Journal of Constructional Steel Research 149 (2018) 195–206

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Constructional Steel Research

Ultimate strength behaviour of S-UHPC-S and SCS sandwich beams under

shear loads
Youzhu Lin a,b, Jiachuan Yan a,b,⁎, Zhenggang Cao a,b, Xianzeng Zeng a,b, Feng Fan a,b, Chaoying Zou a,b
a
Key Lab of Structures Dynamic Behavior and Control, Ministry of Education, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, 150090, China
b
Key Lab of Smart Prevention and Mitigation of Civil Engineering Disasters, Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, 150090, China

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

Article history: The application of steel-concrete-steel (SCS) sandwich structures as containment buildings is proposed for the
Received 3 April 2018 third-generation nuclear power plant AP1000. In this paper, ultra high-performance concrete (UHPC) is
Received in revised form 11 July 2018 developed as the core material to improve structural behaviour. Static tests on two groups of SCS sandwich
Accepted 19 July 2018
beams and two groups of steel-ultra high- performance concrete-steel (S-UHPC-S) sandwich beams were carried
Available online xxxx
out to investigate the structural behaviours under three-point loading, with the research parameters consisting of
Keywords:
the shear reinforcement ratio and core materials. Three failure modes are defined and the structural behaviours
Steel-concrete-steel are analysed, considering the effects of the shear reinforcement ratio, shear studs and core materials on the
Steel-ultra high-performance concrete-steel specimens. Based on the test results, mechanical models are established to predict the shear bearing capacity
Bond-slip of SCS sandwich beams, taking into consideration the effect of the contribution of the steel plates and the
Steel fibres bond-slip action between the steel plates and concrete. Furthermore, a calculation method for predicting the
Ultimate strength ultimate strength of S-UHPC-S sandwich beams is presented, which takes into account the effects of steel fibres
on specimens. The prediction accuracy is verified by means of comparison with the test data.
© 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Steel-concrete-steel (SCS) sandwich structures are proposed as
shielding structures for the third-generation nuclear power plant
AP1000. The SCS sandwich structure consists of two external steel
plates, a concrete core and mechanical shear connectors, and is a new
type of structure, as illustrated in Fig. 1. SCS sandwich structures exhibit
excellent performance, with high integrity, impact resistance, crack
control and leakage prevention, which offer the advantages of short-
ened construction time, saving formworks and promoting construction
efficiency. Apart from serving as shielding structures for nuclear power
plants, popular applications of the SCS sandwich structures include tun-
nels [1], bridges [2], Arctic offshores [3] and protective structures [4], as
illustrated in Fig. 2.
Numerous research works have been conducted to study the struc-
tural behaviour of SCS members. Tomlinson et al. [5] originally proposed
the concept of a steel plate-concrete structure, known as double skin
concrete (DSC) in 1989, for designing the North Wales Conway tunnels
project. In the DSC, studs were not connected to two steel plates di-
rectly, but used to transfer the shear force and resist the interfacial slip
between the steel plate and concrete. In 1991, Wright et al. [6, 7] carried
out a series of tests on 53 steel plate-concrete beams to research the
⁎ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: yanjiachuan@hit.edu.cn (J. Yan).
failure modes and shear behaviours of DSC structures. The failure
modes were divided into five types: flexural, slipping, vertical shear,
steel plate yielding and concrete crush failures. Significant progress in
SCS construction was the development of the bi-steel system in 1998,
which was proposed by the British Corus company [8]. The bi-steel
structure simplified the welding of studs by using transverse short
bars as mechanical shear connectors instead of studs. Xie et al. [9]
presented an experimental investigation on the static behaviour of bi-
steel beams. Foundoukos and Chapman [10] simulated the static behav-
iour of bi-steel beams by means of a finite element model. Based on the
bi-steel structure configuration, the structural type for the SCS sandwich
structures was formed. Liew et al. [11] reviewed the innovations in SCS
sandwich structures that were subjected to blasts, impact, fatigue and
static loads. Moreover, McKinley and Boswell [12], Sener et al. [13],
Yan et al. [3, 14–17], Wang et al. [18, 19], Leng et al. [20–22], Qin et al.
[23] and Huang and Liew [24] conducted a series of SCS sandwich
structure tests. Mckinley and Boswell [12] compared the mechanical
performance of SCS sandwich beams to bi-steel members. Sener et al.
[13] carried out experimental and numerical investigations of SC sand-
wich beams under shear loads, and compared the test results with the
predictions of ACI 349-06 [25], JEAC-4618 [26] and AISC N690-12s1
[27]. Yan et al. [3, 14–17] conducted a series of shear tests for SCS sand-
wich beams, slabs and shells with ultra-lightweight cement composite
(ULCC) as core materials. Moreover, tensile tests on J-hook connectors
as mechanical shear connectors in SCS sandwich structures were

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2018.07.024
0143-974X/© 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
196 Y. Lin et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 149 (2018) 195–206
Fig. 1. SCS sandwich structure.
investigated in order to obtain the tensile resistance and report on the
failure modes. Based on Eurocode 4 [28], modified formulae were pro-
posed to predict the shear strength of the specimens. Wang et al. [18,
19] studied the response behaviour of SCS sandwich panels and devel-
oped a formula for predicting the bending resistance of SCS sandwich
structures. Leng et al. [20–22] defined the shear failure modes of deep
and slender SCS sandwich beams. Moreover, the flexural and shear per-
formances of SCS sandwich slabs under concentrated loads were stud-
ied. Qin et al. [23] presented the minimum shear reinforcement ratio
based on ACI 349-06 [25] for SCS sandwich structures. Huang and
Liew [24] investigated the structural behaviour of a SCS sandwich wall
Fig. 2. Applications of SCS sandwich structures.
with ultra-lightweight cementitious composite materials by means of
a series of compression tests.
In the existing researches, normal concretes have been used as the
core materials. In order to improve the structure durability, ultra high-
performance concrete (UHPC), characterized by high strength,
toughness and durability, was developed for the SCS sandwich struc-
ture, to form the steel-ultra high-performance concrete-steel
(S-UHPC-S) structure. The S-UHPC-S structure can serve in harsh envi-
ronments with a long working life and low maintenance costs, which
may provide new options in developing shielding structures for nuclear
power plants. Previous studies have focused on the structural behav-
iours of SCS sandwich beams. However, limited information exists on
SCS sandwich beams with UHPC as core material, and few studies
have addressed the shear behaviour of S-UHPC-S sandwich beams sys-
tematically. Further investigations are necessary to explore the failure
mode and understand the force-transferring mechanism of S-UHPC-S
sandwich structures. This paper focuses on the out-of-plane shear be-
haviour of SCS and S-UHPC-S sandwich structures used as shielding
structures. Out-of-plane shear force may be generated by earthquake,
non-uniform temperature variation or stiffness variation owing to the
geometrical discontinuity of the structure or other factors [29]. Investi-
gations on the out-of-plane shear behaviour of containment structures
were carried out by cutting a containment structure slitting as a SCS
sandwich beam [23], as illustrated in Fig. 2(d).
This paper investigates and evaluates the shear behaviour of SCS and
S-UHPC-S sandwich beams by means of four groups of static tests. Three
shear failure modes of the SCS and S-UHPC-S sandwich beam structures
are defined, and the effects of the shear reinforcement ratio, core mate-
rials, shear studs and steel fibres are explored in detail. Mechanical an-
alytical models are established for SCS sandwich beams based on the
modified compression field theory (MCFT) [30, 31]. Prediction methods
 Y. Lin et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 149 (2018) 195–206
for the shear bearing capacity of SCS sandwich beams and the ultimate
strength of S-UHPC-S sandwich beams are proposed based on the test
results.
2. Experimental program
Four group tests of simply supported SCS sandwich beams were car-
ried out under static loads to investigate the effects of the core materials
and shear reinforcement ratio on the shear behaviour of the beams. Two
groups of SCS sandwich beams adopted UHPC as the core material,
while the other two groups used C50 concrete as the core material to
constitute the contrasting groups. The beam dimensions were designed
identically, with a depth of 406 mm, length of 4572 mm and width of
304 mm. According to the dimensions of the SCS sandwich structure
in the AP1000 nuclear power plant [32], the reduced scale of the speci-
mens was 4/9. The fabrication details are illustrated in Fig. 3, and the
geometric parameters and material properties are listed in Table 1.
The specimens were divided into part A and part B. The test was first
carried out on part A with a lower shear reinforcement ratio of speci-
mens, following which the support at part A was moved to the un-
cracked part for the test on part B, as illustrated in Fig. 3. It is known
that the shear span-to-depth ratio of beams has a significant effect on
the shear behaviour. According to Kani's valley [33], a shear span-to-
depth ratio of 2.5 was selected to design the tests, where the shear
force will be the governing force of the beams.
Here, a is the distance between the support and loading point; fc is
the measured value of the axial compressive strength of the concrete;
fy,tie is the measured value of the yield strength of the cross ties; fy is
the measured value of the yield strength of the steel plates; dtie is the di-
ameter of the shear studs; Ss is the transverse spacing of the cross ties; ls
is the longitudinal spacing of the shear studs; St is the transverse spacing
of the cross ties; lt is the longitudinal spacing of the cross ties; and ρt,test
is the shear reinforcement ratio of the beams.
2.1. Core materials
Self-compacting concrete with a strength grade of C50 was used as
the core material for the SC1 and SC2 specimens, while UHPC was se-
lected for SC3 and SC4. UHPC is made from 42.5 ordinary Portland ce-
ment, silica fume, quartz sand, water, superplasticiser and steel fibres.
C50 concrete is made from 42.5 ordinary Portland cement, fly ash,
crushed stone, water and superplasticiser. Table 2 displays the detailed
mix proportions of the UHPC and C50 materials.
As illustrated in Fig. 4, fresh UHPC is flowable, and suitable for cast-
ing SCS sandwich beams, which significantly promotes construction ef-
ficiency. Fig. 5 illustrates the casting of specimens. For each beam, three
prism specimens with dimension of 100 × 100 × 400 mm were pre-
pared during casting of the beam specimens. Compression tests were
Fig. 3. Specimen fabrication details.
197
carried out in order to obtain the material properties of the UHPC, as in-
dicated in Table 1.
2.2. Steel plates
Q345 steel was selected to fabricate the steel plates with a thickness
of tp = 9.8 mm. Tensile tests were carried out to obtain the material
properties of the steel plates, which are displayed in Table 1.
2.3. Shear studs
The diameter, length and yield strength of the shear studs were 10
mm, 80 mm and 400 MPa, respectively. The shear studs located near
the steel plate edge were moved inside by 86 mm to meet the need
for concrete protective layer thickness.
2.4. Cross ties
According to the ACI 349–06 code [25], the minimum shear rein-
forcement ratio was calculated by Eq. (1):
pffiffiffiffiffi
fc 1
ρt;ACI ¼ 0:062 ≥0:35 ; ð1Þ
f y;tie f y;tie
where ρt,ACI is the specified value of the shear reinforcement ratio.
Based on Eq. (1), the minimum reinforcement ratio was determined.
As indicated in Table 1, the shear reinforcement ratio ρt,test was in-
creased in sequence to obtain the effect of ρt,test on the shear behaviour
of the beams.
2.5. Test set-up and measurement scheme
The SCS sandwich beams were simply supported and subjected to
three-point loads. The testing machine loading capacity was 2000 kN,
and force-controlled loading was applied to the beams by means of a
lifting jack.
Linear variable differential transformers (LVDTs) were adopted to
measure the SCS sandwich beam deflections, as illustrated in Fig. 6.
LVDTs were installed at the bottom of the beams under the loading
point and supports in order to measure the vertical deflection and sup-
port settlement, respectively. Two LVDTs were installed to measure the
bond-slip between the steel plates and concrete at the specimen ends,
of which one was installed at the steel plate surface and the other at
the concrete surface. The bond-slip value between the steel plates and
concrete could be obtained through the difference in the measured
data of these two LVDTs. The shear load was measured by a force trans-
ducer, and the strains within the critical zone were observed by a mea-
surement system consisting of six LVDTs, as illustrated in Fig. 6. The
198 Y. Lin et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 149 (2018) 195–206

Table 1
Specimen geometric parameters and material properties.

Specimen a (mm) fc (MPa) fy,tie (MPa) fy (MPa) dtie (mm) Ss (mm) ls (mm) St (mm) lt (mm) ρt,test (%)

SC1-A 1015 45.5 520 373 6.5 102 220 152 203 0.103
SC1-B 1015 45.5 520 373 6.5 102 220 152 178 0.117
SC2-A 1015 45.5 520 373 6.5 102 220 152 152 0.137
SC2-B 1015 45.5 435 373 8 102 220 152 152 0.218
SC3-A 1015 107.8 435 373 8 102 220 152 203 0.163
SC3-B 1015 107.8 435 373 8 102 220 152 178 0.186
SC4-A 1015 107.8 435 373 8 102 220 152 152 0.218
SC4-B 1015 107.8 435 373 8 102 220 152 127 0.260

strains could be obtained from the ratio of the initial to measured dis- The failure mode of SC4-A and SC4-B was “flexural failure with steel
placement between two points. The strains of the cross ties and steel fibres snapping”. The difference between this failure mode and that of
plates were measured by embedded strain gauges, as illustrated in Fig. SC3-A and SC3-B is that the cross ties across the flexural crack did not
7. yield.

3.2. Load-deflection curves

3. Test results
3.1. Failure modes
Three failure modes were defined according to the observed exper-
imental phenomena, as follows. For the SCS sandwich beams, the shear
failure mode was defined as “shear failure with bond-slip”, character-
ized by the critical diagonal crack in the shear span and bond-slip at
the interface between the steel plate and concrete. For the S-UHPC-S
sandwich beams, the failure mode was named “flexural-shear failure
with steel fibres snapping”, which featured a flexural crack under the
loading point, yielding of cross ties and snapping of steel fibres. When
the cross ties did not yield, the failure mode was defined as “flexural fail-
ure with steel fibres snapping”.
The failure mode of the SC1-A, SC1-B, SC2-A and SC2-B specimens
was “shear failure with bond-slip”, and all of these specimens exhibited
similar behaviours. As illustrated in Fig. 8, owing to the bending mo-
ments, a flexural crack appeared in the mid-span and penetrated up-
ward from the bottom steel plate. The web-shear crack formed in the
shear span, of which the two ends penetrated towards the support
and loading point bilaterally, but the web-shear crack did not extend
upwards to the bottom surface of the top steel plate. The bottom steel
plate and cross ties across the web-shear crack yielded. Finally, the
web-shear crack developed to the critical diagonal crack and concrete
struts near the support form. Bond-slip and separation appeared at
the interface between the bottom steel plate and concrete, which
were connected to the web-shear crack in the shear span. The critical di-
agonal crack and bond-slip between the steel plates and concrete
played an important role in the specimen failure.
The failure mode of SC3-A and SC3-B was “flexural-shear failure
with steel fibres snapping”. As illustrated in Fig. 9, the flexural crack
formed in the shear span and under the loading point, which penetrated
upward from the bottom steel plate and extended gradually as the load
increased. With the steel fibres snapping, the bottom steel plate and
cross ties across the crack yielded but the concrete was not crushed. In
particular, the interface between the steel plate and concrete exerted
cracks, but no bond-slip and separation. The flexural crack under
the loading point did not widen obviously, and the flexural crack mainly
resulted in the specimen failure.
Fig. 10 illustrates the general load-deflection curve of the specimen,
where the failure modes were flexural-shear and flexural failure with
steel fibres snapping. The vertical axis represents the shear force,
while the horizontal axis represents the deflection below the loading
point. The curve can be divided into four stages. Before the first crack ap-
peared (point 1 in Fig. 10), the beam behaved linearly; this is “Stage I”.
Thereafter, the beam stiffness decreased, because the height of the
cross-section compressive zone was reduced by the crack. However,
the beam still behaved linearly until the cracks appeared at the interface
between the steel plate and concrete (point 2 in Fig. 10). Then, owing to
the yielding of steel plates and cross ties, and snapping of steel fibres
(points 3 and 4 in Fig. 10), the beam stiffness decreased obviously. The
load increased nonlinearly until the appearance of the critical crack;
meanwhile, the beam reached the peak load (point 5 in Fig. 10),
which is defined as “Stage II”. After reaching the peak load, the load
did not decrease rapidly and sustained a certain platform (point 6 in
Fig. 10), which exhibited beam ductility and is known as “Stage III”.
Finally, the load reached the ultimate load and dropped rapidly, which
is referred to as “Stage IV”.
Fig. 11 illustrates the general load-deflection curve of the specimen
for which the failure mode is shear failure with bond-slip. As men-
tioned, the curve can be divided into four stages, namely “Stage I”
(from start to point 1), “Stage II” (from point 1 to 5), “Stage III” (from
point 5 to point 6) and “Stage IV” (from point 6 to end). Moreover, the
load decreased rapidly after reaching the peak load, indicating the
brittleness of this failure mode.
Fig. 12 illustrates the specimen load-deflection curves. It can be
observed that the shear bearing capacity improved as the shear rein-
forcement ratio increased. For specimens SC1-A and SC1-B, the shear
bearing capacity increased by 6.8% with an increase in the shear rein-
forcement ratio from 0.103% to 0.117%. For specimens SC2-A and SC2-
B, the shear bearing capacity increased by 17.6% with an increase in
the shear reinforcement ratio from 0.137% to 0.218%. Apart from the
shear reinforcement ratio, the core material has a significant effect on
the shear bearing capacity. The shear reinforcement ratios of SC2-B
and SC4-A were coincident, but the core materials differed. UHPC was
adopted in specimen SC4-A and C50 concrete was used in specimen
SC2-B. As observed from the load-deflection curves of SC2-B and

Table 2
Mix proportions of UHPC and C50 (mass/cement mass ratio).

Type Water binder ratio Cement Silica fume Fly ash Quartz sand Crushed stone Superplasticiser Medium sand

Fine Coarse Fine Coarse

UHPC 0.2 1 0.25 – 0.61 0.49 – – 0.02 –

C50 0.36 1 – 0.25 – – 0.40 1.58 1.89×10−3 1.98

Note: the diameter, length, tensile strength and volume fraction of the steel fibres in the UHPC materials are 0.18 mm, 13 mm, 2800 MPa and 2%, respectively.
 Y. Lin et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 149 (2018) 195–206
Fig. 4. Casting of UHPC.
SC4-A in Fig. 12, the shear bearing capacity of SC4-A increased by 50%
and the stiffness was improved compared to SC2-B. After the cross ties
yielded, the stiffness of the SC4-A specimen was not obviously reduced.
3.3. Crack behaviours
The shear reinforcement ratio contributed to improving the speci-
men crack behaviours. As illustrated in Fig. 13, the crack widths for
SC1-A, SC1-B, SC2-A and SC2-B under the peak load were 15, 10, 5 and
4 mm, respectively, which decreased with the increase in the shear re-
inforcement ratio. In addition to the shear reinforcement ratio, the
core materials played an important role in the crack behaviours. The
load corresponding to the first flexural crack was 40 kN for SC2-B and
189 kN for SC4-A, where the shear reinforcement ratio of SC2-B and
SC4-A was coincident. This indicates that the cracking load increased
with the use of UHPC as the core material. Moreover, compared to spec-
imens SC1 and SC2, a greater amount of flexural cracks in SC3 and SC4
were observed, with short depths, narrow widths and smaller spacing,
as illustrated in Figs. 8 and 9. Thus, the crack behaviours could be im-
proved by increasing the shear reinforcement ratio and adopting
UHPC as the core material.
3.4. Shear ductility coefficient
In order to estimate the shear ductility of the specimen under a shear
load, the shear ductility coefficient [23] was defined, as expressed in Eq.
(2).
Δpeak
μ¼ ; ð2Þ
Δini
where μ is the shear ductility coefficient; Δpeak is the loading point de-
flection corresponding to the peak shear force; and Δini is the loading
point deflection corresponding to the first yielding of the cross ties.
The shear ductility coefficient is the ratio of the loading point deflec-
tion corresponding to the peak shear force to that corresponding to the
first yielding of the cross tie. When the shear ductility coefficient is no
more than 1.00, the failure mode is classified as brittle failure; other-
wise, the failure mode as classified as shear failure with ductility [23].
The ductility coefficient could be obtained by the tests detailed in
Table 4.
As indicated in Table 3, the ductility was enhanced with the increas-
ing shear reinforcement ratio. The shear ductility coefficient increased
199
22.1% and 29.7% when the shear reinforcement ratio was increased by
0.014 from SC1-A (corresponding shear reinforcement ratio: 0.103%)
to SC1-B (corresponding shear reinforcement ratio: 0.117%) and 0.101
from SC1-B (corresponding shear reinforcement ratio: 0.117%) to SC2-
B (corresponding shear reinforcement ratio 0.218%), respectively. The
shear ductility coefficient of SC2-A (corresponding shear reinforcement
ratio: 0.137%) was less than those of SC1-A and SC1-B owing to the
bond-slip at the interface between the steel plates and concrete. How-
ever, compared to SC2-A, the shear ductility coefficient of SC2-B in-
creased with an increase in the shear reinforcement ratio.
3.5. Bond-slip between steel plate and concrete
Bond-slip failure is a typical interfacial shear failure between steel
plates and concrete, and has a significant effect on the research of
SCS sandwich structures. Fig. 14 illustrates the bond-slip process
between the steel plates and concrete. The shear studs transfer the
interfacial shear force from the steel plates to the concrete, resulting
in autologous deformation. Meanwhile, the concrete near the shear
studs exerts deformation and crushing under high stress, resulting
in the appearance of bond-slip between the steel plates and concrete
[34]. This leads to reduced specimen stiffness and shear bearing ca-
pacity. As illustrated in Fig. 15, the bond-slip between the steel plates
and concrete in specimens SC1 and SC2 was obvious, but bond-slip
was not observed in specimens SC3 and SC4, indicating that UHPC
contributed to reducing the bond-slip between the steel plate and
concrete.
4. Discussion
4.1. Effect of shear reinforcement ratio
The shear bearing capacity, stiffness, cracking behaviour and ductil-
ity were improved as the shear reinforcement ratio increased. That is
because the cross ties resisted the transverse and longitudinal shear
force between the steel plate and concrete. A greater amount of cross
ties led to an increase in the stiffness and composite action between
the steel plate and concrete. Thus, the shear bearing capacity was im-
proved and the cracking and extension of the cracks were delayed.
Fig. 5. Casting of specimens.
200 Y. Lin et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 149 (2018) 195–206
Fig. 6. Test design details.
4.2. Effect of core materials
The failure modes, shear bearing capacity, stiffness, crack behaviours
and bond-slip between the steel plate and concrete exhibit different
regular patterns for SCS sandwich beams with varying core materials.
The failure modes of specimens SC1, SC2, SC3 and SC4 changed from
shear to flexural failure. This is because UHPC can withstand greater
shear force, leading to failure governed by the bending moment; there-
fore, the failure modes were converted to flexural failure.
As illustrated in Fig. 9, the cracks did not cross the cross ties, and the
contribution of the cross ties did not dictate the shear strength of beams,
indicating that the shear contribution of UHPC was significantly higher
than that of the cross ties. This also means that the shear resistance in-
creased with the adoption of UHPC as the core material.
Steel fibres played an important role in improving the shear behav-
iour of specimens. The steel fibres were subjected to tensile stress re-
leased by the cracked concrete and transferred the tensile stress to the
inner uncracked concrete, which is equivalent to increasing the amount
Fig. 7. Arrangement of strain gauges on steel plates and cross ties.
of cross ties. Moreover, the bridging action of the steel fibres delayed
the widening and extension of cracks. The shear bridging action
mechanism of UHPC is the dowel action of steel fibres across the
cracks, which is attributed to the properties of steel fibres for orienta-
tion [35]. Furthermore, owing to the well-known phenomenon of
crack localisation in UHPC, micro-cracks developed to motivate the
steel fibres to transfer the stress into the concrete. The steel fibres
crossed the micro-cracks to reach the ultimate bonding strength at
one of these cracks. Finally, the steel fibres were deformed and pulled
out at this crack, resulting in the concentration of crack development
and a corresponding macro-crack was formed. Compared to typical
shear failure, a higher number of flexural cracks appeared, with
short depths, narrow widths and smaller spacing. Moreover, the
strain-hardening properties of UHPC with steel fibres provided an ef-
ficient shear transfer mechanism, which enhanced the ductility of the
specimens. It is known that the bond-slip between the steel plate and
concrete will appear when the bonding between the steel plate and
concrete disappears. The increased ductility reduces the concrete
damage and deformation. Finally, internal force redistribution occurs
and bond-slip is avoided.
In conclusion, UHPC improved the shear behaviour of specimens by
means of the enhanced high-strength effect of UHPC, contribution of the
steel fibre amount to the cross ties, bridging action of the steel fibres,
crack localisation and UHPC strain-hardening properties. Therefore,
with adoption of UHPC as the core material, the shear bearing capacity
and stiffness of the specimens increased, the cracking and widening of
cracks were limited and the bond-slip between the steel plate and con-
crete was improved.
 Y. Lin et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 149 (2018) 195–206 201

Fig. 8. Shear failure with bond-slip (SC2-B specimen).

4.3. Effect of shear studs
Shear studs increase the contribution of the steel plates and con-
crete, which can effectively decrease the bond-slip between the two in
order to improve the interfacial shear resistance. With the increase in
the spacing of the shear studs, the bond-slip between the steel plates
and concrete was enhanced. In fact, a series of tests indicated that
bond-slip between the steel plates and concrete could be avoided
with sufficient shear connectors [21]. However, in order to meet engi-
neering requirements, shear connectors cannot be designed in abun-
dance. Thus, bond-slip between the steel plate and concrete cannot be
avoided in practical engineering. In this study, bond-slip between the
steel plates and concrete was not observed in specimens SC3 and SC4
without sufficient shear connectors, owing to the contribution of
UHPC as the core material. Thus, the adoption of UHPC as the core ma-
terial can not only prevent bond-slip between the steel plate and con-
crete, but also meet engineering requirements.
5. Theoretical analysis
5.1. Analysis of shear resistance of SCS sandwich beams
5.1.1. Shear analysis models
The truss model [36] was originally introduced with the main steel
providing the tension chord, the concrete top flange acting as the
compression chord, the stirrups providing the vertical tension web
members and the concrete between the inclined cracks acting as 45°
compression diagonal members. Schlaich, Marti, Collins and MacGregor
[37–42] realised that the inclination angle of the concrete struts was not
45°, but ranged between approximately 26.5° and 65°. Thus, the vari-
able-angle truss model became well known. However, the variable-
angle truss model did not contain the aggregate interlock force, friction
and dowel action of the longitudinal reinforcement, and compatibility
was not considered. The ASCE-ACI Task Committee 426 [24] and CSA
Committee A23.3 [31] for reinforced concrete presented the modified
compression field theory (MCFT) based on the variable-angle truss
and compression field theory, which considered the compatibility
requirements as well as equilibrium and incorporated stress-strain
characteristics of both materials. The method could accurately predict
the responses of complex elements.
Based on the MCFT, a calculation method for the shear bearing
capacity of SCS sandwich beams is proposed in this study, which can
consider the contribution of the steel plates as well as the bond-slip
action between the steel plate and concrete. Thürlimann [43] con-
firmed that the smallest angle between the strut and beam axis is
26.5°, which indicates that the forces arising from the compression
fan were equilibrated by sufficient stirrups. In this study, for
specimens SC1 and SC2, the angle between the strut and beam axis
was approximately 26.5° to 33°. Thus, it was supposed that the
angle between the strut and beam axis was 26.5°, which was used
to calculate the shear bearing capacity.

Fig. 9. Flexural-shear failure with steel fibres snapping (SC3-B specimen).

202 Y. Lin et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 149 (2018) 195–206

Fig. 12. Specimen load-deflection curves.

Fig. 10. General load-deflection curve of flexural-shear and flexural failure with steel fibres
snapping.
The contributions of the steel plates and the uncracked concrete in-
crease as the crack widens. Finally, bond-slip appears between the
5.1.2. Calculation method for shear bearing capacity of SCS sandwich beams steel plates and concrete, and the contribution of the steel plates
Based on the test results of the SC1 and SC2 sandwich beams, the as- disappears.
sumptions are considered as follows. By means of the vertical forces equilibrium, the shear bearing capac-
ity Vu
1. The critical crack in the specimens is fixed at an inclined angle of of the specimen is calculated as follows:
26.5° with the beam axis.
2. The cross ties across the diagonal cracks and bottom steel plates V u ¼ V c þ V sv þ V d : ð3Þ
yield, as confirmed by experimental data.
3. The aggregate interlock is not considered in predicting the shear According to the ACI 349-06 code [25], Vc is the contribution of con-
bearing capacity, because the critical cracks widen rapidly under crete:
the ultimate state. qffiffiffiffiffi
4. Loading is transferred to the cross ties through concrete struts that V c ¼ 0:17 f c bc dmc ; ð4Þ
are parallel to the critical crack. It is assumed that the shear stress
is coincident in the concrete struts.
where bcis the width of the concrete cross-section; dmc is the modified
depth of the concrete cross-section [3] and is equal to dmc = dc + tpE/
As illustrated in Fig. 16, Vu is the support reaction at the ultimate Ec, which considers the influence of the compression steel plate; and
state. Concrete is subjected to the shear force before the crack appears. dc is the depth of the concrete cross-section.
After the flexural-shear crack is formed, the contribution of the steel Moreover, Vsv is the contribution of the cross ties across the critical
plates plays an important role in shear resistance. With the develop- cracks, as illustrated in Fig. 17, and the calculation method is expressed
ment of the web-crack, the cross ties cross the cracks subjected to by Eq. (5).
greater shear force and yield in order to limit the development of cracks.
htie = tanα 0
V sv ¼ Asv f y;tie ; ð5Þ
ll

where htie is the height of the cross ties; Asv is the cross-section area of
the cross ties within distance ll; and α0 is the angle of the critical diago-
nal crack with the beam axis, which is assumed as 26.5°.
The contribution of the steel plates is represented by Vd. The shear
contribution of the steel plate [12] can be calculated by the strain com-
patibility between the steel plates and concrete, which is determined as
follows:
 
fy
V d ¼ min V c t t E=dc Ec ; pffiffiffi bc t t ; ð6Þ
3

where Vc is the contribution of the core material, calculated as men-

tioned above; and tt is the total thickness of the bottom and top steel
plates.

5.1.3. Modification of stiffness for SCS specimens

The bond-slip and separation between the steel plates and concrete
affected the stiffness of the SCS beams, which decreased the contribu-
Fig. 11. General load-deflection curve of shear failure with bond-slip. tion of the bottom steel plate. Owing to the bond-slip and separation
 Y. Lin et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 149 (2018) 195–206 203

Fig. 13. Specimen crack widths.

between the top steel plate and concrete not appearing, the contribu- αE is the ratio of the elastic modulus of steel to concrete; Acf is the
tion of the top steel plate did not decrease. Fig. 18(a) illustrates the nor- cross-section area of the beam concrete; and A is the cross-section
mal strain εs of the bottom and top steel plates. Fig. 18(b) illustrates the area of the bottom steel plate.
bond-slip strain εsl, which is equal to a superposition of the steel plate The calculation formula for α is expressed by Eq. (9):
bond-slip strain εss and concrete bond-slip strain εcs. Fig. 18(c) illus- sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
trates the final strain distribution of the bottom steel plate and concrete. ns kA1
Owing to the existence of the bond-slip strain εsl, the interface between α ¼ 0:81 ; ð9Þ
EI 0 ls
the steel plate and concrete exhibited additional shear forces ΔNcand
ΔNs, which decreased the stiffness of the SCS beams. On this basis, a re-
I 0 þA0 d2c
duction coefficient of stiffness ξ is proposed with Eq. (7), according to where A1 ¼ A0 and I0 ¼ Is þ αIcE ; Is is the inertia moment of the steel
GB 50017–2003 [44]. plates; and Ic is the inertia moment of the concrete.
" # Finally, the modified contribution of the steel plates, Vdm, is calcu-
3 lated by Eq. (10). The prediction method for the shear bearing capacity
ξ ¼ η 0:4− 2
ð7Þ Vu of the SCS sandwich beams is expressed by Eq. (11).
ðαlÞ
 
Vd 1
The calculation formula for η is expressed by Eq. (8): V dm ¼ 1þ ð10Þ
2 1þξ
36Edls A0
η¼ 2
; ð8Þ V u ¼ V c þ V sv þ V dm ð11Þ
ns khl

where E is the elastic modulus of the steel plate; d is the distance be-
5.2. Analysis of flexural resistance of S-UHPC-S beams
tween the centre of the bottom steel plate and the top of the specimen;
ls is the longitudinal spacing of the shear studs; ns is the row of shear
For S-UHPC-S sandwich beams, the failure modes are known as
studs; k is the stiffness coefficient of the shear studs [44], where k ¼ 0:4
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi “flexural-shear failure with steel fibres snapping” and “flexural failure
3Ast Ec f c and Ast is the area of cross-section of a shear stud rod; Ec is
the elastic modulus of the concrete;h is the depth of the cross-section
of the specimens; l is the span of the specimens; A0 ¼ αEAAþA
cf A
cf
, where

Table 3
Shear ductility coefficient of specimens.

Specimen Δpeak (mm) Δini (mm) μ Failure mode

SC1-A 11.6 9.1 1.27 Ductility shear

SC1-B 10.2 6.6 1.55 Ductility shear
SC2-A 13.9 12.8 1.09 Ductility shear
SC2-B 11.3 5.6 2.01 Ductility shear
Fig. 14. Bond-slip process between steel plates and concrete.
204 Y. Lin et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 149 (2018) 195–206

Fig. 15. Specimen shear force-slippage curves.

Fig. 17. Contribution of cross ties.

with steel fibres snapping”. The failure mode of the S-UHPC-S sandwich
beams is flexural governed. The assumptions for calculating the flexural
bearing capacity are:
The bonding strength of the steel fibres and concrete is calculated by
(1) The strain of the cross-section accords with the plane cross-sec- Eq. (13):
tion assumption.
(2) The stress-strain relationship for the steel plate and concrete is n f πd f l f
f s f ¼ k0 τf; ð13Þ
the elastic-plastic model. 4

where k0 is an efficiency factor for k0 = 1 − 20ρf, which depends on the

The stress distribution of the cross-section of the S-UHPC-S sand-
wich beams is illustrated in Fig. 19. For the flexural failure of the S-
UHPC-S sandwich beams, bond-slip between the steel plate and con-
crete was prevented. Thus, the bond-slip action between the steel
plate and concrete was not taken into account when predicting the flex-
ural bearing capacity. Fig. 19(a) depicts a schematic cross-section of the
beam. The contribution of the flexural bearing capacity is divided into
two parts: the contribution of the steel plates and UHPC. A stress dia-
gram for the compressive and tensile steel plates is provided in Fig. 19
(b). The contribution of the steel plates M1 is calculated by Eq. (12):
M1 ¼ Af y y1 ;
where A is the cross-section area of the bottom steel plate and y1 is the
distance between the centre of the bottom and top steel plates.
quantity of steel fibres used according to references [45–47]; df is the di-
ameter of the steel fibres; lf is the length of the steel fibres; and τf is the
bond stress between the steel fibres and concrete, as per that provided
pffiffiffiffiffi
by BS8110 [48] for τ f ¼ 2:8 f c .
The number of steel fibres nfis calculated by Eq. (14):
n f ¼ n0 n0 ; ð14Þ
where n0 is the reduction coefficient of the disordered steel fibres,
which is equal to 0.41 [49, 50]; n0 ¼ 2ρ f .
πd f l f =4
As illustrated in Fig. 19 (c), the compressive force bcxfc is the resul-
tant force of the compressive concrete. The tensile force Asffsf is the re-
ð12Þ sultant force of the tensile concrete, which is owing to the bonding
action between the steel fibres and concrete. According to the force
equilibrium, the calculation formulae for the contribution of UHPC, M2,
are expressed by Eqs. (15) and (16):
bc f c x ¼ bc f sf xsf ð15Þ

M2 ¼ bc xf c y2 ; ð16Þ

where y2 is the distance between the centre of the UHPC compression

zone and centre of the UHPC tensile zone; x is the height of the concrete
compression zone; xsf is the height of the concrete tensile zone for xsf =
dc − 1.25x, according to CECS 38:92 [51]; dc is the height of the concrete
cross-section; and bc is the width of the beam cross-section.
Thus, the flexural bearing capacity Mu and shear bearing capacity Vu
for the S-UHPC-S sandwich beams are calculated by Eqs. (17) and (18),
respectively.

Mu ¼ M1 þ M2 ¼ Af y y1 þ bc xf c y2 ð17Þ

Mu
Vu ¼ ð18Þ
λh
Fig. 16. Force distribution of beams.
 Y. Lin et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 149 (2018) 195–206
Fig. 18. Strain distribution of bottom steel plates and concrete.
5.3. Validations of proposed method
The calculation results of the specimens using the prediction method
are listed in Table 4. The ratio of the test to predicted results was distrib-
uted near 1.0. The proposed method offers an average ratio of test to
prediction results of 1.01, with a coefficient of variation (COV) of
0.085, which indicates a strong fit to the test results.
6. Conclusions
This paper has studied the structural behaviour of SCS and S-UHPC-S
sandwich beams by means of four groups of static tests, which investi-
gated the effects of the shear reinforcement ratio, shear studs and core
materials on the specimens. Three failure modes were defined based
on the experimental observations. A mechanical model was established
to predict the shear bearing capacity of the SCS sandwich beams. Fur-
thermore, a calculation method for the flexural bearing capacity was
proposed for the S-UHPC-S sandwich beams. The conclusions are as
follows.
1) The failure modes were divided into three types, namely “shear fail-
ure with bond-slip” for SC1 and SC2, “flexural-shear failure with
steel fibres snapping” for SC3 and “flexural failure with steel fibres
snapping” for SC4, which was converted from shear to flexural fail-
ure with the adoption of UHPC as the core material.
2) Increasing the reinforcement ratio increased the shear bearing ca-
pacity and ductility of the SCS sandwich beams. When the reinforce-
ment ratio increased from 0.103% to 0.117%, the shear bearing
capacity and ductility coefficient increased by 6.8% and 22%,
respectively.
Fig. 19. Simplified stress distribution of cross-section.
205
3) UHPC changed the shear resistance of the structure. The ultimate
bearing capacity increased by 50% when UHPC was used as the
core material. The stiffness and cracking load also increased.
4) Bond-slip between the steel plate and concrete was avoided in spec-
imens SC3 and SC4, owing to the adoption of UHPC as the core ma-
terial. Steel fibres had a significant effect on improving the
structural behaviour of the specimens. The high strength of UHPC,
contribution of the steel fibre amounts to the cross ties, bridging ac-
tion of steel fibres, crack localisation and strain-hardening properties
of UHPC could change the failure mode, increase the shear bearing
capacity, improve the crack behaviours and prevent bond-slip fail-
ure. As demonstrated by the tests, the interface between the steel
plates and concrete in specimens SC3 and SC4 did not exhibit
bond-slip.
5) A mechanical model was established to predict the shear bearing ca-
pacity of the SCS sandwich beams, which considered the bond-slip
between the steel plates and concrete as well as the contribution
of the steel plates.
6) A calculation method for the flexural bearing capacity was proposed
for the S-UHPC-S sandwich beams, which considered the effects of
steel fibres on the specimens.
7) The prediction methods were verified by means of comparison with
the test results, where the average ratio of the test to prediction re-
sults was 1.01 with COV of 0.085. Thus, the prediction results were
conservative and in strong agreement with the experimental results.
The verification confirmed the accuracy of the developed mechani-
cal model in predicting the shear bearing capacity of the SCS sandwich
beams as well as the calculation method for the flexural bearing capac-
ity of the S-UHPC-S sandwich beams. The prediction method was based
206 Y. Lin et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 149 (2018) 195–206

Table 4 [18] Y. Wang, J.Y.R. Liew, S.C. Lee, Ultimate strength of steel–concrete–steel sandwich
Comparison between test results and predictions. panels under lateral pressure loading, Eng. Struct. 115 (2016) 96–106.
[19] Y. Wang, J.Y.R. Liew, S.C. Lee, Experimental and numerical studies of non-composite
Specimen P0 (kN) Vtest (kN) Vpre (kN) Vtest/Vpre steel-concrete-steel sandwich panels under impulsive loading, Mater. Design. 81
(2015) 104–112.
SC1-A 57 394 344 1.14 [20] Y.B. Leng, X.B. Song, H.L. Wang, Failure mechanism and shear strength of steel–con-
SC1-B 76 421 363 1.16 crete–steel sandwich deep beams, J. Constr. Steel Res. 106 (106) (2015) 89–98.
SC2-A 82 376 391 0.96 [21] Y.B. Leng, X.B. Song, Experimental study on shear performance of steel–concrete–
SC2-B 40 442 474 0.93 steel sandwich beams, J. Constr. Steel Res. 120 (2016) 52–61.
SC3-A 160 629 644 0.98 [22] Y.B. Leng, X.B. Song, Flexural and shear performance of steel-concrete-steel sand-
SC3-B 50 623 644 0.97 wich slabs under concentrate loads, J. Constr. Steel Res. 134 (2017) 38–52.
SC4-A 189 663 644 1.03 [23] F. Qin, S. Tan, J. Yan, et al., Minimum shear reinforcement ratio of steel plate concrete
SC4-B 108 596 644 0.93 beams, Mater. Struct. 49 (9) (2015) 1–18.
Mean 1.01 [24] Z. Huang, J.Y.R. Liew, Compressive resistance of steel-concrete-steel sandwich com-
posite walls with J-hook connectors, J. Constr. Steel Res. 124 (2016) 142–162.
COV 0.085
[25] ACI 349M-06, Code Requirements for Nuclear Safety-Related Concrete Structures
Note: P0 is the cracking load of the specimens; Vtest is the shear bearing capacity of the and Commentary (Metric), American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, 2006.
tests; Vpre is the calculation result of the prediction method. [26] JEAC-4618, Technical Code for Seismic Design of Steel Plate Reinforced Concrete
Structures: Buildings and Structures, Japanese Electric Association Nuclear Stan-
dards Committee, Tokyo, 2009.
on experimental specimens with a shear span-to-depth ratio of 2.5; [27] AISC N690-12, Supplement No. 1, Specification for Safety-Related Steel Structures
thus, specimens with other shear span-to-depth ratios should be stud- for Nuclear Facilities, Supplement No. 1 Including Appendix N9 - Design of Steel-
Plate Composite (SC) Walls, AISC, Chicago, 2015.
ied further. Certain additional factors, such as the cross-section depth, [28] Eurocode 4, Design of Composite Steel and Concrete Structures-Part 1.1: General
thickness of the steel plates and spacing of the shear studs require fur- Rules and Rules for Buildings, BS EN 1994-1-1, Brussels; 2004.
ther experiments to discuss the effects on the structural behaviours. [29] Y. Yang, J. Liu, X. Nie, et al., Experimental research on out-of-plane cyclic behavior of
steel-plate composite walls, J. Earthq. Tsunami. 10 (01) (2016) 1650001.
[30] K. Waagaard, Discussion of the shear strength of reinforced concrete members by
Acknowledgements joint ASCE-ACI task committee 426 on shear and diagonal tension of the committee
on masonry and reinforced concrete of the structural division, ASCE J. Struct. Div.
100 (1974) 1147–1149.
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Founda- [31] CSA Committee A23.3, Design of Concrete Structures, Canadian Standards Associa-
tion of China [No. 51308155], the China Postdoctoral Science Founda- tion, Etobicoke Ontario, 1994.
tion Funded Project [Nos. 2013M541389 and 2015T80355] and the [32] Federal Register, AP1000 Design Certification Amendment, https://www.
federalregister.gov/documents/2011/12/30/2011-33266/ap1000-design-certifica-
Foundation of Key Laboratory of Structures Dynamic Behavior and Con-
tion-amendment/ 2011, Accessed date: 30 December 2011.
trol (Ministry of Education) in the Harbin Institute of Technology [No. [33] G.N.J. Kani, The riddle of shear failure and its solution, ACI Struct. J. 61 (4) (1964)
HITCE201608]. 441–467.
[34] N.I.E. Jianguo, Steel-Concrete Composite Structure, China Construction Industry
Press, Beijing, 2005 (In Chinese).
References [35] T.T. Ngo, J.K. Park, S. Pyo, et al., Shear resistance of ultra-high-performance fiber-re-
inforced concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 151 (2017) 246–257.
[1] J.W. Pryer, H.G. Bowerman, The development and use of British steel bi-steel, J. [36] W.W. Kuo, T.J. Cheng, S.J. Hwang, Force transfer mechanism and shear strength of
Constr. Steel Res. 46 (1) (1998) 15. reinforced concrete beams, Eng. Struct. 32 (6) (2017) 1537–1546.
[2] S. Ei-Bahey, M. Bruneau, Bridge piers with structural fuses and Bi-steel columns. I: [37] J. Schlaich, K. Shafer, M. Jennewein, et al., Toward a consistent design of structural
experimental testing, J. Bridg. Eng. 12 (1) (2012) 25–35. concrete, PCI J. 32 (3) (1987).
[3] J.B. Yan, J.Y.R. Liew, M.H. Zhang, et al., Experimental and analytical study on ultimate [38] P. Marti, Basic tools of reinforced concrete beam design, ACI Struct. J. 82 (1) (1985)
strength behavior of steel–concrete–steel sandwich composite beam structures, 46–56.
Mater. Struct. 48 (5) (2015) 1523–1544. [39] J.G. MacGregor, Reinforced Concrete, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs. NJ, 1988.
[4] J.Y.R. Liew, T.Y. Wang, Novel steel-concrete-steel sandwich composite plates subject [40] M.P. Collins, D. Mitchell, Prestressed Concrete Structures, Prentice Hall, Englewood
to impact and blast load, Adv. Struct. Eng. 14 (4) (2011) 673–688. Cliffs, NJ, 1991.
[5] X.X. Dai, J.Y.R. Liew, Fatigue performance of lightweight steel-concrete-steel sand- [41] F.J. Vecchio, M.P. Collins, The modified compression-field theory for reinforced con-
wich systems, J. Constr. Steel Res. 66 (2) (2010) 256–276. crete elements subjected to shear, ACI Struct. J. 83 (2) (1986) 219–231.
[42] F.J. Vecchio, M.P. Collins, Predicting the response of reinforced concrfete beams sub-
[6] H.D. Wright, T.O.S. Oduyemi, H.R. Evans, The design of double skin composite ele- jected to shear using modified compression field theory, ACI Struct. J. 85 (3) (1988)
ments, J. Constr. Steel Res. 19 (19) (1991) 111–132. 258–268.
[7] H.D. Wright, T.O.S. Oduyemi, H.R. Evans, The experimental behaviour of double skin [43] B. Thürlimann, Torsional Strength of Reinforced and Prestressed Concrete Beams —
composite elements, J. Constr. Steel Res. 19 (2) (1991) 97–110. CEB Approach, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 1979.
[8] H. Bowerman, J.C. Chapman, Bi-steel steel-concrete-steel sandwich construction, in: [44] People's Republic of China Ministry of Construction, Steel structure design specifica-
J.F. Hajjar, M. Hosain, W.S. Easterling, et al., (Eds.), Composite Construction in Steel tions GB (GB50017–2003), China Planning Press, Beijing, 2003 (In Chinese).
and Concrete IV, ASCE, USA 2015, pp. 656–667. [45] B. Boulekbache, M. Hamrat, M. Chemrouk, S. Amziane, Influence of yield stress and
[9] M. Xie, N. Foundoukos, J.C. Chapman, Static tests on steel–concrete–steel sandwich compressive strength on direct shear behaviour of steel fiber-reinforced concrete,
beams, J. Constr. Steel Res. 63 (6) (2007) 735–750. Constr. Build. Mater. 27 (1) (2012) 6–14.
[10] N. Foundoukos, J.C. Chapman, Finite element analysis of steel–concrete–steel sand- [46] B. Boulekbache, M. Hamrat, M. Chemrouk, S. Amziane, Flowability of fiber reinforced
wich beams, J. Constr. Steel Res. 64 (9) (2008) 947–961. concrete and its effect on the mechanical properties of the material, Constr. Build.
[11] J.Y.R. Liew, J.B. Yan, Z.Y. Huang, Steel-concrete-steel sandwich composite structures- Mater. 24 (9) (2010) 1664–1671.
recent innovations, J. Constr. Steel Res. 130 (2017) 202–221. [47] A. Perrot, T. Lecompte, P. Estellé, S. Amziane, Structural build-up of rigid fiber rein-
[12] B. Mckinley, L.F. Boswell, Behavior of double skin composite construction, J. Constr. forced materials, Mater. Struct. 46 (9) (2013) 1561–1568.
Steel Res. 58 (10) (2002) 1347–1359. [48] Institute BS 8110, Structural Use of Concrete: Part1, Code of Practice for Design and
[13] K.C. Sener, A.H. Varma, Steel-plate composite walls: experimental database and de- Construction, British Standards Institution, London, 1997.
sign for out-of-plane shear, J. Constr. Steel Res. 100 (13) (2014) 197–210. [49] Danying Gao, Liu Jianxiu, Basic Theory of Steel Fiber Reinforced Concrete, Science
[14] J.B. Yan, J.Y.R. Liew, Design and behavior of steel–concrete–steel sandwich plates and Technology Literature Publishing House, Beijing, 1994 (In Chinese).
subject to concentrated loads, Compos. Struct. 150 (2016) 139–152. [50] Danying Gao, Design and Application of Steel Fiber Concrete, China Construction In-
[15] J.B. Yan, J.Y.R. Liew, X. Qian, et al., Ultimate strength behavior of curved steel-con- dustry Press, Beijing, 2002 (In Chinese).
crete-steel sandwich composite beams, J. Constr. Steel Res. 115 (2015) 316–328. [51] China Construction Engineering Standardization Association Approved, Steel Fiber
[16] J.B. Yan, J.Y. Wang, J.Y.R. Liew, et al., Punching shear behavior of steel–concrete–steel Reinforced Concrete Structure Design and Construction Procedures CECS, 38:92,
sandwich composite plate under patch loads, J. Constr. Steel Res. 121 (2016) 50–64. China Construction Industry Press, Beijing, 1992 (In Chinese).
[17] J.B. Yan, J.Y.R. Liew, M.H. Zhang, Tensile resistance of J-hook connectors used in
Steel-Concrete-Steel sandwich structure, J. Constr. Steel Res. 100 (100) (2014)
146–162.