Search Results for Tanks

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.

Two tanks made of AISI type 304 stainless steel exhibited cracking in the heat-affected zone (HAZ) of the weld that joined the dished end and the shell. The dished ends had been produced by cold deformation. Hardness measurement and simulation tests showed that the deformation was equivalent to a 30% reduction in thickness. Residual stresses were measured at about 135 MPa (20 ksi). The HAZ was found to be sensitized. The tanks had been stored in a coastal atmosphere for about 4 years before installation. The failure was attributed to intergranular stress-corrosion cracking in a sensitized HAZ due to chloride from the environment. Use of low-carbon type AISI 304L was recommended. Minimization of fit-up stresses and covering with polyethylene sheets during storage were also suggested.

During an acceptance test of the Apollo spacecraft 101 service module prior to delivery, an SPS fuel pressure vessel (SN054) (titanium Ti-6Al-4V, approximately 1.2 m (4 ft) in diam and 3 m (10 ft) long) containing methanol developed cracks adjacent to the welds. The test was stopped. This acceptance test had been run 38 times on similar pressure vessels without problems. The methanol was a safe-fluid replacement for the storable hypergolic fuels (blend of 50% hydrazine and 50% unsymmetrical dimethyl hydrazine). Investigation (visual inspection and 65X images) showed similarities to stress-corrosion resulting from contamination during misprocessing of the vessels. However, another vessel underwent a more severe testing procedure and failed catastrophically. Further investigation supported the conclusion that the failure cause was SCC of titanium in methanol. Attack is promoted by crazing of the protective oxide film. It was learned that minor changes in the testing procedures could inhibit or accelerate the reaction. Recommendations included replacing the methanol with a suitable alternate fluid. Isopropyl alcohol was chosen after considerable testing. This incident further resulted in the imposition of a control specification (MF0004-018) for all fluids that contact titanium for existing and future space designs.

Aluminum 7075 aircraft wing tanks failed in the 1950s. Investigation (visual inspection, biological analysis, and chemical analysis) supported the conclusion that MIC was the cause of the failures. Water condensed into the fuel tanks during flight led to microbial growth on the jet fuel. Pitting attack occurred under microbial deposits on the metal surface in the water phase or at the water-fuel interface. Previously, exposure of aluminum 7075 to cultures of various isolates showed that 27 bacterial isolates and 3 fungi could seriously corrode the aluminum alloy over several weeks. No recommendations were made.

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.

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.

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.

A four-million gallon capacity (15,142 cu m) oil storage tank ruptured upon filling after re-erection near West Elizabeth, PA on 2 Jan 1988. The tank shell split vertically with failure originating at a flaw existing prior to the reconstruction. Brittle fracture occurred both up and down from the defect when the stress induced by filling reached a critical value for the steel, which had poor toughness properties. This steel had been used in the original construction of a tank in Ohio more than 40 years previously. The defect at which brittle fracture originated in the tank shell showed evidence of burning from a torch. This tank failure was the catalyst for the introduction of new rules concerning the inspection and assessment of older storage tanks.

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.

Two plastic tank floats in separate toilets in one dwelling failed within a relatively brief period of time. Examination of the floats and of a brass connecting rod revealed that the fracture occurred at the base of the threaded hole in the nipple and was brittle in nature. The fracture surfaces were coated with zinc oxide. It was concluded that the failure resulted from improper repairs and/or adjustments, including the use of a cosmetic zinc oxide cream as a lubricant. The cream initiated deterioration of the originally ductile plastic, causing it to become brittle and fragile.

A 100,000 barrel crude oil storage tank rupture caused extensive property damage in Dec 1980, in Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan. Failure was attributed to a brittle fracture that originated at a weld between a reinforcing pad and a manway nozzle. Factors that contributed to the brittle fracture included incomplete penetration in a single-bevel groove weld, poor impact properties of the hot rolled ASTM A283 low-carbon steel base material, and air temperature down to 27 C on the day of failure. Details of the analysis and results of impact testing are discussed.

An external tank pressure/vent valve regulates the external tank fuel feed system, which transfers fuel under pressure to the internal tanks of the aircraft. A dual-position valve was found to be sticking at the intermediate positions. Also, service air check valves located on the incoming lines contained poppets that were being stuck in a closed or partially closed position because of suspected corrosion product. Residue taken from the check valve poppet and from the dual-position valve was chemically analyzed. Chloride was present in both samples. It was suspected that moisture entering the service air lines left a chloride-containing compound upon evaporation within the air check valves and pressure/vent assembly. This compound subsequently reacted with the anodized, dichromate sealed check valve housing to lock the check valve poppets in a closed or partially closed position, decreasing the actual pressure being supplied to the pressure/vent valve. It was recommended that an inspection be conducted to ensure that the service air check valves are operating properly prior to removal and servicing of the pressure/vent valve assembly. It was also recommended that dry-film lubricant be checked to ensure that it meets specifications for the pressure/vent valve assembly.

A failure of an aboveground storage tank occurred due to external corrosion of the tank floor. The liquid asphalt tank operated at elevated temperatures (approximately 177 deg C, or 350 deg F) and had been in service for six years. Cathodic protection (rectifiers) had been installed since start-up of the tank operation. It was noted, however, that some operational problems with the rectifier may have interrupted its protection. Investigation (visual inspection, on-site examination and testing, EDS analysis of scale deposits, and MIC testing of the soil) supported the conclusion that corrosion may have been caused by an interruption in cathodic protection. The effectiveness of cathodic protection on established microbial deposits is questionable. Recommendations included ultrasonically testing the tank floor and replacing portions based on the remaining wall thickness. Doubling the wall thickness of the floor plates was also recommended.

This paper describes the investigation of a corrosion failure of bottom plates on an aboveground tank used for the storage of potable water. The tank was internally inspected for the first time after six years of service. Paint blisters and rust spots were observed on the bottom plates and first to third course shell plates. Sand blasting and repainting of the bottom plates and first course shell plates was to be used as a remedial measure. However, during the sand blasting, holes and deep pitting were observed on the bottom plates. On-site visual inspection, magnetic flux leakage (MFL) inspection, ultrasonic testing (UT), and evaluation of the external cathodic protection (CP) system were used in the failure analysis. The corrosion products were analyzed using energy-dispersive X-ray analysis (EDAX). The failure is attributed to the ingress of water and its impoundment under the tank bottom along the periphery inside the ring wall and failure of water side epoxy coating. Various measures to prevent such failures in the future are recommended.

The heads of two AISI 8740 steel bolts severed while being installed into an Army tank recoil mechanism. Both broke into two pieces at the head-to-shank radius and the required torque value had not been attained nor exceeded prior to the failure. A total of 69 bolts from inventory and the field were tested by magnetic particle inspection. One inventory bolt failed because of a transverse crack near the head-to-shank radius. It was deduced that either a 100% magnetic particle inspection had not been conducted during bolt manufacturing, or the crack went undetected during the original inspection. Optical and electron microscopy of the broken bolts revealed topographies and the presence of black oxide consistent with quench cracking. The two bolts failed during installation due to the presence of pre-existing quench cracks. Recommendations to prevent future failures include: ensuring that 100% magnetic particle inspections are conducted after bolts are tempered; using dull cadmium plate or an alternative to the electrode position process, such as vacuum cadmium plate or ion-plate or ion-plated aluminum, to mitigate the potential for delayed failures due to hydrogen embrittlement or stress-corrosion cracking; ensuring that the radius at the shoulder/shank interface conforms to specifications; and replacing all existing bolts with new or reinspected inventory bolts.

When a large LPG low-carbon steel storage tank was put into service for the first time and filled beyond the proof testing level, a brittle fracture crack initiated at a fillet weld between a stiffener ring and the wall. The crack propagated to a length of 5.5 m and arrested. Analysis showed that the plates satisfied the criteria of BS 4741. It was concluded that the cause of crack initiation was the lack of a mouse hole at the junction between the stiffening ring and the wall of the tank. The tank was repaired and put back in service. When it was filled beyond the proof test level, again a brittle crack was initiated at a horizontal weld defect and propagated vertically, destroying the tank and the liquefaction plant. The initiation site was a thumbnail elliptical crack in a horizontal weld, having a depth of 1.5 mm, and a length of 4.5 mm. This showed that as late the mid-1970s, misunderstanding of brittle fracture led to the wrong design and construction of an LPG storage tank. The best design specification is to use a correlation between LAST, the Lowest Anticipated Service Temperature, and the DBTT measured by either Charpy tests or DTT.

High-level radioactive wastes generated during the processing of nuclear materials are kept in large underground storage tanks made of low-carbon steel. The wastes consist primarily of concentrated solutions of sodium nitrate and sodium hydroxide. Each of the tanks is equipped with a purge ventilation system designed to continuously remove hydrogen gas and vapors without letting radionuclides escape. Several intergranular cracks were discovered in the vent pipe of one such system. The pipe, made of galvanized steel sheet, connects to an exhaust fan downstream of high-efficiency particulate air filters. The failure analysis investigation concluded that nitrate-induced stress-corrosion cracking was the cause of the failure.

A 127 cu m (4,480 cu ft) pressurized railroad tank car burst catastrophically. The railroad tank was approximately 18 m (59 ft) long (from 2:1 elliptical heads), 3 m (10 ft) in OD, and 16 mm (0.63 in.) thick. The chemical and material properties of the tank were to comply with AAR M-128 Grade B. As a result of the explosive failure of the tank car, fragments were ejected from the central region of the car between the support trucks from ground zero to a maximum of approximately 195 m (640 ft). The mode of failure was a brittle fracture originating at a preexisting lamination and crack in the tank wall adjacent to the tank nozzle. The mechanism of failure was overpressurization of the railroad tank car caused by a chemical reaction of the butadiene contents. The interrelationship of the mode, mechanism, and consequences of failure is reviewed to reconstruct the sequence of events that led up to the breach of the railroad tank car. Means to prevent similar reoccurrences are discussed.

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.