Guide
How Do You Specify a Weld-On Pad Eye on a Drawing: Material, Weld, and Rated Load?
A weld-on pad eye is a machined or forged eye on a flat base that the customer welds to a deck, tower, frame or trailer, and its drawing has to make three separate statements: what the eye is made of, how it is attached, and what load it may carry. Write the grade and condition on the part drawing, leave the weld to the structure drawing, and print a rated load only when someone has a calculation, a test or a maker’s published rating behind it.
By Saola Manufacturing engineering team · Published · Updated
This guide is for design engineers and buyers who add a stainless pad eye for tie-down, tow or lifting use and then have to hand a drawing to a machine shop. It separates the three owners of the specification, gives note wording you can paste, and says plainly where public standards stop. The ASME, AWS and ASTM documents named here are sold, so only their public scopes are described; take limits from your own copy before release.
On this page
Who owns what on a weld-on pad eye drawing?
The part maker owns the material, geometry and finish of the eye. The structure owner owns the weld joint and the base metal, and whoever assigns the rated load owns that number.
Most weak pad eye drawings merge these into one line such as “316 stainless, 2-ton, weld to deck”. Nobody can verify that line: the machine shop cannot prove a load, the welder cannot see the structure behind it, and the engineer who knows the structure never saw the material note. Splitting the drawing into three owned statements is the single most useful change.
The rigging standard people reach for first is ASME B30.26. ASME’s catalog page (2026) describes it as covering the construction, installation, operation, inspection and maintenance of detachable rigging hardware, and lists shackles, links, rings, swivels, turnbuckles, eyebolts, hoist rings, wire rope clips, wedge sockets, rigging blocks and load indication devices. A weld-on pad eye is not in that list. The shackle or hook you hang on the eye is what the standard speaks to; the eye welded to the structure is a design detail for the engineer responsible for the structure.
One practical wrinkle is the edition. ASME’s own page lists B30.26 as a 2026 document placed on stabilized maintenance, while a standards reseller’s page (Nimonik, ASME B30.26-2015 (R2020)) still shows the 2015 edition reaffirmed in 2020. If a customer’s lifting program cites B30.26, ask which edition and put that edition on the RFQ rather than assuming.
How should the drawing state a rated load without inventing one?
Print a rated load only if you can name its basis: a calculation, a proof test, or a manufacturer’s published rating for that exact part. Otherwise write that no rating is assigned by the part maker, and keep the words “break load” off the note.
A rated load (also called working load limit) is a use limit assigned by someone who has accepted responsibility for it. It is not a property of a shape. Nimonik’s summary of B30.26 says the standard gives construction specifications and marking requirements, rated load and manufacturer identification, for each piece of hardware it covers, and mentions ductility, design factors and proof load capability as the reasons. The values come from the standard and the maker’s own testing, neither of which a copied shape inherits.
Catalog pad eyes show the point. The Crosby S-264 pad eye page lists the part as forged from quenched and tempered 1035 carbon steel, gives dimensions and weights for each size, and says the eye has excellent welding qualities and that the AWS specifications should be consulted for welding procedures. The page shows no working load limit. A rating, where a maker publishes one, belongs to that maker’s part, in that maker’s material, installed the way that maker specifies. A stainless eye machined from bar to a similar outline has none of those.
The table below shows who writes each line of the drawing and what the line may claim. Note 3 is the one that causes trouble; the safest default for a custom eye is “rated load: none assigned by part maker”, with the customer’s engineer adding a rating on their own assembly drawing once they have a basis.
| Drawing note | Who writes it | What it may say | Public basis to cite |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Material and condition | Part drawing owner | Grade, bar standard, condition, mill certificate type | ASTM A276/A276M-25 covers hot- or cold-finished stainless bar, with conditions such as annealed (Condition A) |
| 2. Weld | Structure owner | Weld symbol, procedure and base metal on the structure drawing; the eye drawing only shows the weld prep or base geometry | AWS D1.6/D1.6M:2017 AMD1 covers welding stainless steel structural assemblies |
| 3. Rated load | Whoever assigns it | A number only with a stated basis; otherwise “none assigned by part maker” | ASME B30.26 covers marked rated load on the rigging hardware it lists; pad eyes are not in that list |
| 4. Proof test | Whoever sets the program | Yes or no, test load source, every piece or lot sample | Maker practice; the standard text is needed for any value |
| 5. Post-weld surface | Structure owner with finisher | Heat tint removal and passivation, who does it, and when | Not set by the documents above; see the heat tint guide |
| 6. Marking | Part drawing owner | Heat or lot identifier; a load figure only if note 3 names a basis | Marking a figure with no basis would be misleading |
Which stainless grade and condition should a pad eye call out?
Call 316L bar for an eye that will be welded, name the bar standard and condition, and ask for a mill certificate against the heat. Low carbon limits the sensitization that welding can cause.
The British Stainless Steel Association recommends the low-carbon 316L grades for welded seawater structures to avoid intergranular corrosion, and warns that any form of crevice must be avoided (BSSA, seawater selection note, 2026). Our 316 vs 316L guide covers the carbon limits and the dual-grade bar question in detail.
For the bar itself, ASTM A276/A276M-25 covers hot- and cold-finished stainless bars and lists conditions including annealed (Condition A). It excludes free-machining types, which sit in a separate specification. That matters because a free-machining stainless is the natural thing for a shop to reach for when turning an eye from bar, and it is the wrong thing to weld. State the grade explicitly and add “no free-machining grade” when the eye will be welded.
On the certificate, name the type you will accept. The 3.1 vs 2.2 certificate guide explains the difference; for a structural attachment, a 3.1 certificate that ties the chemistry to the heat number on the bar is the usual ask. If you want to confirm the grade on the finished eye, the PMI guide describes what handheld verification can and cannot prove.
Who owns the weld symbol and the weld procedure?
The structure owner does. The pad eye drawing should show the weld preparation or base geometry the eye was designed for, and refer to the structure drawing for the symbol, the procedure and the welder qualification.
AWS lists D1.6/D1.6M:2017 AMD1 as the structural welding code for stainless steel and describes it as covering the requirements for welding stainless steel structural assemblies (AWS store listing, 2017 edition with Amendment 1). The listing does not say which clauses cover design, qualification or inspection, and the code is a purchased document. The point for a drawing is narrower: a stainless weld on a structure belongs under a stainless welding code and a qualified procedure chosen by the party responsible for the structure. The machine shop that turned the eye should not be writing it.
The same division shows up for carbon steel eyes. The Crosby page above tells the reader to reference the AWS specifications for welding procedures rather than giving one. If the structure is a different alloy family from the eye, say so on the drawing; a dissimilar-metal joint is a procedure question for the welder, and a galvanic one for the engineer (see the guide on galvanic corrosion).
Two details belong on the eye drawing because they affect fit-up: the underside of the base, which should be flat and free of burrs, and the edge break on the base, which sets the weld groove. If the joint will sit in seawater, ask the structure owner whether it is seal welded, because an open gap under the base is a crevice. The crevice corrosion design guide covers how those gaps form. For parts that are machined, welded and then re-machined, the weld distortion guide explains why the sequence matters.
What finish call-out should follow the weld?
Name the post-weld surface condition: heat tint removed, then passivated if the application needs it, and state who does it. A drawing that says only “finish as welded” leaves the colored oxide layer at the weld in place.
Heat tint is the colored oxide that forms beside a stainless weld. It is a cosmetic flag and a corrosion concern, and acceptance levels differ by industry. The heat tint guide sets out the acceptance language and the removal options; the passivation guide covers the follow-on step.
The ownership point is the one that gets missed. The weld is made on the customer’s structure, so the person who can clean it is the structure owner or their finisher, not the shop that turned the eye. If the eye is welded at the customer’s site, put the post-weld clean-up on the assembly drawing. If the eye ships with a pre-applied finish, passivation is a chemical surface treatment that Saola places with a partner plant it manages, and the quote states the production site.
Should a proof test go on the pad eye drawing?
Only if someone has decided it is needed. Say yes or no explicitly, name where the test load comes from, and say whether it applies to every piece or to a lot sample.
A blank is read differently by every shop. Some will assume no test, some will quote a test they cannot define, and a few will mark the part as tested without anyone holding a record. A proof test is a load applied below the break load to show that the part carries a stated load without permanent deformation. It needs a test setup, a fixture that loads the eye the way it will be loaded, and a record; it is a purchased service, not a free option on the machining order.
The test load should come from the assembly engineer’s rating basis. If the rated load is “none assigned” (note 3), the proof test line should read “not required”. If the eye is used for lifting under a program that cites B30.26, the program owner decides what proof evidence is needed, and the standard text, not this guide, gives the values. Do not copy a proof factor from a catalog sheet for a different part.
Traceability is the part that is cheap and always worth asking for: a heat or lot identifier on the part, tied to the mill certificate. That lets a later failure be traced to a bar and a lot, whatever the rating question turns out to be.
What belongs in the RFQ, and what does the CNC shop control?
Send the part drawing with notes 1 to 6, the excerpt of the structure drawing that shows the joint, the annual volume, and the standard and edition the customer’s program follows. The machine shop controls geometry, bore size and surface finish, and material identity; it does not control the weld or the rating.
A pad eye from bar is typically a turned eye or a milled blank with a bored hole, with a flat base milled for weld fit-up. Those are the features a CNC shop can hold and measure: eye bore, base flatness and edge breaks, and the radius where the line or shackle bears. State which of these are critical in the way the critical characteristics guide describes, and put the edge-break requirement in a standard note (see the break sharp edges note guide).
At the volumes in an annual program, the useful questions to put to the quote are about repeatability, not price: how the bore and base are held from lot to lot, and which lot identifier appears on the certificate. Machined-from-bar eyes also fit the one-supplier case where a bolt-on base replaces the weld: the same bar and the same drawing, with the fastening owned by the assembly engineer.
If you have a drawing ready, send it with the six notes filled in or marked “by others”. The quote names the production site and the material source, and flags anything on the drawing that reads as a claim the part maker cannot verify.
Frequently asked
Is a weld-on pad eye covered by ASME B30.26?
ASME’s catalog page lists the hardware the standard names, and weld-on pad eyes are not in that list (ASME, 2026). Ask the person who owns the lifting program how they classify the eye, and cite the edition they use.
Can I print a working load limit on the drawing?
Only with a stated basis: a calculation, a test, or a published rating for that exact part and material. A number copied from a catalog pad eye of similar size is not a basis.
316 or 316L for a welded pad eye?
316L is the default for welded stainless because lower carbon limits sensitization in the heat-affected zone. Use plain 316 only when the design relies on its higher strength minimums, and say so on the drawing.
Should the pad eye drawing carry a weld symbol?
Show the weld preparation or base geometry the eye was designed for, and refer to the structure drawing for the weld symbol and procedure. The party responsible for the structure owns the weld.
Does heat tint matter on a deck pad eye?
Yes for corrosion and appearance. Name the post-weld condition and who removes the tint, rather than leaving the weld “as welded”.
Sources
- ASME B30.26, Rigging Hardware, catalog page, ASME, 2026 edition listed, accessed October 2026
- ASME B30.26-2015 (R2020), Rigging Hardware, summary, Nimonik standards reseller, accessed October 2026
- Crosby S-264 Pad Eyes, product page, Kito Crosby, accessed October 2026 (page copyright 2026)
- AWS D1.6/D1.6M:2017 AMD1, Structural Welding Code - Stainless Steel, store listing, American Welding Society, 2017 edition, accessed October 2026
- ASTM A276/A276M-25, Stainless Steel Bars and Shapes, ASTM International store page, 2025 edition
- Selection of 316, 304 and 303 types of stainless steels for seawater applications, British Stainless Steel Association, accessed October 2026 (page copyright 2026)