A storage tank had been in service at a petrochemical plant for 13 years when inspectors discovered cracks adjacent to weld joints and in the base plate near the foundation. The tank was made from AISI 304 stainless steel and held styrene monomer, a derivative of benzene. The cracks were subsequently welded over with 308 stainless steel filler wire and the base plate was replaced with new material. Soon after, the tank began leaking along the weld bead, triggering a full-scale investigation; spectroscopy, optical and scanning electron microscopy, fractography, SEM-EDS analysis, and microhardness, tensile, and impact testing. The results revealed transgranular cracks in the HAZ and base plate, likely initiated by stresses developed during welding and the presence of chloride from seawater used in the plant. It was also found that the repair weld was improperly done, nor did it include a postweld heat treatment to remove weld sensitization and minimize residual stresses.

A riveted 0.25% carbon steel oil-storage tank in Oklahoma was dismantled and reassembled in Minnesota by welding to form a storage tank for soybean oil. An opening was cut in the side of the tank to admit a front-end loader. A frame of heavy angle iron was welded to the tank and drilled for bolting on a heavy steel plate. The tank was filled to a record height. In mid-Jan the temperature dropped to -31 deg C (-23 deg F), with high winds. The tank split open and collapsed. The welding used the shielded metal arc process with E6010 electrodes, which could lead to weld porosity, hydrogen embrittlement, or both. At subzero temperatures, the steel was below its ductile-to-brittle transition temperature. These circumstances suggest a brittle condition. Steps to avoid this type of failure: For cold conditions, the steel plate should have a low carbon content and a high manganese-to-sulfur ratio and be in a normalized condition, low-hydrogen electrodes and welding practices should be used, all corners should be generously radiused, the welds should be inspected and ground or dressed to minimize stress concentrations, postweld heating is advisable, and radiographic and penetrant inspection tests should be performed.

Leakage was identified around a coupling welded into a stainless steel holding tank that stored condensate water with low impurity content. The tank and fitting were manufactured from type 304 stainless steel. The coupling joint consisted of an internal groove weld and an external fillet weld. Cracking was found to be apparent on the tank surface, adjacent to the coupling weld. Chlorine, carbon, and oxygen in addition to the base metal elements were revealed by energy-dispersive x-ray spectrometric analysis. A great number of secondary, branching cracks were evident in the weld, heat-affected zone, and base metal. The branching and transgranular cracking was found to emanate primarily from the exterior of the tank. It was concluded that the tank failed as a result of stress-corrosion cracking that initiated at the exterior surface as aqueous chlorides, especially within an acidic environment, have been shown to cause SCC in austenitic stainless steels under tensile stress.

Several pressurized air containers (i.e., diving tanks) made of non-heat-treatable Al-5Mg aluminum alloy failed catastrophically. Catastrophic failure occurred when a subcritical stress corrosion crack reached a critical size. Critical crack size for unstable propagation was reached prior to wall penetration, which could have led to subsequent loss of pressure, resulting in explosion of the cylinder. It was recommended that more stress corrosion resistant alloys be used for sea diving applications. Furthermore, cylinders should have a reduced wall thickness that can be determined employing the “leak-before-break” design philosophy, developed using fracture mechanics, to eliminate the possibility of catastrophic ruptures.

Two freshwater tanks (0.81 mm (0.032 in) thick, type 321 stainless steel) were removed from aircraft service because of leakage due to pitting and rusting on the bottoms of the tanks. One tank had been in service for 321 h, the other for 10 h. There had been departures from the specified procedure for chemical cleaning of the tanks in preparation for potable water storage. The sodium hypochlorite sterilizing solution used was three times the prescribed strength, and the process exposed the bottom of the tanks to hypochlorite solution that had collected near the outlet. Investigation (visual inspection, 95x unetched images, chemical testing with a 5% salt spray, chemical testing with sodium hypochlorite at three strength levels, samples were also pickled in an aqueous solution containing 15 vol% concentrated nitric acid (HNO3) and 3 vol% concentrated hydrofluoric acid (HF) and were then immersed in the three sodium hypochlorite solutions for several days) supported the conclusion that failure of the stainless steel tanks by chloride-induced pitting resulted from using an overly strong hypochlorite solution for sterilization and neglecting to rinse the tanks promptly afterward. Recommendations included revising directions for sterilization and rinsing.

After 10 to 20 months of service, the carbon steel hoppers on three trucks used to transport bulk ammonium nitrate prills developed extensive cracking in the upper walls. The prills were discharged from the steel hoppers using air superchargers that generated an unloading pressure of approximately 11 kPa (7 psi). Each hopper truck held from 9,100 to 11,800 kg (10 to 13 tons) of prills when fully loaded and handled approximately 90,700 kg (100 tons) per month. The walls of the hoppers were made of 2.7 mm (0.105 in.) thick flat-rolled carbon steel sheet of structural quality, conforming to ASTM A 245 (obsolete specification replaced by A 570 and A 611). Investigation (visual inspection and 100x micrographs polished and etched with nital) supported the conclusion that failure of the hoppers was the result of intergranular SCC of the sheet-steel walls because of contact with a highly concentrated ammonium nitrate solution. Recommendations included the cost-effective solution of applying a three-coat epoxy-type coating with a total dry thickness of 0.3 mm (0.013 in.) to the interior surfaces of the hoppers.

A 5000-gal (20,000-L) hot-water holding tank fractured at a large automotive manufacturing plant. The tank was made from Type 304 austenitic stainless steel. The inner diameter of the tank displayed a macroscopic, web-like network of cracks that deceptively suggested intergranular stress-corrosion cracking. The problem, however, originated on the outside surface of the tank where a tensile stress (due to low applied stress and fabrication-induced residual stresses) accelerated the growth of numerous stress corrosion cracks that eventually broke through to the inner surface, causing leakage and ultimately failure.

The interior of a cylindrical tank used for the road transport of concentrated sulfuric acid revealed severe blistering of the plates, mainly over the crown and more particularly on the first ring. The tank, made in 1958, was of welded construction, the material being mild steel plate. Some of the blisters were pierced by drilling a hole in the center and at the same time applying a small flame. In several cases combustion of the escaping gas caused minor explosions, a result characteristic of hydrogen. Etching showed the material to be a low-carbon steel in the partly spheroidized condition. There was no evidence of cracking of the material in the region of the blisters and bend tests demonstrated it possessed satisfactory ductility. The primary cause of the blistering was ascribed to the presence of discontinuities within the plate. This provided cavities in which the hydrogen was able to accumulate and build up pressure. Had the material been free from discontinuities of appreciable size, the blistering would not have occurred.

This investigation involved two AISI 304L acid storage tanks and one AISI 304L spent solvent tank from a sewage treatment facility. After installation, these tanks were hydrostatically tested using sewage effluent. No leaks were found and after a year or two, the tanks were drained and filled with nitric acid in preparation for service. Three weeks later the two acid tanks were found to be leaking from the bottom. Samples from the spent solvent tank revealed that pitting was located in a depressed area near a suction hole, beneath a black residue. It was concluded that the acid tanks failed by chloride-induced pitting initiated by microbial activity. Further, the spent solvent tank failed by a similar, but anaerobic mechanism. The use of the effluent for the hydrostatic test and the failure to remove it and clean and dry the tanks was the primary cause of failure. Localized carbide segregation in the original plate served as preferential corrosion sites. Had the tanks been hydrostatically tested in a proper manner, the pitting may not have occurred.

Welded steel storage vessels used to hold mildly alkaline solution were produced in exactly the same manner from deep-drawn aluminum-killed SAE 1006 low-carbon steel sheet. After the cylindrical shell was drawn, a top low-carbon steel closure was welded to the inside diameter. The containers were then filled with the slightly alkaline solution, pressurized, and allowed to stand under ambient conditions. A small number, less than 1%, were returned because they began to leak in service. Inspection revealed general corrosion and pitting on the inner surfaces. However, other tanks that experienced the same service conditions developed no corrosion. Corrosion was linked to forming defects that provided sites for localized corrosion, and to lack of steam drying after cleaning, which increased susceptibility to general corrosion.

Four tanks made from type 304L stainless steel were removed from storage. Atmospheric corrosion on the outside of the tanks and pitting and crevice corrosion on the inside were visible. Metallographic examination revealed that the internal corrosion had been caused by crevices related to weld spatter and uneven weld deposit and by service water that had not been drained after hydrostatic testing. External corrosion was attributed to improper passivation. It was recommended that the surfaces be properly passivated and that, before storage, the interiors be rinsed with demineralized water and dried.

Although field corrosion tests had indicated that type 316L stainless steel would be a suitable material for neutralization tanks, the vessels suffered severe corrosion when placed in service. Welded coupons of type 316L had been tested along with similar Alloy 20Cb® (UNS NO8020) specimens in a lead-lined tank equipped with copper coils that had served in this function prior to construction of the new tanks. Both materials exhibited virtually no corrosion and no preferential weld attack. Type 316L was selected for the project. The subsequent corrosion was the result of the borderline passivity of type 316L in hot dilute sulfuric acid (about 0.1%). Inaccuracy of the testing was attributed to the presence of cupric ions in the lead-lined vessel fluids, which had been released by corrosion of the copper coils. Careful control of both temperature and pH was recommended to reduce the corrosion to an acceptable limit.