Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect
Structural
Available
Available Integrity
online
online Procedia
at at 00 (2017) 000–000
www.sciencedirect.com
www.sciencedirect.com
Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000 www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect
Procedia Structural
Structural IntegrityIntegrity
Procedia5 (2017) 1401–1408
00 (2016) 000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

2nd
International Conference on Structural Integrity, ICSI 2017, 4-7 September 2017, Funchal,
nd
2 International Conference on Structural Integrity,
Madeira, ICSI 2017, 4-7 September 2017, Funchal,
Portugal
Madeira, Portugal
Ultimate Strength Capacity of Welded Joints in High Strength
XVUltimate
Portuguese Strength Capacity
Conference on of 2016,
Fracture, PCF Welded10-12Joints
Februaryin High
2016, PaçoStrength
de Arcos, Portugal
Steels
Steels
Thermo-mechanical modeling of a high pressure turbine blade of an
Zuheir Barsoumaa*, Mansoor Khurshida,b
Zuheir airplane
Barsoumgas turbine
*, Mansoor engine
Khurshid a,b
KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Teknikringen 8, 100 44 Stockholm, Sweden
a

KTH
ab
RoyalSweden
Cargotec InstituteAB
ofBromma
Technology, Teknikringen
Conquip, 8, 100
Malaxgatan 7, 44
164Stockholm, Sweden
22 Kista, Sweden
a b c
P. Brandão , V. Infante , A.M. Deus *
Cargotec Sweden AB Bromma Conquip, Malaxgatan 7, 164 22 Kista, Sweden
b

a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Av. Rovisco Pais, 1, 1049-001 Lisboa,
Portugal
b
IDMEC, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Av. Rovisco Pais, 1, 1049-001 Lisboa,
Abstract
Portugal
Abstract
c
CeFEMA, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Av. Rovisco Pais, 1, 1049-001 Lisboa,
High strength steels are nowadays used in a wide range of weight lifting applications, e.g. spreaders and cranes, where there is a
Portugal
High
demand strength steels aredesign
on lightweight nowadays usedstructures
of these in a widewithrange of weight
increased lifting applications,
structural performance e.g. where spreaders
the welds andbecome
cranes,morewhere there istoa
sensitive
demand on lightweight
failure. This study focuses design of these structures
on investigating with increased
the influence of the structural
mismatch performance where the
in the yield strength ofwelds
the weldbecome
fillermore sensitive
material and the to
failure. This studydepth
Abstract
welds penetration focuseson on
theinvestigating the influence
ultimate strength capacity ofandthe mismatch
failure modesinof thebutt
yield
andstrength of the high
fillet welded weldstrength
filler material andyield
steels of the
welds
strengthpenetration
in the range depth on the
of 350 – 960 ultimate strength
MPa. The load capacity
carrying and failureof
capacities modes
these of butt and joints
mentioned fillet welded high strength
are evaluated steels of yield
with experiments and
strength
Duringinwith
compared the range
their the of 350 –modern
operation,
estimations 960by MPa.
finite The
aircraft load
engine
element carrying capacities
components
analysis (FEA), areofdesign
and these mentioned
subjected joints are
rulestoinincreasingly
Eurocode evaluated
demanding
3 and with
American experiments
operating
Welding and
conditions,
Society
especially
compared
Code AWSwith thethe
D1.1. high
Fullypressure
estimations turbine
penetratedby finite(HPT)
joint with blades.
element Such(FEA),
analysis
under-matched conditions
fillerand cause
designthese
material isrules
moreparts to undergo
inductile
Eurocode and3the different
and types
American
ultimate of time-dependent
Welding
strength Society
capacity of
degradation,
Code
base AWScan
plate beone
D1.1. of which
Fully
achieved. It is
penetratedcreep. A model
joint
is observed with using theunder-matched
under-matched
that joints with finitefiller
element method
material (FEM)
fillerismaterial
more was
ductile
are developed,
andsensitive
more intoorder
the ultimate to be able
strength
penetration to This
capacity
ratio. predict
of
theplate
base creep
influence iscan behaviour
be achieved.
more of ItHPT
pronounced blades.
isinobserved
joints Flight
that
in S960 data
joints
steel records
with with(FDR)
under-matched
welded for a specific
filler
under-matched material aircraft,
are moreItprovided
filler material. sensitive bypenetration
to
is also found athat
commercial ratio.aviation
the design This
rules
company,
influence
in Eurocode3 were
is more
(valid used to obtain
pronounced
for design thermal
inofjoints
welded andsteel
in S960
joints mechanical
in welded
steels dataunder-matched
with
of grade fortothree
up S700) different
canfiller flight cycles.
material.
be extended is In
alsoorder
toIt designing oftowelds
found create
that the the 3Dsteels
in design
S960 model
rules
needed
in Eurocode3
using for (valid
correlation thefactor
FEM ofanalysis,
for design a HPTjoints
one. of welded bladeinscrap
steels was scanned,
of grade up to and
S700) itscan
chemical composition
be extended to designing and ofmaterial
welds in properties
S960 steels were
obtained. The data that
using correlation factor of one. was gathered was fed into the FEM model and different simulations were run, first with a simplified 3D
rectangular block shape, in order to better establish the model, and then with the real 3D mesh obtained from the blade scrap. The
© 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
overall
© 2017 Theexpected
Authors. behaviour
Published byinElsevier
terms of displacement was observed, in particular at the trailing edge of the blade. Therefore such a
B.V.
© 2017 The under
Peer-review Authors. Published by
responsibility ofofElsevier
the B.V. Committee of ICSI 2017.
Scientific
model can
Peer-review be useful
under in the goal
responsibility of the predicting
Scientific turbine of
Committee blade
ICSIlife,
2017given a set of FDR data.
Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific Committee of ICSI 2017.
Keywords:
© 2016High
The Strength
Authors.Steels; Welded
Published byJoints; Ultimate
Elsevier B.V. Strength; Failure;
Keywords: High Strength Steels; Welded Joints; Ultimate Strength; Failure;
Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific Committee of PCF 2016.

Keywords: High Pressure Turbine Blade; Creep; Finite Element Method; 3D Model; Simulation.

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +46 70 230 43 42; fax: +46 70 230 43 42.
* Corresponding
E-mail address:author. Tel.: +46 70 230 43 42; fax: +46 70 230 43 42.
zuheir@kth.se
E-mail address: zuheir@kth.se
2452-3216 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Peer-review underThe
2452-3216 © 2017 responsibility of theby
Authors. Published Scientific Committee of ICSI 2017.
Elsevier B.V.
Peer-review underauthor.
* Corresponding responsibility
Tel.: +351of218419991.
the Scientific Committee of ICSI 2017.
E-mail address: amd@tecnico.ulisboa.pt

2452-3216 © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific Committee of PCF 2016.
2452-3216  2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific Committee of ICSI 2017
10.1016/j.prostr.2017.07.204
1402 Zuheir Barsoum et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 5 (2017) 1401–1408
2 Zuheir Barsoum / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000

1. Introduction

Structural integrity is important in many industrial sectors where welding is a primary technique for joining. In
numerous structures welds are identified as critical sections and prone to mechanical failures. A common failure mode
identified in metals is ductile failure which utilizes excessive plastic deformation which is used in designing structures
in vehicle industry e.g. cranes, spreaders, and Haulers etc. It is also used for designing cabin of the drivers in
construction equipment etc. to protect drivers in an unexpected roll over collisions. To successfully implement HSS
in mechanical structures it is important that different parts are joined together without defects in the weld and therefore
achieving sufficient static and fatigue strengths. The speed of developing new steels is much higher than the speed of
developing new filler materials of higher strength. As the yield strength of steel reaches 960MPa, it becomes difficult
to find filler materials of similar strength which is one of the hurdles in utilizing higher strength steels as base materials.
Due to melting of the steel, microstructural changes occur near the weld which results in the development of HAZ.
For steels of higher yield strength especially greater than 500MPa this zone is obvious and can result in lower hardness
than the base material and weld metal. This zone might limit the global strength of the joint and the strength of base
material will not be utilized to full capacity. In this way, the target of higher pay load capacity might not be achieved.
Fig. 1 shows the development in strength of filler materials and HSS. The comparison is only based on the yield
strengths of the available steels and filler materials. Filler materials of similar yield strength are rarely available as the
yield strength of base material reaches 960 MPa. This make steels of yield strength greater than 700MPa to be welded
with under-matching filler i.e. yield strength of filler material is lower than the yield strength of base material.
Therefore, the static strength of the joint is limited to the strength of filler material. Using steel of yield strength greater
than 700MPa in such situation might not be an appropriate choice if the weld is not properly designed.

Fig. 1. Development of HSS and filler materials

Various design methodologies for welded joints subjected to predominant static loading are given in Eurocode 3
(2011) and AWS D1.1 (2010). These are valid for welds in steel up to yield strength 700MPa. Darrel et al (1989)
investigated the ultimate strength of partially penetrated groove welds in two different mild steels and five weld metal
penetration ratios (20-50%). They developed a method and proposed equations for predicting the ultimate tensile
strength of welded joint. Lesik et al (1990) developed expressions for predicting ultimate load and deformation
capacities in fillet welded connections. Satoh et al (1975) studied the influence of under-matching filler on the strength
of weld in HT 80 structural steel. They found that the strength of the weld reaches the strength of base metal as the
width of soft layer i.e. the undermatching weld is decreased. A reasonable under-matching strength was found not less
than 90% of the base metal. In Björk et al (2012), Collin et al (2005) and Rafael et al (2009), the validity of design
rules in Eurocode 3 for HSS are investigated. Under-matching filler is observed to increase the ductility of the joint
and increase in the strength of filler material increases the global strength of the joint.
This study investigates the influence of the mismatch in the yield strength of the filler material and the welds
penetration depth on the ultimate strength capacity and failure modes of butt and fillet welded high strength steels in
the grade range of 350 – 960 MPa. The load carrying capacities of these mentioned joints are evaluated with
experiments and compared with the estimations by finite element analysis (FEA), and design rules in Eurocode 3 and
 Zuheir Barsoum et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 5 (2017) 1401–1408 1403
Zuheir Barsoum / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000 3

American Welding Society Code AWS D1.1. Fully penetrated joint with under-matched filler material is more ductile
and the ultimate strength capacity of base plate can be achieved. It is observed that joints with under-matched filler
material are more sensitive to penetration ratio. This influence is more pronounced in joints in S960 steel welded with
under-matched filler material. It is also found that the design rules in Eurocode 3 (valid for design of welded joints in
steels of grade up to S700) can be extended to designing of welds in S960 steels using correlation factor of one.

Nomenclature

fu nominal ultimate tensile strength of either filler or base material [MPa]

βw correlation factor defined as ratio between tensile weld strength and base material, Table 4.1 in [1]
┴ normal stress perpendicular to the weld throat [MPa]
τ// shear stress (in the plane of the weld throat thickness), parallel to the axis of the weld [MPa]
γM2 safety factor, 1.25
F applied force [N]
a weld throat thickness [mm]
l length of the weld [mm]
α angle between applied load and critical weld throat plane

2. Static Joint Design

Two types of joints were considered; fillet welds (cruciform joints) and butt welds with full and different partial
penetrations. The specimens were designed according to Hobbacher (2007) and SS-EN 9018 (2010). The fillet welds
were designed with full (100%) and partial (50% and 75%) penetration. The lower weld in the cruciform joint is
always fully penetrated while the upper weld has different penetration levels. Web plates in these joints are made of
S600MC HSS grade while the flange is made of S690 QL HSS grade. Three different consumables for various strength
mismatch cases were selected based on the properties of the lower HSS grade. For more details on filler material
strength and penetration ratio see Khurshid et al (2012). Fig 2a shows the geometry and dimensions for the cruciform
joints. For the butt-welded joints, the specimens have been designed for fully and partially penetration. Dimensions
of the X and single V butt welds are shown in Fig 2b. The partial penetrated joints were designed with 67% weld
metal penetration. The but-welded joints were manufactured in HSS grades S700 and S960. Filler materials for three
strength mismatch cases (under-matched, matched and over matched) were selected, for more details about filler
materials and welding see Khurshid et al (2015).

Fig 2. Dimensions and geometry for cruciform fillet welds (a) and butt welds (b).
1404 Zuheir Barsoum et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 5 (2017) 1401–1408
4 Zuheir Barsoum / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000

Fig 3. Load capacity calculation on different section for a butt weld.

3. Design Codes and Standards

According to Eurocode 3 and AWS D1.1. load carrying capacities should be calculated on three different section,
for example on a butt weld as illustrated in fig 3. Fig 1a shows the two section where the load capacity should be
calculated on fillet weld. Both standards allow the use of under-matched filler materials. In case of fully penetrated
joints, section A-A is the weaker section. Both standards follow different formulae and safety factors to calculate load
carrying capacity of the weld. Here only the directional method in Eurocode will be described, where the load carrying
capacity is evaluated according to the following equations:

The load carrying capacity of a partially penetrated fillet weld is given as follows:

In case of butt welds, α = 90 deg. For partially penetrated butt welded joints contribution from possible eccentric
loading is also considered in the calculations. In AWS D1.1, for fully penetrated butt welds, it is recommended to
consider the base plate load carrying capacity as the load carrying capacity of the joint. For partial penetrated butt
welds, the allowable stress is 0.3x the nominal tensile strength of the weld metal, but not more than 0.6x the yield
strength of the base metal. This assumption leads to safety factors ranging from 2.2 for shear forces parallel to the
longitudinal axis of the weld to 4.6 for forces normal to the axis under service loading.

4. Testing and analysis

Vickers hardness testing has been done on the fillet and butt welds, Changes in the hardness was observed in the
HAZ in comparison with the base material. In general, a joint with under-matched and matched weld filler material a
lower hardness in the weld metal and the peak value can be observed as compared to over-matched filler material.
The testing was carried out in a Schenk 250 kN machine with a constant displacement rate of 2 mm/min and strain
gauges to monitor the force-displacement Khurshid et al (2012). Ultimate strength capacity vs. displacement graphs
obtained are presented in fig 4a for fully penetrated joint with different filler material and in fig 4b for partially
penetrated fillet welds. Failure for the full penetration fillet welds occurred in the web plates of the steel grade S600
MC while for the partial penetrated fillet welds failure occurred on the welds. Fig 4 c shows examples of the different
failure locations for the fillet welds.
 Zuheir Barsoum et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 5 (2017) 1401–1408 1405
Zuheir Barsoum / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000 5

Fig 4. ultimate strength vs displacement (a) for full penetration (b) effect of penetration ratio (c) failure locations.

For the S700 butt welded joints no significant difference in the load capacity is observed in the different cases,
except the deformation capacity (i.e. overall ductility in the joint). Failure in these joints started in the weld root and
propagated along the HAZ (Heat Affected Zone). For the S960 butt welded joints, matching weld metal showed higher
hardness, whereas under-matching weld metal has lower hardness in comparison to the base material. Failure for
matching joints occurred in the base plate. In case of under-matching joints, the load carrying capacity of the base
plate could be achieved but the deformation capacity was decreased. Failure of these joints occurred in between the
weld metal and the HAZ.
ABAQUS/EXPLICIT 6.11 has been used for nonlinear finite element analysis to evaluate the behavior of the joints
for different cases. The stress singularities at sharp edges where removed using effective notch stress concept,
Barsoum et al (2012). Weld metal, base plate and HAZ were assigned material properties based on the hardness
measurements based on correlation between hardness, yield and tensile strength Barsoum et al (2014). The failure
criteria for load carrying capacity was based on limited plastic strain distribution across the critical section of the joint.
For conservative approaches where no plastic deformation is allowed, 0.2% plastic strain distribution across the
critical section of the joint can be used. In case of fully penetrated joints, base material is the critical section, while in
case of partially penetrated joints, the weld throat plane is the critical section. Fig 5 shows examples of estimated
failure locations, experimentally and FEA, for full and partial penetrated butt welds.

Fig 5. Failure location for partial-and full penetrated butt welds.

5. Comparison design codes, FEA and experiments

5.1. Fillet welds

In Fig 6 the ultimate strength capacities for fully penetrated joints with different filler materials evaluated by FEA,
testing and design codes are in close agreement. Also, the failure location is verified by the standards. Both
1406 Zuheir Barsoum et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 5 (2017) 1401–1408
6 Zuheir Barsoum / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000

experiments and FEA shows that a joint with an under-matched filler material is more ductile in comparison to joints
with over-matched and matched filler. The effect of weld metal penetration ratio on the ultimate strength capacity can
also be seen. Keeping 75% penetration ratio as a reference, for a joint with an under-matched filler material, the
ultimate strength capacity of the joint increases by 63% with increase of the penetration ratio to 100%, while a decrease
in penetration ratio to 50% decrease the ultimate strength capacity by 28%. The joint with an over-matched filler
material shows that with full penetration the ultimate strength capacity is increased by 16% while a decrease in
penetration ratio the capacity decrease by 20%. Thus, the weld metal penetration ratio has more influence on the
ultimate strength capacity of the joint with under-match filler material. It is also observed that the capacity is dependent
on the joint preparation because the angle of critical plane of the weld to the direction of applied loading changes with
a change in joint preparation.

Fig 6. Comparison of ultimate strength capacity for fillet welds (a) under-matching (b) over-matching filler material.
 Zuheir Barsoum et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 5 (2017) 1401–1408 1407
Zuheir Barsoum / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000 7

5.2. Butt welds

Fig 7 shows the load carrying capacity estimations for full and- partially penetrated butt welded joints in S700 and
S960. FEA and experiments are in good agreement with each other and the standards are conservative for the most
cases. As the weld metal penetration increases, in case of over-matching joints, the estimation by Eurocode 3 tends
towards less conservative estimations. When the weld metal penetration reaches full penetration, the base plate
strength limits the strength of the joint. In such cases the standards recommend use of the strength of the lower strength
section in the joint in calculating the capacity. One reason for the conservatism of the standards is the use of safety
factors. AWS D1.1 is more conservative as it allows the use of higher safety factors. In case of S700 partially
penetrated joints, the maximum load carrying capacity is 70% of the fully penetrated joints. In case of S960 matched
partially penetrated joints, the loss in load carrying capacity is 30% and in case of under-matched joints, 57% of the
base plate strength could be achieved.

Fig 7. Load carrying capacity for butt welds (a) S700 full (b) S700 partial (c) S960 full (d) S960 partial penetration.

6. Conclusions

The most important geometrical parameters of welds are the weld root and toe, flank angle at the weld toe and the
depth of penetration at the weld root. The most important mechanical parameters of the welded joint are strength of
base material, filler material and HAZ. Along with these parameters the static strength is influenced by the width of
the weld metal and HAZ. This zone is created due to microstructural changes occurring because of welding process
in the base material near by the weld metal. In high strength steel welds this effect is more prominent than the mild
steel welded joints, usually a decrease in strength is observed in HAZ as compared to the base material. Among the
geometrical parameters weld metal penetration is an important parameter which influence the static strength
significantly. It is observed that the static strength of the joint increases with an increase in weld metal penetration.
This effect is more significant in joints with under-matching filler material, moderate in joints with matching filler
material and comparatively less in joints with over-matching filler material. It is also observed that with the increase
of the yield strength of the steel the static strength increase provided similar weld metal penetration is achieved and
similar strength filler material is used in the joint.
As the load increases the correlation factor, βw, decreases. Higher correlation factors result in conservative estimations
and lower βw results in less conservative but more economical estimations. The use of βw = 1.0 was found appropriate
for under-matching welds in S700 MC. βw = 1.0 was also found appropriate for welds in S960 which ensured 20%
safety to the maximum load carrying capacity of the joint.
1408 Zuheir Barsoum et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 5 (2017) 1401–1408
8 Zuheir Barsoum / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000

Acknowledgements

SSAB (Swedish Steel Company) and Cargotec Sweden AB Bromma Conquip is acknowledged for financial
support, manufacturing of specimens and testing.

References

Eurocode 3, 2011. Design of steel structures - Part 1-8: Design of joints.

AWS D1.1, 2010. Structural welding (steel)
Darrel P. Gagnon, D.J. Laurie Kennedy,1989. Behavior and ultimate tensile strength of partial joint penetration groove welds, Canadian Journal
of Civil Engineering 16, 384- 399.
Lesik D. F., D.J. Laurie Kennedy, 1990. Ultimate strength of fillet welded connections loaded in plane, Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 17,
55-67.
Satoh, K., Toyoda, M., 1975. Joint strength of heavy plates with lower strength weld metal, Welding research supplement, pp. 311-319.
Björk T., Toivonen J., Nykänen T, 2012. Capacity of fillet welded joints made of ultra-high strength steel, Welding in the world.
DOI.10.1007/BF03321337.’
Collin P., Johansson B.,2005, ‘Design of welds in high strength steels,’ Proceedings of the 4th European Conference on Steel and Composite
Structures, Maastricht, Volume C.
Rafael Picón R., Cañas J.,2009. On strength criteria of fillet welds, International journal of Mechanical Sciences 51 pp 609-
618.doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2012.03.048.
Hobbacher, 2007. Recommendation for fatigue design of welded joints and components, IIW document XIII-2151-07/XV-1254-07.
EN 9018, 2010. Destructive tests of welds in metallic materials – Tensile test of cruciform and lapped joints.
Khushid M., Barsoum Z., Mumtaz N.A., 2012. Ultimate strength and failure modes for fillet welds in high strength steels, Journal of Materials and
Design, Vol 40, pp.36-42.
Khurshid M., Barsoum Z., Barsoum I., 2015. Load carrying capacities of butt welded joints in high strength steels, ASME Journal of Engineering
Materials and Technology, Vol. 137, pp. 1-9.
Barsoum Z., Khurshid M., Barsoum I., 2012. Fatigue strength evaluation of friction stir welded aluminum joints using the nominal and notch stress
concepts, Journal of Materials and Design, Vol 41, pp. 231-238.
Barsoum I., Khan F. and Barsoum Z., 2014. Optimization of the torsional strength of an induction hardened splined shaft, Materials and Design,
Vol. 54, pp. 130–136.