At around 8:30 p.m., an induction furnace at a foundry was breached, resulting in an explosion followed by a plume of smoke. The furnace’s power supplies were shut off by its automatic safety devices. The firefighters were alerted. All the employees were evacuated. The heat from the furnace prevented the firefighters from getting near it. The building was not damaged. The foundry workers were furloughed for four days.

The accident was caused by a series of events. Firstly, the furnace’s cooling system had failed. This failure was reported during the previous melting operation, at 3:44 p.m. It was reported again when the current melting operation was started when the accident occurred, at 5:38 p.m. The first time the failure occurred, it was acknowledged without maintenance staff being informed. The second time, a maintenance crew arrived. While the crew were working, the metal inside the furnace began to cool. At the same time, the stopper rod/nozzle assembly failed while the ladles were pouring metal into the moulds. As there were no available safety ingot moulds (they had not been emptied since being used two days earlier), the cold metal went back into the furnace under maintenance. When maintenance on the furnace ended at 6:17 p.m., the furnace was restarted and scrap metal was added, creating an overload. In addition, the furnace was restarted at full capacity when it should have been progressively heated due to the cooled metal inside it. This, coupled with the overloading of the furnace, caused a crust to form. At 8:23 p.m., the system reported an insulation fault on the furnace. The crust caused the metal at the bottom of the furnace to overheat, which prematurely wore down the furnace’s refractory and opened a hole that allowed the molten metal to pass through the cooling circuit. The explosion was caused by the reaction between the water and molten metal.

Before the furnace was restarted, the manufacturer checked the conformity of the facility. The foundry workers were made aware of the accident’s causes. They received additional training and were tested at the end of the course. Ultimately, the operator increased the training of his workers, followed by evaluation tests. He also introduced simulation exercises.