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.

A portion of the roof of a single story building collapsed during a thunder storm. A failure analysis was conducted to determine whether this structural failure was due to improper design, substandard construction materials, faulty erection, or extreme weather conditions. The failure analysis consisted of an onsite inspection, macrofractographic examination of the fractures where the girders were welded to the columns, macrofractographic examination of the fractured trusses, metallographic examination of the girder and truss materials, chemical analysis of the low-carbon steel girder and truss materials, and mechanical testing of the truss material. It was concluded that substandard structural components in combination with faulty construction was responsible for this service failure.

On 23 Dec 1997, a portion of the main ore conveyor at a large mine collapsed onto a highway and shut down mine operations. The conveyor structure that collapsed was supported by a steel truss spanning 185 ft. Truss failure occurred just as the conveyor transport rate was increased to 8,260 tph. Under this total loading, which was only slightly above the regular operating condition, a poorly designed and fabricated transition joint in the west lower chord failed, thereby overloading other key structural members and causing the entire truss to collapse. Another contributing cause of the collapse was the transition joint welds, where the fracture originated. They were made with undersized fillet welds, 20% smaller than specified on the original fabrication drawing. Because of the poorly designed joint detail and the deficient welds, both of which concentrated stress and strain in the low ductility direction of the transition joint plate, lamellar tearing of plate material occurred at the boxed I-beam fillet weld attachment. Brittle fracture of this joint precipitated global collapse of the truss structure.

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.

A 230 mm (9 in.) diameter disk attrition mill was scheduled to grind 6.35 mm (0.25 in.) diameter quartz particles to a 0.075 mm (0.003 in.) diameter powder. Due to severe wear on the grinding plates, however, the unit was unable to complete the task of grinding the rock. The mill consisted of a heavy gray cast iron frame, a gravity feeder port, a runner, and a heavy-duty motor. The frame and gravity feeder weighed over 200 kg (440 lb) and, in some areas, was over 25 mm (1 in.) thick. To obtain the operating speed of 200 rpm, a gear system was used to transmit the torque from the 2-hp motor. The runner consisted of a 50 mm (2 in.) diameter shaft and two gray cast iron grinding plates. Investigation (visual inspection, historical review, photographs, model testing of new plates, chemical analysis, hardness testing, optical macrographs, and optical micrographs) supported the conclusion that the primary feed material was harder than the grinding plates, causing wear and eventual failure. Recommendations included reducing the clearance between the flutes and possible material changes.

This article provides a background of friction-bearing failures due to overheating. The failures of locomotive axles caused by overheated traction-motor support bearings are discussed. The article also describes liquid-metal embrittlement (LME) in steel. It examines the results of various axle studies, with illustrations and concludes with information on the simulation of the LME mechanism.

A white cast iron water-line plug in a fire sprinkler systems split during leak repair. Examination revealed no material flaws, fatigue, or excessive corrosion. The plug head exhibited signs of excessive loads used in attempts to force the plug farther into the pipe. The evidence obtained indicated that the failure resulted from human error.

A steel splice plate in a power transmission line tower cracked while in service. Metallographic analysis indicated the presence of a white hard martensite layer near the crack, which occurred in the heel of the plate. Mechanical property tests revealed localized hardening in the area of the crack, supporting the metallurgical findings. A substantial deterioration of the Charpy impact toughness of the material in the heel region was also observed which is believed to have caused the initiation and propagation of the cracks leading to the failure.

Impact or percussive wear is defined as the wear of a solid surface that is due to percussion, which is a repetitive exposure to dynamic contact by another body. Impact wear, however, has many analogies to the field of erosive wear. The main difference is that, in impact wear situations, the bodies tend to be large and contact in a well-defined location in a controlled way, unlike erosion where the eroding particles are small and interact randomly with the target surface. This article describes some generic features and modes of impact wear of metals, ceramics, and polymers. It discusses the processes involved in testing and modeling of impact wear, and includes two case studies.

Engineered components fail predominantly in four major ways: fracture, corrosion, wear, and undesirable deformation (i.e., distortion). Typical fracture mechanisms feature rapid crack growth by ductile or brittle cracking; more progressive (subcritical) forms involve crack growth by fatigue, creep, or environmentally-assisted cracking. Corrosion and wear are another form of progressive material alteration or removal that can lead to failure or obsolescence. This article primarily covers the topic of abrasive wear failures, covering the general classification of wear. It also discusses methods that may apply to any form of wear mechanism, because it is important to identify all mechanisms or combinations of wear mechanisms during failure analysis. The article concludes by presenting several examples of abrasive wear.

This article considers the main characteristics of wear mechanisms and how they can be identified. Some identification examples are reported, with the warning that this task can be difficult because of the presence of disturbing factors such as contaminants or possible additional damage of the worn products after the tribological process. Then, the article describes some examples of wear processes, considering possible transitions and/or interactions of the mechanism of fretting wear, rolling-sliding wear, abrasive wear, and solid-particle erosion wear. The role of tribological parameters on the material response is presented using the wear map concept, which is very useful and informative in several respects. The article concludes with guidelines for the selection of suitable surface treatments to avoid wear failures.

Wear, a form of surface deterioration, is a factor in a majority of component failures. This article is primarily concerned with abrasive wear mechanisms such as plastic deformation, cutting, and fragmentation which, at their core, stem from a difference in hardness between contacting surfaces. Adhesive wear, the type of wear that occurs between two mutually soluble materials, is also discussed, as is erosive wear, liquid impingement, and cavitation wear. The article also presents a procedure for failure analysis and provides a number of detailed examples, including jaw-type rock crusher wear, electronic circuit board drill wear, grinding plate wear failure analysis, impact wear of disk cutters, and identification of abrasive wear modes in martensitic steels.

Failure analysis of a mobile harbor crane wheel hub that included SEM and EDS analyses demonstrated that the mechanism of failure was fatigue. The wheel hub was a ductile cast iron component that had been subjected to cyclic loading during a ten-year service period. The fracture surface of the fatigue failure also contained corrosion deposit, suggesting that cracking occurred over a period of time sufficient to allow corrosion of the cracked surfaces. Replacement and alignment of the failed wheel hub was recommended along with inspection of the nonfailed wheel hubs that remained on the crane.

Erosion occurs as the result of a number of different mechanisms, depending on the composition, size, and shape of the eroding particles; their velocity and angle of impact; and the composition of the surface being eroded. This article describes the erosion of ductile and brittle materials with the aid of models and equations. It presents three examples of erosive wear failures, namely, abrasive erosion, erosion-corrosion, and cavitation erosion.