41 views

Uploaded by bsitler

NUS Structural Coursework

- Gravity Composite building
- Composite Columns I
- Overview of Eurocodes
- Composite Column II
- Composite Columns III
- Overview of Eurocode 3
- Chapter 5 Continuous composite beams.pdf
- Composite Slab
- Steel Frame Classification
- NUS Composite Beam I
- Composite Beam Design
- Structural Engineering Imperfections
- NUS Composite Beam II
- 1990_03_mar_design_of_tower_foundations_ns_and_vasanthi_344.pdf
- 3 Compression Mem
- 5-UnrestrainedBeam
- Lateral Torsional Buckling of Castellated Beams
- Beams on Elastic Foundation
- Composite Floor Construction
- Composite Floor -Fire

You are on page 1of 10

Summary:

Composite floors are frequently used in multi-storey building construction.

A composite slab comprises steel decking, reinforcement and cast in situ concrete.

When the concrete has hardened, it behaves as a composite steel-concrete

structural element.

Modern profiled steel may be designed to act as both permanent formwork during

concreting and tension reinforcement after the concrete has hardened.

Design of composite slabs requires consideration of the performance of the steel

sheeting as shuttering during construction and as reinforcement to the hardened

concrete slab.

Loading, analysis for internal forces and moments, and section verification are

explained.

The shear connection between the steel sheeting and concrete is of particular

importance. This is usually determined by tests.

Design methods - the semi-empirical m-k method and the partial interaction

method are explained.

Objectives:

The student should:

Appreciate the advantages of composite floors

Recognise that the design of composite slabs requires consideration of the

construction and in service conditions

Be aware of the analysis methods available for determining internal forces and

moments

Know how to perform design checks at the serviceability and ultimate limit states

Understand the basis of the semi-empirical and partial interaction design

approaches.

References:

Eurocode 4: Design of composite steel and concrete structures Part1.1 General

rules and rules for buildings, EN 1994-1-1:Draft No. 2

Porter, M L and Ekberg, C E: Design recommendations for steel deck floor slabs,

J ournal of the Structural Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 102,

No. ST11, November 1976, pp. 2121- 2136.

Wright, H D, Evans, H R and Harding, P W: The use of profiled steel sheeting in

floor construction, J ournal Constructional Steel Research, 1987, pp.279-295

Design Manual for Composite Slabs, ECCS Technical Committee 7 Working

Group 7.6, Report 87, 1995

Ritchie, J K and Chien, E Y L: Composite floor systems, Constructional Steel

Design An International Guide, Ed. Dowling, P J et al. Elsevier Applied

Science, 1992, pp.471-479

6 -

1

Contents:

1 General

2 Aspects of use of composite structures

2.1 Architectural

2.2 Economics

2.3 Functionality

2.4 Service and building flexibility

2.5 Assembly

2.6 Comparison with other methods

3 Construction methods

3.1 Construction elements

3.2 Slabs

3.2.1 Reinforced concrete slabs

3.2.2 Pre-stressed concrete slabs

3.2.3 Profiled steel sheeting

3.3 Beams

3.4 Columns

3.5 J oints

6 -

2

Chapter 6: Composite Slabs with Profiled Steel Sheeting

Introduction

A composite slab is a slab in which profiled steel sheets are used initially as

permanent shuttering and subsequently combine structurally with the hardened

concrete and act as tensile reinforcement in the finished floor.

The profiled steel sheet must therefore be capable of transmitting horizontal shear at

the interface between the sheet and the concrete; pure bond between steel sheeting

and concrete is not considered effective for composite action. Composite behaviour

between profiled sheeting and concrete can be ensured by several means (see Fig.1):

a) mechanical interlock provided by deformations in the profile (indentations or

embossments);

b) frictional interlock for profiles shaped in a re-entrant form;

c) end anchorage provided by welded studs or another type of local connection

between the concrete and the steel sheet, only in combination with (a) or (b);

d) end anchorage by deformation of the ribs at the end of the sheeting, only in

combination with (b).

Figure 1 Typical forms of interlock in composite slabs

Design situations

The following situations need to be considered:

a) Profiled steel sheeting as shuttering (Fig. 2): Verification is required for the

behaviour of the profiled steel sheeting while it is acting as formwork for the wet

concrete. Account shall be taken of the effect of props, if any (Fig. 3).

b) Composite slab: Verification is required for the floor slab after composite

behaviour has commenced and any props have been removed.

6 -

3

Figure 2 Construction stage Figure 3 Use of temporary props

Profiled steel sheeting as shuttering

A particular advantage of using a steel deck is its ability to act as a working platform

during construction (see Fig. 2). In calculations for the steel deck as shuttering, the

designer therefore needs to consider the following loads:

the weight of concrete and the steel deck;

construction loads including local heaping of concrete during construction; these are

to be obtained by reference to Part 1.6 of Eurocode 1.

storage load, if any;

ponding effect (increased depth of concrete due to deflection of the sheeting).

Ponding may be ignored if the central deflection of the sheeting under its own weight

plus that of the wet concrete, calculated for serviceability, is less than 1/10 of the slab

depth. If this limit is exceeded, this effect should be allowed for. It may be assumed

that the nominal thickness of the concrete is increased over the whole span by 0,7.

The recommended limit on deflection

s

of the sheeting under its own weight plus the

weight of wet concrete, excluding the construction load, is L/180 where L is the

effective span between supports (props being supports in this context).

Profiled steel sheeting as shuttering is treated in Part 6 of BS5950 and in Part 1.3 of

Eurocode 3. The design approach of both codes is now outlined.

Figure 4 Plate buckling

6 -

4

The resistance of profiled steel sheeting as shuttering is influenced by its resistance to

local plate buckling. Fig. 4 shows an element in compression. As buckling occurs the

greater flexibility of the middle region of the plate results in load being shed to

supported edges. The plate may therefore be taken as stressed uniformly over an

effective breadth b

e

, see Fig. 5. The moment resistance is determined based on the

Figure 5 Profiled steel sheeting in positive (sagging) bending

effective section. Ribs are rolled into the parts of the sheeting expected to be in

compression to act as stiffeners. These reduce the slenderness b/t of such elements

and therefore increase their resistance to local buckling.

Typical sheeting will be able to span about 3 m as shuttering, particularly if laid as a

continuous element over two spans (see Fig. 6). With both spans loaded, this results in

the maximum elastic moment being at the internal support. Tests show that collapse

occurs after some redistribution of moment has occurred from the internal support

into the span region. When the limiting moment of resistance is reached in sagging

bending, the rotation at the internal support results in the resistance there being

somewhat below its maximum value. The ultimate load can be calculated by rigid-

plastic structural analysis, provided that this reduction is accounted for in the

calculation.

It is often found that in un-proppped construction, it is the construction condition that

governs design.

Verification of composite slabs for ultimate limit states

Part 5 of BS5950 and Part 1.1 of Eurocode 4 treat design of the slab as a composite

element. The design approaches are similar, except that the Eurocode gives an

additional method for determining resistance to longitudinal shear.

The following possible failure modes should be considered:

Flexure

Longitudinal shear

6 -

5

Figure 6 Behaviour of continuous sheeting

Vertical shear

Punching shear

In design checks for the ultimate limit state, it may be assumed that the whole of the

loading acts on the composite slab, provided this assumption is also made in design

for longitudinal shear.

A continuous slab is usually designed as a series of simply supported spans with

nominal reinforcement provided over intermediate supports.

Flexure

Plastic theory is used as the basis for calculating the bending resistance. Fig. 7 shows

the stress blocks to be assumed if the neutral axis is above the sheeting. The design

yield strength of the steel sheeting is denoted f

yp,d

.

Figure 7 Sagging bending if the neutral axis is above the steel sheeting

6 -

6

Longitudinal shear

This is the most likely failure mode at the composite stage, due to breakdown of

interaction between the sheeting and the concrete (see Fig. 8).

Figure 8 Failure by loss of interaction

In Eurocode 4 the design resistance against longitudinal shear may be determined by

the m-k method or by a partial connection method. The latter should only be used

though for composite slabs with a ductile longitudinal shear behaviour.

The longitudinal shear behaviour may be considered as ductile if the failure load

exceeds the load causing a recorded end slip of 0,1 mm by more than 10%.

The m-k method

It should be shown that the maximum design vertical shear V

Ed

for a width of slab b

does not exceed the design shear resistance V

l,Rd

determined from the following

expression:

+ = k

L b

A m d b

V

s

p

Vs

p

Rd l,

(1)

where:

b, d

p

are in mm;

A

p

is the nominal cross-section of the sheeting in mm

2

;

m, k are design values for the empirical factors in N/mm

2

obtained from slab tests;

L

s

is the shear span in mm;

Vs

is the partial safety factor for the ultimate limit state.

The recommended value for

Vs

is 1,25.

6 -

7

Testing of composite floor slabs

Tests to determine the factors m and k are described in Annex B to Part 1.1 of

Eurocode 4. The recommended test set-up should be as shown in Fig. 9. The variables

to be investigated include the thickness and the type of steel sheeting, the steel grade,

the coating of the steel sheet, the density and grade of concrete, the slab thickness and

the shear span length L

s

.

Figure 9 Test set-up

Determination of design values for m and k

If the behaviour is ductile, the experimental shear force V

t

should be taken as 0,5

times the value of the failure load W

t

. If the behaviour is brittle this value shall be

reduced, using a factor 0,8.

If two groups of three tests are used and the deviation of any individual test result in a

group from the mean of the group does not exceed 10%, the design relationship may be

determined as follows:

From each group the characteristic value is deemed to be the one obtained by taking

the minimum value of the group reduced by 10%. The design relationship is formed

by the straight line through these characteristic values for groups A and B (see Fig.

10).

Design shear span

For design, L

s

should be taken as:

L/4 for a uniform load applied to the entire span length;

the distance between the applied load and the nearest support for two equal and

symmetrically placed loads;

for other loading arrangements, including a combination of distributed and

asymmetrical point loads, an assessment should be made based upon test results or

by the following approximate calculation. The shear span should be taken as the

maximum moment divided by the greater support reaction.

6 -

8

Note: b, d

p

and L

s

are in mm, A

p

is in mm

2

, V

t

is in N.

Figure 10 Evaluation of test results

The partial connection method

The breakdown of interaction before the attainment of the bending resistance (see

above) implies that the slab has only partial shear connection. An alternative to the m

k method is therefore to calculate a reduced design bending resistance M

Rd

based on a

limiting shear strength

u,Rd

at the steel-concrete interface. It then has to be shown that

at any cross-section the design bending moment M

Ed

does not exceed M

Rd

.

The design resistance M

Rd

can be determined from stress blocks (see Fig. 7) but with

N

cf

replaced by:

N

c

=

u,Rd

b L

x

N

cf

(2)

where L

x

is the distance of the cross-section being considered to the nearest support.

The limiting shear strength can be determined from the tests described earlier.

Vertical shear and punching shear

These failure modes are treated by reference to Eurocode 2 in a manner similar to

reinforced concrete slabs (see Fig.11).

Deflection

The usual approach is to limit the span to depth ratio to the values limits given in

Eurocode 2 for reinforced concrete slabs. Eurocode 4 does give a calculation method

as an alternative.

6 -

9

Figure 11 Critical perimeter for punching shear

- Gravity Composite buildingUploaded bybsitler
- Composite Columns IUploaded bybsitler
- Overview of EurocodesUploaded bybsitler
- Composite Column IIUploaded bybsitler
- Composite Columns IIIUploaded bybsitler
- Overview of Eurocode 3Uploaded bybsitler
- Chapter 5 Continuous composite beams.pdfUploaded bybsitler
- Composite SlabUploaded bybsitler
- Steel Frame ClassificationUploaded bybsitler
- NUS Composite Beam IUploaded bybsitler
- Composite Beam DesignUploaded bybsitler
- Structural Engineering ImperfectionsUploaded bybsitler
- NUS Composite Beam IIUploaded bybsitler
- 1990_03_mar_design_of_tower_foundations_ns_and_vasanthi_344.pdfUploaded byPRABHUTIRUPUR
- 3 Compression MemUploaded bybsitler
- 5-UnrestrainedBeamUploaded bybsitler
- Lateral Torsional Buckling of Castellated BeamsUploaded byMartin Wijaya
- Beams on Elastic FoundationUploaded byprabhu81
- Composite Floor ConstructionUploaded bybsitler
- Composite Floor -FireUploaded bybsitler
- Dry Dock Transverse Bending FailuresUploaded byzeek77
- Basic Engineering CalculationsUploaded byrheins2000
- Eurocode 4Uploaded byleodegarioporral
- Example Composite Floor SlabUploaded byZamfira Octavian
- Compendium-of-en-1993-1-1Uploaded byahemadam
- Experiments on Castellated Steel BeamsUploaded byLuiz Flávio Vieira Brant
- Pipe 288Uploaded byrezajun2820
- Section 6 - Hobbs Upheaval Buckling Method.docUploaded byAlvin Smith
- Buckling Analysis of Concrete Spherical ShellsUploaded byammarmp
- Laser Assisted Forming for Ship Building (Paper)Uploaded bypal_malay

- FE - 3 FE ConceptUploaded bybsitler
- CE 579 Lecture 4 Stability-Energy Method Lrg DeflectionsUploaded bybsitler
- CE 579 Lecture 4 Stability-Differential EqnsUploaded bybsitler
- CE 579 Lecture 4 Stability-Energy Method Sm DeflUploaded bybsitler
- FE - 5 Global Stiffness MatrixUploaded bybsitler
- FE - 8 Beam ElementUploaded bybsitler
- CE 579 Lecture8 Stability- Differential equationsUploaded bybsitler
- CE 579 Lecture 7 Stability-Differential equationsUploaded bybsitler
- Lecture 2 by Chiew Sing Ping FOR CIVIL AND STRUCTUREUploaded byAUNGPS
- FE - 10 Plane StressUploaded bybsitler
- CE 579 Lecture 1 Stability-Stability vs BucklingUploaded bybsitler
- CE 579 Lecture 3 Stability-Energy MethodUploaded bybsitler
- FE - 9 2D InterpolationUploaded bybsitler
- FE - 4 Numerical IntegrationUploaded bybsitler
- CE 579 Lecture 2 Stability-DesignUploaded bybsitler
- CE 579 Lecture 6 Stability-Differential equationsUploaded bybsitler
- FE - 11 Plane StrainUploaded bybsitler
- FE - 6 FE ProgrammingUploaded bybsitler
- CE 579 Lecture 6 Stability- Differential equations-TorsionUploaded bybsitler
- Prof. Salah CE591compcol_F13Uploaded bymagdyamdb
- Column beam detailsUploaded bybsitler
- Eccentric shearUploaded bybsitler
- Composite Beam DesignUploaded bybsitler
- Gusset plate exampleUploaded bybsitler
- Steel design Beam column connectionUploaded bybsitler
- Composite Beam ExampleUploaded bybsitler
- DeflectionUploaded bybsitler
- Composite beam shoringUploaded bybsitler
- Composite Beam ColUploaded bybsitler
- FE - lecture notes indexUploaded bybsitler

- PCA Notes on ACI 318-08 - Chapter 22 - FootingsUploaded byJeyson Guerra
- lec1Uploaded byD.VENKATA RAMANA REDDY
- Noida And Company Gate 2003 Mechanical Solution PaperUploaded byKrishna Eela
- TezaUploaded byMircea Venghiac
- Tunnel LiningUploaded byswabright
- Problem Set 8-Chapter 17_Shafts-Selected ProblemsUploaded bysainath_84
- Analytical_Optimization_of_Chassis_Frame.pdfUploaded bykus satria d
- T-REC-L.26-201508-I!!PDF-EUploaded byburvanov
- diff_bwt_is_800_101Uploaded bydskumar49
- KSOU Diploma in Civil Engineering Distance ModeUploaded bySunil Jha
- 59356080 Etabs Flowchart v 9Uploaded bySushil Dhungana
- Rear Fuselage structureUploaded byaerogem618
- Longitudinal Pin for Shaft-hub ConnectionUploaded bymet-calc
- Finite Element Analysis of a Composite Bridge DeckUploaded bywjzzen
- 01 -Keynote - Haki 2018 Papertaylor to HakiUploaded byWayanArtana
- CONSTRUCTION 9D STRUCTURAL DESIGN CONCRETE.pdfUploaded byIgnacio Jr Ramiento Paguyo
- DESIGN OF STEEL STRUCTURES.pdfUploaded byMopidevi Vijaya Kishore
- arch2012Uploaded byChava Jahnavi
- Example 2Uploaded bySaroeun Tim
- Bolted Beam Column ConnectionsUploaded bylael00
- SEISMIC OF IRREGULAR BUILDINGUploaded byDiane Mahal KO
- Old Rcc DesignUploaded byPrashant Sunagar
- Final Project FileUploaded byJohn Kifl
- Manual PC Carbocomp -TRADECCUploaded byconstructerman
- 2008[1]. Slope-Deflection Equations for Stability and Second-Order Analysis of Timoshenko Beam-column Structures With Semirigid ConectionsUploaded byramoruso
- c04a PACP Lecture 04Uploaded byCristian Blanaru
- EE-SEMESTER-I-VIII-HPTU-SYLLABUS.pdfUploaded byAnonymous HGD9CHZ
- Lateral–Torsional Buckling of Cold-Formed Zed-purlins Partial-laterally Restrained by Metal SheetingUploaded byReaditReadit
- MOS 17032009Uploaded byBhavesh Pipaliya
- Phosphorescent behaviour of nipa palm extract: pH dependent effectsUploaded bysardineta