See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/268394616

Analysis of a Bucketwheel Stacker Reclaimer

Structural Failure
Article

CITATIONS

READS

196

3 authors, including:
LEONARDO SALES ARAUJO

Eduardo de Miranda Batista

Federal University of Rio de Janeiro

Federal University of Rio de Janeiro

12 PUBLICATIONS 79 CITATIONS

53 PUBLICATIONS 197 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate,

letting you access and read them immediately.

SEE PROFILE

Available from: LEONARDO SALES ARAUJO

Retrieved on: 16 September 2016

Analysis of a Bucketwheel Stacker Reclaimer Structural Failure

L.S. Araujo, L.H. de Almeida, E.M. Batista
Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil

Keywords: Bucketwheel Stacker Reclaimer, Failure Analysis, Structural Collapse

Abstract
The structural collapse of an iron ore Bucketwheel Stacker Reclaimer at the beginning of
its operations was investigated through mechanical tests, microstructural characterization,
computational structural analysis and evaluation of the operational status at the time of the
accident. The failure occurred by brittle fracture at the welded connection between a rectangular
hollow section member and a flange. The main factors for failure were the highly restricted
welded joint combined with cleavage crack propagation in direction of lower fracture toughness.
This particular connection was responsible for the load transference between the frontal tie
member and the boom extremity. The structural analysis showed that the joint fractured was one
of the most likely points of primary collapse, corroborated by the important value of the service
loading versus structural resistance ratio. The combination of these factor lead to the premature
collapse of the structure.
Introduction
Failures of huge industrial structures such as Bucketwheel Stacker Reclaimers (BSR)
draw considerable attention of the interested parts: owners, manufacturers and insurance
companies. Impacts on productivity in the event of an unexpected interruption of a BSR are
enormous. Such equipments can achieve operational capacities up to 10,000 tons per hour and
the loss of one BSR could create bottlenecks on ore output. Besides economic losses owing to its
interruption, fixing or replacing such equipments would consume large amounts of time and
resources. Due to its complexities failure analysis of similar equipments can vary from structural
failure due to overloading to microstructural defects leading to collapse [1-3].
The analysis presented in this article is based on the failure analysis of a BSRs structural
collapse during operation in August 2007, less than six months after its first load test with iron
ore. The failure mode was catastrophic. Figure 1 present the BSR during after the failure.

Figure 1: Collapsed structure odf the BSR.

The structural stability of the BSR is based mainly on the integrity of frontal and rear ties
the boom and integrity of the mast. The structure is balanced by a system of tie beams connected
with the mast and, any failure of these elements lead to loss of balance and, as a result, collapse,
as the structure do not account for any redundancy.
Failure Analysis
The investigation of the accident was based on: visual inspection of the collapsed
structure; sampling key parts for evaluation with mechanical tests (hardness, tensile and Charpy
tests), microstructural characterization; structural analysis and analysis of the operational
conditions before the accident.
The investigations over the root causes of the structural collapse indicated the rupture of
one of the connections of the rectangular hollow section (RHS) member, responsible for the
loading transfer from the frontal tie to the boom extremity (identified as joint #1). Such
connections consist of twin 19mm (3/4) thick plate flanges tied by 16 bolts with diameter of
25,4 mm (1). Each flange was welded to the ends of the RHS member. After the collapse, visual
inspection confirmed that the tubular members at the joint #1 remained undeformed. However,
the flanges were partially torn with some degree of plastic deformation. In figure 2, both parts of
the fractured flanges can be observed. In theses flanges, some parts of the fracture surface
presented corrosion, revealing a fracture which occurred through the border of the weld fillet,
previously to the final rupture and structural collapse.

A
B

(a)

(b)

Figure 2 Fractured joint #1. Figure (a) shows the flange of the junction #1 where the failure has initiated, partly
torn and presenting some degree of corrosion through the weld fillet. Samples for characterization were collected
from A and B regions, indicated by the dotted lines. Figure (b) shows the adjacent tubular beam with the remaining
part of the flange.

Structural Analysis
The structural performance of the BSR was measured by computational structural
analysis, followed by a safety evaluation, based on the prescriptions of the AISC standards [4].
The numerical analysis considered only the equipment self weight and regular service loads, a
load combination valid at the time of the BSR project development. Winds, dynamical impacts
and temperature loadings were not considered as, at the time of the accident, the wind velocity
was not significant to the failure of the equipment. The dynamical impacts were not considered
as the BSR was operating the bucket wheels with regular velocity, was not rotating the boom
neither proceeding translational movements over the rails. Impacts were not observed previously
the accident and temperature variations were not significant.
Figure 3 shows the results of loading-strength rate for the critical points of the structure.
The values must be under unity and the lower the value, the less likely is the occurrence of the
primary collapse at the considered point. The heaviest loaded points in that section of the BSR
structure were the frontal ties, with 0,90. The second most loaded point in the structure was the
joint where the primary fracture occurred, showing a loading-strength rate of 0,77.

Figure 3: Rate between maximum load and structural resistance are displayed in the gray boxes.

Samples were collected from the failed flanges in perpendicular directions, from its edges
until the welded junction with the tubular members, as shown in figure 2. Figure 4 presents a
transversal view of one of the weld fillets that connected the flange with the tubular member,
where the hardness indentations are indicated. Such configuration leads to a welded junction
with high geometric restrictions. Besides, in some parts of the weld fillet, lack of penetration was
observed. Rockwell B hardness measurements were made over the weld fillet, flange and tubular
beam sections, with values presented on table 1.

Figure 4: Sample of the welded junction between the flange and tubular beam.
The numbers indicate hardness measurements over the weld region and surroundings.
Lack of penetration is observed in the weld fillet.

Table 1: Rockwell B hardness measurements over the weld fillet, beam and flange sections.
Rockwell B
hardness
68
71
75,5
79
81
83
83
81
81,5
85
84,5
81,5
80
82
81
78,5
93

Position #
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

The BSR was manufactured with ASTM A36 structural steel. The chemical composition
and mechanical properties attended the requirements for such steels, as listed in tables 2 and 3,
which shows the average chemical composition of the base and the weld metals.
Table 2: Average chemical composition of samples from the base metal and weld metal (wt%).
Position
Base
Weld

Si

Mn

0.17

0.22

0.83

0.02

0.02

0.06

0.62

1.26

0.02

0.02

Table 3: Average mechanical properties of samples from the steel flage.

Average

Yield
strength

Tensile
strength

Elongation
(50mm)

335 61

479 43

11,3 1,2

The microstructure revealed considerable degree of banding, due to the rolling process,
resulting in anisotropy between longitudinal and transversal rolling directions. In figure 5 it can
be observed the banding microstructure following the rolling direction. Such anisotropy resulted
also in considerable differences in the toughness of the plate, which were corroborated by
Charpy tests. Table 4 presents the results of the impact toughness tests at 25C.

Direction A

Figure 5: Banded microstructure of the flange.

Table 4: Charpy tests results at 25C for the samples in transversal directions.

Direction A
Direction B

Test #1
7,5
20,5

Charpy Energy (J)

Test #2
7,3
24,8

Test #3
8,3
23,2

There were no evidences that a progressive fracture associated with equipment operation
had occurred. It was observed that one of the parts of the weld between the beam and the flange
presented some oxidation in its surface, indicating that a crack in such part developed before the
final failure of the BSR structure. The oxidized surface was aligned with the direction which
presented low energy values for Charpy tests.
During the fracture analysis of the fractured flange it was observed that a significant part
of the fracture surface presented a brittle aspect due to the cleavage micromechanism, as shown
in figure 6. The remaining part of the fracture, very close to the weld fillet and at the final
rupture region, presented ductile aspect with the characteristic dimples. Figure 7 shows the
transition between the two fracture modes.

Figure 6: Cleavage aspect of the fracture surface.

Brittle (cleavage)

Ductile (dimples)

Figure 7: Transition between the brittle and ductile fracture modes.

Conclusions
The fracture which lead to the final collapse of the BSR occurred mainly by cleavage
micromechanism in both sampling regions, A and B (figure 2). In flanges direction A, a crack
appeared at some time before the final failure and, during this interval, its fracture surface was
oxidized. The fracture probably occurred in two steps, initially in region A and finally, in region
B, resulting in the rupture of joint #1 and structural collapse.
The occurrence of cleavage fracture was favored by local levels of stress concentration
[5]. In this case this stress concentration was provided by the highly restricted welding process,
as commented previously.
The flange microstructure presented some degree of banding, characteristic of thick
rolled plates. Mechanical properties fully complied ASTM A36 standard and hardness
measurements at weld, base metal and heat affected zone showed expected values. However,
despite the fact that all the properties fully comply the requisites and were not the determinant
cause of the failure, the anisotropy evidenced in Charpy tests and metallography played a
significant role in final failure.
The lower toughness direction A (figure 2) cracked first, as result of stress concentration
provided by the weld. Then, such crack raises the stress concentration locally, leading to crack
propagation by cleavage mechanism through the highly restricted regions, until the final phase of
the fracture process with plastic deformation.
References
[1] S. Bonjak, N. Zrni, A. Simonovi, D. Momilovi, Failure analysis of the end eye
connection of the bucket wheel excavator portal tie-rod support, Engineering Failure Analysis,
Vol 16, 2009, p 740-750
[2] M.J. Hadianfard, M.A. Hadianfard, Structural Failure of a Telescopic Shiploader during
Installation, J. Fail. Anal. And Preven, Vol 8, 2008, p 564-571

[3] S. Ghosal, D. Misra, T.K. Saha, D. Chakravorty, B. Chaudhuri, Failure Analysis of Stackercum-Reclaimer in Ore Handling Plant, J. Fail. Anal. And Preven, Vol 7, 2007, p 282-291
[4] AISC, Load and Resistance Factor Design Specification for Structural Steel Buidings, 1993
[5] D.J. Wulpi, Understanding How Components Fail, American Society for Metals, 1993