Advertisement

Subsea Bolt Failure Analysis Using Advanced Forensics

  • R. LindleyEmail author
  • M. Li
  • W.-Y. Chen
  • C. Hudson
  • X. Xiao
Technical Article---Peer-Reviewed
  • 22 Downloads

Abstract

Resistance to environmentally assisted cracking is a key consideration in the selection of materials for subsea drilling safety critical equipment bolting applications. This paper describes several unique forensic tools used in combination to examine a safety critical bolt that failed during subsea oil and gas exploration in the Gulf of Mexico, one of several failures in a single flange. The method of examination presented here represents a new and unique toolset for examining failures in subsea bolts. The two-inch-diameter coated bolt, specified as AISI 4340 steel alloy, sheared near one of the threaded ends. The sheared bolt end was removed and cut approximately in half to examine microscopic cracks. Scanning electron microscopy techniques were utilized to examine the flat, cut face of the bolt interior. The sample and individual small sections were examined at the Advanced Photon Source at Argonne National Laboratory using high-energy synchrotron X-rays with energy levels up to 100 keV. The X-ray examinations produced a three-dimensional picture of the sample. Based on the results and discussions, design recommendations were made for increased corrosion resistance in subsea environments.

Keywords

Alloy steel Catastrophic failure Chemistry Energy-dispersive spectroscopy 

Notes

Acknowledgment

This material is based upon work supported by Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) funding from Argonne National Laboratory, provided by the Director, Office of Science, of the US Department of Energy under Contract No. DE-AC02-06CH11357 and royalty funds under the same contract. This research used resources of the Center for Nanoscale Materials, which is a Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science User Facility under DOE Contract No. DE-AC02-06CH11357. Use of the Advanced Photon Source (APS), Argonne National Laboratory (ANL), is supported by the US Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Science under Contract DE-AC02-06CH11357. This manuscript has been authored by Brookhaven Science Associates, LLC under Contract No. DE-SC0012704 with the US Department of Energy. The United States Government retains and the publisher, by accepting the article for publication, acknowledges that the United States Government retains a non-exclusive, paid-up, irrevocable, world-wide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this manuscript, or allow others to do so, for United States Government purposes.

References

  1. 1.
    ASTM A320/A320M-15a, Standard Specification for Alloy-Steel and Stainless Steel Bolting for Low-Temperature Service (ASTM International, West Conshohocken, 2015)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    ASTM A540/A540M-15, Standard Specification for Alloy-Steel Bolting for Special Applications (ASTM International, West Conshohocken, 2015)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    R.C. Newman, W.R. Whitney Award Lecture, understanding the corrosion of stainless steel. Corrosion 57(12), 1030–1041 (2001).  https://doi.org/10.5006/1.3281676 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Z. Szklarska-Smialowska, E. Lunarska, The effect of sulfide inclusions on the susceptibility of steels to pitting, stress corrosion cracking and hydrogen embrittlement. Werkst. Korros. (Mater. Corros.) 32(11), 478–485 (1981).  https://doi.org/10.1002/maco.19810321103. (in German) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    C.E. Sims, F.B. Dahle, The effect of aluminum on the properties of medium carbon cast steel. AFS Trans. 46, 65–132 (1938)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    L.K. Bigelow, M.C. Flemings, Sulfide inclusions in steel. Metall. Trans. B 6B, 275–283 (1975)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. Garet, A.M. Brass, C. Haut, F. Guttierez-Solana, Hydrogen trapping on non-metallic inclusions in Cr–Mo low alloy steels. Corros. Sci. 40, 1073 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    W.K. Kim, S.U. Koh, B.Y. Yang, K.Y. Kim, Effect of environmental and metallurgical factors on hydrogen induced cracking of HSLA steels. Corros. Sci. 50, 3336 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    B.D. Craig, A contribution to the mechanism of hydrogen entry into steels in acid environments. Corrosion 34, 282 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    M. Al-Mansour, A.M. Alfantazi, M. El-boujdaini, sulfide stress cracking resistance of API-X100 high strength low alloy steel. Mater. Des. 30(10), 4088–4094 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Y. Kikuta, T. Araki, A. Hirose, Effect of non-metallic inclusions on hydrogen assisted cracking. Trans. Jpn. Weld. Soc. 19(1), 60–65 (1988)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Y. Neishi, T. Makino, N. Matsui, H. Matsumoto, M. Higashida, H. Ambai, Influence of the inclusion shape on the rolling contact fatigue life of carburized steels. Metall. Mater. Trans. A 44(5), 2131–2140 (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11661-012-1344-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    J. Maciejewski, The effects of sulfide inclusions on mechanical properties and failures of steel components. J. Fail. Anal. Preven. 15(2), 169–178 (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11668-015-9940-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Y. Higuchi, M. Numata, S. Fukagawa, K. Shinme, Inclusion modification by calcium treatment. ISIJ Int. 36, S151–S154 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    L. Luyckx, J. Bell, A. Mclean, M. Korchynsky, Sulfide shape control in high strength low alloy steels. Metall. Trans. 1, 3341 (1970)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    J.E. Scheel, N. Jayaraman, D.J. Hornbach, Engineered residual stress to mitigate stress corrosion cracking of stainless steel weldments. Corros. Conf. Expo 3, 2660–2675 (2011)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    K.A. Chandler, Marine and Offshore Corrosion (Butterworths, London, 1985)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© ASM International 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Lindley
    • 1
    Email author
  • M. Li
    • 2
  • W.-Y. Chen
    • 2
  • C. Hudson
    • 3
  • X. Xiao
    • 4
  1. 1.Energy Systems DivisionArgonne National LaboratoryLemontUSA
  2. 2.Nuclear Engineering DivisionArgonne National LaboratoryLemontUSA
  3. 3.Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement, U.S. Department of the InteriorSterlingUSA
  4. 4.Energy and Photon SciencesBrookhaven National LaboratoryUptonUSA

Personalised recommendations