3 views

Uploaded by Suman Mushahary

random paper

- Use of BS 5950
- Corbel Design
- Design+Provisions+for+Shear+Walls
- CFD-ACI-318-08
- 2-Span PSC Composite Girder Bridge
- Aisc Clean Columns Worksheet
- Steel-concrete composite coupling beams — behavior and design
- CFD-ACI-318-05
- CFD-IS-456-2000
- Advanced strength of materials paper model
- Pushover Analysis for Structure Containing RC Wall
- Combined Footing Design for compressive load
- COST E24 Probabilistic Model Code for Timber _ Glued Laminated Timber
- Design of Unstiffened Extended Single Plate Shear Connections
- Etabscon
- 10. Literature Review
- Park&Paulay-1975 (Bull NZSEE Vol 8 No 1)
- BEAM WSD====
- Comparing Effects of Openings in Concrete Shear Walls
- de04_6

You are on page 1of 12

and torsion

Huiyong Ban a,b,, Ee Loon Tan c, Brian Uy b

a

Key Laboratory of Civil Engineering Safety and Durability of China Education Ministry, Department of Civil Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, PR China

b

Centre for Infrastructure Engineering and Safety, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, UNSW Australia, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia

c

School of Computing, Engineering and Mathematics, University of Western Sydney, Penrith, NSW 2751, Australia

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

Article history: An improved understanding of the performance of composite beams subjected to combined exure and torsion

Received 16 February 2015 is essential for practical design as such loading states are very common in bridges for the main girder and in build-

Received in revised form 13 May 2015 ings for edge beams. Multi-span steelconcrete composite beams consisting of two steel joists and one concrete

Accepted 30 May 2015

slab are concerned herein, on which an experimental study and nite element (FE) modelling analyses are

Available online 11 June 2015

presented. Eight reduced scale beams under combined exure and torsion to varying degrees are tested, with

Keywords:

both full and partial shear connection being incorporated. Either exure-dominated or torsion-dominated failure

Composite beams modes are observed in each test depending on the ratio between the bending and torsional moments applied

Multi-span externally. Load-deformation responses, ultimate strengths as well as exuretorsion interaction of all speci-

Torsional strength mens are also reported and discussed. Based on the experimental outcomes, a three-dimensional FE model is

Flexuretorsion interaction developed and further validated against the test results, and an extensive range of parametric analyses are under-

Experimental study taken by using the FE model. It is indicated that in addition to well-known parameters relating to the concrete

Finite element analysis slab and stirrups, the torsional strength of multi-span composite beams is also sensitive to the degree of shear

connection, spacing of the joists and span-to-depth ratio. Contributions of the steel joist and its constraint on

the slab towards the torsional strength are increased. With respect to their exuretorsion interaction relation,

no increase in the torsional strength is observed within the presence of combined exure, and vice versa. The

interaction is insensitive generally to various parameters considered herein and the test results exhibit consistent

phenomenon. Design guidance and new equations for predicting the torsional strength and the exuretorsion

interaction relation are proposed based on the test and FE analysis results as well as a comprehensive review of

existing approaches in the literature.

2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction combined exure and torsion, which consist of two steel joists and one

concrete slab and are widely used in bridges.

Steelconcrete composite beams have been widely used in bridge Despite a large number of investigations on the torsional behaviour

and building construction due to their capability of combining the bene- of composite beams being undertaken in the past decades, few con-

ts of both the steel component in tension and the concrete component cerned the multi-span composite beams. The earliest research was

in compression. Combined loading actions of exure and torsion are very focused on the elastic performance of composite beams under pure tor-

common for either main girders in bridges or edge beams in buildings, sion [6,7], in which equations developed were further veried by exper-

and therefore knowledge for understanding the load responses of mem- imental investigations [8]. Colville [9] tested four composite beams

bers subjected to such loading conditions is essential for practical design. curved in plan in 1973, with a design methodology for shear connectors

Surprisingly, few national standards cover this loading combination for in such beams and lower bound for the exuretorsion interaction

the design of composite beams, such as the Australian Standard [1], being developed. In late 1970s, a series of composite beam tests under

Eurocode 4 (EC4) [2], British Standard [3], American Code [4] and combined exure and torsion were conducted by Singh and Mallick

China's Code [5] for composite structures. This paper is devoted to eval- [10], Ghosh and Mallick [11], and Ray and Mallick [12]. Based on the

uating the strength aspects of multi-span composite beams subjected to test results, they found that contributions of the concrete slab towards

the ultimate strength in torsion of composite beams were major, and

equations for reinforced concrete (RC) members could also give satisfac-

Corresponding author at: Key Laboratory of Civil Engineering Safety and Durability of

China Education Ministry, Department of Civil Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing

tory torsional strengths for composite beams. They also proposed various

100084, PR China. exuretorsion interaction relations based on their test results. More

E-mail address: banhy@tsinghua.edu.cn (H. Ban). recently, Thevendran et al. [13] and Tan and Uy [14] experimentally

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2015.05.023

0143-974X/ 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

2 H. Ban et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 113 (2015) 112

focused on composite beams with one steel joist, whilst little was relat-

ed to multi-span composite beams. The lack of knowledge for under-

standing the performance of the multi-span composite beams under

combined exure and torsion may lead to unreasonable or even unsafe

design solutions, as they may behave differently compared with the

single-span beams due to the much stronger restraint provided by

steel joists towards the concrete slab. Multi-span members are com-

monly used in bridges and highway interchanges, and further knowl-

edge on the behaviour of such members could vastly improve design

techniques for these critical paradigms of infrastructure.

With the aim of understanding the overall behaviour of multi-span

steelconcrete composite beams subjected to combined exure and

torsion, eight reduced scale tests under varying loading conditions

Fig. 1. Cross-sectional geometry (unit: mm).

are presented herein, and their failure modes, load-deformation re-

sponses, ultimate strengths as well as the exuretorsion interaction

are analysed. A three-dimensional FE model is developed and calibrated

by using the test results. Extensive parametric analyses incorporating

the degree of shear connection, material strengths, reinforcement ratios

of stirrups, cross-sectional geometries as well as span-to-depth ratios are

undertaken. Based on this work, design guidance in terms of calculation

equations for predicting the torsional strength and exuretorsion inter-

action relation of such multi-span composite beams is proposed.

2. Experimental programme

with identical cross-section and beam span were prepared and tested,

referred to as MCBF14 and MCBP14 respectively for full and partial

shear connection throughout this paper. Both beam ends of each speci-

men were restrained from twisting. Each of the multi-span beams

consisted of two steel joists and one concrete slab, with 19 mm diame-

ter headed studs as mechanical shear connectors. Fig. 1 illustrates

Fig. 2. Loading setup (unit: mm). their cross-sectional geometry, with all dimensions given in mm. An

Australian universal beam 200 UB 29.8 [19] was utilised as the steel

investigated the behaviour of curved composite beams subjected to joist, and the solid concrete slab was 1000 mm in width and 120 mm

combine exure and torsion. Nie et al. [15] carried out an experimental in thickness. Spacing of the two joists was 500 mm. Two layers of

study on straight composite beams and developed a three-dimensional Australian N12 reinforcement at 150 mm spacing were embedded in

behavioural truss model for predicting their ultimate strengths under the slab as the longitudinal reinforcement, and R10 stirrup bars were

combined actions of exure and torsion, and new exuretorsion inter- utilised as the torsional reinforcement at 200 mm spacing. Shear con-

action relations were proposed [16]. Tan and Uy [17] experimentally nectors were uniformly distributed over the beam length at 285 mm

investigated such behaviour of straight composite beams with the spacing, and there were two rows of connectors welded on each joist

consideration of partial shear connection, and developed a three- for the full shear connection, and one row for the partial interaction.

dimensional nite element (FE) model by using ABAQUS for non- The total beam length was 4600 mm with a simply supported span

linear analysis [18]. All of the afore-mentioned investigations indicated of 4000 mm. All beams were subjected to two-point loads with varying

that there was a conspicuous increase in the ultimate strength in torsion loading eccentricities for producing different combined actions, and the

within the presence of a combined exure for single-span composite loading point was 675 mm away from the mid-span which gave a load-

beams. ing span of 1350 mm, as shown in Fig. 2. Beams MCBF1 and MCBP1 were

Fig. 3. Beam test setup. (a) Pure bending; (b) combined exure and torsion.

H. Ban et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 113 (2015) 112 3

increased progressively until the peak load was reached. The loading

was terminated when either the maximum stroke of the jack was

reached or the loading capacity of the specimens dropped drastically.

The mid-span deection, beam end rotation and twist at the loading

points were monitored throughout the test. As the beams were statically

indeterminate due to the torsional restraint at beam ends, Fig. 4 gives

the internal torsional moment diagram along the beam length, and

Fig. 4(a) reects the loading conditions in the tests.

150 mm [20]) were prepared during casting, and their compressive

Fig. 4. Internal torsional moment diagram. (a) Two-point loading; (b) single point loading. strengths at different ages are plotted in Fig. 5. The mean compressive

strength at 28 days after casting was 25.5 MPa, and the exural tensile

strength was 4.1 MPa. Standard tension coupon tests were undertaken

to obtain material properties of the steel joist, reinforcing bars and

headed studs, and their average results are summarised in Table 1.

of both full and partial shear connection, and the test setup and dimen-

sions are illustrated in Fig. 6. Fig. 7 plots load versus slip curves obtained

from the push-out tests. Totally, eight and four connectors were incor-

porated in each full and partial shear connection push-out test, respec-

tively, and their corresponding mean shear capacity of an individual

connector was 88.6 kN and 99.7 kN, respectively.

Fig. 5. Concrete compressive strengths at different ages. 2.4. Beam test results

Test results of load versus mid-span deection curves of all the eight

Table 1 specimens are illustrated in Fig. 8, and typical moment versus beam end

Summary of steel properties.

rotation curves and torsion versus twist at the loading point curves are

Sample Elastic modulus Es Yield strength fy Tensile strength fu shown in Figs. 9 and 10, respectively. Magnitudes of both the beam end

(MPa) (MPa) (MPa) rotation and the twist are given in absolute values.

Steel ange 2.16 105 342.7 521.2 Crack patterns and failure modes depended heavily on the propor-

Steel web 2.27 105 364.6 531.7 tion of exure and torsion in the combined actions to which the beam

N12 bars 1.90 105 480.7 620.0 was subjected rather than degrees of shear connection. Either exure-

R10 bars 1.92 105 350.3 470.0

dominated or torsion-dominated failure mode was observed in each

Headed studs 2.10 105 442.1 560.3

test. Beams MCBF1 and MCBP1 subjected to pure bending failed by

exure due to crushing of the concrete, of which typical crack pattern

under pure bending and the loading points were at the centerline of the is shown in Fig. 11(a). It is visible that the cracking and crushing of

slab (Fig. 2(a)). For the other beams MCBF24 and MCBP24, loading the concrete occurred in the areas adjacent to the loading points.

eccentricities were involved to produce combined torsion. Distance be- Beams MCBF2 and MCBP2 under high exure and low torsion, were

tween the loading points and the edge of the slab was 300 mm, 200 mm similarly exure-dominated and failed by the concrete crushing. The

and 100 mm for beams MCBF(P)24, respectively, as shown in Fig. 2(b). exure-dominated failure mode could produce higher ductility based

Beams MCBF4 and MCBP4 were subjected to the highest level of torsion. on the deections in Fig. 8.

Fig. 3 shows photos of the test setup. A 1000 kN hydraulic jack was Beams MCBF34 and MCBP34 under relatively low exure and

used to apply the load. Displacement control was adopted with a load- high torsion failed in the same manner with a torsion-dominated

ing rate of 80 s/mm for the rst hour; afterwards the loading rate was mode, as shown in Fig. 11(b). Diagonal cracks in 45 direction basically

Fig. 6. Push-out test setup. (a) Full shear connection; (b) partial shear connection.

4 H. Ban et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 113 (2015) 112

Fig. 7. Push-out test results. (a) Full shear connection; (b) partial shear connection.

were observed throughout the top surface of the concrete slab between and therefore it was unloaded prematurely and its torsional strength

the loading points, and numerous slightly horizontal cracks occurred on was even smaller compared with beam MCBP3 (Table 2).

both sides of the slab. The torsion-dominated failure mode exhibited Table 2 lists the ultimate strengths of all specimens, including the peak

relatively poor ductility as shown in Fig. 8. It is worth noting that load Pu, ultimate bending moment Mu and ultimate torsional moment Tu.

beam MCBP4 eventually failed by the punching shear resulting from Calculation of Tu was carried out by using the corresponding loading

the loading points being located on the cantilever portion of the slab; eccentricity and based on Fig. 4(a). The exuretorsion interaction

Fig. 8. Comparison of load versus mid-span deection responses between test results and FEA results. (a) Full interaction; (b) partial interaction.

H. Ban et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 113 (2015) 112 5

Fig. 9. Comparison of FE results with test results for moment versus beam end rotation responses. (a) Full interaction; (b) partial interaction.

Fig. 10. Comparison of FE results with test results for torsion versus twist responses. (a) Full interaction; (b) partial interaction.

Fig. 11. Typical crushing and cracking patterns. (a) Flexure-dominated mode; (b) torsion-dominated mode.

diagram of the test results is illustrated in Fig. 12, in which the ultimate and torsion, as they may produce similar loading capacities at a lower

strength in pure torsion was determined based on equations proposed cost in terms of lower demand of shear connectors.

by Nie et al. [16]. It is indicated from Fig. 12 that there is no increase in

the torsional strength within the presence of exure, in contrast with 3. Finite element modelling

single-span composite beams which commonly possess a conspicuous

increase based on previous research [1018]. Either the ultimate strength A three-dimensional FE model was developed by using ABAQUS [21]

in torsion or in exure was reduced in cases of combined actions. How- to assess the strength of multi-span composite beams subjected to

ever, this phenomenon needs further conrmation through FE modelling combined exure and torsion. All scientic denitions of material

as no tests under pure torsion were carried out herein. In addition,

strength characteristics of multi-span composite beams with partial

shear connection were close to that with full shear connection, especially

in the cases of medium exure and medium torsion as well as high ex-

ure and low torsion. This implied benets of the partial shear connection

to the strength of multi-span composite beams under combined exure

Table 2

Summary of beam test results.

MCBF2 596.57 395.23 39.52 MCBP2 576.54 381.96 38.20

MCBF3 522.45 346.12 51.92 MCBP3 512.04 339.23 50.88

MCBF4 415.44 275.23 55.05 MCBP4 372.5 246.78 49.36

Fig. 12. Flexuretorsion interaction diagram of test results.

6 H. Ban et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 113 (2015) 112

the theory manual [21] in detail.

relation as shown in Fig. 13(a), with a yield plateau and strain hardening

being considered. The relation may be determined through parameters

such as the Young's modulus Es, yield strength fy and ultimate tensile

stress fu, strain at the onset of strain hardening st, and strain u at

which fu was reached. Poisson's ratio was taken as an identical value

of 0.3 [22]. With respect to reinforcements, an elastic perfectly-plastic

model was utilised. The metal plasticity model utilised herein is an

isotropic hardening model using von Mises' yielding criterion [21].

The concrete damaged plasticity model was selected for simulating

Fig. 14. Typical FE mesh of the multi-span composite beam.

the concrete material in this paper, with tensile cracking and compres-

sive crushing being assumed as two main failure mechanisms; the yield

surface of this material model is controlled by two hardening variables surfaces attached on the top of the slab were dened for simulating

that are related to failure mechanisms in tension and compression, loading plates.

respectively [21]. Its hardening in compression was determined by

using a non-linear stressstrain relationship prescribed in Eurocode 2

(EC2) [23] as shown in Fig. 13(b), whilst its tension stiffening was de- 3.3. Validation of FE model

ned by means of a crackingdisplacement based curve [24] as shown

in Fig. 13(c), which is expressed as To calibrate the FE model developed herein, performance of the

eight multi-span composite beams subjected to combined exure and

torsion was modelled. In the validation process, all geometric and mate-

t p ek ; 1

rial parameters were determined based on the test results reported in

this paper, and the non-linear behaviour of connector elements in the

where t is the tensile stress beyond cracking, p is the tensile strength FE model was determined in accordance with the shear-slip responses

of concrete and can be expressed as p = 0.3(fc 8)2/3 when fc of headed studs obtained from the push-out tests.

58 MPa otherwise p = 2.12ln(1 + fc / 10) [23], is the crack width, Fig. 8 shows comparisons of the load versus mid-span deection re-

the constant is 1.01 and the corresponding value of the constant k sponse between the test results and FE modelling calculations, in which

is 1.544 103 with being given in units of in [24]. Poisson's ratio good consistency is indicated in terms of the peak load and the initial

of the concrete was taken as 0.2 [23,25]. stiffness. It is worth noting that the FE results of beam MCBP4 markedly

overestimated its loading capacity to some extent, and the reason is that

3.2. FE model it was unloaded prematurely due to the punching shear failure around

the two loading points in the test.

Fig. 14 shows a typical mesh of the FE model for a multi-span com- Fig. 9 illustrates comparisons of the FE modelling results with the

posite beam, which consists of one concrete slab and two steel joists. test results for the moment versus beam end rotation responses for

Solid element C3D8 (three-dimensional, 8-node continuum stress/ the two specimens (MCBF1 and MCBP1) subjected to pure exure, in

displacement element) was used for meshing the concrete slab, and which good agreement is observed. Fig. 10 plots typical comparisons

T3D2 (three-dimensional, 2-node truss element) truss elements were of the FE modelling results with the test results for the torsion versus

embedded in the slab for modelling the reinforcement. Shell element twist responses at the loading point, in which the agreement is also

S4R (4-node, quadrilateral, stress/displacement shell element with satisfactory.

reduced integration and a large-strain formulation) was utilised for Fig. 15(a) plots a comparison of the FE results with the test results for

modelling the steel joists. With respect to shear connectors, connector loading capacities of all the eight specimens under different loading

element CONN3D2 (three-dimensional, 2-node connector element) conditions. It can be seen that the two groups of results have good

was applied, of which mechanical properties were dened in both lon- consistency with each other, and the loading capacity predicted by the

gitudinal and transverse directions by means of non-linear shear versus FE model is lower than the test results by 1.5% on average, with a stan-

slip relations; whilst in the vertical direction connectors were assumed dard deviation of 5.9%. A comparison of the FE results with the test

to be elastic. A hard contact pair was dened at the interface between results for the ultimate strength in torsion is shown in Fig. 15(b), with

the top ange of the joists and the soft of the concrete slab. Rigid good agreement being observed. The torsional strength obtained from

Fig. 13. Stressstrain relationships adopted in ABAQUS. (a) Steel; (b) concrete in compression; (c) concrete in tension.

H. Ban et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 113 (2015) 112 7

Fig. 15. Comparison of FE results with test results for strength. (a) Loading capacity; (b) torsion.

the FE analyses is lower than the test results by 0.7% on average, with a 4.1. Effects of degree of shear connection

standard deviation of 6.7%.

Based on the afore-mentioned comparisons of strengths as well as Both partial and full shear connection were involved in the paramet-

deformations of the multi-span composite beams subjected to various ric study, with three degrees c of 0.5, 1.0 and 1.5 being selected. Fig. 16

loading conditions with combined exure and torsion, it is condent shows comparisons of strengths of the multi-span composite beams

to apply the developed FE model herein for further parametric analyses. subjected to combined exure and torsion with various degrees of

shear connection. It is indicated in Fig. 16(a) that the ultimate strength

Tu0 in pure torsion increases slightly with an increase of c. With respect

4. Parametric analyses to the exuretorsion interaction as plotted in Fig. 16(b), generally con-

sistent results of the three groups of beams are observed, and the inter-

To assess the torsional strength and the exuretorsion interaction action curve of partial shear connection beams is a bit lower compared

behaviour of multi-span composite beams, an extensive body of para- with full shear connection beams. The reason for the phenomenon indi-

metric analyses was conducted herein by using the calibrated FE cated in Fig. 16 is that higher degrees of shear connection can provide

model. Parameters relating to the degree of shear connection, material stronger combination between the concrete and steel components.

strengths, reinforcement ratios of stirrups, cross-sectional geometries Nevertheless, the effect of the degree of shear connection is negligible

as well as span-to-depth ratios were incorporated in the parametric generally.

study, and all the parameters considered herein are listed in Table 3. In addition, the torsional strength of multispan composite beams is

All the bold values in Table 3 corresponded to a standard beam, whilst gradually decreased with an increase of values of the combined exure,

others were utilised for comparative beams. With the aim of quantifying which is consistent with the test results as shown in Fig. 12; whilst for

the interaction behaviour of exure and torsion, eight values of single-span composite beams, by contrast, there is normally a conspicu-

moment-to-torsion ratios = T / M were considered, in which T and ous increase in the torsional moment when combined exure is present

M denote the maximum internal torsional and bending moments in accordance with previous research [1018]. This characteristic of the

along the beam length carried by the composite beam, respectively. A exuretorsion interaction of multi-span composite beams is mainly

value of = 0 corresponds to a beam under pure bending whilst a resulted from the much stronger restraint provided by the two joists

value of = + corresponds to a beam subjected to pure torsion. The towards the slab in torsion, which makes the whole cross-section closer

other six values of were archived by assigning certain values of the to a completely integrated solid section. The explanation can be further

loading eccentricities. A total of 96 steelconcrete composite beams conrmed by the deformation and strain distributions at the mid-span

were modelled and calculated in the parametric study. based on the FE modelling results. Fig. 17 shows typical deformation

All beams were simply supported whilst both the beam ends were at the mid-span of beams under varying loading conditions, and it can

restrained from twisting. Loads were applied at the mid-span, and be seen that the steel joists and the concrete slab synchronise as they

therefore the maximum internal torsional moment carried by the twist; whilst for single-span composite beams visible difference be-

beam was half of the torque externally applied, as shown in Fig. 4(b). tween the two components was observed [18]. Besides, the develop-

The ultimate internal torsional and bending moments (Tu and Mu, ment of strains throughout the cross-sectional height as shown in

respectively) were obtained based on the FE modelling results to assess Fig. 18 also exhibits good consistency between the steel and concrete

the strength characteristics of multi-span composite beams subjected components in terms of the curvature; whilst single-span composite

to combined exure and torsion. Tu and Mu were normalised in the beams demonstrate signicant differences for the curvature between

exuretorsion interaction diagram by using the pure torsional (Tu0) the two components. In Fig. 18, strains within both steel joists and the

and bending capacities (Mu0), respectively. corresponding portion of the slab are given.

Table 3

Parameters and their values.

Material strengths of concrete and steel components commonly

Parameters Range Values applied in practice were adopted herein, i.e. the concrete possessed a

Degree of shear connection c 0.51.5 0.5, 1.0, 1.5 compressive strength fc of 32 MPa [25] and the steel had a yield strength

Concrete strength fc (MPa) 32100 32, 65 fy of 350 MPa [22]; meanwhile high strength (HS) materials were incor-

Steel grade fy (MPa) 350690 350, 690 porated to clarify the effects of their increased strengths on the perfor-

Stirrup ratio Ars/s (mm) 0.160.64 0.16, 0.32, 0.48, 0.64

mance of multi-span composite beams under combined exure and

Cross-sectional geometry 200 UB 29.8, 460 UB 76.4

Spacing of joists b0 (mm) 400600 400, 500, 600 torsion, with 65 MPa and 690 MPa respectively for the concrete and

Span-to-depth ratio L/D 1525 15, 20, 25 steel being utilised. All reinforcements possessed an identical yield

Moment-to-torsion ratio = T/M 0 to + 0, 0.025, 0.05, 0.10, 0.15, strength of 350 MPa and consistent geometric parameters.

0.20, 0.30, + Fig. 19 illustrates comparisons of strengths of the multi-span

Bold values correspond to a standard beam in the parametric analyses. composite beams under combined exure and torsion with different

8 H. Ban et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 113 (2015) 112

Fig. 16. Effects of degree of shear connection on strength of multi-span composite beams. (a) Torsional strength; (b) exuretorsion interaction diagram.

Fig. 17. Deformation at the mid-span. (a) Pure bending ( = 0); (b) combined exure and torsion ( = 0.2); (c) pure torsion ( = +).

study to elucidate their effects on the strength of multi-span composite

beams, in which Ars is the cross-sectional area of one leg of the stirrup

and s is the spacing of the stirrups. Fig. 20 plots comparisons of strengths

of the multi-span composite beams subjected to combined exure and

torsion with different stirrup congurations. It can be observed in

Fig. 20(a) that larger stirrup ratios Ars/s give higher torsional strengths

accordingly, which is consistent with the principle of contributions of

stirrups towards torsional capacities for both single-span composite

beams [1012] and RC members [26]. Meanwhile, it is worth noting

that the contributions of stirrups towards the torsional strength of

multi-span composite beams were not such signicant, as the increase

in Fig. 20(a) is gentle to some extent. With regard to the exuretorsion

interaction, the effects of stirrup ratios are insignicant according to

Fig. 18. Strain distribution throughout the cross-sectional height obtained from FE model- comparisons in Fig. 20(b), notwithstanding the torsional strength

ling results. (a) Pure bending ( = 0); (b) combined exure and torsion ( = 0.2). being improved.

material strengths. A marked increase in the torsional strength Tu0 can 4.4. Effects of cross-sectional dimension

be found in Fig. 19(a), which implies that contributions of the concrete

material and steel joists towards the torsional strength are also signi- With respect to geometric parameters, two types of cross-sections

cant in addition to that of stirrups. Based on the exuretorsion interac- were modelled, in which two universal beams 200 UB 29.8 and 460 UB

tion diagram as shown in Fig. 19(b), it can be seen that higher strength 76.4 [19] were utilised with companion concrete slabs of 1000 mm

materials may result in a slightly lower interaction curve, but the trend 120 mm and 1500 mm 150 mm in dimension, respectively. For

of the curves is basically consistent. beams with 460 UB 76.4, the moment-to-torsion ratios was deter-

mined as = 0, 0.0125, 0.025, 0.05, 0.075, 0.10, 0.15, + for ensuring

4.3. Effects of stirrup ratio the calculation data being scattered more reasonably on the interaction

curve. In accordance with comparisons of strengths of multi-span com-

Stirrups embedded in the concrete slab contribute essentially to- posite beams subjected to combined exure and torsion with the two

wards the torsional capacity, and therefore four stirrup ratios Ars/s different cross-sectional dimensions as shown in Fig. 21, it is indicated

Fig. 19. Effects of material strength on strength of multi-span composite beams. (a) Torsional strength; (b) exuretorsion interaction diagram.

H. Ban et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 113 (2015) 112 9

Fig. 20. Effects of stirrup ratio on strength of multi-span composite beams. (a) Torsional strength; (b) exuretorsion interaction diagram.

in Fig. 21(a) that stronger cross-section logically gives higher torsional 4.6. Effects of span-to-depth ratio

strength, because contributions of all the prime components of concrete,

stirrups and steel joists are markedly improved in larger cross-sections. Span-to-depth ratio L/D is one of the most important parameters at

Despite this, the exuretorsion interaction response is insensitive to the level of member that may inuence the overall behaviour of com-

the change of the cross-section as shown in Fig. 21(b). posite beams subjected to combined exure and torsion. Three values

of L/D ranging from 15 to 25 were incorporated herein, and Fig. 23

plots their comparisons for both torsional strengths and exuretorsion

4.5. Effects of spacing of steel joists interaction diagrams. It can be seen that larger span-to-depth ratios give

relatively lower torsional strengths due to the accordingly increased

For multi-span composite beams, spacing b0 between centrelines deformation in terms of twist and resulted premature yielding and fail-

of the two joists may also possess essential effects on the torsional ure of component materials. However, the exuretorsion interaction

strength, as larger values of the spacing b0 may lead to higher torsional diagram is insensitive to this ratio.

stiffness of the entire composite cross-section, and three values ranging

from 400 mm to 600 mm were incorporated herein.

From comparisons of strengths of multi-span composite beams sub- 5. Design guidance

jected to combined exure and torsion with various values of b0 as

shown in Fig. 22, it can be seen that larger spacing b0 results in markedly With the aim of developing robust design guidance for predicting

higher torsional strengths, which is due to the increased torsional stiff- the torsional strength and the exuraltorsion interaction relation of

ness of the cross-section. The exuretorsion interaction diagram is such multi-span composite beams subjected to combined exure and

insensitive to the spacing of the two joists when b0 is smaller than half torsion, a number of equations available in the literature for predicting

of the width of the concrete slab, whilst the interaction curve is slightly their strengths were reviewed herein, and were compared with the

lower when b0 exceeds half of the slab width. afore-mentioned FE analysis results to clarify their accuracy and scope.

Fig. 21. Effects of cross-sectional dimension on strength of multi-span composite beams. (a) Torsional strength; (b) exuretorsion interaction diagram.

Fig. 22. Effects of spacing of steel joists on strength of multi-span composite beams. (a) Torsional strength; (b) exuretorsion interaction diagram.

10 H. Ban et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 113 (2015) 112

Fig. 23. Effects of span-to-depth ratio on strength of multi-span composite beams. (a) Torsional strength; (b) exuretorsion interaction diagram.

5.1. Torsional strength strength of the concrete. The coefcient can be obtained by using

the following equation [26]:

Torsional strength Tu of a steelconcrete composite section normally

" #

consists of three components, i.e. contributions of the concrete Tc, of 1 192 t X

1 nb

stirrups Tc and of the steel joist Tj, which can be expressed as [10] 1 5 c tanh c

3 bc n5 2t c

n1;3;5

" # : 7

k 8

X

1

T u T c T s T j: 2 1 2

n 2 coshnb

2t

c

n1;3;5 c

compared with contributions of the slab for single-span composite On the basis of STA and CEC approaches, Hsu [30] proposed a new

beams [9,11], it was considered in this research for multi-span compos- equation with coefcients being determined through PCA tests, with

ite beams because there are two joists and the cross-section is closer to a length in units of in. and stress in units of psi,

completely integrated section. Tj for one steel joist can be determined by !

q

using [27] t 2c bc f yrl y x0 y0 Ars f yrs

T c T s jPCA 2:4 f c 0:66m 0:33 0 ; 8

3 f yrs x0 s

|{z} |{z}

T j b f t 2f t 3f =3 bw t 2w =2 t 3w =6 y ; 3 Tc t 1:5

where bf and tf are the width and thickness of the joist ange, bw and tw where m is the volume ratio of the longitudinal reinforcement to the

are the width and thickness of the joist web, and y is the shear strength stirrups and may be obtained by m = Arl s / [Ars2(x0 + y0)] and Arl is

of the steel and is taken as 0.6 fy [17]. the cross-sectional area of all longitudinal reinforcements, fyrl is the

Most of relevant research has been focused on contributions of the yield strength of the longitudinal reinforcement.

concrete slab towards the torsional strength. Hsu [26] reviewed several By employing dozens of subsequent experimental investigations,

classical theories dealing with the pure torsion, including Rausch's Hsu improved Eq. (8) based on the skew-bending theory as [31]

Space Truss Analogy (STA) [28], Cowan's Efciency Coefcient (CEC)

q

[29] as well as theories of Hsu himself based on PCA tests (PCA) [30] t 2c bc p f yrl y x0 y0 Ars f yrs

T c T s jSBT 2:4 f c m 1 0:2 0 ; 9

and Skew-Bending Theory (SBT) [31] which served as a basis of the de- 3 f yrs x0 s

|{z} |

{z}

sign for torsion since the 1971 ACI Codes [26]. Tc t 1:6

Torsional strength of the concrete slab in accordance with the STA

approach [26,28] is expressed as

Ray and Mallick [12] introduced Hsu's another equations [32,33] in

metric units, with slight differences from Eqs. (8) and (9),

Ars f yrs

T c T s jSTA 2x0 y0 ; 4

s y x0 y0 Ars f yrs

5=3 1=3

T c T s jHsu 3:089t c bc f c 0:66m 0:33 0 ; 10

x0 s

where x0 and y0 are the smaller and larger dimensions of stirrups, re- y

0:7 m 1:5 & 0 2:6;

spectively, Ars is the cross-sectional area of one leg of the stirrups, fyrs x0

is their yield strength, and s is their spacing.

According to CEC method [11,15], contributions of the concrete slab where the length is given in units of cm and the stress is given in units

to the torsional strength may be calculated by of kg/cm2.

Despite the afore-mentioned equations being originally developed

Ars f yrs for RC members, they can give satisfactory results against previous

T c T s jCEC T e 1:6x0 y0 ; 5 single-span composite beam tests [1012].

s

More recently, Nie et al. [16] proposed a new equation for determin-

where the contribution of the plain concrete is taken as the elastic ing the contribution of the concrete slab towards the torsional strength

torque Te, which may be derived from Eq. (6) as of composite beams, expressed as

p Ars f yrs

T e t 2c bc f t ; 6 T c T s jNIE 0:1015f t W t 2:9698 mx0 y0 ; 11

s

where is St. Venant's coefcient and is a function of the ratio bc/tc, tc is where Wt is the torsional plastic section modulus of the concrete slab

the thickness of the concrete slab and bc is the width, ft is the tensile and taken as Wt = t2c 3bc tc / 6.

H. Ban et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 113 (2015) 112 11

methodologies for assessing the strength of structural members sub-

jected to combined exure and torsion. The lower bound interaction re-

lation proposed by Colville [9] seems like the rst one for steelconcrete

composite beams, which is expressed as

2 2

Mu Tu

1; 12

M u0 T u0

Fig. 24. Comparison between FE modelling and equation results for torsional strength of moments along the beam length, respectively, and Mu0 and Tu0 are the

multi-span composite beams. ultimate strengths in pure bending and pure torsion of the cross-

section, respectively.

Singh and Mallick [10] proposed an interaction diagram in terms of a

Figs. 16(a) and 19(a)23(a) plot calculation results obtained from broken line model with two segments based on test results, which may

the afore-mentioned equations together with the FE modelling results, be obtained from

based on which the following research ndings were made:

Tu 21 M u Tu Mu

1 & 1:21; 12:1 1 & 1:21: 13

(i) The approaches SBT, PCA and STA gave the lowest torsional T u0 110 M u0 T u0 Mu0

strengths for multi-span composite beams, and the approaches

CEC and Hsu produced medium results; the method NIE pos- Ghosh and Mallick [11], and Ray and Mallick [12] respectively

sessed the highest predictions in the torsional strength which introduced two different interaction relations based on experimental

was also the most accurate compared with the FE modelling research; however, no explicit equations were reported.

results for multi-span composite beams. Nie et al. [15] proposed an interaction relation consisting of three

(ii) The torsional strength of multi-span composite beams were line segments based on test results, which can be derived by

demonstrated to be sensitive to the degree of shear connection, 8 p

the spacing of the two joists and the span-to-depth ratio, which < M u =M u0 0:65 : T u =T u0 1 3:17Mu =Mu0 ;

are not involved in existing approaches for predicting the tor- M =M N 0:65 : T u =T u0 3:422:55Mu =M u0 &N0:6; 14

: u u0

sional strength of composite beams. T u =T u0 6 6Mu =Mu0 & 0:6:

(iii) The torsional strength of multi-span composite beams utilising

HS materials was dramatically higher than the predictions of Nie et al. [16] developed another interaction equation based on the-

the method NIE (Fig. 19(a)), whilst that for high stirrup ratios oretical results,

was markedly lower than the results obtained from the method 8

NIE (Fig. 20(a)). As a consequence, it implied that for the torsional >

> M M T Mu 2 Tu

< u 0:807 u0 : u 0:312 0:539 1;

strength of multi-span composite beams, previous methods prob- Tu T u0 T u0 Mu0 T u0 15

ably underestimated the contributions of the steel joist and of the >

> M M M

: u N0:807 u0 : u 1:

plain concrete, and overestimated that of stirrups. Tu T u0 M u0

Despite some inuential parameters being excluded in the approach plotted in Fig. 25(a) together with all the FE analysis results. It can be

NIE (Eq. (11)) [16], it may still give satisfactory predictions for the tor- seen that the FE analysis results are closer to the lower bound of inter-

sional strength of multi-span composite beams with parameters in the action given by Colville [9]. There is no conspicuous increase in the tor-

practical range, as shown in Fig. 24 with a majority of the deviation sional moment when the combined exure is present, which is contrast

being within 10%. Nevertheless, the resistance in torsion of such with single-span composite beams. Fig. 25(b) gives a more accurate

multi-span composite beams is logically and theoretically different interaction relation developed through non-linear tting of the FE anal-

from that with single steel joist in terms of the non-uniform torsion, ysis results, and it is expressed as

and therefore further investigations incorporating more parameters 1 3:5

and theoretical research are in need to conrm and to improve this de- Mu Tu

1: 16

sign guidance by emphasising the feature of non-uniform torsion. M u0 T u0

Fig. 25. Comparison of exuretorsion interaction relations of multi-span composite beams. (a) Existing models; (b) proposed model.

12 H. Ban et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 113 (2015) 112

6. Conclusions [4] American Institution of Steel Construction (AISC), ANSI/AISC 36010. Specication

for structural steel buildings, AISC, Chicago, 2010.

[5] Ministry of Construction of the People's Republic of China (MCPRC), GB 500172003

Eight reduced scale tests on multi-span steelconcrete composite code for design of steel structures, China Architecture & Building Press, Beijing,

beams under combined exure and torsion were reported in this paper, 2006.

[6] P.F. McManus, G.A. Nasir, C.G. Culver, Horizontally curved girders-state of the art,

and 96 such beams were modelled by using a validated FE model for J. Struct. Div. 95 (5) (1969) 853870.

parametric analyses. A large range of parameters were incorporated to [7] P.F. McManus, C.G. Culver, Nonuniform torsion of composite beams, J. Struct. Div. 95

elucidate their effects on the torsional strength as well as the exure (6) (1969) 12331256.

[8] C.P. Heins, J.T.C. Kuo, Composite beams in torsion, J. Struct. Div. 98 (5) (1972)

torsion interaction relation of multi-span composite beams. Based on 11051117.

the research ndings, the following conclusions can be made: [9] J. Colville, Tests of curved steelconcrete composite beams, J. Struct. Div. 99 (7)

(1973) 15551570.

Multi-span steelconcrete composite beams failed in either a exure- [10] R.K. Singh, S.K. Mallick, Experiments on steelconcrete composite beams subjected

dominated mode or a torsion-dominated mode, depending on the to torsion and combined exure and torsion, Indian Concr. J. 51 (1) (1977) 2430.

[11] B. Ghosh, S.K. Mallick, Strength of steelconcrete composite beams under combined

proportion of combined actions; the former mode normally corre-

exure and torsion, Indian Concr. J. 53 (2) (1979) 4853.

sponds to high ductility whilst the latter one implies poor ductility. [12] M.B. Ray, S.K. Mallick, Interaction of exure and torsion in steelconcrete composite

The FE model developed herein is adequate for predicting the strength beams, Indian Concr. J. 54 (3) (1980) 8083.

and deformation of multi-span composite beams subjected to com- [13] V. Thevendran, S. Chen, N.E. Shanmugam, J.Y.R. Liew, Experimental study on steel

concrete composite beams curved in plan, Eng. Struct. 22 (8) (2000) 877889.

bined exure and torsion. [14] E.L. Tan, B. Uy, Experimental study on curved composite beams subjected to

There is no increase in the torsional strength within the presence combined exure and torsion, J. Constr. Steel Res. 65 (2009) 18551863.

of combined exure for multi-span composite beams in contrast [15] J. Nie, L. Luo, S. Hu, Experimental study on composite steelconcrete beams under

combined bending and torsion, Compos. Hybrid Struct. 2 (2000) 631638.

with single-span beams. The cross-section of multi-span composite [16] J. Nie, L. Tang, C.S. Cai, Performance of steelconcrete composite beams under

beams exhibits good integration in terms of synchronised twist and combined bending and torsion, J. Struct. Eng. 135 (9) (2009) 10481057.

basically consistent curvature for the steel and concrete components. [17] E.L. Tan, B. Uy, Experimental study on straight composite beams subjected to

combined exure and torsion, J. Constr. Steel Res. 65 (2009) 784793.

Despite the torsional strength of such beams being sensitive to the [18] E.L. Tan, B. Uy, Nonlinear analysis of composite beams subjected to combined

degree of shear connection, the spacing of the two joists and the exure and torsion, J. Constr. Steel Res. 67 (2011) 790799.

span-to-depth ratio, the equation developed by Nie et al. [16] provides [19] Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand (AS/NZS). AS.NZS3679.1-2010 Struc-

tural steel Hot-rolled bars and sections. Sydney: AS & Wellington: NZS, 2010.

satisfactory predictions in the practical range.

[20] British Standards Institution (BSI), BS EN 123901: 2000 testing hardened

Flexuretorsion interaction diagrams of such multi-span composite concrete shape, dimensions and other requirements of specimens and moulds,

beams are close to the lower bound curve, and a new relation was pro- BSI, London, 2000.

[21] ABAQUS, Abaqus 6.11 documentation, Dassault Systmes, Providence, RI, USA, 2011.

posed herein which could produce more accurate predictions for such

[22] Standards Australia (AS), AS 41001998 steel structures, AS, Sydney, 1998.

beams. [23] British Standards Institution (BSI), BS EN 1992-1-1: 2004 eurocode 2: design of con-

crete structures part 11: general rules and rules for buildings, BSI, London, 2004.

[24] V.S. Gopalaratnam, S.P. Shah, Softening response of plain concrete in direct tension,

J. Am. Concr. Inst. 82 (3) (1985) 310323.

Acknowledgements [25] Standards Australia (AS), AS 36002009 concrete structures, AS, Sydney, 2009.

[26] T.T.C. Hsu, Torsion of reinforced concrete, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1984.

75117.

The work in this paper was supported nancially by the Australian

[27] N.S. Trahair, M.A. Bradford, The behaviour and design of steel structures to AS 4100,

Research Council through Discovery Projects (DP087974 and E and FN Spon, London, 1998. 412413.

DP110101328), which is acknowledged with thanks. All the laboratory [28] E. Rausch, Design of reinforced concrete in torsion(Ph.D. Thesis) Technische

Hochschule, Berlin, 1929. 53 (in German).

staffs at the University of Western Sydney are also acknowledged for

[29] H.J. Cowan, An elastic theory for torsional strength of rectangular reinforced concrete

their assistant during the testing. beams, Mag. Concr. Res. 2 (4) (1950) 38.

[30] T.T.C. Hsu, Ultimate torque of reinforced rectangular beams, J. Struct. Div. 94 (2)

References (1968) 485510.

[31] T.T.C. Hsu, Discussion of Pure torsion in rectangular sections a re-examination

[1] Standards Australia (AS), AS 2327.1-2003 composite structures part 1: simply by McMullen AE and Rangan BV, J. Am. Concr. Inst. 76 (6) (1979) 741746.

supported beams, AS, Sydney, 2003. [32] T.T.C. Hsu, Torsion of structural concreteplain concrete rectangular section, Torsion

[2] British Standards Institution (BSI), BS EN 1994-1-1: 2004 eurocode 4: design of of Structural ConcreteSpecial publication SP-18, American Concrete Institute,

composite steel and concrete structures part 11: general rules and rules for build- Detroit, Michigan 48219, USA, 1968. 203238.

ings, BSI, London, 2004. [33] T.T.C. Hsu, Torsion of structural concrete-behaviour of reinforced concrete rectangu-

[3] British Standards Institution (BSI), BS 59503.1: 1990 structural use of steelwork in lar members, Torsion of Structural ConcreteSpecial publication SP-18, American

building part 3: design in composite construction section 3.1 code of practice for Concrete Institute, Detroit, Michigan 48219, USA, 1968. 261306.

design of simple and continuous composite beams, BSI, London, 1990.

- Use of BS 5950Uploaded bySmr Only
- Corbel DesignUploaded bySamarakoon Banda
- Design+Provisions+for+Shear+WallsUploaded byRm1262
- CFD-ACI-318-08Uploaded byGlenn Rey Domingo
- 2-Span PSC Composite Girder BridgeUploaded byNabeel Ahmad
- Aisc Clean Columns WorksheetUploaded byOsman Carrillo Soto
- Steel-concrete composite coupling beams — behavior and designUploaded bycyrusnasirai
- CFD-ACI-318-05Uploaded byfpalacios_5
- CFD-IS-456-2000Uploaded bythanzawtun1981
- Advanced strength of materials paper modelUploaded bydurgaraokamireddy
- Pushover Analysis for Structure Containing RC WallUploaded byGirish Deshmukh
- Combined Footing Design for compressive loadUploaded bySunil Joshi
- COST E24 Probabilistic Model Code for Timber _ Glued Laminated TimberUploaded byCristian Toșa
- Design of Unstiffened Extended Single Plate Shear ConnectionsUploaded byGonzalo Contreras
- EtabsconUploaded bypaulkohan
- 10. Literature ReviewUploaded byAkhil Rajagopal
- Park&Paulay-1975 (Bull NZSEE Vol 8 No 1)Uploaded byangelomarinilli
- BEAM WSD====Uploaded bylitrakhan
- Comparing Effects of Openings in Concrete Shear WallsUploaded byIrshadAhmed
- de04_6Uploaded byRobert Walusimbi
- Pushover Analysis for Structure Containing RC WallUploaded bySoledad Somarriba
- D-198Uploaded byWahyunal Yuriswan
- RC Frame Design of Buildings November 2012 SKJUploaded bydev27
- ME 3320 Calendar StrengthsUploaded bycollege_kid081
- 516-4571-1-PBUploaded byBennet Kuriakose
- Beams and One-way SlabsUploaded byDa Jesusluvsme
- trb015Uploaded byrespect9
- Performance Based Desing and Analysis of Composite Beams in BuildingsUploaded byNenad
- Triangular BCC structural analysis-Static 1-1.docxUploaded bymahfuzul_haque
- smUploaded byNebish Mani

- McDonalds June Inc Algonac - PrintInspectionUploaded byLiz Shepard
- CMS Cables AceleracionUploaded byMarcel Baque
- Getting the Full Benefits of a HazopUploaded byaymenkaram
- Is 2250-1981 (Preparation and Use of Masonry Mortars)Uploaded byDharmesh
- expert opinionUploaded byDaniel Panjaitan
- A 3.2 Porous Paving Systems 8-05draft p tUploaded byJenni Guerrero Quiñones
- HBO - Silicon Valley 1x01Uploaded byJohn Ta
- Ccrp CourseUploaded byKathryn May
- CE09 404 Structural Analysis I APR 2014Uploaded bySai Das
- NEMA FG 1-1993 - Fiberglass Cable Tray Systems.pdfUploaded byadenoi
- Concrete Vebe TestUploaded byDarrenTofu
- Is Regionalism A Route To Free TradeUploaded byanaconda06
- Report on Branded Shoes FinalUploaded byNeeraj Madnani
- Lg Lm u1350aUploaded byluis262
- EXP 1 EXAMPLE.odtUploaded byFatin Najwa
- 60 questoesUploaded byminasemmacae
- Ibps Pos Mt Cwe III 2013Uploaded byAnonymous ksch6E4DH
- MIMMSUploaded byMiguel Orozco Luna
- State of Utah 2011 Comprehensive Report on HomelessnessUploaded byState of Utah
- EEET423L Final ProjectUploaded byAlan Reyes
- PLAN DE GESTION DEL BUSINESS CASE.pdfUploaded byNelson Barrial Lujan
- Transmisor TRA ComecoUploaded byCorina Fraszczak
- TheimpactofglobalfinancialUploaded byMarilyn Montera
- Best Software Quality Assurance Practice Process in the Project LifeUploaded byivonchi1982
- Keil Undercut AnchorsUploaded byTracyval Cada
- 1Uploaded bydukan356517
- Nolo Complete Books-in-Print 2010-2011Uploaded byNolo
- Scriptomatic, Inc. v. United States, 555 F.2d 364, 3rd Cir. (1977)Uploaded byScribd Government Docs
- bizhub c450 Network Scan OperationsUploaded byAylee_M
- A-Study-of-Barangay-Little-Baguio.docxUploaded byCarlene Zaballero