Design - Part 1

This next series of Connect articles will look at welding design.

Best practice in design is not simply a matter of deciding on the appropriate weld size or component thickness
capable of carrying the service loads; there are many aspects of designing a welded component that need to be
considered in addition to calculating permissible stresses. Weldability and mechanical properties such as tensile
strength, toughness and fatigue resistance, all of which the designer must be familiar with, have been dealt with in a
number of other Job Knowledge articles and will not be covered in this series on design.
In addition to selecting the material and specifying weld sizes, the designer must bear in mind that the decisions that
he/she makes will directly affect the cost, safety and serviceability of the structure or component.
It is therefore necessary for the designer to:

select the most appropriate material

select the most cost effective design of welded joint

design the component to be welded by the most cost effective process

specify the smallest weld acceptable for both service and fabrication

use the smallest number of welds

ensure that there is adequate access for both welding and inspection

ensure that realistic dimensional tolerances are specified and can be achieved
The topics mentioned above involve a range of specialised technologies and it is therefore essential for the designer
to seek advice from other professions such as metallurgists and welding engineers and not to rely solely upon their
own judgement. This must be done before the design process has proceeded beyond the point of no return; sadly this
is often not the case!
To begin let us look at some definitions. Firstly, the joint type or configuration of which there are five fundamental
forms as shown in Fig.1. Note that there are no welds associated with these joint types.

a) In-line or butt joint

b) T-joint

c) Corner joint

d) Lap joint

e) Edge joint
Fig.1. Joint types (a) - (e)
These various joint types may be joined by only two weld types. Firstly, the butt weld where the weld is within the
plane of the components being joined and secondly, the fillet weld where the weld is completely or mostly outside
the plane of the components ( Fig.2). Plug and edge welds are somewhat special cases and will be discussed later.

a) Butt weld

b) Fillet weld
Fig.2. Weld types
A butt weld may be combined with a fillet weld to form a compound weld as illustrated in Fig.3:

a) Single-sided T-butt weld

b) Single-sided T-butt weld with superimposed fillet weld - a compound weld

Fig.3. Compound welds

Fillet welds are probably the most common type of weld, particularly in structural steelwork applications, so this
first section will look at some of the design considerations of fillet welds. They may be used to make T, lap and
corner joints ( Fig.4).

a) T-joint fillet weld

b) Corner joint fillet weld

c) Lap joint fillet weld

Fig.4. Single-sided fillet welded joint types
A fillet weld is approximately triangular in shape, the size being defined by the weld throat or leg length as shown
inFig.5.

Fig.5. Terms used to describe features of a fillet weld

Fillet welds sizes should be specified preferably by referring to the throat thickness 'a' although the leg length 'z' is
often used and can be easier to measure during weld inspection. Conventionally, the leg lengths are regarded as
being of equal dimensions, the weld forming an isosceles triangle in cross section.
The convex fillet is generally undesirable for two main reasons. a)The junction of the weld metal with the parent
metal at the weld toe can form a significant stress raiser and will adversely affect both fatigue life and brittle fracture
resistance; b) the excess weld metal in the cap costs both time and money to deposit without contributing to joint
strength. The concave fillet weld can be beneficial with respect to fatigue strength and, if required, the minimum
throat thickness MUST be specified.
Fillet welds are less expensive to make than butt welds as there is no requirement to cut or machine a weld
preparation. Although they are capable of carrying substantial loads they should not be used where the applied loads
put the root of the weld in tension, particularly where the loading is dynamic - fatigue life in particular is drastically
reduced. Where such loading is a possibility then a double sided T-joint should be made using two fillet welds
( Fig.6).

Fig.6. Preferred fillet welded joint type under bending loads

It is commonly thought that the fillet weld is an easier weld for the welder to make than a butt weld as the weld is
deposited on solid metal. However, this is not necessarily the case when full fusion into the root of the weld is
required. It is not unknown for highly skilled welders to fail a fillet weld qualification test where this is a design
requirement. This is an important point and needs to be considered firstly by the designer asking if it is an essential
requirement and secondly by the fabricator when pricing a contract.

This also raises the point that the fillet weld is extremely difficult to volumetrically examine using non-destructive
testing techniques to confirm its internal soundness. This applies particularly to the root region where it is not
possible to measure, with any degree of precision, any lack of fusion, slag entrapment etc. Therefore the same
reliance on joint integrity, and hence service performance, should not be placed on a fillet weld as may be placed on
a fully inspected butt weld.
The next article (Part 2) will discuss the topic of fillet weld design before moving on to butt joints.
Design Part 2
Job Knowledge
The article in the last issue of Connect introduced the fillet weld, the least costly weld type to make since the
components to be joined do not require flame cutting or machining of a weld preparation, the pieces can be propped
against each other and the welder can then deposit a single pass of weld metal against a solid metal backing.
Whilst this sounds simple there are some aspects of making a fillet weld that must be taken into account (in addition
to those already mentioned in the previous article Design part 1).
Cooling rates in a fillet weld are greater than in a similar thickness butt joint. There are three paths by which heat
will be lost from the weld. This fact means that lack of fusion/cold start defects are more likely, particularly in high
thermal conductivity metals such as aluminium and the risks of cold cracking are increased in carbon and low alloy
steels. What may be acceptable in terms of heat input and/or preheat temperature for a butt weld may therefore not
be acceptable with a fillet weld configuration. This point has sometimes been overlooked, particularly when welding
on temporary attachments such as strongbacks, where quality control may be somewhat lax. This has led to major
cracking problems for some fabricators.
Unlike a butt weld where the required weld throat is generally the thickness of the parent metal, the size of a fillet
weld is determined by the loads that it is expected to carry. It can therefore be of any size that the designer specifies
although there are practical limitations with respect to both minimum and maximum throat thickness.
With the conventional arc welding processes it is difficult to deposit a fillet weld with a throat less than some 2mm.
This is in addition to the possibility of the lack of fusion/cold cracking mentioned above due to the rapid cooling
rates experienced by small fillet welds. The maximum size of fillet weld is generally that of the thickness of the
thinner of the two items being joined but very large fillet welds may cause unacceptable distortion and/or extremely
high residual stresses. In addition, above a certain size it may be more economical to make a T-butt, rather than a
fillet weld.
Although the throat thickness is regarded as being the most important dimension for design purposes it is a fact that
mechanical failure of fillet welds is often along the fusion line or through the parent material itself. One reason for
this in carbon or low alloy steels is that the weld metal is mostly substantially stronger than the parent metal.
As mentioned in Connect article No. 90 there are a variety of fillet weld shapes that make the accurate measurement
of the throat thickness a little more difficult than may be first thought.
The throat is the shortest distance from the root to the face of the weld. To measure this dimension in a regular mitre
or flat faced fillet weld is relatively simple. The shape is that of an isosceles triangle, the throat being 0.7 of the leg
length. Convex, concave and deep penetration welds, however have throat thicknesses as illustrated in Fig.1.

a) mitre fillet weld

c) concave fillet weld

b) convex fillet weld

d) deep penetration weld

Fig.1.Throat dimensions in fillet welds
It is apparent then, that measurement of either leg length or actual throat thickness alone is not reliable in
determining the design throat thickness of a weld but that the weld shape must be taken into account. The excess
weld metal of the convex weld gives no benefit with respect to design strength and, from a cost point of view, the
fillet weld face should be as flat as possible.

The deep penetration weld is a very cost effective way of increasing the joint strength as only a proportion of the
weld metal is from deposited filler metal. However, it is not possible to measure the throat of a deep penetration
weld. To guarantee that the minimum design throat has been achieved it is necessary to control welding parameters
and fit-up within very tight tolerances. This type of weld is therefore generally made using an automated or
mechanised welding process (submerged arc or spray transfer MIG/MAG) in order to achieve sufficient and
consistent control of the welding parameters.
When deciding on the size of a fillet weld it should be remembered that a small increase in throat thickness will
result in a large increase in deposited weld metal as the cross sectional area of a fillet weld is a function of the square
of the leg length (area = z2/2). Increasing the throat from, say, 5 to 6mm results in an increase in area and therfore
weld metal of around 45%. This equates to almost 0.1kg extra weld metal per 1 metre length of weld. There are thus
substantial cost and weight penalties to be paid if the joint is either over-specified by the designer or over-welded by
the welder. There are no hard and fast rules about the point at which it is more economical to change from a fillet
weld to either a double sided fillet weld or a partial penetration butt weld. Areas quoted in Fig.2 are worth bearing in
mind when deciding on fillet weld sizes.

Fig.2. Relative cross sectional areas

For a fillet weld loaded in shear (the load parallel to the weld) the calculation of stress on the weld is simple; it is the
load divided by the area of the weld throat.

Fig.3. Calculation of fillet weld throat

It is assumed for design purposes that fillet welds fail through the throat and it is therefore a simple matter to
calculate the cross sectional area capable of carrying this applied load when the strength of the weld metal is known.
Note that the shear strength of a metal is generally around 70% to 80% of the tensile strength. This figure is often
factored to give an acceptable margin of safety. In the UK for plain carbon steels a shear strength of 115N/mm 2 is
frequently used, enabling the throat thickness to be calculated from the simple formula throat:- throat 'a' = P/(L x
115).
The throat dimensions of a double fillet weld T-joint loaded in tension can be determined using the same approach.
Note, however, that this is a very simplistic calculation and does not take into account any other stresses (bending,

torsion etc) that the weld may experience. It is however beyond the scope of these brief articles to cover in any depth
the stress analysis of welds.
Design Part 3
Fillet welds may be combined with full or partial penetration butt welds - a combination weld. The designer is
therefore required to decide whether to use a T-butt weld, a fillet weld or a combination of the two. In making this
decision cost is a major factor.
As mentioned in Job knowledge 91, the fillet weld requires no weld preparation, is easy to deposit and is often
regarded as the cheapest weld of all to make. However cross sectional area, and therefore cost, increases as a
function of the square of the leg length. Assuming the same strength requirements from the fillet welds as for the Tbutt welds it becomes more economical to use a double sided full penetration T-butt joint at a plate thickness of
around 30mm.The accuracy of this figure should be treated with caution as it is dependent on many factors such as
the weld preparation costs and included angle.
Welding position is an additional factor. It may be more economical to deposit a butt weld in the flat position, where
large diameter electrodes and high welding currents can be used, rather than a double sided fillet weld where one
weld must be made in the overhead position ( Fig.1).

Fig.1. Flat position T-butt weld vs overhead fillet weld

An additional benefit from using a T-butt weld is that this weld type provides a direct transfer of force through the
joint, giving a better performance under fatigue loads. Many design specifications will also have lower allowable
stresses for a fillet weld compared with a butt weld and this can have a significant effect on cost, particularly when
designing to match the strength of thicker plates.
It should be remembered that it is difficult, if not impossible, to examine a fillet weld volumetrically using
radiographic or ultrasonic techniques and the internal weld quality is therefore entirely dependent on the skill and
integrity of the welder. The comments on T-joints also apply to corner joints where two fillet welds may be more
economical than one large fillet as shown in Fig.2. However, remember that one weld may need to be made in the
overhead position if the component cannot be turned.

Fig.2. Corner Joints: Area of weld in a) -50mm2; and b) -25mm2

From the foregoing it is obvious that the decision to use fillet welds, T-butt joints or combination welds is not as
straightforward as it may first appear and there are numerous factors that must be taken into account.
Butt joints are those welds where the weld metal is contained within the planes of the surfaces of the items being
joined. The weld throat may be the full section thickness, a full penetration joint, or a proportion only - a partial
penetration joint. Welds may be 'single sided joints', welded all from one side, or 'double sided', welded from both
sides, ( Fig.3).

Fig.3. Full and partial penetration welds

Except for very thin plate, arc welded butt joints require a weld preparation to be flame cut or machined along the
joint line. The conventional arc welding processes can penetrate into the base metal by only a limited amount. The
maximum penetration in conventional TIG or manual metal arc (SMAW) welds is in the region of 3mm, MAG
(GMAW) welds around 6mm and submerged arc some 15mm.
In order to weld the full thickness of a plate and achieve the weld throat thickness required by design it is therefore
necessary to cut away sufficient metal along the joint line so that the welding electrode has access to the root of the
joint, enabling the root pass to be deposited and then the remainder filled to complete the joint. A weld preparation,
the 'weld prep', is therefore formed along the joint line using flame cutting, plasma cutting or machining. Figure
4identifies the key features of a 'single bevel' weld preparation and those of a 'single-V' joint.

The smaller the included angle, the less access this will give to the root and the greater is the risk of defects such as
lack of side wall fusion. This reduced access may, however, be compensated for by an increase in the root gap.
The bevel angles and the root gap will depend upon the process(es) used to make the joint and the material
thickness. A narrow included angle requires less weld metal and therefore is more economical as the thickness
increases. A downside to this is that the narrower the angle the more difficult access becomes and the risk of welding
defects as mentioned above.
Too wide a root gap will result in a loss of control of the weld pool and melt through giving an irregular and
excessive penetration bead. This may be overcome by using a backing strip if this is permitted by the service
conditions.

Fig.4. Single bevel weld preparation

The choice of the weld preparation is therefore a compromise between maintaining adequate access and minimising
the weld volume.
If a high quality root bead is required and access is not available to the root side of the weld e.g. in a pipe carrying
fluids or in high pressure service, then an acceptable condition can be achieved using the TIG process to make the
root bead. A typical pipe butt weld set-up would be 60 included angle, 1mm to 2mm root gap and a zero to 1.5mm
thick root face.
Where access to the reverse side of the joint is available, the condition of the penetration bead is less important as
the root bead can be ground to sound metal and a sealing pass deposited.
A reduction in weld volume can be achieved by the use of a 'J' preparation as shown in Fig.5. This preparation,
unlike the straight chamfer of the 'V' preparation which can be flame cut, must be machined.

Fig.5. Key features of single sided 'J' preparation

This can be an expensive operation, which is why this type of weld is used only on thick joints, where the saving in
deposited weld metal outweighs the cost of machining, or where very high quality root beads are required.

Machining of the weld preparation dictates that the dimensions, particularly that of the root face thickness, can be
controlled far more closely than is possible with flame cutting and therefore a more accurate fit-up can be achieved.
It is often used on orbitally TIG welded pipe butt joints where a machined joint enables the tolerances required by a
fully automatic process to be achieved.
Design Part 4
The previous article looked briefly at butt weld design where mention was made of the increased risk of producing
defects as the bevel angle or the root gap is reduced. Bevelling the plate edges allows access to all parts of the joint,
enabling good fusion throughout the weld to be achieved. The bevel can be on one or both edges of the items to be
joined. What is important is the included angle which is dictated by the need both to achieve the correct
torch/electrode angle and to maintain the required arc length and wire stick-out. as shown in Fig.1. The angle on a
single bevel joint, as in Fig.1(c) obviously needs to be greater than that on a double bevel V-joint if access problems
are not to be encountered. Experience has shown that a weld preparation angle of 45 on a single bevel joint is
usually sufficient to allow adequate access.

Fig.1. Effect of a narrow weld preparation angle

A similar effect is produced by too narrow a root gap where, as above, there is insufficient access to permit a correct
arc length to be achieved and the arc cannot be placed in the correct position. Conversely, too wide a root gap on an
unbacked weld will require a large, wide weld pool to bridge the gap, resulting in melt through, a loss of control of
the pool and the formation of localised excess weld metal - known colloquially as 'noddies' or 'dangleberries'.
As may be guessed from the above, the most problematic region in a weld is that of the root pass. Single sided joints
require dimensionally accurate weld preparations and fit-up and skilled welders to ensure full penetration welds with
an acceptable root contour. The best root pass appearance using conventional arc welding processes will be achieved
using the TIG process but acceptable root conditions can also be achieved with MMA, MIG/MAG and FCAW
welding.
When welding, it is obviously easier for the welder when there is a sound base on which to deposit the weld metal;
hence the need for a very skilled welder when making full penetration single sided welds.

When permitted by design, it is possible to use partial penetration welds as illustrated in Fig.3 of Connect article no.
92. However, note that this type of joint is not recommended when fatigue is an issue.
Where access to the reverse side of a partial penetration weld is available, then the fabricator has the option of
depositing a sealing pass. Remember, however, that most welding processes have only limited penetration and there
is a real risk that not all of the unfused land will be melted away. To be certain of removing the unfused land, 'back
gouging' the root and filling the groove with sound weld metal is generally carried out. Backgouging, or removal of
the unfused land, can be done by any of the conventional metal removal techniques; machining, arc air gouging,
chipping, grinding etc (Fig.2). Of these methods, arc air gouging is probably the most cost effective and can produce
a smooth contoured U-shaped groove with an included angle of 50 to 60 degrees, allowing adequate access.
The back gouging must be sufficiently deep that any lack of penetration is removed. To confirm that this has been
done it is good practice to perform magnetic particle or liquid penetrant inspection of the gouged groove.

Fig.2. Backgouging to achieve full penetration

An alternative to backgouging, or when access to the reverse side is not available, is to use a backing strip which
will provide support for a fully penetrated root pass. The backing strip may be permanent or temporary,
(see Fig.3 below).

Fig.3. Various forms of backing

The permanent backing strip weld does not have as good a performance in fatigue loading as a single sided TIG root
butt weld and the crevice is a site for preferential corrosion. Whether a permanent backing strip weld is acceptable
for service is therefore a design decision.
In addition to providing support for the root pass, a further major advantage of the backing strip weld is that fit-up
tolerances may be relaxed as the strip acts as a locating feature. This is particularly so when pipe butt welding where

the strip forms a spigot on which to centre the joining pipe. In addition root gap may be varied, the only real
limitations being those of cost; the wider the root gap the greater the volume of weld metal and distortion.
The strip must be compatible with the filler metal and the parent base metal. It must be correctly fitted, in close
contact with both edges of the weld preparation and welded into position using intermittent tack welds. Any gap
between the backing strip and the plate edges is a site for slag entrapment and results in a poor root profile. To
ensure full fusion in the root of the weld it is advisable to use a feather edge and to direct the welding arc at the
plate/pipe edges.
When a permanent backing strip cannot be used, then a temporary backing bar may be used (conventionally a
permanent backing is known as a 'strip', a temporary backing as a 'bar'). As the name suggests this is a backing that
is easily removed at the end of the welding operation; it has not become fused to the root pass.
It may be made of a ceramic or of copper, chromium plated for use on stainless steel and nickel based alloys to
prevent contamination. Austenitic stainless steel has also been used. The metal backing bars may be water cooled to
aid heat loss and may be grooved to provide a mould for the molten weld metal. Welding conditions and fit-up must
be carefully controlled to prevent the welding arc from impinging directly on the bar, otherwise there maybe melting
of the bar and contamination of the weld pool.
Ceramic backing bars can be obtained in a variety of sizes with shaped grooves to form a weld pool mould. They
may be rigid bars of ceramic or articulated such that they can be wrapped around the inside diameter of a pipe or
tube. Ceramic tapes are also available, as illustrated above.
These tapes have wide strips of adhesive either side of the ceramic tile to enable the tape to be held in place during
welding and peeled off on completion. As with the permanent backing strip, care needs to be taken to ensure that the
ceramic tile is in close contact with the metal surfaces otherwise slag and/or weld metal will run into the gap, giving
an irregular weld root.
Design Part 5
The previous Job Knowledge articles looked at fillet and partial/full penetration butt welds. The final three weld
types to be dealt with in this series on weld design are the edge weld, the spot weld and the plug weld.
The edge weld is a specialised weld that has limited fields of application and is mostly used for the joining of sheet
metal components although it may be used for the fabrication of tube to tubesheet welds. The edge weld is
frequently used as an alternative to a corner weld where achieving an accurate fit may be difficult, particularly on
thin section components. Instead, by raising a flange on one of the components and clamping the two components
together a weld can be made along the edge. Sealing the lid on a can is one ideal application as the lid can be pushed
in to the can, resulting in a minimal gap and a self jigged joint (Fig.1). The weld size and penetration is limited so
this weld type is generally only possible on thin components using methods such as TIG, plasma TIG or the power
beam welding processes.

Fig.1. Edge weld used to seal container lid

This type of edge weld may also be used for tube to tubesheet welding where, by machining a pintle onto the
tubesheet, the tube can be inserted through the tube hole and an edge weld made, (Fig.2) This has the advantage that

the heat sink is more evenly balanced when attempting to weld a thin tube to a thick tubesheet. In tubesheets of
limited weldability or where postweld heat treatment is essential it is possible to deposit a ring of weld metal round
the tube hole. This ring may then be machined to provide the pintle so that the residual stresses are reduced and the
tube/tubesheet weld is made in good weldability weld metal. This results in a reduction in residual stress in the
tubesheet and a reduction in the risk of cracking.

Fig.2. Edge weld used to weld tube to tubesheet joints

Alternatively, if PWHT is required the tubesheet and its weld rings can be PWHT'd, the pintles machined on and
non-destructively examined (NDE) and the tube/tubesheet welds made in the thin section, removing the need for a
second PWHT cycle. Because of the accuracy of these machined joints the welding process, generally TIG, is
frequently mechanised or fully automated.
The spot weld, Fig.3, is normally associated with resistance welding where two thin sheets are overlapped and held
in close contact by pressure from the welding electrodes during the welding cycle. The resistance spot weld could
therefore be regarded as self jigging. Spot welding with the arc welding processes also uses a lap type joint but
presents a more difficult problem in that the joint must be firmly clamped together such that there is no gap between
the two surfaces. Failure to do this means that the weld metal may spill into the gap and full fusion to the underlying
plate may not be achieved. Good jigging and fixturing is therefore essential.

Fig.3. Spot welds

Applications of this joining method include sheet metal work and the lining ('wallpapering') of ducts, tanks etc with
thin, corrosion-resistant sheets. The greatest strength of the welds is developed when the welds are in shear parallel
to the plate surfaces.
As mentioned earlier, penetration into the parent metal from the various arc welding processes is limited, around
4mm with TIG (perhaps as much as 10mm with activated flux TIG), 10mm with plasma-TIG and 6mm with MAG
welding. The thickness of the upper plate that must be fully penetrated to provide a sound weld is therefore similarly
limited. An additional problem with MAG welding is that the filler wire is fed continuously into the weld pool so
that a large lump of excess weld metal may be deposited on the plate surface. Autogenous TIG or plasma-TIG will
give a weld flush with or slightly below the plate surface. The process can be partially mechanized. Special torches
are available that, when held against the plate surface, give the correct electrode/work piece distance and timers on
the welding power source that may be set to give the desired arc time.

To enable thicker plate to be joined by 'spot welding' a circular or elongated hole may be machined through the top
plate, enabling either a plug or a slot weld to be made by filling the hole with weld metal. Whilst this may seem tobe
a simple and easy process the strength of this type of joint depends upon full fusion of the weld metal with the
vertical wall of the hole cut into the upper plate, see Fig.4. As with a fillet weld, lack of fusion in this area will result
in a reduction in the throat thickness of the joint. It is therefore essential that the welder directs the welding arc into
the bottom corner of the joint and does not simply puddle the weld metal into the hole. With small diameter plug
welds this can be a difficult and skilled operation and welders need to be adequately trained to ensure that they can
achieve full fusion.

Fig.4. Plug and slot welds

Since the strength of the plug or slot weld is determined by the throat it may not be necessary to fill the hole
completely unless the weld must be flush with the surface of the plate for cosmetic reasons. Besides being
unnecessary from the point of view of joint strength, a completely filled hole will have high residual stresses. These
may cause unacceptable distortion and will increase the risk of cold cracking in carbon and low alloy steels.
This brief series of Job Knowledge articles has concentrated on the design of joints for welding. The designer also
needs to remember that, not only must the joints be suitable for welding, they must in addition enable any nondestructive testing required by the contract or specification to be carried out. Provision therefore needs to be made to
allow adequate access for the positioning of radiographic film and the radiation source, or to enable the correct
scanning patterns to be used if the joint is to be ultrasonically tested.
Whilst NDE of butt welds is reasonably straightforward, radiography or ultrasonic examination of fillet welds is not
generally regarded as being possible. The designer must therefore take into account the possibility of undetected
defects in this type of joint.