In F & H Construction v. ITT Hartford Insurance Company of the West (2004) 118 Cal.App.4th 364, the issue was whether the welding of inferior-grade steel caps onto another product, steel composite piles, caused property damage--"physical injury to tangible property"--to the piles within the meaning of a CGL policy. (F & H Construction, supra, 118 Cal.App.4th at pp. 368, 371-372.) It was undisputed that the use of the lesser grade caps produced structural units that were not damaged but were inadequate for their intended purpose. (Id. at p. 368.) On review of a grant of summary judgment in the insurer's favor, the appellate court explained that the prevailing view was that "incorporation of a defective component or product into a larger structure does not constitute property damage unless and until the defective component causes physical injury to tangible property in at least some other part of the system." (Id. at p. 372.) In reaching that conclusion, the appellate court, in distinguishing cases relied upon by the appellant, agreed with the Illinois Supreme Court's definition of the term "physical injury" as " 'unambiguously connoting damage to tangible property causing an alteration in appearance, shape, color or in other material dimension.' " (F & H Construction, at p. 377.) The F & H court used the word "material" to qualify the dimension (such as appearance, shape or color), not the extent of the alteration; the court did not define physical injury to require a material alteration in shape, appearance, color or other dimension. The F & H Construction court merely held that where the only injury was in the form of a product's failure to perform as intended and the damages were "intangible economic damages" (the cost of modifying the caps and lost bonus for early project completion), there was no physical injury to tangible property within the meaning of the CGL policy. (F & H Construction, 118 Cal.App.4th at pp. 373-374.)