What Does Corrosion Failure Mean?

Corrosion failure is a type of material failure

caused by corrosion. This condition necessitates
immediate preservation and safeguarding. Corrosion
failure may necessitate corrosion product sampling and
testing, as in the case of microbiologically influenced
corrosion (MIC), where viable cultures can provide the
most meaningful results. Failure analysis studies are
especially useful in the chemical processing, refining, oil
and gas, and pulp and paper industries.

Explanation of Corrosion Failure

Corrosion failures are frequently associated with

material selection and the environment. Material
specifications, quality-assurance records, installation
and maintenance records, and an environmental history
are all helpful in resolving corrosion failures. Failures are
classified into eight types of corrosion in the National
Association of Engineers (NACE) guidelines. To
facilitate visual identification, the eight types of corrosion
are divided into three categories:

• Easily identified by a simple visual examination -

Pitting, galvanic corrosion, and crevice corrosion

• Erosion, fretting, intergranular, and cavitation

examinations may be required.

• Microscopy is typically used for verification (optical,

electron microscopy, etc.) Exfoliation, de-alloying,
corrosion fatigue, and stress corrosion cracking are all
examples of corrosion processes.
 Predicting corrosion failure necessitates
metallurgical investigations of components, equipment,
metals, alloys, coatings, linings, and structures due to
corrosion, environmental degradation and abuse,
incorrect metal application, and mechanical failure.
Recognizing the symptoms and mechanism of a
corrosion failure is an important first step in solving the
problem. There are five ways to reduce corrosion
failures:
• Change to a more appropriate material
• Environmental modifications
• Use of protective coatings
• Use of cathodic or anodic protection
• Modifications to the system or component's design
Most corrosion failures are not one-of-a-kind in nature. A
similar problem has most likely been encountered and
solved previously for any given failure. It is critical to
obtain a history of the operation of the failed component.
The Economic Impact of Corrosion

At current prices, the cost of metal corrosion to

the U.S. economy is close to $300 billion annually. The
use of more corrosion-resistant materials and the
implementation of best corrosion-related technical
practises could reduce these costs by about one-third.
These projections are the outcome of a recent revision
of the findings from the 1978 study Economic Effects of
Metallic Corrosion in the United States. The research
project was carried out by Battelle Columbus
Laboratories and the National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST), and it was published in April 1995.
According to the original study's elaborate model of
more than 130 economic sectors, metallic corrosion cost
the United States $82 billion, or 4.9% of its gross
domestic product, in 1975. (GNP). It was also
discovered that 60% of the price. However, these costs
have changed because of 20 years of scientific research
and technological development, much of which was
prompted on by the 1978 study. By critically assessing
changes in scientific understanding and industrial
practises brought about by corrosion over the course of
two decades, the Battelle panel updated the earlier
findings. In the initial study, the production, use, and
maintenance of motor vehicles accounted for nearly
40% of the costs associated with metallic corrosion in
1975. No other sector contributed more than 4% of the
total, and the majority made less than 1%. For instance,
the aviation industry, which contributed just over 3%,
was among the next largest. Less than 1% of the total
cost was related to pipelines, a sector where corrosion
is a known issue.
The panel concluded that of all industries, the
automotive sector had likely invested the most in
anticorrosion measures. Utilizing coated metals,
stainless steels, and more protective finishes have
advanced. Additionally, several material swaps made
primarily for weight reduction purposes have also
decreased corrosion. The panel also believes that 15%
of corrosion costs that were previously considered
unavoidable can now be classified as avoidable. By
using better procedures, the industry is thought to have
eliminated about 35% of corrosion that could have been
avoided. The panel found that there have been gains
and losses in the shipbuilding, pipeline, and aircraft
industries, with most of them tending to balance one
another out. For instance, using more expensive
materials has frequently reduced the need for painting
or repairs related to corrosion. Overall, it was estimated
that total corrosion costs for the US economy had
decreased by no more than 5%, with an additional 2%
reduction in unavoidable costs, aside from in motor
vehicle and aircraft applications. According to the
updated study, the total cost of metallic corrosion in
1995 was reduced by about 14% from what it would
have been in 1975 terms, or 4.2% of the GNP.
Previously estimated to make up 40% of the total,
avoidable corrosion now amounts to 35% but still costs
slightly more than $100 billion annually. The cost to the
economy is represented by this number, which can be
decreased by increasing the use of corrosion-resistant
materials, developing corrosion prevention techniques,
and funding corrosion-related research. The findings of
the 1978 and 1995 Battelle/NIST studies are compared
in Table 2. Corrosion-causing factors Fig. 4 illustrates a
few of the variables that affect corrosion and its costs.
Application of current corrosion technology, aided by
technology transfer, lowers the cost of corrosion.
Research and development lead to the creation of new
and improved corrosion technology. The cost of
corrosion is decreased by properly implementing
corrosion control techniques (such as coatings,
inhibitors, and cathodic protection). Corrosion costs
typically rise because of factors like postponed
maintenance, extended building useful lives, and
equipment.
 Higher performance requirements and more
hostile environments frequently result in higher
corrosion costs. Government regulations that forbid the
use of tried-and-true methods of protection due to safety
concerns or environmental harm are another cause of
increased corrosion costs. For instance, the removal of
oil-based paints throughout industry and the use of lead-
based paints on houses, bridges, and aircraft to reduce
smog has had negative effects. Alternative water-based
paints haven't always provided an equivalent level of
corrosion protection. Cost components. Although
relative importance of costs varies from industry to
industry, the total cost of corrosion is made up of several
generalised factors. Some are simple to identify, while
others are more difficult. Corrosion costs are incurred in
manufacturing in several ways during the product
development cycle, starting with the materials, energy,
labour, and technical know-how needed to produce a
product. For instance, a product might need to be
painted to prevent corrosion. Plain carbon steel can be
replaced with a corrosion-resistant metal, and technical
services may be needed to design and instal cathodic
protection on a product. Stress relief and protection
against stress-corrosion cracking may require additional
heat treatment. Corrosion has an impact on various
operating costs as well. For instance, water treatment
systems frequently need to be supplemented with
corrosion inhibitors.
 Corrosion is a factor in some maintenance and
repair costs, and corrosion control programmes are
frequently implemented by corrosion specialists.
Corrosion also results in capital expenses. Corrosion
shortens the useful life of manufacturing equipment. To
accommodate scheduled downtime and corrosion-
related maintenance, excess capacity is necessary for
an operation that is expected to run continuously. Other
times, redundant equipment is set up so that one unit
can be serviced while another unit handles processing.
Purchases of corrosion prevention and control products,
maintenance and repair, and premature replacement all
result in costs for the end user or consumer. Ten
components of the cost of corrosion were identified in
the original Battelle/NIST study: replacement of
buildings or equipment loss of the goods repairs and
upkeep surplus capacity redundant technology control of
corrosion technical assistance Design Protection
Equipment and component inventory Examples for each
of these categories are provided in Table 3.
Replacement, product loss, and maintenance and repair
are all simple. If downtime for a plant that is intended to
operate continuously could be decreased if corrosion
were not a factor, excess capacity is a corrosion cost.
 This component explains the additional plant
capacity (capital stock) that has been maintained due to
corrosion. Additional plant equipment (capital stock)
required because of corrosion is accounted for by
redundant equipment. Large fans and pumps are just
two examples of specific critical components that have
backups to keep processing going while undergoing
corrosion control maintenance. Both the technical
support (engineering, research and development, and
testing) costs and the costs of corrosion control are
simple to understand. Design costs for corrosion are not
always as obvious. Insurance and inventory, the final
two cost components, may be important in some
circumstances. Other less quantifiable cost factors, such
as loss of life or loss of goodwill due to corrosion, can
have a significant impact in addition to these ten
categories. catastrophic failures that happen all at once,
like corrosion.
induced leak in an oil pipeline, with resulting loss of product
and environmental contamination can result in costly damage
that is difficult to either assess or repair as well as massive
legal penalties as “punitive damage.”
The Environment Impact of Corrosion

A material is attacked destructively by corrosion

when it reacts with its environment. The detrimental
effects of corrosion have grown to be a significant issue
on a global scale. In addition to the regular occurrence
of this type of degradation, corrosion also results in plant
shutdowns, resource waste, product loss or
contamination, efficiency reduction, expensive
maintenance, and expensive overdesign. Additionally, it
may endanger safety and impede technological
advancement.

Step 1 iron + oxygen --> iron oxide

Step 2 iron oxide + water --> hydrated iron oxide (rust)

Metals oxidise in the atmosphere during

corrosion. This indicates that oxygen and metal combine
to create a new layer. This layer may or may not be
beneficial. Rusting of iron and steel is unquestionably
the most significant type of corrosion. Iron oxidises
through the process of rusting, which results in the
formation of rust, a reddish-brown crust on the surface
of the iron. Iron is used so frequently that it must be
protected from rusting, such as when making tools and
buildings. Rusting can be avoided by sealing off the
iron's surface from air and water, such as by painting,
oiling, or greasing it, or by plating the iron with a shield
of another metal.

Corrosion resistance is present in many iron

alloys. The reason stainless steels, which are iron alloys
with metals like chromium and nickel, do not even
corrode is that the additional metals help form a hard,
adherent oxide coating that fends off further attack.

Iron corrodes more quickly than metals like

aluminium, chromium, and zinc, but these metals' oxides
form a protective layer that shields the metal from
further damage. The iron's surface is constantly being
exposed to a new surface due to the brittle nature of
rust. Therefore, these metals might be a better option for
a product that will be subjected to rusting environments,
such as water and air.
Recognizing the symptoms and mechanism of a
corrosion problem is an important preliminary step on
the road to finding a convenient solution. There are
basically five methods of corrosion control:

 Change to a more suitable material

 Modifications to the environment with the use of
inhibitors
 Use of protective metallic or organic coatings
 Design modifications to the system or
component

 Provide adequate ventilation and drainage to

minimize the accumulation of condensation

 Avoid depressed areas where drainage is

inadequate

 Avoid the use of absorptive materials (such

as felt, asbestos and fabrics) in contact with
metallic surfaces)

 Prepare surfaces adequately prior to the

application of any protective coating system.

 Provide easy access for the purposes of

corrosion inspection and maintenance work
Human Error as a Factor in Corrosion Failure

There are many causes of corrosion failure. Major

factors include the environment, the materials in
question, and the stresses that a material experiences.
In industries where corrosion is a problem, various
materials, technologies, and processes are extensively
discussed. However, one of the least talked about
causes of corrosion is human error. It might happen for
a variety of reasons:

 Lack of communication
 Unwillingness to improve the situation
 Lack of knowledge
 Distractions
 Lack of teamwork
 Stress and fatigue
 Lack of resources
 Pressure
  Lack of assertiveness
 Lack of awareness
 Insufficient control and supervision

Here we'll take a look at how human error contributes to

corrosion failure and what can be done to mitigate its
effects.

Where Human Error Occurs

Every project goes through a number of stages,

starting with manufacturing and design and ending with
supervision and maintenance work. One or more of the
aforementioned stage may experience human error. The
most crucial stage of any metallic system is the design
phase; if a significant mistake is made at this stage, the
risk of corrosion failure is significantly increased. For the
best design, a number of factors must be taken into
account, such as the material choice, the wall thickness
and diameter (for pipelines), as well as the corrosion
allowance and corrosion control measures.

Depending on their intended use, all metallic

structures are susceptible to internal or external
corrosion. In order to prevent corrosion, a suitable
corrosion control technique must be chosen and
implemented, and the metal type and grade must be
compatible with the medium being used. Coating, lining,
chemical inhibitors, or cathodic protection (CP) systems
are used to control corrosion. To ensure good
performance over the course of the system's life, these
methods can be combined
 It is typical to use a coating in conjunction with
cathodic protection and to inspect the coating that has
been applied before installing the metallic system to
ascertain the coating's effectiveness. It is also
necessary to take into account how the coating material
degrades as a result of its interactions with the
surrounding electrolyte. An incorrect understanding of
these factors may result in an inadequate cathodic
protection system design and faster structural corrosion.
(For an introduction to CP, make sure to read The
Basics of Cathodic Protection.)

Numerous flaws, such as errors in the

application of coatings or linings or mistakes in the
welding process, can occur during the construction of
metallic systems. To eliminate these flaws, a number of
factors must be taken into account, including ambient
temperature, the temperature of the metallic system,
surface finishing during manufacturing, and surface
preparation prior to application.

Predictive maintenance requires corrosion

supervision due to the multiplicity of variables at play
(PdM). Measuring the corrosion rate allows for corrosion
supervision. The corrosion rate is calculated using a
variety of methods, including weight loss measurement
and thickness measurement. Another type of corrosion
monitoring equipment is corrosion coupons and smart
pigs. Unpredictable corrosion failure may result from
human error in the selection of corrosion monitoring
equipment, assessing the accuracy of this equipment, or
analysing the output data.

Types of Human Error

There are six key error categories that can contribute to

corrosion failure.

1. Operational Errors

Operational errors occur when a system or process

operates outside of or beyond the parameters of its
design. For example, if specified operating practices call
for a specific operating temperature, and a worker
makes a decision to exceed this temperature,
accelerated corrosion may be the result.

2. Design Errors

Design errors can occur when a system's design fails to

match up to its application, or when the way the system
is used is changed without a thorough review. This type
of error can be an engineering error, or can occur when
other workers install systems or machines without
proper oversight.

3. Maintenance Errors

Maintenance errors occur when maintenance personnel

fail to properly maintain or repair a system, or improperly
install one of its components.
4. Manufacturing Errors

Manufacturing errors occur when components in a

system are improperly manufactured or include flaws
that can contribute to corrosion failure.

5. Installation Errors

Original installation of a system's components can

cause corrosion failure if those components are installed
incorrectly or without proper oversight.

6. Supervisory Errors

Supervisory errors are said to occur when a

problem is noticed, but no action is taken. Often, a
worker may believe that someone else will take
care of the problem, or that it's someone else's
responsibility.

How to Reduce Human Error

Human factors need to be considered in order to

minimise human errors. Human factors are all the
elements that contribute to or enhance employee
performance. Understanding interactions between
people and other components of complex systems is
central to the field of human factors.
 Human factors optimise human well-being,
overall system performance, and reliability by applying
scientific knowledge and principles, lessons learned
from prior incidents, and operational experience. The
field contributes to the design and assessment of
systems, tasks, equipment, environments, and products.
It focuses on the creation of sustainable and secure
workplace cultures as well as the innate traits,
requirements, capacities, and limitations of individuals.
In other words, just like reducing other corrosion factors,
mitigating human errors necessitates careful protocol
use, supervision, and inspection.

Additionally, all work should be done according

to applicable codes and standards and should be
completed by professionals.

Human Error Categories

The causes that fell into these categories were those
that were clear from component inspection, field
analysis, and conversations with plant hourly and
salaried operating and maintenance staff. Six error
categories were chosen: operational, design,
maintenance practise, supervisory, manufacturing, and
original equipment installation. These categories were
chosen based on conversations with others and the
author company's experience. We used the following
definitions to group the causes into categories:

 Operational errors - These are situations where

the machine or process was operated beyond
the normal or accepted design boundaries. Two
plant examples are:
o The paper machine frame was not cleaned
properly, and the resultant microbiological
corrosion resulted in structural perforation.

o The specified operating practice called for a

maximum operating temperature of 10,500oC,
but the operator ran it at 11,500oC because the
higher temperature would result in a greater
production rate. The result was that corrosion
perforated the vessel in less than a year.

 Design errors - There were two categories of

design errors. The most common involved the
design of the machine or the system that did not
meet the needs of the operation, however there
were also situations where the machine
performance requirements were changed without
a sound design review. (Before citing the
example, we should note that these were not
necessarily the result of errors committed by
engineers. There were several examples where
the "design" of a piece of equipment was the work
of a maintenance planner, or a vendor sales
representative and the equipment was installed
without competent oversight review. There were
also situations where plant personnel with tacit
engineering approval, but no realistic design
analysis changed the machine operating rate.)
Examples include:
o The dryer felt roll failed from fatigue that
originated where a stiffener was welded into the
roll. The original design resulted in a high stress
concentration at the site of significant residual
stresses. It did not specify stress relieving and
the roll developed a fatigue crack and failed
catastrophically.
o The pump impeller failed from cavitation, a
corrosion mechanism. The cavitation resulted
from poor piping design and the rapid failure
from the use of a material that was not cavitation
resistant. The system design had the pump
operating at well below the minimum NPSH.
o The paper machine operating speed was
increased by 5% without a serious engineering
review. Consequently, some components were
operating at resonant frequencies and failed
repeatedly with the result that the machine
production capability was reduced by the
increase in speed.
 Maintenance errors - The maintenance
mechanics did not repair a machine or properly
install the machine or component after a repair.
Examples:
o The pump shaft had loose bearings resulting
from poor fitting practice. The resultant fretting
corrosion reduced the fatigue strength of the
shaft and the shaft fractured from corrosion
fatigue.
o A crankshaft on a large reciprocating
compressor failed from bending fatigue. The
crankshaft was supported by three plain
bearings and the bearing alignment was not
checked prior to crankshaft installation. Several
months later the shaft failed because of the
loading.

 Manufacturing errors - The components were

improperly manufactured and as a result failed
prematurely. Examples include:
o The manufacturer of large vertical shaft pumps
used in waste treatment plants had torsional
resonance in both the drive shafts and the pump
bases. As a result, the drive shafts would
fracture from torsional fatigue after 4000 to 8000
operating hours.
o The manufacturer of an expansion joint specified
for use at 180 psi supplied one designed for use
 at 120 psi. (There was an error in their internal
procedures.) The joint failed during operation
shortly after starting up.

 Original installation errors - At the time of the

installation a properly designed and
manufactured piece of equipment was installed
incorrectly and, as a result, failed prematurely.
Two examples are:
o The vertical pump motor that was misaligned,
causing stress on the shaft, and directly
contributing the shaft failure.
o The copper water line that was installed without
the specified dielectric union, resulting in
corrosion that caused a leak approximately 15
months later.

 Supervisory errors - A situation where there is

general recognition that a potentially serious
problem exists, but no action is taken and the
result is a significant failure. Two examples are:
o A supercalender drive failure that occurred when
the reducer ran out of oil. This 2000 hp reducer
had been leaking for over a year but no
corrective action had been taken.
o A critical bearing that failed when the lubricant
supply system failed. There was a monitoring
system on the lubricant line and, even though
the machine diagnostic report noted that the
monitoring system had failed several months
earlier, it had not been repaired. As a result,
when the lubricant supply failed the bearing was
destroyed and substantial downtime resulted.