Front. Archit. Civ. Eng.
China 2011, 5(3): 278293
DOI 10.1007/s11709-011-0120-z
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Kazi Md Abu SOHEL, Jat Yuen Richard LIEW, Min Hong ZHANG
Analysis and design of steel-concrete composite sandwich
systems subjected to extreme loads
Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011
Abstract This paper presents the design guide based on
analytical, numerical and experimental investigation of
Steel-concrete-steel (SCS) sandwich structural members
comprising a lightweight concrete core with density ranged
from 1300 to 1445 kg/m3 subjected to static, impact and
blast loads. The performance of lightweight sandwich
members is also compared with similar members with
normal weight concrete core and ultra high strength
concrete core (fc = 180 MPa). Novel J-hook shear
connectors were invented to prevent the separation of
face plates from the concrete core under extreme loads and
their uses are not restricted by the concrete core thickness.
Flexural and punching are the primary modes of failure
under static point load. Impact test results show that the
SCS sandwich panels with the J-hook connectors are
capable of resisting impact load with less damage in
comparison than equivalent stiffened steel plate panels.
Blast tests with 100 kg TNT were performed on SCS
sandwich specimens to investigate the key parameters that
affect the blast resistance of SCS sandwich structure.
Plastic yield line method is proposed to predict the plastic
capacity and post peak large deection of the sandwich
plates. Finally, an energy balanced model is developed to
analyze the global behavior of SCS sandwich panels
subjected to dynamic load.
Keywords blast load, composite structure, impact load,
lightweight concrete, sandwich plate, J-hook connector
1 Introduction
Steel-concrete-steel (SCS) sandwich structures are
Received December 25, 2010; accepted April 5, 2011
Kazi Md Abu SOHEL, Jat Yuen Richard LIEW ( ),
Min Hong ZHANG
Department of Civil Engineering National University of Singapore,
Singapore
E-mail: ceeljy@nus.edu.sg
becoming popular in offshore, bridge and other civil
engineering constructions because of their higher specic
strength and better stiffness. This form of construction may
be used as an alternative to either conventional stiffened
steel plate or reinforced concrete construction [13]. Zuk
[4] and Bergan et al. [5] carried out further work to realize
its potential for application as lightweight deck structures
and for strengthening of weakened areas in ship structures.
The apparent advantages of the system are that the external
steel face plates act as both primary reinforcement and
permanent formwork, and also as impermeable, impact and
blast resistant membranes.
Sandwich structure comprises three major structural
parts: face plates, sandwich core, and mechanisms to
transfer shear between face plates and core. If a structure is
potentially subject to signicant bending moment, cyclic
loading and large impact loading arising from hazardous
environment, the SCS sandwich system serves as an
appealing alternative to existing stiffened steel plate
structures. The advantages of SCS include, but not limited
to, the following: 1) economical and optimized design to
achieve highs stiffness and strength; 2) improved impact
resistance, especially leakage control after punching failure
of the steel plates; 3) compared with stiffened plate, the
exposed steel surface area is less and hence the amount of
the protection coating can be reduced; 4) require less
stiffeners and therefore less welding which eventually
leads to improved fatigue performance; 5) concrete core
provides good acoustic and thermal insulation; and 6)
prefabrication and modular construction reduce construc-
tion time.
To improve the performance, adhesive, angle shear
connector, and stud shear connectors were used in SCS
sandwich structures by Solomon et al. [6], Malek et al. [7]
and Tomlinson et al. [8]. Further modication in SCS
sandwich construction was done and named as Bi-Steel
[9]. SCS sandwich structure with adhesive bonding was
not ideal in resisting shear force because there was no
vertical shear reinforcement. The sandwich structure with
angle shear connectors performed rather poorly in shear
 K.M.A. SOKEL et al. Analysis and design of steel-concrete composite sandwich systems subjected to extreme loads
Fig. 1 Separation of face plate from core when the sandwich beams are subjected to impact. (a) Beam with overlap shear studs; (b) beam
with angle shear connectors
and separation of face plates occurs when it was subjected
to impact loading. Headed studs could not provide through
connection between the face plates and thus separation of
face plates due to accidental impact load led to signicant
reduction in load carrying capacity. The overlap length and
close stud spacing could lead to difculty in concrete
casting or grouting. Furthermore, research done by Liew
et al. [2] showed that the shock wave generated by impact
and blast loads tend to push the face plate out from the core
leading to tensile separation as shown in Fig. 1. Bi-steel
connectors (Fig. 2) proposed by Pryer and Bowerman [9]
limit the core thickness to be at least 200 mm and the
friction welding of the connectors must be carried out in
workshop involving the use of proprietary equipment.
To overcome all the above mentioned disadvantages a
novel method of connecting the two face plates using J-
hook connector was developed by Liew et al. [10]. The J-
hooks can direct connect the top and bottom steel face
Fig. 2 Bi-steel panel [9]
279
plates as shown in Fig. 3, and their uses are not restricted
by the concrete core thickness. The proposed novel SCS
sandwich system offers signicant advantages for applica-
tions involving extreme loadings. Examples of such
applications are as blast protective barriers and vehicle
impact barriers as shown in Fig. 4. In this paper, the
structural performance of SCS sandwich system with
various concrete materials subject to static patch load,
impact and blast loads is studied based on both experi-
mental and analytical investigations. The key parameters,
which include sandwich core strength, face plate thickness,
and employment of shear connectors, affecting the
structural performance are investigated.
2 Sandwich composite panels with J-hook
connectors
For weight sensitive marine, offshore and some civil
structures, the core thickness of the sandwich panel shall
be optimized. In addition, to minimize the dependence on
the welding equipment and to introduce exibility in
construction and repair, novel shear connectors named J-
hook connectors and associated construction methods were
invented by Liew and Sohel [1]. Generally, the construc-
tion process of SCS sandwich panels with J-hook
connectors can be divided into two stages: 1) fabrication
of steel plates and shear connectors and 2) lling of
concrete between the plates.
In the rst stage, the J-hook connector can be fabricated
by bending a steel bar or through forging and machining.
The diameter and height of the J-hook connectors depend
280 Front. Archit. Civ. Eng. China 2011, 5(3): 278293

Fig. 3 (a) Welding of J-hook shear connector by automatic welding gun; (b) Assembly of SCS panel with J-hook connectors

Fig. 4 Example of usage of SCS sandwich system. (a) Offshore structures in arctic region; (b) blast barrier wall; (c) free standing
automobile barrier

on the strength requirement and are subject to the limit of using commercially available shear stud arc welding
core thickness. For small core thickness, the diameter of equipment as shown in Fig. 3(a). After welding of
the J-hook connectors is limited by its bending radius. The J-hooks, two plates are hooked together by applying a
J-hook connectors can be welded to the face plates by light tension force to the plates before lling concrete in
 K.M.A. SOKEL et al. Analysis and design of steel-concrete composite sandwich systems subjected to extreme loads
Fig. 5 SCS sandwich system with J-hook connectors
between the gap of the two steel plates [1]. The SCS
sandwich panel can be assembled easily and efciently as
shown in Fig. 3(b).
Such J-hook shear connectors can effectively ensure
composite action between steel face plates and concrete
core under normal design loads. They also constrain the
local buckling of steel face plates. Under extreme loadings,
such as impact loading, the J-hook connectors prevent
separation of steel the face plates and ensure both face
plates act compositely with the concrete core. This
connection technology together with the use of lightweight
concrete core would reduce overall weight of the SCS
sandwich system and make it a competitive choice for
marine and offshore structures.
3 Analysis of SCS sandwich structures
under static load
The potential failure mechanisms are shown in Fig. 5 and
the design formulae to predict the ultimate resistance of
various failure modes are described below.
3.1 Flexural resistance
The plastic moment resistance of a composite SCS
sandwich section can be determined by assuming a
rectangular plastic stress block of depth xc for the concrete
(Fig. 6). The concrete beneath the neutral axis (NA) is
assumed to be cracked. The forces in the steel plates
depend on the yield strength and shear strength of material
used for the connectors in resisting interfacial shear
stresses in between the steel plate and the concrete core.
It is also assumed that sufcient shear connectors are
provided to prevent local bucking of the steel plate in
compression.
The nominal compressive force in concrete (Ncu) is
given by
0:85fc
Ncu bxc , (1)
gc
where b, c and c are the beam width, concrete cylinder
281
Fig. 6 Force distribution in the section at fully plastic stage
strength, and partial safety factor for concrete respectively.
The plastic neutral axis position can be obtained by
equating the compression force to the total tension force
Nc Ncu Nt : (2)
Putting Nc = ybtc, Nt = ybtt and Ncu from Eq. (1) in
Eq. (2),
xc 1:176gc y tt tc =fc , (3)
where c = 1.5 as recommended by Eurocode 2 [11] for
design purposes; Nc and Nt are the compressive and tensile
forces in the top and bottom steel plates, respectively.
By taking moments about the center of the compression
steel plate, the plastic moment of resistance of the
sandwich section is:

t t  0:85fc bxc
t 
Mpl y btt hc c t 0:5xc c : (4)
2 2 gc 2
When the steel plates are of equal thickness and strength,
the SCS sandwich beams can be treated as an under
reinforced concrete beam. Since an under reinforced beam
fails in a ductile manner, the SCS sandwich beam deected
extensively and usually developed extensive and wide
cracks in the nal loading stages [12]. After yielding of
tension steel plate, the cracking of the concrete will
continue to rise toward the compression steel plate. In this
case, the strain at the bottom plate is very large compared
282 Front. Archit. Civ. Eng. China 2011, 5(3): 278293

to top steel plate. The moment capacity of the beam is Ls is the dimension of the slab specimen; L is the span
reached when the neutral axis moves near to the lower between the supports.
surface of the compression plate (i.e. x & 0) and the
bottom plate is fully yielded. 3.2 Punching shear resistance
Therefore, in case of tc = tt = t, the moment of resistance
of the sandwich section becomes Figure 8(a) illustrates the failure pattern of a SCS sandwich
slab showing the formation of a cone due to a punching
Mpl Nt hc t: (5) load from the top. The punching shear resistance within the
For fully composite beam (Nt = ybtt, in which y is the concrete core around the loaded perimeter of the SCS
yield strength of the steel plate), the number of J-hook sandwich slab may be calculated using Eurocode 2 [11] or
connectors welded in the bottom or top face plate between CEB-FIP [14] approach, on the basis that the slab behaves
the points of zero and maximum moment should be, ns = similarly to conventional reinforced concrete members
ybtt/(PR) in which is the reduction factor for concrete. with shear reinforcement in the punching shear zone. It
Therefore, Eq. (5) becomes should be noted that: 1) the method is for reinforced
concrete slabs with re-bars in the tension side of the slab,
Mpl y btt hc t: (6) which differs from the SCS sandwich slabs having top and
bottom steel face plates. 2) The load factor, strength-
If the number of J-hook connectors is reduced, the beam
reduction factor, and material factors have been taken as
will be partially composite and the moment resistance of
unity. The actual test values of the material (concrete and
the partially composite beam will also be reduced
steel) properties were used in the model. 3) In the SCS
correspondingly. For partially composite beam,
sandwich slab, the top plate participates in transferring the
Nt np PR , (7) punching load to the concrete. Therefore, the punching
perimeter (Fig. 8(b)) may be calculated as
in which np is the number of shear connectors between the
points of zero and maximum moment for partial composite u1 4c 22hc 2ntc , (10)
beam. Therefore, Eq. (5) can be written as in which n = Es/Ec, where Es and Ec are the modulus of
Mpl np PR hc t: (8) elasticity of steel and concrete respectively.
The punching resistance of the composite sandwich slab
For SCS sandwich slabs, the exural capacity of the slab
can be evaluated using the yield line theory. Figure 7
shows the fracture pattern of yield lines in a square slab,
simply supported at four edges and subjected to a
concentrated patch load. From the virtual work principle,
the exural capacity of the slab may be evaluated using the
equation proposed by Rankin and Long [13],
 
Ls
Fp 8mpl 0:172 , (9)
Lc
where mpl is the plastic moment capacity per unit length
along the yield line, c is the side length of the loading area,

Fig. 8 Punching shear in SCS sandwich slab. (a) Typical

Fig. 7 Formation of yield-line mechanism of sandwich slab punching cone in SCS sandwich; (b) control perimeter for
subjected to concentrated load at center punching shear
 K.M.A. SOKEL et al. Analysis and design of steel-concrete composite sandwich systems subjected to extreme loads 283

is obtained by summing the shear resistance provided by signicant elongation of hook or cracking of concrete.
the concrete core and the contribution from the shear Therefore, it can be assumed that the hook connector is
connectors as fully engaged while concrete core develops its full shear
strength.
Vpun Vc Vs : (11)
Vc is the shear resistance of the concrete core obtained as 3.3 SCS sandwich slabs under patch loadexperimental
Eurocode 2 [11]: verication
 
1
Vc Cc kc 1 1001 fck 3 u1 hc , (12) Eight tests were conducted on two way spanning SCS
sandwich slabs with a square aspect ratio. The span length
p
where kc 1 200=hc 2 with hc in mm, 1 = tt/hc was 1.0 m. The slabs were simply supported on all four
0.02, Cc = 0.18/c for normal weight concrete and Cc = edges using xed bars on two adjacent sides and loose bars
0.15/c for LWC, 1 = 0.4 + 0.6/22001.0 in which is on the other sides. Load was applied through 100 mm
the density of concrete (kg/m3), c is the partial safety square solid column. The differences among the test
factor for concrete. If bers are added into the concrete specimens are core thickness, steel plate thickness,
core, the shear resistance of the concrete may be modied J-hook diameter and concrete types (see Table 1).
as (Majdzadeh et al. [15]), Figure 9(a) shows the test arrangement of the SCS
  sandwich slab.
1 The load-deection behavior of SCS slabs under
Vc Cc kc 1 1001 fck 3 kf f ,FRC u1 hc , (13)
concentrated load is shown in Fig. 10. The behavior of
all the slabs followed a pattern at the initial stage of
where kf = 0.216 for steel ber (hook end), limited to a loading. First a linear reaction with some slight tension
maximum of 1% volume fraction; kf = 0.290 for synthetic cracking and the lifting of the corners which was expected.
bers; and f,FRC = FRC plain in which FRC and plain are Secondly, the onset of slip, bucking of upper plate and
the shear strength of FRC and plain concrete, respectively, possibly the failure of one or more connectors occurred.
as determined by direct shear test. In the present study An explanation of this may be as follows. Initially the slab
f,FRC = FRC plain = 4.23Vf is used conservatively as behaves in a fully composite way with full adhesion
suggested by Mirsayah et al. [16] for at ended bers with between concrete and steel and thus no slip was observed.
circular cross section in which Vf is the percentage of ber Once the bond fails the connectors are required to carry all
volume faction. the shear forces.
Vs is the contribution of the J-hook connectors for The load deection behaviors were different between the
punching resistance, i.e., slabs with normal weight concrete and lightweight
Vs ncp Ft , (14) concrete as shown in Fig. 10. After the rst peak, the
slabs with normal weight concrete showed rapid reduction
where ncp is the number of J-hook connector attached to in load capacity. The reason is that the slab failed by
the bottom plate within the critical perimeter u1 subtracting punching of concrete core. After the local punching failure,
the number of J-hooks under the loading area; Ft is the the load capacity again increased due to membrane action
tensile capacity of each J-hook connector obtained from of the steel plates. In the cases of the slabs with lightweight
direct tensile test of interconnected J-hooks within a concrete cores, the load gradually increased with deection
concrete block. From the tensile tests [17], it was observed after exural yielding due to the membrane action of the
that the maximum tensile strength reached before any steel plates. At the nal stage of loading, the failure was
Table 1 Properties of the SCS sandwich slab specimens
specimen no. t/mm d/mm hc/mm concrete type fc/MPa concrete density/(kg$m3)
SLCS6-80 5.96 10 80 LWC 27.0 1420
SLFCS6-80 5.96 10 80 LWFC 28.5 1445
SLFCS6-100 5.96 10 100 LWFC 28.5 1445
SLFCS6-100(12) 5.96 12 100 LWFC 28.5 1445
SCS4-100 3.98 10 100 NWC 57.2 2370
SCS6-100 5.96 10 100 NWC 57.2 2370
SCFS6-100 5.96 10 100 NWFC 59.0 2400
SCFS8-100(12) 7.98 12 100 NWFC 59.0 2400

Notes: NWC = normal weight concrete; LWC = lightweight concrete (1450 kg/m ); NWFC = normal weight concrete with ber (1% steel ber); LWFC = lightweight
3

concrete with ber (1% steel ber)

284 Front. Archit. Civ. Eng. China 2011, 5(3): 278293

Table 2 Comparison of SCS sandwich slab test results with predicted exural load according to Eq. (9)
slab Ref. nt y/MPa PR/kN Mpl/(kN-m) Fp/kN Fp-exp/kN Fp-exp/Fp
SLCS6-80 121 315 19.0 22.1 250 252 1.01
SLFCS6-80 121 315 22.3 25.9 293 302 1.04
SLCFS6-100 121 315 22.3 31.9 361 364 1.01
SLCFS6-100(12) 121 315 28.0 40.1 453 454 1.01
SCS4-100 121 275 33.0 48.4 582 518 0.89
SCS6-100 121 315 33.0 52.5 593 620 1.05
SCFS6-100 121 315 34.6 55.5 622 729 1.17
SCFS8-100(12) 121 355 48.5 78.6 889 892 1.01

Table 3 Calculated punching capacity (by Eqs. (10) to (14)) of the slabs
slab Ref. Ft/kN ncp Vpun/kN Fp/kN Fp-exp/kN Fp/Vpun predicted mode of failure
SLCS6-80 16 4 272 250 252 0.92 exural
SLFCS6-80 18 4 488 293 302 0.60 exural
SLCFS6-100 18 4 638 361 364 0.57 exural
SLCFS6-100(12) 25 4 666 453 454 0.68 exural
SCS4-100 22 4 448 582 518 1.30 punching-shear
SCS6-100 22 4 474 593 620 1.25 punching-shear
SCFS6-100 23 4 685 622 729 0.91 exural
SCFS8-100(12) 40 4 797 889 892 1.12 punching-shear

Notes: Vpun = calculated punching capacity; Fp = calculated exural capacity; Ft = tensile strength of interconnected J-hook connector embedded in concrete

Fig. 9 SCS sandwich slab under static load. (a) Test set-up; (b) at the end of the test

governed by either buckling of top steel plate or cracking
and crushing of the concrete core. From the test results, the
general load-deection behavior of the SCS sandwich
slabs under concentrated load is illustrated in Fig. 11.
The comparisons of the ultimate loads are given in
Table 2. Experimental shear capacity of the J-hook
connectors was used to predict the ultimate load carrying
capacity of the slabs in this study. In case of lightweight
concrete, 90% of the experimental ultimate shear capacity
of J-hook connector was used because push-out tests
conducted by Liew and Sohel [1] showed that the load-slip
behavior of J-hook connectors in the lightweight concrete
was very ductile with the strength of the connector
uctuating in the region of about 8% to 10% of the
maximum load.
The maximum difference between test and calculated
exural load carrying capacity of the SCS sandwich slabs
is within 17% (Table 2). The predicted exural load
capacity is generally conservative except for slab SCS4-
100 with thin steel face plates with a thickness of 4 mm. In
this case, punching failure occurred in both concrete and
top steel plate.
Table 3 compares the calculated punching load capacity
of the slabs obtained from Eqs. (11) to (14) with the
predicted exural resistance. The punching capacity of the
concrete core is considered to be reached when the load-
 K.M.A. SOKEL et al. Analysis and design of steel-concrete composite sandwich systems subjected to extreme loads 285

Fig. 11 Different stages of behavior of SCS sandwich slabs under

concentrated load

4 Behavior of SCS sandwich panels

subject to impact loads
4.1 Test specimens

Two SCS sandwich specimens A and B were prepared (Fig.

Fig. 10 Experimental load-deection curves. (a) Sandwich slabs
with normal weight concrete core; (b) sandwich slabs with light
weight concrete core
deection curve begins to descend from the rst peak as
shown in Fig. 10. Only the slabs with normal weight
concrete cores show this behavior. The ratio of the
predicted exural load to the calculated punching load
(Fp/Vpun) for the slabs with normal weight concrete core
ranged from 0.91 to 1.30 with an average value of 1.14.
12). Both specimens utilized 6 mm thick S275 steel plates.
The dimensions of two specimens were the same (2400
mm1000 mm). The concrete core thickness was 100 mm.
Two sides along the length of the panel were temporarily
closed by C-channel during concrete grouting. Both ends
along the width of the panel were permanently closed
by steel plates with continuous welding. During test,
the side channels along the length of the panels were
removed. Lightweight aggregate concrete with a density of
1400 kg/m3 was used for panel A and lightweight concrete
with a density of 1300 kg/m3 and strength of 43 MPa was
used for panel B. Details of the panels are given in Table 4.
For comparison, one equivalent stiffened steel plate was
prepared for impact test. All the SCS sandwich panels are
simply supported at both ends (Fig. 12(b)). But, Stiffened
steel plate (SP) was bolted at two ends with the support
(see Fig. 13(b)).
4.2 Test set-up
Impact tests were conducted by an instrumented

Table 4 Panel specications

panel t/mm hc/mm concrete fc/MPa Ec/GPa /(kg$m3) fy/MPa S/mm dj/mm
A 5.98 100 LWC 23.0 11 1400 276.0 100 10
B 5.98 100 LC 43.0 16 1300 276.0 100 10
SP 11.96 - 276.0

Notes: t = thickness of steel plate; hc = concrete core thickness; S = spacing of J-hook connectors; dj = diameter of J-hook connector, Vim = impact velocity; Ec =
modulus of elasticity of concrete; LC = lightweight concrete with ne aggregate; SP = stiffened steel plate
286 Front. Archit. Civ. Eng. China 2011, 5(3): 278293

Fig. 12 (a) Concrete pumping into the panel; (b) composite panel after concrete casting

Fig. 13 Impact test set-up. (a) Sandwich panel test set-up; (b) stiffener steel plate set-up; (c) potentiometers attachment to the specimen

drop-weight impact test machine as shown in Fig. 13. A
7.5-meter tall steel frame was constructed and rmly
bolted on the concrete base to increase the rigidity of the
entire frame. The SCS sandwich panel was simply
supported on a base frame over a span of 2000 mm. A
central impact in the vertical direction was achieved by
means of smooth rollers so that the projectile can drop
freely along the guide rails. A mechanical hoisting system
(winch) which is controlled by a hydraulic system was
used to raise the projectile to the required height. A
photodiode system, comprising two laser emitters and two
photodiodes, was set near the specimen to record the
incident and rebound velocities of the projectile. When the
projectile crosses the rst photodiode, the data acquisition
system was triggered and the data captured over a period of
500 milliseconds (ms) which was enough to capture the
full impact event. In this study, the drop height was xed at
4 m and the projectile mass was 1246 kg. The hemisphe-
rical projectile head diameter was 90 mm. When the
projectile reached the specimen, the velocity, V0 was
approximately 95% of its free fall velocity as shown in
Table 4. Five percent loss of free fall velocity was due to
friction in the hoisting winch and friction between the
rollers and the guide rails. Periodic checks on the tup
indicated that negligible permanent deformation had
occurred as a result of repeated use.
For this experiment, both the projectile and the speci-
mens were instrumented in order to capture the damage
and response of the specimens. Quartz force rings of total
capacity 1050 kN were attached near the projectile tip as a
load cell in order to measure the impact force. Five linear
potentiometers were attached to the bottom surface of the
slab at the center, and 100, 200 and 300 mm away from the
center of the panel, respectively (Fig. 13(c)). They were
 K.M.A. SOKEL et al. Analysis and design of steel-concrete composite sandwich systems subjected to extreme loads
Fig. 14 (a) Impact test set-up; (b) SCS sandwich panel after impact load; (c) stiffened steel panel (SP) after impact
used to determine the deection of the panel during impact.
A 16-channel digital oscilloscope with an adjusted scan
rate of 1 MHz per channel was used for data acquisition. A
high speed camera which was capable of capturing 1000
frames per second was used to observe the central
deformation and projectile movement during the impact.
The pictures obtained from the high speed camera were
used for measuring the projectile displacement during
impact.
Under impact testing, electrical noise may be generated
due to the electronic systems used and the mechanical
system adopted. The recorded signals were digitally
ltered using a low-pass second-order Butterworth ltering
software. A ltering frequency of 5 kHz cut-off was found
to be suitable to avoid unwanted noise without affecting
the signal. The same projectile was used for all the impact
tests described in this paper.
4.3 Test results
Damage pattern due to the impact was almost similar for
all the SCS sandwich panels with major deformation
occurred at the impact point (see Fig. 14). When the
projectile struck the panel, very high stress was developed
at the point of the impact. This stress caused local
indentation and crushing of the concrete core below the
impact point. The impact stress waves traveled from the
impact point to the supports and induced cracks in the
concrete core. The panel gained momentum as the
projectile traveled downward causing larger displacements
which further induced more damage to the concrete core
due to the formation of exural cracks in the concrete core.
The bottom steel plate experienced impact pressure due to
large local indentation and tends to move downward and
separate from concrete core as shown in Fig. 15. The
separation of the bottom plate was prevented by the J-hook
287
Fig. 15 Impact pressure distribution around the impact point
connectors which connected both the top and bottom steel
plates. The J-hook connectors prevented the buckling of
the top steel face plate which was in compression due to
exural action.
Test results show that J-hook shear connectors are
effective in preventing tensile separation of the steel face
plates, thus reducing the overall beam deection and
maintaining the structural integrity despite the presence of
exural and shear cracks in the concrete core. The SCS
sandwich panels experienced permanent deformation after
the impact and the permanent deformation shapes are
given Fig. 16(a). The force-displacement curves are shown
in Fig. 16(b).
From these gures, it is seen that higher strength of the
concrete core helps to reduce the deformation. In the case
of stiffened steel plate (SP), maximum and permanent
deformation was 156 and 116 mm respectively (Table 5).
Whereas, for the SCS sandwich panel A, these values were
142.7 and 106.5 mm, respectively. Although, the impact
velocity is lower in case of panel SP than other SCS
sandwich panels, the panel SP experienced the highest
deformation. This phenomenon indicates that the SCS
sandwich panels with J-hook connectors can withstand
higher impact load with less deformation than the stiffened
steel plates.
288 Front. Archit. Civ. Eng. China 2011, 5(3): 278293

Fig. 16 (a) Permanent deformed shape of the panels; (b) force-displacement curves

Table 5 Impact test results

panel t/mm hc/mm fc/MPa Vim/(m$s1) wmax/mm yp/mm
A 5.98 100 23.0 7.96 142.7 106.5
B 5.98 100 43.0 7.96 92.5 63.5
SP 11.96 6.30 156.0 116.0

Note: yp = permanent deformation at center

5 SCS sandwich structures subject to
blast load
A series of military explosive tests was carried out under
the funding of the Defense Science and Technology
Agency (DSTA) in collaboration with the Centre of
Protective Technology (CPT) at the National University
of Singapore (NUS) to investigate the blast response of
simply-supported steel-concrete composite sandwich
panels. Different congurations of these panels were
tested in order to evaluate the effectiveness of such
structures in resisting the blast loading. Total of 6
specimens were fabricated for 3 blast tests. Two specimens
were tested in each blast test. The conguration and
notations of the specimens are illustrated in Fig. 17.
Each specimen has a length of 1200 mm and a width of
495 mm. The core thicknesses are all 70 mm. Specimen
CSP was constructed as a cellular structure with internal
web as stiffeners connecting two face plates. Specimen
CSP and SCSN4 were designed in such a way that both
have similar level of bending moment capacity and
stiffness. As shown in Table 6, only specimens of CSP
and SCSN4 employed 4 mm-thick steel plates as face
plates, whereas the other specimens used 3mm steel plates.
J-hook shear connectors with a diameter of 10 mm were
employed in specimens other than CSP and SCSNE. The
connector spacing in both directions is 100 mm. All side
plates and end plates were llet welded to adjacent
structural components.
All the steel plates were of grade S275 with yielding

Fig. 17 Congurations and notations of SCS sandwich specimen with connectors (a) and Cellular stiffened plate (CSP) (b)
 K.M.A. SOKEL et al. Analysis and design of steel-concrete composite sandwich systems subjected to extreme loads 289

Table 6 Specimens subject to blast load

test no. specimen tf ts te concrete type dj/mm yp/mm failure/response modes
1 CSP 4 3.0 3 160 exural local buckling
SCSN4 4 1.5 3 NWC 10 27 exural
2 SCSN 3 1.5 3 NWC 10 53 exural
SCSNE 3 1.5 3 NWC 10 31 exural
3 SCSL 3 1.5 3 LWC 10 86 shear
SCSH 3 1.5 3 HSC 10 81 exural

Notes: tf = thickness of face plate; ts = thickness of side plates; te = thickness of end plates; HSC = ultra-high strength concrete

Table 7 Concrete material properties

concrete density/(kg$m3) compressive strength/MPa tensile strength/MPa Youngs modulus/GPa poisson ratio
NWC 2300 35.3 3.5 19.5 0.19
LWC 1250 20.1 2.0 11.2 0.24
HSC 2700 184.1 7.0 62.3 0.26

strengths of 275 to 300 MPa from the tensile coupon tests.
Three different structural grades of concrete materials were
employed as sandwich core: normal weight concrete
(NWC), lightweight aggregate concrete (LWC) and ultra-
high strength concrete (HSC). The properties of these three
concrete materials were tested according to relevant ASTM
standards [18,19] and summarized in Table 7. These
properties are also used in the numerical study.
The reinforced concrete (RC) support structure was
designed to support two specimens during each blast test. It
was also designed so that the amount of equalizing
pressure acting on the backside of specimens can be
minimized. The larger base of the RC support was
submerged in the soil to ensure stability. The specimens
were secured by brackets at two ends. The brackets were
secured to the RC support by 8 bolts, which were welded to
the reinforcement cage.
As shown in Fig. 18, ve 20 kg TNT (100 kg in total)
military crater charges were arranged in an annular pattern
and were placed at a standoff distance of 5 m from the
specimens. The same arrangement and position of the
charges were maintained in all three blasts.
The permanent deformation of all six specimens were
measured and tabulated in Table 6. In blast 1, it is

Fig. 18 Blast test setup with 100 kg TNT charge. (a) schematic; (b) actual test arrangements
290 Front. Archit. Civ. Eng. China 2011, 5(3): 278293
Fig. 19 Specimen CSP (stiffened plate on the left) and specimen
SCSN4 (SCS panel on the right) after blast 1
interesting to observe that specimen CSP experienced very
large permanent deformation. Comparison between CSP
and SCSN4 is shown in Fig. 19. Local buckling was
observed for specimen CSP. The main failure mode is
exural. Specimen SCSN4, which subject to the same blast
load, experienced relatively less damage. The maximum
permanent mid-span deformation is 27 mm. Considering
that the two specimens were designed with the same face
plate thickness, stiffness, and static exural capacity, the
difference is mainly attributed to the concrete core that
added mass and rigidity of the structural system. This
demonstrated the effectiveness of the SCS sandwich
composite compared with stiffened plate in terms of
Fig. 20 (a) Specimen SCSN (left) and SCSNE (right) after blast 2; (b) specimen SCSL (left) and SCSH (right) after blast 3
Fig. 21
maintaining structural integrity and residual capacity.
Comparing SCSN4 (with 4 mm face plate) and SCSN
(with 3 mm face plate), it can be observed that the face
plate thickness, which contributes most part to the exural
resistance of the panel, indeed plays crucial role in resisting
blast load. This is due to the fact that the structural
response to blast is dominated by exure. On the contrary,
it is interesting to note that specimen SCSL (with
lightweight core) had a different failure mode as shown
in Fig. 20. Transverse shear failure led to the formation of
plastic mechanism. The excessive shear and plastic hinge
developed at support during the blast caused the shear
buckling of the side plates and rupture at edge. The tearing
mark of shear connector was also observed at the back side
of the SCSL panel as shown in Fig. 21.
It should be noted that the side plates contributed
signicantly to the performance of the SCS sandwich
panels subject to the blast loading. Due to small core
thickness and width of the SCS sandwich, which were
determined by the detonation capacity, side plates
contributed signicantly to the overall structural integrity
of the SCS panel. Therefore, specimen SCSNE without
shear connectors had relatively small permanent deforma-
tion. Another phenomenon observed was that the employ-
ment of high strength concrete core did not lead to smaller
permanent deformation. This may be related to the brittle
nature of the ultra high strength concrete. Further research
Failure of specimen SCSL
 K.M.A. SOKEL et al. Analysis and design of steel-concrete composite sandwich systems subjected to extreme loads
is currently on-going to improve the ductility of the ultra
high strength concrete.
6 Energy balance model to predict the
impact and blast response
When a normal structural member is subjected to an
accidental impact from a falling object, it may suffer
considerable damage. Depending upon possible frequency
of such accidents, a decision has to be made whether to
construct a heavy but expensive structure which can resist
the impact load without signicant damage, or a more
economical one which may absorb the impact energy
without collapse, but the structure may be repaired or
retrotted.
Usually, when considering heavy impact loading of the
type discussed, the deection of a member will be well
outside the elastic range. The static load-deection (R-w)
curve for a sandwich beam is similar to the idealized
elastic-plastic case shown in Fig. 22, where Ru is the
maximum load and wm is the deection corresponding to
point C on the curve. The area ABCD is the energy
absorbed at deformation level C which is designated as Ed.
In the energy balance model, the kinetic energy of the
impacting mass will be converted into strain and fracture
energy due to exure, shear, and local indentation of the
panel, plastic yielding of the steel plates and crushing and
cracking of the concrete core. The energy losses from
material damping, surface friction, and higher modes of
vibration are assumed to be negligible, and therefore not
considered in the energy equations.
The impact energy absorbed by a panel in exural
response can be expressed as:
Eimpact Ee Ep Em Elocal , (15)
where Ee = (1/2)Ruwe is the maximum elastic energy
(recoverable); Ep = Fp(wp we) is the plastic work
(irrecoverable) when the system deected beyond we; and
Em is the energy for membrane stretching of the panel (in
case of xed ended panels).
When the impact energy delivered is small, i.e.,
Eimpact < Ee + Elocal, the deection occurs within the
elastic range (w < we) and the panel can survive the impact
without global permanent damage.
For moderate levels of impact energy Ee + Elocal <
Eimpact < Ee + Ep + Elocal, plastic deformation is induced
but the maximum displacement is within the range of we
and wp. The SCS sandwich panels can still withstand the
impact with some local damage and global plastic
deformation. The magnitude of maximum plastic deforma-
tion depends on how much plastic work is needed to
dissipate the impact energy.
When the impact energy is large, i.e., Eimpact > Ee + Ep
+ Elocal, the panel is unable to dissipate the total impact
291
energy, resulting in failure. US Department of the Army
[20] recommends that for a simply supported doubly
reinforced concrete beam, it may be designed to attain
large deections corresponding to a support rotation of
about 8 degrees which corresponds to a span to deection
ratio of L/w14 under dynamic loading. This criterion
may be applied to SCS sandwich beams as their exural
behaviors are similar to those of doubly reinforced
concrete beams. Doubly reinforced concrete beams can
achieve large deection with ductile mode of failure.
Similarly, test observations [1] showed that SCS sandwich
beams also can achieve large deection with ductile
deformation. In addition, SCS sandwich beam also
contains steel reinforcing on both top and bottom sides
of the beam which is resemble to doubly reinforced
concrete beam. Hence, the deection criteria of doubly
reinforced concrete beam are adopted for SCS sandwich
beam in the absence of any other guidelines available in the
literature.
To ensure structural integrity of the panel, adequate
number of J-hook connectors must be provided to permit
ductile deformation and redistribution of forces in the
connectors. However, when safety for personnel and
equipment are required, a limiting deection ratio of
L/w53 or a limiting ductility ratio of 10, whichever
governs, is specied as a reasonable estimate of the
absolute magnitude of the beam deformation as suggested
by US Department of the Army [20].
To use this energy balance model, the force-
displacement curve (i.e. resistance function) of the
structure should be known. Plastic moment resistance
and deection of SCS sandwich panel can be determined
analytically which is discussed in section 3.1. Using the
plastic method, the resistant function for a simply
supported SCS sandwich panels as Fig. 22 can be obtained.
If the panel is xed at both ends, tensile membrane force
is activated at large-deection of the beam. The membrane
force is related to the deection of the beam. It is assumed
that the tensile membrane force is carried out by the steel
face plates only. Using this assumption and in light of
Wang et al. [21] considerations, for a beam with a span L,
width b, and plate thickness t, and deformed at its mid-
span, the load carrying capacity (by membrane action) can
be approximately formulated as following:
Fmem 80 bt , (16)
L
where 0 is the yield strength of the steel plate.
In case of impact loading, dynamic effect on material
strength needs to be considered. The yield strength (0) in
Eq. (16) needs to be modied to consider the strain rate
effect. The mean uniaxial strain rate _ d for impact velocity
V0 may be estimated by means of the Perrone and Bhadras
[22] approximation which pis further simplied by Jones
[23] as _ d 4wm V0 =3 2L2 for beams, where wm =
292 Front. Archit. Civ. Eng. China 2011, 5(3): 278293
Fig. 22 (a) Deected shape of an elastic beam; (b) idealized force-displacement curve of a beam (resistance function of a beam)
maximum deection in mm, and L = length of the beam in
mm. The Cowper-Symonds equation has been widely used
[23] to estimate the dynamic yield strength, fyd, of the steel
plate from the static yield strength, fy, with known _ d as
given in Eq. (3).
Table 8 shows the calculated moment and static load
carrying capacity of the SCS sandwich panels. Using
equations in section 3, these parameters were calculated.
Elastic deformation at ultimate static load was calculated
using standard beam equation for SCS sandwiches as
described elsewhere [1]. From these calculated parameters,
resistance curve were drawn. Table 8 compares the
calculated maximum deection during impact and the
experimental deformation. In these calculations, the
contact energy was ignored because of its small value
compared to the bending energy. It can be observed that the
energy balance method overestimates the maximum
deection compared with the experimental results for
both panels. The ratio between analysis and test ranged
from 1.03 to 1.17. In view of the approximations involved
in the analysis, the prediction by analytical modeling
can be considered reasonably accurate for design
purposes.
7 Conclusions
This paper discusses the behavior, analysis and design of
novel SCS sandwich system with J-hook connectors
subject to static, impact and blast loads. In general, SCS
sandwich panels with J-hook connectors exhibit ductile
behavior when they are subjected to static loads. The use of
J-hook connectors effectively improves the punching and
impact resistance of concrete core due to the connement
effect and they defer the crack propagation during loading.
The J-hook connectors prevent the local buckling of the
Table 8 Comparison between analysis and experiment for impact
panel Mpl/(kNm) Ru/kN
A 139 278
B 192 385
Notes: Mpl = plastic moment capacity; Ru = maximum resistance load or ultimate load carrying capacity; we = deection at ultimate load; wanalysis = calculated maximum
deformation during impact; wmax-exp = experimental maximum deformation during impact
face plates and enhance the resistance due to tensile
separation of the face plates. Analytical solutions have
been proposed to predict failure modes observed from the
tests including punching shear failure, shear connectors
failure, exural and yielding of steel plates. If the patch
load is applied on a small area, punching failure was found
to be the dominant mode of failure. The J-hook connector
was found to be effective not only in resisting the
transverse shear but also the vertical shear. Using the
plastic yield line analysis, an upper bound solution for
predicting the ultimate exural strength of SCS sandwich
slabs can be obtained.
Compared to stiffened plate panels of the same stiffness
and static exural capacity, the SCS sandwich panels show
better structural performance under blast loads. Based on
the permanent deformation, it is found that the steel face
plate thickness is crucial to increase the structural
resistance of the SCS panels to blast loads. When normal
strength concrete is used, exural failure dominates the
structural resistance. Therefore, increased steel face plate
thickness enhances blast resistance of the SCS sandwich
panel. When the concrete core has lower strength and
density (such as lightweight concrete), failure of the SCS
sandwich panel is dominated by shear. The use of ultra-
high strength concrete core does not improve the overall
structural performance of the SCS sandwich panel due to
the brittleness of the concrete. When large deformation is
considered, higher density concrete core (or the mass of the
sandwich structure) has some benecial effect in reducing
the permanent deformation due to blast load.
An energy balance method was applied to analyze the
global response behavior, especially the energy absorption
capacity of the SCS sandwich panels. Using this approach,
the maximum deformation of the panel during impact can
be estimated with reasonable accuracy for a given impact
energy and panel conguration.
we/mm Eimpact/(N-m) wanalysis/mm wmax-exp wanalysis/wmax-exp
10.2 39443 146.8 142.7 1.03
11 39443 108.3 92.5 1.17
 K.M.A. SOKEL et al. Analysis and design of steel-concrete composite sandwich systems subjected to extreme loads
Acknowledgements The authors acknowledge the nancial support by
Singapore Defense Science & Technology Agency on a project Explosive
Testing of SCS Sandwich Composite Panel (R379000017123) and Lloyd
Register on project Development of Composite Sandwich Structures for
Arctic Region (R264002003720). Special thanks go to Mr. K.W. Kang for
his work on blast tests.
References
1. Liew J Y R, Sohel K M A. Lightweight steel-concrete-steel
sandwich system with J-hook connector. Engineering Structures,
2009, 31(5): 11661178
2. Liew J Y R, Sohel K M A, Koh C G. Impact tests on steelconcrete
steel sandwich beams with lightweight concrete core. Engineering
Structures, 2009, 31(9): 20452059
3. Hoff G C. A major research program on steel-concrete-steel
sandwich elements. In: Bahram M. Shahrooz, Gajanan M. Sabnis.
Hybrid and composite structures. Farmington Hills, MI: American
Concrete Institute, 1998, 3787
4. Zuk W. Prefabricated sandwich panels for bridge decks. Transporta-
tion Research Board Special Report, 1974, 148: 115121
5. Bergan P G, Bakken K. Sandwich design: a solution for marine
structures? In: Proceedings of the International Conference on
Computational methods in Marine Engineering. Eccomas Marine
2005, Oslo, Norway, 2729 June
6. Solomon S K, Smith D W, Cusens A R. Flexural tests of steel-
concrete-steel sandwiches. Magazine of Concrete Research, 1976,
28(94): 1320
7. Malek N, Machida A, Mutsuyoshi H, Makabe T. Steel-concrete
sandwich members without shear reinforcement. Transactions of
Japan concrete Institute, 1993, 15(2):12791284
8. Tomlinson M, Tomlinson A, Chapman M, et al. Shell composite
construction for shallow draft immersed tube tunnels. In: Proceed-
ings of ICE International Conference on Immersed Tube Tunnel
Techniques. Manchester, UK, April, 1989,
9. Pryer J W, Bowerman H G. The development and use of British
steel Bi-Steel. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 1998, 46
(13): 15
10. Liew J Y R, Wang T Y, Sohel K M A. Separation Prevention Shear
Connectors for Sandwich Composite Structures. U.S. Patent, 61/
047,130, 2008
11. Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete StructuresPart 11: General
Rules and Rules for Buildings. BS EN 199211, 2004
12. McKinley B, Boswell L F. Behaviour of double skin composite
construction. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2002, 58
(10): 13471359
13. Rankin G I B, Long A B. Predicting the Punching Strength of
Conventional Slab-Column Specimen. In: Proceedings of the
Institution of Civil Engineers (London), part 1. 1987, 82: 327346
14. CEB. CEB-FIP Model Code 1990. Trowbridge, Wiltshire, UK:
Comit Euro-International du Bton, Redwood Books, 1993
15. Majdzadeh F, Soleimani S M, Banthia N. Shear strength of
reinforced concrete beams with a ber concrete matrix. Canadian
Journal of Civil Engineering, 2006, 33(6): 726734
16. Mirsayah A A, Banthia N. Shear strength of steel ber-reinforced
concrete. ACI Material Journal, 2002, 66(5): 473479
17. Sohel K M A, Liew J Y R. Steelconcretesteel sandwich slabs with
293
lightweight core-static performance. Engineering Structures, 2011,
33(3): 981992
18. ASTM C39/C39M05. Standard Test Method for Compressive
Strength of Concrete. ASTM International, 2005
19. ASTM C46902. Standard Test Methods for Static Modulus of
Elasticity and Poissons Ratio of Concrete in Compression. ASTM
International, 2002
20. Department of the US Army. Structures to Resist the Effects of
Accidental Explosions. Technical Manual 51300, Washington,
DC, 1990
21. Wang G H, Arita K, Liu D. Behavior of a double hull in a variety of
stranding or collision scenarios. Marine Structures, 2000, 13(3):
147187
22. Perrone N, Bhadra P. Simplied large deection mode solutions for
impulsively loaded, viscoplastic, circular membranes. Journal of
Applied Mechanics, 1984, 51(3): 505509
23. Jones N. Structural impact. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1989, 348
Prof. J Y Richard LIEW received his Ph.
D. degree from Purdue University, USA, in
1992. He is currently a Professor and the
Program Director for Hazard, Risk and
Mitigation at the National University of
Singapore (NUS). His research interests
include deployable structures, steel-concrete
composite systems and re & blast safety
design of buildings and offshore structures.
He interacts closely with the steel industry in the Asian Region as a
technical advisor in the areas of steel and composite structures. He
has also seen his R&D brought from the laboratory to full-scale
applications. The latter include projects in airport structures, high-
rise buildings and large-span structures. He is a registered
professional engineer in Singapore and a chartered engineer in U.
K. He is a past president of the Singapore Structural Steel Society.
Dr. Min Hong ZHANG is Professor at
Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, National University of Singa-
pore (NUS). She obtained her Ph.D. degree
from the Norwegian University of Science
and Technology in Trondheim, Norway.
Prior to joining NUS, she was Research
Scientist at Canada Centre for Mineral and
Energy Technology. Prof. Zhang is a Fellow
of American Concrete Institute.
Dr. Kazi Md Abu SOHEL received his Ph.
D. degree from the National University of
Singapore (NUS) in 2009. He is currently a
Research Fellow in the Department of Civil
and Environmental Engineering at the NUS.
His research interests are the development
and design of steel-concrete composite
sandwich system for the dynamic load and
lightweight composite decking system.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.