J Fail. Anal. and Preven.
(2015) 15:474–479
DOI 10.1007/s11668-015-9977-9
CAS E HISTORY—PE E R-R EVI EWE D
Investigation on Failure of a Drilling Rig Mast Structure
. . .
D. Ghosh H. Roy S. Ray A. K. Shukla
Submitted: 27 November 2014 / in revised form: 16 April 2015 / Published online: 24 June 2015
ASM International 2015
Abstract A drilling rig that was used for exploration of
gaseous fuels was inspected. During its operation the rig
mast suddenly collapsed and the structure got twisted from
the middle. The failure investigation was carried out to
determine the probable causes of failure in the rig. Esti-
mation of mechanical properties, optical microscopic
analysis along with scanning electron microscopy exami-
nations were necessary supplements to this investigation.
Detailed stress analysis of the structure for different con-
ditions of loads and anchors was examined. It was
ultimately concluded that non-functioning of record-o-
meter was responsible for rapid increase in operating load
and one or more cables/anchoring points did not have
sufficient strength to withstand the operating load. The
anchoring cable broke with a jerk and the mast structure
collapsed under its weight.
Keywords Defect analysis Failure analysis
Fractography Structural Integrity
Introduction
In spite of the best efforts of design engineers and material
scientists, engineering components fail in service. Occur-
rence of failure of engineering components may lead to
serious consequences such as significant financial loss,
environmental contamination, and even loss of life. In the
event of a failure, it is sometimes essential to investigate
the root cause of failure in terms of design, quality of
D. Ghosh (&) H. Roy S. Ray A. K. Shukla NDT &
Metallurgy Group, CSIR-Central Mechanical
Engineering Research Institute, Durgapur 713209, India
e-mail: dghosh@cmeri.res.in; dbs1012000@gmail.com
123
material, fabrication procedure, or operational error in
handling. This investigation primarily deals with the
assessment of probable cause of damage of an in-service
drilling rig mast structure for exploration of methane gas
from a coal bed. Photographs of mast structure before and
after failure are shown in Fig. 1. There are few available
reports on failure analysis of mast structures [1–5], how-
ever, failure of these types of drilling rig mast structures
are very rare as they are too expensive (millions of Euros)
and are handled with utmost care. It is evident from Fig. 1a
that during operation, the mast structure was anchored with
cables and were fixed at different ends such that resultant
of the stresses were concentrated on the main structure.
The complete mast structure was inclined toward the
borehole at an angle of 4L. Four cables, identified (RTG1,
RTG2, FTG1, and FTG2) from the rear and front top ends
of the mast were anchored at four points on the ground.
These points were located at equal angles with symmetry
along the line joining the borehole point and center of the
winch drum. All the cables were positioned at angle of 45L
in the vertical plane. There were two cables (RTC1 and
RTC2) connecting the top end of the mast to the anchors
on the carrier. Two more cables (RMC1 and RMC2) are
connected between the middle portion of the mast and two
anchor points on the carrier. Two cables (RMG1 and
RMG2) are anchored to the ground and connected to the
middle part of the mast. The anchor points on the ground
have also been located in similar manner as of the cables,
used to anchor the top of the mast. Other cables, which do
not share the load on the mast structure, have not been
considered in the analysis.
While in operation, the drilling pipe jammed at a level
of 1175 m, which was slowly brought to a level of 1153 m.
Thereafter, a jarring action was followed with no success.
Hence, an additional pull on the cable was applied to
J Fail. Anal. and Preven. (2015) 15:474–479 475

release it. During this operation, the rig mast suddenly Investigations
collapsed and the structure twisted from the middle (Fig.
1b). Circumstantial evidences revealed that the record-o- Visual Examination and Preliminary Findings
graph was non-functional at that time, which therefore
could not record the level of loading applied at the moment Visual examination of the failed mast structure was carried
of failure. The root cause of the failure of the different out and it revealed the following:
engineering components has been conducted to prevent the
repetitive failure and at the same time remedial measures (i) The maximum damage and bending/twisting were
are also highlighted to avoid similar failure in near future localized near to middle portion of the mast
structure (Fig. 2).
[6–20].
(ii) Plastic deformation in the form of bending and
The basic objective of this work was to identify the root
twisting of the failed structure was evident as shown
cause of the failure and to ascertain whether it was due to in the Fig. 3.
problem related to materials or the failure was deficiencies
(iii) A number of cracks open to the surface of various
in the design, fabrication, installation, error in functioning,
magnitudes and direction were present at many of
etc. Apart from preliminary visual examination, chemical
the welded joints away from the damaged locations
analysis of the chain link material, magnetic particle
of the mast structure (Fig. 4). It is possible that
examination of welded joints, mechanical testing, fracto-
appropriate non-destructive testing was not carried
graphic analysis, and detailed finite element analysis using
out during its scheduled inspection.
ANSYS software package form the different steps of this
investigation in order to identify the probable cause of (iv) There was inadequate reporting of previous NDT
inspections.
failure of the mast structure.
(v) The stress record-o-graph was not functioning
properly during the event of failure.
(a)

Cables Cables Material Characterization

The failed material is subjected to analyze chemically by

Cables Cables spectrometer (Model: Q4 TASMAN, Bruker, Germany). The
results of the analysis of the materials are provided in Table 1.
The chemical analysis confirmed to the specifi-cation ASTM-
Carrier 595 grade steel [21]. Microstructural analysis was carried out
Carrier from the samples extracted from region shown in Fig. 3.
Tensile tests were carried out as per ASTM standard E-8m
[22]. Flat specimens of 25 mm gage length and 5 mm
thickness were fabricated from the as

(b)

Fig. 1 Drilling rig mast structure during (a) in-service condition and Fig. 2 The middle portion of the mast structure is the region with
(b) after collapse maximum damage

123
476 J Fail. Anal. and Preven. (2015) 15:474–479

Materials twisted due to plastic

the specimens was taken at 10 kgf load and is reported in
deformation
Table 2. The obtained values (mechanical properties) of the
mast structure confirms to the specification of ASTM
Location for sample
removal for material 595/572A, though the UTS values (528 Mpa) are on the
characterization higher side in comparison to the specified value (450
Mpa). However, ASTM 595/572A grade materials are
recom-mended for mast structure [6]. The fracture surface
was saw cut and carefully extracted from the failed mast
structure (from location marked in Fig. 3). The fracture
surface was subsequently cleaned by ultrasonic cleaner
(acetone is used as solvent) followed by surface
replication. It is to be noted that the fracture surface being
exposed to open atmosphere for a long time resulted in the
formation of severe corroded layer on its outer surface. An
Fig. 3 Deformed and twisted angle near the middle portion of the
attempt was made to remove the corroded layer using HCL
structure as cleaning media. The fracture surface was then examined
using scanning electron microscope (SEM), S-3000N,
Hitachi Ltd, Japan (Figs. 5, 6).

Results and Discussion

Metallographic analysis of a damaged and undamaged

region revealed a microstructure consisting of pearlite and
widmanstatten ferrite (Fig. 5). There was no abnormal
material degradation in the damaged location of the failed
mast structure. Thorough examination of the fracture sur-
faces (Fig. 6) revealed a texture indicative of cleavage-type
cracking with river line patterns at places along with duc-
tile voids around the vicinity. The crack initiation zone was
observed in Fig. 6b. It can be concluded from the SEM
image that the failure was due to application of the stress
that exceeded the strength of the part. The sudden jerk
during the collapse of the mast structure showed that the
material had undergone high rate of loading and then
plastically collapsed. Some type of steels are stain rate
dependent and may exhibit cleavage-type cracking under
high strain rate, while exhibiting dimple rupture under
slower strain rate. The evidence of ample plastic defor-
mation in the failed component is shown in Fig. 3.

Structural Analysis Using FEM

In order to identify probable cause of failure of the mast

Fig. 4 Magnetic particle examination revealed presence of fine cracks
in the weld joints at many location of undamaged part of the mast
structure
received failed sample. The tensile properties, yield
strength (YS), ultimate tensile strength (UTS), and per-
centage elongation are shown in Table 2. The hardness of
structure, simulated analysis of the structure for different
conditions of loads and anchors was examined. The anal-ysis
was carried out by finite element method (FEM). The FEM is
a numerical method, being used extensively in the areas of
Solid Mechanics, Heat Transfer, Fluid Mechanics, Aero-
elasticity, coupled field analysis etc. [23]. The method is
based on discretization of a structure in finite number of inter-
connected elements. The physical behavior of the field
variables of the elements, viz., displacement,

123
J Fail. Anal. and Preven. (2015) 15:474–479 477
Table 1 Chemical analysis (weight percent) of the samples extracted from the failed mast structure

Element C Mn Si S P
Weight percent 0.21 0.85 0.027 0.022 0.012
Specified ranges 0.15–0.25 0.30–0.90 0.035 max 0.035 max 0.060 max

Table 2 Observed tensile properties along with average hardness value

Sample No. Y.S, MPa U.T.S, MPa % Elongation Avg. hardness, 10 Kgf, HV
1 338 528 31 132
2 340 528 28
3 324 527 27.5

Fig. 5 Microstructures of the (a) undamaged part and (b) damaged part of the mast structure

slope (degree of freedom) in case of structural analysis, are
defined in terms of variables at the nodes by suitable
interpolation function. The elastic characteristics of an
element is defined from the geometrical and material
properties of the element and expressed in the form of a
matrix, called element stiffness matrix. The stiffness
matrices of the elements are assembled suitably to form the
global stiffness matrix of the complete assembly. Subse-
quently, the simulated loads and the support conditions are
applied and the resulting matrix is solved to obtain the
unknown nodal variables, loads, and reactions at supports.
Different conditions have been used to simulate possible
failure causes. Examining different possibilities of failures,
different structural conditions, which may lead to final
failure, have also been examined. Five different configu-
rations have been analyzed to examine the possibility of
failure of any member of the structure or anchoring cable.
All the configurations have been analyzed for 160 T load
on the mast structure.
The probable total cases have been considered are as
follows:
(i) Case-1: The complete structure before failure with
all the anchored cables in positions and 160 T load
on the structure.
(ii) Case-2: The complete structure without one
anchored cable connecting top of the mast and
anchoring point (RTG1).
(iii) Case-3: The complete structure without one
anchored cable connecting top of the mast and
anchoring point (RTC1).
(iv) Case-4: The complete structure without one
anchored cable connecting the middle of the mast
and anchoring point (RMC1).

123
478 J Fail. Anal. and Preven. (2015) 15:474–479

Fig. 8 Simulated FEM of the

deformed mast structure without
cables

(v) Case-5: The complete structure without one

Fig. 6 Fracture surface showing (a) river line and high magnification
image showing (b) river lines and ductile voids along crack initiation
zone
anchored cable connecting the middle of the mast
and one anchoring cable (RMG1).
Depending on the results, subsequent load cases have been
defined for examination.
The physical properties or real properties of the ele-
ments, such as plate thickness, cross-sectional area, and
moment of inertia of different members have been calcu-
lated from the measured dimensions of the corresponding
structural members and cables.
The following material properties have been used for
different structural members:

Fig. 7 Finite element models

developed for stress analysis

123
J Fail. Anal. and Preven. (2015) 15:474–479
Modulus of elasticity, E = 210,000 MPa;
Poisson’s ratio = 0.3;
Yield stress = 334 MPa. The finite element model
developed for stress analysis is shown in Fig. 7.
The detailed FEM analyses reveal the following:
The maximum deformation of the structure, maximum
cable tensions and maximum equivalent von Mises stress,
is given by the relation,
p p 2 2 2 2
req ¼ 1= 2 ðrx ryÞ þ ðry rzÞ þ ðrz rxÞ þ ð6s xy þ 3. W.P. Sung, J.C.M. Kao, R. Chen, Failure analysis of Q345 steel
2 2
6s zx þ 6s yzÞ:
ðEq 1Þ
Here rx, ry, and rz represent normal stresses and s xy, szx,
and syz represent shear stresses.
From simulated studies under different conditions of the
mast, it was observed that with all ropes in proper
anchored condition, the mast would not have failed even
with enhanced load or jerks. Therefore, initiation of
deformation must have started owing to failure of some
cables. There-fore, the sequence of operations, conditions
of the mast, anchored cables and loads, which have led to
failure of the mast, is concluded as follows:
(a) One of the anchoring cables of the top of the mast
has failed due to either improper anchoring or poor
service condition of the cable.
(b) Excessive load on the mast due to jerks has led to
failure of the anchoring cables of the top of the mast.
(c) Without anchors at the top, stress near the intercon-
nection between the lower and upper parts of the
mast structure goes beyond yield strength and the
mast deforms plastically.
(d) With higher inclination of the mast, effective
bending load on the structure increases substantially
and bending continues further.
(e) Finally, even in absence of load tension, because of
self weight, the mast fails as shown in Fig. 8, similar
to Fig. 1b (actual failure).
Conclusions
Based on the findings of this investigation, it is concluded that
non-functioning record-o-meter did not provide ade-quate
warning that the load applied to the mast was applied at the
dangerous levels. This ultimately led to rapid increase in
operating load. One or more of the cables or the anchoring
points did not have sufficient strength to withstand the rapid
increase in operating load exerted due to the sudden addi-
tional pull. One or two anchoring cables at the top failed first,
thereafter stress between the lower and upper parts of the
479
mast structure was beyond the yield strength and mast
deformed plastically failing under its own weight.
References
1. G. Das, S. Chakrabarty, A.K. Dutta, S.K. Das, K.K. Gupta, R.N.
Ghosh, Failure analysis of a high mast lamp post. Eng. Fail.
Anal. 13, 1153–1158 (2006)
2. J.H. Lee, W.D. You, J.W. Kim, J.H. Choi, B.H. Choe, Failure
analysis of a mast column. Eng. Fail. Anal. 10, 317–323 (2003)
structures on port cranes. Appl. Mech. Mater. 401–413, 844–847
(2013)
4. F. Frendo, Analysis of the catastrophic failure of a dockside
crane jib. Eng. Fail. Anal. 31, 394–411 (2013)
5. E.S. Kim, S.K. Choi, Failure analysis of connecting bolts in
collapsed tower crane. Fatigue Fract. Eng. Mater. Struct 36, 228–
241 (2012)
6. J. Swaminathan, K. Guguloth, M. Gunjan, P.K. Roy, R.N. Ghosh,
Eng. Fail. Anal. 15, 311–316 (2008)
7. D. Ghosh, H. Roy, A.K. Shukla, Investigation of probable cause of a
premature cracking of down comer nozzle of heat recovery steam
generator (HRSG). J. Fail. Anal. Prev. 9(6), 517–521 (2009)
8. D. Ghosh, H. Roy, S. Ray, A.K. Shukla, High temperature corro-sion
failure of a secondary superheater tube in thermal power plant boiler.
High Temp. Mater. Process. 28(1–2), 109–114 (2011)
9. G. Das, S.G. Chowdhury, A.K. Ray, S. Das, D.K. Bhattacharya,
Eng. Fail. Anal. 9, 563–570 (2002)
10. H. Roy, D. Ghosh, A.C. Pankaj, A.K. Shukla, J. Basu, A case
study on the premature failure of a cooling water pump shaft. Int.
J. Manuf. Sci. Prod. 9(1–2), 99–106 (2011)
11. H. Roy, A. Saha, D. Ghosh, S. Roy, A.K. Shukla, Failure
investigation of platen superheater outlet header. J. Mech. Behav.
Mater. 19(6), 373–382 (2011)
12. D. Ghosh, S. Ray, H. Roy, Failure investigation of high tem-
perature Stud. J. Fail. Anal. Prev. 14(1), 17–20 (2014)
13. S.G. Chowdhury, P. Kumar, S.K. Das, D.K. Bhattacharyya, N.
Parida, Failure analysis of high temperature studs. Eng. Fail.
Anal. 8, 521–528 (2001)
14. D. Ghosh, S. Ray, H. Roy, N. Mandal and A.K. Shukla, High
temperature graphitization failure of primary superheater tube.
High Temp. Mater. Process. doi:10.1515/htmp-2014-0137
15. D. Ghosh, H. Roy, A. Mondal, failure investigation of condensate
pump shaft. J. Fail. Anal. Prev. 14(4), 450–453 (2014)
16. W. Muhannad, K.M. Deen, Failure analysis of water pump shaft.
J. Fail. Anal. Prev. 10, 161–166 (2010)
17. D. Ghosh, S. Ray, H. Roy and A.K. Shukla, Investigation into
cause of high temperature failure of boiler superheater tube. High
Temp. Mater. Process. doi:10.1515/htmp-2014-0018
18. A.M. Lancha, M. Serrano, D. Gomez, Bricane. Eng. Fail. Anal.
8, 271291 (2001)
19. H. Roy, P. Sharma, D. Ghosh and A.K. Shukla, Corrosion failure
of in-service economizer tube. J. Fail. Anal. Prev. doi:10.1007/
s11668-014-9848-9
20. D. Ghosh, S. Ray, A. Mondal, H. Roy, Failure investigation of
radiant platen superheater tube of thermal power plant boiler.
High Temp. Mater. Process. doi:10.1515/htmp-2013-0128.
21. ASM, ASM Handbook, vol. 1 (ASM, Metals Park, 1993)
22. ASTM standard E-8M, Standard Test Methods for Tension
Testing of Metallic Materials, vol. 03.01, 2011
23. T.R. Chandrapatla, A.D. Belegundu, Introduction to Finite Ele-
ments in Engineering. Pearson Higher Ed USA, 2011
123
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited
without permission.