Engineering Failure Analysis 105 (2019) 1172–1188

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Failure Analysis

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/engfailanal

Failure analysis of a titanium plate heat exchanger – Mechanical

T
fatigue
A.S. Pelliccionea, , R. SantAnnaa, M.H.S. Siqueiraa, A.F. Ribeirob, J.E. Ramosa,
⁎

O.P. Silvaa, M.F. Pimentela

a
Petróleo Brasileiro S.A., Brazil
b
Petrobras Transporte S.A., Brazil

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: This article presents a failure analysis of a plate heat exchanger. The equipment aims to decrease
Plate heat exchanger fresh water temperature using seawater as the cooling medium. The plates were manufactured
Mechanical fatigue from ASTM B265 Grade 1 titanium. After 126.000 h of operation, low thermal efficiency became
Titanium evident and the equipment was shutdown for inspection. Visual inspection detected plates with
Stress analysis
through-wall cracks. To identify the mechanisms and causes of failure, the investigation included:
visual inspection, chemical analysis via optical emission spectroscopy (OES), metallography,
fractography, 3D laser scanning and finite element stress analysis. The plates failed due to me-
chanical fatigue caused by service loading fluctuations.

1. Introduction

Plate heat exchangers (PHE) are commonly used for process heating and cooling applications in a wide range of industrial
applications, including oil and gas industry [1]. This type of equipment has higher heat transfer performance, achieving compact
designs compared to conventional shell and tube heat exchangers [2].
The PHE consists of corrugated metal plates with portholes for the flow of the two fluids between which heat transfer occurs.
Tightening bolts compress the plate pack between a fix frame plate and a movable pressure plate. The plates have elastomeric sealing
gaskets, which direct the fluids into alternated channels [3].
The corrugations promote fluid turbulence and support the plates preventing lateral movement. As the fluids pass through the
heat exchanger, heat flows from the hot to the cold medium. Counter current flow enables maximum heat recovery. The Fig. 1 shows
a typical arrangement of a plate gasket layout [4]. The area between double gaskets has operation pressure acting on one side, while
atmospheric pressure acts on the other side. This is a consequence of the leakage vent shown in Fig. 1, position 2. Thus, the referred
region is the most stressed area, concerning pressure effects.
This case study analyzes a failure of a plate heat exchanger designed to cool down fresh water using seawater. During operation,
the loss of performance became evident requiring the equipment shutdown. In a previous analysis, plates with cracks were found. The
cracks occurred on the sealing surface inside double gasket area. The usual inlet seawater temperature was 29 °C and the expected
outlet fresh water temperature was 32 °C. The operation pressure envelope was 0.6 to 0.8 MPa (freshwater) and 0.3 to 0.4 MPa
(seawater). The plates were manufactured from ASTM B265 Grade 1 (commercially pure titanium) [5] with 0.6 mm thickness. The
equipment failed after approximately 126,000 h of operation.

⁎
Corresponding author at: Rua Ulysses Guimarães, 565, 20211-255 Cidade Nova, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
E-mail address: andre.pelliccione@petrobras.com.br (A.S. Pelliccione).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2019.07.059
Received 7 May 2018; Received in revised form 22 July 2019; Accepted 28 July 2019
Available online 29 July 2019
1350-6307/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
A.S. Pelliccione, et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 105 (2019) 1172–1188

Fig. 1. Typical plate and gasket. 1 – Through-flow port. 2 – Leakage vent. 3 - Double gaskets. 4 - Port hole. Adapted from API 662 [4].

Fig. 2. Plates 1, 2 and 3 showing cracks in the gasket area (arrows).

Fig. 3. a) Through-wall crack in the gasket area of plate 1. b) Detail of cracked area.

3 – Double gaskets. 4 – Port hole. Adapted from API 662 [4].

2. Materials and methods

The failure analysis included chemical analysis; metallography; fractography with scanning electron microscopy (SEM); electron

1173
A.S. Pelliccione, et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 105 (2019) 1172–1188

Fig. 4. a) Through-wall crack in the gasket area of plate 2. b) Detail of cracked area.

Fig. 5. a) Through-wall crack in the gasket area of plate 3. b) Detail of cracked area.

Fig. 6. Plate 4, with crack in the gasket area, used for tests and analysis.

backscattered diffraction (EBSD) for microstructure characterization; 3D laser scanning and finite element analysis (FEA).
The visual inspection detected through-wall cracks in four plates. The location of the cracks was on the sealing surfaces, inside the
double gasket area, as shown in Figs. 2 to 6 (samples identified as plates 1 to 4). Other discontinuities, such as dents and erosion wear,
were not observed. The described tests were performed in plate 4 (Fig. 6).
Chemical analysis in three different points on the plate surface was performed by spark optical emission spectrometry (Spark-
OES), according to ASTM E2994 [6].
The Fig. 7 shows the location of the three metallographic specimens prepared from plate 4: sample 1 (cross section); sample 2
(longitudinal section, parallel to the crack) and sample 3 (cross section, containing the crack). After grinding and polishing, the

1174
A.S. Pelliccione, et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 105 (2019) 1172–1188

Fig. 7. Areas selected for metallographic analysis.

Table 1
Chemical composition of plate 4 (wt%).
Elements Ti Fe Cr V Cu Mn Mo Ni Si

1 99.7 0.033 0.016 0.023 0.006 0.006 0.010 0.014 0.004

2 99.7 0.038 0.017 0.019 0.005 0.006 0.013 0.014 0.006
3 99.7 0.037 0.018 0.023 0.005 0.006 0.011 0.014 0.009
Average 99.7 0.036 0.017 0.022 0.005 0.006 0.011 0.014 0.006

Fig. 8. Sample 1 (cross section). Equiaxed α grains and an acicular phase. 2% HF etching.

specimens were etched with 2% HF solution [7] and examined by optical microscope.
The EBSD maps were acquired with a scan step size of 0.30 μm, aiming to examine the microstructure.
The FEA allowed estimating the stresses at the plate's failure region.

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Chemical analysis

Table 1 presents the results of chemical analysis, performed by optical emission spectrometry. The chemical composition met the
chemical requirements for ASTM B265 Grade 1 [5].

1175
A.S. Pelliccione, et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 105 (2019) 1172–1188

Fig. 9. Sample 2 (longitudinal section). Equiaxed α grains and an acicular phase. 2% HF etching.

Fig. 10. Sample 3 (cross section). Through-wall crack and other two parallel cracks that nucleated on plate surface. No etching.

Fig. 11. Sample 3 (cross section). Transgranular propagation. Equiaxed α grains and an acicular phase. 2% HF etching.

1176
A.S. Pelliccione, et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 105 (2019) 1172–1188

Fig. 12. EBSD phase maps, indicating alpha phase (green) and titanium hydride (yellow). (For interpretation of the references to colour in this
figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

Fig. 13. Crack located at the border of the gasket area.

Fig. 14. Fracture surface corresponding to the through-wall crack.

1177
A.S. Pelliccione, et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 105 (2019) 1172–1188

Fig. 15. Detail of fracture surface shown in Fig. 14.

Fig. 16. Fracture with ratchet marks and without apparent plastic deformation.

Fig. 17. Detail of Fig. 16 showing ratchet marks at the top and bottom of fracture surface.

1178
A.S. Pelliccione, et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 105 (2019) 1172–1188

Fig. 18. SEM image of surface fracture. Presence of mechanical fatigue striations. The smooth areas at the bottom of the image are due to post-
fracture mechanical damage.

Fig. 19. SEM image of fracture surface. Detail of Fig. 18 showing striations with higher magnification.

3.2. Metallography

The microstructure consisted of equiaxed α grains and an acicular phase [8], as shown in Figs. 8 and 9.
The cross section of sample 3 was ground until reaching the crack. The Fig. 10 shows two additional parallel cracks to the main
crack detected by visual inspection. The cracks were transgranular as evidenced after etching, as shown in Fig. 11.
The EBSD analysis identified 8% of titanium hydride in the microstructure as shown in Fig. 12. Titanium hydride is a brittle phase
that favors crack initiation and propagation of titanium and its alloys [9].

3.3. Fractography

3.3.1. Visual inspection and fracture surface analysis using a stereomicroscope

Figs. 13 to 15 evidence that both the crack nucleation and propagation occurred at the border of the gasket seating area.
Cutting the sample close to the crack tip allowed evaluating the correspondent fracture surface, as shown in Figs. 14 to 17.
The fracture occurred without apparent plastic deformation (Fig. 16). Ratchet marks were visible at the top and bottom of fracture

1179
A.S. Pelliccione, et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 105 (2019) 1172–1188

Fig. 20. SEM image of fracture surface. Fatigue striations.

Fig. 21. Scanned and imported geometry.

surface, evidencing multiple fatigue crack nucleation due to reversed bending (see Figs. 16 and 17) [10]. “The occurrence of ratchet
marks requires almost simultaneous initiation of several fatigue cracks, a situation that is favored by high stress and to a lesser extent by the
presence of high stress-concentration factors” [11].

3.3.2. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) analysis

The fracture surface showed striations, typical of mechanical fatigue, according to Figs. 18 to 20.

3.4. Finite element method stress analysis (FEA)

Laser scanning with 0.5 mm resolution built the plate's model. The 3D laser scanning can maps surfaces using the principle of laser
triangulation. Some researchers [12,13] applied this technique in weld quality control. The Fig. 21 shows the imported geometry for
the finite element model.
The model adopts the same global dimensions used in Reference [14]. The scanned geometry positioned in sequence represented
the contact profile between plates.

1180
A.S. Pelliccione, et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 105 (2019) 1172–1188

Fig. 22. Contact regions between plates.

Fig. 23. Finite element mesh.

Once separation and frictional sliding between surfaces do not occur during normal service, the linear bonded type contact was
selected. The Fig. 22 shows the contact regions for the presented model.
The plates shell elements mesh appears in Figs. 23 to 25. Mesh refinement iterations targeted a displacement convergence below
0.8% tolerance in relation to the pre-refined results.

1181
A.S. Pelliccione, et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 105 (2019) 1172–1188

Fig. 24. Mesh detail.

Fig. 25. Mesh detail.

The modeled external pressure (0.3 MPa), compressing the plate pair, represented minimal seawater operational pressure, as
shown in Fig. 26.
Internally, the fresh water pressure of 0.8 MPa acted, modeling the maximum freshwater pressure, as shown in Fig. 27.
For the shell type element, the pressure acts on the top surface (shown in red in Figs. 26 and 27). The pressure intensity value is
negative to be consistent with an internal pressure acting (applied to the bottom surface). The internal pressure acted only on the
fresh water region (internal to the gasket area), as presented in Fig. 27.
The model adopted a minimal sealing pressure 2mp, acting at the gasket sealing surface (Fig. 28), defined according to ASME Sec.
VIII D-1, appendix 2 [15]. The referred criterion defines a minimal gasket sealing pressure with two times the experimental factor (m)
multiplied to the fluid internal pressure (p). The experimental factor (m), determined by gasket manufacturer, depends on the gasket
type and material. For the nitrile rubber gasket material, the model adopted an experimental factor m = 6.
Fixed ux and uz displacements constrained the model vertical boundary edges. Fixed uy and uz constrained the model horizontal
boundary edges. The boundary vertical and horizontal edges appear in Fig. 29. The boundary conditions model also followed re-
ference [14].

1182
A.S. Pelliccione, et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 105 (2019) 1172–1188

Fig. 26. Seawater pressure.

Fig. 27. Freshwater pressure.

Table 2 summarizes the applied loads for maximum and minimal operational scenarios. Seawater is considered stable around
0.3 MPa, whereas fresh water is considered to range from 0.6 MPa to 0.8 MPa.
Mises equivalent stress and maximum principal stress for load case 1 appear in Figs. 30 and 31, respectively.

1183
A.S. Pelliccione, et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 105 (2019) 1172–1188

Fig. 28. Minimal sealing pressure (2mp) region.

Fig. 29. Constrained displacements.

The most stressed regions are coherent with the identified plate cracking regions. Similar results occurred for the load case 2, but
with inferior stress values, as Figs. 32 and 33 demonstrate.
Linear elastic load cases superposition allows to obtain the stress tensor range. Figs. 34 and 35 show the Mises equivalent stress
range and Fig. 36 shows the principal stress range (normal to the parallel crack plane) for the most stressed region, where the plate
cracks occurred (sealing region).

1184
A.S. Pelliccione, et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 105 (2019) 1172–1188

Table 2
Maximum and minimum loads model.
Load case one – maximum operational

Internal pressure (fresh water) 0.8 MPa

External pressure (seawater) 0.3 MPa
Sealing pressure 2mp 9.2 MPa

Load case two – minimum operational

Internal pressure (fresh water) 0.6 MPa

External pressure (sea water) 0.3 MPa
Sealing pressure 2mp 7.2 MPa

Fig. 30. Mises equivalent stresses – load case 1.

Fig. 31. Maximum principal stress – load case 1.

1185
A.S. Pelliccione, et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 105 (2019) 1172–1188

Fig. 32. Mises equivalent stress – load case 2.

Fig. 33. Maximum principal stress – load case 2.

Maximum stresses ranges occurred next to the plate cracked areas. The model did not consider residual stresses due to plate
forming nor due to plate pack assembling stresses. Peak stresses were also neglected, due to shell elements type choice. Adopting solid
elements, in order to identify peak stresses, would make the model computationally unfeasible, due to the plate low thickness to
lateral dimension ratio. Considering just membrane and bending stresses, the shell type elements produce precise results.
The estimated stress levels occurring for load cases 1 and 2 are substantially higher than material yield stress and may cause
localized plastic cyclic deformation. Higher probability of occurrence includes system start-up and shutdown conditions. Certainly,
the risk of low cycle fatigue increases, due to high stress levels. The morphology observed by surface fracture analysis endorsed this
hypothesis.

1186
A.S. Pelliccione, et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 105 (2019) 1172–1188

Fig. 34. Mises equivalent stress range – sealing region.

Fig. 35. Mises equivalent stress range – sealing region detail.

4. Conclusions

From the failure analysis performed on titanium grade 1 heat exchanger plates, it was concluded that:

- The failure occurred due to mechanical fatigue, as evidenced by the observed features such as striations, ratchet marks, multiple
crack nucleation and transgranular crack propagation.
- The ratchet marks observed at the top and bottom of fracture surface indicated reverse bending loading. Finite element analysis
verified highest tensile stress range at gasket area in both sides of the plate, confirming this evidence.
- The titanium hydride present in the microstructure probably contributed to the reduction of fatigue life.
- Based on an actual industry case study, some of the methods registered in this paper can serve as candidates for failure analysis
procedure of PHEs. This type of equipment is widely used in the offshore oil and gas production. Therefore, its failure has a
relevant economic impact for such industry.

1187
A.S. Pelliccione, et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 105 (2019) 1172–1188

Fig. 36. Principal stress range normal to the crack plane – sealing surface.

Acknowledgment

We gratefully thank to SENAI IST Solda, especially to Leandro Guimarães de Oliveira, Rafael Silveira Barbosa, Lincoln Silva
Gomes and Suzana Bottega Peripolli, who provided direct or indirect support for the tests carried out in this work.

Declaration of Competing Interest

We wish to confirm that there are no known conflicts of interest associated with this publication and there has been no significant
financial support for this work that could have influenced its outcome.
We confirm that the manuscript has been read and approved by all named authors and that there are no other persons who
satisfied the criteria for authorship but are not listed. We further confirm that the order of authors listed in the manuscript has been
approved by all of us.
We confirm that we have given due consideration to the protection of intellectual property associated with this work and that
there are no impediments to publication, including the timing of publication, with respect to intellectual property.
Authors:
André da Silva Pelliccione, Rafael Sant'Anna, Marcio Humberto Silva Siqueira, André Freitas Ribeiro, Júlio Endress Ramos,
Orlandemberg Pereira da Silva, Marcelo Francisco Pimentel.

References

[1] A. Muley, R.M. Manglik, Experimental study of turbulent flow heat transfer and pressure drop in a plate heat exchanger with Chevron plates, J. Heat Transf. 121
(1) (1999) 110–117.
[2] Mazen M. Abu-Khader, Plate heat exchangers: recent advances, Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 16 (4) (2012) 1883–1891.
[3] K. Sreejith, Basil Varghese, Deepak Das, Harikrishnan K. Delvin Devassy, G.K. Sharath, Design and cost optimization of plate heat exchanger: international,
Journal of Engineering And Science 4 (10) (2014) 43–48.
[4] API 662, Plate Heat Exchanger for General Refinery Services – Part 1 – Plate and Frame Heat Exchangers, (2006), p. R2011.
[5] ASTM B265 – 15, Standard Specification for Titanium and Titanium Alloy Strip, Sheet, and Plate, (2015).
[6] ASTM E2994–16, Standard test method for analysis of titanium and titanium alloys by spark atomic emission spectrometry and glow discharge atomic emission
spectrometry (performance-based method), (2016).
[7] ASTM E407 – 07, (Reapproved 2015) - Standard Practice for Microetching Metals and Alloys, (2015).
[8] L.M. Gammon, R.D. Briggs, J.M. Packard, K.W. Batson, R. Boyer, C.W. Domby, Metallography and Microstructures of Titanium and its Alloys, vol. 9, ASM
Handbook, 2004, pp. 899–917.
[9] Yanhong Chang, et al., Characterizing solute hydrogen and hydrides in pure and alloyed titanium at the atomic scale, Acta Mater. 150 (2018) 273–280.
[10] N.W. SACHS, Practical Plant Failure Analysis, CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2007.
[11] ASM Handbook, Failure Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 11 ASM International, Materials Park, Ohio, 2002.
[12] W. Huang, R. Kovacevic, A laser-based vision system for weld quality inspection, Sensors 11 (1) (2011) 506–521.
[13] C.L. Chang, Y.H. Chen, Measurements of fillet weld by 3D laser scanning system, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 25 (5–6) (2005) 466–470.
[14] R. SantAnna, Comportamento Estrutural de Permutadores de Placas, MSc. Thesis (2013).
[15] ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section VIII, Division 1: Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels, Appendix 2, (2017).

1188