J Fail. Anal. and Preven.
(2008) 8:207–212
DOI 10.1007/s11668-008-9129-6
TECHNICAL ARTICLE—PEER-REVIEWED
Cracking Tendencies in Fillet Welds
Debbie Aliya Æ Julian Raphael
Published online: 28 March 2008
Ó Society for Machinery Failure Prevention Technology 2007
Abstract Simplified models of several configurations of
structural steel arc weldments were made as an aid to
understanding the importance of penetration and weld size
with respect to fatigue crack initiation tendencies. Sur-
prising findings were that the presence of a gap (simulating
less than ideal fit up) may increase or reduce the value of
the highest stress depending on the configuration. The
effect of residual stresses was not included in the model,
however causes and effects of residual stresses in welds
will be briefly described in a qualitative manner.
Keywords Contact stresses
Effective throat

FEA Model
Fillet weld
Fit up
Leg length
Penetration

Residual stress
Background
Sometime in the 1990s, a manufacturing company was
having a problem with a weld that they had made
successfully for some time. The results of an internal
investigation found that the settings on the fixture had been
Reprinted with permission from Integration of Machinery Failure
Prevention Technologies into Systems Health Management,
Proceedings of the 61st Meeting of the Society for Machinery Failure
Prevention Technology, Society for Machinery Failure Prevention
Technology, 2007, pp. 165–173.
D. Aliya (&)
Aliya Analytical, Inc., PO Box 2407, Grand Rapids,
MI 49501, USA
e-mail: DaAliya@aol.com
J. Raphael
JR Technical Services, LLC, Abingdon, VA, USA
e-mail: drjulianraphael@hotmail.com
unintentionally changed. An outside investigation of the
effect of the improper settings centered on the weld
dimensions, including penetration, leg and throat size, and
heat affected zone hardness. Significant reductions of
effective throat size had been caused by the fixture prob-
lem, despite the fact that the leg lengths were within the
specified range, and had not changed significantly. The
number of cycles that it took to create a fatigue crack was
reduced by about half. Personnel at the plant did not
understand why there was such a dramatic effect of
something so invisible on the part.
Heat affected zone hardness values were not altered, as
the preheating cycle had not changed. The analyst was
asked ‘‘Why does the weld penetration matter?’’ At the
time, not only did the somewhat youthful writer not have
an answer, but several knowledgeable engineers who were
questioned at the time did not have answers either. The
problem remained a mystery.
Some time later, as the writer gained a greater under-
standing of stress states and weld procedure, some possible
explanations started to form. Welding is a powerful and
useful joining method, yet weld failures are frequent and
often problematic. Many metallurgical and welding experts
agree that a properly executed weld will crack in the parent
metal if the assembly cracks at all. This implies that any
joint that cracks in the fusion metal was improperly exe-
cuted. This work shows that the situation surrounding
stress analysis, the main tool available to predict and
understand crack location and orientation preferences in a
structure, is very complicated. In fact, after we completed
this analysis, we found that very sophisticated models of
weldments are being utilized, including service load
induced stresses and residual stresses. By entering the
words ‘‘residual stress finite element weldment’’ in an
Internet search engine, several articles were found, as well
123
208
Fig. 1 Configuration of model weldment
Fig. 2 Shows ripple effect present on most real welds. The model did
not account for this
as abstracts of articles available for purchase. The most
readily available all cover butt welds, rather than fillet
welds, which are more widely used in applications outside
of power and energy generation equipment, pressure ves-
sels, and other critical applications.
The rest of this paper deals with a very simplified model
of several different versions of a fillet weld joining two
pieces of one inch thick ASTM A36 steel plate. We did not
attempt to use different properties for the fusion boundary
or heat affected zones. The joint produces an ‘‘L’’ shape,
whose two-inch long vertical leg is fixed. The standard load
that we selected to hang from the end of the two-inch long
horizontal leg was 1,000 pounds. The third dimension of
the joint was set at 0.5 inches. To have some simulation of
real life welding conditions, we left a gap of 0.010 inches
between the small end of the horizontal leg and the vertical
face of the vertical member, as shown in Fig. 1.
As shown in Fig. 1, the model did not really simulate a
weld at all. This simplified model allowed us to gain some
understanding of the geometric issues associated with real
world weld quality. But even here, we did not try to address
the effect of the scalloping at the weld toe that is a result of
the progressive solidification of a weld bead. Obviously,
the scalloping effect complicates the model and creates
locally higher stresses than would be expected based on the
simple model (Figs. 2 and 3). Real welds also have dif-
ferent material properties in the fusion zones, as might be
expected from the different appearance of the fusion metal
123
J Fail. Anal. and Preven. (2008) 8:207–212
Fig. 3 This real world weld cracked along the stress concentrations
created by the scallops
Fig. 4 This double fillet weld cross section has been fine ground and
etched with acid to reveal the fact that the weld filler and base metals
have different characteristics
compared to the base metal in the metallographically pre-
pared and etched steel weld cross section shown in Fig. 4.
The Model
We ended up modeling four different variations of the
basic weld. To start with, we used the weld size recom-
mended by the widely known Lincoln Electric Procedure
Handbook of Arc Welding [1], which for a one-inch thick
plate, is 0.75 inches. Since both plates were the same
thickness, we did not need to concern ourselves with
selecting the thinner plate (Fig. 5).
What really changed from one model to the next was the
length of the notch created by the gap between the hori-
zontal and vertical members. Deeper penetration made the
notch shorter. The Von Mises stress plot can be correlated
with a form of damage parameter which shows the loca-
tions where it is easiest for a fatigue crack to initiate;
fatigue cracks initiate in shear, and local yielding must
occur. The principal stress plot shows the locations of
positive principal stresses, where it is easiest for the crack
to extend (Figs. 6 and 7). Note that the Von Mises stresses
are high at both the root and the face of the weld, while the
principle stresses are high only along the face of the weld.
J Fail. Anal. and Preven. (2008) 8:207–212 209

Fig. 7 Principal stresses for basic model with nominal weld size

Fig. 5 Basic weld dimensions

Fig. 6 Von mises stresses for basic model with nominal weld size

Thus, while it may be possible in this case for a fatigue

crack to initiate at the root, it is unlikely that it will grow. A
Fig. 8 This is the weld with deeper penetration
crack that initiates at the face of the weld will tend to grow.
This model shows two locations along the face of the weld
that might tend to crack. The weld toe has a narrow ‘‘red
strip’’ in the Finite Element Analysis1 and the centerline of
the weld also has a ‘‘hot spot.’’ In practice, we rarely see
the crack in the center of the face. The reason for this, in a
properly executed weldment, which uses filler material that
is stronger than the base material, is likely due at least in
part to the ragged nature of the weld toe, such as the pre-
viously mentioned scallops. Residual stresses may also
tend to be higher at the toe, since the material never gets as
hot as the filler metal itself. The released heat of fusion
may provide some stress relief in the filler metal.

1 Fig. 9 Stiffer horizontal leg results from increased penetration. Gap

J. Raphael, PhD, performed the Finite Element Analysis work using closing no longer ‘‘absorbs’’ stress
NASTRAN modeling software. The models were linear elastic
models, which means that any stresses shown over the yield strength
The cross sectional sketch of the next analysis (Fig. 8) is
of the material are higher than actual. However, this model gives us a
good starting point to understand where the likely crack initiation based on the premise that we should be able to lower the
positions might be in the simple geometries studied. stresses by making a deeper weld. It was believed that by

123
210
Fig. 10 Model simulating ‘‘lack of fusion’’ weld anomaly
Fig. 11 Stress map for ‘‘lack of fusion’’ simulation
having more material in the fusion zone, thereby shortening
the effective notch at the root of the weld that is created by
our intentionally modeled gap, we would expect a more
robust weldment.
However, the result of the linear finite element model
(Fig. 9) shows us that the smaller throat and lower
Fig. 12 The effect of a large
weld bead with deep penetration
and significantly lower stresses
123
J Fail. Anal. and Preven. (2008) 8:207–212
penetration of the first model allowed the gap to close, and
created an overall lower maximum stress in the ‘‘worse’’
weld!
The remaining models were with material actually
missing from the root of the weld, and another attempt at
an ‘‘improvement,’’ which was a larger weld bead than
anyone would normally use intentionally in practice for
this size (thickness) of plate.
First the original nominal sized weld with the missing
material at the root. The ‘‘empty’’ triangle was large
enough to allow the horizontal member to flex, and thus
close the bottom of the gap (Fig. 10).
Figure 11 shows the finite element stress map. Note that
the maximum stress is at the weld toe, with another high
stress location at the bottom edge of the gap. Cracks are
unlikely to start at the bottom of the gap, as the stresses
here are compressive. Note also that while the peak stress
is higher than the value for the original model with com-
plete fusion, it is lower than the model with ‘‘good’’
penetration.
The final model was done for the oversized legs and
penetration. I have seen several articles written by welding
engineers on the subject of issues related to oversized
welds. The usual objection is that it is wasteful of labor,
time, and expensive consumable supplies. However, in this
model, again based only on geometry and not considering
residual stresses or metallurgical damage, we see a sig-
nificant reduction in stress (Fig. 12). Note also that the high
stress location has moved away from the weld toe toward
the center of the face of the bead.
This concludes the modeling portion of this paper. A
lesson learned was the complex nature of welding. The
blanket advice on how to make a preferred weld is clearly
useful only as a rough guide to welding. Anyone who
wishes to improve a problem design clearly needs to try
to understand what is happening in the particular weld-
ment in question, rather than trying to apply a blanket
solution.
J Fail. Anal. and Preven. (2008) 8:207–212
Fig. 13 Several examples of deviations from ideal weld practice
Some Real Weld Cross Sections
Although most fillet weld cracks start at the weld toe, there
are situations where cracks start at the root. Usually this is
due to the particular stress distribution created by the
loading geometry. Figure 13 shows a cross section of a
component that had been subject to a durability test. There
is a crack which is growing out of the root (Weld A in
Fig. 13). The cross section seen in Weld B has an
‘‘undercut’’ condition. Going back to the finite element
maps in Figs. 6, 7, 9 and 11, again, even without consid-
ering undercut, the stresses are often highest at the weld
toe. Undercut will make it that much more likely that a
crack will be able to initiate at the weld toe. Weld C in the
same Figure shows a large gap, which we now know may
Fig. 14 Root crack
211
Fig. 15 ‘‘Bubble gum’’ joints create high constraint
end up being helpful or harmful to the assembly durability,
however, the missing material in the middle of the weld
face may be just as harmful as many of the ‘‘named’’ weld
discontinuities, such as lack of root fusion and internal
porosity.
Figure 14 shows another example of a fatigue crack
growing into the base material from the root of the weld,
and another weldment with the same geometry.
One type of weld discontinuity can be very damaging in
some loading geometries. Incomplete fusion (in the sense
of any boundary lacking atom to atom bonds across it) at
the weld toe position at the end of the length of a weld may
cause a fatigue crack to initiate immediately on starting
service. Figure 15 shows the ends of a ‘‘t’’ weld with beads
on both sides of the vertical member. The ends of these
welds were classical ‘‘bubble gum’’ welds. This term may
not be considered formal by some, but in the writer’s
opinion, it is a good term. The implication is that the
weldment would have been just as strong had the filler
material been bubble gum! In fact, the constraint created by
this geometry makes the structure weaker than if there were
no weld at all at this location. A better joint would have
been created by wrapping the fillet bead around the end of
the vertical member, and doing whatever it took to make
sure that the welder, human or robot, was getting enough
123
212 J Fail. Anal. and Preven. (2008) 8:207–212

to allow regular use by the average welding contractor. The

example of a longitudinal butt weld in joining two steel
sheets allowed a relatively clear example of the magnitude
of residual stresses that can develop in welds. Figure 16
shows two views of the weld flash which protruded from
such a butt weld produced by a resistance welding process.
The weld metal at the seam shrank enough to leave visible
gaps in the weld bead after the material cooled. In this case
the base metal was stressed in compression while the weld
metal was stressed in tension. Clearly, the weld metal is
more likely to crack in this case.

Conclusion

The benefits of welding as a joining technology are so

widespread that it is unlikely to be given up any time soon.
Understanding stresses in welds to a degree that allows us
to make the best use of welding will likely continue to
require careful attention to known good practice and
inspection, in order to prevent inconvenient or catastrophic
failures. Taking time to think about how we know what we
think we know can allow us to gain a more comprehensive
understanding of reality, the ultimate decision maker in
which of our designs and products succeed and which ones
Fig. 16 Butt weld fail.

heat into the base metal to melt some of it and actually
make a joint.
It has already been mentioned that realistic modeling of
residual stresses in fillet welds is not far enough advanced
Reference
1. Lincoln Electric Company: The Procedure Handbook of Arc
Welding, 13th edn. Dec 1994, Figs. 2–104 and Tables 2–7,
pp. 2.2–4 and 2.2–5.

123
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.