This article was downloaded by: [Library Services City University London]

On: 15 February 2014, At: 14:50

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer
House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Welding International
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/twld20

Failure analysis of welded constructions

a

Jan Stabrya & Krzysztof Dutka

The University of Warmia and Mazury , Olsztyn, Poland

Published online: 31 May 2011.

To cite this article: Jan Stabrya & Krzysztof Dutka (2011) Failure analysis of welded constructions, Welding
International, 25:7, 517-522, DOI: 10.1080/09507116.2010.540839
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09507116.2010.540839

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the Content) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of
the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied
upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall
not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other
liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or
arising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Welding International
Vol. 25, No. 7, July 2011, 517522
Selected from Przeglad Spawalnictwa 2008 (6) 15 20

Failure analysis of welded constructions

Jan Stabrya and Krzysztof Dutka
The University of Warmia and Mazury, Olsztyn, Poland

Downloaded by [Library Services City University London] at 14:50 15 February 2014

In this article, we described the dependence of the failure of steel building constructions on the quality of their welded joints.
On the basis of our own experience, we specified basic improprieties observed in the manufacturing process of welded
joints. Examinations were made of welded constructions in which discontinuities were revealed after only a short period of
use. Laboratory tests showed a series of technological and constructional shortcomings. On the basis of the examinations
results, some guidelines for a revision of the welding process were handed to one particular manufacturer.

Introduction
Welding is a commonly applied joining technique in
industries related to bridges, hulls, pressure containers,
industrial pipelines, and building constructions. The quality
of the joints made determines a constructions hardness
and its fault-free operation1,2. In various manufacturing
fields, the approach to quality varies3 7. Especially,
restrictive provisions are laid on productions subject to
technical inspections [DT, UT, and WO-W provisions
(Polish regulatory codes)], while the most tolerant refers to
building construction production. After having worked
with various companies producing steel construction
structures8,9, it can be seen that welding production very
often occurs based only on simplified construction
documentation. Project descriptions very often contain
such recommendations as metal sheets to be joined with
fillet welds (a 0.7 g) and butt welds (on the full width of
a thinner component); the construction to be performed
according to PN-B/06200 standard, 5th fault quality, more
important joints to be X-ray tested without indications
as to the location of the more important joints and very
often what their required quality levels are, along a
kilometre of welds. In the project under discussion, the
following was not considered: necessity for butt profiles
joining when construction elements fit within trading
lengths. This particular manufacturer joins shorter cut-off
fragments with butt welds which were not planned for in
the construction documentation and are not covered by
not-destructive tests. Only construction catastrophes10 12
expose the presence of those joints made without full
penetration and allow for the checking of those joints
quality using NDT methods.
The companys construction designers often show no
appropriate knowledge with regard to their steels
mechanical and thermomechanical states, select materials
according to the type without considering thermomechanical treatment states or surface finishing methods, and
apply metallurgic repair procedures (pit erosion, cut-outs,
and hardfacing of cracking). The authors are familiar with
the various cases which are as follows:
. Utilization of metallurgic constructions characterized

by surface delimitations and overlapping.

ISSN 0950-7116 print/ISSN 1754-2138 online
q 2011 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/09507116.2010.540839
http://www.informaworld.com

. Weld distribution near cold-work zones of cold-work

profiles is also very common.

. Presence of non-technological construction solutions.
. In many companies, there are no welding engineers.

Welding technology processes conducted depend on

the welders opinion or spoken instructions from a
foreman or a master welder.
Frequent cold welding of steels with higher
resistance, e.g. 18G2A with component thicknesses
exceeding 30 mm.
Production plants do not use quality systems
according to ISO 9000 standards, are not familiar
with PN-EN ISO 3834 standards, have no qualified
welding technologies, have no organized professional
quality control according to PN-EN 473 standards.
Technical conditions for performance and acceptance
are not prepared, test joints are not made, and there
are no recommendations as to the choice of
technology, the welding materials used, or the welder
qualifications.
Welders fail to provide valid certifications according
to PN-EN287-1, possessing only welders books
issued many years ago.
Construction materials budgeting, transport, handling, and storage leave a lot to be desired as well, as
does protection against permanent transfer of
metallurgic features, etc.
Fundamental shortcomings in the manufacturing of
welded steel constructions include application of
incorrect welding technology, careless welding, and
the presence of inadmissible welding discrepancies.

After a fairly recent construction catastrophe at the

Katowice Exhibition Centre10, standards and provisions
requirements have been followed more strictly. Usually,
tests are recommended when a construction undergoes
serious damage11,13 and often, exploitation cracks appear
before a catastrophe occurs. Laboratory tests designed to
confirm established quality and to highlight faulty joints
for repairs prevent construction defects. Laboratory test
results may also be used as indications for performance of
corrections in the technological process. Both existing
damage states and analysis of reasons for catastrophic

518

J. Stabrya and K. Dutka

failures require resistance analysis as well as credible

assessment and material tests1,7,9.

Aim and study range

The aim of the study was to identify the causes of cracking
in welded joints of pipe elements. The study range of the
joints collected from the faulty construction and a rewelded sample joint covered is as follows:
. Visual tests (VT; PN-EN ISO 5817, PN-EN 970),
. Hardness tests in the welded joint HV (PN-EN

1043-1).

Downloaded by [Library Services City University London] at 14:50 15 February 2014

. Joint macroscopic tests MA (PN-EN 1321).

The subject of the study was a two-bolt lock unit for a

guidepost gateway (Figure 1).
The unit consists of a top bolt, bottom bolt, and two
fastening beams. In the construction, cracks were found
in the welded joints, which were seen under a zinc layer
after a short operating period. Cracks in the weld joining
the top and bottom bolts with the fastening beams
occurred in the HAZ (from the bolts side), in the area
opposite each fastening beams corner. The locations of
the cracks are shown in a diagram of the weld knot
(Figure 2).
The construction was made of 300 300 6.3 mm
hot-bended square profiles (top and bottom bolt) and
250 250 8 mm (fastening beam). Construction components made of S355J2H steel were joined by applying
welding method 135 (MAG). Examples of construction
cracks are shown on Figures 3 and 4.
A cut-out weld knot fragment was provided for
laboratory tests by the welding company which included
cracking in a place marked as in Figure 3, as well as
additional test components made of the same materials
but including corrections which had been made in the
technological process, as per the authors suggestions.
Figures 5 and 6 show components delivered for tests.
Top bold 300 300 6.3

Fastening beam
250 250 8

Figure 2. Location of cracks on a scheme of the weld knot of

the lock unit.

From the fragment provided for tests which included

cracks, two strips marked A and B were cut out, and
metallographic microsections were performed on their
cross sections (Figure 7). Cross section A was created in a
place where the opening was the largest (from the
fastening beam corner), and comparative cross section B
was created in a place away from the corner where
cracking was not visible.
The microstructure of both cross sections together with
the enlargement of areas with disclosed discrepancies are
shown in Figures 8 and 9. According to the manufacturers
information, the constructions under testing were supposed to have been made as angled, multi-beam butt joints
with full penetration and replenished with a fillet weld.
However, according to the penetration size, preparation
for the welding process was imprecise as the distance
between the fastening beam face and bolts surface was
estimated at 8 mm (cross section A) and 10 mm (cross
section B) standard distances should range from 1 to
3 mm. Replenishing filled weld has approximately 10 mm
of thickness, while one-sided filled welds are performed
with a thickness not exceeding 0.7 of the welded
component thickness for which this example has a
maximum of 4.5 mm.
In the weld on both cross sections, various welding
discrepancies are present.
Cross section A (Figure 8) cracking visible from
the outside refers to the opened, incomplete fusion with a
length of approximately 3 mm (Figure 8(c)). In the same
line of cracking inside the weld (in internal beams),
the next incomplete fusion, with a length of approxi-

Bottom bold 300 300 6.3

Figure 1. Scheme of the guidepost gateway (arrows point at the

lock units elements).

Figure 3. An example of cracking in the HAZ weld on the 300

locks side. The crack indicates the biggest spacing in the
proximity of the fastening beam. It tapers off further on.

Welding International

519

Downloaded by [Library Services City University London] at 14:50 15 February 2014

Figure 4. View of the damage. Cracking in the HAZ

circumferential weld in the proximity of the corners.

mately 4 mm, is visible, as well as a large slag inclusion

(Figure 8(b)).
Moving towards the fastening beam face, the next
incomplete inter-layer fusion is visible (Figure 8(a)).
In the native material (NM) of a bolt under open
incomplete fusion, a cracking is visible (Figure 8(d)).
Cross section B (Figure 9) was performed in a place
where the surface slot was not visible to the naked eye.
The discontinuity found in macroscopic tests is an
incomplete fusion covered with a zinc layer (Figure 9(a)).
The external beam is stuck to the bolts surface at a depth
of approximately 4 mm. In the beads arranged from the
edge of the fastening beam, incomplete fusion and
cracking are present (Figure 9(b)).
In the bolts wall, cracking perpendicular to its surface
(of approximately 1.5 mm length) starts in the region of the
face of the stuck bead (Figure 10) and was created before
the zinc coating, which is proved by the presence of zinc in
a slot.
This cracking is clearly visible on the surface of the
cross section used for hardness testing in the welded joint.
Hypothetically, the presence of this crack should be
related to the low quality of the metallurgic profile
(chemical composition segregation, inappropriate deoxidation, and degasification method), and profile bending
process (e.g. too low a temperature), as well as thermal
procedures related to the construction process.
The presence of zinc in a slot at the face of the stuck
bead shows that the material discontinuity was created
either before galvanization or during the process.

Figure 5. Fragment of the knot construction with cracking

designed for laboratory testing. The surface is covered with a
thick zinc layer prone to chipping.

Figure 6. Additional testing element carried out after correct

re-selection of welding technology. Weld as seen after the
penetration tests (discontinuity not found).

Hardness tests
HV10 hardness was measured using an HPO 250 hardness
tester on a cross section of the stretch provided for tests.
Measurements were made on the NM of the bolt, in the
heat-affected zone (HAZ) of the bolt, in the weld (at a
depth of up to 2 mm under the surface external beads),
and in the HAZ and NM of the fastening beam. Table 1
presents the test results.

Figure 7. Spots where the samples for metallographic testing

were cut-off. Cross section A at the spot of the biggest cracking
(in the proximity of the fastening beams corner) and cross
section B at a spot distant from the cracking.

Downloaded by [Library Services City University London] at 14:50 15 February 2014

520

J. Stabrya and K. Dutka

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

Figure 8. Macrostructure of cross section A (etched in nital, 4,

3 [sic] magnification). (a d) Welding discrepancies were
found (magnification 10).

The bolts NM shows the lowest hardness. In the

curved part of the bolt, hardness was increased by
40 50 HV, which proves incomplete profile recrystallization in the hot forming process. In the HAZ, bolt hardness
of approximately 100 HV was found, exceeding NM
hardness (some standards allow varying hardness in joint
zones of up to 80 HV), although only hardness levels
exceeding 350 HV require joints to be annealed or given
initial heating before welding. Hardness in both the NM
and the HAZ of the fastening beam is comparable with the
welds hardness and is of good quality.

(a)

(b)

Figure 9. Macrostructure of cross section B (etched in nital, 4

magnification of 4 ). (a d) Welding discrepancies were found
(magnification 13).

galvanizing. In the following penetration tests, no surface

discontinuities were found, which means the applied
annealing did not cause cracks in the weld. Components
were cut as shown in Figure 13. Cross sections were
located near corners, i.e. in places where cracks occurred
in the zinc-coated construction. Figures 11 and 12 show
two macroscopic microsections made.
Figure 11 shows a second cross section B, where
unacceptable welding discrepancies were found.
Based on macroscopic tests of the cross sections, it was
stated that the geometry and sample joint quality compared
to the initial solution were significantly improved. Better
preparation for welding could be observed, as a result of

Sample component assessment after modification

of the technological process
In consideration of the authors suggestions, the
manufacturer made modifications to their technological
process by shortening the distance between joined
elements, and in their scarfing and welding techniques.
After introduction of these changes, sample components
were made which then underwent penetration tests which
showed no cracking within the joints (Figure 6). These
new sample joints were tested at a temperature of 4508C in
an electric chamber furnace for 10 min, in order to
simulate the thermal conditions which occur during

(a)

(b)

Figure 10. Cracking in (a) the NM upon the arc of the profile
300 300; (b) traces of hardness measurements are visible. The
arrow points at the zinc in the slot.

Welding International
Table 1.

521

Results of HV10 hardness measurements.

(a)

Place of measurement
(mm)

Downloaded by [Library Services City University London] at 14:50 15 February 2014

NM of 300 300 lock

NM of 300 300 lock arc
HAZ of 300 300 lock
Weld
HAZ of 250 250 fastening beam corner
NM of 250 250 fastening beam

Hardness range
(HV)
136160
180206
249264
190230
221225
180205

which a much lower volume of melted metal and correct

depth of the fillet weld (a 4.5 mm). Therefore, the weld
face does not overlap the bolts edge zone. The face ends at
a distance of approximately 1.5 g from the arcs start to the
internal bolts profile. HAZ was decreased and at the same
time, the welding effect on recrystallization processed in a
bended profile decreased.
A correct welding technique was maintained along
the joints entire length. Even so, in one cross section, a
lack of side fusion on the fastening beam edge was found
(Figure 12(a)) and incomplete fusion in the root of the
weld between the penetration bead and bolts profile
surface was visible (Figure 12(b)).

Summary
Based on a certificate provided by the manufacturer,
the bolts profile was made of S355J2H steel according to
PN-EN 10210:2006, i.e. a non-alloy construction steel
designated for hot-formed shapes. According to general
recommendations for welded joints, locating welds in
cold-work zones caused by bending, upsetting, cutting
with scissors, digging holes, etc. especially in unsettled
steels and those inclined to ageing, should be avoided.
In cold-deformed areas, the distance between the weld and
the deformed area should be higher than five thicknesses of
the welded element. In the discussed construction, this
recommendation was not included, because the weld
where the cracking occurred was in a place overlapping
the curved part of the bolts profile. The increased
hardness of the curved part of the bolt proved incomplete
recrystallization, and, therefore, each thermal effect

Figure 11. Macrostructure of cross section B (etched in Adlers

reagent, magnification 4).

(b)

Figure 12. Macrostructure of cross section A (etched in Adlers

reagent, magnification 4 ). (a) Lack of side fusion
(magnification 8) and (b) lack of fusion at the weld root
(magnification 8).

process (gassy cuts and welding) in that zone may lead

to recrystallization.
There were also attempts to explain the cracking by the
presence of atomic nitrogen in the structure, which would
cause ageing as well as the high carbon equivalent value
(CEV). According to the certificate, the steel used is
characterized by low nitrogen content as well as sufficient
silicon and aluminium content for correct settling and
resistance to ageing. CEV 0.36% is much lower than is
permitted by the standard (0.50%) which shows that the
steel should not cause any welding problems due to its
chemical composition.
As a result of changes made to their technological
preparation process and in the welding of the joint, overall
quality was improved. In the re-welded sample joint, both
in the provided state and after annealing, no cracks were
observed which were present in the damaged element.

522

J. Stabrya and K. Dutka

The created discontinuities should not be connected with
the following:
. Hot-dip galvanization.
. Hardness in the HAZ from quenching.

As a result of the discrepancies found in the production

process, periodical inspections of welding in progress are
recommended.

Downloaded by [Library Services City University London] at 14:50 15 February 2014

References

Figure 13. Test element after slitting. The cross section sector
taken for metallographic testing is marked by an arrow.

In the macroscopic tests, a lack of side fusion was found on

one of the cross sections. This means that welding
techniques could be further improved by decreasing the
threshold or applying 0.5 V scarfing with distance
elimination. Welding technology should be adapted to
the welding position of the actual construction.

Conclusions
Discrepancies in the gateway bolt unit construction are
included as follows:
. Use of incorrect welding technique, which was the

reason for the presence of a number of the welding

defects, mainly incomplete fusions.
. Improper preparation for welding (too high distance
and probably too great a threshold and no scarfing).
The following affect cracking occurrence in a joint:
. Incorrect construction solution applied, where a

weld gets closer to secure with cold-work bolts

curved parts causing recrystallization.
. Stresses caused by no deformation possibility of
a rigid wall (too small distance from weld to
profiles arc).
. Too much heat introduced in, for example, the
thickening of the fillet weld.
. Material defects of metallurgic origin and recrystallization processes.

1. Dutka K, Stabrya J. Jakosc zaczy w procesie wytwarzania i

napraw konstrukcji spawanych. Konferencja Wydziau
Mechanicznego Doskonalenie techniki i technologii w
przemysle i rolnictwie, Olsztyn; 1996.
2. Robakowski T. Wpyw wad w zaczach spawanych na
wasnosci eksploatacyjne konstrukcji spawanych, Gliwice:
Wydawnictwo Instytutu Spawalnictwa; 1997.
3. Zioko J. Konstrukcje stalowe. Czesc 2. Wytwarzanie i
montaz, WSiP; 1995.
4. Zioko J. Utrzymanie i modernizacja konstrukcji stalowych.
Arkady; 1991.
5. Medwadowski J. Stalowe konstrukcje budowlane. odz:
Wydawnictwo Politechniki odzkiej; 1974.
6. Stabrya J. Rola badan nieniszczacych w produkcji obiektow
dla przemysu spozywczego VII Sympozjum im. Cz.
Kanafojskiego Problemy budowy oraz eksploatacji maszyn
i urzadzen rolniczych, Pock; 1997.
7. Wolak Z, Dutka K, Stabrya J, Lipinski T, Wach A. Badania
nieniszczace w ocenie stanu technicznego urzadzen
energetycznych. Materiay Konferencji nt Problemy eksploatacji maszyn w pracach wydziau mechanicznego.
Wydz. Mech. ART w Olsztynie Sekcja Podstaw Eksploatacji
Komitetu Budowy Maszyn PAN; 1994.
8. Stabrya J. Rola badan nieniszczacych w zapobieganiu
katastrofom ekologicznym. Sympozjum miedzynarodowe
Ekologia w ogrodnictwie, Olsztyn; 1996.
9. Wolak Z, Dutka K, Stabrya J, Lipinski T. Zastosowanie
badan nieniszczacych jako metody diagnostycznej w procesie
modernizacji urzadzen. I Miedzynarodowe. Seminarium nt
Modernizacja techniki dla potrzeb rejonow: olsztynskiego i
kaliningradzkiego, RosjaKaliningrad; 1994.
10. Wuwer W. i inn.: Poaczenia w konstrukcji hali Miedzynarodowych Targow Katowickich w Chorzowie. XXIII
Konferencja naukowotechniczna Awarie budowlane
2007, Szczecin-Miedzyzdroje; 2007.
11. Kozowski A, Sleczka L. Stanawaryjnykonstrukcjidachowej
z ryglami o falistym srodniku, XXIII Konferencja naukowotechniczna Awarie budowlane 2007, Szczecin-Miedzyzdroje; 2007.
12. Lobanow LM. Current directions of research work
conducted in the E.O. Paton Institute of Electric Welding
in the field of welding technique and welded constructions
strength. Biuletyn Instytutu Spawalnictwa. 1999;5.
13. Ziolkowski W. i inn.: Bedne zaozenia projektowe
przyczyna awarii konstrukcji hali. XXIII Konferencja
naukowotechniczna Awarie budowlane 2007, Szczecin
Miedzyzdroje; 2007.
14. Chmiel J, Tuleja J. Badania makroskopowe elementow
metalowych. Akademia Morska w Szczecinie; 2005.