LAPPEENRANTA UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY

Department of Mechanical Engineering

Laboratory of Fatigue and Strength









MASTERS THESIS


STATISTICAL VARIATION OF WELD PROFILES AND THEIR EXPECTED
INFLUENCE ON FATIGUE STRENGTH




The subject of the masters thesis has been confirmed by the Department Council of the
Department of Mechanical Engineering on October 5
th
, 2005.


The thesis has been examined by Prof. Gary B. Marquis and Dr. Timo Nyknen


Lappeenranta, May 23
rd
, 2006



Arjun Seshadri
Teknologiapuistonkatu 4 B 12
53850 Lappeenranta
+358 50 9239099
DMWT 0273470


i
ABSTRACT


Lappeenranta University of Technology
Department of Mechanical Engineering

Arjun Seshadri

Statistical variation of weld profiles and their expected influence on fatigue
strength

Masters thesis 2006
47 Pages, 27 Figures, 2 Tables and 7 Appendices
Supervisors: Prof. Gary B. Marquis and Dr. Timo Nyknen
Keywords: Cruciform joints; Non-load carrying welds; Fatigue strength; Statistical
analysis; Extreme value theory, Fracture mechanics

The general objective of this study was to conduct a statistical analysis on the variation
of the weld profiles and their influence on the fatigue strength of the joint. Weld quality
with respect to its fatigue strength is of importance which is the main concept behind
this thesis. The intention of this study was to establish the influence of weld geometric
parameters on the weld quality and fatigue strength. The effect of local geometrical
variations of non-load carrying cruciform fillet welded joint under tensile loading was
studied in this thesis work.

Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics was used to calculate fatigue strength of the
cruciform fillet welded joints in as-welded condition and under cyclic tensile loading,
for a range of weld geometries. With extreme value statistical analysis and LEFM, an
attempt was made to relate the variation of the cruciform weld profiles such as weld
angle and weld toe radius to respective FAT classes.



ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT



The work reported in this thesis was carried out in the Department of Mechanical
Engineering at Lappeenranta University of Technology, Finland.

It gives me immense pleasure to express my deepest gratitude to those who have helped me
all along my masters thesis.

I am grateful to my supervisor and mentor, Prof. Gary B. Marquis, who has not only been a
source of inspiration all through my studies in Lappeenranta University of Technology, but
also has been a good advisor. I sincerely thank him for his ever-patient guidance and
counsel, which was helpful during my thesis work.

I also would like to extend my appreciation to Dr. Timo Nyknen and Dr. Timo Bjrk for
their expertise and advices which assisted me during my thesis work.

My further appreciation is towards the aid given by the staffs and assistants of Fatigue and
Strength, Material Science and Welding Laboratories of Lappeenranta University of
Technology.

I owe a special gratitude to my close and dear ones, far and near to me. My parents and my
elder brother, who have been the backbone of my life, have encouraged and supported
throughout my studies here at LUT.













iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS


ABSTRACT............................................................................................................................ i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ..................................................................................................... ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS...................................................................................................... iii
List of Figures .................................................................................................................... v
List of Tables...................................................................................................................... v
List of Abbreviations and Symbols................................................................................... vi
1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Objectives and approach ........................................................................................ 4
1.2 Thesis Outline ........................................................................................................ 4
2 TECHNICAL BACKGROUND.................................................................................... 5
2.1 Geometrical weld parameters................................................................................. 5
2.2 Overview of weld imperfections............................................................................ 6
2.2.1 Embedded weld discontinuity........................................................................ 7
2.2.2 Geometrical imperfections............................................................................. 7
2.2.3 Surface weld discontinuity............................................................................. 7
2.3 Stress concentration ............................................................................................... 9
2.3.1 Stress concentration factor - K
t
.................................................................... 10
2.3.2 Effect of weld geometric profile on stress concentration............................. 10
2.3.3 Improvement techniques .............................................................................. 11
2.4 Extreme Value Theory......................................................................................... 13
2.4.1 Order statistics.............................................................................................. 13
2.4.2 Distribution of smallest values..................................................................... 14
2.4.3 Distribution of largest values ....................................................................... 15
3 DATA COMPILATION.............................................................................................. 16
3.1 Cruciform weld geometry .................................................................................... 16
3.2 Weld profile evaluation methods ......................................................................... 17
3.3 Labeling the specimens ........................................................................................ 18
3.4 Data acquisition.................................................................................................... 19
3.5 Measurement of geometric parameters ................................................................ 20
3.5.1 Evaluation of weld toe radius....................................................................... 22
3.5.2 Evaluation of weld toe angle........................................................................ 22
3.5.3 Evaluation of other parameters .................................................................... 23
3.6 Non destructive testing......................................................................................... 23


iv
4 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF DATA ..................................................................... 25
4.1 Extreme value probability plot............................................................................. 25
4.2 Determination of minimum weld toe radius ........................................................ 26
4.3 Determination of minimum weld toe angle ......................................................... 27
4.4 Grouping the data................................................................................................. 27
5 FRACTURE MECHANICS APPROACH.................................................................. 28
5.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................... 28
5.2 Linear-elastic fracture mechanics (LEFM) .......................................................... 29
5.3 Stress intensity factor calculation......................................................................... 31
5.4 Stress concentration magnification factor, M
k
..................................................... 31
5.5 Calculation of fatigue life..................................................................................... 32
5.6 Fatigue strength.................................................................................................... 33
5.7 Analysis................................................................................................................ 34
6 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION.................................................................................. 35
6.1 Geometric variations ............................................................................................ 35
6.2 Grouping of weld specimens................................................................................ 36
6.3 Influence of weld profile variation on stress concentration................................. 38
6.4 Influence of weld profile variation on fatigue strength........................................ 39
6.5 Comparison with Structured Light Measurement ................................................ 40
7 CONCLUSION............................................................................................................ 43
REFERENCES..................................................................................................................... 44
APPENDICES




















v
List of Figures

Figure 1.1: Toe and root side cracks of a fillet weld [4] ........................................................ 1
Figure 1.2: Fatigue strengths of plain, notched and plate with fillet welded attachment. [6] 2
Figure 1.3: Fatigue Design S-N curves for welded joints in steel [7].................................... 3
Figure 2.1: Cross-sectional view of a groove and fillet weld [9]........................................... 5
Figure 2.2: Common weld imperfections [14]....................................................................... 8
Figure 2.3: Influence of weld toe angle on SCF at the weld toe [2] .................................... 11
Figure 2.4: A stainless steel welded joint after hammer peened.......................................... 12
Figure 2.5: S-N curves of steel fillet welds treated by improvement techniques [18]......... 12
Figure 3.1: A model of the cruciform weld showing the specimen pieces order................. 17
Figure 3.2: Order of the welds in both sets .......................................................................... 18
Figure 3.3: Diagrammatic view of the surfaces selected ..................................................... 19
Figure 3.4: Sequence of welds on selected surfaces as in the micrographs (Set 1) ............. 20
Figure 3.5: Sequence of welds on selected surfaces as in the micrographs (Set 2) ............. 20
Figure 3.6: An example of a measured weld specimen ....................................................... 21
Figure 3.7: Measurement of weld toe radius [24] ................................................................ 22
Figure 3.8: Measurement of weld toe angle......................................................................... 23
Figure 3.9: Schematic representation of non destructive measurement............................... 24
Figure 5.1: Basic modes of crack surface displacement [30]............................................... 29
Figure 5.2: Basic joint geometry and a typical mesh used in finite element analysis [8].... 31
Figure 6.1: Extreme value distribution for weld toe angle (a side) ..................................... 35
Figure 6.2: Extreme value distribution for weld toe radius (a side) .................................... 36
Figure 6.3: Extreme value distribution of weld toe angle for different groups (a side) ...... 37
Figure 6.4: Extreme value distribution of weld toe radius for different groups (a side) ..... 38
Figure 6.5: Weld profile variation with respect to stress concentration factor (a side) ....... 39
Figure 6.6: Weld profile variation with respect to fatigue strength (a side) ........................ 40
Figure 6.7: Comparison of measurements for weld toe angle (a side) ................................ 41
Figure 6.8: Comparison of measurements for weld toe radius (a side) ............................... 42

List of Tables
Table 3.1: Specimen sets with their steel grades.................................................................. 18
Table 5.1: Parameters for a/T =1.0 [8]................................................................................. 34


vi
List of Abbreviations and Symbols


FAT Fatigue class
HAZ Heat affected zone
IIW International Institute of Welding
LEFM Linear-elastic fracture mechanics
NDT Non destructive testing
SCF Stress concentration factor
SLM Structured light measurement


a Throat thickness
x Crack depth
C Fatigue capacity
K Stress intensity factor
K
t
Stress concentration factor
M
k
Stress concentration magnification factor
N Fatigue life
T Thickness of the plate
Weld toe angle
Flank angle (180 - )

no
Nominal stress range
Weld toe radius

no
Nominal stress





1
1 INTRODUCTION


Normally all heavy machinery, ships, bridges, buildings and railroads, consists of extensive
frameworks and intricate angles in the structure. They may be joined by many kilometers of
welded joints. The welded joints are an integral part of these load-carrying structures and at
the same time also the weakest points. The strength or the integrity of a structure thus
depends on these welded joints. A study which would relate the weld profile to the strength
of the structure will consequently help in predicting the life of the structure.

The structures subjected to variable or repeated cyclic loads may fail in service, where as
they may withstand static loading. This type of damage, which consists of the formation of
crack or cracks under the action of varying loads, is known as fatigue. [2] Fatigue damage
generally occurs at stress-concentrated regions where the localized stress exceeds the yield
stress of the material. [3] Sharp changes in direction, which occur generally at the toes of
butt welds and at the toes or roots of fillet welds, causes local stress concentration. These
points will therefore react to be in a highly stressed state and will cause cracks to grow at a
faster rate. The toe and root side cracks of a fillet weld are shown in Figure 1.1. [4]



Figure 1.1: Toe and root side cracks of a fillet weld [4]

It is usually found that design stresses in repeatedly loaded structures are limited by the
fatigue strength of the welded details; hence the presence of a weld in a member can


2
drastically reduce its fatigue strength. [5] This comparison of un-notched, notched and
welded specimen can be seen in Figure 1.2.


Figure 1.2: Fatigue strengths of plain, notched and plate with fillet welded attachment. [6]

Common welded details have been assigned fatigue categories or classes and corresponding
S-N curves according to fatigue recommendations by International Institute of Welding
(IIW). These curves are derived from large amounts of experimental data and have been
verified with analytical studies. They include effects of weld imperfections, local stress
concentration due to the weld geometry, stress direction, residual stresses, etc. Each fatigue
strength curve (fatigue class or FAT class) is identified by the characteristic fatigue strength
of the detail at two million cycles. [7] The fatigue life (N) of a detail mainly affected by the
stress range () is usually expressed as, N = C /
m
; where, m is a constant, which for
most welded details is equal to 3 and C is the fatigue capacity.

The wide variation in the fatigue strengths of welded joints, illustrated in Figure 1.3
recommended by IIW, arises as a result of variations in the severity of stress concentrations
for different weld types and loading directions. [5] Though fillet welds are considered as
poorer fatigue strength detail, they are widely used and preferred as they are economical,
simple to prepare from the standpoint of edge preparation and fit-up. [1]



3

Figure 1.3: Fatigue Design S-N curves for welded joints in steel [7]

Considering a fillet weld as shown in Figure 1.1, the weld root constitutes severe stress
concentration since the lack of weld penetration is equivalent to a crack. The weld toe can
be even more severe as the abrupt change in section at the weld toe introduces a stress
concentration. In steels, the fillet weld has much lower fatigue strength because fatigue
cracks propagate from pre-existing crack-like defects and the majority of the fatigue life of
the weld is spent propagating a crack. In contrast, a significant part of the life of a plate
with a hole in it is spent initiating the crack. [5]

The existence of crack-like defects is considered to eliminate the crack initiation stage of
fatigue life. Clearly the absence of a significant crack initiation period in the fatigue life of
welded joints is disadvantageous and considerable improvement in fatigue life would result
if measures could be taken to reintroduce a crack initiation period by removing the crack-
like defects. Therefore, emphasis of fatigue assessment must be focused on the crack
growth stage of fatigue life within the framework of Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics
(LEFM). [5] [8]

The design of any structure is very important to be good as it influences the life of the
structure. The fatigue behavior of welded joints with consideration of geometrical factors
that produce locally high stresses is thus essential to be determined.


4
1.1 Objectives and approach


The general objective of this study was to conduct a statistical analysis on the variation of
the weld profiles and their influence on the fatigue strength of the joint and therefore to link
weld quality to its fatigue strength. The effect of local geometrical variations of non-load
carrying cruciform fillet welded joint under tensile loading was studied. The cruciform
fillet welded joints in the as-welded condition and under cyclic tensile loading, the crack
initiation period was considered non-existent and Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics was
used to calculate fatigue strength for a range of weld geometries. With extreme value
statistical analysis and LEFM, an attempt was made to relate the variation of the cruciform
weld profiles such as weld angle and weld toe radius to respective FAT classes. A second
objective was to compare destructive and non-destructive weld geometry measurement
methods.


1.2 Thesis Outline


The purpose of this paper was to statistically analyze the variation of non-load carrying
cruciform fillet weld profile and its impact on the fatigue strength of the joint. In the
beginning, a brief introduction to fatigue of welded structures and need for assessment of
fatigue behavior is discussed. A brief background of the weld defects, cruciform joint and
extreme value statistics are covered in the next section. It is followed by a description of the
measurements and generally the work involved in collection of the data.

The next task to compute statistical distributions describing the variability in non-load
carrying cruciform fillet welded joint details is also explained. The method involved in
linking the obtained statistical analysis to the fatigue strength of the welded joint, i.e.,
LEFM is discussed later. The results of the analysis and then discussed. Here, the fatigue
strength or the FAT class of the given structure is predicted. Finally, the results thus studied
are discussed and concluded in the final part of the paper.


5
2 TECHNICAL BACKGROUND


There are many factors that affect the fatigue strength and life of a welded structure. Weld
imperfections or flaws, weld profile, loading and the application of the structure together
play a role in determining the fatigue life of the structure. The basic step is to understand
the parts of a simple weld.

2.1 Geometrical weld parameters


The main parts of a groove or butt weld and fillet weld are shown in Figure 2.1. These parts
are briefly explained below.


Figure 2.1: Cross-sectional view of a groove and fillet weld [9]

The toe is the junction between the face of the weld and the parent metal. The root of a
weld includes the points at which the back of the weld intersects the base metal surfaces.
When we look at a triangular cross section of a fillet weld, as shown in view B of Figure
2.1, the leg is the portion of the weld from the toe to the root. The throat thickness a is the
minimum distance from the root to a point on the face of the weld. Theoretically, the face
forms a straight line between the toes. [9]


6
The heat affected zone (HAZ) is a part of the parent metal which has not been melted with
the filler metal, but which undergoes fast heating and cooling during the passage of the
welding arc. In this zone, the parent metal is subject to a hardening treatment and can
consequently become brittle. [10]
Fatigue strength is mainly controlled by weld imperfections and geometrical weld
parameters. The main parameters considered in weld designing for fatigue are basically the
weld angle , weld toe radius and throat thickness a.


2.2 Overview of weld imperfections


Many structures, when subjected to repeated cyclic loading will weaken and eventually
initiates cracking. If repeated loading continues, the cracks will grow through the member
thickness and increase in length. The development of these cracks through this process is
termed fatigue crack initiation and growth. Fatigue damage in large structures normally
accumulates most rapidly at joints or discontinuities, where stresses are raised above those
in the surrounding structure by local effects. [11]

Understanding weld imperfections will help in identifying them and, more important,
prevent them from occurring. A preventive tool within the quality system is more efficient
than sorting bad welds from good welds. [12]

Welded structures or joints might be considered to have many kinds of defects and
imperfections. A discontinuity could be the result of a defect, but not necessarily a defect.
A defect, on the other hand, is a discontinuity that by nature or accumulated effect. Total
crack length is a defect. The three main types of imperfections could be embedded weld
discontinuity, geometrical imperfections and surface weld discontinuity. [11]




7
2.2.1 Embedded weld discontinuity


Embedded weld discontinuity are mostly non-planar imperfection. They could be in the
form of cavities, solid inclusions or porosity. Porosity in welds is a void formed by gas
which is entrapped during solidification process, and the size of these cavities may vary
widely. [2] Various studies have been conducted to determine the severity or the effect of
porosity on the welded joint or structure. The results of these studies as shown by Gurney,
indicates clearly that the fatigue strength decreases rapidly as the percentage of porosity or
cavities increases. Slag or metallic inclusions also have the same effect, and also the most
common form of defect to be encountered. Considerable attention has been put in this
aspect to reduce the amount of slag inclusions during welding and cleaning. [2]

2.2.2 Geometrical imperfections


Geometrical imperfections include axial misalignment, angular misalignment angular
distortion and imperfect weld profile. Misalignments do not change the fatigue strength of
the weld but increases the geometric stress on the weld. The stress concentration regions at
the weld toe are enhanced, therefore decreasing the fatigue strength of the structure. These
types of imperfections can be measured relatively easily. [11] [13]

2.2.3 Surface weld discontinuity


Surface weld discontinuity mainly represent cracks, lack of fusion or penetration, undercut
and overlap. These are mainly categorized as planar imperfections.

Lack of fusion between the weld metal and parent base metal or adjoining weld beads can
occur at any location within the weld joint and be present in fillet welds or groove welds.


8
Incomplete fusion may result when the temperature of the base material is not elevated to
its melting point during the welding process. [12] This is shown in Figure 2.2.


Figure 2.2: Common weld imperfections [14]


Lack of penetration is a discontinuity in which the weld metal does not extend through the
joint thickness. In other words, it is the failure of the filler metal to fill the root of the weld
completely. Some common causes of incomplete joint penetration are a bad groove weld
design or a fit-up that is unsuitable for the welding conditions. [12]

Undercut is defined as a groove melted into the base metal adjacent the weld toe, or weld
root, and left unfilled by weld metal. The first is the melting away of the base material at
the side wall of a groove weld at the edge of a bead, which produces a sharp recess in the
area where the next bead is to be deposited. The second condition is reduction in thickness
of the base material at the toe of the weld (Figure 2.2). This condition can occur on a fillet
weld or a butt joint. Excessive undercut can seriously affect the performance of a weld,
particularly if it is subjected to fatigue loading in service. [12]

Cold-lap or overlap as shown in Figure 2.2 is a protrusion of weld metal beyond the weld
toe, or weld root. This condition occurs in fillet welds and butt joints and produces notches
at the toe of the weld that are undesirable because of their resultant stress concentration
under load. [12]



9
Insufficient throat thickness usually occurs in fillet weld and butt joint profiles due to
excessive concavity, which considerably reduces weld strength. On the other hand,
excessive convexity can also produce a notch effect in the welded area and, consequently,
concentration of stress under load. [12]

Cracks in welded joint are probably the most dreaded of all the weld discontinuities. The
crack sensitivity of a base material may be associated with its chemistry and its
susceptibility to the formation of elements that reduce its ductility. The welding operation
can produce stresses in and around the weld, introducing extreme localized heating,
expansion, and contraction. Cracking often is caused by stress concentration near
discontinuities in welds and base metal and near the notches of the welded joint. [12]


2.3 Stress concentration


Fatigue is a complex problem primarily related to structural geometry, with secondary links
to material properties. The influence of notches and other discontinuities on the fatigue
strength of a component can be at least partially explained by the effect of such
discontinuities on the stress distribution. [2]

When a smooth uniform flat plate is subjected to axial tension, the stress distribution on the
cross-section will be uniform. But if you consider the same loading with a hole drilled at
the centre of the plate, we observe non-uniformity and a stress peak at the edge of the hole.
Such stress peaks produced by any abrupt changes in shape or discontinuity are known as
stress concentrations. [2] In welded structures, we see these stress concentrations
originating at weld toes and weld roots.






10
2.3.1 Stress concentration factor - K
t



If the discontinuities in the component have well-defined geometries, it is usually possible
to determine a stress concentration factor (SCF), K
t
, for these geometries. Then the local
maximum stress can be accounted using the well known relation between the local peak
stress to the average stress as shown in equation (1). [2] [15]


max
= K
t

no
(1)

However in the case of a sharp crack in which the radius of the crack tip approaches zero,
the stress concentration being severe, the use of fracture mechanics becomes necessary to
analyze structural performance. [15] Weld toe radius and angle are a few parameters
defining SCF at the weld toe which is our main concern in this thesis work.


2.3.2 Effect of weld geometric profile on stress concentration


Welds are associated with having pre-existing discontinuities that act as initiation sites for
fatigue. These weld discontinuities include slag intrusions, undercut, and lack of
penetration (among others). With these fatigue crack initiation sites already present in the
structure, crack growth can begin almost immediately. [16]

Extensive research [2] has been made to determine the effect of various weld geometry
parameters on fatigue life of welded joints. Analytical models have been developed to
predict fatigue strength of welded joints influenced by the variation of weld geometry
parameters. Researchers have concluded that the SCF is strongly influenced by weld profile
geometry factors such as weld toe radius and flank angle. [17]



11
Gurney [2] has showed the variation of SCF for different weld angles of cruciform joints,
for both load-carrying welds and non-load carrying welds (Figure 2.3). We can observe that
when the flank angle increases and the toe become sharper, it in turn increases the SCF at
the weld toe. This finally results in decrease of fatigue strength and life of the joint.



Figure 2.3: Influence of weld toe angle on SCF at the weld toe [2]


2.3.3 Improvement techniques


Fatigue is often noted to start at the weld toe due to the presence of the slag intrusions as
well as the geometry of the weld toe (angle, radius and undercut), both of which act as
stress concentrators. Grinding, hammer peening, or dressing of the weld toe can reduce the
incidence of discontinuities. [16] [5]

Figure 2.4 shows a stainless steel lap joint which is hammered to create a smooth radius so
as to eliminate the stress concentrators and increase the crack initiation life.



12

Figure 2.4: A stainless steel welded joint after hammer peened


Higher fatigue lives can be obtained from performing post-weld improvement techniques.
These techniques help to remove weld toe imperfections and reduce the stress concentration
by improving the weld profile. [18][19] A comparison of S-N curves obtained for
transverse non-load carrying cruciform fillet welded joint treated by different improvement
techniques and for as-welded is illustrated in Figure 2.5.



Figure 2.5: S-N curves of steel fillet welds treated by improvement techniques [18]





13
2.4 Extreme Value Theory



The branch of statistics dealing with the extreme deviations from the median of probability
distributions is called Extreme value theory. [20] Applications of extreme value theory
include predicting the probability distribution of extreme floods, day to day market risks,
fracture or fatigue of materials, aeronautics, corrosion of metals, etc.

Extreme value distributions are the confined or limiting distributions for the minimum or
the maximum of a very large collection of random observations from the same arbitrary
distribution. Gumbel has shown that for any well-behaved initial distribution (i.e., F(x) is
continuous and has an inverse), only a few models are needed, depending on whether you
are interested in the maximum or the minimum, and also if the observations are bounded
above or below. [20]

Extreme value distributions can be better understood with a paradigm. For example, if a
system consists of n identical components in series, and the system fails when the first of
these components fails, then system failure times are the minimum of n random component
failure times. [21] In general, its applicability can be justified whenever the phenomenon
causing failure depends on the smallest or the largest value of variable, the underlying
distribution of which is of the exponential type. [22]


2.4.1 Order statistics


Let X
1
, X
2
X
n
be a random sample from a probability density function, and if these n
observations are arranged in ascending order so that X
(1)
X
(2)
X
(n)
, where X
(1)
is the
smallest observation and X
(n)
the largest. Clearly X
(1)
can be any one of the n X
i
s. Then X
(1)

is called the first order statistic, whereas X
(n)
is called the nth order statistic.



14
Consider a chain consisting of n small links. It is obvious that the strength of chain cannot
be greater than the strength of the weakest link. Therefore, the chain breaks when its
weakest link breaks. Suppose that the life- length distribution of each link, f
X
(x;), is an
exponential distribution. Then the life distribution of the chain ( ) x F
X
1
will be given by the
distribution of the smallest order statistic. [22] Thus,
( ) ( ) [ ]
nx n
X X
e x F x F

= = 1 1 1
1
(2)
It can also be shown that the life-length distribution of the strongest link, X
(n)
, is given by,
( ) ( ) [ ] ( )
n
x n
X X
e x F x F
n

= = 1 (3)


2.4.2 Distribution of smallest values


Using the exact distribution of the first order statistic shown in equation (2) and applying to
a case of an exponential distribution, the limiting distribution of the first order statistic X
(1)

is obtained. It is thus stated by Gumbel that there are three possible types of distributions
for the smallest order statistics. [22] The cumulative distribution functions are:

Type I 0 ; exp exp 1 ) (
) 1 (
> < <
(

\
|
=

x
x
x F
X
(4)
Type II 0 , ; exp 1 ) (
) 1 (
> <
(
(

\
|
=

x
x
x F
X
(5)
Type III 0 , ; exp 1 ) (
) 1 (
> <
(
(

\
|
=

x
x
x F
X
(6)





15
2.4.3 Distribution of largest values


Using the exact distribution of the largest order statistic shown in equation (3) and applying
to a case of an exponential distribution, the limiting distribution of the largest or nth order
statistic X
(n)
is obtained. Three possible types of distributions for the largest order statistics
are stated by Gumbel. [22] The cumulative distribution functions are:

Type I 0 ; exp exp ) (
) (
> < <
)
`

\
|
=

x
x
x F
n
X
(7)
Type II 0 , ; exp ) (
) (
>
(
(

\
|
=

x
x
x F
n
X
(8)
Type III 0 , ; exp ) (
) (
>
(
(

\
|
=

x
x
x F
n
X
(9)

















16
3 DATA COMPILATION


As mentioned, the fatigue strength of a welded structure is mainly controlled by the
imperfections in weld and also the geometrical weld parameters. The measurement of the
various weld parameters such as the weld angle , weld toe radius and throat thickness
a are thus essential while designing for fatigue. [13]

Therefore, by knowing the dimensions of the weld profile, it is possible to estimate both
remaining life of the component and extent of degradation using the fracture mechanics
concepts. The variation of these parameters can be studied then be related to the fatigue
strength of the joint. The welded connection considered for this work was cruciform welded
joint.


3.1 Cruciform weld geometry


The cruciform joint specimens were fabricated from mostly S355 and S650 steel plates of 6
mm thickness and connected by metal active gas welding (MAG) process. Each specimen
was cut to four smaller pieces beside the fatigue specimen. The order in which they were
cut and the welding direction is shown in the model of cruciform joint shown in Figure 3.1.
Two points must be noted here;

The specimen pieces on the left of the fatigue specimen were labeled L1 and L2 in
the direction of the welding.
The specimen pieces on the right of the fatigue specimen were labeled R1 and R2
against the direction of the welding.


17

Figure 3.1: A model of the cruciform weld showing the specimen pieces order


3.2 Weld profile evaluation methods


Many cruciform welded joints were produced in the Welding Laboratory of Lappeenranta
University of Technology for the purpose of fatigue testing and as well as a part of this
thesis work. Measurements were done manually using micrographs. The specimens were
numbered and then longitudinally cut to smaller pieces through weldment. The surfaces of
these specimen pieces were then polished and etched to measure the required dimensions.

The stages involved in measurement and data acquisition are thus briefly explained in this
section. Later the final results were compared with the data obtained by Non destructive
testing (NDT) using computer-based image processing software. This method is also briefly
described later in this section.



18
3.3 Labeling the specimens


The specimens were divided into two sets, according to chronological sequence of welded
sides. The sequences of labeling of welded sides, i.e., a, b, c and d, of both sets are shown
clearly in Figure 3.2. The specimens were labeled as X01, X02 and so on. Table 3.1
shows each specimen with their steel grades.


Figure 3.2: Order of the welds in both sets

Table 3.1: Specimen sets with their steel grades
First Set Second Set
Specimens Steel Grade Specimens Steel Grade
X01X30 S355 X31X34 S355
X39 S355 X35X37 S650
X40 S355 X41X47 S650
X59 S650 X51X53, X55, X56 S650
X66X70 S650 X60X65 S650
X71X77 S650
Note: Specimen numbers X38, X48, X49, X50, X54, X57and X58 were not used


Here again, two points must be noted;

The specimens were labeled as X01, X02 and so on.
The specimen pieces were labeled as, for example, X01L1 and X01L2 for the pieces
on left side of fatigue specimen and X01R1 and X01R2 for the pieces on right side
of the fatigue specimen.



19
3.4 Data acquisition


The weld parameters can be measured from the cut specimen pieces only after the surfaces
were ground, polished and etched. Selection of surfaces for measurement is important as
the variation of weld profiles should be considered. Hence, the nearest and the farthest
surfaces to the fatigue specimen were selected so as to obtain reasonable values. The
surfaces selected are shown in Figure 3.3. These surfaces were ground, polished and then
etched so that the extent of the heat affected zone (HAZ), the weld material and the base
metal could be seen.


Figure 3.3: Diagrammatic view of the surfaces selected


The sequence of welds on the surfaces of the specimen pieces of both the sets as in the
micrographs are shown in Figure 3.4 and 3.5. The micrographs of all the specimens are
shown with measurements in Appendix II.



20

Figure 3.4: Sequence of welds on selected surfaces as in the micrographs (Set 1)


Figure 3.5: Sequence of welds on selected surfaces as in the micrographs (Set 2)


3.5 Measurement of geometric parameters


Measurement of the weld profile was the next step before making a statistical analysis. The
important weld parameters such as the weld angle , weld toe radius , cold laps and
undercuts were measured on every weld side a, b, c and d. The throat thickness a and
weld penetration were also measured only for the a weld side. The measurements were
done from micrographs manually using the program AutoCAD 2002. [23] One of the
measured weld specimen used in this thesis is shown in Figure 3.6.



21

Figure 3.6: An example of a measured weld specimen
2
1



22

3.5.1 Evaluation of weld toe radius


The weld toe radius has influence of the stress concentration and therefore it is
important to measure it. It is not an easy task to fit a circle at the weld toe. In some of the
cases, it was hard to decide the radius to be measured wherein a circle with a local radius
and a circle with a much bigger radius could be fitted. These extreme cases illustrate the
difficulties with measuring the weld toe radius.

The methods used for measuring the weld toe radius were;
Method of tangent at a distance d from the intersection of weld bead and base metal
(Figure 3.7 (a)). [24]
Choosing the smallest circle that best fits the weld toe (Figure 3.7 (b)). [24]


Figure 3.7: Measurement of weld toe radius [24]


3.5.2 Evaluation of weld toe angle


The measured weld toe angle in all the weld specimens on every weld side showed less
variation, unlike weld toe radius measurement. The definition used for the weld toe angle
corresponds to the angle between the base metal and the tangent line drawn on the weld
bead is 1 mm above the base metal. This is shown in Figure 3.8.



23

Figure 3.8: Measurement of weld toe angle


3.5.3 Evaluation of other parameters


Cold lap: The length of protrusion of weld metal beyond the weld toe, if any, was measured
perpendicular to the base metal.

Undercut: The depth of the groove melted into the base metal adjacent to the weld toe was
measured parallel to the base metal.

Throat thickness: If the weld is convex or concave, the shortest distance between the line
connecting the weld toes and the intersection of the flange to the base metal was measured
to be the throat thickness of the weld. [1] If the weld bead is uneven, then a tangent which
is nearer to the intersection was chosen for measurement. For calculation purposes, this
measurement is taken approximately as 5 mm.


3.6 Non destructive testing


Any form of testing or inspection that can verify the structural integrity of a structure or
component without affecting its ability to perform in service is termed as Non destructive
testing (NDT). Non destructive tests require sophisticated equipments and interpretation of
results by skilled, well trained personnel.



24
Visual tests by human eye might be slower and prone to errors; therefore they are being
replaced by automated visual testing using optical instruments. These methods are usually
referred to as machine vision, where it acquires data and analyses images to reach
conclusion automatically. A typical machine vision system consists of a light source, a
video camera, digitizer, a computer and an image display. Usually, the test object is
illuminated and the image is captured using a video camera for processing by computer.
[25] The method used in determining the weld profile is shown in Figure 3.9.


Figure 3.9: Schematic representation of non destructive measurement


The computer first enhances the contrast of the image and later, the image is segmented for
feature extraction and then it records a huge amount of data. The extracted 3-dimentional
weld profile from the data is then used for further analysis such as measurement of weld toe
profile, throat thickness, weld leg length, etc. The non destructive measurement used for
the analysis will be hereby known as Structured Light Measurement (SLM). [13]

This method gives more accurate final values than manually measuring with micrographs.
The various geometrical weld parameters were measured using SLM, but only in the
fatigue specimen and not on the specimen pieces. An attempt is made to compare the
fatigue strength of the cruciform welded joint obtained from measuring with the help of
micrographs and from SLM.



25
4 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF DATA


The collected data of the geometric weld parameters as explained above for both sets were
then tabulated and the detail list is shown in Appendix I. The cruciform welded joint under
cyclic tensile loading was considered to have non-load carrying welds. The data was used
for a statistical analysis of the local geometrical variations. Later LEFM was used to
calculate fatigue strength or FAT classes for the range of weld geometries. The task
involved in analyzing the data is briefly described in this section.

Extreme value probability plot was first used to analyze the values of the geometric weld
parameters of each weld side. These parameters were the measured weld toe radius and
weld toe angle . Since the minimum values of these parameters are considered to
increase the stresses and affect the fatigue strength, the concept of extreme value of
smallest values was therefore used. Later a plot of weld toe radius versus weld toe angle
was used to make probable groups of classes of welds.

Work carried out by Murakami [26] to study the effects of small defects and nonmetallic
inclusions and guidelines by TWI [27] show extensive usage of extreme value theory which
helped in understanding the concept.


4.1 Extreme value probability plot


As the number of values were not too large, the cumulative function, F(x), used in the
extreme value approach was determined by,

F(x) = (j-0.3) / (n+0.4) (10)

where, j is the number of weld specimens arranged in ascending order


26
n is the total number of weld specimens

The extreme value distribution of Type I for the smallest values, as explained in Section
2.4.2 in this report, was used for the analysis. The equation is given by,

0 ; exp exp 1 ) (
) 1 (
> < <
(

\
|
=

x
x
x F
X
(11)

The reduced variates, y
i
, were then calculated from the above equations. Taking natural
logarithms twice for equation (11), we are able to derive,


(

\
|
+

=
4 . 0
3 . 0
ln ln
n
j
y
i
(12)

Extreme value probability plot was thus obtained by plotting equation (12) against weld toe
radius and weld toe angle.


4.2 Determination of minimum weld toe radius


The method described by Gumbel gives us an estimation of minimum weld toe radius. The
minimum weld toe radii obtained from the data of all weld sides of the specimen pieces
were ordered, and then plotted on an extreme value probability plot. The right hand axis
indicates the extreme value probability in percentage and the left hand axis will represents
the extreme value probability obtained from equation (12). A line can be fitted through the
data points and so that it is helpful to estimate the probability of minimum weld toe radius.
In other words, this line would indicate the minimum weld toe radius at any chosen
probability level.




27
4.3 Determination of minimum weld toe angle


Similar to the minimum weld toe radius, the minimum weld toe angles were also plotted.
Here again, the minimum weld toe angles obtained from the data of all weld sides of the
specimen pieces were ordered, and then plotted on an extreme value probability plot. The
right hand axis indicates the extreme value probability in percentage and the left hand axis
will represents the extreme value probability obtained from equation (12). The fitted line
would indicate the minimum weld toe radius at any chosen probability level.


4.4 Grouping the data


Fitting a line in the extreme value probability plots may however be difficult in this case as
the specimens had been welded under various different parameters. Hence, grouping them
as different weld qualities such as A, B, C and D; and then an appropriate value from each
group can be further estimated from the probability plot. This grouping was done in this
thesis work firstly by plotting minimum weld toe radius versus minimum weld toe angle.
Using fracture mechanics, as explained in detail in following Section, M
k
factors or stress
concentration magnification factors were calculated and helped in grouping the data points.












28
5 FRACTURE MECHANICS APPROACH


5.1 Introduction


Fracture mechanics may be defined as the application of the techniques and analyses of
applied mechanics to the problem of the extension of an existing crack or crack-like defect.
Fracture mechanics may be used for fatigue analyses as supplement to S-N data. The
purpose of such analysis is to document, by means of calculations, that fatigue cracks,
which might occur during service life, will not exceed the crack size corresponding to
unstable fracture. [2] [28]

Since fracture always consists of the progressive growth of a crack, it is only the material
which is instantaneously adjacent to the crack tip which is actually breaking at any
particular moment. Thus fracture mechanics is concerned mainly with the situation existing
at the crack tip, and it is assumed that the discrete volume of material there will break when
some critical condition is reached. The size of any plastic zone at the crack tip will tend to
be small compared with the crack length, and it is possible to calculate the conditions
around the crack by linear elastic stress analysis. [2]

According to fracture mechanics, defects present in materials lead to failure by growing to
a critical, self propagating size. The fracture mechanics concepts allow one to calculate the
critical sizes of defects as a function of their depth, length, active stress system and stress
intensity and such properties of the material as its elastic modules, yield strength and
fracture toughness. Therefore, by knowing the dimensions of defects present in a
component, it is possible to estimate both remaining life of the component and extent of
degradation using the fracture mechanics concepts. [25]



29
5.2 Linear-elastic fracture mechanics (LEFM)


The important region from the point of view of crack propagation is the crack tip. In the
analysis of stresses near the tip of a sharp crack, where a stress singularity is presumed to
exist, the concept of using elastic stress concentration factors breaks down. LEFM manages
to overcome this problem by analyzing the stress field surrounding the crack tip, rather than
the infinite stress in this region. [29]

A cracked body may be loaded in any one or a combination of the three displacement
modes shown in Figure 5.1. Mode I is called the opening mode and consists of the crack
faces simply moving apart due to tension. Mode II is called the sliding mode where the
crack faces slide relative to one another in a direction normal to the leading edge of the
crack due to shear and Mode III is called the tearing mode which involves relative sliding
of the crack faces in a direction parallel to the leading edge due to shear. Mode I is the
predominant stress situation in most practical cases. [30] [29]


Figure 5.1: Basic modes of crack surface displacement [30]


If the load applied to a member containing a crack is too high, the crack may suddenly
grow and cause the member to fail by fracturing in a brittle manner, i.e., with little plastic
deformation. From the theory of fracture mechanics, a quantity called stress intensity
factor, K, can be defined that characterizes the severity of the crack situation as affected by
crack size, stress, and geometry. Here, the material is assumed to behave in a linear-elastic
manner, according to Hookes Law, so that the approach being used is called linear-elastic
fracture mechanics (LEFM). [30]


30

The stress intensity factor is used to describe the elastic stress field in a cracked structure.
For case of mode I loading, it is typically expressed in the form, [29]

x Y K
no I
= (13)

In the above equation,
no
represents nominal stress, x is the crack depth and Y accounts for
the effects of crack shape and geometry. In welded joints, fatigue failures initiate at the
weld toe on the plate surface. The crack then propagates for the major part of the life as
semi-elliptical cracks. In more detail, equation (13) can be written as, [29] [2]

x
M M M
K
no
t s k
=

0
(14)

The factor M
k
allows for the fact that the crack is situated at a position of stress
concentration factor K
t
. The factor M
s
is a correction to allow for the fact that the mouth of
the crack is situated at a free surface. The factor M
t
is a correction for plate thickness, to
allow for the fact that there is a free surface ahead of the crack and
0
is a correction term
given by the complete elliptic integral of the second kind and depends on the crack front
shape. [2] [31]

In the analysis of fatigue crack growth, where stresses are cyclic in nature, it becomes
necessary to define a stress intensity factor range which is a difference between maximum
and minimum stress intensity factors in the cycle. [29] It is given by,

min max
K K K = (15)

Equation (13) then takes the form,

x Y K
no
= (16)



31
5.3 Stress intensity factor calculation


Numerous 2-D non-load carrying fillet welded cruciform joints were modeled and finite
element analyses (FEA) were performed by Nyknen et al. [8] in order to study the effect
of local geometrical variables parametrically. The investigated finite element model is
shown in Figure 5.2.


Figure 5.2: Basic joint geometry and a typical mesh used in finite element analysis [8]

When appropriate, weld toe radius, weld flank angle and weld size were altered and tensile
cyclic loading was applied at the end of the main plate. The opening mode and sliding
mode stress intensity factors K
I
and K
II
were calculated. The equivalent opening mode
stress intensity factor, which is used in crack growth predictions, was also calculated. [8]


5.4 Stress concentration magnification factor, M
k



The stress concentration magnification factor, M
k
, is defined as the ratio of the stress
intensity factor of a cracked plate with a stress concentration to the stress intensity factor
with the same cracked plate without the stress concentration. [8] [31] From equation (14),
the range of the stress intensity factor for an elliptical crack at the toe of a fillet welded
joint, K, can be written as,


32
x
Y M
K
no
u k

=
0
(17)

where,
no
is the nominal tensile stress range in the main plate.
Y
u
= M
s
M
t


The M
k
- factors were based on continuous edge cracks, hence, the crack depth: width ratio
is zero, i.e., x/2c = 0 and
0
= 1. The correction term Y
u
for a double-edge crack in a plate
under tensile loading applied is given as, [8]

95 . 0
2
0 ,
2
42 . 3
2
12 . 2
2
36 . 0 98 . 1
3 2
< <
|

\
|
+
|

\
|

\
|
+ =
T
x
T
x
T
x
T
x
Y
u
(18)


5.5 Calculation of fatigue life


In order to predict fatigue crack propagation, the Paris-Erdogan relationship is commonly
accepted and used in practice for a wide range of mode I cracks. This relationship is also
recommended by the International Institute of Welding (IIW) [7] for calculating the fatigue
crack propagation rate of welded joints is given as, [8]

m
K C
dN
dx
= (19)

where dx/dN is the crack growth rate per cycle (mm/cycle)
C and m are material constants, and
K is the range of the stress intensity factor (Nmm
-3/2
)

If the crack length is normalized by the plate thickness, 2x/T, equation (17) and equation
(19) can be combined and integrated to give the expected number of cycles to failure. [8]


33


|

\
|
|
|

\
|
|

\
|
= |

\
|
=

T
x
T
x
m
u k
m
T
x
T
x
f f
T
x
d
T
T
x T
Y M
C T
x
d
T
K
C
N
2
2
2
2
1 1
2
2
2
2
1 2
2
1


By separating the constants from the integration

1 ) 2 / (

=
m m
T C
I
N

, where

\
|
|
|

\
|
|

\
|
=

T
x
T
x
m
u k
f
T
x
d
T
x
Y M I
2
2
1
2 2
(20)

The value of crack growth integral, I, in the equation (20) depends on the initial and final
crack lengths, x
i
and x
f
. [8]


5.6 Fatigue strength


The fatigue strength of a welded joint is normally characterized by its fatigue class, FAT,
which identifies the range of stress corresponding to 210
6
cycles to failure with a 95%
survival probability. [7] Using the values, m = 3, C
mean
= 1.7 10
-13
and

C
char
= 310
-13
, the
cyclic life corresponding to any stress range can be evaluated. The theoretical FAT can then
be determined by adjusting the result according to the S-N curve, equation (20), so as to
give the stress range corresponding to the fatigue life of two million cycles. On the basis of
equation (20) the corresponding mean fatigue strength is:

FAT FAT
C
C
mean
char
mean
208 . 1 3 = = (21)

where, C
mean
is the mean fatigue crack growth rate coefficient and
C
char
is the characteristic value corresponding to 95% survival probability.




34
5.7 Analysis


The analysis was carried out for different a/T ratios, weld flank angles and /T ratios. For
each a/T-ratio, the corresponding M
k
-factors were curve fitted as a function of 2x/T, /T and
using nonlinear regression analysis. For very small cracks, it was assumed that M
k
K
t
.
The M
k
-factors (equation (22)) were therefore set equal to K
t
when 2x/T = 0. [8]

( )
( )
3,
,
4 3, ,
1 1, 2,
, ,
,
,
2 3 4,

180

180
2
1
, where and , , 1...4
2
i
i j
i i j
r
c
i i
i j i j
k i i j s r c
i j
i
x
s r r
a b
T T
M s r i j
x
d
s s r
T T

| | | |
+ +
| | +
\ \
= = = =
| | | |
+
+ +
| |
\ \
(22)

For calculation purposes, a/T ratio was assumed to be 1 and the parameters a
i,j
, b
i,j
, c
i,j
, and
d
i,j
used for calculation of M
k
values for this thesis work are shown in Table 5.1. These
parameters holds good for flank angle ranging between = 15
o
60
o
and /T = 0 1.0.
These M
k
values were calculated for every weld side of each specimen and then K
t
curves
were used to group the specimens into good and bad welds. [8]


Table 5.1: Parameters for a/T =1.0 [8]
j 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
i a
i,j
b
i,j

1 0.7895 0.0115 0.4315 0.0640 0.9701 0.0151 0.2322 -0.00886
2 4.3057 0.3420 0.4481 1.1479 7.2975 1.4614 10.5044 0.8728
3 0.7453 2.0673 -1.9094 0.0540 -0.5478 0.2716 2.0890 0.4897
4 0.7627 0.7800 0.7646 0.0667 0.3925 0.6089 -0.2288 -0.00409
c
i,j
d
i,j

1 0.2242 -3.7736 1.1454 1.1104 1.3543 0.9466 1.0889 1.2440
2 -0.4701 2.8158 1.6045 0.2199 0.2448 0.2231 0.7981 0.7760
3 0.6263 -2.2588 -0.5329 5.2627 2.0248 3.9828 1.7797 0.0963
4 2.0902 3.8035 0.9644 1.2096 0.1057 1.0331 1.9074 0.0351








35
6 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION


6.1 Geometric variations


The measured weld toe angle on each weld side were ordered and then plotted on extreme
value probability plot. Figure 6.1 shows the extreme value distribution for weld toe angle of
the weld side a. The extreme value distributions of minimum weld toe angle for other weld
sides b, c and d are shown in Appendix III. An estimate of the probability for minimum
weld toe angle can be obtained if a line is fitted through the data points.

0.995
0.99
0.95
0.9
0.8
0.5
0.1
-1.6
-0.6
0.4
1.4
2.4
3.4
4.4
5.4
80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
Minimum weld toe angle '' (deg)
-
l
n
(
-
l
n
(
F
)
)
F
All welds (70) - a Side

Figure 6.1: Extreme value distribution for weld toe angle (a side)


Since the cruciform joints were welded with many different welding parameters, the
distribution fails to fall in a straight line. In other words, the distribution helps us to
understand that the specimens have different weld quality and that they have to be grouped
into different classes or groups. Hence making an estimation of minimum weld toe angle
for different groups is more sensible.



36
Similar to the minimum weld toe angle, the minimum weld toe radii were also plotted on
extreme value probability plot. Here again, the minimum weld toe radius obtained from the
data of all weld sides of the specimen pieces were ordered. Figure 6.2 shows the extreme
value distribution for weld toe radius of the weld side a. The extreme value distributions of
minimum weld toe radius for other weld sides b, c and d are shown in Appendix III.

0.995
0.99
0.95
0.9
0.8
0.5
0.1
-1.6
-0.6
0.4
1.4
2.4
3.4
4.4
5.4
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Minimum weld toe radius '' (mm)
-
l
n
(
-
l
n
(
F
)
)
F
All welds (70) - a Side

Figure 6.2: Extreme value distribution for weld toe radius (a side)

From the above distribution of weld toe radius we can observe that a line is difficult to be
fitted through all the points. Unlike weld toe angles, the measured weld toe radii have lesser
accuracy and hence many data points fall on the same radius values. These distributions are
also grouped into different weld quality and then estimation for minimum weld toe radius is
made for required probability level.


6.2 Grouping of weld specimens


As observed in the above extreme value probability plots fitting a line was difficult as the
specimens had been welded under various different parameters. Hence grouping them as


37
different weld qualities such as A, B, C and D; and then an appropriate value from each
group can be further estimated from the probability plot.

M
k
factors or stress concentration magnification factors were calculated for each extreme
value angle and radius and according different M
k
factors, the data points were grouped.
This grouping shows the different weld qualities and also probability of extreme values
with respect to the different weld qualities.

Figure 6.3 shows the extreme value distribution of weld toe angle for different weld
qualities for weld side a. Here, the fitted lines for each weld quality indicates that there is a
95% probability that the minimum weld toe angle for weld quality A is greater than 120
and for weld quality D, it is greater than 80. Similar estimation for other weld qualities and
for other weld sides can be made for this distribution.

a Side
0.1
0.5
0.8
0.9
0.95
0.99
0.995
-1.6
-0.6
0.4
1.4
2.4
3.4
4.4
5.4
80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
Minimum weld toe angle '' (deg)
-
l
n
(
-
l
n
(
F
)
)
F
A B C D

Figure 6.3: Extreme value distribution of weld toe angle for different groups (a side)


The extreme value distributions of minimum weld toe angle for different groups for other
weld sides b, c and d are shown in Appendix IV. We also observe that for weld toe angle
distribution, most of the specimens belong to weld quality A and B having greater angles,
which are good welds.


38
Grouping of the weld specimens were also done by plotting extreme value distributions for
minimum weld toe radii. Figure 6.4 shows the extreme value distribution of weld toe radius
for different weld qualities for weld side a. The fitted lines for each weld quality indicates
that there is a 95% probability that the minimum weld toe radius for weld quality A is
greater than 0.5 mm. Similar estimations for other weld qualities and for other weld sides
can be made.

a Side
0.1
0.5
0.8
0.9
0.95
0.99
0.995
-1.6
-0.6
0.4
1.4
2.4
3.4
4.4
5.4
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Minimum weld toe radius '' (mm)
-
l
n
(
-
l
n
(
F
)
)
F
A B C D

Figure 6.4: Extreme value distribution of weld toe radius for different groups (a side)


The extreme value distributions of minimum weld toe radius for different groups for other
weld sides b, c and d are shown in Appendix IV. Here again we can observe that most of
the specimens belong to weld quality A and B having greater radii, which are good welds.


6.3 Influence of weld profile variation on stress concentration


To study the influence of variation of weld geometric parameters on stress concentration,
minimum weld toe radii were plotted against minimum weld toe angles. M
k
factors or
stress concentration magnification factors were calculated for each extreme value angle and


39
radius. For very small cracks, it was assumed that M
k
K
t
. The M
k
-factors were therefore
set equal to K
t
when 2x/T = 0. These M
k
values were calculated for every weld side of each
specimen and then K
t
curves were plotted. The plot shown in Figure 6.5 for weld side a,
illustrates how the weld parameters are distributed along different stress concentration
factor curves.

K
t
= 3
K
t
= 2
K
t
= 1.5
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
2,5
80 100 120 140 160
Weld toe angle '' (deg)
W
e
l
d

t
o
e

r
a
d
i
u
s

'

'

(
m
m
)
All welds (70) - a Side

Figure 6.5: Weld profile variation with respect to stress concentration factor (a side)


This distribution allows us to understand that the good weld specimens lie between stress
concentration factors 1.5 to 2. Similar plots for other weld sides b, c and d are shown in
Appendix V.


6.4 Influence of weld profile variation on fatigue strength


To study the influence of variation of weld geometric parameters on fatigue strength which
was the main goal of this thesis, similar plots between minimum weld toe radii and
minimum weld toe angles were made. M
k
factors or stress concentration magnification
factors were calculated for each extreme value angle and radius. Using LEFM, we can


40
obtain FAT classes for each set of weld toe radius and weld toe angle. FAT curves were
thus plotted in the graph against weld toe angles and weld toe radius. The plot shown in
Figure 6.6 for weld side a, illustrates how the weld parameters are distributed along
different FAT curves.

FAT 75
FAT 80
FAT 85
FAT 90
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
2,5
80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
Weld toe angle '' (deg)
W
e
l
d

t
o
e

r
a
d
i
u
s

'

'

(
m
m
)
All welds (70) - a Side

Figure 6.6: Weld profile variation with respect to fatigue strength (a side)


The variation of the weld profile which finally influences the fatigue strength of the
specimen can be understood by these plots. The weld geometric parameters which show
higher fatigue strength lie between FAT 80 and FAT 90. As the weld toe radius and weld
toe angle decreases, we observe that the weld specimens have lesser fatigue strength.
Similar plots for other weld sides b, c and d are shown in Appendix VI.


6.5 Comparison with Structured Light Measurement


The method employed to compare or verify the measurements made manually or visually to
that obtained from non destructive measurement, is a simple verification tool. This requires
that the ordinate and the abscissa have the same scale, in which case perfection is


41
represented by any point on the 45 line. Here, though we cannot say that the measurements
obtained from SLM are perfect or accurate, a comparison was thus made. [32][33]

If the measurements made manually were closer to SLM, the least squares regression line
fit would coincide with the 45 line. Correspondence between the regression line and the
45 line is simply the measure of reliability. [33] Therefore, a comparison of the orientation
of the regression line and the 45 line gives a visual representation of the relative quality of
measurements. As the quality decreases, the regression line tends more towards horizontal.

Figure 6.7 shows the comparison of manual measurement and SLM for weld toe angle of
weld side a. The correlation factor obtained for this plot was 0.8783, which is just a linear
relationship between the two variables. This factor varies from -1 to +1. The points would
lie on the 45 line if the correlation factor is -1 or +1.

Weld toe angle '' - (a Side)
45line
R
2
= 0.7715
correlation = 0.8783
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Structured Light Measurement
M
a
n
u
a
l

M
e
a
s
u
r
e
m
e
n
t
Data points
(68 welds)

Figure 6.7: Comparison of measurements for weld toe angle (a side)


Hence, for weld toe angle, the manual measurements seem to be close to the values
obtained from SLM. Other weld sides b, c and d are also compared for weld toe angle
measurements which are shown in Appendix VII.



42
Figure 6.8 shows similar plot which compares both the methods for weld toe radius of weld
side a. Here, the correlation factor obtained was 0.5322, which shows there is a larger
difference in measurement of weld toe radius between both the methods. This method does
not show the consistency of both methods but rather is just a verification method. Similar
comparisons between manual measurements and SLM of weld toe radius for other weld
sides b, c and d are shown in Appendix VII.

Weld toe radius '' - (a Side)
45line
R
2
= 0.2833
correlation = 0.5322
0
1
2
3
0 1 2 3 4 5
Structured Light Measurement
M
a
n
u
a
l

M
e
a
s
u
r
e
m
e
n
t
Data Points
(68 welds)

Figure 6.8: Comparison of measurements for weld toe radius (a side)


















43
7 CONCLUSION


The work carried out in this thesis helps to understand the influence of weld geometric
profile on the fatigue strength and life of the cruciform welded joint. The use of extreme
value statistical analysis and LEFM was learnt and with the help of these concepts an
attempt was made to relate the variation of the cruciform weld profiles such as weld toe
angle and weld toe radius to its fatigue strength. The extreme value probability plot also
helps to estimate the minimum or extreme values for a certain probability level.

This study also helped to group the cruciform welded fillet joints into good and bad welds
with respect to different FAT classes. The weld toe angles measured manually were closer
when compared to structured light measurement (SLM). Relative to SLM, the
measurements done visually for weld toe radius, proved to have a larger difference. In
comparison to SLM, it can be said that the specimens are predicted to have a lower stress
concentration.

The variation of weld geometric parameters as observed from the measurements on four
surfaces along the weld direction can be useful for further studies. Also the measured throat
thickness of the weld profile can be helpful to study its influence on fatigue strength for
load-carrying welds.


















44
REFERENCES



[1] Kobelco Steel Group. ABCs of arc welding - Fillet weld legs determine size and
throat of fillet welds [On-line]. Retrieved February 16
th
, 2006, from
http://www.kobelco.co.jp/english/welding/files/v3n1,7.pdf

[2] Gurney, T.R. 1979. Fatigue of welded structures. Cambridge University Press,
London, United Kingdom.

[3] US Army Corps of Engineers (Engineer manual). 2001. Inspection, evaluation
and repair of hydraulic steel structures [On-line]. Retrieved March 3
rd
, 2006,
from http://www.usace.army.mil/usace-docs/eng-manuals/em1110-2-
6054/entire.pdf

[4] European Steel Design Education Programme (ESDEP) Course. Basic
Introduction to Fatigue [On-line]. Retrieved February 20
th
, 2006, from
http://www.kuleuven.ac.be/bwk/materials/Teaching/master/wg12/l0100.htm#SEC_1

[5] The Welding Institute (TWI). 1983. Improving the fatigue performance of welded
joints. Cambridge, United Kingdom.

[6] European Steel Design Education Programme (ESDEP) Course. Improvement
techniques in welded joints [On-line]. Retrieved February 22
nd
, 2006, from
http://www.kuleuven.ac.be/bwk/materials/Teaching/master/wg12/l0500.htm#SEC_1

[7] Hobbacher, A. 2003. Recommendations for fatigue design of welded joints and
components. IIW doc. XIII-1965-03 / XV-1127-03. Paris, France.

[8] Nyknen, T., Marquis, G. & Bjrk, T. Fatigue analysis of non-load-carrying fillet
welded cruciform joints. Lappeenranta University of Technology, Finland.


45
[9] Types of welds [On-line]. Retrieved March 21
st
, 2006, from
http://www.tpub.com/steelworker1/18.htm

[10] European Steel Design Education Programme (ESDEP) Course. Generalities on
welded connections [On-line]. Retrieved March 2
nd
, 2006, from
http://www.kuleuven.ac.be/bwk/materials/Teaching/master/wg11/l0210.htm

[11] Ship Structure Committee. 2005. The effect of fabrication tolerances of fatigue
life of welded joints [On-line]. Retrieved March 8
th
, 2006, from
http://www.shipstructure.org/pdf/436-1.pdf

[12] Anderson, T. 2003. Understanding weld discontinuities [On-line]. Retrieved
March 20
th
, 2006, from http://www.thefabricator.com/WeldingInspection/
WeldingInspection_Article.cfm?ID=603

[13] Samuelsson, J. & Marquis, G. Toward a weld quality system for predominantly
fatigue loaded structures: Assessment of two available systems (SHY
Yhteisfoorumi 2005) [On-line]. Retrieved February 24
th
, 2006, from
http://www.shy-hitsaus.net/Yhteisfoorumi2005_Marquis.pdf

[14] American Metallurgical Consultants. Welding discontinuities [On-line]. Retrieved
March 20
th
, 2006, from http://www.weldingengineer.com/Discontinuities_.htm

[15] Barsom, J.M. & Rolfe, S.T. 1999. Fracture and fatigue control in structures.
Third Edition. Philadelphia, United States of America.

[16] Industrial and Systems Engineering Course. Introduction to welding engineering
[On-line]. Ohio State University. Retrieved March 12
th
, 2006, from http://www-
iwse.eng.ohio-state.edu/ISECourses/ise311/Class%20Notes/LippoldAU05/Intro
%20to%20Welding%20Engineering-2005-Section%205%20-%20Welding%20
Design.pdf


46
[17] Shah Alam, M. 2005. Structural integrity and fatigue crack propagation life
assessment of welded and weld-repaired structures [On-line]. Louisiana State
University. Retrieved February 23
rd
, 2006, from
http://etd.lsu.edu/docs/available/etd-11142005-125954/unrestricted/ ALAM_
Dissertation.pdf

[18] Maddox, S.J. 1992. Fatigue design of welded structures. Engineering design in
welded constructions (for IIW). Pergamon Press, United Kingdom.

[19] Haagensen, P.J. 2002. Improvement techniques for higher weld quality in new
design and life extension of aging structures (IIW Commission XIII). Norwegian
University of Science and Technology, Norway.

[20] Extreme value theory [On-line]. Retrieved January 26
th
, 2006, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_value_theory

[21] Tobias, P. Engineering Statistics Handbook. Extreme value distributions [On-
line]. Retrieved January 26
th
, 2006, from
http://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/apr/section1/apr163.htm

[22] Mann, N.R., Schafer, R.E. & Singpurwalla, N.D. 1974. Methods for statistical
analysis of reliability and life data. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. United States of
America.

[23] AutoCAD 2002 website (http://www.autodesk.com/)

[24] Lieurade, H., Huther, I. & Lebaillif, D. 2002. Weld quality assessment as regard
to fatigue (IIW Commission XIII). Centre Technique des Industries Mcaniques.
France.



47
[25] Rao, B.P.C. Visual techniques in NDT. Encyclopedia of Materials: Science and
Technology, Elsevier Science Ltd., September 2001, pp 6043-6046.

[26] Murakami, Y. 2002. Metal fatigue: Effects of small defects and nonmetallic
inclusions. First Edition. Elsevier Science Ltd, United Kingdom.

[27] The Welding Institute (TWI). 2002. Guidelines for use of statistics for analysis of
sample inspection of corrosion. Cambridge, United Kingdom.

[28] Det Norske Veritas. 2005. Fatigue design of offshore steel structures
(Recommended practice DNV-RP-C203) [On-line]. Retrieved March 8
th
, 2006,
from http://exchange.dnv.com/OGPI/OffshorePubs/ViewArea/RP-C203.pdf

[29] Monahan, C.C. 1995. Early fatigue crack growth at welds. Computational
Mechanics Publications, United Kingdom.

[30] Dowling, N.E. 1999. Mechanical behavior of materials. Second Edition. Prentice
Hall, Inc., New Jersey, United States of America.

[31] Nyknen, T. 1993. M
k
-factor equations and crack growth simulations for fatigue
of fillet-welded T-joints. Lappeenranta University of Technology, Lappeenranta,
Finland.

[32] Mendenhall, W. & Reinmuth, J.E. Statistics for management and economics.
Fourth Edition. Duxbury Press, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.

[33] Common verification methods [On-line]. Retrieved April 20
th
, 2006, from
http://www.bom.gov.au/bmrc/wefor/staff/eee/verif/Stanski_et_al/VerificationSW
BPart2.pdf

APPENDICES



Appendix I.....Measured weld geometric parameters


Appendix II......Weld specimen micrographs with measurements


Appendix III....Weld geometric variations


Appendix IV....Grouping of weld specimens


Appendix V..Influence of weld profile variation on stress concentration


Appendix VI....Influence of weld profile variation on fatigue strength


Appendix VII.......Comparison with Structured Light Measurement













Measured weld geometric parameters Appendix I 1/24

First Set


Specimen
Specimen
piece
Thickness
Throat
thickness
at A
Penetration
at A
Weld
Weld
angle
Toe
Radius
Undercut
Cold
lap
X01 L1 5.925 4.00 1.47 a 132.3 0.45
b 136.4 1.20 0.16
c 132.2 0.80 0.07
d 142.7 1.00
L2 5.788 4.05 1.45 a 142.8 0.40
b 143.7 1.00
c 141.7 0.80 0.07
d 148.5 1.00
R1 5.781 4.04 0.78 a 132.7 0.45
b 135.4 0.90 0.08
c 142.5 1.00
d 142.4 1.00 0.07
R2 5.777 4.00 1.07 a 136.2 0.60
b 147.2 0.80 0.06
c 131.6 0.80
d 135.1 0.80
X02 L1 5.828 3.99 2.24 a 138.7 0.40
b 127.7 0.35
c 138.0 0.50
d 134.6 0.40
L2 5.739 4.04 1.27 a 135.6 0.60
b 126.2 0.40
c 142.8 0.45
d 135.1 0.50
R1 5.761 3.81 2.25 a 142.0 0.80
b 131.4 0.45
c 138.4 0.70 0.11
d 134.1 0.35
R2 5.638 3.98 1.53 a 132.7 0.80
b 136.4 0.70
c 135.4 0.80 0.07
d 136.0 0.60 0.08
X03 L1 5.751 4.32 1.25 a 125.7 0.30
b 131.8 0.40 0.09
c 135.0 0.50
d 134.8 0.45
L2 5.810 4.58 0.99 a 130.5 0.45
b 124.4 0.35
c 134.8 0.50
d 135.4 0.50
R1 5.819 4.39 1.09 a 130.9 0.50
b 129.6 0.35
c 138.9 0.60
d 133.9 0.40
R2 5.802 4.38 1.23 a 126.5 0.30
b 128.1 0.35
c 132.8 0.20 0.07
d 126.5 0.55



Measured weld geometric parameters Appendix I 2/24

Specimen
Specimen
piece
Thickness
Throat
thickness
at A
Penetration
at A
Weld
Weld
angle
Toe
Radius
Undercut
Cold
lap
X04 L1 5.942 4.26 2.00 a 125.0 0.35
b 126.7 0.45 0.47
c 115.9 0.30
d 126.8 0.50
L2 6.023 4.26 1.42 a 120.5 0.40
b 124.4 0.45
c 117.3 0.20
d 126.5 0.40
R1 5.965 4.20 1.30 a 115.7 0.25
b 119.1 0.35
c 117.2 0.35
d 122.4 0.25
R2 5.994 4.41 2.06 a 122.1 0.45
b 126.5 0.50
c 113.5 0.15
d 125.2 0.25
X05 L1 5.878 4.07 1.02 a 133.8 0.75
b 144.1 0.75
c 149.3 1.00
d 149.1 0.90 0.07
L2 5.927 3.95 0.98 a 140.7 0.90 0.08
b 137.1 1.00
c 136.9 1.10
d 140.5 1.05
R1 5.934 4.26 0.73 a 135.9 0.80 0.07
b 147.3 0.90
c 137.3 0.90
d 146.6 1.00 0.13
R2 5.867 4.16 1.36 a 144.6 1.00
b 141.3 0.90
c 146.7 0.80
d 145.7 0.85 0.09
X06 L1 5.999 3.99 2.57 a 91.4 0.10
b 87.1 0.10
c 93.1 0.60
d 86.7 0.10
L2 6.058 3.86 2.76 a 92.9 0.10
b 92.9 0.10
c 93.5 0.60
d 87.0 0.10
R1 6.065 3.88 3.23 a 96.0 0.10
b 93.9 0.10
c 71.2 0.80
d 78.0 0.10
R2 6.098 3.90 2.91 a 93.8 0.10
b 92.5 0.15
c 90.0 0.15
d 97.4 0.30






Measured weld geometric parameters Appendix I 3/24

Specimen
Specimen
piece
Thickness
Throat
thickness
at A
Penetration
at A
Weld
Weld
angle
Toe
Radius
Undercut
Cold
lap
X07 L1 5.911 3.88 2.59 a 91.8 0.50
b 102.1 0.10
c 90.0 0.35
d 104.5 0.50
L2 5.994 4.10 2.32 a 84.1 0.20
b 106.9 0.10
c 97.6 0.15
d 92.7 0.10
R1 5.826 3.85 2.56 a 96.8 0.10
b 97.0 0.10
c 57.2 0.10
d 93.9 0.15
R2 5.851 3.94 2.88 a 92.4 0.45
b 109.0 0.00
c 84.1 0.20
d 92.9 0.40
X08 L1 5.810 3.93 0.48 a 144.6 1.20
b 140.7 1.20
c 139.1 1.30 0.09
d 149.9 1.00 0.09
L2 5.770 3.96 1.16 a 138.4 1.20
b 146.8 1.35
c 142.5 1.30 0.11
d 153.2 1.50
R1 5.892 4.01 0.86 a 129.6 1.25
b 143.2 1.20 0.08
c 150.7 1.20 0.07
d 145.3 0.30
R2 5.841 4.03 1.30 a 148.7 1.10
b 152.5 1.00 0.08
c 142.7 1.20 0.11
d 145.4 1.25
X09 L1 5.991 3.94 0.58 a 127.9 0.20
b 140.2 0.80
c 134.6 0.90
d 135.8 1.40
L2 5.855 3.85 0.46 a 129.1 0.15
b 139.5 0.70
c 136.6 0.80
d 138.3 1.10
R1 5.874 4.02 1.33 a 133.7 0.30
b 134.7 0.35 0.60
c 139.5 0.80
d 140.1 0.90 0.11
R2 5.846 4.02 1.58 a 133.9 0.45
b 140.7 0.50
c 133.6 0.85
d 138.7 1.00






Measured weld geometric parameters Appendix I 4/24

Specimen
Specimen
piece
Thickness
Throat
thickness
at A
Penetration
at A
Weld
Weld
angle
Toe
Radius
Undercut
Cold
lap
X10 L1 5.906 4.14 0.93 a 142.1 0.50
b 145.8 1.30
c 146.6 1.40
d 145.7 1.50
L2 5.899 4.08 1.45 a 138.3 0.20
b 140.2 1.20
c 151.3 1.50 0.08
d 156.4 1.30
R1 5.896 4.11 0.23 a 128.1 0.60
b 151.3 0.40
c 145.5 0.50
d 152.9 0.90
R2 5.899 4.10 0.94 a 135.0 0.75
b 148.8 1.40
c 144.8 0.80
d 142.8 1.10
X11 L1 5.663 3.85 1.69 a 141.6 0.90
b 144.7 0.40
c 137.9 0.80
d 138.1 0.90
L2 5.728 3.87 1.69 a 141.1 0.80
b 140.9 0.50
c 137.6 0.85 0.16
d 139.2 0.90 0.10
R1 5.766 3.83 1.80 a 140.4 1.00
b 136.3 0.40
c 133.8 0.90 0.11
d 140.6 0.80 0.06
R2 5.733 3.75 1.82 a 146.9 1.00
b 136.5 0.30
c 139.5 1.00 0.80
d 140.6 0.80
X12 L1 5.813 3.95 1.69 a 133.1 1.30
b 145.1 1.70
c 147.2 1.70 0.10
d 137.4 1.10
L2 5.848 3.97 1.49 a 139.9 1.20
b 131.3 1.60
c 136.2 1.50 0.40
d 149.0 1.30
R1 5.770 4.02 1.48 a 135.4 1.10
b 138.0 1.50
c 146.3 1.85 0.10
d 144.7 0.80
R2 5.768 3.99 1.34 a 138.8 1.00
b 149.6 1.45
c 143.1 1.50 0.08
d 144.1 0.90 0.09






Measured weld geometric parameters Appendix I 5/24

Specimen
Specimen
piece
Thickness
Throat
thickness
at A
Penetration
at A
Weld
Weld
angle
Toe
Radius
Undercut
Cold
lap
X13 L1 5.782 3.75 0.87 a 143.0 1.40
b 149.0 0.80
c 145.1 0.60
d 142.9 0.90
L2 5.716 3.72 0.89 a 139.0 1.50
b 138.0 0.90
c 139.4 1.20
d 146.8 0.95
R1 5.759 3.86 1.54 a 137.1 1.20
b 139.5 1.00
c 154.6 1.30
d 144.9 1.00 0.12
R2 5.704 3.96 0.74 a 140.9 1.20
b 144.7 1.05
c 141.3 1.20
d 146.8 1.10
X14 L1 5.739 3.63 0.92 a 140.8 0.80
b 151.8 1.30
c 145.0 1.00
d 150.4 1.20
L2 5.780 3.57 1.28 a 140.6 0.85
b 134.6 1.00
c 139.1 1.10
d 148.3 1.50
R1 5.717 3.60 1.47 a 137.3 0.70
b 156.7 2.00
c 138.6 0.80
d 144.8 0.50
R2 5.738 3.59 0.61 a 143.9 1.65
b 150.2 1.90
c 136.4 0.40
d 141.4 1.10 0.12
X15 L1 5.772 3.77 0.54 a 127.5 1.70
b 124.1 2.20 0.15
c 125.8 1.80
d 133.7 2.50 0.10
L2 5.745 3.58 1.21 a 123.5 1.50 0.08
b 128.4 2.00 0.16
c 124.5 1.80 0.15
d 131.2 2.30 0.17
R1 5.731 3.49 0.68 a 129.3 1.80
b 136.1 2.40 0.15
c 134.0 2.30 0.11
d 139.7 2.20
R2 5.802 3.98 0.18 a 128.8 2.50
b 132.5 2.00 0.20
c 126.8 2.20
d 135.7 2.50






Measured weld geometric parameters Appendix I 6/24

Specimen
Specimen
piece
Thickness
Throat
thickness
at A
Penetration
at A
Weld
Weld
angle
Toe
Radius
Undercut
Cold
lap
X16 L1 5.703 3.75 0.05 a 132.2 2.10
b 140.8 1.70
c 142.2 2.50
d 140.3 2.20
L2 5.799 3.72 1.18 a 131.2 2.00 0.06
b 140.8 0.80
c 134.5 2.90
d 134.9 2.20
R1 5.778 3.69 0.84 a 131.8 2.00
b 141.7 1.60
c 135.7 2.20
d 135.5 2.00
R2 5.822 3.75 0.79 a 131.5 2.00
b 139.3 1.50
c 132.6 2.40
d 138.9 2.50
X17 L1 5.790 3.78 1.65 a 129.0 0.50
b 135.9 1.50 0.10
c 138.8 3.00
d 131.3 1.00
L2 5.908 3.71 0.42 a 135.8 1.80
b 131.8 0.70
c 136.9 3.20
d 133.3 1.70
R1 5.815 3.80 1.07 a 129.8 2.00
b 133.2 0.80
c 136.5 2.70
d 133.2 0.90
R2 5.730 3.71 1.29 a 128.2 2.60 0.07
b 138.8 2.00
c 137.4 2.60
d 132.2 1.50
X18 L1 5.650 3.38 0.51 a 122.7 1.50 0.19
b 136.6 0.70
c 128.1 2.40 0.09
d 132.8 2.30
L2 5.803 3.40 0.11 a 126.1 1.90 0.16
b 131.7 1.70
c 135.2 2.80 0.11
d 132.5 2.40
R1 5.805 3.57 0.79 a 132.5 1.45 0.15
b 125.8 2.00 0.13
c 133.2 2.60
d 127.9 2.40
R2 5.748 3.75 0.68 a 127.9 2.20
b 129.0 2.10
c 130.6 2.50
d 129.1 2.60






Measured weld geometric parameters Appendix I 7/24

Specimen
Specimen
piece
Thickness
Throat
thickness
at A
Penetration
at A
Weld
Weld
angle
Toe
Radius
Undercut
Cold
lap
X19 L1 5.865 3.66 0.75 a 121.8 1.90
b 129.1 1.00
c 124.5 1.20 0.15
d 130.8 0.80
L2 5.809 3.67 0.66 a 128.3 2.00
b 128.5 2.30
c 132.0 2.40 0.17
d 130.7 1.60
R1 5.819 3.68 1.09 a 125.1 1.60 0.11
b 128.9 2.00
c 135.1 1.70
d 137.5 1.80
R2 5.881 3.92 0.46 a 133.7 1.40 0.09
b 129.6 1.30 0.15
c 125.0 1.20 0.08
d 131.2 1.50 0.11
X20 L1 5.725 3.84 0.14 a 127.1 1.30
b 131.1 1.40 0.13
c 136.2 1.30 0.16
d 134.3 1.00 0.18
L2 5.684 3.50 0.58 a 129.3 1.80 0.10
b 132.3 1.45
c 127.7 1.60 0.19
d 135.2 1.00 0.39
R1 5.747 3.87 0.91 a 126.9 1.20 0.10
b 122.4 1.00 0.36
c 136.4 2.20 0.19
d 135.3 1.20 0.23
R2 5.762 3.91 0.67 a 131.9 1.60 0.15
b 137.6 1.60
c 133.1 1.10
d 138.0 1.70
X21 L1 5.751 3.80 1.01 a 128.8 2.00
b 139.5 1.00
c 123.6 0.30
d 125.2 0.30 0.12
L2 5.855 3.49 0.42 a 127.6 2.10 0.13
b 138.7 1.10
c 128.0 1.80
d 130.6 0.80 0.10
R1 5.765 3.68 1.71 a 124.8 1.90 0.17
b 127.0 1.00
c 130.0 1.80 0.13
d 130.9 0.90 0.13
R2 5.736 3.70 1.15 a 134.6 1.70
b 128.0 0.60
c 121.8 1.60
d 128.2 0.35






Measured weld geometric parameters Appendix I 8/24

Specimen
Specimen
piece
Thickness
Throat
thickness
at A
Penetration
at A
Weld
Weld
angle
Toe
Radius
Undercut
Cold
lap
X22 L1 5.815 3.76 1.92 a 125.1 0.90 0.57
b 136.5 1.30 0.42
c 139.1 1.50 0.29
d 138.5 0.20 0.58
L2 5.866 3.83 1.33 a 124.1 1.10 0.19
b 130.5 1.40 0.16
c 140.9 1.00 0.47
d 136.9 1.00 0.41
R1 5.853 3.59 1.49 a 127.6 1.20 0.30
b 132.7 1.20 0.23
c 136.0 0.20 0.60
d 133.0 0.80 0.34
R2 5.831 3.57 1.98 a 131.6 1.10 0.43
b 132.9 0.50 0.66
c 136.2 1.00 0.46
d 135.3 0.30 0.38
X23 L1 5.801 3.48 1.80 a 133.4 1.20 0.12
b 134.3 1.10 0.61
c 132.7 1.40 0.57
d 137.3 0.80 0.47
L2 5.876 3.66 1.20 a 122.4 1.40 0.16
b 135.6 0.50 0.65
c 143.9 1.10 0.59
d 132.6 1.10 0.38
R1 5.803 3.45 1.30 a 125.5 1.60 0.12
b 134.0 1.30 0.52
c 143.4 1.20 0.37
d 138.1 1.00 0.49
R2 5.785 3.68 1.59 a 124.7 1.40 0.30
b 138.6 1.20 0.24
c 138.4 1.10 0.43
d 131.0 0.40 0.58
X24 L1 5.843 3.80 1.80 a 123.3 1.00
b 128.7 1.70
c 128.7 0.70
d 133.9 2.00
L2 5.854 3.88 2.03 a 122.7 1.00
b 133.6 1.80
c 136.8 0.90
d 134.9 1.30
R1 5.716 3.44 1.29 a 121.9 0.90
b 131.4 1.60
c 133.9 1.00
d 133.6 0.90
R2 5.875 3.76 2.26 a 125.3 0.80
b 134.6 1.60
c 129.1 0.80
d 133.0 0.80






Measured weld geometric parameters Appendix I 9/24

Specimen
Specimen
piece
Thickness
Throat
thickness
at A
Penetration
at A
Weld
Weld
angle
Toe
Radius
Undercut
Cold
lap
X25 L1 5.818 3.90 1.63 a 131.6 0.50
b 132.7 1.00
c 136.3 1.30
d 136.5 0.60
L2 5.773 3.59 1.24 a 134.2 0.60
b 138.5 1.20
c 134.1 2.00
d 140.2 0.70
R1 5.776 3.64 1.43 a 139.9 0.70
b 137.7 1.40
c 126.6 2.00
d 135.2 0.80
R2 5.762 3.57 1.94 a 133.5 1.40
b 137.4 0.80 0.12
c 137.4 1.30
d 135.0 0.30
X26 L1 5.749 3.98 2.32 a 126.4 1.00
b 130.1 1.20
c 127.8 1.30
d 133.0 1.80
L2 5.912 4.18 2.12 a 127.6 1.10
b 132.2 1.90
c 133.4 1.40
d 133.3 1.50
R1 5.785 4.04 1.81 a 128.6 0.90
b 136.2 1.00
c 133.0 1.20
d 134.8 1.30
R2 5.895 4.15 2.12 a 130.9 0.80
b 129.9 0.90
c 134.3 1.70
d 136.4 1.20
X27 L1 5.806 3.89 1.71 a 128.1 0.90
b 134.4 1.20
c 139.3 1.70
d 136.2 0.70
L2 5.797 3.61 1.70 a 124.0 1.00
b 137.7 0.50
c 131.4 2.40
d 132.3 1.10
R1 5.792 3.74 1.34 a 129.1 0.60
b 126.4 0.40
c 132.3 1.50
d 138.5 2.40
R2 5.878 3.63 1.30 a 126.6 0.90
b 136.1 0.80
c 139.3 0.70
d 134.4 2.20






Measured weld geometric parameters Appendix I 10/24

Specimen
Specimen
piece
Thickness
Throat
thickness
at A
Penetration
at A
Weld
Weld
angle
Toe
Radius
Undercut
Cold
lap
X28 L1 5.803 3.56 2.21 a 136.1 0.60
b 139.4 1.50
c 133.7 1.40
d 132.7 0.40 0.13
L2 5.792 3.44 2.20 a 140.2 0.80
b 138.0 1.70
c 136.0 1.00
d 140.5 0.30 0.24
R1 5.777 3.84 1.47 a 129.7 0.50
b 134.3 0.50
c 138.6 0.90
d 141.9 0.50 0.30
R2 5.854 3.67 1.33 a 132.0 0.70
b 139.6 1.30
c 140.6 0.70
d 137.2 0.60 0.16
X29 L1 5.821 3.73 1.76 a 130.0 0.25
b 141.1 0.30
c 133.0 0.15
d 137.7 1.00
L2 5.873 3.74 1.51 a 139.3 0.60
b 138.3 1.30
c 138.3 0.90
d 135.2 0.70
R1 5.795 3.54 1.00 a 134.9 0.40
b 136.8 0.80
c 145.5 0.90
d 135.4 0.60
R2 5.870 3.73 2.09 a 132.1 0.30
b 142.2 1.40
c 132.7 0.60
d 136.7 0.50
X30 L1 5.830 3.95 1.80 a 127.0 1.00
b 132.4 1.60
c 131.6 1.20
d 135.8 1.20
L2 5.834 3.82 1.89 a 131.7 1.10
b 131.1 1.90
c 131.1 1.00
d 134.8 1.30
R1 5.830 4.06 2.16 a 129.3 1.00
b 134.8 1.60
c 132.7 1.10
d 132.0 1.00
R2 5.821 4.06 2.17 a 135.0 1.40
b 135.3 2.00
c 132.7 0.80
d 130.9 0.80






Measured weld geometric parameters Appendix I 11/24

Specimen
Specimen
piece
Thickness
Throat
thickness
at A
Penetration
at A
Weld
Weld
angle
Toe
Radius
Undercut
Cold
lap
X39 L1 5.733 3.76 1.09 a 133.4 1.60
b 137.7 1.80
c 137.6 2.00
d 132.3 2.70
L2 5.719 3.50 0.99 a 128.3 1.80
b 140.7 2.00
c 140.7 2.10
d 129.8 2.60
R1 5.767 3.48 0.23 a 137.5 1.50
b 131.8 1.80
c 135.0 2.80
d 130.7 2.00
R2 5.790 3.74 0.82 a 134.9 1.80
b 134.7 1.70
c 136.5 2.50
d 133.1 2.10
X40 L1 5.854 3.96 0.62 a 131.8 1.60
b 134.7 2.30
c 134.5 1.80
d 135.5 2.40
L2 5.846 3.98 0.66 a 132.5 1.70 0.09
b 138.9 2.60
c 135.9 2.60
d 138.5 2.70
R1 5.839 3.82 0.78 a 129.2 1.60
b 135.3 2.60
c 132.1 2.20
d 138.3 2.80
R2 5.865 3.76 1.75 a 128.7 2.70
b 133.6 2.50 0.12
c 142.6 2.50
d 141.3 2.90
X59 L1 5.754 3.22 0.30 a 130.1 1.90
b 125.1 0.10
c 134.3 2.00
d 132.4 2.20
L2 5.777 3.12 0.33 a 132.7 2.00
b 127.8 0.20
c 141.5 2.40
d 136.5 2.40
R1 5.982 3.39 0.38 a 121.4 1.20
b 131.7 0.70 0.08
c 140.9 1.30
d 142.5 2.00 0.12
R2 5.829 3.25 0.48 a 130.8 0.90
b 137.5 1.20
c 130.4 1.00
d 136.2 1.50






Measured weld geometric parameters Appendix I 12/24

Specimen
Specimen
piece
Thickness
Throat
thickness
at A
Penetration
at A
Weld
Weld
angle
Toe
Radius
Undercut
Cold
lap
X66 L1 5.884 3.32 0.70 a 125.3 1.30 0.21
b 108.8 0.40
c 127.7 1.50
d 119.6 1.60
L2 5.796 3.26 0.87 a 126.1 1.40 0.22
b 106.8 0.60
c 128.6 1.90 0.13
d 131.8 0.50
R1 5.851 3.48 0.60 a 118.2 1.20 0.13
b 109.6 0.30
c 127.9 1.40
d 131.5 1.80
R2 5.872 3.26 0.60 a 115.5 1.00 0.18
b 115.5 0.70
c 129.4 1.30 0.08
d 126.8 1.80
X67 L1 5.882 3.68 0.00 a 126.4 0.40
b 119.0 1.20
c 118.8 1.30 0.68
d 119.0 1.20 0.40
L2 5.841 3.55 0.13 a 121.1 0.30
b 118.3 0.60
c 122.7 1.40 0.60
d 117.4 1.30 0.53
R1 5.817 3.42 0.09 a 116.6 0.30 0.21
b 115.3 0.50 0.12
c 122.6 1.00 0.38
d 114.4 1.00 0.45
R2 5.895 3.49 0.00 a 122.9 1.60
b 119.0 1.30 0.09
c 119.2 1.20 0.55
d 119.7 1.40 0.44
X68 L1 5.845 3.52 0.18 a 120.2 0.50
b 120.9 0.80
c 124.8 0.75
d 122.7 0.40
L2 5.856 3.51 0.00 a 122.5 0.80
b 127.1 1.00
c 128.5 0.50 0.19
d 122.6 0.60 0.09
R1 5.827 3.51 0.70 a 117.5 0.50 0.08
b 120.3 1.00
c 122.2 1.20
d 124.7 0.30
R2 5.815 3.40 0.00 a 123.5 0.40
b 127.8 0.30
c 121.0 0.20
d 126.1 1.80






Measured weld geometric parameters Appendix I 13/24

Specimen
Specimen
piece
Thickness
Throat
thickness
at A
Penetration
at A
Weld
Weld
angle
Toe
Radius
Undercut
Cold
lap
X69 L1 5.783 3.38 0.28 a 112.8 0.70
b 109.2 1.00 0.25
c 119.4 1.00 0.41
d 127.7 1.30 0.43
L2 5.814 3.42 0.00 a 114.1 0.50
b 113.0 0.70 0.28
c 119.8 1.20 0.48
d 123.1 1.40 0.42
R1 5.867 3.26 0.38 a 117.9 1.60
b 118.3 0.60
c 119.8 1.50 0.58
d 124.1 1.50 0.28
R2 5.845 3.40 0.00 a 124.4 1.40
b 122.5 0.50
c 121.2 1.00 0.47
d 119.2 1.40 0.47
X70 L1 5.791 3.24 0.11 a 117.5 0.10
b 111.2 0.10
c 118.7 1.60 0.56
d 130.9 2.10 0.49
L2 5.867 3.23 0.24 a 117.9 1.20
b 129.3 1.30
c 117.5 1.70 0.44
d 121.9 2.00 0.43
R1 5.831 3.89 0.00 a 126.3 2.00 0.20
b 122.3 0.00 0.23 0.21
c 118.7 1.50 0.32
d 125.4 1.20 0.39
R2 5.791 3.49 0.00 a 122.6 0.40 0.16
b 122.4 2.00 0.13
c 120.3 1.40 0.46
d 116.0 1.60 0.46



















Measured weld geometric parameters Appendix I 14/24

Second Set


Specimen
Specimen
piece
Thickness
Throat
thickness
at A
Penetration
at A
Weld
Weld
angle
Toe
Radius
Undercut
Cold
lap
X31 L1 5.818 3.98 1.93 a 116.7 0.25
b 111.1 0.10
c 95.6 0.10
d 126.5 0.20 0.19
L2 5.763 3.83 1.75 a 115.1 0.40
b 100.9 0.30
c 104.5 0.00
d 121.8 0.40
R1 5.864 3.59 2.06 a 106.7 0.10
b 97.0 0.30
c 101.8 0.10
d 124.2 0.20 0.19
R2 5.748 3.88 1.75 a 113.6 0.10
b 105.8 0.25
c 118.0 0.10
d 111.0 0.20
X32 L1 5.812 3.64 1.79 a 114.1 0.10
b 94.8 0.10
c 100.8 0.00
d 116.0 0.20
L2 5.879 3.76 1.63 a 114.4 0.10
b 94.1 0.10
c 102.0 0.15
d 118.4 0.25
R1 5.767 3.46 1.95 a 107.2 0.00
b 98.8 0.00
c 105.9 0.00
d 120.2 0.10
R2 5.814 3.65 1.08 a 109.0 0.00
b 102.7 0.00
c 95.9 0.10
d 128.6 0.10
X33 L1 5.871 3.35 0.97 a 98.3 0.20
b 106.1 0.10
c 113.1 0.15
d 104.1 0.00
L2 5.902 3.40 1.99 a 102.0 0.10
b 105.6 0.10
c 109.5 0.20
d 108.5 0.50 0.14
R1 5.814 3.98 1.10 a 112.1 0.10
b 109.8 0.10
c 109.6 0.10
d 114.1 0.40 0.12
R2 5.937 3.79 1.79 a 106.9 0.00
b 109.6 0.00 0.09
c 115.7 0.20
d 111.8 0.10



Measured weld geometric parameters Appendix I 15/24

Specimen
Specimen
piece
Thickness
Throat
thickness
at A
Penetration
at A
Weld
Weld
angle
Toe
Radius
Undercut
Cold
lap
X34 L1 5.706 3.70 1.74 a 110.2 0.10
b 92.9 0.00
c 100.5 0.15
d 107.7 0.15
L2 5.760 3.63 1.93 a 108.0 0.10
b 103.0 0.10
c 99.8 0.10
d 112.2 0.15
R1 5.731 3.54 1.08 a 113.1 0.00 0.08
b 108.9 0.00
c 107.2 0.10
d 104.1 0.10
R2 5.813 4.02 2.05 a 117.4 0.10
b 96.6 0.10
c 107.2 0.00
d 107.5 0.00
X35 L1 5.880 3.84 0.52 a 134.4 1.60
b 122.6 0.30
c 134.9 2.00
d 132.9 0.50
L2 6.001 3.96 1.59 a 132.5 2.60 0.31
b 128.1 0.40
c 137.4 2.10 0.06
d 131.4 1.00
R1 5.851 3.96 0.39 a 130.1 0.30
b 124.5 0.60
c 134.0 1.70
d 123.9 1.20
R2 5.872 3.80 0.94 a 127.5 1.00
b 119.2 0.40
c 130.5 1.50 0.08
d 126.0 1.00
X36 L1 5.934 3.98 0.53 a 129.6 1.00 0.08
b 123.8 0.10
c 127.5 0.80 0.27
d 119.6 0.60 0.13
L2 5.898 3.81 1.31 a 124.7 0.30
b 125.5 1.00
c 113.1 0.50
d 115.3 0.10
R1 5.900 4.05 0.33 a 134.6 1.00 0.64
b 129.4 1.00
c 120.9 0.15
d 126.2 0.30
R2 5.963 3.93 1.20 a 130.4 0.30 0.68
b 123.9 0.50
c 119.0 0.15
d 117.4 0.30






Measured weld geometric parameters Appendix I 16/24

Specimen
Specimen
piece
Thickness
Throat
thickness
at A
Penetration
at A
Weld
Weld
angle
Toe
Radius
Undercut
Cold
lap
X37 L1 5.906 3.91 1.46 a 114.5 0.40 0.13
b 119.8 0.10 0.33
c 120.0 0.20
d 113.3 0.40
L2 5.896 3.74 1.20 a 112.1 0.40
b 124.2 0.20
c 115.7 0.10
d 128.7 0.25
R1 5.894 3.76 1.30 a 118.1 0.20
b 120.7 0.30
c 121.9 0.30
d 124.2 0.50
R2 5.841 3.87 1.03 a 119.3 0.20
b 116.5 0.30
c 118.5 0.20
d 118.4 0.15
X41 L1 5.881 3.55 1.82 a 113.8 0.60 0.14
b 119.9 1.50
c 125.9 0.40
d 121.7 0.30
L2 5.909 3.55 1.54 a 123.4 0.20
b 123.1 0.10
c 121.8 0.80
d 130.3 1.60
R1 5.828 3.44 0.87 a 124.3 0.50 0.26
b 135.2 1.30
c 127.8 1.40
d 123.0 1.30
R2 5.913 3.43 0.92 a 110.2 0.40
b 117.6 1.00
c 127.7 1.00
d 119.7 1.20
X42 L1 5.855 3.09 0.94 a 117.0 1.30
b 101.9 0.10
c 112.9 0.50
d 126.7 0.55
L2 5.844 3.12 0.87 a 115.4 1.40 0.11
b 112.6 0.40 0.53
c 111.7 0.40 0.32
d 126.4 1.60 0.07
R1 5.932 3.16 0.97 a 112.5 1.20 0.18
b 102.4 0.00
c 113.0 0.40
d 129.5 1.30 0.08
R2 5.863 3.05 1.06 a 120.2 0.80
b 105.7 0.10
c 124.6 0.60
d 119.4 1.00 0.10






Measured weld geometric parameters Appendix I 17/24

Specimen
Specimen
piece
Thickness
Throat
thickness
at A
Penetration
at A
Weld
Weld
angle
Toe
Radius
Undercut
Cold
lap
X43 L1 5.944 3.52 1.81 a 121.3 0.30
b 112.5 0.40
c 128.9 1.00 0.12
d 119.8 0.80 0.10
L2 5.920 3.53 1.13 a 106.8 0.40
b 109.9 0.50 0.25
c 119.7 0.40
d 126.0 1.10
R1 5.889 3.45 1.80 a 129.1 0.00
b 122.2 1.20 0.36
c 117.6 0.20 0.40
d 113.6 0.60
R2 5.928 3.46 1.73 a 116.4 0.20
b 116.0 0.30
c 116.9 0.40
d 112.9 0.10
X44 L1 5.957 3.44 1.35 a 104.3 0.50 0.32
b 111.5 0.55
c 97.6 0.35
d 130.1 0.40
L2 5.964 3.49 1.38 a 111.6 0.10
b 122.4 0.40
c 99.3 0.00
d 112.9 0.80 0.05
R1 5.929 3.52 1.80 a 116.2 0.20
b 110.1 0.10
c 101.0 0.10
d 122.4 0.90 0.12
R2 5.953 3.62 1.79 a 125.6 0.10
b 119.5 0.20
c 118.2 0.10
d 120.3 0.80 0.24
X45 L1 5.973 3.38 1.10 a 131.8 1.40
b 130.0 2.00
c 144.1 2.20
d 133.0 1.50
L2 5.970 3.37 1.32 a 125.1 1.50
b 133.1 2.30
c 126.1 2.00
d 128.2 2.20
R1 5.932 3.29 0.59 a 125.5 1.00
b 133.2 1.80
c 137.4 1.20 0.06
d 128.3 1.50
R2 5.978 3.39 0.74 a 133.2 1.60
b 127.3 1.50
c 136.0 2.00
d 130.8 0.50






Measured weld geometric parameters Appendix I 18/24

Specimen
Specimen
piece
Thickness
Throat
thickness
at A
Penetration
at A
Weld
Weld
angle
Toe
Radius
Undercut
Cold
lap
X46 L1 5.871 3.23 0.80 a 115.1 1.20 0.13
b 112.0 1.20 0.13
c 120.0 1.30
d 128.8 1.10
L2 5.801 3.24 1.09 a 116.5 1.00 0.20
b 116.8 1.40
c 114.6 1.00 0.05
d 119.8 1.30
R1 5.819 3.33 0.71 a 119.1 1.00
b 115.6 1.30
c 120.1 0.25
d 123.5 1.00
R2 5.894 3.37 0.49 a 116.2 1.50 0.10
b 115.3 0.50
c 113.2 0.60
d 120.5 1.00 0.12
X47 L1 5.898 3.27 0.73 a 124.6 1.40 0.14
b 135.3 2.00
c 137.4 1.90
d 133.9 1.80
L2 5.894 3.16 0.85 a 122.9 1.50 0.17
b 133.8 2.20
c 120.6 1.00
d 128.5 2.00
R1 5.924 3.30 0.26 a 125.7 1.20 0.08
b 129.4 1.90 0.08
c 128.9 1.60
d 124.9 1.60 0.26
R2 5.902 3.30 0.56 a 131.6 1.00
b 134.4 1.60
c 134.5 2.00
d 132.3 1.60
X51 L1 5.914 3.81 0.65 a 125.4 0.20
b 131.3 0.50
c 121.5 0.30
d 126.4 0.80 0.08
L2 5.945 3.63 0.98 a 120.8 0.30
b 119.0 0.60 0.14
c 127.0 1.20
d 129.3 0.50
R1 5.944 3.87 1.52 a 113.8 0.40
b 122.4 0.60 0.12
c 136.9 0.80 0.15
d 117.8 2.00
R2 5.933 3.97 0.68 a 112.3 0.10
b 111.2 0.50
c 129.2 2.30
d 124.7 1.40






Measured weld geometric parameters Appendix I 19/24

Specimen
Specimen
piece
Thickness
Throat
thickness
at A
Penetration
at A
Weld
Weld
angle
Toe
Radius
Undercut
Cold
lap
X52 L1 5.898 3.66 1.67 a 115.8 0.20
b 102.2 0.10
c 106.0 0.25
d 110.1 0.10
L2 5.940 3.45 2.60 a 118.6 0.25
b 102.6 0.25
c 103.4 0.05
d 125.6 0.40
R1 5.975 3.51 2.37 a 114.1 0.20
b 104.9 0.00
c 106.0 0.15
d 119.9 0.10
R2 5.955 3.75 1.27 a 116.8 0.10
b 103.3 0.00
c 119.3 0.15
d 118.9 0.10
X53 L1 5.977 3.69 0.81 a 125.1 0.20
b 119.4 0.15
c 111.0 0.20
d 119.6 1.40
L2 5.912 3.46 0.98 a 130.1 0.20
b 118.7 0.10
c 110.5 0.30
d 114.8 1.60
R1 5.949 3.56 1.44 a 125.5 0.10
b 129.2 0.15
c 112.3 0.20 0.35
d 127.8 1.30
R2 5.941 3.75 1.49 a 137.7 0.40
b 119.1 1.00
c 129.3 0.10
d 126.7 0.30
X55 L1 5.880 3.46 1.24 a 104.9 0.30
b 135.1 0.00 1.18
c 111.9 0.10
d 107.9 0.90
L2 5.883 3.34 1.19 a 106.8 0.30
b 119.1 0.70
c 116.7 0.10
d 115.3 1.00 0.45
R1 5.960 3.42 1.26 a 115.0 0.20
b 110.6 0.20
c 117.9 0.20
d 112.6 0.80
R2 5.912 3.40 1.27 a 123.7 0.20
b 116.0 0.00
c 119.2 0.20
d 117.7 1.00






Measured weld geometric parameters Appendix I 20/24

Specimen
Specimen
piece
Thickness
Throat
thickness
at A
Penetration
at A
Weld
Weld
angle
Toe
Radius
Undercut
Cold
lap
X56 L1 5.876 3.58 1.00 a 117.4 1.00 0.78
b 118.3 0.80
c 125.6 0.80
d 127.5 0.80
L2 5.797 3.68 0.96 a 125.5 1.10 0.53
b 115.1 1.00
c 118.8 0.50
d 123.1 0.90
R1 5.882 3.60 0.82 a 120.7 0.50
b 115.1 0.70
c 116.9 0.60
d 117.6 0.80
R2 5.878 3.59 1.09 a 120.7 1.00 0.61
b 113.2 0.60
c 127.2 0.80
d 128.6 0.70
X60 L1 5.949 4.04 1.49 a 105.4 0.40
b 108.6 0.10
c 111.2 0.20
d 115.0 0.25
L2 5.977 4.15 1.89 a 115.2 0.10
b 104.4 0.10
c 107.6 0.15
d 120.5 0.20
R1 5.895 3.84 1.64 a 113.4 0.20
b 98.1 0.00
c 111.0 0.15
d 108.5 0.20
R2 5.942 4.03 1.95 a 112.8 0.15
b 100.2 0.00
c 106.0 0.10
d 110.3 0.10
X61 L1 5.864 3.30 2.46 a 105.7 0.30
b 109.2 0.40 0.14
c 123.1 0.20
d 115.9 0.25
L2 5.893 3.49 2.19 a 115.9 0.10
b 109.2 0.00
c 110.2 0.40 0.10
d 108.4 0.10
R1 5.832 3.50 2.32 a 112.9 0.00
b 90.6 0.20
c 99.1 0.10
d 106.7 0.20
R2 5.923 3.54 2.59 a 100.1 0.10
b 92.5 0.20
c 99.7 0.30
d 105.0 0.10






Measured weld geometric parameters Appendix I 21/24

Specimen
Specimen
piece
Thickness
Throat
thickness
at A
Penetration
at A
Weld
Weld
angle
Toe
Radius
Undercut
Cold
lap
X62 L1 5.845 4.11 1.89 a 125.1 0.30
b 109.7 0.15
c 112.2 0.40
d 123.4 0.30
L2 5.862 4.02 2.09 a 121.5 0.30
b 113.9 0.20
c 113.6 0.25
d 118.0 0.15
R1 5.835 4.01 1.84 a 112.7 0.30
b 106.8 0.30
c 113.0 0.15
d 122.6 0.25
R2 5.898 4.06 2.06 a 121.1 0.30
b 108.0 0.00
c 115.3 0.15
d 126.5 0.15
X63 L1 5.904 3.62 1.83 a 92.7 0.10
b 98.8 0.00
c 100.5 0.00
d 105.6 0.00
L2 5.924 3.69 1.93 a 94.1 0.00
b 101.2 0.15
c 107.4 0.30 0.78
d 98.0 0.30
R1 5.875 3.54 1.84 a 96.2 0.20
b 91.5 0.00
c 91.3 0.00
d 101.0 0.00
R2 5.984 3.95 2.42 a 105.8 0.10
b 90.9 0.10
c 93.0 0.10
d 102.8 0.10
X64 L1 5.951 4.22 1.44 a 127.8 0.15
b 107.8 0.00
c 118.1 0.15
d 131.3 0.40
L2 5.891 4.20 1.42 a 128.5 0.30
b 104.2 0.10
c 120.1 0.20
d 126.6 0.50
R1 5.916 4.11 1.66 a 123.6 0.15
b 116.7 0.00
c 123.8 0.10
d 133.5 0.20
R2 5.930 4.04 2.14 a 128.9 0.40
b 111.6 0.10
c 121.3 0.10
d 126.9 0.10






Measured weld geometric parameters Appendix I 22/24

Specimen
Specimen
piece
Thickness
Throat
thickness
at A
Penetration
at A
Weld
Weld
angle
Toe
Radius
Undercut
Cold
lap
X65 L1 6.004 4.29 1.57 a 116.3 0.20
b 108.1 0.15
c 124.1 0.15
d 128.3 0.20
L2 5.941 4.22 1.95 a 115.3 0.10
b 107.8 0.10
c 123.7 0.10
d 135.0 0.30
R1 5.911 3.99 1.79 a 116.6 0.00
b 110.3 0.10
c 121.7 0.10
d 129.0 0.50
R2 5.945 3.98 1.61 a 115.9 0.00
b 114.5 0.00
c 115.2 0.15
d 120.2 0.10
X71 L1 5.933 3.38 2.53 a 114.5 0.10
b 106.8 0.10
c 119.2 0.10
d 123.2 0.10
L2 5.906 3.59 2.07 a 117.4 0.15
b 104.0 0.10
c 108.2 0.00
d 122.2 0.30
R1 5.879 3.68 1.34 a 114.2 0.20
b 107.3 0.10
c 120.4 0.10
d 129.7 0.20
R2 5.846 3.61 1.52 a 111.2 0.10
b 104.9 0.00
c 115.3 0.15
d 119.0 0.10
X72 L1 5.918 3.37 1.28 a 118.9 0.10
b 120.2 0.00
c 116.9 0.10
d 112.9 0.10
L2 5.972 3.41 1.37 a 114.4 0.30 0.31
b 121.6 0.40 0.26
c 118.2 0.15
d 117.7 0.80
R1 5.951 3.40 1.72 a 99.2 0.10
b 116.0 0.00
c 122.5 0.00
d 116.3 0.50
R2 5.992 3.38 1.46 a 107.7 0.20
b 108.3 0.15
c 111.0 0.10
d 109.9 0.15






Measured weld geometric parameters Appendix I 23/24

Specimen
Specimen
piece
Thickness
Throat
thickness
at A
Penetration
at A
Weld
Weld
angle
Toe
Radius
Undercut
Cold
lap
X73 L1 5.952 4.11 1.36 a 128.9 1.00
b 110.5 0.00
c 112.3 0.20
d 123.5 1.60
L2 5.871 3.94 1.58 a 118.7 0.20
b 108.1 0.00
c 112.5 0.10
d 126.8 0.30
R1 5.871 4.05 1.39 a 122.1 1.20
b 120.2 0.00
c 120.4 0.30
d 115.8 1.80
R2 5.937 3.98 1.36 a 125.2 1.00
b 117.1 0.20
c 121.9 0.40
d 125.1 0.70
X74 L1 5.925 3.85 1.55 a 127.0 1.20
b 130.6 1.00
c 128.7 0.60
d 126.4 1.70
L2 6.020 3.82 1.06 a 130.2 1.30
b 128.4 2.00
c 126.5 1.00
d 129.9 2.00
R1 5.933 3.85 0.86 a 130.8 1.00
b 128.7 1.70
c 127.8 0.20
d 122.9 1.60
R2 5.964 3.99 1.54 a 128.7 1.00
b 127.6 1.40
c 125.4 0.60 0.05
d 130.1 0.50
X75 L1 5.871 3.80 1.18 a 123.2 2.00
b 137.5 1.10
c 143.2 1.00 0.29
d 140.2 2.00
L2 6.013 4.12 0.99 a 128.7 0.20
b 139.0 2.20 0.09
c 138.7 0.00 0.64
d 139.4 1.70
R1 5.977 4.09 0.96 a 126.9 1.60
b 134.7 1.70
c 146.5 2.80 0.09
d 135.3 1.90 0.10
R2 6.048 3.97 0.99 a 132.5 0.60
b 145.1 4.00
c 151.4 2.00
d 139.4 1.50






Measured weld geometric parameters Appendix I 24/24

Specimen
Specimen
piece
Thickness
Throat
thickness
at A
Penetration
at A
Weld
Weld
angle
Toe
Radius
Undercut
Cold
lap
X76 L1 5.926 3.86 1.27 a 129.6 1.80
b 128.1 2.00
c 135.3 2.40 0.13
d 135.0 2.00 0.47
L2 5.906 3.98 1.04 a 125.0 1.00
b 128.3 2.20 0.08
c 130.8 1.30 0.40
d 126.8 2.50 0.36
R1 5.965 4.02 1.17 a 131.6 1.60
b 129.8 1.80
c 132.3 1.60 0.28
d 129.9 2.00 0.32
R2 5.938 3.93 0.90 a 129.3 1.80
b 129.8 1.40
c 141.8 1.60 0.19
d 134.4 1.00 0.24
X77 L1 5.949 4.10 0.75 a 129.7 3.00 0.11
b 122.5 0.50
c 124.4 1.70
d 130.1 1.00 0.20
L2 5.939 3.78 0.58 a 122.8 2.00
b 118.1 0.60
c 138.3 1.40
d 129.0 1.60 0.11
R1 5.978 3.92 0.97 a 124.6 2.00 0.06
b 117.0 2.00 0.48
c 124.0 1.40
d 126.6 1.60 0.13
R2 5.975 3.84 0.87 a 125.7 1.60
b 120.5 0.70
c 131.2 1.80
d 124.9 1.60









Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 1/35

First Set

X01






X02




Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 2/35


X03






X04





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 3/35


X05






X06





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 4/35


X07






X08





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 5/35


X09






X10





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 6/35


X11






X12





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 7/35


X13






X14





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 8/35


X15






X16





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 9/35


X17






X18





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 10/35


X19






X20





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 11/35


X21






X22





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 12/35


X23






X24





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 13/35


X25






X26





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 14/35


X27






X28





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 15/35


X29






X30





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 16/35


X39






X40





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 17/35


X59






X66





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 18/35


X67






X68





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 19/35


X69






X70





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 20/35

Second set

X31






X32




Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 21/35


X33






X34





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 22/35


X35






X36





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 23/35


X37






X41





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 24/35


X42






X43





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 25/35


X44






X45





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 26/35


X46






X47





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 27/35


X51






X52





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 28/35


X53






X55





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 29/35


X56






X60





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 30/35


X61






X62





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 31/35


X63






X64





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 32/35


X65






X71





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 33/35


X72






X73





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 34/35


X74






X75





Weld specimen micrographs with measurements Appendix II 35/35


X76






X77




Geometric variations Appendix III 1/3

0.995
0.99
0.95
0.9
0.8
0.5
0.1
-1.6
-0.6
0.4
1.4
2.4
3.4
4.4
5.4
80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
Minimum weld toe angle '' (deg)
-
l
n
(
-
l
n
(
F
)
)
F
All welds (70) - b Side

Figure III A: Extreme value distribution for weld toe angle (b side)



0.1
0.5
0.8
0.9
0.95
0.99
0.995
-1.6
-0.6
0.4
1.4
2.4
3.4
4.4
5.4
50 70 90 110 130 150
Minimum weld toe angle '' (deg)
-
l
n
(
-
l
n
(
F
)
)
F
All welds (70) - c Side

Figure III B: Extreme value distribution for weld toe angle (c side)


Geometric variations Appendix III 2/3

0.995
0.99
0.95
0.9
0.8
0.5
0.1
-1.6
-0.6
0.4
1.4
2.4
3.4
4.4
5.4
70 90 110 130 150
Minimum weld toe angle '' (deg)
-
l
n
(
-
l
n
(
F
)
)
F
All welds (70) - d Side

Figure III C: Extreme value distribution for weld toe angle (d side)



0.1
0.5
0.8
0.9
0.95
0.99
0.995
-1.6
-0.6
0.4
1.4
2.4
3.4
4.4
5.4
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Minimum weld toe radius '' (mm)
-
l
n
(
-
l
n
(
F
)
)
F
All welds (70) - b Side

Figure III D: Extreme value distribution for weld toe radius (b side)


Geometric variations Appendix III 3/3

0.1
0.5
0.8
0.9
0.95
0.99
0.995
-1.6
-0.6
0.4
1.4
2.4
3.4
4.4
5.4
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Minimum weld toe radius '' (mm)
-
l
n
(
-
l
n
(
F
)
)
F
All welds (70) - c Side

Figure III E: Extreme value distribution for weld toe radius (c side)



0.995
0.99
0.95
0.9
0.8
0.5
0.1
-1.6
-0.6
0.4
1.4
2.4
3.4
4.4
5.4
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Minimum weld toe radius '' (mm)
-
l
n
(
-
l
n
(
F
)
)
F
All welds (70) - d Side

Figure III F: Extreme value distribution for weld toe radius (d side)

Grouping of weld specimens Appendix IV 1/3

b Side
0.995
0.99
0.95
0.9
0.8
0.5
0.1
-1.6
-0.6
0.4
1.4
2.4
3.4
4.4
5.4
80 100 120 140
Minimum weld toe angle '' (deg)
-
l
n
(
-
l
n
(
F
)
)
F
A B C D

Figure IV A: Extreme value distribution of weld toe angle for different groups (b side)



c Side
0.1
0.5
0.8
0.9
0.95
0.99
0.995
-1.6
-0.6
0.4
1.4
2.4
3.4
4.4
5.4
50 70 90 110 130 150
Minimum weld toe angle '' (deg)
-
l
n
(
-
l
n
(
F
)
)
F
A B C D

Figure IV B: Extreme value distribution of weld toe angle for different groups (c side)


Grouping of weld specimens Appendix IV 2/3

d Side
0.995
0.99
0.95
0.9
0.8
0.5
0.1
-1.6
-0.6
0.4
1.4
2.4
3.4
4.4
5.4
70 90 110 130 150
Minimum weld toe angle '' (deg)
-
l
n
(
-
l
n
(
F
)
)
F
A B C D

Figure IV C: Extreme value distribution of weld toe angle for different groups (d side)



b Side
0.995
0.99
0.95
0.9
0.8
0.5
0.1
-1.6
-0.6
0.4
1.4
2.4
3.4
4.4
5.4
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Minimum weld toe radius '' (mm)
-
l
n
(
-
l
n
(
F
)
)
F
A B C D

Figure IV D: Extreme value distribution of weld toe radius for different groups (b side)
Grouping of weld specimens Appendix IV 3/3

c Side
0.1
0.5
0.8
0.9
0.95
0.99
0.995
-1.6
-0.6
0.4
1.4
2.4
3.4
4.4
5.4
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Minimum weld toe radius '' (mm)
-
l
n
(
-
l
n
(
F
)
)
F
A B C D

Figure IV E: Extreme value distribution of weld toe radius for different groups (c side)



d Side
0.1
0.5
0.8
0.9
0.95
0.99
0.995
-1.6
-0.6
0.4
1.4
2.4
3.4
4.4
5.4
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Minimum weld toe radius '' (mm)
-
l
n
(
-
l
n
(
F
)
)
F
A B C D

Figure IV F: Extreme value distribution of weld toe radius for different groups (d side)

Influence of weld profile variation on stress concentration Appendix V 1/2

K
t
= 3
K
t
= 2
K
t
= 1.5
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
2,5
80 100 120 140 160
Weld toe angle '' (deg)
W
e
l
d

t
o
e

r
a
d
i
u
s

'

'

(
m
m
)
All welds (70) - b Side

Figure V A: Weld profile variation with respect to stress concentration factor (b side)




K
t
= 3
K
t
= 2
K
t
= 1.5
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
2,5
50 70 90 110 130 150
Weld toe angle '' (deg)
W
e
l
d

t
o
e

r
a
d
i
u
s

'

'

(
m
m
)
All welds (70) - c Side

Figure V B: Weld profile variation with respect to stress concentration factor (c side)
Influence of weld profile variation on stress concentration Appendix V 2/2

Kt = 3
Kt = 2
Kt = 1.5
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
2,5
70 90 110 130 150
Weld toe angle '' (deg)
W
e
l
d

t
o
e

r
a
d
i
u
s

'

'

(
m
m
)
All welds (70) - d Side

Figure V C: Weld profile variation with respect to stress concentration factor (d side)

Influence of weld profile variation on fatigue strength Appendix VI 1/2

FAT 75
FAT 80
FAT 85
FAT 90
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
2,5
80 100 120 140
Weld toe angle '' (deg)
W
e
l
d

t
o
e

r
a
d
i
u
s

'

'

(
m
m
)
All welds (70) - b Side

Figure VI A: Weld profile variation with respect to fatigue strength (b side)



FAT 75
FAT 80
FAT 85
FAT 90
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
2,5
50 70 90 110 130 150
Weld toe angle '' (deg)
W
e
l
d

t
o
e

r
a
d
i
u
s

'

'

(
m
m
)
All welds (70) - c Side

Figure VI B: Weld profile variation with respect to fatigue strength (c side)
Influence of weld profile variation on fatigue strength Appendix VI 2/2

FAT 75
FAT80
FAT 85
FAT 90
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
2,5
70 90 110 130 150
Weld toe angle '' (deg)
W
e
l
d

t
o
e

r
a
d
i
u
s

'

'

(
m
m
)
All welds (70) - d Side

Figure VI C: Weld profile variation with respect to fatigue strength (d side)

Comparison with Structured Light Measurement Appendix VII 1/3

Weld toe angle '' - (b Side)
45line
R
2
= 0.693
correlation = 0.8325
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Structured Light Measurement
M
a
n
u
a
l

M
e
a
s
u
r
e
m
e
n
t
Data points
(68 welds)

Figure VII A: Comparison of measurements for weld toe angle (b side)



Weld toe angle '' - (c Side)
45line
R
2
= 0.7733
correlation = 0.8794
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Structured Light Measurement
M
a
n
u
a
l

M
e
a
s
u
r
e
m
e
n
t
Data points
(68 welds)

Figure VII B: Comparison of measurements for weld angle (c side)


Comparison with Structured Light Measurement Appendix VII 2/3

Weld toe angle '' - (d Side)
45line
R
2
= 0.7606
correlation = 0.8721
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Structured Light Measurement
M
a
n
u
a
l

M
e
a
s
u
r
e
m
e
n
t
Data points
(68 welds)

Figure VII C: Comparison of measurements for weld toe angle (d side)



Weld toe radius '' - (b Side)
45line
R
2
= 0.4691
correlation = 0.685
0
1
2
3
0 1 2 3 4 5
Structured Light Measurement
M
a
n
u
a
l

M
e
a
s
u
r
e
m
e
n
t
Data Points
(68 welds)

Figure VII D: Comparison of measurements for weld toe radius (b side)


Comparison with Structured Light Measurement Appendix VII 3/3

Weld toe radius '' - (c Side)
45line
R
2
= 0.4067
correlation = 0.6377
0
1
2
3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Structured Light Measurement
M
a
n
u
a
l

M
e
a
s
u
r
e
m
e
n
t
Data Points
(68 welds)

Figure VII E: Comparison of measurements for weld toe radius (c side)



Weld toe radius '' - (d Side)
45line
R
2
= 0.2304
correlation = 0.4799
0
1
2
3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Structured Light Measurement
M
a
n
u
a
l

M
e
a
s
u
r
e
m
e
n
t
Data Points
(68 welds)

Figure VII F: Comparison of measurements for weld toe radius (d side)