1. Why this matters on offshore projects

Most Norwegian and European design offices produce structural drawings to ISO 2553. Most South Korean and American fabrication yards — where the majority of offshore topsides, jackets, and modules are built — work to AWS A2.4. When a drawing package crosses that boundary, a weld symbol that looks identical in both systems can specify a completely different weld configuration.

The welder sees an ISO symbol. He reads it as AWS. He places the fillet on the wrong side of the joint. The weld passes visual inspection. It passes magnetic particle testing. The NCR doesn't surface until radiography or TOFD during pre-installation inspection — at which point the structure may be half-assembled, the joint is inaccessible, and the repair cost is entirely disproportionate to the original error.

Real cost of a weld-side NCR A single weld-side non-conformance caught late in fabrication typically costs €10,000–100,000 to resolve, depending on joint accessibility and repair category. For structural primary members requiring full removal and re-welding, costs can exceed this range significantly when production delays are included. The root cause is almost always a drawing interpretation error, not a welding skill issue.

This problem is not hypothetical. It is a well-documented pattern on NCS projects where Norwegian engineering contractors issue drawings to Korean or Singaporean fabrication yards without explicitly declaring the weld symbol standard. The risk is compounded by the fact that most welders and many QC inspectors do not spontaneously question which standard applies — they default to whatever standard they trained on.

Understanding exactly where ISO 2553 and AWS A2.4 diverge — and where they appear identical but are not — is essential knowledge for any engineer who issues or reviews offshore structural drawings.

2. The two standard families

ISO 2553:2019 (Welding and allied processes — Symbolic representation on drawings — Welded joints) is published by the International Organization for Standardization. It is the dominant standard in Europe, most of Africa, and much of Asia outside Korea and Japan. Norway, the UK, the Netherlands, France, Germany, and Australia all work to ISO 2553 by default. DNV-ST-0378, NORSOK M-120, and EN 1090 all reference ISO 2553.

AWS A2.4:2020 (Standard Symbols for Welding, Brazing, and Nondestructive Examination) is published by the American Welding Society. It is the standard in the United States, Canada, South Korea, and Japan. Most major fabrication yards in Ulsan, Geoje, and Mokpo work to AWS A2.4 as their internal reference, regardless of what the design drawings state — unless the project contract explicitly requires otherwise.

Scope of both standards Both ISO 2553 and AWS A2.4 cover the full range of fusion welding joint types: fillet welds, butt welds (groove welds), plug and slot welds, spot welds, seam welds, and surfacing welds. Both use a leader line with an arrow, a horizontal reference line, and symbols placed on or around the reference line to specify joint geometry. The visual similarity between the two systems is exactly what makes the differences dangerous.

Key structural differences at a glance

The most significant systemic differences between the two standards are:

3. Arrow line and reference line

Both ISO 2553 and AWS A2.4 use the same basic drawing element: an arrow line pointing to the joint, connected to a horizontal reference line. Weld symbols are placed above or below this reference line to indicate which side of the joint is being specified. Here the similarity ends.

ISO 2553 convention

In ISO 2553, symbols placed below the reference line apply to the arrow side of the joint — the side the arrow physically points to. Symbols placed above the reference line apply to the other side (the side opposite the arrow). The standard also provides for a dashed identification line, placed parallel to the reference line, which can be drawn above or below it to further clarify which side is intended. In ISO 2553, the dashed line is on the same side as the symbol when specifying the other side.

AWS A2.4 convention

In AWS A2.4, symbols placed below the reference line also apply to the arrow side. Symbols placed above the reference line apply to the other side. So far, this matches ISO.

The critical difference emerges with the broken arrow. In AWS A2.4, when the arrow breaks (has a kink or jog in it before reaching the joint), this signals that the arrow points specifically to the member that receives the bevel or groove preparation — not merely to the joint in general. ISO 2553 has no exact equivalent of the AWS broken-arrow convention, though it uses arrow-side / other-side designation for the same purpose. An ISO drawing engineer who adds a bend in the arrow for clarity (a common informal practice) may unintentionally trigger the AWS broken-arrow interpretation at a Korean yard.

The #1 confusion point The arrow-side / other-side convention looks identical in a superficial reading of both standards. Both put arrow-side symbols below the reference line. But because the ISO dashed identification line changes position depending on context, and AWS uses the broken arrow for a different purpose, an engineer trained in one system reading a drawing from the other system can silently misinterpret joint side for multi-pass groove welds — with no visual indication that anything is wrong.

4. Fillet weld notation

The fillet weld is the most common weld type in offshore structural work — joining stiffeners to plates, braces to chords, gussets to beams. The symbol is a right triangle in both standards. But the size specification differs significantly.

ISO 2553 fillet notation

ISO 2553 uses two possible size designations for a fillet weld:

ISO: a5 ◁ → throat = 5 mm fillet (leg ≈ 7 mm) ISO: 6 ◁ → leg = 6 mm fillet (throat ≈ 4.2 mm)

The "a" prefix is mandatory in ISO 2553 when throat thickness is the design basis. This distinction matters: European structural codes (EN 1993-1-8) and NORSOK design checks are throat-based — the design strength is calculated on the effective throat. When a Norwegian design engineer writes a5, he means the weld must achieve a 5 mm throat regardless of leg geometry. A Korean QC inspector reading this as a leg measurement will accept an undersized weld.

AWS A2.4 fillet notation

AWS A2.4 specifies fillet weld size as leg length by default, written to the left of the weld symbol. There is no "a" or "S" prefix in the standard symbol position for a standard fillet; size to the left of the symbol is always leg. Effective throat can be specified, but it requires an additional notation — it is not the default.

AWS: 6 ◁ → leg = 6 mm fillet (throat ≈ 4.2 mm for standard fillet) AWS: E6 ◁ → effective throat = 6 mm (non-standard; requires explicit callout)
The a-prefix trap An ISO drawing specifying a5 sent to an AWS yard will almost certainly be read as "leg = 5" — not "throat = 5". The resulting fillet will have a throat of approximately 3.5 mm instead of 5 mm. For a primary structural connection this is a 30% reduction in effective weld area. This category of error has been documented on module fabrication projects in South Korea.

Symbol orientation

The fillet triangle symbol itself is visually the same in both standards — a right triangle with the vertical leg on the left and the hypotenuse on the right. ISO places the symbol so the right angle points toward the reference line; AWS uses the same orientation. In practice the symbols are drawn identically by most CAD systems, which means the standard ambiguity cannot be resolved by looking at the symbol shape alone — the title block and drawing notes are the only indication of which system applies.

5. Butt weld and groove weld notation

Groove welds (butt welds) cover a wide range of joint preparations: square butt, V-groove, double-V, U-groove, J-groove, bevel groove, and combinations thereof. Both standards define symbols for all major groove types, but there are important differences in how certain joint geometries are represented and how the prepared side is designated.

V-groove and bevel-groove

For a single-V groove weld, both ISO 2553 and AWS A2.4 use a V-shape symbol on the reference line. The differences emerge in the details:

Flare-bevel and flare-V groove

AWS A2.4 explicitly defines flare-bevel and flare-V groove symbols for joints between a curved surface (pipe or round bar) and a flat plate, or between two curved surfaces. These are distinct symbols with their own graphic representation in AWS.

ISO 2553 does not have dedicated symbols for flare-bevel and flare-V geometries. ISO handles these either through a compound edge weld symbol or by using standard groove symbols with an accompanying note specifying the joint geometry. An AWS drawing with a flare-bevel symbol arriving at an ISO-trained checker may produce confusion, or the symbol may be misinterpreted as a standard bevel groove.

Partial penetration welds

AWS specifies partial joint penetration (PJP) welds using the S(E) notation: S is the required depth of groove preparation, E is the weld size (effective throat for PJP). ISO 2553 handles partial penetration differently — the design throat "a" is specified, and the drawing note or WPS states whether full or partial penetration is required. This creates an interpretation gap when a partial penetration groove is specified: an ISO-trained engineer reads "a" as throat regardless; an AWS-trained inspector looks for the S(E) format and may not recognise the ISO partial penetration designation.

Full penetration assumptions differ AWS convention assumes that a groove weld symbol without an S(E) designation requires complete joint penetration (CJP). ISO convention does not make this assumption automatically — the requirement for full penetration must be confirmed by the drawing note or WPS reference. On projects mixing the two conventions, this asymmetry has caused partial penetration welds to be made where full penetration was required.

6. Finish and surface contour symbols

Both standards provide symbols to specify the required surface contour of the finished weld face — whether it should be flush (dressed), convex, or concave — and to indicate the method of finishing (grinding, machining, chipping, or unspecified).

Contour symbols

Both ISO 2553 and AWS A2.4 define three surface contour conditions, shown above the weld symbol:

Contour ISO 2553 symbol AWS A2.4 symbol Notes
Flush Straight horizontal line above symbol Straight horizontal line above symbol Identical in both standards
Convex Arc bowing upward — convex curve line Same arc bowing upward; letter R indicates grinding to convex profile in some notations AWS explicitly uses letter suffixes (G, M, C, R) for finish method; ISO places the method letter separately
Concave Arc bowing downward — concave curve; letter C placed above Arc bowing downward; letter C placed above symbol Both use C, but AWS also uses the arc as the primary indicator

Finish method letters

AWS A2.4 uses a specific set of letter codes placed above the contour symbol to indicate how the weld surface should be finished: G (grinding), M (machining), C (chipping), R (rolling), or no letter if the method is unspecified. These letters are mandatory for critical joints where the finishing method affects fatigue performance.

ISO 2553 also uses finish method letters, but they are placed differently — above the symbol in some editions, and the set differs slightly. ISO does not always require a finish symbol where the weld is expected to be left in the as-welded condition, even on critical structural joints. AWS, by contrast, requires a contour symbol on any weld where surface quality is specified, and omitting the symbol is taken to mean the contour is at the welder's discretion.

Weld-all-around

Both standards use the same symbol for weld-all-around: a circle at the intersection of the arrow line and the reference line. This is one of the few areas where ISO and AWS are genuinely identical in both symbol shape and meaning. The same is true for field weld — both use a filled flag at the same location (though AWS uses a different flag orientation in some editions).

7. Supplementary symbols — staggered intermittent welds

Intermittent fillet welds — where the weld is not continuous but deposited in short runs at regular intervals — are extremely common in offshore structural work. They reduce distortion, save weld metal on lightly loaded connections, and are specified on gratings, secondary stiffeners, and non-structural attachments. The notation for intermittent welds is completely different between the two standards, and the numbers used look superficially similar while meaning different things.

ISO 2553 intermittent notation

ISO 2553 uses the format: n × l / e, placed to the right of the weld symbol, where:

ISO: 6 × 50 / 150 → 6 runs, each 50 mm long, at 150 mm pitch (centre-to-centre) Gap between runs = 150 − 50 = 100 mm

AWS A2.4 intermittent notation

AWS A2.4 uses the format: length – pitch, placed to the right of the symbol (and sometimes broken across both sides of the reference line for chain or staggered welds), where:

AWS: 50 – 150 → weld runs of 50 mm, at 150 mm centre-to-centre spacing (number of runs is implicit from joint length) Gap between runs = 150 − 50 = 100 mm

Staggered intermittent welds

For staggered intermittent welds — where the welds on the arrow side are offset by half a pitch from the welds on the other side — both standards use symbols on both sides of the reference line. ISO places the symbols in a staggered arrangement relative to each other. AWS uses the same staggered arrangement but adds the explicit pitch dimension on both sides.

The intermittent notation trap An ISO drawing calling for 6 × 50 / 150 looks like it could plausibly be read as "50 mm welds at 150 mm pitch" by an AWS-trained fabricator — which is partly correct (the individual numbers match), but the total specified weld length on a 1000 mm joint would be: ISO = 6 × 50 = 300 mm of weld, AWS reading = floor(1000/150) × 50 = 6 × 50 = 300 mm. In this specific case the result happens to be the same. But if the joint length is different, or the pitch doesn't divide evenly, the results diverge — and there is no warning to the fabricator that a problem exists.

8. How to avoid mismatches on offshore projects

The fundamental control measure is simple and costs nothing: declare the weld symbol standard in the drawing title block. Every drawing should carry a note in the title block or the general note block stating: "All weld symbols per ISO 2553:2019" or "All weld symbols per AWS A2.4:2020." Without this declaration, the fabricator has no contractual basis for choosing between interpretations.

For projects crossing standards boundaries

When the design is done to ISO 2553 but the fabrication yard works to AWS A2.4 — the standard situation for Norwegian design / Korean fabrication — the following practices are effective:

1
Symbol standard declaration in title block — add "Weld symbols per ISO 2553:2019" to all drawing title blocks. This is the minimum contractual requirement and puts the interpretation obligation on the fabricator.
2
Weld symbol legend sheet — include a dedicated legend sheet as the first drawing in the package, showing each symbol type used on the project with its ISO and equivalent AWS interpretation side-by-side. This is particularly important for the fillet weld throat vs. leg distinction and for intermittent weld notation.
3
WPS cross-reference — link all critical weld symbols on the drawing to the applicable Welding Procedure Specification (WPS) by number. The WPS states the throat requirement explicitly in millimetres, removing the ISO "a" prefix ambiguity entirely.
4
Pre-production drawing review with the yard — schedule a drawing review meeting with the fabrication yard's engineering and QC teams before cutting steel. Walk through all weld symbols on primary structural drawings, confirm interpretation, and document agreed interpretation in meeting minutes.
5
Welder and inspector awareness — include a brief on ISO 2553 vs AWS A2.4 differences in the fabrication yard's pre-job welding coordination meeting. This is particularly important for throat vs. leg size and for intermittent weld notation.

Standards references on Norwegian/offshore projects

For clarity, the primary references applicable to NCS and offshore projects:

9. Quick reference table and NCR checklist

The table below summarises the most significant differences between ISO 2553 and AWS A2.4 across the symbol elements most commonly encountered on offshore structural drawings.

Symbol element ISO 2553:2019 AWS A2.4:2020 Risk if misread
Fillet leg size Number to the left of symbol, no prefix — e.g. 6 Number to the left of symbol, no prefix — e.g. 6 Low — notation identical; dimension units must still be confirmed
Fillet throat size Lowercase "a" prefix before the number — e.g. a5 No equivalent default prefix; effective throat requires explicit callout (e.g. E5 or separate note) High — ISO a5 read as leg 5 at AWS yard; throat becomes ~3.5 mm instead of 5 mm
Intermittent weld notation n × l / e (runs × length / pitch) — e.g. 6 × 50 / 150 length – pitch — e.g. 50 – 150; run count implicit Medium — numbers superficially similar; total weld length diverges when joint length doesn't match the ISO run count
Arrow side / other side Below ref. line = arrow side; above = other side. Dashed identification line may be above or below. Below ref. line = arrow side; above = other side. Broken arrow indicates specific prepared member. Medium — base rule matches; broken-arrow and dashed-line conventions differ and can cause side reversal on complex groove joints
Weld-all-around Circle at the arrow/reference line junction Circle at the arrow/reference line junction Low — identical in both standards
Flush contour / dressing Horizontal line above symbol; method letter (G, M, C) placed separately Horizontal line above symbol; method letter (G, M, C, R) placed above contour line Low — visually similar; letter position differs slightly but interpretation is generally clear
Backing bar / backing strip Rectangle symbol below the groove symbol; "MR" indicates removable backing Rectangle symbol below the groove symbol on the other-side of reference line; (M) in parentheses indicates removable Medium — notation for removable vs. permanent backing differs; a permanent backing left in place due to misreading creates a stress concentration in fatigue-sensitive joints
Field weld Filled flag at arrow/reference junction (flag points away from arrow) Filled flag at arrow/reference junction (flag orientation may vary by edition) Low — both standards convey the same meaning; minor flag orientation differences do not affect interpretation

NCR prevention checklist — before releasing drawings to fabrication

Use this checklist before a drawing package is issued for construction (IFC) to any yard where standard ambiguity exists:

When in doubt — specify both

For projects with high cross-standard risk, add a weld callout table to the general notes sheet that lists every weld type used on the project, the symbol as drawn, and the explicit dimensional requirements (throat in mm, leg in mm, total weld length for intermittent welds). This removes interpretation ambiguity entirely. The extra sheet costs one drafter half a day. The NCR it prevents can cost a week of production time at the yard.

Related articles
DNV-ST-0378
Padeye Design Guide
Weld throat requirements, NDT classes, and SWL marking for lifting appliance padeyes.
NORSOK N-004 · DNV-OS-C101
N-004 vs DNV-OS-C101
Which structural standard governs and how weld quality classes interact between them.
EN 10204
Material Certificates Explained
Type 3.1 vs 3.2 material certificates — traceability requirements for offshore welds.

Search ISO 2553 and AWS A2.4 with AI

Leide's AI Navigator gives clause-cited answers from offshore engineering standards — look up weld requirements, material specs, and drawing tolerance rules without hunting through PDFs. DNV-ST-0378 lifting appliance standards are already indexed, with more being added continuously.

Try the AI Navigator →