Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
ScienceDirect
Procedia Structural Integrity 31 (2021) 28–32

4th International Conference on Structural Integrity and Durability, ICSID 2020

Failure analysis of a ruptured compressor pressure vessel

Goran Vukelica,*, Goran Vizentina, Zeljko Bozicb, Luka Rukavinaa
a
University of Rijeka, Faculty of Maritime Studies, Studentska 2, 51000 Rijeka, Croatia
b
University of Zagreb, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Naval Architecture, I. Lučića 5, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia

Abstract

This paper deals with failure analysis of a ruptured pressure vessel that served as a part of an air compressor. Pressure vessel failed
during hydrostatic test when, at a pressure level lower than proof pressure, two cracks occurred on the shell and test fluid leakage
was recorded. Experimental investigation methods were employed to determine possible causes of crack occurrence and vessel
rupture. Liquid penetrate inspection was performed to check for other surface-breaking defects on the shell and locations of the
cracks. Visual examination revealed the condition of the internal surface of the shell. Optical microscopy was used to inspect crack
area while scanning electron microscopy examination at suitable magnification was employed to characterize fine microstructure
of the fractured surface and to reveal flaws that served as rupture initiation points. Material’s chemical composition was determined
using optical emission spectrometer with glow discharge source sample stimulation. Hardness test results were used to derive
maximum tensile strength of the material. According to results obtained from performed investigations, it was concluded that
excessive corrosion at the bottom part of the pressure vessel caused formation of pits that served as initiation points for leakage
cracks. Recommendations for avoidance of such scenario with the rest of the user’s compressor pressure vessel were given. Also,
ultrasonic testing of shell thickness was performed and results of the performed hydrostatic pressure test were recorded to be used
in subsequent numerical failure analysis of the failed pressure vessel.
©
© 2021
2021The TheAuthors.
Authors.Published by Elsevier
Published B.V.
by ELSEVIER B.V.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0)
Peer-review under responsibility of ICSID 2020 Organizers. license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0)
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND
Peer-review under responsibility of ICSID 2020 Organizers.
Keywords: pressure vessel; hydrostatic test; leakage; pressure vessel failure.

*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +385-51-338-411; fax: +385-51-336-755.
E-mail address: gvukelic@pfri.hr

2452-3216 © 2021 The Authors. Published by ELSEVIER B.V.

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0)
Peer-review under responsibility of ICSID 2020 Organizers.

2452-3216 © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0)
Peer-review under responsibility of ICSID 2020 Organizers.
10.1016/j.prostr.2021.03.006
 Goran Vukelic et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 31 (2021) 28–32 29
2 Goran Vukelic et al. / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000–000

1. Introduction

Research presented in this paper is concerned with the failure of an air pressure vessel. Pressure vessel, Fig. 1, was
in a form of a thin-walled steel cylinder and was used as a part of an air compressor unit. Vessel was manufactured by
„Prva petoletka”, Trstenik, former Yugoslavia, in 1984. It has a volume of 60 l, declared mass of 21.3 kg, but the
actual weighted mass was 21.6 kg. Working pressure of the vessel is 8 bar and test pressure is set at 13 bar.
Overall length of the vessel is 820 mm, outer diameter 306 mm and shell thickness 3 mm.

Fig. 1. Inspected pressure vessel.

Failure occurred during hydrostatic test when two cracks were noted on the shell of the vessel and test fluid
leakage from them observed. Hydrostatic pressure test performed with the aim of reaching and holding test pressure
of 13 bar. Testing liquid was water. Analogue pressure gauges and digital pressure transducer were connected to the
vessel to monitor pressure drop. Pressure loss was noticed on the pressure gauges and computer display connected to
digital pressure transducer. Also, two leaks were visually identified on the outer surface.

a) b)

Fig. 2. a) Hydrostatic pressure test setup; b) water leakage from two cracks.

In order to determine possible causes of failure, experimental investigation was performed, comprising of
acquisition of technical specifications, non-destructive testing (NDT), material characterization and visual and
microscopic observations. Methods used and results obtained are given in following sections of this paper.
Conclusions about the failure causes and recommendations about the avoidance of similar scenario are given the end.
Also, directions for future research based on numerical procedures are outlined.

2. Experimental failure analysis

Visual inspection of the outer surface revealed light surface corrosion uniformly spread at the contact
between the vessel and the saddle holdings of the compressor installation. Also, sporadic localized corrosion points
were noted, Fig. 1. As for the inner condition, uniformly heavily corroded surface with pitting corrosion points was
noted using inspection borescope, Fig. 3. This type of defect presents a serious threat to the integrity of the pressurized
components (Chmelko and Biro 2019), especially when the corrosion is coupled with mechanical loads (Kelil et al.
2019) that can have alternating nature also (Baragetti and Arcieri 2018), so further investigations followed.
30 GoranGoran
VukelicVukelic
et al. / et
Structural Integrity
al. / Procedia Procedia
Structural 00 (2019)
Integrity 000–000
31 (2021) 28–32 3

Fig. 3. Heavily corroded inner surface of the vessel.

Microscopic examination of cut-out specimens containing cracks was performed using optical, Fig. 4, and
scanning electron microscope (SEM), Fig. 5.

a) b)

Fig. 4. Optical microscope image at 20x magnification of pitting location on: a) outer surface; b) inner surface.

a) b)

Fig. 5. SEM image at 100x magnification of pitting location on: a) outer surface; b) inner surface.

Fractographic analysis was employed as the major analytical method for the failure description and crack
identification (Pantazopoulos et al. 2019). Heavily corroded inner surface can be noted in Fig. 4b), but in spite of the
magnification, through-wall cracks couldn’t be detected on the locations of pitting corrosion. However, SEM
inspection allows to analyze the condition of pressure equipment in detail (Muthanna et al. 2019) and images in Fig.
5 show the actual character of pits. SEM was also used for measuring the diameter of the opening of the crack to be
used in subsequent numerical analysis.
Non-destructive testing was performed, as a powerful tool in assessing the condition of the pressure
equipment (Bertolin et al. 2020)(Porziani et al. 2020). Ultrasonic thickness measurement was performed before the
specimens of the vessel were cut out in order to determine shell thickness variations. Locations of performed
measurement are given in Fig. 6 and results in Table 1.
4 Goran Vukelic et al. / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000–000
Goran Vukelic et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 31 (2021) 28–32 31

Fig. 6. Ultrasonic thickness measurement orientation and zones.

Table 1. Shell thickness (in mm).

Orientation 0° 90° 180° 270°
Zone
1 2.5 2.7 2.6 2.7
2 1.9 2.1 2.7 1.9
3 2.7 2.6 2.6 2.8

Obtained results clearly show that nominal thickness of 3 mm is reduced, in some locations by even more
than a third. These locations appear to be in a lower position of the vessel, near the drainage opening at the bottom.
Chemical composition of vessel material was determined using glow discharge spectrometer, Table 2.

Table 2. Chemical composition of pressure vessel steel (wt%).

C Si Mn P S Cr Ni Nb
0.094 0.0376 0.401 0.0194 0.0122 0.0249 0.0191 0.0039
Cu Al Sn W Co Pb As Mo
0.086 0.0631 0.0069 0.0079 0.0044 0.0003 0.0013 0.0043

Composition of tested material is adequate to steel EN 10028-2 grade P235GH (1.0345, ASTM A285).
EN10028-2 is a standard for the non-alloy and alloy steel plates with specified elevated temperature properties. This
is a non-alloy steel with good plasticity, toughness, cold bending and welding properties even under high temperature.
Steel P235GH is mainly used for pressure equipment (boilers, heat exchangers, steam tubes and pressure vessels). It
has application in chemical industries, power stations, instruments and processing utilities in fertilizer and food
industries. Additionally, hardness test was performed using with found mean hardness value of 590 HV (Vickers
hardness number). Maximum tensile strength of the steel derived from the hardness value (Boyer and Gall 1985) is
σTS = 3.2 HV = 410.88 MPa. According to the standard, for steel plate thickness less than 6 mm maximum tensile
strength is σTS = 360-480 MPa and yield strength σYS = 235 MPa.

3. Conclusion

Considering obtained experimental results, root causes of failure can be summarized as inadequate
maintenance of the vessel without regular draining, cleaning, NDT inspection and hydrostatic pressure testing. This
inadequate maintenance led to excessive pitting corrosion with through-wall multiple damage locations on the shell
of the vessel. Leak-before-break scenario developed with vessel failing to pass hydrostatic pressure test well below
the set test pressure value. Simple engineering assessment (Zaidi et al. 2020) was performed in order to determine the
state of the vessel and to discover causes of failure.
Possible recommendations to avoid such scenario include adequate maintenance of remaining undamaged
vessels and appropriate choice of inspection technique (Radu et al. 2020). Also, for already damaged vessels, hoop-
wrapping with composite patches is proposed (Behera et al. 2019) as multilayer design can reduce the corrosion
incidence (Baragetti et al. 2020) and composites have proven as a reliable material for pressurized components (Hastie
et al. 2020). However, composite patches need to be optimized in the terms of their length, thickness and the
orientation of the layers (Takacs et al. 2020) and their interaction and subsequent damage in contact with water
32 Goran Vukelic et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 31 (2021) 28–32
Goran Vukelic et al. / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000–000 5

(Vizentin and Vukelic 2019) needs to be considered. Also, long-term tests (Monkova et al. 2020) need to be performed
in order to ensure the sustainability of the repair technique. This idea will serve as a guideline for further research of
the authors which they will try to achieve blending digital twin stress analysis results and actual experiments (Moi et
al. 2020). This combined approach assures a thorough insight (Milovanović et al. 2020; Vukelic et al. 2019) into the
problem of failure of engineering components and their design optimization.

Acknowledgements
This research has been supported by University of Rijeka, project uniri-technic-18-200 „Failure Analysis of
Materials in Marine Environment”.

References

Baragetti, S., Arcieri E.V., 2018. Corrosion Fatigue Behavior of Ti-6Al-4 V: Chemical and Mechanical Driving Forces. International Journal of
Fatigue 112, 301-307.
Baragetti, S., Božić, Ž., Arcieri. E.V., 2020. Stress and Fracture Surface Analysis of Uncoated and Coated 7075-T6 Specimens under the Rotating
Bending Fatigue Loading. Engineering Failure Analysis 112, 104512.
Behera, S., Sahoo, S. K., Srivastava, L., Srinivasa Gopal. A. S., 2019. Structural Integrity Assessment of Filament Wound Composite Pressure
Vessel Using through Transmission Technique. Procedia Structural Integrity 14, 112-118.
Bertolin, C., de Ferri, L., Razavi, J., Berto. F., 2020. Acoustic Emission NDT for Monitoring Hygro-Mechanical Reactions of Coated Pine Wood:
A Methodological Approach. Procedia Structural Integrity 28, 208-217.
Boyer, H. E., Gall., T.L., 1985. Metals Handbook. American Society for Materials, Materials Park.
Chmelko, V., Biro. D., 2019. Safety of Pressure Pipe Operation with Corrosive Defect. Procedia Structural Integrity 17, 520-525.
Hastie, James C., Igor A. Guz, and Maria Kashtalyan. 2020. Structural Integrity of Deepwater Composite Pipes under Combined Thermal and
Mechanical Loading. Procedia Structural Integrity 28, 850-863.
Kelil, Taieb et al., 2019. Assessment of API X65 Steel Pipe Puffiness by a Strain Based Design (SBD) Approach under Bi-Axial Loading.
Engineering Failure Analysis 104, 578-588.
Milovanovic, N. et al., 2020. Structural Integrity and Life Assessment of Rotating Equipment. Engineering Failure Analysis 113, 104561.
Moi, T., Cibicik, A., Rølvåg, T., 2020. Digital Twin Based Condition Monitoring of a Knuckle Boom Crane: An Experimental Study. Engineering
Failure Analysis 112, 104517.
Monkova, K., Monka, P.P., Hric, S., Kozak, D., Katinič, M., Pavlenko, I., Liaposchenko, O. 2020. Condition Monitoring of Kaplan Turbine
Bearings Using Vibro-Diagnostics. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Robotics Research 9(8), 1182-88.
Muthanna, B. G. N. et al. 2019., Inspection of Internal Erosion-Corrosion of Elbow Pipe in the Desalination Station. Engineering Failure Analysis
102, 293-302.
Pantazopoulos, G. et al., 2019. Fatigue failure analysis of a Ø14 B500C steel rebar: Metallurgical evaluation and numerical simulation. Engineering
Failure Analysis 101, 180-192.
Porziani, S. et al., 2020. Structural Integrity Assessment of Pressure Equipment by Acoustic Emission and Data Fractal Analysis. Procedia Structural
Integrity 25, 246-253.
Radu, D., Sedmak, A., Sedmak, S., Li, W., 2020. Engineering Critical Assessment of Steel Shell Structure Elements Welded Joints under High
Cycle Fatigue. Engineering Failure Analysis 114, 104578.
Takacs, L., Kovacs, L., Olajos, T., 2020. Numerical Tool with Mean-Stress Correction for Fatigue Life Estimation of Composite Plates. Engineering
Failure Analysis 111, 104456.
Vizentin, G., Vukelic, G., 2019. Degradation and Damage of Composite Materials in Marine Environment. Medziagotyra 26(3), 337-42.
Vukelic, G., Vizentin, G., Masar, A. 2019. Hydraulic torque wrench adapter failure analysis. Engineering Failure Analysis 96, 530-537.
Zaidi, R. et al., 2020. Risk Assessment of Oil Drilling Rig Welded Pipe Based on Structural Integrity and Life Estimation. Engineering Failure
Analysis 112, 104508.