also produced in smaller quantities.

—The Community industry had therefore to upgrade their equipment and adapt production patterns in order to produce these more specialised product types,which explains the slight increase in overall capacity and also the high percentage of idle capacity,previously dedicated to the production of standard types.

(132)Community unrelated importers also argued that,had the Community producers additionally produced the equivalent quantities that were imported from the PRC in the period considered,the impact upon capacity utilisation would have been very small and it would have remained below 60%.In this respect,it should be noted that the quantities imported from the PRC during the period considered are significant as they represent about26,9%of the total Community production in 2006.Consequently,the positive effect on capacity utilisation would have been more significant than alleged if these quantities had been produced in the Community,for which the capacity was available.

(133)Following the definitive disclosure,several Community unrelated importers argued that should the measures be finally adopted,they would lead to a shortage of supply in the Community market,of more than200000tonnes.However,based on the spare capacity levels found in the IP,the actual production capacity available in the Community is estimated to be above2,5million tonnes i.e.well in excess of the level of Community consumption of2,27million tonnes.Therefore,it was found that the spare production capacity available in the Community is well above the alleged shortage of 200000tonnes and would easily meet the demand for the product concerned.

5.2.Stocks

(134)The figures below represent the Community industry's volume of stocks at the end of each period.

(135)Stocks decreased by5%during the period considered,despite the7%increase in production.This is mainly related to the decreasing share of standard products in the Community industry's portfolio.

However,considering that the production of the like product in the Community is predominantly by order,the level of inventories is not considered to be a very meaningful indicator for this product.

5.3.Sales,market share,growth and average unit prices in the Community

(136)The figures below represent the Community industry's sales to independent customers in the Community.

(137)The Community industry's sales volumes increased by12%during the period considered and by 21%in value as a result of the increasing share of special products based on customers'drawings.

(138)At the same time,it was found that average sales prices to unrelated buyers in the Community market increased during the period considered.This price increase should be seen in the light of the significant increase in raw material prices and the fact that the Community industry has concentrated its efforts on the higher segment of the market(special products)which was less affected by the dumped imports.High-quality products,meeting specific needs from the customers,as opposed to standard products,are generally more expensive on a unit-selling price basis.Hence,the increase in sales prices reflects both the increase in raw material costs but also the changes in the product range produced by the Community industry.

(139)After an increase between2003and2004,the volume of sales of the Community producers decreased by1%.At the same time,Community consumption increased by29%,meaning that the Community industry was unable to take advantage of the increase in Community consumption and thus that the market share of the Community producers declined by24%in less than three years.In all likelihood the drop in the Community producers'market share,if calculated for the whole period considered(i.e.including2003),would be even higher.

(140)It was thus found that the Community industry could not benefit from the growth of the market resulting from the increase in Community consumption as dumped imports from the PRC deprived Community producers of the opportunity to continue production of standard products on a larger scale.

5.4.Profitability and cash flow

(141)The levels of profits from the sale of the like product by the Community industry fluctuated throughout the period considered while only reaching moderately positive levels.

(142)Profitability was at its lowest level in2003(2,1%)but it has since improved,which is linked partly to the efforts of the Community industry to reduce manufacturing costs and increase productivity and the fact that they concentrated their efforts on the supply of high quality products generating higher revenues than standard products,the former being less affected by dumped imports from the PRC than the latter.

(143)It should be noted that the overall positive profitability during the period under consideration coincided with an expanding market during an expansion phase of the economic cycle which took place during2004and beginning of2008,and it is likely to deteriorate significantly when these trends are reversed.Indeed,as a widespread industrial product,fasteners are highly sensitive to the variations of the general economic situation and the industrial production in particular.

(144)The evolution of the cash flow from the sales in the Community of the like product increased by 33%up to2005,but returned in the IP to close to its initial level.

5.5.Investments,return on investments,and ability to raise capital

(145)The production of fasteners is relatively capital intensive.The Community industry has argued that the optimisation of production is needed to respond to a more and more challenging market environment.In order to achieve this flexibility,the Community industry has maintained relatively high levels of investment,which has declined somewhat during the period considered but still remains at a significant level.This investment was mainly for the purchase of new machinery to optimise production.

(146)During the period considered,the return on investment,expressed as a percentage of net sales, increased by seven percentage points between2003and the IP.This was explained by the fact that the Community industry has tried to maximise the use of its existing production capacities without making large scale investments.As shown during the investigation,all sampled producers have developed their internal tooling resources so as to adapt their production facilities to their new customer base(special products based on customers'drawings).

(147)No evidence was found in respect of a reduced or increased ability to raise capital over the period considered.

5.6.Employment and productivity

(148)The evolution of employment,productivity and labour costs in the Community industry were as follows:

(149)The Community industry increased its number of employees between2003and the IP.This was a result of both an effort to maintain production volume and production of more diversified complex products requiring a constant flexibility of tooling and machineries.The results of this strategic process within the Community industry was also reflected in productivity,which remained stable during the period considered although they had to adapt to their new customer base(special products based on customers'drawings)requiring more human resources.

5.7.Wages

(150)Average wage levels increased moderately during the period considered.

5.8.Magnitude of the actual margin of dumping and recovery from past dumping

(151)As indicated in recital150,the dumping margins found are clearly above de minimis.Furthermore, given the volume and the price of the dumped imports,the impact of the actual margin of dumping cannot be considered negligible.

(152)The Community is not recovering from the effects of past dumping since no investigations have been carried out prior to the current one.

5.9.Conclusion on injury

(153)Between2003and the IP the volume of dumped imports of the product concerned from the PRC increased by almost180%,reaching a26%market share in the IP.Moreover,in the IP,the sales prices of the Community industry were substantially undercut by those of the dumped imports of the product concerned.On a weighted average basis,price undercutting was over40%.

(154)At the same time,while the Community consumption increased by29%,the sales volume of the Community industry only decreased by1%.Its market share fell by24%and it could not fully pass on the global increase in raw material prices to its customers,resulting in continuing low levels of profitability.

(155)As a consequence,production did not increase at the same pace as Community consumption,and capacity utilisation remained very low,at around50%,during the period considered.This has also had a negative impact on profitability,as it kept the industry from fully taking advantage of economies of scale.

(156)The impact of the dumped imports upon the profitability of the Community industry was somewhat mitigated during the period under consideration by the Community market expansion and the favourable economic cycle.However,this situation could be reversed when this cycle comes to an end.

(157)Notwithstanding the industry's considerable efforts to maintain production volume,through flexible production throughout the period considered and its continuing efforts to increase productivity and competitiveness,its profitability,cash flow and return on investment did not reflect the continuing increase of the Community demand for the product concerned.This trend could severely impact the Community industry's capacity to maintain the production of high-quality parts.

(158)Subsequent to the disclosure of the information document,exporting producers in China and the Community importers argued that since some indicators such as sales volume,prices,and profit show a positive evolution during the period considered,the Commission should conclude that the Community industry has not suffered material injury.

(159)The Community industry,on the other hand,has argued that the current low levels of profitability are increasingly affecting its ability to maintain and improve the production equipment at a level which would allow them to maintain a significant presence in the higher end of the market.Hence, the loss of high production volumes of standard products is also affecting the Community industry capacity to continue to provide high-quality products.

(160)The investigation has since confirmed that material injury resulted from the significant displacement of Community products by Chinese imports in some important market segments,with a negative impact on capacity utilisation and profitability,although this impact has been somewhat attenuated by the fact hat the industry managed to compensate lower production volumes by focusing on market segments and products generating higher revenues.

汽车常用紧固件概述

汽车常用紧固件概述

一、紧固件基础知识 1.1 概述 1.2 紧固件分类 1.3 螺纹 1.4 螺纹配合等级 1.5 紧固件标记方式 1.6 紧固件常用材料 二、紧固件制造工艺 2.1 紧固件生产工艺流程2.2 紧固件生产工序简介 2.3 典型工艺路线 三、紧固件检验及试验

1.1 概述 紧固件指能够起紧固作用的零件。螺纹紧固件是指带有螺纹的紧固件，是根据一定的尺寸制造的，它通过外螺纹和内螺纹的相互配合来发挥其基本功能，我们正是利用螺纹紧固件具备的这种功能，使螺纹紧固件在物体与物体的连接和紧固上，以及物体的移动等方面起到很大作用。 紧固件不仅包括螺纹紧固件，还有垫圈、铆钉、销等。

1.2 紧固件分类 紧固件基础知识---紧固件分类 自攻螺钉 螺栓木螺钉 销铆钉 螺柱挡圈 螺母螺钉垫圈 组合件和连接副 焊接钉 键

1.3 螺纹-分类（按用途） 根据用途可把螺纹分成四类 ①紧固螺纹,包括普通螺纹；过渡配合螺纹；过盈配合螺纹； 小螺纹；MJ螺纹 ②传动螺纹，包括梯形螺纹；锯齿形螺纹；方形螺纹。 ③管螺纹，55°牙型角的管螺纹；60°牙型角的管螺纹；米制锥螺纹；干密封管螺 纹。 ④专用螺纹，包括光学仪器用螺纹；锻钢阀门用短牙梯形螺纹；机床梯形螺纹丝 杠；石油螺纹；气瓶螺纹等等。

1.3 螺纹-五要素 螺纹由牙型、直径、螺距、线数和旋向（螺纹几何尺寸的五要素）确定。 只有五要素完全一致的内外螺纹才能配合使用。 在五要素中，牙型、公称直径、螺距又是主要的三要素，国家标准规定了一些标准的牙型、公称直径和螺距，凡是这些要素都符合标准的都称为标准螺纹。 牙型符合标准，但公称直径或螺距不符合标准的称为特殊螺纹，牙型不符合标准的称为非标准螺纹

SAEJ1199公制外螺纹钢制紧固件机械性能及材料要求中文版

Mechanical and Material Requirements for Metric Externally Threaded Steel Fasteners 公制外螺纹钢制紧固件机械性能与材料要求 1.Scope 围 1.1 This SAE Standard covers the mechanical and material requirements for eight property classes of steel, externally threaded metric fasteners in sizes M1.6 through M36, inclusive, and suitable for use in automotive and related applications. 本SAE 标准涵盖汽车及相关工业使用，尺寸在M1.6到M36钢铁外螺纹紧固件的八个性能等级的机械性能与材料要求。 1.2 Products included are bolts, screws, studs, U-bolts, preassembled screw and washer assemblies (sems), andproducts manufactured the same as sems except without washer. 产品包括：螺栓、螺钉、螺柱、U型螺栓、预装配的螺钉和垫片组件以及与预装配组件一样加工的无垫圈产品。 1.3 Products not covered are tapping screws, thread-rolling screws, and self-drilling screws.Mechanical andmaterial requirements for these products are covered in other SAE documents. 产品不包括自攻螺钉、自挤螺钉、钻尾螺钉。这些产品的机械性能与材料要求包含在SAE 另外的标准中。 1.4 The term stud as referred to herein, applies to a cylindrical rod of moderate length, threaded on either one or both ends or throughout its entire length.It does not apply to headed, collared, or similar products which are more closely characterized by requirements shown herein for bolts. 螺柱这里是指适用于中等长度圆柱杆，螺纹在一端有或两端都有，或全螺纹的产品。它并不适用于有头的、带定位的或类似于本文中所要求的螺栓特性近似的产品。 1.5 For specification purposes, this document treats U-bolts as studs.Thus, wherever the word studs appears,U-bolts is also implied.U-bolts covered by this document are those used primarily in the suspension andrelated areas of vehicles.(Designers should recognize that the U configuration may not sustain a loadequivalent to two bolts or studs of the same size and grade; thus actual load-carrying capacity of U-boltsshould be determined by saddle load tests.) 为了规，本标准将U型螺栓是为螺柱。因此，本文中涉及到的螺柱要求，U型螺栓同样适用。本文所提及的U型螺栓是使用于车辆悬挂位置或相关位置的产品。（设计者应了解到同样尺寸、等级的U型螺栓与两个螺栓或螺柱的载荷是不相等的，因此，U 型螺栓的实际承载应以鞍型荷重测试方法来判定。 2 References 参考资料 2.1 Applicable Publications—The following publications form a part of this specification to the extent specifiedherein.Unless otherwise indicated, the latest issue of SAE publications shall apply. 适用版本- 下列出版物作为本标准的一部分。除非另有规定，应采用SAE最新版本标准。 2.1.1 SAE PUBLICATIONS —Available from SAE, 400 monwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001. SAE 美国汽车工程协会出版物 SAE J121M—Decarburization in Hardened and Tempered Metric Threaded Fasteners

标准紧固件概述

标准紧固件概述 Company Document number：WUUT-WUUY-WBBGB-BWYTT-1982GT

紧固件指能够起紧固作用的零件。 螺纹紧固件是指带有螺纹的紧固件，是根据一定的尺寸制造的，它通过外螺纹和内螺纹的相互配合来发挥其基本功能，我们正是利用螺纹紧固件具备的这种功能，使螺纹紧固件在物体与物体的连接和紧固上，以及物体的移动等方面起到很大作用。 紧固件不仅包括螺纹紧固件，还有垫圈、铆钉、销等。 1、螺纹的分类 根据用途可把螺纹分成四类 ①紧固螺纹,包括普通螺纹；过渡配合螺纹；过盈配合螺纹；小螺纹；MJ螺纹 ②传动螺纹，包括梯形螺纹；锯齿形螺纹；方形螺纹。 ③管螺纹，55°牙型角的管螺纹；60°牙型角的管螺纹；米制锥螺纹；干密封管螺纹。 ④专用螺纹，包括光学仪器用螺纹；锻钢阀门用短牙梯形螺纹；机床梯形螺纹丝杠；石油螺纹；气瓶螺纹等等。 2、螺纹的加工方法：滚压、磨削、切削三种方式。 3、螺纹的标注方法： 例如：M 10×1 LH –7H-L M表示普通螺纹特征代号；10×1表示公称直径×螺距，粗牙不注螺距；LH表示左旋螺纹代号，右旋螺纹不注出旋向代号；7H表示公差带代号；L表示旋合长度组别代号。中等长度不注出组别代号，特殊需要时注出具体长度值。 一、紧固件的种类 紧固件一般包括： 螺钉、螺栓、螺母等螺纹紧固件 垫圈、铆钉、销等非螺纹紧固件 1、编号规则

标准件的编号应依照标准CACBW-7，主要有以下7个部分组成。 1汽车标准件的代号 2类别代号、组别代号 3尺寸规格代号 4材料、机械性能等级和热处理代号 5覆盖层代号 6全螺纹代号 7涂胶代号 具体内容如下： 1、汽车标准件的代号。标准件特征代号有Q或CQ、T三种形式 2、类别代号、组别代号。 第一位数字： 1—螺栓类 2—螺钉类 3—螺母类 4—垫圈、挡圈、铆钉 5—开口销、销、键 6—螺塞、管接件、环箍夹片 7—润滑件、密封件、连接件 8—空号 9—其他。 第二位数字为标准件的组别代号。 第三位数字为标准件的分组号，对于螺纹件其偶数表示粗牙，奇数表示细牙；管螺纹例外。 3、尺寸规格代号。 螺栓、螺钉、铆钉、销及销钉等以“螺纹直径”或“杆径”和“长度”表示。直径为一位时，应在左边加“0”定位，长度是几位就写几位。 螺母以螺纹直径表示，并以两位数定位，若螺纹直径为一位数字时，应在左边加“0”定位。 垫圈、挡圈等均以相应联接的螺纹或轴孔直径表示，当直径为一位数字时在左边加“0”定位。两位以上照实书写。

碳素钢与合金钢紧固件螺栓,螺钉,螺柱的机械特性

前言 这个标准是根据工业标准法，并通过日本工业调查会的审议，由通商产业大臣修订而成的工业标准。根据此规，JISB 1051-1991被修改并替换。 这次的修改，删除了以往的在日本工业标准附属书上规定的“性能等级4T-7T 的钢制螺栓，小螺丝的机械特性”，以达到与相应的国际标准ISO898-1一致。 在JISB 1051中，有以下的附属书。 附属书A（参考）在高温下的屈服点或是0.2%耐力。 日本工业标准 碳素钢和合金钢紧固件的机械特性 第一部分：螺栓，螺钉和螺柱 序文这个标准，是翻译了1999年发行第三版的ISO898-1，没有经过改变技术内容和标准票的样式而作成的日本工业标准。划虚线的地方是原来的国际标准当中没有的事项。 1 适用范围这个标准是规定有关于把碳素钢和合金钢的螺栓，螺钉和螺柱置于10-35摄氏度内试验时的机械特性。 符合此标准要求事项的产品虽是在10-35摄氏度内被评价的，但在高于或低于此温度范围的情况下，有时没法保持规定的机械和物理特性。附属书就举例说明了在高温下的屈服点或是0.2%耐力的值。 在低于规定的温度范围的情况下，特别是冲撞强度会发生重要变化。螺钉高于或低于规定的温度范围下使用的情况，产品的机械和物理特性是否符合使用者的特别标准条件，责任在于使用者。 与螺钉的有效断面积相比，头部附近的线断面积小小的圆头等的螺钉，有些没有满足这个标准规定的扭力测验和拉力要求。（参照6） 这标准，适用于以下条件的螺栓，螺钉和螺柱。 - M1.6-M39的平行螺钉以及M8*1-M39*3的细齿螺钉 - 根据JISB0205和JISB0207要求而作的螺钉的直径和螺距的组合 - 螺钉的等级根据JISB0209或者JISB0211的要求 - 是碳素钢或合金钢物体

《紧固件机械性能 索氏体高强不锈结构钢螺栓、螺钉和螺柱》标准全文及编制说明

ICS 21.010.10 J13 中国机械工业联合会团体标准 T/ CMIF××××—20×× 紧固件机械性能索氏体高强不锈结构钢 螺栓、螺钉和螺柱 Mechanical properties of fasteners Sorbite stainless high-strength structural steel bolts, screws and studs （征求意见稿） 20××-××-××发布20××-××-××实施 ___________________________________________________________________________________________ 中国机械工业联合会发布

目录 前言 (Ⅱ) 1 范围 (1) 2 规范性引用文件 (1) 3 代号 (1) 4 标记制度 (2) 5 化学成分 (2) 6 机械性能 (2) 7 试验方法 (4) 8 标志 (6) 9 表面处理和包装 (8) 附录A（资料性附录）索氏体高强不锈结构钢的特性 (9) 附录B（资料性附录）索氏体高强不锈结构钢物理性能 (10) 附录C（资料性附录）索氏体高强不锈结构钢紧固件性能等级与对应的热处理工艺参数11

前言 本标准按GB/T 1.1—2009给出的规则起草。本标准由中国机械工业联合会提出。 本标准由全国紧固件标准化技术委员会归口。本标准起草单位：

紧固件机械性能索氏体高强不锈结构钢 螺栓、螺钉和螺柱 1范围 本标准规定了由索氏体高强不锈结构钢制造的、在环境温度为10℃～35℃条件下测试时，螺栓、螺钉和螺柱的机械性能。在较高或较低温度下，其性能可能不同。 本标准适用的螺栓、螺钉和螺柱； ──螺纹公称直径d ≤39mm; ──直径和螺距符合GB/T 192、GB/T 193和GB/T 9144普通螺纹； ──任何形状的。 不适用于有特殊性能要求的紧固件，如可焊接性。 注：对超出本部分规定的极限规格（如d >39mm）,只要能符合性能等级的要求，则可以使用本部分标记制度。 本标准未规定特殊环境下耐腐蚀和抗氧化性，对高温或零度以下使用的耐腐蚀性、抗氧化性和机械性能，可以由使用者和制造者按每一特殊场合进行协议。有关材料特性的一些信息在附录A和附录B中给出。有关腐蚀和耐腐蚀的定义，见GB/T 10123。 成型加工后的索氏体高强不锈结构钢紧固件是有磁性的（见附录A）。 2 规范性引用文件 下列文件对本文件的应用是必不可少的。凡是注日期的引用文件，仅注日期的版本适用于本文件。凡是不注日期的引用文件，其最新版本（包括所有的修改单）适用于本文件。 GB/T 90.2 紧固件标志与包装 GB/T 90.3 紧固件质量保证体系 GB/T 192 普通螺纹基本牙型 GB/T 193 普通螺纹直径与螺距系列 GB/T 3098.1 紧固件机械性能螺栓、螺钉和螺柱 GB/T 3098.6 紧固件机械性能不锈钢螺栓、螺钉和螺柱 GB/T 4334 金属和合金钢的腐蚀不锈钢晶间腐蚀试验方法 GB/T 5267.4 紧固件表面处理耐腐蚀不锈钢钝化处理 GB/T 9144 普通螺纹优选系列 GB/T 37430-2019 建筑结构用高强不锈钢 T/SSEA 0002—2017 索氏体高强不锈结构钢热轧钢棒 T/SSEA 0003—2017 索氏体高强不锈结构钢热轧盘条 3 代号 A机械加工试件的断后伸长率，% A1断后伸长量，mm A s，公称螺纹公称应力截面积，mm2 b 螺纹长度，mm d螺纹公称直径,mm d2外螺纹基本中径,mm

标准紧固件规范

修订记录 一、目的 对所采购的标准件的质量进行控制，对进货检验所涉及的技术要求、检验方法、抽 样等进行规定。 二、适用范围 适用于螺栓、螺母、平垫、弹垫、销轴等标准件的进货检验。 三、一般性检查(按S-3级, AQL=2.5) 3.1 查随货技术资料质量证明书，证明该标准符合标准要求和订货合同证明书应包括： 1. 供方名称或厂标； 2. 制造依据的标准； 3. 精度级别； 4. 表面处理方法。 3.2 外观检查 3.2.1抽查是否有等级钢印标志 a) 性能等级为4.6、5.6及≥8.8级的螺栓、螺钉必须标志； b) 性能等级为5级及≥8级的螺母必须标志； c) 螺纹直径≥5mm的螺栓、螺钉、螺母才需要标志。 3.2.2 螺钉表面： 表面应光洁、平整、无毛刺、无锈斑、无缺牙、无烂牙，镀层不得有起泡、脱落或锌白等缺陷，厚度应满足规定要求。 四、尺寸检查(按S-3级，AQL= 2.5) 依据相关的国标或技术要求进行检查 4.1 对螺栓、螺钉及螺母，应检查螺纹大小径、螺纹导入长度、螺距，同时使用相应的螺纹 规止通规进行检测；

a) 电镀前的螺栓、螺钉应使用公差等级为6g螺纹环规检查，电镀后的螺栓、螺钉应使 用公差等级为6h螺纹环规检查； b) 电镀前的螺母应使用公差等级为6G螺纹止通规及塞规检查，电镀后的螺母应使用公 差等级为6H螺纹止通规及塞规检查； c) 螺栓、螺母、螺钉通规检查须每个螺纹能顺利通过才合格，止规检查最多只能通过两 个螺纹才合格。 4.2 对自攻螺钉类，按标准要求进行螺纹尺寸检测：螺纹外径、末端外径、螺纹导入长度、 螺距。 五、性能检查 5.1 硬度检查（每批抽3Pcs试验，按Ac/Re=0/1判定） a) 根据实际情况，对大于或等于M8的螺栓、螺钉、螺母直接在洛氏硬度计上测试即可； b) 有机械性能等级要求时，按对应的国标或图纸进行检验；未作要求时；螺栓、螺钉必 须为4.8级，螺母必须为8级； c) 对于自攻、自挤螺钉，硬度检测应制成镶件，测试其表面硬度、芯部硬度及渗碳层深 度。 1. 自攻、自挤螺钉热处理后的表面硬度应≥450HV0.3 2. 自攻钉热处理后的芯部硬度： 螺纹≤ST3.9：270~390 HV5 螺纹≤ST4.2：270~390 HV10 3. 自挤螺钉热处理后芯部硬度应为290~370HV10 4. 自攻螺纹规格与渗碳层的关系： 5. 自挤螺钉螺纹规格与渗碳层的关系：

不锈钢紧固件知识解读

一、不锈钢的特性： 1、不锈钢定义：不锈钢通常指具有抵抗空气、水、酸、碱盐或其它介质腐蚀能力的钢根据合金成份的不同，分别侧重不锈性和耐酸性，有些钢虽然具有不锈性，但不一定耐酸，耐酸钢通常具有不锈性。所有的不锈钢没有一种能够应付所有的腐蚀环境，都可以不生锈。“不锈钢”是一种错误的名称，因为没有一种能够应付所有腐蚀环境，都可以不生锈的，不锈钢的真正含义只是“难生锈”而已。 2、不锈钢的分类： （1）按组织结构：马氏体不锈钢，铁表体不锈钢，奥氏体不锈钢，双相不锈钢； （2）按钢中主要化学成份：铬不锈钢镍不锈钢，铬镍钼不锈钢，超低碳不锈钢。（用于生产紧固件主要使用300系奥氏体不锈钢，此类不锈钢的主要化学成份是18%铬加8%镍，即一般所称的18-8不锈钢，属铬镍不锈钢系列） （3）奥氏体不锈钢的特性：正常状态下无磁性，冷作加工后略有磁性；在各种温度，均可保持其奥斯田组织，不发生相变，所以不能用热处理使其硬化；但施予冷作加工，可使其硬化，并增加强度。 主要有以下几种钢种：302HQ（0Cr18Ni9Cu3）、SUS304(0Cr18Ni9)、304M、 304J3(302HC)、316(0Cr17Ni12Mo2)、316L(0Cr17Ni14Mo2)。 其化学成份为：

其钢种特性介绍如下： 302HQ：低碳，低氮，低硫，极低之加工硬化率，极佳之冷间加工性，适用于形状复杂，成型难度高之用途。 304：加工硬化率适中，适于一般的冷加工及伸抽，冷加工性能较好。 304M：中等的加工硬化率，适于一般的冷间加工及伸抽。 304HC：添加铜取代镍，降低钢材之加工硬化率，且可维持较低之导磁性。 SUS316：加钼，更佳的耐蚀性及耐孔蚀性。 SUS316L：低碳，较316更佳的耐蚀性及更佳的冷加工性。 二、奥氏体钢螺栓、螺钉和螺柱机械性能

关于紧固件钢的一些简要说明

紧固件材料 一、目前市场上标准件主要有碳钢、不锈钢、铜三种材料。 （一）碳钢。我们以碳钢料中碳的含量区分低碳钢，中碳钢和高碳钢以及合金钢。 1、低碳钢C%≤0.25% 国内通常称为A3钢。国外基本称为1008，1015，1018，1022等。主要用于4.8级螺栓及4级螺母、小螺丝等无硬度要求的产品。（注：钻尾钉主要用1022材料。） 2、中碳钢0.25%0.45%。目前市场上基本没使用 4、合金钢：在普碳钢中加入合金元素，增加钢材的一些特殊性能：如3 5、40铬钼、SCM435，10B38。芳生螺丝主要使用SCM435铬合金钢，主要成分有C、Si、Mn、P、S、Cr、Mo。 （二）不锈钢。性能等级：45，50，60，70，80 主要分奥氏体（18%Cr、8%Ni）耐热性好，耐腐蚀性好，可焊性好。A1，A2，A4 马氏体、13%Cr耐腐蚀性较差，强度高，耐磨性好。C1，C2，C4铁素体不锈钢。18%Cr镦锻性较好，耐腐蚀性强于马氏体。目前市场上进口材料主要是日本产品。按级别主要分SUS302、SUS304、SUS316。（三）铜。常用材料为黄铜…锌铜合金。市场上主要用H62、H65、H68铜做标准件。 二、碳钢产品所使用的盘元：

三、材料中各类元素对钢的性质的影响： 1、碳（C）：提高钢件强度，尤其是其热处理性能，但随着含碳量的增加，塑性和韧性下降，并会影响到钢件的冷镦性能及焊接性能。 2、锰（Mn）：提高钢件强度，并在一定程度上提高可淬性。即在淬火时增加了淬硬渗入的强度，锰还能改进表面质量，但是太多的锰对延展性和可焊性不利。并会影响电镀时镀层的控制。 3、镍（Ni）：提高钢件强度，改善低温下的韧性，提高耐大气腐蚀能力，并可保证稳定的热处理效果，减小氢脆的作用。 4、铬（Cr）：能提高可淬性，改善耐磨性，提高耐腐蚀能力，并有利于高温下保持强度。 5、钼（Mo）：能帮助控制可淬性，降低钢对回火脆性的敏感性，对提高高温下的抗拉强度有很大影响。 6、硼（B）：能提高可淬性，并且有助于使低碳钢对热处理产生预期的反应。 7、矾（V）：细化奥氏体晶粒，改善韧性。 8、硅（Si）：保证钢件的强度，适当的含量可以改善钢件塑性和韧性。 四、关于不锈钢材质之特性简介（304、316） （一）该三种材质均为300系列的奥氏体不锈钢，其化学成分如下： 名称 C Si Mn P S Ni Cr Mo Cu 304M ≤0.06≤1.0≤2.0≤0.045≤0.03 8.91-10.0 18.0-20.0 0 0 316 ≤0.03-0.06 ≤1.0≤2.0≤0.045≤0.03 10.0-14.0 16.0-18.0 2.0-3.0 0 304HC ≤0.08≤1.0≤2.0≤0.045≤0.03 8.0-10.5 17.0-19.0 0 1.0-3.0

紧固件材料知识

一、目前市场上标准件主要有碳钢、不锈钢、铜三种材料。 （一）碳钢。我们以碳钢料中碳的含量区分低碳钢，中碳钢和高碳钢以及合金钢。 1、低碳钢C%≤0.25% 国内通常称为A3钢。国外基本称为1008，1015，1018，1022等。主要用于4.8级螺栓及4级螺母、小螺丝等无硬度要求的产品。（注：钻尾钉主要用1022材料。） 2、中碳钢0.25%≤0.45% 国内通常称为35号、45号钢，国外基本称为1035，CH38F，1039，40ACR等。主要用于8级螺母、8.8级螺栓及8.8级内六角产品。 3、高碳钢C%>0.45%。目前市场上基本没使用 4、合金钢：在普碳钢中加入合金元素，增加钢材的一些特殊性能：如3 5、40铬钼、SCM435，10B38。芳生螺丝主要使用SCM435铬鉬合金钢，主要成分有C、Si、Mn、P、S、Cr、Mo。 （二）不锈钢。性能等级：45，50，60，70，80 主要分奥氏体（18%Cr、8%Ni）耐热性好，耐腐蚀性好，可焊性好。A1，A2，A4 马氏体、13%Cr耐腐蚀性较差，强度高，耐磨性好。C1，C2，C4铁素体不锈钢。18%Cr镦锻性较好，耐腐蚀性强于马氏体。目前市场上进口材料主要是日本产品。按级别主要分SUS302、SUS304、SUS316。（三）铜。常用材料为黄铜…锌铜合金。市场上主要用H62、H65、H68铜做标准件。 二、碳钢产品所使用的盘元：

三、材料中各类元素对钢的性质的影响： 1、碳（C）：提高钢件强度，尤其是其热处理性能，但随着含碳量的增加，塑性和韧性下降，并会影响到钢件的冷镦性能及焊接性能。 2、锰（Mn）：提高钢件强度，并在一定程度上提高可淬性。即在淬火时增加了淬硬渗入的强度，锰还能改进表面质量，但是太多的锰对延展性和可焊性不利。并会影响电镀时镀层的控制。 3、镍（Ni）：提高钢件强度，改善低温下的韧性，提高耐大气腐蚀能力，并可保证稳定的热处理效果，减小氢脆的作用。 4、铬（Cr）：能提高可淬性，改善耐磨性，提高耐腐蚀能力，并有利于高温下保持强度。 5、钼（Mo）：能帮助控制可淬性，降低钢对回火脆性的敏感性，对提高高温下的抗拉强度有很大影响。 6、硼（B）：能提高可淬性，并且有助于使低碳钢对热处理产生预期的反应。 7、矾（V）：细化奥氏体晶粒，改善韧性。 8、硅（Si）：保证钢件的强度，适当的含量可以改善钢件塑性和韧性。 四、关于不锈钢材质之特性简介（304、316） （一）该三种材质均为300系列的奥氏体不锈钢，其化学成分如下： （二）主要化学成分与不锈钢性能之关系。 1、碳C 可增加硬度和强度，含量过高会降低其延展性和耐蚀性 2、铬Cr 可增加耐蚀性、抗氧化性，使品粒细化，增加强度，硬度和耐磨性 3、镍Ni 可增加高温强度、耐蚀性，降低冷加工硬化之速率

紧固件的分类

紧固件分类方法 为了使用、管理和描述方便、需要采用一定的方法对其进行分类。标准件之都归纳了几种常用的紧固件分类方法： 1. 按使用领域分类 根据紧固件的使用领域不同，国际上将紧固件分为两大类：一类是一般用途紧固件，另一类是航空航天紧固件。 一般用途紧固件就是常用的普通紧固件。这类紧固件的标准在国际化上由ISO/TC2（国际标准化组织/紧固件标准化技术委员会）制定并归口，各国则以国家标准或标准化协会标准出现。我国紧固件国家标准由全国紧固件标准化技术委员会（SAC/TC85）制定并归口。这类紧固件采用普通螺纹和力学性能等级制度，广泛用于机械、电子、交通、店里、建筑、化工、船舶等领域，也可用于航空航天地面产品和电子产品。力学性能等级制度能够反映紧固件的综合力学性能，但主要是反映承载能力。该制度一般只限定材料类别和成分，不限定具体材料牌号。标准件之都为您提供 航空航天紧固件是专为航空航天飞行器设计的紧固件，这类紧固件的标准在国际上有ISO/TC20/SC4（国际标准化组织/航空航天器标准化技术委员会/航空航天紧固件技术委员会）制定并归口。我国的航空航天紧固件标准由紧固件国家军用标准、航空标准、航天标准共同构成。航空航天紧固

件的主要特点如下：标准件之都为您提供 （1）螺纹采用MJ螺纹（米制）、UNJ螺纹（英制）或MR螺纹。 （2）采用强度分级和温度分级。 （3）强度高、重量轻，强度等级一般在900Mpa以上，可达1800MPa甚至更高。 （4）精度高，防松性能好，可靠性高。 （5）能适应复杂环境。 （6）对所用材料有严格要求等。标准件之都为您提供 2.按传统习惯分类 根据我国的传统习惯，紧固件分为螺栓、螺柱、螺母、螺钉、木螺钉、自攻螺钉、垫圈、铆钉、销、挡圈、连接副和紧固件—组合件以及其他等13个大类。我国国家标准一直沿用这一分类方法。 3.按是否制定了标准分类 根据是否制定了标准，紧固件分为标准紧固件和非标准紧固件。标准紧固件是指已经标准化并形成了标准的紧固件，如国家标准紧固件、国家军用标准紧固件、航空标准紧固件、航天标准紧固件和企业标准紧固件等。非标准紧固件是指尚未形成标准的紧固件。随着适用范围的拓宽，非标准紧固件总的趋势会逐渐形成标准，转化为标准紧固件；也有些非标准紧固件，因为各种复杂因素影响，只能一直作为专用件适

我国紧固件行业概况研究

我国紧固件行业概况研究 1、行业概况 紧固件是指起到紧固连接作用且应用范围极其广泛的一类机械零件。本行业的上游企业主要为碳钢、不锈钢和铜等不同材质线材的供应商，上游行业竞争相对充分，产品替代性强。公司的下游行业主要是汽车、电子、电器、机械、化工、冶金、模具和液压等行业，紧固件广泛应用于各种机械、设备、车辆、船舶、铁路、桥梁和建筑。从紧固件需求的行业分布来看，汽车工业、维修和建筑工业以及电子工业的占比较高。下游行业对本行业的发展具有重大的驱动作用，其发展状况直接影响了对本行业产品的需求变化。随着技术的不断进步，下游行业对紧固件的技术要求也将发生改变，这会刺激细分行业内的公司不断研究开发新技术、新工艺，以适应市场需求的变化。 近年来我国紧固件行业保持较快发展，产量、销量和国有化程度不断提高。紧固件广泛应用各种机械、设备、车辆、船舶、铁路、桥梁、建筑、结构、工具及仪器仪表等领域，与装备制造业的发展紧密相关。随着我国经济稳定发展，紧固件下游产业需求持续提高，以及国家政策的大力支持，紧固件市场规模将继续保持上升，根据中商产业研究院数据，预计2019 年中国紧固件的总体市场规模将达到1,380 亿元。

数据来源：中商产业研究院整理 高端紧固件主要集中在航空航天、高铁、风电、核电、汽车及船舶等领域，此领域多属于我国高端装备制造业。近年来，我国高端装备制造业发展迅速，带动高端紧固件制造业稳定发展，早在2013年，我国智能制造、高速轨道交通、海洋工程等高端装备制造业产值占装备制造业比重已经超过10%。高端装备制造业处于价值链高端和产业链核心环节，决定着整个产业链综合竞争力的战略性新兴产业，是我国产业核心竞争力的体现，得到国家大力支持。高端紧固件市场规模将伴随着航空航天、卫星及应用、轨道交通装备、海洋工程装备、核电、风电以及汽车等行业的快速发展而持续走高，根据中商产业研究院数据，预计2019 年中国高端紧固件市场规模将达到590 亿元。

紧固件用钢简介

紧固件用钢简介 钢材是紧固件中最基本的材料，虽然有色金属和复合材料的应用比重在逐年增加，但高强度紧固件所用钢材的作用是无法替代的。各种紧固件通常由冷镦钢来制作。从品种分类来说，紧固件所用的钢材除了普碳钢外，还有不锈钢、高温合金钢、铝镁合金、蒙乃尔合金等等。其中不锈钢和有色金属约占耗材总量的5%—7%，除此之外主要是冷镦线材。冷镦钢线材、盘条的钢种一般为低、中碳优质碳素结构钢和低合金钢。低碳冷镦钢主要用于冷镦螺母。螺栓、螺钉的用材主要以中碳钢（ML35和SWRCH35K）为主，经调质处理后达到8级和8级以上。 冷镦是在常温下利用金属塑性成形的。冷镦性能是冷镦钢的重要性能之一。其性能主要体现是具有良好的冷成形性；对于变形要具有尽可能小的阻力和可能高的变形能力。冷镦钢因冷成型性能良好，在机械加工行业用冷拔代替热轧材切削机加工，这种工艺的优点是在节约大量工时的同时，金属消耗可以降低10%-30%，符合清洁生产、节约资源型企业大生产，而且产品尺寸精度高，表面光洁度好，生产效率高，是重点推广的先进机加工工艺。因此，采用冷镦工艺制造紧固件，不但效率高、质量好，而且用料省、成本低。 国内冷镦钢线材、盘条的开发尽管起步较晚，但发展很快，尤其进入20世纪80年代中期以后，高速线材生产线、盘条连轧生产线的纷纷投产，为冷镦钢线材、盘条的生产提供了装备上的保证。 2005年末冷镦线材的生产能力达600万吨／年（约占线材总量的10—12%）。与紧固件行业建立合作关系的以宝钢、马钢、邢钢、湘钢、杭钢为主的钢厂，已经形成了我国冷镦用线材的产业群。产品的品种由低碳、超低碳、中碳（调质），低合金合金钢和表面渗碳硬化用钢几个大类，规格由5.5～42mm，几乎覆盖了紧固件用钢全部需求。 近年来，随着中国紧固件行业的快速发展，紧固件用钢需求也有明显增长。钢铁几乎占据紧固件产品100%的重量，同时，考虑到生产过程中15%-20%的材料损耗，一吨紧固件大约需要1.18-1.25吨钢铁，每年紧固件需要消耗钢材数量相当可观。据有关资料表明，就冷镦钢市场2003年全国紧固件需求量达到300万吨，2005年需求量增至450万吨，2006年全国需求量达到550多万吨，预计2007年将增至800万吨。

标准紧固件概述

紧固件指能够起紧固作用的零件。 螺纹紧固件是指带有螺纹的紧固件，是根据一定的尺寸制造的，它通过外螺纹和内螺纹的相互配合来发挥其基本功能，我们正是利用螺纹紧固件具备的这种功能，使螺纹紧固件在物体与物体的连接和紧固上，以及物体的移动等方面起到很大作用。 紧固件不仅包括螺纹紧固件，还有垫圈、铆钉、销等。 1、螺纹的分类 根据用途可把螺纹分成四类 ①紧固螺纹,包括普通螺纹；过渡配合螺纹；过盈配合螺纹；小螺纹；MJ螺纹 ②传动螺纹，包括梯形螺纹；锯齿形螺纹；方形螺纹。 ③管螺纹，55°牙型角的管螺纹；60°牙型角的管螺纹；米制锥螺纹；干密封管螺纹。 ④专用螺纹，包括光学仪器用螺纹；锻钢阀门用短牙梯形螺纹；机床梯形螺纹丝杠；石油螺纹；气瓶螺纹等等。 2、螺纹的加工方法：滚压、磨削、切削三种方式。 3、螺纹的标注方法： 例如：M 10×1 LH –7H-L M表示普通螺纹特征代号；10×1表示公称直径×螺距，粗牙不注螺距；LH表示左旋螺纹代号，右旋螺纹不注出旋向代号；7H表示公差带代号；L表示旋合长度组别代号。中等长度不注出组别代号，特殊需要时注出具体长度值。 一、紧固件的种类 紧固件一般包括： 螺钉、螺栓、螺母等螺纹紧固件 垫圈、铆钉、销等非螺纹紧固件 1、编号规则 标准件的编号应依照标准CACBW-7，主要有以下7个部分组成。 1汽车标准件的代号2类别代号、组别代号 3尺寸规格代号4材料、机械性能等级和热处理代号 5覆盖层代号6全螺纹代号 7涂胶代号 具体内容如下： 1、汽车标准件的代号。标准件特征代号有Q或CQ、T三种形式 2、类别代号、组别代号。 第一位数字：1—螺栓类2—螺钉类3—螺母类4—垫圈、挡圈、铆钉 5—开口销、销、键6—螺塞、管接件、环箍夹片 7—润滑件、密封件、连接件8—空号9—其他。 第二位数字为标准件的组别代号。 第三位数字为标准件的分组号，对于螺纹件其偶数表示粗牙，奇数表示细牙；管螺纹例外。 3、尺寸规格代号。 螺栓、螺钉、铆钉、销及销钉等以“螺纹直径”或“杆径”和“长度”表示。直径为一位时，应在左边加“0”定位，长度是几位就写几位。

HGT205922009《钢制管法兰、垫片、紧固件》新旧标准对比.doc

精心整理 HG/T20592-2009( 钢制管法兰、垫片、紧固件 ) ⑴、法兰公称压力等级采用PN.2.5,6,10,16,25,40,63,100,160。 ⑵、钢制管法兰用材料：增加类别号，P19。 PL 法兰增加了 PN40 等级，增加了钢制孔板法兰（规范性附录），钢制夹套法兰（资 料性附录）。 、把原HG20608-1997归入到HG/T20606-2009,钢制管法兰用非金属平垫片，并 在HG/T20606-2009 中增加了好多品种。 HG/T20610-2009 钢制管法兰用缠绕式垫片，金属材料和填充材料都比老标准有所 增加，老标准称外环，新标准称对中环。 ⑹、紧固件使用限制，新、旧标准有所区别： 老标准新标准 商品级六角螺栓，使用条件应符合商品级六角螺栓及Ⅰ型螺母使用条件应符合 ①、PN＜1.6MPa；①、公称压力等级小于或等于PN16； ② 、非剧烈循环场合；②、非有毒，非可燃介质及非剧烈循环场合； ③ 、配非金属软垫片；③、配非金属平垫片。 ④ 、介质为非易燃、易爆及毒性危害程度较大 的场合。 商品级双头螺柱及螺母使用条件应符合以下要求商品级双头螺柱及Ⅰ型螺母使用条件应 符合以 ①、 PN≤4.0MPa；下要求 ②、非剧烈循环场合；①、公称压力等级小于或等于PN40； ②、非有毒，非易燃介质及非剧烈循环场合； 除上述以外应选用专用级螺柱（双头螺柱或全螺除上述以外应选用专用级全螺纹螺柱和 Ⅱ型螺母 纹螺柱）和专用级螺母。缠绕垫、金属包覆垫、 齿形组合垫、金属环垫等半金属或全金属垫片应 使用 35CrMoA 等高强度螺柱（双头螺柱或全螺 纹螺柱） 紧固件六角头螺栓 标准规格性能等级（商品级）GB/T5782（粗牙）M10.M12,M16,M20,M24,M27,M30,M 5.6，8.8，A2-50,A4-50,A2-70, 33A4-70 GB/T5785（细牙）M36 ×3,M39× 3,M45×3,M52 × 4,M56×4 等长双头螺柱 标准规格性能等级（商品级） GB/T901M10.M12,M16,M20,M24,M27,M30,M8.8，A2-50,A4-50,A2-70, 33A4-70 M36 ×3,M39× 3,M45×3,M52 × 4,M56×4 全螺纹螺柱

hgt钢制管法兰垫片紧固件》新旧标准对比

HG/T20592-2009(钢制管法兰、垫片、紧固件) ⑴、法兰公称压力等级采用。 ⑵、钢制管法兰用材料：增加类别号，P19。 ⑶、PL法兰增加了PN40等级，增加了钢制孔板法兰（规范性附录），钢制夹套法兰（资料性附 录）。 ⑷、把原HG20608-1997归入到HG/T20606-2009,钢制管法兰用非金属平垫片，并在 HG/T20606-2009中增加了好多品种。 ⑸、HG/T20610-2009钢制管法兰用缠绕式垫片，金属材料和填充材料都比老标准有所增加，老 标准称外环，新标准称对中环。 ⑹、紧固件使用限制，新、旧标准有所区别： 老标准新标准 商品级六角螺栓，使用条件应符合商品级六角螺栓及Ⅰ型螺母使用条件应符合 ①、PN＜；①、公称压力等级小于或等于PN16； ②、非剧烈循环场合；②、非有毒，非可燃介质及非剧烈循环场合； ③、配非金属软垫片；③、配非金属平垫片。 ④、介质为非易燃、易爆及毒性危害程度较大 的场合。 商品级双头螺柱及螺母使用条件应符合以下要求商品级双头螺柱及Ⅰ型螺母使用条件应符合以 ①、PN≤；下要求 ②、非剧烈循环场合；①、公称压力等级小于或等于PN40； ②、非有毒，非易燃介质及非剧烈循环场合；除上述以外应选用专用级螺柱（双头螺柱或全螺除上述以外应选用专用级全螺纹螺柱和Ⅱ型螺母纹螺柱）和专用级螺母。缠绕垫、金属包覆垫、 齿形组合垫、金属环垫等半金属或全金属垫片应 使用35CrMoA等高强度螺柱（双头螺柱或全螺 纹螺柱） 紧固件六角头螺栓 等长双头螺柱 全螺纹螺柱

螺栓/螺柱与螺母匹配 紧固件材料 平垫圈GB/T ※管法兰： 板式平焊法兰，螺纹法兰，对焊环松套法兰，平焊环松套法兰不应使用与剧烈循环工况，在剧烈循环工况下应选用带颈对焊法兰或整体法兰。 ※垫片： ·柔性石墨材料用氧化性介质时最高使用温度不超过450℃； ·石棉和非石棉垫片不应用于极度和高度危害介质和高真空场合； ·具有冷流倾向聚四氟乙烯平垫片，其密封面应采用FF，MFM，TG； ·公称压力小于等于PN16的法兰，采用缠绕垫，金属包覆垫，半金属垫，金属环垫时应采用带颈对焊法兰.。 ※紧固件： ·低强度紧固件，仅用于公称压力小于等于PN16，采用非金属平垫片的法兰，不应使用于剧烈循环的工况，级紧固件适用于温度不大于200℃的场合； ·六角螺栓仅适用于公称压力小于或等于PN16的场合； ·公称压力大于等于PN40或高温工况应采用全螺纹螺柱。

紧固件标准

紧固件标准（螺母） 序号标准编号及名称被代替的标准1G B39—88方螺母—C级G B39—76 2G B41—86六角螺母—C级（ISO4034—1979）G B41—76 3G B56—88六角厚螺母G B56—76 4G B62—88蝶形螺母G B62—76 5G B802—88组合式盖形螺母G B802—76 6G B804—88球面六角螺母G B804—76 7G B806—88滚花高螺母G B806—76 8G B807—88滚花薄螺母G B807—76 9G B808—88小六角特扁细牙螺母G B808—76 10G B809—88嵌装螺圆母G B809—76 11G B810—88小圆螺母G B810—76 12G B812—88圆螺母G B812—76 13G B815—88端面带孔圆螺母G B815—76 14G B816—88侧面带孔圆螺母G B816—76 15G B817—88带槽圆螺母G B817—76 16G B889—86非金属嵌件六角锁紧螺母ISO（7040—1983）G B889—80 C B890—80 17G B923—88盖形螺母G B923—76 18G B6170—86六角螺母A和B级（ISO4032—1979）G B52—76 G B51—76 19G B6171—86六角螺母—细牙A和B级（ISO4032—1979G B52—76 G B53—76 20G B6172—88六角薄螺母—A和B级—倒角G B54—76 G B53—76 21G B6173—86六角薄螺母—细牙—A和B级G B854—76 22G B6174—86六角薄螺母—B级—无倒角（ISO4036—1979）—— 23G B6175—86六角螺母A和B级（ISO4033—1979）G B55—76 24G B6176—86六角螺母—细牙—A和B级G B55—76 25G B6177—88六角法兰面螺母—A级（ISO4161—1983）—— 26G B6178—86六角开槽螺母—A和B级G B57—76 G B58—76 27G B6176—86六角开槽螺母—C级G B57—76 G B58—76 28G B6180—86六角开槽螺母—A和B级—— 29G B6181—86六角开槽溥螺母—A和B级G B59—76 G B60—76 30G B6184—86金属六角锁紧螺母（ISO7719—1983）—— 31G B6185—86非金属六角锁紧螺母—5、8、10和12级（ISO4032—1979）—— 32G B9457—88六角开槽螺母细牙A和B级G B57—76 G B58—76有关全部 33G B9458—88六角开槽螺母细牙A和B级—— 34G B9459—86六角开槽薄螺母细牙A和B级G B59—76 G B60—76有关全部

钢结构紧固件的安施工方法及质量标准

钢结构紧固件的安施工方法及质量标准 适用范围 ★主要适用于钢结构安装中的普通螺栓、扭剪型高强度螺栓、大六角头高强度螺栓、铆钉、自攻钉、拉铆钉、射钉、锚栓、地脚锚栓等紧固标准件安装施工方法及质量标准; ★其它领域、用途的钢结构框架紧固件安装施工也可参照执行。 施工要求 ★安装施工前对施工主要设备、机具准备完毕;所有零部件、构件预制组装检验完安装施工前对施工场地、排放材料场地准备好，具备施工条件; ★所有参见施工的人员已参加了施工技术交底，明确了施工程序、施工方法、安装工序、质量标准、成品保护和HSE技术要求; ★施工班长、岗长应对施工图纸资料、标准图集、施工及验收标准规范等熟知; ★到货的品种、规格、性能等应符合现行国家产品标准和设计要求，有产品质量文件。高强度大六角头螺栓连接副和扭剪型高强度螺栓连接副出厂时应分别随箱带有扭矩系数和紧固轴力(预拉力)检验报告; a)高强度螺栓连接副应按包装箱配套供货，包装箱上应标明批号、规格、数量及生产日期。螺栓、螺母、垫圈外观表面应涂油保护，不应出现生锈和沾染赃物，螺纹不应损伤; b)普通螺栓作为永久性连接螺栓时，当设计有要求或对其质量有疑义时，应进行螺栓实物最小拉力载荷复验，每种规格螺栓抽查8个; c)对高强度大六角头螺栓连接副应进行扭矩系数复验并出具检验报告，每批抽取8套连接副进行复验，复验后计算出每组8套连接副扭矩系数的平均值应为0.110——0.150，标准偏差小于或等于0.010; d)扭剪型高强度螺栓连接副应进行预拉力复验并出具检验报告，每批抽取8套连接副进行复验，预拉力平均值及标准偏差应符合下表要求： e)对建筑结构安全等级为一级，跨度为40m及以上的螺栓球节点钢网架结构，其连接高强度螺栓应进行表面硬度试验，按照规格抽查8只。对8.8级的高强度螺栓其硬度应为HRC21-29;10.9级高强度螺栓其硬度应为HRC32-36，且不得有裂纹或损伤。