Design - Part 1

Job Knowledge
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 in Fig.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 nondestructive 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 a 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 disproportionately 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 = z 2/2). Increasing the
throat from, say, 5 to 6mm results in an increase 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/mm2 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
Job Knowledge
Part
Part
Part
Part

1
2
4
5

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 T-butt 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 4 identifies 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
Job Knowledge

Part
Part
Part
Part

1
2
3
5

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
Job Knowledge
Part
Part
Part
Part

1
2
3
4

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 non-destructive 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.