›
Part 4
Technical
Composite/Steel compendium
Composite and Steel
Construction compendium
Part 4: Composite beams using precast concrete units
This article is part of a series
that will gradually build to form a
Composite (steel-concrete) and
Steel Construction compendium.
Written by leading experts from
the SCI, the articles aim to provide
a real insight into composite
and steel construction, to help
practicing engineers get the most
from these materials.
Introduction
The first three articles in this series focused on composite beams
and slabs in which the concrete element is cast in situ. However,
it is also possible to form the concrete flange of a composite
beam using precast units, be they solid or hollow-core. It is a form
of construction that can be particularly appropriate in certain
circumstances – as well as demonstrating the usual benefits of
composite construction such as reduced steel beam weight/depth.
In particular, using precast units may facilitate greater spacing
of secondary beams and efficient use of composite construction
in semi-exposed applications (such as car parks). If no concrete
topping is needed then the ‘dry construction’ may facilitate work
on site. Although the use of profiled decking has the advantage
of reducing the amount of crane time needed to construct a floor
(because individual sheets can be manually placed) precast units
offer the benefit of providing a more robust floor from the moment
they are in position.
Composite beams with precast units are not within the current
scope of Eurocode 4, and the rules within that code (particularly
those concerning effective flange width, stud resistance and
minimum degree of shear connection) should not be blindly
applied to this form of construction. Complementary guidance and
justification is given in this article, which focuses solely on precast
units used with downstand beams (the 'Further reading' section
includes a publication that discusses shallow floors using precast
units).
The effective flange
Hollow-core units
For hollow-core units, the extent of the in situ concrete, and the
area of transverse reinforcement provided (bars passing between
opposing units, Figure 1), will strongly influence the effective width
of the slab that may be considered in the composite beam design.
Research has demonstrated that the effective width of the slab
should not be taken as greater than the total width of the concrete
infill plus the width of the gap between the ends of the hollow-core
TSE28_41-43 CSCC 4 v4.indd 41
www.thestructuralengineer.org
TheStructuralEngineer 41
April 2014
units. This dimension will typically be less than 1.5m, with bars
extending between 500mm and 600mm into the units depending
on fire design requirements. The full depth of concrete is assumed
(justified by tests) to be mobilised within this width. As all of the
effective flange is therefore in close proximity to the beam, any
reduction in the depth of in situ topping (that may result from
precambering of the hollow-core units) will not adversely affect
structural performance.
Solid planks
Due to the fact that more in situ concrete topping is used with solid
planks (compared to hollow-core units), the effective width may
be calculated in the same way as for a composite beam with an
in situ slab. The effective width given in EN 1994-1-1 Clause 5.4.1.21
is expressed in relation to the span of the beam. Different values
may apply at different points along the beam, although when elastic
global analysis is used, a constant effective width may be assumed
over the whole of each span, taken as span/4.
Solid planks transverse to the beam may be considered to act in
compression when the edge details permit transfer of compression
through in situ concrete. In this case, a minimum of 25mm of the
slab depth should be deducted because of the lack of in situ
concrete at the interface between the bottom edges of the planks.
Figure 2 shows this in the context of hollow-cores. If there is a
simple butt joint detail between the planks, this does not achieve
effective compression transfer, and the depth of the slab should
be taken as equal to the depth of the concrete topping alone. Note
that in this case the structural characteristics of the composite
beam will be sensitive to the depth of in situ topping, and care
should be taken to allow for any reductions in this depth, due to
precambering of the precast units.
N Figure 1
Reinforcing bars passing
SCI
between hollow-core units
25/03/2014 10:10

42 TheStructuralEngineer
April 2014
Interface where no transfer
of compression is assumed
 Figure 3
Push off test with precast units
D. LAM, UNIVERSITY OF BRADFORD, UK
Shear connection
Resistance of shear studs
Eurocode 4, like BS 5950-3.12, defines the resistance of a shear
stud in a solid concrete slab (Clause 6.6.3.1), and gives reduction
factors kt and kl to apply to this resistance when the slab is formed
using profiled steel decking (be it transverse to or parallel with the
beam axis, respectively). The reduction factors are based on tests
comprising slabs of relevant form. A similar approach must be taken
to determine reduction factors relevant to slabs comprising solid or
hollow-core precast units, which can then be justifiably applied to the
solid slab resistances given in EN 1994-1-1.
For hollow-core units the reduction factor k is based on the results of
push-out tests by Lam (Figure 3). It is a function of the gap between
the plank ends and the confinement of the stud within that gap (which
is traversed by reinforcement), and may be taken as 0.9 provided
the detailing rules on minimum gap width and bar size given in the
following sub sections are respected (more information is given in the
forthcoming SCI publication, P401: Design of composite beams using
precast concrete slabs in accordance with Eurocode 4).
Tests have demonstrated that the reduction factor for studs
embedded in slabs using solid planks is only a function of the gap
between the solid planks. A value of k equal to 1.0 may be used when
TSE28_41-43 CSCC 4 v4.indd 42
›
Part 4
Technical
Composite/Steel compendium
W Figure 2
Cross section
through a joint between
solid planks
SCI
 Figure 4
End bearing of solid
planks on steel beam
75 mm
SCI
there is sufficient gap to ensure correct compaction of the concrete.
Minimum degree of shear connection
The minimum degree of shear connection rules given in Clause 6.6.1.2
of EN 1994-1-1 ensure that the shear studs have adequate deformation
capacity, based on a characteristic slip capacity of 6mm i.e. they
guarantee that the connection will be sufficiently stiff to stop greater
slip occurring. In order to ensure that 6mm slip can be accommodated,
and so the use of these rules is justified for slabs using precast units,
16mm diameter high tensile transverse reinforcement bars should be
used (passing between opposing units) when hollow-core units are
employed. The bars should be placed at least 15mm below the heads
of the studs (Fig. 1). This is not generally a problem because studs
are typically 125mm high and the base of the opening is 30-40mm
above the base of a hollow-core unit. When solid planks are employed,
it is recommended that bars of at least 10mm diameter are used, in
conjunction with A142 fabric, in order to maintain 6mm slip capacity.
Special considerations for steel beam specification
Minimum top flange width
The minimum acceptable beam (top flange) width depends on the
type of slab, whether the shear connectors are to be shop-welded
or site-welded and whether the beam is an internal or edge beam.
It is specified to ensure that the precast units will have sufficient
25/03/2014 10:10

b
Fd
Fd
Restoring moment
= Fd b
SCI
 Figure 5
Restoring moment due to balanced loading
bearing (Figure 4), and that the shear studs can be placed and
correctly embedded in concrete. The width chosen must also take
into account manufacturing and construction deviations, including
variations in the size and position of the steelwork, length variations
in the manufacture of the precast units and the accuracy with which
the units can be positioned on site. Although it is possible, with time
and effort, to quantify each of these factors separately, a simple
summation would be excessively conservative. A global overview of
how deviations might reasonably combine, should be considered.
Using such an approach, The Precast Flooring Federation
recommend a minimum of 75mm nominal bearing length3.
In addition to providing adequate bearing for the units, the gap
between them must be sufficient. Ordinarily a minimum of 85mm
is recommended for site-welded shear connectors, to allow
sufficient space for the welding tool and concrete placement
(65mm) while recognising up to 10mm excess bearing of the
precast units on each side. For shop-welded shear connectors
this can be reduced to 70mm, as only 50mm is needed to allow
for concrete placement.
The minimum beam flange width should therefore be 235mm for
site welded studs, or 220mm if they are shop welded. It may be
possible to use a steel section with a narrower flange, particularly
to support shorter span precast units, if manufacturing and site
deviations can be controlled within tighter tolerances. This should
only be carried out in consultation with the precast supplier.
Loading during construction
Two distinct conditions need to be considered when verifying the
bare steel beam. Firstly, the construction phase during which the
precast units are put in place, and during which (depending on
the sequence of placement and the span of the units to either
side of a given beam) the beam may be subject to significant
unbalanced loading because the units act eccentrically to the
beam's centroid. Any unbalanced loading will subject the beam
to combined bending and torsion, for which both cross section
and member verifications should be carried out. Secondly, the
stage when all the units are in place and the weight of any in situ
topping, including the variable construction loads, must be allowed
TSE28_41-43 CSCC 4 v4.indd 43
www.thestructuralengineer.org
43
for. During this second phase, provided the precast units to either
side are of equal span, the beam will be verified for balanced
loading. There is no need to consider 'pattern loading' with the
construction loads placed to one side only.
Restraint of the steel beam
When the slab is formed from in situ concrete, the top flange of
the steel beam will normally be restrained during construction,
either by adequately fixed decking spanning transverse to the
beam (in which case it has in-plane stiffness), or by the secondary
beams that support longitudinal decking at 3-4m centres. When
precast units are used, provided they are of equal span to either
side of the beam, they may be assumed to provide restraint
through a combination of restoring moment (Figure 5) and friction
for beam spans up to 160 times the unit's bearing width (i.e. spans
up to around 8m may be assumed to be restrained)4. If the top
flange cannot be assumed to be held in place by the units, specific
restraints must be provided. Such restraints should be capable
of resisting a force equal to 2.0% of the force in the compression
flange.
As well as the possible need to provide structural restraint to the
beam to prevent torsional modes of failure, it may be necessary
to provide temporary restraints to hold the top flange in position
during placement of the precast units. The precise requirement
will depend on a number of variables, in particular the lateral
stiffness of the beam. A recognised rule-of-thumb is to place ties
between compression flanges at a minimum spacing of 40x the
beam flange width.
References and further reading
1) British Standards Institution (2005) BS EN 1994-1-1:2004
Eurocode 4. Design of composite steel and concrete structures –
General rules and rules for buildings London: BSI
2) British Standards Institution (1990) BS 5950-3.1:1990+A1:2010
Structural use of steelwork in building. Design in composite
construction. Code of practice for design of simple and continuous
composite beams London: BSI
3) Precast Flooring Federation (2013) Code of Practice for: The
Safe Installation of Precast Concrete Flooring and Associated
Components [Online] Available at: www.precastfloors.info/
downloads/download-registration.html (Accessed: March 2014)
4) Steel Construction Institute (2011) Stability of Steel Beams and
Columns (P360) Ascot, Berkshire: SCI
Further reading
Steel Construction Institute (2014) Design of composite beams
using precast concrete slabs in accordance with Eurocode 4 (P401)
Ascot, Berkshire: SCI (publication in 2014)
Lam D. (2007) ‘Capacities of headed stud shear connectors in
composite steel beams with precast hollowcore slabs’ Journal of
Constructional Steel Research, 63, pp. 1160-1174
Steel Construction Institute (2006) Design of asymmetric Slimflor
beams with precast concrete slabs (P342) Ascot, Berkshire: SCI
Steel Construction Institute (2011) Design of steel beams in torsion
(P385) Ascot, Berkshire: SCI
25/03/2014 10:10