Engineering Failure Analysis 16 (2009) 1195–1202

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Failure Analysis

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

Prevention of failures of high strength fasteners in use in offshore

and subsea applications
Khlefa A. Esaklul a, Tawfik M. Ahmed b,*
a
BP Exploration, Building C, 2nd Floor, Chertsey Road, Sunbury TW16 7LN, UK
b
Ionik Consulting/JP Kenny Inc., 17404 Katy Freeway, Suite 350, Houston, TX 77094, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Adequate strength and resistance to corrosion and environmentally assisted cracking are
Received 11 July 2008 the key elements in selection of fasteners for offshore and subsea systems. Not only proper
Accepted 23 July 2008 material selection is of paramount importance but also proper material processing to
Available online 30 July 2008
ensure suitability of fasteners for the intended subsea service environment. This become
increasingly evident as the attention of the oil and gas industry shifts to exploring and
Keywords: developing reservoirs in deeper waters where the cost of operation and intervention is very
Fasteners
high. This paper examines some of the challenges that face the oil and gas industry with
Bolts
Fasteners failures
particular emphasis on prevention of failures due to hydrogen embrittlement (HE) under
Hydrogen embrittlement conditions of cathodic protection (CP). Efforts were made to carefully review factors that
Cathodic protection could play a significant role in HE. These factors include material selection and compatibil-
ity with CP, size effect, qualification testing, design criteria and finally applied stress level
after assembly.
Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

The offshore and marine industry still relies on fasteners as the primary joint method. For ease of assembly and construc-
tion, flanged connections are still an integral part of any offshore developments with fasteners being the primary means for
assembly. The combined presence of stresses and corrosive environment requires in addition to the strength; good resistance
to both corrosion and environmentally induced cracking in order to meet the high reliability and integrity of these systems.
Development of deepwater reservoirs with higher water depths, higher reservoir pressure and higher temperature inherently
requires a class of materials with optimum combined properties that exceed typical subsea materials that commonly have
been in use. The costly intervention and the demand for higher safety and protection for the environment increased the need
for inherent design reliability and the need for highly reliable and proven performance parts. As more complex and higher
pressure systems are being built, larger diameter; made of higher strength materials fasteners; are being used. Fasteners with
diameters that exceed 100 mm are increasingly becoming common. Materials selection for fasteners is essentially based on
their mechanical properties, corrosion resistance (general, galvanic and localized; pitting and crevice), along with resistance
to environmentally assisted cracking (EAC) which includes stress corrosion cracking (SCC), hydrogen embrittlement (HE) and
sustained load cracking (SLC). While alloy steels had given adequate performance from a corrosion point view in cathodically
protected systems, their resistance to cracking has been of major concern particularly for the high strength grades.
Although, some materials may have the combined desired properties, their applicability is limited due to size limitation
or lack of uniform through thickness properties as a result of inadequate hardenability. In addition to these limitations, high
cost is another factor that limits the use of some of these alloys.

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: tawfi[email protected] (T.M. Ahmed).

1350-6307/$ - see front matter Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.engfailanal.2008.07.012
1196 K.AA. Esaklul, T.M. Ahmed / Engineering Failure Analysis 16 (2009) 1195–1202

Fasteners can fail as a result of one or more of these causes:

 Overload.
 Corrosion.
 Fatigue.
 Corrosion fatigue.
 Environmentally assisted cracking.

Selection of type of fasteners and assembly processes must account for the above factors to ensure reliable long term per-
formance. Joint design and installation practices address the overload and fatigue issues. Corrosion, corrosion fatigue and
EAC are addressed through materials selection and application of corrosion protection measures.
It is recognized that high strength steels are prone to SCC and HE and their resistance decreases with the increase in
strength. The resistance of these materials is generally expressed in terms of hardness limit above which the material is
not recommended for use in the specific environment (e.g. sea water) or in terms of SCC or HE threshold stress intensity fac-
tors, KISCC, KIHE, respectively. Steels with yield strength levels below 120 ksi are generally resistant to SCC and HE [1,2]. Above
120 ksi yield strength,
pffiffiffiffi
ffi KIEAC decreases with the increase in yield strength with a typical threshold stress intensity value of
50—80 ksi in: for 145 ksi yield strengthpmaterialffiffiffiffiffiffi [1,2]. Typical fracture toughness value (KIC) for 145 ksi yield strength
quenched and tempered steels is 200 ksi in:
In the absence of cathodic protection high strength steels are typically more resistant to EAC in sea water. NASA has eval-
uated several aerospace grade high strength low alloy steels and showed that AISI 4340 is resistant to SCC up to tensile
strength of 180 ksi (40 HRC) [3]. For cathodically protected components, historically alloy steel fasteners were limited to
ASTM A320 L7M [4] and ASTM A193 B7M [5] grades with a maximum hardness of 22 HRC (235 HB), i.e., the specified limit
for sour service applications per MR0175 [6]. Recent studies have shown that limiting subsea fasteners to the sour service
requirements is overly conservative and have shown that subsea fasteners exposed to cathodic protection can be used to a
maximum hardness of 34 HRC (313 HB) per ISO/DIS 13628-1 recommended practice [7,8].

2. Design criteria

Design of bolted joints are governed by ASME Pressure Vessel Code or API Standards, e.g. ASME B16.5 [9] and API 6A [10]
for offshore equipments. The flange size and pressure rating generally decide the number, size and strength of the fasteners
required. As the size, strength and the demand for high reliability increases, the materials properties particularly strength,
toughness and resistance to SCC become the primary selection criteria.
To resist brittle fracture, improved fatigue strength and resistance to stress corrosion cracking and hydrogen embrittle-
ment, the material is specified with certain level of ductility, toughness and controlled hardness. These parameters typically
require a specific heat treatment to control strength or hardness. Typical factors used in the selection of fasteners are

 Material strength (yield and ultimate strength).

 Material ductility expressed in elongation (generally 7–18% minimum).
 Toughness typically specified as Charpy Impact values at the lowest expected temperature (generally average Charpy
toughness values of 20–50 ft.lb minimum).
 Resistance to corrosion and stress corrosion cracking.
 Resistance to hydrogen embrittlement and other hydrogen induced cracking.
 Long fatigue life.

Selection of the material strength is determined by the design stress which is determined by

 Design stress at rated working pressure (rsm).

 The maximum allowable general primary membrane stress at hydrostatic test pressure (rST).
 The maximum combined primary and secondary stress (rSS).

These stresses are limited to

rsm = the smaller of 2/3 rMSYS or 1/2 of rMSUTS,

rST = the smaller of 5/6 rMSYS or 2/3 of rMSUTS,
rSS = the smaller of 2 rMSYS or rMSUTS,

where

rMSUTS is the minimum specified ultimate tensile stress.

rMSYS is the minimum specified yield strength.
 K.AA. Esaklul, T.M. Ahmed / Engineering Failure Analysis 16 (2009) 1195–1202 1197

Increasing the pressure rating of the component or the combined stress intensity requires the use of higher strength
material.
For control of corrosion and SCC, materials are either selected for their resistance to both corrosion and SCC or controlled
via application of cathodic protection. In the case of subsea, it has been shown that cathodic protection by means of sacri-
ficial anodes is very effective in control of corrosion of carbon steel fasteners in use with carbon steel or corrosion resistance
alloys (CRA) connections [7].
The resistance to SCC limits the strength for each material and in many cases renders some materials not viable. This led
to the move to use the high strength grades of CRA’s.

3. Defect tolerant design approach

To ensure that the fastener materials have sufficient resistance to SCC, defect tolerance approach should be considered for
the design of fasteners. Stress intensity solutions for threaded components are given by the following equation [2]:
pffiffiffiffiffiffi
K I ¼ C r pa; ð1Þ

where KI is the stress intensity factor, C is the shape factor (1.5 has been used for threads geometry) [2], r is the nominal stress
and a is the depth of surface breaking flaw.
In the absence of corrosive environment, the limit to the stress intensity factor is the fracture toughness of the material
(KIC) in air. For environments that can cause SCC or HE, the limit will be KISCC or KIHE which is defined as the threshold stress
intensity factor above which a flaw would grow due to SCC or HE, respectively. The threshold stress intensity for SCC or HE is
typically much lower than the fracture toughness of the material and can drop as low as 20% of the fracture toughness in air
for highly susceptible materials.
It is recognized that as the material strength increases, the fracture toughness deceases and correspondingly KISCC or KIHE
decrease also. Eq. (1) can be used to establish the maximum allowable initial flaw size in fasteners based on KISCC or KIHE. Eq.
(1) can be re-written as
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
K IEAC ¼ C r paallowable ð2Þ

from which
 2
1 K IEAC
aallowable ¼ : ð3Þ
p Cr
Fig. 1 shows the effect of the drop in threshold values (KIEAC) on the allowable flaw size for different yield stress values of
100, 120 and 140 ksi. Nominal stress in all cases was assumed to be equal to half of the yield stress. pffiffiffiffiffi
The data of Fig. 1 indicate that for high strength materials a minimum KISCC or KIHE higher than 80 ksi in: is desired in
order to have a reasonable detectable flaw size. Also, note the trend of decreasing the allowable flaw size with increasing
material strength due to higher applied stresses associated with the high strength bolts.

0.90
YS = 100 ksi
0.80
YS = 120 ksi
Allowable initial flaw size (in)

0.70 YS = 140 ksi

0.60

0.50

0.40

0.30

0.20

0.10

0.00
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
1/2
K IEAC (ksi.in )

Fig. 1. Maximum allowable flaw size as a function of the threshold stress intensity factor for environmentally assisted cracking.
1198 K.AA. Esaklul, T.M. Ahmed / Engineering Failure Analysis 16 (2009) 1195–1202

Table 1
Typical materials for subsea fasteners

Alloy group Material Yield strength (ksi) Tensile strength (ksi)

Alloy steels AISI 4140 75–105 100–125
AISI 4130 120 135
AISI 4340 145 160
Stainless steels Duplex SS 2507 80–95 116–145
A286 95–119 150–190
Custom 455 135–231 160–260
PH 13-8 Mo 190–205 220–235
S17400 145–170 200
S17700 140–230
S15700 170–230
Ferralium 255 110 130
Ni base alloys K-400 30 75–100
K-500 86 105–150
Alloy 718 120–145 150–180
Alloy 725 120 165
Alloy 925 110 168
Alloy 59 128–168 149–170
Alloy X-750 92 162
Alloy 625 120 165
Rene 41 157 206
Co–Ni alloys MP35N 230 280
MP159 250 260
Be–Cu alloys C17200 145–190
C17300 145–190
C17000 125–185
Ti base alloys Ti–6Al–4V, Ti–6Al–4V ELI 128 200
Ti 3Al–8V–6Cr–4Mo–4Zr 115 120
Ti–5Al–1Sn–1Zr1V–0.8Mo 111 126
Corona–5Ti–4.5Al–5Mo–1.5Cr 120–153
Ti–6Al–6V–2Sn 145–160
Ti–10V–2Fe–3Al 150
Ti–6Al–2Sn–4Zr–6Mo 150–160
Ti–7Al–4Mo 150–160
Ti–13V–11Cr–3Al 160
Ti–8Mo–8V–2Fe–3Al 170
Ti–11.5Mo–6Zr–4.5Sn 175
Ti–15V–3Al–3Cr–3Sn 190
Ti Beta 21S 205

4. Materials for subsea fasteners

Detail summary of the suitability of various alloys for fasteners in seawater applications is given by Aylor et al. [11] and
Ross and Tuthill [12]. Table 1 summarizes the available materials for high strength fasteners.
For high strength alloys the primary concern is the effect of CP which can originate from the sacrificial anodes placed on
subsea components or from impressed current systems such as the case of components connected to drilling rigs or ships,
e.g. drilling risers and blowout preventers (BOP). Polarized potential of 1050 to 1100 mV (Ag/AgCl/seawater) can be pro-
duced from aluminum or zinc anodes in some areas of subsea structures which represent substantial level of overprotection
for non-ferrous alloys particularly CRA’s and that would induce hydrogen embrittlement [7]. Hydrogen embrittlement be-
comes more pronounced when the level of CP is more negative than 900 mV (Ag/AgCl/seawater) [7].

5. Qualification testing

Localized and galvanic corrosion and EAC resistance data for high strength materials are limited and somewhat contra-
dictory [12–14]. In view of the limited data, selection of subsea fasteners applications still relies on qualification testing for
the specific application. One of the qualification testing reported that the resistance to hydrogen cracking in slow strain rate
testing for eight high strength alloys was in the following order; titanium alloys, C96900 copper alloy, A286 stainless steel,
AISI 4340 Q&T, AISI 4140 Q&T, 410 stainless steel, Alloy 718 and finally duplex stainless steel. Testing revealed that 410
stainless steel, Alloy 718 and duplex stainless steel had less than 50% reduction in ductility (% ductility is defined as the ratio
of RA in corrosive environment after 8 day cathodic charging in aerated seawater/RA inert environment) [15]. Ratios in the
range 0.8–1.0 normally represent high resistance to EAC whereas low values below 0.5 show high susceptibility to EAC.
There was no explanation for the low hydrogen cracking resistance of Alloy 718. On the contrary, testing by Esaklul and
 K.AA. Esaklul, T.M. Ahmed / Engineering Failure Analysis 16 (2009) 1195–1202 1199

Table 2
Susceptibility to hydrogen embrittlement after Ref. [11] and other recent sources

Alloy/condition HE susceptibility Comments Refs.

AISI 4340 and 4130 >120 ksi yield Susceptible for hardness >34 HRC at potential of Based on lab testing and field experience [11,17]
strength (ASTM A320 Gr L43) 950 mV or more negative
AISI 4140 (ASTM A320 Gr L7 or ASTM Susceptible for hardness >34 HRC at potential of Based on lab testing and field experience [11,17]
A193 Gr B7) 950 mVSCE or more negative
Duplex SS 2507 Slight or some effect of cathodic protection. Crack growth tests [11,23,25]
Hardness limit to 28 HRC
254 SMO No or very little effect of cathodic protection Crack growth tests [11,25]
Ferralium 255 Susceptible at potential of 1000 mVSCE Based on slow strain rate tests [23]
Alloy 286 (solution treated and aged) Resistant Based on slow strain rate, C-ring, tensile [11]
and fracture mechanics tests
Marinel No or very little effect of cathodic protection Crack growth tests [23,25]
Beryllium copper Resistant Based on slow strain rate tests [23]
K-500 all conditions Susceptible at potential of 850 mV or more Based on field experience and slow strain [11]
negative rate tests
Alloy X-750 Susceptible at potential of 1000 mV or more Based on field experience and slow strain [11,24]
negative and hardness >35 HRC rate tests
Alloy 925 (solution treated and aged) Susceptible at potential of 1250 mV Based on slow strain rate tests [11,23]
Alloy 625 Slight or some effect of cathodic protection. Crack growth tests [23,25]
Hardness limit is 35 HRC
Alloy 718 (solution treated and single  Susceptible for hardness >40 HRC at potential Based on slow strain rate tests and filed [11,16]
aged per API 6A 718) of 850 mV or more negative experience
 Resistant Based on CT tests
Alloy 725 (solution treated and aged)  Susceptible at potential of 850 mV or more Based on slow strain rate tests [11,16]
negative
 Resistant Based on CT tests
Ti–6Al–4V (solution treated and Variable susceptibility Based on slow strain rate tests, notched [11,23]
annealed) bars, U-bends
Ti–5Al–1Sn–1Zr1V–0.8Mo (as forged) Resistant Based on slow strain rate tests and fracture [11,23]
toughness

Martin [16] of Alloy 718 and 725 nickel alloys at cathodic potential of 1000 to 100 mV showed that both alloys are resis-
tant to hydrogen cracking in the presence of cathodic protection.
Several aerospace grade high strength low alloy steels were evaluated by NASA which showed that in the absence of
cathodic protection AISI 4340 is resistant to SCC up to tensile strength of 180 ksi (40 HRC) [3]. Testing of AISI 4340 bolts
by one of the authors [17] revealed that fasteners at strength levels of 145 ksi yield strength are susceptible to HE when they
are subject to cathodic protection (CP) of 950 mV confirming the conclusions of the limit of 34 HRC sited above. Failure
occurred in a short time demonstrating the high susceptibility of the high strength steel to HE at these strength and CP levels.
Summary of the hydrogen embrittlement resistance of several materials is given in Table 2.
It can be said that most of the experimental data suggest that many materials are prone to hydrogen embrittlement based
on accelerated testing but there have been few reported failures in the field. It has been challenging for the oil industry to
establish reliable test methods for materials qualification and asses the risk to HE. The few failures that have been reported
were predominately a result of over stress, misuse or processing problems and not due to inherent lack of resistance to EAC.
Two factors have been attributed to the acceptable performance of some of these alloys in the field:

 Low applied stresses on the fasteners.

 The severity of the tests used to qualify the materials for these applications.

Design stresses of fasteners are typically set for the worst-case conditions, which are much higher than normal operating
stresses, mainly rare events such as 100-year storms and components in the field have not experienced such severe events.
Use of harsher environments and EAC tests such as slow strain rate testing to simulate field conditions over the design life
in a short period of time far exceeds the actual field conditions experienced by the fasteners.

6. Field experience

The main drivers for HE of any bolting material have been a susceptible microstructure, CP and pre-tensioning levels.
Austenitic and duplex stainless steels are generally considered immune to HE in the solution annealed condition. Suscepti-
bility to HE increases as s materials are cold worked to improve their strength. Bolts made of Ferralium 255 in the solution
treated and aged condition used on subsea clamps had failed [23].
Copper based alloys are known for their susceptibility to SCC when exposed to ammonia or amines. An SCC failure of alu-
minum bronze screws was traced to ammonia which believed to be present due to decay of marine growth [23]. In another
case, SCC due to the use of curing epoxy paints was reported [20]. Failures have also been reported for precipitation hardened
Cu–Ni–Al–Mn alloy (Hiduron 191) bolts [22].
1200 K.AA. Esaklul, T.M. Ahmed / Engineering Failure Analysis 16 (2009) 1195–1202

The US Navy has used Alloy K-500 extensively and has experienced many failures of this alloy due to hydrogen embrit-
tlement and galvanic corrosion problems in addition to corrosion resulting from galvanic interaction with more noble mate-
rials [18]. Alloy K-500 has also been used in the offshore industry for many years with several reported failures that have
been attributed to hydrogen embrittlement induced by cathodic protection [19–23]. Some of the failures were originally
associated with highly susceptible microstructure due to unsuitable heat treatment. But failures could not be eliminated
even with the proper heat treatment suggesting inherent lack of resistance to HE. Subsequently, alloy K-500 has gone out
of favor and alternative replacement was pursued. Alloy X-750 bolts used for subsea wellheads failed after 4 years in service
as a result of HE that was accelerated by high applied stress due to over-torque of the bolts [24].
Alloy steels mainly AISI 4140 and 4340 remain the most common material for subsea fasteners. The authors are familiar
with successful applications of high strength alloy steel fasteners for drilling risers [16]. Bolts made of Alloy 718 have been
used for BOP bolting in two drilling ship operation with combined anode and impressed current cathodic protection for over
seven years with no failures. Alloy 718 has shown good performance in seawater under CP provided that its microstructure is
free from continuous network of delta phase along grain boundaries which was found to be detrimental to HE [26]. Similar
experience has been reported for Ti-6-4 ELI where over 850 bolts have been used on the Heidrun drilling riser [23] for over
10 years.

7. High strength materials options

For applications that require high yield strength and EAC resistance, the options are limited. Table 3 lists the various com-
mercial alloys available for yield strength >150 ksi. For large diameter (>2½ in.) fasteners with yield strength of 150 ksi, the op-
tions are limited to the following alloys: alloy steels (AISI 4340), Alloy 718, Alloy 725, MP 159 and Ti alloys. Alloys MP 35N, K-
500, 17-4PH H1100, Alloy A286, Alloy 925, Rene 41, Alloy 625, and Be–Cu alloys do not meet the strength/size requirements.
Nickel alloys 718 and 725 offer excellent resistance to EAC in sea water with CP and are among the best candidates for
deepwater subsea bolting. Alloy 725 has the advantage of better hydrogen embrittlement resistance and greater crevice and
pitting corrosion resistance than Alloy 718. This makes Alloy 725 better candidate for large diameter bolts.
Nickel alloys, nickel cobalt and titanium alloys have higher toughness and EAC resistance and inherently higher defect
tolerance compared to high strength steels in subsea applications. Future applications may consider Custom 455, PH13-8,
MP159, Ti–15V–3Al–3Cr–3Sn and Ti–10V–2Fe–3Al in addition to Alloys 718 and 725 for high strength large diameter bolts.
Further qualifications will be required to determine their EAC resistance limits.

Table 3
Materials for 150 ksi yield strength fasteners

Alloy group Material Yield strength Size limit (in.) EAC resistance
Steels AISI 4130 >150 Very low
AISI 4340 >150 Very low
Stainless steels A286 150 Questionable
Custom 455 230 Good
PH 13-8 Mo 190–205 Good
S17400 145–170 Very low
S17700 140–230 Very low
S15700 170–230 Very low
Ni based alloys Alloy 718 130176 Good
Alloy 725 165 Good
Alloy X-750 130 Good
Co–Ni alloys MP35N 230 <2 Good
MP159 276 Good
MP159 modified 150 Good
Be–Cu alloys C17200 145–190 Low toughness
C17300 145–190 Low toughness
C17000 125–185 Low toughness
Ti alloys Ti–6Al–6V–2Sn 145–160 <3 Questionable
Ti–6Al–6V–2Sn–4Zr–6Mo 150–160 <4 Questionable
Ti–7Al–4Mo 150–160 <2 Questionable
Ti–4.5Al–5Mo–1.5Cr 120–153 Questionable
Ti–10V–2Fe–3Al 150 Good potential
Ti–8Mo–8V–2Fe–3Al 170 <4 Questionable
Ti–11.5Mo–6Zr–4.5Sn 175 <3 Questionable
Ti–3Al–8V–6Cr–4Mo–4Zr 180 (aged) <4 Questionable
Ti–13V–11Cr–3Al 160 <4 Questionable
Ti–15V–3Al–3Cr–3Sn 190 Good potential
Ti–15Mo–2.7Nb–3Al–0.2Si 205 Good potential
 K.AA. Esaklul, T.M. Ahmed / Engineering Failure Analysis 16 (2009) 1195–1202 1201

Table 4
Variation in hardness values for AISI 4340 Q&T high strength steel bolts

Hardness range (HRC) 35 36–37 36–38 36–39 38–39 39

Number of heats 1 Heat 8 Heats 1 Heat 6 Heats 1 Heat 1 Heat

8. Materials specification and quality assurance

Use of any of the recommended high strength alloys for subsea applications must adhere to specifications mainly heat
treatment, degree of cold work and maximum hardness to ensure sufficient resistance to EAC. Resistance to HE due to catho-
dic protection must be treated in the same way as sulfide stress cracking where the maximum hardness allowed must not be
exceeded. For example large diameter high strength alloy steel bolts with specified hardness of 35 HRC range from 34 to 38
HRC and are generally close to 38 HRC than 34 HRC. Table 4 shows an example of the range of hardness measured in one lot
of 31=4 in. diameter bolts used for drilling riser applications. This demonstrates that much tighter specifications are needed
and must specify a maximum hardness of 34 HRC for high strength steel fasteners.

9. Conclusions

Field experience and the environmental assisted stress cracking test data confirm the following:

1. Cathodic protection provides sufficient corrosion protection for bolts in subsea applications even in dissimilar materials
joint.
2. High strength steels with hardness below 34 HRC are resistant to EAC for cathodically protected components.
3. High strength steels with hardness >34 HRC are highly susceptible to cracking due to hydrogen embrittlement induced by
cathodic protection.
4. High strength nickel alloys have high resistance to hydrogen embrittlement and are ideal candidates for high strength
subsea bolts.
5. Use of high strength materials must adhere to known strength limits and specify maximum hardness, e.g. 34 HRC for alloy
steel, to ensure resistance to cathodic protection induced hydrogen embrittlement.
6. Several other materials such as Custom 455, PH13-8, MP159, Ti–15V–3Al–3Cr–3Sn and Ti–10V–2Fe–3Al have the EAC
resistance and are good candidates for consideration for subsea applications.

Acknowledgements

The authors express their sincere thanks to BP and JP Kenny for permission to publish this paper.

References

[1] Atlas of stress corrosion cracking data. ASM International; 1984.

[2] Bickford JH. An introduction to the design and behavior of bolted joints. 2nd ed. Marcel Deckker, Inc.; 1990.
[3] Humphries TS, Nelson EE. Evaluation of the stress corrosion cracking resistance of several high strength low alloy steels, NASA TM-78276, May 1980.
Marshall Space Flight Center, Alabama.
[4] ASTM A 320/A 320M standard specification for alloy-steel and stainless steel bolting materials for low-temperature service.
[5] ASTM A193/A193M standard specification for alloy-steel and stainless steel bolting materials for high temperature or high pressure service and other
special purpose applications.
[6] International Standard NACE MR0175/ISO15156. Petroleum and natural gas industries. Materials for use in H2S-containing environments in oil and gas
production.
[7] Guidelines for materials selection and corrosion control for subsea oil and gas production equipment, Publication No. 194. London, UK: The
Engineering Equipment and Materials Users Association; 1999.
[8] API 17D. Specification for subsea wellhead and christmas tree equipment. Washington, DC: American Petroleum Institute; 1996.
[9] ASME/ANSI B16 – standards of pipes and fittings.
[10] API Spec 6A. Specification for wellhead and christmas tree equipment. Washington DC: American Petroleum Institute; 1996.
[11] Aylor DM, Bowles CA, Tregoning RL, Gaudett MA. High strength fasteners for seawater immersion service. In: Proceeding of offshore pipeline
workshop, Galveston, Texas; 1999.
[12] Ross RW, Tuthill AH. Practical guide to using marine fasteners. Mater Perform 1989;29(4):65–9.
[13] Wolfe LH, Burnette CC, Joosten MW. Hydrogen embrittlement of cathodically protected subsea bolting alloys corrosion 93, Paper No. 288. Houston
Texas: NACE International.
[14] Johnson, Roy. Corrosion problems in the oil industry. In: 11th Scandinavian corrosion congress, Stavanger, Norway, 1989 (Avesta Corrosion
Management No. 3-1989).
[15] Gaudett MA. 150 ksi yield strength fastener material certification plan. Naval Surface Warfare Center Carderock Division Report, TR-61 – 98/26,
November 1998.
[16] Esaklul K, Martin J. High strength fasteners for subsea applications. In: Corrosion 2004, Paper No. 04151. Houston Texas: NACE International.
[17] Esaklul KA. Unpublished BP Work.
[18] Hibner EL, Shoemaker LE. High strength corrosion resistant alloy 686 for seawater fastener service. In: Corrosion 2002, Paper No. 02195. Houston
Texas: NACE International.
[19] Wolfe LH et al. Hydrogen embrittlement of cathodically protected subsea bolting alloys. Mater Perform 1993;32(7):14.
1202 K.AA. Esaklul, T.M. Ahmed / Engineering Failure Analysis 16 (2009) 1195–1202

[20] Natishan ME, Porr Jr WC, Issues surrounding the use of nickel–copper Alloy K-500 fasteners in seawater. In: Corrosion/94, Paper No. 483. Houston, TX:
NACE International.
[21] Wolfe LH, Joosten MJ. Failures of nickel/copper bolts in subsea application. SPE Prod Eng 1988(August):382.
[22] Andersen O, Joosten MW, et al. Evaluation of high strength Cu–Ni–Mn–Al bolting used in oil and gas service. In: Corrosion 96, Paper 78. Houston,
Texas: NACE International.
[23] Bolting and fastener application in the offshore and process industry state of the art. DNV Report No. 2002-3301. Det Norske Veritas.
[24] Toffolo G, Fassina P, Marangoni M, Msallem A. Nickel alloy stud bolts failure – a case history. OMAE – Mater Eng ASME 1996;3:165–72. 1996.
[25] Slind T, Eggen TG, Bardal E, Haagensen PJ. Fatigue performance of nine bolt materials in air and in seawater with cathodic protection. Avesta Sheffield
Paper ACOM 1-1993.
[26] API SPEC 6A718 Specification of Nickel Base Alloy 718 (UNS N07718) for Oil and Gas Drilling and Production Equipment.