NORR Report Algo Mall Study

COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE Algo Mall Study
Reference: 30160FR (Rev. 02) Date: 07 Febuary 2013
COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE
30160FR (Rev. 02)
ALGO MALL STUDY 07 Febuary 2013
Submitted to: NORR Limited Attention Dr. H Saffanni 175 Bloor St. East Toronto, ON M4W 3R8
Submitted by: BMT FLEET TECHNOLOGY LIMITED 311 Legget Drive Kanata, ON K2K 1Z8
BMT Contact: Dr. L.N. Pussegoda Tel: 613-592-2830, Ext. 205 Fax: 613-592-4950 Email: NPussegoda@fleetech.com
BMT Fleet Technology Limited accepts no liability for any errors or omissions or for any loss, damage, claim or other demand in connection with the usage of this report, insofar as those errors and omissions, claims or other demands are due to any incomplete or inaccurate information supplied to BMT Fleet Technology Limited for the purpose of preparing this report.
BMT Fleet Technology Limited 30160FR (Rev 02)
REVISION HISTORY RECORD Revision No. 00 01 02 Date of Issue 16 January 2013 29 January 2013 07 Febuary 2013 Description of Change Initial submission. Revised submission including Client comments. Revised submission considering Client comments.
Algo Mall Study
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS .....................................................................................vii
BACKGROUND................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Selected Exhibits for Non-Destructive Evaluation (NDE) followed by Destructive Testing ............................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Scope of Investigation .................................................................................................... 1 NON-DESTRUCTIVE EVALUATION (NDE)................................................................. 2 2.1 Exhibit A ........................................................................................................................ 2 2.2 Exhibit B......................................................................................................................... 4 2.3 Exhibit 543/525 .............................................................................................................. 9 2.4 Exhibit 527 ................................................................................................................... 11 2.5 Exhibit 530 Fillet Weld Measurements..................................................................... 11 2.6 Exhibit 530 and 511 Section Size Measurements ...................................................... 14 FAILURE SURFACE OBSERVATIONS ....................................................................... 15 3.1 Exhibit A ...................................................................................................................... 15 3.2 Exhibit 543 ................................................................................................................... 18 METALLOGRAPHIC EXAMINATIONS....................................................................... 22 4.1 Sample Preparation....................................................................................................... 22 4.1.1 Weld Connection - Exhibit A to B ................................................................... 22 4.1.2 Weld Connection - Exhibit 543/525 and 527 ................................................... 24 4.2 Assembly of Macrographs............................................................................................ 24 4.3 Microscopic Examinations ........................................................................................... 29 4.3.1 Weld Connection - Exhibit A to B ................................................................... 29 4.3.2 Weld Connection - Exhibit 543 to 527............................................................. 31 4.3.3 Exhibit A .......................................................................................................... 34 4.4 Examination of the Surface of the Angle Cut out from Exhibit B ............................... 37 4.5 Material Chemical Analysis ......................................................................................... 39 4.6 Material Mechanical Properties.................................................................................... 40 4.6.1 Tensile Testing ................................................................................................. 40 4.6.2 Hardness Testing .............................................................................................. 42 CORROSION RATE ESTIMATE.................................................................................... 44 5.1 Structural Coating Life and Corrosion Rates ............................................................... 45 5.2 Comparison of Corrosion Rates ................................................................................... 46 CONCLUDING REMARKS RELATED TO CONNECTION DETAIL FAILURE PROCESS ......................................................................................................................... 47
APPENDICES APPENDIX A: EXHIBIT LIST APPENDIX B: HARDNESS TESTING
Algo Mall Study
iii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1: Exhibit A - Full Section Column Flange (Thickness 13.4 mm) ............................... 2 Figure 2.2(a): Measurements of the Height of the Remaining Weld Attached to the Column Flange (Exhibit A) ...................................................................................................... 3 Figure 2.2(b): Measurements of the Leg Length of the Remaining Weld Attached to the Column Flange (Exhibit A) ...................................................................................................... 3 Figure 2.3: Two Views of Exhibit B .............................................................................................. 5 Figure 2.4: Condition of the BoltHeads (Exhibit B); Side 1.......................................................... 6 Figure 2.5: Exhibit B; After Cleaning by Wire Brushing to Remove Loose Corrosion Product ... 7 Figure 2.6: Exhibit B - Thickness of Angle LegConnected Column Flange................................. 8 Figure 2.7: Exhibit B - After Cleaning to Remove Corrosion Product from Nut.......................... 8 Figure 2.8: Full Section Column Flange (Thickness 13.4 mm).................................................. 9 Figure 2.9: Exhibits 543 and 525 Measurements of Weld Size ................................................... 10 Figure 2.10: Exhibit 527 .............................................................................................................. 11 Figure 2.11: Intact Beam to Column Connection ........................................................................ 12 Figure 2.12: Intact Connection Weld Height (Arrow Marks the Weld Height in Figure 2.13(a) ............................................................................................................ 12 Figure 2.13: Exhibit 530 Measurements of the Weld Size .......................................................... 13 Figure 3.1: Exhibit A Marked Out Before Cutting ...................................................................... 15 Figure 3.2: Exhibit A Section from 130 and 260 mm Measured from Top.............................. 16 Figure 3.3: Exhibit A - Side 1 After Cleaning with Inhibited Acid............................................. 17 Figure 3.4: Exhibit A - After Cleaning with Inhibited Acid........................................................ 18 Figure 3.5: Exhibit 543 Marked with the White Line Before Cutting......................................... 19 Figure 3.6: Exhibit 543 Section from 130 and 230 mm Measured from Top........................... 19 Figure 3.7: Exhibit 543 Side 2 Before Cleaning ....................................................................... 20 Figure 3.8: Exhibit 543 Side 1 After Cleaning with Inhibited Acid. ........................................ 20 Figure 3.9: Exhibit 543 Side 1 After Cleaning with Inhibited Acid ......................................... 21 Figure 4.1: Exhibit B Assembled After Cutting........................................................................... 22 Figure 4.2: Exhibit B; Section Plane Approximately 130 mm from Top.................................... 22 Figure 4.3: Exhibit A; Section Plane Approximately 130 mm from Top.................................... 23 Figure 4.4: Example of Metallographic Sections of the Failed Weld Connection at Approximately 130 mm from Top in Weld Connection - Exhibit A to Exhibit B ... 23 Figure 4.5: Example of Metallographic Sections of the Failed Weld Connection in Weld Connection - Exhibit 543 to 527............................................................................... 24 Figure 4.6: Failed Weld A130/B130 ............................................................................................ 25 Figure 4.7: Failed Weld A260/B230 ............................................................................................ 26 Figure 4.8: Demolition Separated Weld 543_220/527_220......................................................... 27 Figure 4.9: Reference Weld 530 .................................................................................................. 28 Figure 4.10: Micrographic Views at the Failure Surface Marked by White Arrows Exhibit A to B ........................................................................................................... 31 Figure 4.11: Micrographic views in the Upper Portion of the Failure Surface on Side 1 marked by arrows - Exhibit 543 to 527. Section plane 230 mm from top............................ 33
Algo Mall Study
iv
Figure 4.12: Micrographic Views in the Lower Portion of the Failure Surface on Side 1 - Exhibit 543 to 527. Section plane 230 mm from top............................................................ 34 Figure 4.13: Assembly Showing the Removal Location of Sample from Exhibit A for Metallography........................................................................................................... 35 Figure 4.14: Mounted Sample from Exhibit A at Section Plane 30 mm from Top. .................... 36 Figure 4.15: Micrographic Views of the Failure Surface of Angle - Exhibit A; Side 1 (Section plane 30 mm from top) ............................................................................................. 37 Figure 4.16: The Piece removed from Exhibit B; Side 1 ............................................................. 38 Figure 4.17: Streoscopic View of the Surface shown in Figure 16(a). ........................................ 39 Figure 4.18: Flange Sample Extracted From Exhibit 511............................................................ 41 Figure 4.19: Stress-Strain Curve from Tension Specimen from Flange of Exhibit 511.............. 42 Figure 4.20: Macrograph at Section Plane 630 mm from Top (Side 1) of Exhibit 530............... 43
Algo Mall Study
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1: Table 4.1: Table 4.2: Table 4.3: Table 4.4: Table 5.1: Table 5.2: Table 5.3: Table 5.4: Table 5.5: Table 5.6: Section Size Measurements for Exhibit 530 and 511 ................................................. 14 Estimated Weld Sizes (Leg Lengths) at Fusion Faces................................................ 28 Estimated Section Thicknesses ................................................................................... 29 Chemical Analysis Results, wt% ................................................................................ 40 Measured Tensile Properties For Exhibit 511............................................................. 42 Estimated Decreased Weld Dimensins due to Corrosion and Corrosion Rate ........... 44 Estimated Decreased Section Thicknesses Due to Corrosion..................................... 44 Coating Life Statistics................................................................................................. 45 Corrosion Rate Statistics............................................................................................. 46 Pitting Corrosion Rate Data ........................................................................................ 46 Estimated Corrosion Rate Statistical Parameters........................................................ 46
Algo Mall Study
vi
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS Al BM BMT C Cr CSA Cu HAZ L Angle L Flange Mn NDE Ni NRC OPP P S Si tAngle t Flange Ti V VHN W WM Aluminium Base metal BMT Fleet Technology Carbon Chromium Canadian Standards Association Copper Het Affeted Zone Weld leg size attached to angle section Weld leg size attached to flange section Manganese Non-Destructive Evaluation Nickle National Research Council Ontario Provincial Police Phosphorus Sulphur Silicon Thickness of angle leg section Thickness of column flange Titanium Vanadium Vickers Hardness Number Distance between parallel sides of nut from bolted connection Weld Metal
Algo Mall Study
vii
BACKGROUND
BMT Fleet Technology Limited (BMT) was tasked to complete a metallurgical and structural investigation of the steel structural elements removed from the Algo Mall and delivered to the BMT test labs. A listing of the materials delivered to BMT by the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) is presented in Appendix A as an Exhibit list. The work performed in this investigation was coordinated and contracted through NORR Limited. The initial meeting held at BMT s office on September 6, 2012 reviewed the background of the investigation and developed an initial scope for the investigation as documented in the meeting minutes. BMT s role in this investigation was focussed on the connection detail (welded double angle beam connection) suspected to have precipitated the collapse of the Mall roof top parking surface. 1.1 Selected Exhibits for Non-Destructive Evaluation (NDE) followed by Destructive Testing The Exhibit materials (Appendix A) selected for detailed investigation included: Failed connection identified as Exhibits A (column) and B (beam and bolted angles to the web). The separation occurred at the fillet welds connecting the two angles to the column flange. Similar beam to column connection consisting of Exhibits 543/525 (column flange) to 527 (beam and bolted angles to the web). This separation was reported to have occurred during demolition. Exhibit 530 which is a beam to column connection. Exhibit 511 which is a column. This was to be used for extraction of a sample for tensile testing for confirm the material grade as 300W/44W (CSA G40.21). These Exhibits are presented in Appendix A. 1.2 Scope of Investigation The agreed scope of work for the BMT investigation included the provision of engineering opinions related to: the mode and rate of degradation observed at the suspect connection (Exhibit A and B); the extent of degradation (corrosion) and the remaining capacity of the connection; and the mode and mechanism of failure of the connection. BMT structural engineering, welding engineering and metallurgical engineering expertise and experience were used to complete this investigation. The details of the findings of this investigation are provided in the sections that follow.
Algo Mall Study
NON-DESTRUCTIVE EVALUATION (NDE)
The first step in the investigation involved non-destructive measurement and evaluation of the subject structural components as outlined in the sections that follow for each Exhibit. 2.1 Exhibit A Measurements were made to determine the remaining weld sizes on the column flange presented in Figure 2.1. The measurements were made using a calibrated vernier caliper along the two vertical welds (marked by the white arrows in Figure 2.1) on each side and the results are presented in Figure 2.2. The section to be cut out for cleaning the failure region (i.e., the weld length along the section from 130 mm to 260 mm on Sides 1 and 2) using inhibited acid is marked in Figure 2.2(a). Black scale deposits were removed from the region between the two welds, i.e., the crevice area of the failed connection, and bagged for later analysis. Such typical scale is marked by the green arrow. The scale deposits were sent for chemical analysis to the NRC lab.
Top
Side 2
Side 1
Figure 2.1: Exhibit A - Full Section Column Flange (Thickness 13.4 mm)
Algo Mall Study
Exhibit A - weld height

5 4.5 4 3.5 Weld heigth, (mm) 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Length, (mm) 350 400 450 500 metallography planes cut out piece side 1 side 2
Side 2
Side 1
Top Length
Height
Figure 2.2(a): Measurements of the Height of the Remaining Weld Attached to the Column Flange (Exhibit A)
The weld height (ordinate), in Figure 2.2(a) indicates the portion of the weld size, in the column flange, that is remaining after the failure. The weld size in Figure 2.2(b) is the leg length of the weld attached to the column flange. The weld length is measured as 460 mm.
Exhibit A - leg length
16 Top 14 12 Leg length, (mm) 10 weld length side 1 side 2
Side 2
8
Side 1
Top
6 4 2
Length
Leg Length (Size)

0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Length, (mm) 350 400 450 500
Figure 2.2(b): Measurements of the Leg Length of the Remaining Weld Attached to the Column Flange (Exhibit A)
Algo Mall Study 3
2.2 Exhibit B Two views of Exhibit B are presented in Figure 2.3. These consist of:
The beam connected to the column; and The angles that connect the beam to the column. It is noted that the failure occurred between the angles and the column flange along the fillet welds (identified in Figure 2.1 as Side 1 and 2) except the area marked by the white ellipse in Figure 2.3(a). The failure surface in the area marked by the white elipse was located in the Side 1 angle leg. The area marked by the white ellipse was cut out to be more closely examined using the stereoscope. The objective of this detailed inspection was to identify any rubbing or surface damage in this local region of the angle.
Side 1
Top
Side 2
(a)
Algo Mall Study
Side 2
Top
(b) Figure 2.3: Two Views of Exhibit B
As illustrated in Figures 2.3 and 2.4, the angle and the bolted connection were severely corroded. Samples of the black and orange scale deposits shown on the angle in Figure 2.3(a) in the areas marked by the yellow elipse were removed and bagged for chemical analysis at the NRC lab. Corrosion product samples were similarly removed for chemical analysis at the NRC lab from the nuts marked by the yellow elispses in Figure 2.3(b). Figure 2.4 is presented to show a close up view of the condition of the bolt heads on the other side (Side 1) of the connection displayed in Figure 2.3.
Algo Mall Study
Side 1
Figure 2.4: Condition of the BoltHeads (Exhibit B); Side 1
The side shown in Figure 2.5 was cleaned by wire brushing to remove corrosion products in order to make measurements of the remaining thickness of the angle leg bolted to the beam web and the leg welded to the column flange. A calibrated micrometer was used to measure the angle leg that was welded to the column flange and a vernier caliper was used to measure the angle leg bolted to the web. The minimum thicknesses measured along the angle legs in the region shown in Figure 2.5 was 4.8 mm and 4.6 mm for the angle leg that was welded to the column flange and the angle leg bolted to the beam web, respectively. The thickness values of the angle leg that was welded to the column flange are consistent with the weld heights displayed in Figure 2.2(a). These measurements were recorded and stored in an MS Excel file. This file also includes measurements of the thickness of the angle leg close to the corner of the angle along the entire length of the angle. This data was measured using a micrometer. The results of these measurements are shown in Figure 2.6 for both the angle leg thickness at the edge and corner. These results suggest that the average thickness of the angle leg is marginally lower at its edge than at the corner on Side 1 and almost the same on Side 2.
Algo Mall Study
Side 1
Figure 2.5: Exhibit B; After Cleaning by Wire Brushing to Remove Loose Corrosion Product
8.0 7.0 Thickness, (mm) 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 0 50 100 150 200 250 Length, (mm) 300 350 400 450
Top
edge corner
Angle Edge Thickness Angle Corner Thickness
a) Side 1
Algo Mall Study
8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 0
Top
edge corner
Thickness, (mm)
Angle Edge Thickness Angle Corner Thickness
50
100
150
200 250 Length, (mm)
300
350
400
450
b) Side 2
Figure 2.6: Exhibit B - Thickness of Angle LegConnected Column Flange
One of the nuts in the bolted connection was cleaned to remove the corrosion products and the distance between parallel side (W) measured using a vernier caliper was 25.3 mm as marked in Figure 2.7.
Side 2
Figure 2.7: Exhibit B - After Cleaning to Remove Corrosion Product from Nut
Algo Mall Study
2.3 Exhibit 543/525 These Exhibits were examined because they were reported to be the connection supporting the beam on the opposite column flange to the connection that failed (Exhibits A and B). This connection was pulled apart during demolition activity, thus in-service, it was an intact welded connection. The measurements taken at this connection detail were collected for comparison with the construction quality, connection details and degradation observed at Exhibits A and B. Due to the lower levels of corrosion at this connection detail, compared to that at Exhibits A and B, the structural geometry could be considered to be reflective of original construction.
Measurements were made to determine the weld sizes on the column flange shown in Figure 2.8. The column flange (Exhibit 525) had been cut in half and bent before delivery to BMT. Measurements of the weld size were made using a vernier caliper along the two vertical welds on each side and the results are presented in Figure 2.9, in a manner as for Exhibit A in Section 2.1 of the report.
Top Side 1 Side 2
Figure 2.8: Full Section Column Flange (Thickness 13.4 mm)
Algo Mall Study
543 & 525- weld height

8 7 6 Weld heigth, (mm) 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 Length, (mm) 450 500 550 600 650
side 1 side 2
a) Weld Height Attached to the Column Flange

543 & 525- leg length
16 14 12 Leg length, (mm) 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 Length, (mm) 450 500 550 600 650 side 1 side 2
b) Weld Leg Length Attached to the Column Flange Figure 2.9: Exhibits 543 and 525 Measurements of Weld Size
Algo Mall Study
10
The total weld length is measured as 610 mm by assembling Exhibit 543 and 525 as one unit. It was found that the weld size does not change significantly along the length on the weld. The weld height was in the range of 6 mm to 7 mm and the leg length varied from 10 mm to 14 mm, that is, the weld height was about double and the leg length was similar to that measured in Exhibit A. Note that compared to Exhibit A there is only corrosion in the section between the two welds, i.e., the crevice created by welding the angles to the flange. 2.4 Exhibit 527 The side view of Exhibit 527 is presented in Figure 2.10. It consists of the angles and beam that were connected to Exhibits 543 and 525. It was noted that the length of the angle in Figure 2.10 is equal to the length of the weld along the flange shown in Figure 2.8.
Side 2
Figure 2.10: Exhibit 527
After wire brushing to remove loose corrosion product and paint, measurements of the thickness of the angle on both sides were made following the procedures adopted for Exhibit B and described in Section 2.2 in this report. The measured average thickness of the two legs of one angle was 8.5 mm on the side bolted to the web and 7.5 mm for the side that was welded to the flange of Exhibits 543/525. These thickness values of the side connected to the column flange are marginally greater than the weld height reported in Figure 2.9(a). These measurements were recorded in an MS Excel file for future reference. This file also reported average thickness at the corner of the angle to be 8.1 mm.
2.5 Exhibit 530 Fillet Weld Measurements Measurements were made to determine the weld size along fillet weld shown in Figure 2.11. This detail is a beam to column connection with no corrosion but has a thicker column flange than that of the failed connection. These measurements were taken to consider the as-built geometry of the connection detail. A close up of the fillet weld is shown in Figure 2.12. The measurements were made using a vernier caliper along the two welds on each side and the results are presented in Figure 2.13, in a similar display as for Exhibit A in Section 2.1 of the report.
Algo Mall Study
11
Top
Side 1
Figure 2.11: Intact Beam to Column Connection
Side 2
Figure 2.12: Intact Connection Weld Height (Arrow Marks the Weld Height in Figure 2.13(a)
Algo Mall Study
12
8 7 6 Weld heigth, (mm) 5 side 1 side 2 4 3 2 1 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 Length, (mm)
(a) Weld Height Attached to the Angle

18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 Length, (mm) side 1 side 2
Leg length, (mm)
(b) Weld Height Attached to the Column Flange Figure 2.13: Exhibit 530 Measurements of the Weld Size
Algo Mall Study
13
The weld height was in the range of 6 mm to 7.5 mm and leg length varied from 12 mm to 16 mm. In summary, the weld size was marginally larger to that measured in Exhibit 543/525.
2.6 Exhibit 530 and 511 Section Size Measurements Section size measurements were taken on the columns and beams of the above Exhibits 530 and 511, as requested by NORR Limited. Measurements of the thickness of the web and flange were made using a vernier caliper. The section sizes (i.e., W and H) were dimensioned using a steel ruler. The results presented in Table 2.1 also include the nominal dimensions. Table 2.1: Section Size Measurements for Exhibit 530 and 511
Exhibit 530 Column 530 Beam Side 1 530 Beam Side2 511 Column 511 Beam Section W10x89 Nominal Dimensions Web Thickness (mm) Flange Thickness H W Nominal Measured Nominal Measured 276.4 261.1 15.6 14.8 25.3 27.3-27.8
W24x84
611.9
229.1
11.9
11.7-11.8
19.6
19
W24x76
607.3
228.1
11.2
11.3-11.4
17.3
17.2-17.3
W10x49 W24x76
254 607.3
254 228.1
8.6 11.2
9.4-9.6 11.1-11.8
14.2 17.3
15.5-15.7 16.9-17.2
Algo Mall Study
14
FAILURE SURFACE OBSERVATIONS
This section provides a description of the observations derived from the destructive examination of the connection details. 3.1 Exhibit A In order to carryout close up examination of the failed weld surface using a stereoscope, it was necessary to cut out a selected region as indicated in Figure 2.2(a) in Section 2.1. Exhibit A was marked out at 130 mm and 260 mm from the top and the portion between 130 mm and 260 mm; i.e., between the two white lines, was cut by saw. The photo documentation of the cuts and the cut section are shown in Figure 3.1 and Figure 3.2, respectively.
Top
Side 2
Side 1
Figure 3.1: Exhibit A Marked Out Before Cutting
Algo Mall Study
15
Side 2
Side 1
Figure 3.2: Exhibit A Section from 130 and 260 mm Measured from Top ((The arrow points to the bottom orientation.)
The examination of the failed surface before cleaning using the stereoscope did not reveal any fracture surface features, therefore the weld region on both sides were cleaned using inhibited acid solution (50/50 water and Hydrochloric acid with Rodine). Rodine is an inhibitor that has been found to be effective in not removing metal (iron). Figure 3.3 shows the failed connection (Side 1) region after cleaning with the inhibited acid solution. Side 2 (not shown) also shows similar appearance. As the initial cleaning appeared to be insufficient, a more rigorous cleaning using a synthetic material brush while immersed in a cleaning solution was successful in exposing bare metal in some regions while in the base/root of the weld, a black deposit (see white arrows in Figure 3.3) remains. The magnetite deposit extends from the root of the weld into the weld throat. This suggests that the weld throat seperation (initiating from the weld root) was exposed to a corrosive environment for a significant period of time (i.e., greater than one year). The formation of magnetite (Fe 3O4) 1 occurs after the formation of red or orange oxide by converting its iron ions. Thus magnetite is an older form of oxide.
Jones, Deny A, Principles and Prevention of Corrosion , Macmillan Publishing Company, New York, 1992.
Algo Mall Study
16
Side 1
(a) Initial cleaning
Side 1
(b) Final Cleaning

Figure 3.3: Exhibit A - Side 1 After Cleaning with Inhibited Acid (The left end is the cut at 130 mm from top side of column)
The black regions (marked by the white arrow in Figure 3.3) are magnetite deposits. Magnetite is a magnetic form of oxide which can be differentiated from the red/orange oxide commonly referred to as red rust. The magnetite is difficult to clean from the surface and is an older form of corrosion product compared to red rust. The metallic region (marked by the green arrow in Figure 3.3) has been cleaned effectively by the inhibited acid solution. Figure 3.4 provides a detail view of the region close to the 130 mm end. The failure surface in the metallic regions may not have the virgin failure features due to dissolution of the steel in a corrosion process. The bright spots in Figure 3.4(b) are indicative of minute corrosion pits when viewed with the stereoscope.
Algo Mall Study
17
Side 1
(a) Initial Cleaning
Side 1
(b) Final Cleaning

Figure 3.4: Exhibit A - After Cleaning with Inhibited Acid. (A closer view than Figure 3.3. The left end is the cut at 130 mm from top side of column.) 3.2 Exhibit 543 In a similar way to that described in Section 3.1, a 100 mm long section was cut outby saw. The photo documentation of the cuts and the cut section are shown in Figure 3.5 and Figure 3.6, respectively. This connection was pulled apart during demolition activity, thus in-service it was an intact welded connection.
Algo Mall Study
18
Side 1
Side 2
Figure 3.5: Exhibit 543 Marked with the White Line Before Cutting
Side 1
Side 2
Figure 3.6: Exhibit 543 Section from 130 and 230 mm Measured from Top
The examination of the failed surface using the stereoscope revealed fracture surface features, as shown in Figure 3.7. Compared to Exhibit A where the failed surface had black oxide (magnetite), the fracture surface in Exhibit 543 indicated only the presence of red oxide. This was expected as the oxide on the fracture surface of Exhibit 543 would have formed only after demolition. Side 1 was cleaned using inhibited acid solution in two stages as described in Section 3.1.
Algo Mall Study
19
Side 2
Figure 3.7: Exhibit 543 Side 2 Before Cleaning (The left end is at 220 mm from top side of column)
Side 1
Side 1
(b) Final Cleaning

Figure 3.8: Exhibit 543 Side 1 After Cleaning with Inhibited Acid. (The left end is at 220 mm from top side of column)
The black oxide (magnetite) in Figure 3.8 is confined to the area on the column flange adjacent to the weld root (Figure 3.7) and thus could have been formed in service. The initial cleaning was effective in cleaning only a strip at the top of the failure, as marked by the green arrow as illustrated in Figure 3.8(a). The final clean was effective in removing the red oxide in the rough fracture region, as marked by white arrow in Figure 3.8(b). Figure 3.9 illustrates a detail view of the region close to the 220 mm end. The strip at the top of the fracture (marked by green arrow in Figure 3.8(a)) indicates a smooth surface compared to the rough surface below it. There is a step, marked by the white arrow in Figure 3.9(b), and is in an oblique plane to the rest of the failed surface. The black region in Figure 3.9(b) is clearly visible as a black scale formed in the column flange and in this view appears to extend to the bottom of the failed surface. The black scale was removed and was found to be magnetic and is likely to be magnetite. These two fracture surface regions are reviewed by microscopic examination in Section 4.3.2.
Algo Mall Study
20
(b) Final Cleaning

Figure 3.9: Exhibit 543 Side 1 After Cleaning with Inhibited Acid (A closer view of Figure 3.8. The left end is at 220 mm from top side of column.)
Algo Mall Study
21
METALLOGRAPHIC EXAMINATIONS
To further examine the connection details, metallurgical samples were removed for examination as described in the sections that follow. 4.1 Sample Preparation
4.1.1 Weld Connection - Exhibit A to B The failure of this welded connection is believed to be the cause for the collapse of the concrete slab. Metallographic sections were prepared on both welds (Side 1 and Side 2) of Exhibit A at the two locations marked in Figure 2.2(a). These two locations represent the minimum and maximum weld height along the length of the weld. Metallographic specimens were also prepared at approximately the same locations, with respect to the distance along the weld in Exhibit B. To remove these specimens, Exhibit B had to be cut by saw similar to Exhibit A as described in Section 3. Photographic records were made during this process. Figure 4.1 displays Exhibit B assembled after saw cutting and may be compared with Figure 2.3(a). Figure 4.2 presents a cross-sectional view of a cut surface through Exhibit B.
Side 1 Top
Side 2
Figure 4.1: Exhibit B Assembled After Cutting.
Side 1
Side 2
Figure 4.2: Exhibit B; Section Plane Approximately 130 mm from Top. (Location for extraction of metallographic samples is marked by the two circles.)
Algo Mall Study
22
Metallography samples were extracted at locations indicated by the circles in Figures 4.2 and 4.3. Four samples were extracted from the two cut planes shown in Figure 4.1. It is noted that the edges of the angles at these locations were welded to the column flange by fillet welds. In a similar way, four metallographic samples were also extracted to display the weld profile in Exhibit A. Figure 4.3 is presented to show a cut plane in Exhibit A.
Side 1
Side 2
Figure 4.3: Exhibit A; Section Plane Approximately 130 mm from Top (Location for extraction of metallographic samples is marked by the two circles.) The samples were cut and prepared for metallographic examination. The steps involve mounting the extracted samples in Bakelite and then grinding with a 1200 grit paper using metallurgical preparation equipment. The samples are then etched in 10% nital solution (10% volume nitric acid in methanol) to reveal the macro-structure. Two examples of this are provided in Figure 4.4. The weld metal is the region marked by the arrow and the halo around it is the visible heat affected zone (HAZ) due to welding. It is to be noted that this is the minimum weld height location as displayed in Figure 2.2(a).
(a) Exhibit B - Side 2
(b) Exhibit A - Side 2

Figure 4.4: Example of Metallographic Sections of the Failed Weld Connection at Approximately 130 mm from Top in Weld Connection - Exhibit A to Exhibit B
Algo Mall Study
23
4.1.2 Weld Connection - Exhibit 543/525 and 527 A similar procedure described in Section 4.1 was adopted to prepare metallography samples at a section plane 220 mm from the top with reference to Figure 2.7. The resulting metallographic samples are presented in Figure 4.5. The weld metal regions are marked by the arrows.
(a) Exhibit 527 - Side 1
(b) Exhibit 543 - Side 1

Figure 4.5: Example of Metallographic Sections of the Failed Weld Connection in Weld Connection - Exhibit 543 to 527 4.2 Assembly of Macrographs Sample specimens from each of the angle leg and the column flange that were sectioned and photographed are used to develop an understanding of the connection geometry at the time of the failure and at construction. Figures 4.6 and Figure 4.7 illustrate the sectioned specimens taken from the separated welds, designated as Welds A130/B130 and A260/B230 (combining Exhibit A and B sections at positions 130 mm and 260 mm from the top), respectively. In each case, specimens from the two sides (Side 1 and Side 2) of the welded connection are shown. The estimated original (i.e., at construction) section thicknesses and fillet weld profile have been added to the figures to illustrate the estimated amount of material lost to corrosion. Figure 4.8 similarly illustrates the sectioned specimens taken from the weld separated during demolition, designated as Weld 543_220/527_220 (Exhibits 543 and 527 at a position of 220 mm from the top of the weld). As shown in Figure 4.8, the effects of corrosion are negligible. Figure 4.9 illustrates a reference weld, designated Weld 530 (one side only), which shows an intact fillet welded connection with no corrosion. In each figure, the separated components in a connection have been positioned by closely aligning the contours of the fusion line (within the thickness of the steel sections) and the contours of the heat-affected zones. In assembling these composite figures, care was taken to
Algo Mall Study
24
ensure that the adjacent images were presented at the same level of magnification. The rectangular blue backgrounds positioned behind each sectioned component provide the nominal dimension of the component. Similarly, the red triangular backgrounds are used to illustrate the nominal weld sizes considered to have been used in construction. Where the nominal weld (red triangle) is obscured by the weld, a black dashed line has been used to represent the nominal fillet weld trangle boundaries. Corroded fillet weld
Angle Leg (as-received) Fusion line contour Heat-affected zone contour Column Flange (as-received)
(a) Side 2 Idealized Fillet Weld Profile Column Flange (as-constructed)
Angle Leg (as-constructed) Fusion face for determining weld leg length (excluding any gap)
(b) Side 1 Figure 4.6: Failed Weld A130/B130
Algo Mall Study
25
(a) Side 2
(b) Side 1 Figure 4.7: Failed Weld A260/B230
Algo Mall Study
26
(a) Side 1
(b) Side 2 Figure 4.8: Demolition Separated Weld 543_220/527_220
Algo Mall Study
27
Figure 4.9: Reference Weld 530 The as-received weld sizes (weld sizes measured by BMT), taken as the leg lengths along the fusion face (and not accounting for gaps between the components), have been estimated from the photographs of the specimens. The nominal weld sizes, which are assumed from the idealized fillet weld (red background triangle) shown in the photographs, have been estimated similarly. The estimated leg lengths are listed in Table 4.1 for each weld specimen, for each side. Table 4.1: Estimated Weld Sizes (Leg Lengths) at Fusion Faces
Weld Failed Weld Specimen A130 / B130 A260 / B230 543_220 / 527_220 530 Nominal Weld Size1 [mm] Side 1 Side 2 LAngle LFlange LAngle LFlange 7 7 7 7 13 13 13 13 7 7 7 13 13 13 As-Received Weld Size1 [mm] Side 1 Side 2 LAngle LFlange LAngle LFlange 3.5 4.5 7 7 8.0 12.0 13 13 3.5 5.0 7.0 8.0 12.5 13
Demolition Separated Weld Reference Weld
1. The weld size (leg length) is estimated based on the weld at the fusion face with no gap assumed between the angle leg and the column flange.
Table 4.2 lists the thickness for each angle leg and column flange section from each specimen for the estimated original (i.e., at construction) condition and in the as-received (i.e., corroded) condition.
Algo Mall Study
28
Table 4.2: Estimated Section Thicknesses

Estimated Original Thickness [mm] Side 1 Side 2 tAngle tFlange tAngle tFlange 7.9 7.9 7.9 7.9 14.2 14.2 14.2 25.3 7.9 7.9 7.9 14.2 14.2 14.2 As-Received Thickness [mm] Side 1 tAngle tFlange1 2.5 4.0 7.9 8.0 9.5 12.5 13.5 Side 2 tAngle tFlange1 4.0 5.4 7.9 9.0 12.9 14.0
Weld
Specimen
Failed Weld Demolition Separated Weld Reference Weld
A130 / B130 A260 / B230 543_220 / 527_220 530
1. The as-received column flange thickness is measured from the minimum thickness shown in the photographs.
The exact fit between the separated components cannot be known with certainty and it is similarly not known when the welds failed. It is noted from the photographs of the failed and separated welds, shown in Figure 4.6 and Figure 4.7, that significant corrosion of the structural members and the weld profile has occurred. Further, evidence of pitting corrosion is seen on the surfaces of the weld failures, indicating that the wastage may have progressed through the entire thickness of the weld throat during the service life. In particular, the weld illustrated in Figure 4.6(b), corresponding to specimen A130/B130 at Side 1, shows significant corrosion of the angle leg indicating that a corrosive environment was present on both surfaces. This suggests that the corrosion process would have reduced the weld size from both the face and root. 4.3 Microscopic Examinations Microscopic examination of the fracture path to attempt to identify the mode of failure and contributing factors was completed, by examination of metallographic sections, and is reported subsequently. 4.3.1 Weld Connection - Exhibit A to B A pair of the macro-structure observation samples was prepared for microscopic examination. This is done by re-grinding the etched sample in 1200 grip paper and polishing to a 1 micron finish using metallurgical preparation equipment. The samples are then etched in 2% nital solution to reveal the microstructure. The pairs selected were the section plane 260 mm from top for Exhibit A and plane 230 mm from top for Exhibit B from Side 2. The focus of the examination was to assess the microstructure at the failure surface of both Exhibits. The observations indicated the following: The failure surface in Exhibit A was entirely in the weld, i.e., the microstructure along the failure surface display weld metal (see Figure 4.10a). This microstructure is
Algo Mall Study
29
characterized as columnar morphology that is typical of as-deposited weld metal microstructure. There were pits along the failure surface (marked by green arrow). The pit marked by the green arrow is filled with oxide. This suggests that the failure surface was exposed to a corrosive environment for a significant period of time for pitting to occur and for corrosion deposits to be present in the pits. There was no observable grain deformation at the failure surface. The failure surface in Exhibit B was entirely in the HAZ, i.e., the microstructure along the failure surface did not display weld metal (see Figure 4.10b). This observation combined with that in the first bullet suggests that the fracture path followed the weld fusion line (i.e., boundary between the weld metal and base material of the angle). The pits along the failure surface in Exhibit A supports the observations presented in Figure 3.4(b) in Section 3. The failure surface was exposed to a corrosive environment for a significant period of time. Therefore it is clear that the original failure surface (i.e., failure surface before corrosion) in Exhibit A is not present due to corrosion and hence any inference from fractography (observations made on the cleaned fracture surface) could be misleading.
200 m
(a) Exhibit A Side 2 - Section plane 260 mm from Top
Algo Mall Study
30
200 m
(b) Exhibit B Side 2 - Section Plane 230 mm from Top
Figure 4.10: Micrographic Views at the Failure Surface Marked by White Arrows Exhibit A to B 4.3.2 Weld Connection - Exhibit 543 to 527 A pair of the macro-structure observation samples was prepared for microscopic examination as described in Section 4.3.1. The pair selected was section plane 220 mm from top for Exhibit 543 and plane 220 mm from top for Exhibit 527 from Side 1. This is because the macrograph presented in Figure 4.8(a) indicated weld metal in Exhibit 527 at the edge of the angle in the upper portion of the failure path. It is noted that there is no expected metal loss after demolition and therefore the failure path represents the actual path as compared to those observations made in Section 4.3.1 for connection Exhibit A to B. The observations indicated the following: The failure surface in Exhibit 543 and 527 was in the weld in one portion of the fracture; i.e., the microstructure along both halves of the failure surface display weld metal, as illustrated in Figure 4.11. This region represents the smooth failure surface at the top side of the fractograph presented in Figure 3.9. (Note that in Figure 3.9, the corrosion on this surface is removed by cleaning in inhibited acid solution, while the metallographic section was prepared before removal of surface rust.) There is observable grain deformation at the failure surface in this portion of the fracture. The deformation of the grain structure is local and only a few (i.e. 5 to 10) microns deep and can be found on both sides of the failure surface. The grain deformation morphology indicates shear at the two failure surfaces suggesting a ductile failure process.
Algo Mall Study
31
There is evidence of a layer of non-metallic film (corrosion product) at the failure surface in Exhibit 527 as illustrated in Figure 4.11(b) and as marked by the green arrow. The non-metallic film is 5 to 10 microns and it is likely to be a layer of red rust. The failure surface in the portion of the fracture that appears rough in Figure 3.9 is in the HAZ in both halves of the failure surface (see Figure 4.12). The transition from the smooth surface to the rough surface presented in Figure 3.9 indicates an oblique surface as described in Section 3.2. The failure surface profile in Figure 4.12 indicates evidence of the rough surface marked by the arrows. The failure surface profile also indicates planer facets and subsidiary cracks marked by the arrow in Figure 4.12. This is indicative of the cleavage (brittle) mode of fracture and is likely in the HAZ adjacent to the weld. Two modes of failure are possible in the two regions presented in Figures 4.11 and 4.12 for the failure in the weld and HAZ as a result of different toughness in the two microstructural regions.
100 m
(a) Exhibit 543
Algo Mall Study
32
100 m
(b) Exhibit 527
Figure 4.11: Micrographic Views in the Upper Portion of the Failure Surface on Side 1 Marked by Arrows - Exhibit 543 to 527. Section Plane 230 mm from Top
100 m
(a) Exhibit 543
Algo Mall Study
33
100 m
(b) Exhibit 527
Figure 4.12: Micrographic Views in the Lower Portion of the Failure Surface on Side 1 Exhibit 543 to 527. Section plane 230 mm from top 4.3.3 Exhibit A As a result of a progress meeting with Norr and Giatec, a request was made to extract a sample from Exhibit A. The objective was to observe the fracture path that occurred in the angle welded to Side 1. The location of the sample extraction with respect to the top region of this Exhibit is documented in Figure 4.13. The sample removal location is marked by the black arrow and the plane for microscopic examination is indicated by the red arrow. The green arrow in Figure 4.13 indicates the location where the fracture deviated to the angle section. It is to be noted that this is the only location where the failure occurred outside of the weld zone as was also noted in Figure 2.3(a) in Section 2.2. Also, the opposite side of this fracture was in the region enclosed in the white ellipse in Figure 2.3(a).
Algo Mall Study
34
Side 2
Side 1
Figure 4.13: Assembly Showing the Removal Location of Sample from Exhibit A for Metallography (The white arrow points to the bottom orientation of the column.)
Algo Mall Study
35
The metallographic sample is presented in Figure 4.14 with the failure surface to be examined marked by the arrow is from the angle section. There was apparent rotation or prying of the angle from the column during the failure, as can be interpreted from Figure 4.14. This suggests that the angle section fracture was the last element of the connection failure.
Side 1
Figure 4.14: Mounted Sample from Exhibit A at Section Plane 30 mm from Top. (The arrow points to the failure surface to be examined on Side 1.) The metallographic examination of the failure path in this section plane revealed the following:
The failure surface has non-metallic material (likely oxide), as indicated by the white arrows in Figure 4.15; and The grain structure has apparent deformation at the surface layer as observed by compressed shape of the grains, indicated by the black arrow, compared to the grain structure present 50 microns below the failure surface.
Side 1
100 m
Algo Mall Study
36
(a) Lower Magnification
Side 1
50 m
(b) Higher Magnification

Figure 4.15: Micrographic Views of the Failure Surface of Angle - Exhibit A; Side 1 (Section plane 30 mm from top)
4.4 Examination of the Surface of the Angle Cut out from Exhibit B The region enclosed in the white ellipse in Figure 2.3 (Section 2.2) was cut out for close examination. The surface of the cut out that needed to be examined to detect indication of any rubbing is presented in Figure 4.16 before and after cleaning in inhibited acid. The black marks enclosed inside the white circle were marks made by a marker to identify a cut line.
Algo Mall Study
37
(a) Before Cleaning
(b) After Cleaning

Figure 4.16: The Piece removed from Exhibit B; Side 1 The shiny spots in Figure 4.16(a) were examined under the stereoscope and appeared to have a metallic appearance (see Figure 4.17). However there were no indications that these were a result of rubbing of this surface on the column flange in Exhibit A. After cleaning in inhibited acid more black oxide regions appeared as can be infered by comparing Figure 4.16(a) and 4.16(b). It is likely that the black regions in Figure 4.16(b) were covered by red rust in Figure 4/16(a).
Algo Mall Study
38
Figure 4.17: Streoscopic View of the Surface shown in Figure 16(a).
4.5 Material Chemical Analysis Samples were removed from the following:
weld connection between Exhibits A and B weld connection between Exhibits 543/525 and 527 base metal: Exhibits A(column flange), B (angle), 543 (column flange) and 527(angle).
Information collected from the original construction drawings indicated that the structural sections were made from Grade 300W material and that a 7018 electrode was used for fabrication. The properties of these materials are used as the basis for comparison of the measured material properties. Weld nuggets were removed from Exhibit A and 543 column flange by sawing off a length sufficient to have more than 2 g. The location of these nuggets with respect to the top of the weld are approximately 100 mm. For Exhibit A and 543 the flange material was removed from one of the locations where the weld macroscopic samples were removed. The same procedure was adopted for removing angle material from Exhibit B and 527. The samples were sent to Exova Labs in Burlington, Ontario for chemical analysis. The results are presented in Table 4.3. The base metal compositions meet the CSA 300W requirements.
Algo Mall Study
39
These requirements are C (max) 0.22, Mn 0.5 to 1.5, P (max) 0.04, S (max) 0.05 and Si (max) 0.40. Table 4.3: Chemical Analysis Results, wt%
Sample A (flange) B (angle) 543 (flange) 527 (angle) A (weld) 543 (weld) CSA 300W C 0.20 0.17 0.20 0.15 0.11 0.11 <0.22 Si 0.03 0.13 0.03 0.17 0.37 0.34 <0.40 Mn 1.11 0.81 1.13 0.80 1.19 1.21 0.5 1.5 S 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 <0.05 P 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 <0.04 Cr 0.03 0.11 0.03 0.10 0.05 0.04 Cu 0.26 0.26 0.27 0.25 0.15 0.14 Ni 0.05 0.10 0.05 0.12 0.04 0.03 Al <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 V <0.01 <0.005 <0.01 <0.01 0.010 0.012 Ti <0.01 <0.005 <0.01 <0.01 0.026 0.025
The results of the chemical analysis suggest that the 7018 electrode used in this construction in combination with a humid and saline (i.e., marine type) environment after the breakdown of protective coatings are likely to contribute to a preferential weld zone corrosive attack2. 4.6 Material Mechanical Properties
4.6.1 Tensile Testing A coupon was removed from Exhibit 511 flange material. A portion of the Exhibit flange was cut out by flame (see Figure 4.18). The tensile test coupon was cut out by using a saw from the flange in longitudinal direction. The full thickness reduced section tension test specimens was machined from the coupon following ASTM E8 guidance.
Brigham, R.J., et. al., Evaluation of Weld-Zone Corrosion Of Ship Building Steel Plates For use in the Arctic Environment , Canadian Metallurgical Quarterly Vol 27, pg 311-321, 1988
Algo Mall Study
40
Figure 4.18: Flange Sample Extracted From Exhibit 511 The tensile test was performed at quasi-static rate following ASTM E8. The load and specimen gauge length extension was acquired during the test. The acquired data was post processed to obtain the stress-strain curve, yield strength (0.2% off set) and the tensile strength. The total elongation at fracture on a 50 mm gauge length was measured after the test was completed. Figure 4.19 displays the stress-strain curve and Table 4.4 presents the yield strength, tensile strength and elongation. The results met the CSA 300W requirements. These requirements are, 300 MPa (min) yield strength, 450 620 MPa tensile strength and 23% (min) elongation (50 mm gauge length).
Algo Mall Study
41
Figure 4.19: Stress-Strain Curve from Tension Specimen from Flange of Exhibit 511 Information collected from the original construction drawings indicated that the structural sections were made from Grade 300W material and that a 7018 electrode was used for fabrication. The properties of these materials are used as the basis for comparison of the measured material properties. Table 4.4: Measured Tensile Properties For Exhibit 511
Sample 511 (flange) CSA 300W Yield Strength (MPa) 327 >300 Tensile Strength (MPa) 487 450 620 Total Elongation (%) 42.5 >23
4.6.2 Hardness Testing The metallographic sample shown in Figure 4.9 was used to perform hardness traverse across the weld, HAZ and base metal. The macrograph of this sample is again presented in Figure 4.20 to illustrate the hardness traverse locations. Hardness was carried out in a calibrated Vickers Machine using the 5 kg load. The locations of the traverse are marked by the red broken lines. The locations represent (1) sub-surface regions of the column flange and (2) mid-thickness region of the angle.
Algo Mall Study
42
2 1
Figure 4.20: Macrograph at Section Plane 630 mm from Top (Side 1) of Exhibit 530 The detailed results of the hardness testing are presented in Appendix B where the individual hardness readings are provided for each indentation of the two traverses. The results show that for the column flange sub-surface traverse (identified as 1 in Figure 4.20), the average base metal hardness is VHN 175 and average weld metal hardness is VHN 226. The peak hardness observed on this traverse was VHN 260 at the fusion boundary (coarse grained heat affected zone), as is typical for welded connections. For the hardness traverse along line 2 (as identified in Figure 4.20) an average hardness value of VHN 165 was measured for the angle base material and an average harness value of VHN 226 was measured for the weld metal. The peak hardness, observed at the weld fusion boundary (coarse grained heat affected zone) was VHN 237. These hardness measurement results indicate that an over-matched weld was deposited in construction, as is accepted construction practice. The weld metal ultimate strength exceeds that of the column flange and angle material. The lower hardness of the angle, compared to the flange indicates that the tensile strength of the angle is lower than that of the column flange. Vickers hardenss measurement was also carried out on metallographic sections from Exhibits A and 543. These sections are presented for Exhibits A and 543 in Figure 4.7 (section plane 260 mm) and Figure 4.8 (section plane 220 mm), respectively. For Exhibit A the average base metal hardness is VHN 154 and the weld metal average hardness is VHN 218. For Exhibit 543 the average base metal hardness is VHN 153 and the weld metal average hardness is 227. The results indicate that the weld metal is over-matched, as would be expected in these two welds as well.
Algo Mall Study
43
CORROSION RATE ESTIMATE
Based upon the measured weld sizes and structural section thicknesses at the time of this investigation (i.e., as-received ) and the nominal weld sizes and estimated original section thicknesses (i.e., at construction ), uniform corrosion rates have been estimated. The estimated corrosion rates are listed in Table 5.1 and Table 5.2 for the weld leg lengths and for the section thicknesses, respectively. Table 5.1 and Table 5.2 include the diminished weld lengths and section thicknesses; i.e., the change in length and thickness, as calculated from the nominal less the as-received and estimated original dimensions presented in Tables 4.1 and 4.2. In estimating the corrosion rates, it is assumed that the components have been subjected to corrosion uniformly. Further, the corrosion rate as determined is based on a service life of 32 years; i.e., assuming construction during 1980. The corrosion rate is therefore estimated using the following equation:
Table 5.1: Estimated Decreased Weld Dimensions due to Corrosion and Corrosion Rate
Weld Failed Weld Specimen Corroded Length [mm] Side 1 Side 2 LAngle LFlange LAngle LFlange 3.5 2.5 5.0 1.0 3.5 2.0 5.0 0.5 Weld Corrosion Rate[mm/y] Side 1 Side 2 LAngle LFlange LAngle LFlange 0.109 0.063 0.156 0.031 0.109 0.063 0.156 0.016
A130 / B130 A260 / B230
Table 5.2: Estimated Decreased Section Thicknesses Due to Corrosion

Weld Failed Weld Specimen Corroded Thickness [mm] Side 1 Side 2 tAngle tFlange tAngle tFlange 5.4 3.6 4.9 0.9 3.9 2.4 4.9 0.5 Section Corrosion Rate [mm/y] Side 1 Side 2 tAngle tFlange tAngle tFlange 0.169 0.113 0.153 0.028 0.122 0.075 0.153 0.016
A130 / B130 A260 / B230
The corrosion rates expressed in Tables 5.1 and 5.2 differ in that the Section Corrosion Rates (Table 5.2) are based upon corrosion attached on two surfaces while the Weld Corrosion Rates are based upon single surface corrosion. Therefore when comparing these rates, the Section Corrosion Rate (Table 5.2) should be divided by 2. These estimated corrosion rates are approximate values and should be considered lower bound values. While these calculations assume a uniform corrosion rate from the date of construction until they were removed from the failure site, it is known that the structural components were coated. The coating would be expected to play a role in preventing the onset of corrosion,
Algo Mall Study
44
although it would have a finite life. If the coating life was assumed to be approximately five years on average, the estimated corrosion rates presented in Tables 5.1 and 5.2 would increase by 18.5%. 5.1 Structural Coating Life and Corrosion Rates A literature review of available corrosion rate data was used to identify statistics related to structural coating life, general corrosion and pitting corrosion rates. Since structural detail corrosion rates and coating quality data is not generally available for steel civil structures, data used to infer steel corrosion wastage rates were drawn from the marine industry.3,4,5 This comparison is considered appropriate if the failed structural connection was assumed to operate in a humid environment in the presence of salts or chlorine ions. The marine industry coating life statistics for a given structural connection are defined based upon the connection detail location and environment. These coating life values are considered to be statistically distributed based upon a normal distribution that theoretically represents the variability in the paint application quality. Data collected from the literature indicates that the mean life of coatings ranges from 5 to 10 years. This range in coating life is related to the component location and environment. From literature, the coating life normal distribution statistics outlined in Table 5.3 can be used. Table 5.3: Coating Life Statistics
Locations Living Space Exterior Deck Interior Deck Dry Cargo Space Ballast Tank Liquid Cargo Space Coating Life [years] Mean 10 9 10 1* 5 7 Coeff. of Variation 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3
* Low coating life is due to expected abrasion in cargo loading and unloading. The marine industry mean corrosion rates, once coating failure has occurred, are assigned to a component based on location and environment. In addition, a coefficient of variation in corrosion rate (COV = standard deviation/mean) can be assigned to each component. The corrosion rate mean and coefficient of variation data can be drawn from the data collected from the literature and presented in Table 5.4.
Tanker Structure Cooperative Forum, Condition Evaluation and Maintenance of Tanker Structures , TSCF, Published by Witherby & Co, 1992. 4 Ge Wang, John Spencer, Tarek Elsayed, Estimation Of Corrosion Rates Of Structural Members In Oil Tankers , 22nd International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, 2003. 5 A. Dinovitzer, Life Expectancy Assessment of Ship Structures , US Ship Structure Committee SSC-427
Algo Mall Study
45
Table 5.4: Corrosion Rate Statistics

Structure Type Deck Deck Stiffener Side Bottom Liquid Cargo [mm/y] Class 1 2 3 4 Mean 0.05 0.09 0.06 0.05 COV 1.7 2 0.6 1.7 Ballast [mm/y] Class Mean 5 6 7 8 0.19 0.16 0.07 0.19 Ullage/Dry Space [mm/y] Class Mean COV 9 10 11 12 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6
COV 1.1 1.4 0.04 1.1
The potential for pitting or weld zone preferential corrosion was considered in the marine industry data with a pitting corrosion rate for those components whose coatings have broken down. The rate of pitting corrosion assignment can be based on the corrosion data collected in the literature review. Pitting corrosion affects the integrity of the structure by reducing the effectiveness of the weldment. Pitting corrosion rate data available for consideration is shown in Table 5.5. Table 5.5: Pitting Corrosion Rate Data
Structure Type All Connections Liquid Cargo [mm/year]* Mean COV 1.5 0.11 Ballast [mm/year] Mean COV 2 0.2 Ullage/Dry Space Mean COV 0 0
5.2 Comparison of Corrosion Rates Based on the estimated corrosion rates listed in Tables 5.1 and 5.2 for the weld sizes and for section thicknesses respectively, the mean and standard deviations of the data are listed in Table 5.6. As noted previously, these corrosion rates ignore the protection afforded by the coating and assuming a 5-year coating life would be 18.5% higher if the corrosion wastage occurred over a time duration that was five years shorter. Table 5.6: Estimated Corrosion Rate Statistical Parameters
Mean [mm/year] Weld Sizes Section Thicknesses Combined (Weld Sizes Section Thicknesses) and Standard Deviation [mm/year] COV [-] 0.61 0.56 0.57
0.088 0.104 0.096
0.053 0.058 0.055
Given the statistics listed in Table 5.4, the estimated corrosion rates provided in Table 5.6 are aligned with those corresponding to liquid cargo structural corrosion rates in the marine industry or those associated with a ballast tank, but certainly exceed those for a marine structural dry (high humidity) space.
Algo Mall Study
46
CONCLUDING REMARKS RELATED TO CONNECTION DETAIL FAILURE PROCESS
The investigation completed by BMT Fleet Technology Limited did not identify any specific issues with the original construction quality of the welded connection that failed. The measured material properties were in good agreement with the specified properties of the materials listed in the original design drawings (Section 4.5). The connection detail that failed experienced a significant level of corrosion degradation (Section 5.1) reducing the load carrying capacity of the connection detail. The weld corrosion rate was accelerated due to the marine (Section 5.2) like environment (moisture and salinity) and the welding electrode chemistry that resulted in localized preferential corrosion of the weld metal after the connection protective coating became ineffective (Section 4.4). The fractographic evidence in the weld failure region, from 130 to 260 mm from the top of the weld, showed the failure surface was pitted due to corrosion and included black oxide indicating that the failure occurred along the weld some months before final separation (Section 3.1) The macrographic presentations also indicate metal loss in the assembled weld connections (Section 4.2). The larger losses are seen at a section plane 130 mm where the leg length of the connection to angle section is at the minimum. This observation suggests that a significant amount of material was lost due to the corrosion process that continued after the weld fracture. The micrographic examination (Section 4.3.3) indicates that it is most likely that the last ligament of the connection to fail was the upper end of the angle section of Side 1. This comment is supported by several factors including the rotation (or prying) of the remaining piece of the angle section form the column flange, and the absence of corrosion pits on this failure surface. In order for the deformation observed in the angle component to occur, the bulk of the welded connection must have failed prior to separation of this ligament.
Algo Mall Study
47
APPENDIX A EXHIBIT LIST
Algo Mall Study
A-1
Algo Mall Study
A-2
Algo Mall Study
A-3
Algo Mall Study
A-4
Algo Mall Study
A-5
Figure A.1: 527 End View
Figure A.2: 527 Side View
Algo Mall Study
A-6
Figure A.3: Sample 530
Algo Mall Study
A-7
Figure A.4: Sample 525 and 543
Algo Mall Study
A-8
Figure A.5: Exhibit 511
Algo Mall Study
A-9
Figure A.6: Sample A
Figure A.7: Sample B
Algo Mall Study
A-10
Figure A.8: Sample B (side)
Algo Mall Study
A-11
APPENDIX B HARDNESS TESTING
Algo Mall Study
B-1
Procedure: Date: Report Number:
Vickers 5 kg load 13-Dec-12 30160 Exhibit '530' Side 1 60mm from top
Load 5 (kg) traverse on angle
Ocular Reading Hardness
Applicable Standard: ASTM E92 JC Technician: NP Checked by:

Macro sketch
530_S1 60mm from end sub S traverse on column flange

Location Ocular Reading Hardness
BM-1 BM-2 BM-3 HAZ-4 HAZ-5 HAZ-6 HAZ-7 HAZ-8 FL-9 W-10 W-11 W-12 W-13 W-14 FL-15 HAZ-16 HAZ-17 BM-18 Average
233 232 226 214 215 204 192 189 194 203 201 200 203 206 195 201 219 225
171 172 182 202 201 223 252 260 246 225 229 232 225 218 244 229 193 183 #DIV/0!
BM-19 (T/4 ) BM-20 (T/4 ) BM-21 (T/4 ) HAZ-22 HAZ-23 HAZ-24 HAZ-25 HAZ-26
240 238 234 229 225 218 208 198
161 164 169 177 183 195 214 237
W-27 W-28 W-29 W-30
203 202 201 199
225 227 229 234
Comments:
ACCEPT
Average
REJECT
Algo Mall Study
B-2

NORR Report Algo Mall Study

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

NORR Report Algo Mall Study

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE Algo Mall Study

Reference: 30160FR (Rev. 02) Date: 07 Febuary 2013

30160FR (Rev. 02)

ALGO MALL STUDY 07 Febuary 2013

Algo Mall Study

APPENDICES APPENDIX A: EXHIBIT LIST APPENDIX B: HARDNESS TESTING

Algo Mall Study

Algo Mall Study

Algo Mall Study

Algo Mall Study

Algo Mall Study

Algo Mall Study

NON-DESTRUCTIVE EVALUATION (NDE)

Algo Mall Study

Exhibit A - weld height

Leg Length (Size)

Algo Mall Study

(b) Figure 2.3: Two Views of Exhibit B

Algo Mall Study

Algo Mall Study

Angle Edge Thickness Angle Corner Thickness

Algo Mall Study

8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 0

Angle Edge Thickness Angle Corner Thickness

200 250 Length, (mm)

Algo Mall Study

Top Side 1 Side 2

Figure 2.8: Full Section Column Flange (Thickness 13.4 mm)

Algo Mall Study

543 & 525- weld height

a) Weld Height Attached to the Column Flange

Algo Mall Study

Figure 2.10: Exhibit 527

Algo Mall Study

Figure 2.11: Intact Beam to Column Connection

Algo Mall Study

(a) Weld Height Attached to the Angle

Leg length, (mm)

Algo Mall Study

Algo Mall Study

FAILURE SURFACE OBSERVATIONS

Figure 3.1: Exhibit A Marked Out Before Cutting

Algo Mall Study

Algo Mall Study

(a) Initial cleaning

(b) Final Cleaning

Algo Mall Study

(a) Initial Cleaning

(b) Final Cleaning

Algo Mall Study

Algo Mall Study

(a) Initial Cleaning

(b) Final Cleaning

Algo Mall Study

(a) Initial Cleaning

(b) Final Cleaning

Algo Mall Study

Figure 4.1: Exhibit B Assembled After Cutting.

Algo Mall Study

(a) Exhibit B - Side 2

(b) Exhibit A - Side 2

Algo Mall Study

(a) Exhibit 527 - Side 1

(b) Exhibit 543 - Side 1