Engineering Failure Analysis 17 (2010) 571–578

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Failure Analysis

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/engfailanal

Stress concentration effects of undercut defect and reinforcement metal

in butt welded joint
M. Cerit, O. Kokumer, K. Genel *
Mechanical Engineering Department, Sakarya University, Adapazari 54187, Turkey

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In the present study, stress distribution of butt welded joints with various amounts of rein-
Received 8 July 2009 forcement metal and undercut defect has been investigated under uniaxial tension for a
Accepted 11 October 2009 full penetration by systematically conducting a series of two-dimensional finite element
Available online 1 November 2009
(FE) models. The FE analysis indicated that the amount of reinforcement metal in weld
zone has an important effect on stress distribution. For 120° of the reinforcement angle
Keywords: that designating reinforcement metal in weld joint, and 0.5 mm of toe radius, the value
Welding
of stress concentration factor (SCF) exceeds 3.3r0. The analyses show that SCF takes much
Defect
Stress concentration
higher values in both low reinforcement angle and ratio of toe radius to plate thickness (R/
Finite element t). As for joints with undercut defects, it is concluded that severity of SCF is mainly con-
trolled by the ratio of depth to radius of undercut (h/r) and width (W). In addition to under-
cut defect, the presence of reinforcement metal, SCF noticeably increases with decreasing
the reinforcement angle; it attains maximum value (7.4r0) for h/r = 5 and W = 3 mm. How-
ever, for the joints having wider undercut defects, the influence of reinforcement metal on
SCF is found to be relatively lower; SCF is 6.7r0 for W = 6 mm. Finally, an attempt has been
made to construct simple relationships among the SCF of the weld joint, reinforcement
angle, undercut defect and dimensionless parameters defining weld toe detail.
Crown Copyright Ó 2009 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

It is well known that butt weld is an important connection for the integrity of most types of welded structures such as
bridges, ships, pressure vessels and offshore platforms. The mechanical properties of a welded joint depend mainly on micro-
structure of heat affected zone (HAZ), residual tensile stress and geometrical discontinuities such as misalignment, excessive
reinforcement metal, toe radius and undercut defect [1]. These geometrical discontinuities formed on the welded joint tend
to intensify the local stress field and hence reduce the load carrying capacity, which consequently represent an important
limitation to the safe and reliable of welded structures. The magnification of the stress at the local stress field can be ex-
pressed by the elastic stress concentration factor, Kt (SCF), which must be known in engineering analysis and design. The
undercut defect, associated with either improper welding techniques or excessive welding currents, or both, is generally lo-
cated parallel to junction of weld metal and base metal at the toe or root of the weld [1,2]. The weld toe region is the point at
which the base metal and weld face meet, and the greatest changes occur in their section. For the cyclic loading, the stage of
crack initiation is dramatically reduced by the sharp toe radius and possible presence of undercut defect [3]. Therefore, there
is practically no crack initiation period due to these discontinuities, which behave as pre-existing cracks. As a result, the fa-
tigue life of a welded joint is much lower than that of the base metal. From the experimental studies and failure analyses on

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +90 264 295 5860; fax: +90 264 295 5601.
E-mail address: kgenel@sakarya.edu.tr (K. Genel).

1350-6307/$ - see front matter Crown Copyright Ó 2009 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.engfailanal.2009.10.010
572 M. Cerit et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 17 (2010) 571–578

real welded structures, the weld toe and undercut are usual locations for the fatigue cracks [3–5]. The prior investigations on
undercut defect and toe radius revealed that the burr grinding of toe region increases the fatigue endurance of the welds by a
factor of at least 4.6, and the undercut has more detrimental effects than that of the embedded discontinuities [6]. Since the
crack readily nucleates at the geometrical discontinuity of weld detail having the maximum SCF value, its prediction is very
important for fatigue life calculations and/or modelling.
Although, the investigations have generally focused on fatigue behaviour of reinforcement metal and other discontinuity,
separately [4–11], and also some suggested equations with poor accuracy to predict SCF due to deriving from photoelastic
method reviewed by Radaj et al. [12], no systematic computer-based numerical study covering determination of SCF of weld

reinforce.
metal 0
W
R
h r
weld
toe
undercut t

W:undercut width θ : reinforcement angle

h:undercut depth R: weld toe radius
r: undercut root radius t : plate thickness
Fig. 1. Characteristic parameters of butt weld and undercut defect.

Table 1
Dimension of weld details used in parametric studies. All dimension in mm.

Undercut width, W 3 4 5
Undercut depth, h 0.5 1.0 1.5 2 2.5
Undercut deep radius, r 0.5 1.0 1.5
Reinforcement angle, h (degree) 120 140 150 160 180
Weld toe radius, R 0.5 1 2 4 6
Plate thickness, t 10 20 30 40

1 MPa

Fig. 2. A finite element model and meshing around the undercut defect.
 M. Cerit et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 17 (2010) 571–578 573

detail for various sizes of undercut defect and reinforcement metal have been cited in the literature. In the present study,
stress distribution of butt welded joints with various amounts of reinforcement metal and undercut defect has been inves-
tigated under uniaxial tension for a full penetration by conducting a series of two-dimensional (2D) finite element (FE) mod-
els. Moreover, the combined effect of reinforcement metal and undercut defect is also examined. Dimensions of weld joint
are changed parametrically due to SCF at the weld toe, as well as the reinforcement metal depending on the geometry. Based

Fig. 3. Stress contour at weld toe region for 20 mm of plate thickness: (a) h = 120o, R = 0.5 mm (b) h = 160o, R = 0.5 mm and (c) h = 160o, R = 4 mm.
574 M. Cerit et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 17 (2010) 571–578

on the results of stress analyses, an attempt has been made to construct simple relationships among the SCF of weld joint
and both reinforcement angle, undercut defect and dimensionless parameters defining weld toe detail.

2. Finite element analysis

Dimensions of solid model used in the analyses are 100 in length and 30 in width in mm for the plate thickness in the
range of 10–40 mm. Since SCF at the weld toe and undercut depend on the geometry, weld joint details given in Fig. 1
are changed parametrically according to data tabulated in Table 1.
FE modelling was performed for a full penetration of single V groove type of weld joint. Two hundred FE models have
been constructed in determining SCF of each weld joint.
In the critical section, SCF is calculated by using the ratio of maximum stress to nominal stress determined from the cross
section area. Since the size of undercut is very small, it is neglected in the calculation of the net area. Thus, it is assumed that
r0 = rnet for whole study. Two hundred 2D models with varying dimension tabulated in Table 1 are constructed parametri-
cally. This parametric study is carried out by employing (ANSYS Ò) finite element (FE) software. Models have been meshed by
using approximately 100,000 of 2D twenty node structural plane elements. Finer mesh is used around and within the weld
details. Axial loading is subjected to the end of one side, and the other side, displacement at x-direction is taken to be zero. In
order to read the SCF value directly on the maximum principal stress counter, a uniform r0=1 MPa stress value is selected as
a load. A linear elastic material model is used. Modulus of elasticity and Poisson’s ratio are taken to be 207 GPa and 0.3,
respectively. In evaluation of the results, the maximum principal stress was considered. Fig. 2 shows the mesh density of
butt welded joint with 160° of reinforcement angle with undercut.

3. Results and discussion

Fig. 3 shows principal stress contours in the weld toe region for various joint having different reinforcement angle and
weld toe radius for 20 mm of plate thickness.

Fig. 4. Stress contours in undercut regions for the weld joint with 160o of reinforcement angle and 1.5 mm of root radius for various undercut widths. (a)
and (c) W = 3 mm, h = 0.5 and h = 2.5 mm for the depth, respectively. (b) and (d) W = 5 mm, h = 0.5 and h = 2.5 mm for the depth, respectively.
 M. Cerit et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 17 (2010) 571–578 575

It can be seen that the critical point is transition zone from the base metal to weld metal, the maximum principal stress is
3.36r0 for the joint having h = 120°, R = 0.5 mm (Fig. 3a). From the results of FE analysis made on model with different
reinforcement metal. SCF decreases as the reinforcement angle increases for a given toe radius. As can be seen in Fig. 3b,
the maximum stress occurs at the same region but its value considerably lower (1.85r0) for h = 160° and R = 0.5 mm. It is
known that another important parameter is the weld toe radius. When the SCF is recalculated for the same reinforcement
angle appearing in Fig. 3b and higher toe radius (R = 4 mm), it is found to be 1.47r0 (see Fig. 3c). This behaviour is attributed
to the change in the principal stress trajectories around the weld joint. The bigger the toe radius is the smaller the stress
concentration, as expected.
The effect of undercut is also investigated in the present study. Fig. 4 illustrates the stress distribution in the weld joint
containing undercut defect for h = 160° and 1.5 mm of undercut root radius for various depths and widths of undercut.
From these figures, it is seen that the stress concentrates at the bottom of undercut and its value changes with depth and
width of undercut defect. Fig. 4a and b shows the effect of undercut width on SCF for the same root radius. SCF value reduces
from 2.39 to 2.17 for 3 and 5 mm of undercut width, respectively (Fig. 4a and b) corresponding to a 9% of reduction. From the
results given Fig. 4a and c, SCF varies from 2.39 to 4.26r0 for 0.5 mm and 2.5 mm depths, respectively. Considering the anal-
yses made on the models that have the same root radius, it has been deduced that the depth of undercut has remarkable
effect on stress distribution. The effect of depth has also been obtained from the joints having the same undercut width
(W = 5 mm) (Fig. 4b and d). When the stress distribution of Fig. 4c is compared to that of Fig. 4a and d, the decrease in
the SCF arising from undercut width is observed to be slightly lower. As a result, it is possible to conclude that the depth
of undercut is main factor controlling severity of SCF.
The change in SCF for the weld joint having 20 mm of plate thickness with reinforcement angle (h) for various toe radius is
given in Fig. 5a. As can be noted from the figure, the increase in the reinforcement angle gives rise to parabolic-like decrease
in SCF.
For 120° of the reinforcement angle and 0.5 mm of toe radius, SCF is seen to exceed 3.3r0, and SCF decreases with increas-
ing in the toe radius. Lower values in both reinforcement angles and toe radii, the severity of SCF increases dramatically. All

(a) 3.5
θ
(b) 2.5
θ
R R=2

3.0 t=20 mm t
2.0
2.5
Kt

Kt

2.0 1.5
Plate
1.5 thick. t [mm]
10
R [mm] 1.0 20
0.5 4.0 30
1.0 6.0
1.0 40
2.0
0.5 0.5
120 140 160 180 120 140 160 180
Reinforcement angle, θ (degree) Reinforcement angle, θ (degree)

(c) 5.0

4.5 R θ
4.0 t

3.5
Reinforcement
Kt

3.0 angle,θ (degree)

120
2.5 140
150
2.0 160

1.5

1.0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
R/t

Fig. 5. The change in SCF with respect to reinforcement angle for: (a) various toe radius, (b) plate thickness, and (c) the dependence of SCF on R/t for various
reinforcement angles.
576 M. Cerit et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 17 (2010) 571–578

plotted curves get closer to each other towards to 180° of reinforcement angle, at which no stress concentrates at the weld
toe naturally (Fig. 5a). Influence of the plate thickness on SCF can be seen in Fig. 5b for a given toe radius (R = 2 mm). Accord-
ing to Fig. 5b, the SCF increases with reinforcement metal, as expected. It also increases with increasing the plate thickness
with a decreasing rate. The effect of both toe radius and plate thickness can be considered as a normalized parameter that is
the ratio of toe radius to plate thickness (R/t). The dependence of SCF on R/t for various reinforcement angles is given in
Fig. 5c covering all combination of R and t data used in this study. Diminishing in SCF with increasing R/t is general charac-
teristic of these plots; SCF lies below 1.5r0 for higher value of R/t. As noted, for low values of R/t ratio, the effect of reinforce-
ment angle on SCF is noticeable, and it is approximately 4.7r0 for 120° of reinforcement angle. However, its magnitude is
only on the order of 2.5 for 160° of reinforcement angle. On the other hand, it should also be noted that, for higher values
of R/t, reinforcement metal has no significant influence on SCF (Fig. 5c).
Another discontinuity is undercut defects considered in this study. It is known that the notch depth, as well as root radius
are important parameters in the evaluation of notch severity [13,14]. Based on the FE analyses made on weld joints with
various undercut width (W), depth (h), as well as the root radius (r), the variation of the SCF with h/r ratio are given in
Fig. 6. The main characteristic of these plots is that the SCF increases with the ratio of h/r, as expected (Fig. 6a–c). Analyses
have been performed for 140°, 160° and 180° of the reinforcement angle, because this range is more realistic in engineering
point of view. When the plots for 3 mm of undercut width given in Fig. 6a are examined, the reinforcement angle has little
effect for broad and shallow undercut geometry.
In Fig. 5a, the SCF is 2.75r0 for 140° of reinforcement angle and R = 0.5 mm. In addition to the reinforcement metal, the
presence of slight undercut (h/r = 1) causes the value of the SCF to increase to nearly 3.5r0 (Fig. 6a). It is clearly deduced that
the slight undercut considerably increases the severity of SCF. This behaviour of combined effect of both discontinuities is
consistent with the literature [1]. At the highest h/r ratio, SCF reaches its maximum value (7.42r0) where the joint having
the narrowest undercut (W = 3 mm), its values are very close to each other for the reinforcement angle of 140° and 160°.
However, the weld joints without reinforcement metal take relatively lower SCF values. This is a common behaviour at high-
er h/r ratios for all of undercut width (W = 3, 4, 5). As can be seen in Fig. 6b and c, in the weld joints having relatively wider
undercut defect severity of SCF value is moderate. It is possible to say that the reinforcement metal is marginalized at wider
undercut values, regardless of reinforcement angle, the SCF is on the order of 6.8r0 for h/r = 5 and W = 5 mm (see. Fig. 6c).

(a) 7.5 (b) 7.5

7.0 7.0
0 0
h 6.5 h
6.5
6.0 W 6.0 W
5.5 5.5
5.0 5.0
Kt

4.5
Kt

4.5
4.0 4.0
Undercut witdh (W=3) Undercut witdh (W=4)
3.5 3.5 Reinforcement Regress.
Reinforcement Regress.
3.0 angle, 0 curve 3.0 angle,θ (degree) curve
140 140
2.5 160 2.5 160
180 180
2.0 2.0
1.5 1.5
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
h/r h/r

(c) 7.5 (d) 7.5

7.0 7.0
0 0
6.5 h 6.5 h

6.0 W 6.0 W
5.5 5.5
5.0 5.0
Kt

4.5
Kt

4.5
5% deviation line
4.0 4.0
Undercut witdh (W=5)
3.5 Reinforcement Regress. 3.5
3.0 angle,θ (degree) curve
3.0 Undercut witdh (W=5)
140
2.5 Reinforcement angle,θ (degree)
160 2.5
180 140 160 180
2.0 2.0
1.5 1.5
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
h/r h/r

Fig. 6. Variation of the SCF with h/r ratio in the weld joint having undercut defect for various widths and reinforcement angles.
 M. Cerit et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 17 (2010) 571–578 577

When considering the distribution of data points in Fig. 6c, they fall in a narrow band, and therefore one regression curve
with deviation lines can be offered (Fig. 6d). The data of SCF for the weld joints are scattered in ±5% deviation. In order to
clarify the effect of undercut width on stress distribution, FE analyses for the 6 mm of undercut width and h/r = 5 ratio
was also performed, and the change of SCF with reinforcement angle have been presented in Fig. 7 together with the data
appearing in Fig. 6a–c. Fig. 7 also facilitates the comparison of SCF data for the joints with undercuts and the joints without
undercut having 0.5 mm of the smallest toe radius where joint has the maximum SCF value.
Here, SCF values and its change with reinforcement angle are examined; the presence of undercut brings about dramat-
ically increase in the severity of stress concentration. In case of no reinforcement (h = 180°), the SCF of weld joints with nar-
rower undercuts is at least 6.5 times more than that of joint without undercut. The SCF value is 7.42r0 for the 140° of the
reinforcement angle and narrowest undercut width, while its value approaches to 3r0 without undercut defect. As can be
seen from the dashed line curve, plotted for the joint having widest undercut, the magnitude of SCF is observed to be lowest.
Considering slopes of curves, the sensitivity of SCF to reinforcement angle tends to decrease. This behaviour can be attributed
to the change in the principal stress trajectories around the bottom of the undercut defect.
In order to construct simple equations to predict SCF, mathematical relationship between SCF and R/t, h/r for the various
reinforcement angles have been developed by using least square regression analysis and the parameters of suggested equa-
tion have been tabulated in Table 2.
It can be concluded that the exponent for the weld joint without undercut varies with only reinforcement angle, whereas
without reinforcement metal, coefficient A controls the severity of SCF depending on the undercut width. SCF values of the
weld joint having both reinforcement metal and undercut defect can be determined by coefficient A and exponent a. For

8.0
Undercut width W (mm)
h/r =5 3
7.5 4
5
6
7.0

6.5
Kt

4.0
No undercut
3.0
R=0.5 mm
2.0

1.0

0.0
140 160 180
Reinforcement angle, θ (degree)

Fig. 7. The change of SCF with respect to reinforcement angle with and without undercut defect.

Table 2
Equation of SCF and its parameters.

Equation Reinforcement angle, h (Degree) Undercut width, W (mm) Coefficient A Exponent a

a 120 No undercut 0.24 0.620
K t ¼ 1 þ AðR=tÞ
140 0.550
150 0.490
160 0.420

K t ¼ 1 þ Aðh=rÞa 180 (no reinforce metal) 3 2.25 0.580

4 2.18
5 2.17
140, 160 3 2.45 0.580
140 4 2.41 0.570
5 0.532
160 4 2.30 0.584
5 0.553
578 M. Cerit et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 17 (2010) 571–578

Fig. 6d, a power law relationship holding between SCF and h/r ratio can simply be described with a correlation coefficient (R2)
of 0.990 as follows:

K t ¼ 1 þ 2:27ðh=rÞ0:58 ð1Þ

4. Conclusions

When the above results are taken into consideration, this study has primarily yielded the following conclusions. The
amount of reinforcement metal and weld toe radius have an important effect on stress distribution. Both lower reinforce-
ment angles and toe radii cause higher values of SCF. Plate thickness, which is another factor, should also be considered,
and R/t is recommended in the evaluation of stress distribution in butt welded structure. In case of lower reinforcement an-
gles and R/t ratios, the SCF takes much higher values. As for weld joints with undercut defects, the ratio of depth to radius of
undercut (h/r) and width are the main parameters controlling the severity of SCF. In addition to excessive reinforcement me-
tal, slight undercut gives rise to increase in the SCF. At higher values of h/r, the SCF dramatically increases with reinforcement
metal; it reaches 7.42r0 for h/r = 5 and W = 3. It is therefore concluded that the combination of the reinforcement metal and
undercut defect being the most dangerous form can cause significant reduction in the load carrying capacity of the weld
joint. Finally, in order to predict the SCF for the joints with and without undercut defect, power law relationships have been
offered between SCF and dimensionless parameter containing weld joints and/or defects.

References

[1] Welding handbook. Welding technology, 8th ed, vol. 1. American Welding Society, 550 NW LeJeune Road Miami; 1991.
[2] Metals handbook. Welding, brazing and soldering, vol. 6. Ohio: ASM Int Metals Park; 1995.
[3] Metals handbook. Failure analysis and prevention, vol. 11. Ohio: ASM Int Metals Park; 1995.
[4] Stephens RI, Fatemi A, Stephens RR, Fuchs HO. Metal fatigue in engineering. 2nd ed. John Wiley Sons; 2001.
[5] Gagg CR, Lewis PR. In-service fatigue failure of engineered products and structures–Case, study review. Eng Fail Anal 2009;16:1775–93.
[6] Zhang YH, Maddox, Stephen J. Fatigue life prediction for toe ground welded joints. Int J Fatigue 2009;31:1124–36.
[7] Lassen Tom, Récho Naman. Fatigue life analyses of welded structures. London: ISTE Ltd.; 2006.
[8] Kirkhope KJ, Bell R, Caron L. Weld detail fatigue life improvement techniques part 1. Mar Struct 1999;12:447–74.
[9] Niue X, Glinka G. The weld profile effect on the SIF in weldments. Int J Fract 1987;35:3–20.
[10] Ho N-J, Lawrence FV. Constant amplitude and variable load history fatigue test results and predictions for cruciform and lap welds. Theor Appl Fract
Mech 1984;1:3–21.
[11] Wahab MA, Alam MS. The significance of weld imperfections and surface peening on fatigue crack propagation life of butt-welded joints. J Mater
Process Technol 2004;153–154:931–7.
[12] Radaj D, Sonsino CM, Fricke W. Fatigue assessment of welded joints by local approaches. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing Limited and CRC
Press LLC; 2006.
[13] Dowling NE. Mechanical behaviour of materials. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall; 1993.
[14] Pilkey WD, Pilkey DF, Peterson RE. Peterson’s stress concentration factors. New Jersey: John Wiley Sons; 2008.