Steel-Concrete Composite Beams With Precast Hollow-Core Slabs: A Sustainable Solution

sustainability
Article
Steel-Concrete Composite Beams with Precast Hollow-Core
Slabs: A Sustainable Solution
Felipe Piana Vendramell Ferreira 1 , Konstantinos Daniel Tsavdaridis 2, * , Carlos Humberto Martins 3
and Silvana De Nardin 1
1 Department of Civil Engineering, Federal University of São Carlos, 13565-905 São Carlos, São Paulo, Brazil;
ferreirafpv@gmail.com (F.P.V.F.); snardin@ufscar.br (S.D.N.)
2 School of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Physical Sciences, University of Leeds,
Leeds LS2 9JT, UK
3 Department of Civil Engineering, State University of Maringá, 87020-900 Maringá, Paraná, Brazil;
chmartins@uem.br
* Correspondence: k.tsavdaridis@leeds.ac.uk; Tel.: +44(0)-113-343-2299
Abstract: Industrialization of construction makes building operation more environmental friendly

and sustainable. This change is necessary as it is an industry that demands large consumption of
water and energy, as well as being responsible for the disposal of a high volume of waste. However,
the transformation of the construction sector is a big challenge worldwide. It is also well known that
the largest proportion of the material used in multistory buildings, and thus its carbon impact, is
attributed to their slabs being the main contributor of weight. Steel-Concrete composite beams with
precast hollow-core slabs (PCHCSs) were developed due to their technical and economic benefits,
owing to their high strength and concrete self-weight reduction, making this system economical

and with lower environmental footprint, thus reducing carbon emissions. Significant research has
been carried out on deep hollow-core slabs due to the need to overcome larger spans that resist high
Citation: Ferreira, F.P.V.; Tsavdaridis,
loads. The publication SCI P401, in accordance with Eurocode 4, is however limited to hollow-core
K.D.; Martins, C.H.; De Nardin, S.
slabs with depths from 150 to 250 mm, with or without a concrete topping. This paper aims to
Steel-Concrete Composite Beams
with Precast Hollow-Core Slabs: A
investigate hollow-core slabs with a concrete topping to understand their effect on the flexural
Sustainable Solution. Sustainability behavior of Steel-Concrete composite beams, considering the hollow-core-slab depth is greater than
2021, 13, 4230. https://doi.org/ the SCI P401 recommendation. Consequently, 150 mm and 265 mm hollow-core units with a concrete
10.3390/su13084230 topping were considered to assess the increase of the hollow core unit depth. A comprehensive
computational parametric study was conducted by varying the in situ infill concrete strength, the
Academic Editor: Jorge de Brito transverse reinforcement rate, the shear connector spacing, and the cross-section of steel. Both full
and partial interaction models were examined, and in some cases similar resistances were obtained,
Received: 17 March 2021 meaning that the same strength can be obtained for a smaller number of shear studs, i.e., less energy
Accepted: 7 April 2021
consumption, thus a reduction in the embodied energy. The calculation procedure, according to
Published: 10 April 2021
Eurocode 4 was in favor of safety for the partial-interaction hypothesis.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral

Keywords: composite beams; hollow-core slabs; sustainable; finite element analyses
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
1. Introduction
Researchers have been studying the impact that civil construction causes on the
environment. In this context, a concept that has been studied is embodied energy in
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
materials of buildings [1]. In Whitworth and Tsavdaridis [2,3], optimization studies were
This article is an open access article
presented in Steel-Concrete composite beams with the objective of presenting sustainable
distributed under the terms and
structural designs by minimizing the embodied energy. The study showed that it is
conditions of the Creative Commons possible to reduce the embodied energy of these structural systems, considering the design
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// recommendations of Eurocode 4 [4].
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ Conventional Steel-Concrete composite beams have a concrete slab that is placed at
4.0/). the upper flange of the downstand steel profile. In this context, three types of slabs can be
Sustainability 2021, 13, 4230. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13084230 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2021, 13, 4230 2 of 25
used: solid, composite or precast hollow-core slabs (PCHCSs). In composite beams with
PCHCSs, a cast in situ concrete topping is usually made to provide a smooth and uniform
finish [5]. The concrete topping can increase the strength and stiffness of the structural
system [6,7]. Other factors influence the strength of PCHCSs, such as the intensity of
the actual prestress, the prestress transmission length, the depth of the slab, and filled
cores [8]. PCHCSs are widely used in countries with cold climates in the construction of
residential or industrial buildings due to their fast installation. In Albero et al. [9], the
estimate of the number of PCHCS floors installed in Europe was estimated to be close to
1 billion square meters. The use of PCHCSs offers advantages; e.g., large spans, speed of
construction, and reduced construction costs [5,10–14]. In the European Union, according
to Ahmed and Tsavdaridis [15], construction and building are responsible for about 40% of
environmental impact. In Dong et al. [16], the precast and cast in situ construction methods
were compared using a case study. The authors concluded that the precast construction
could lead to a 10% carbon reduction for one cubic meter of concrete. The PCHCS is an
industrialized structural element that consumes less energy when constructed in-house in
comparison to in situ, and with a minimum waste of concrete, and thus with an overall
lower carbon footprint. In terms of sustainability, the PCHCS is a structural element that
contributes not only to the speed of construction, but also to the significant reduction of
CO2 emissions due to the lower consumption of concrete.
The present study aims to examine the flexural behavior of Steel-Concrete composite
beams with PCHCSs and a concrete topping, considering a hollow core unit (HCU) depth
greater than the SCI P401 recommendation. The finite element (geometrical nonlinear
analysis) model was developed based on tests [17,18]. The results were compared with the
SCI P401 procedure [19], and thus analytical models of shear-stud resistance capacity were
employed [19,20].
2. Background
Lam [17] and Lam et al. [21] presented flexural tests on Steel-Concrete composite
beams with PCHCSs. A four-point bending was considered. In these studies, the concrete
topping was not considered. The experimental results showed a sudden failure due to
the shear studs rupturing and the concrete cracking, resulting in a loss of stiffness. Lam
et al. [22] complemented the previous studies and carried out a parametric study in which
they observed that with an increase in the depth of PCHCSs (150 mm to 200–250 mm),
there was an increase in the ultimate strength. However, the slab could fail due to excessive
cracking. Ellobody and Lam [23] investigated the shear studs and the gap while considering
the flexural behavior. The authors concluded that the shear-stud resistance increased with
the increase of the gap, and the in situ infill concrete strength influenced the strength of
the shear studs. In 2003, SCI P287 [24] was published; it is a design criteria for composite
beams with PCHCSs [17]. This publication was subsequently updated to SCI P401 [19].
The document gathers recommendations of minimum dimensions, such as arrangement of
the shear studs and transverse reinforcement. However, some limitations were observed,
such as application only for 150–250 mm HCU depths; 12 mm or 16 mm transverse
reinforcement diameters are recommended for composite construction. For partial shear
connection, 16 mm diameter bars should be provided; for HCUs up to 260 mm, 16 mm
diameter bars should be considered, spaced at 200–350 mm. For full interaction, if the
plastic neutral axis (PNA) lies within the slab, the interaction degree must be reduced, or
the size of the steel profile increased. A technical report (COPPETEC, PEC-18541/2016),
which was presented by Batista and Landesmann [18], described tests on composite beams
with PCHCSs and concrete topping. According to the authors, at the ultimate strength,
the loss of stiffness was due to excessive cracking. In Ferreira et al. [25], a parametric
study was presented, considering PCHCSs with 150 mm of depth and 50 mm of concrete
topping. In this study, the presence of the concrete topping increased the strength of the
composite beams by at least 7%. As observed, few studies have investigated the behavior
of Steel-Concrete composite beams with PCHCSs [26]. Tawadrous and Morcous [4] and
strength of the composite beams by at least 7%. As observed, few studie
investigated the behavior of Steel-Concrete composite beams with PCHCS
Tawadrous and Morcous [4] and El-Sayed et al. [5] showed that, due to the succes
Sustainability 2021, 13, 4230
of PCHCSs, deeper HCUs were developed to resist higher loads and3 of to25support
spans. In this scenario, some researchers carried out tests to investigate the beha
deeper PCHCSs [12,13,27–32]. However, these investigations did not consider com
El-Sayed et i.e.,
behavior, al. [5]Steel-Concrete
showed that, duecomposite
to the successful
beams.use of PCHCSs, deeper HCUs were
developed to resist higher loads and to support longer spans. In this scenario, some
researchers carried out tests to investigate the behavior of deeper PCHCSs [12,13,27–32].
3. Numerical
However, these Model: Validation
investigations Study composite behavior, i.e., Steel-Concrete
did not consider
composite beams.
In this section, the methodology of the validation study is described. The A
software [33]
3. Numerical was Validation
Model: used. Three types of Steel-Concrete composite beams were m
Study
considering symmetry:
In this section, the methodology of the validation study is described. The ABAQUS
software
1. 150[33]
mmwasof used.
HCUThree
depthtypes ofaSteel-Concrete
with chamfered end composite
(Figure beams
1a);were modeled,
considering symmetry:
2. 150 mm of HCU depth and 50 mm of concrete topping with a squared end
1. 150 mm of HCU depth with a chamfered end (Figure 1a);
1b);
2. 150 mm of HCU depth and 50 mm of concrete topping with a squared end (Figure 1b);
3.
3. 265mm
265 mm of HCU
of HCU depthdepth
and 50and 50concrete
mm of mm oftopping
concrete
withtopping
a squaredwith a squared
end (Figure 1c). end
1c).
(a)
(b)
Figure 1. Cont.
Sustainability 2021,2021,
Sustainability 13, 13,
x 4230 4 of 25
(c)
Figure
Figure 1.1.Parts
Partsof of Steel-Concrete
Steel-Concrete composite
composite beams
beams with with core
a hollow a hollow core
slab: (a) 150 slab:
mm of(a) 150 mm of h
hollow-
core-slab depth
core-slab depth withwith a chamfered
a chamfered end; (b)end; (b) of
150 mm 150 mm of hollow-core-slab
hollow-core-slab depth and 50 mm depth and 50 mm o
of concrete
topping
crete with a squared
topping with a end; (c) 265end;
squared mm of(c)hollow-core-slab depth and 50 mmdepth
265 mm of hollow-core-slab of concrete
andtopping
50 mm of con
with a squared end.
topping with a squared end.
Geometrical nonlinear analyses were processed using the Static Riks method. This
methodGeometrical nonlinear
was previously analyses
used in [25,34–40] andwere processed
is based using method.
on the arc-length the Static Riks metho
Residual
method wasnot
stresses were previously used
considered. in stresses
These [25,34–40] and
do not is based
influence theon the arc-length
ultimate strength ofmethod
composite beams subjected to only positive moments. The residual stresses
ual stresses were not considered. These stresses do not influence the ultimate increase the stre
effects of the negative moment [41,42].
composite beams subjected to only positive moments. The residual stresses incre
effects
3.1. Testsof the negative moment [41,42].
The numerical models were calibrated considering tests on Steel-Concrete composite
3.1.
beamsTests
with PCHCSs, at 150 mm and 265 mm of depth, and with or without a concrete
topping. Figure 2 and Table 1 show the details of the tests [18,43], in which d is the steel-
The numerical models were calibrated considering tests on Steel-Concrete com
beam depth, bf is the steel-flange width, tf is the steel-flange thickness, tw is the steel-web
beams
thickness,with
b is PCHCSs,
the effectiveatslab
150width,
mm gandis the265gap,mm hc isofthe
depth,
depth and
of thewith
HCU,or without
c is the ac
topping. Figurethickness,
concrete-topping 2 and Table 1 distance
Le is the show the details
between the of
endthe tests
of the [18,43],
beam and theinsupport,
which d is th
Lp is thedepth,
beam distancebfbetween the load application
is the steel-flange width, pointtf isand support, Lb is thickness,
thesteel-flange
the the unrestrained
tw is the st
length, ϕ is the diameter of the transverse reinforcement, fy,f is the yield strength of the
thickness, b is the effective slab width, g is the gap, hc is the depth of the HCU,
flange, fy,w is the yield strength of the web, fy,s is the transverse reinforcement yield strength,
concrete-topping thickness,
fc,HCU is the HCU compressive Le is the
strength, anddistance between
fc,in is the in situ infillthe end of the
compressive beam and t
strength.
port, Lp is the distance between the load application point and the support, Lb is th
strained Table 1. Details
length, φ isof the
specimens (in mmof
diameter and
theMPa).
transverse reinforcement, fy,f is the yield s
Model d bf tf tof
w theb flange,
g fy,whcis thec yieldLe strength
Lp of
Lb the ϕweb,fy,f
fy,s is fthe
y,w transverse
fy,s fc,HCU reinforceme
fc,in
CB1 355 171.5 11.5 strength,
7.4 1665 fc,HCU
65 is150the HCU- compressive
150 1500 5700 strength,
16 310and 355 fc,in is 585
the in50 situ
a
infill
32 a
comp
CB2 355 171.5 11.5 7.4 1665 65 150 - 150 1500 5700 8 310 355 473 50 a 26 a
CB3 299 306 11 strength.
11 1756 156 150 50 185 1915 5830 12.5 345 345 500 45 b
b
30 b
b
CB4 299 306 11 11 1756 106 265 50 185 1915 5830 12.5 345 345 500 45 30
a b
Cubic resistance; cylindric resistance.
thickness, b is the effective slab width, g is the gap, hc is the depth of the HCU, c is the
concrete-topping thickness, Le is the distance between the end of the beam and the sup-
port, Lp is the distance between the load application point and the support, Lb is the unre-
strained length, φ is the diameter of the transverse reinforcement, fy,f is the yield strength
Sustainability 2021, 13, 4230 of the flange, fy,w is the yield strength of the web, fy,s is the transverse reinforcement 5yield
of 25
strength, fc,HCU is the HCU compressive strength, and fc,in is the in situ infill compressive
strength.
(a) (b)
Figure 2.
Figure 2. Geometric
Geometric details
details of
of tests
tests (in
(in mm):
mm): (a)
(a) lateral
lateral view;
view; (b)
(b) section.
section.
The shear-stud dimensions were 19 × 125 mm2 (CB1 and CB2) and 19 × 135 mm2
(CB3 and CB4). The shear-stud spacing of the CB1 and CB2 models was 150 mm. For
models CB3 and CB4, the spacing between the shear studs was 200 mm.
3.2. Materials
The concrete-damage plasticity (CDP) [44–46] model was used. This model is based
on the plastic theory, and can be used to describe the irreversible damage that occurs during
the fracture process [33], such as cracking and crushing. The concrete-damage plasticity
model makes use of the yield function of Lubliner et al. [45], with modifications proposed
by Lee and Fenves [46]. Concrete, as a brittle material, undergoes considerable volume
change called dilatancy [47], which is caused by inelastic strains. The flow rule followed
the Drucker–Prager model. The concrete-damage plasticity model can be regularized using
viscoplasticity. The regularization of Duvaut-Lions [48] was used. The input parameters
for defining the plastic behavior are presented in Table 2, in which ψ is the dilation angle,
ξ is the eccentricity, σb0 is the initial equibiaxial compressive yield stress, σc0 is the initial
uniaxial compressive yield stress, Kc is the ratio of the second stress invariant on the tensile
meridian to that on the compressive meridian, and µ is the viscosity parameter.
Table 2. Concrete Damage Plasticity input parameters [25,38,40].
Parameter Value Ref.

Ψ (◦ )
(In situ concrete) 40 [47,49]
Ψ (◦ ) (HCU concrete) 28 [28]
ξ 0.1 (default) [28,33,47,49]
σb0 /σc0 1.16 (default) [28,33,47,49]
Kc 2/3 (default) [28,33,47,49]
µ (s−1 ) 0.001 -
The concrete model of Carreira and Chu [50,51] was used for both compression and
tension Equations (1)–(3). For steel, the perfect elasto-plastic behavior was considered.
σ β c (ε/ε c )
= (1)
fc β c − 1 + (ε/ε c ) β c
σ β c (ε/ε t )
= (2)
ft β c − 1 + (ε/ε t ) β c
fc 3

βc = + 1.55(MPa) (3)
32.4
x 6 of 24
concrete tensile strength, and βc is the stress–strain relationship form factor of concrete in
compression.
where εc is the strain corresponding to concrete compressive strength, εt is the strain
corresponding to concrete tensile strength, fc is the compressive concrete strength, ft is the
3.3. Interaction concrete tensile strength, and βc is the stress–strain relationship form factor of concrete
in compression.
Figure 3 shows the pairs of interactions. The tie constraint technique allowed us to
simulate the perfect
3.3.bond between the contact surfaces. The contacts between the concrete
Interaction
and the transverse reinforcements
Figure 3 shows the were made
pairs throughThe
of interactions. thetieembedded region allowed
constraint technique [33]. The nor-
us to
mal/tangential behavior was
simulate the considered
perfect bond between between thesurfaces.
the contact steel The
beam andbetween
contacts PCHCS, the steel
the concrete
and the transverse reinforcements were made through the embedded region [33]. The
beam and gap, thenormal/tangential
actuator and behavior
concrete topping, and the shear stud and gap. The shear
was considered between the steel beam and PCHCS, the steel
studs were located in and
beam thegap,
gap, theusing
actuatorthe
andsame
concretetechnique
topping, and presented inand
the shear stud [52]. The
gap. The friction
shear
coefficient was based on the Coulomb friction model. The literature reports some values
studs were located in the gap, using the same technique presented in [52]. The friction
coefficient was based on the Coulomb friction model. The literature reports some values of
of the friction coefficient [53–55]. Friction coefficients of 0.2 and 0.3 were adopted for the
the friction coefficient [53–55]. Friction coefficients of 0.2 and 0.3 were adopted for the gap
gap and headed stud and the
and headed studsteel beam
and the steel and
beamslab interfaces,
and slab interfaces, respectively
respectively [55].[55].
Figure 3. Surface-to-surface interactions.

Figure 3. Surface-to-surface interactions.
3.4. Boundary Conditions
3.4. Boundary Conditions
The boundary conditions (Figure 4) were applied considering the symmetry at midspan
The boundary = URx = URy (Figure
(Uzconditions = 0) [25,37–40].
4) wereThe vertical
applied displacement was restrained
considering at the supports
the symmetry at mid-
(Uy = 0) and the lateral displacement at the ends of the slab (Ux = 0). Displacement control
span (Uz = URx = UR y = 0) [25,37–40]. The vertical displacement was restrained at the sup-
was used. The difficulties with softening materials can be avoided by applying a simple
ports (Uy = 0) andform
theoflateral displacement
displacement at The
control [56,57]. thedisadvantages
ends of theinslab (Ux = 0).
displacement Displacement
control are related
control was used.toThethe selection of thewith
difficulties appropriate displacement
softening variable
materials can[58].
beThus, the variable
avoided selected a
by applying
for the stopping criterion was the midspan vertical displacement.
simple form of displacement control [56,57]. The disadvantages in displacement control
are related to the selection of the appropriate displacement variable [58]. Thus, the varia-
ble selected for the stopping criterion was the midspan vertical displacement.
Sustainability2021,
Sustainability 2021,13,
13,xx 77 of
of 24
24
Figure4.4.4.Boundary
Figure
Figure Boundaryconditions
Boundary conditionsof
conditions ofthe
of theCB3
the CB3model.
CB3 model.
model.
3.5.
3.5.Discretization
3.5. Discretization
Discretization
The
Thediscretization
The discretizationof
discretization ofthe elements
theelements
elementsis is shown
shownin inFigure
in Figure5.5.5.The
Figure The
The dimension
dimension
dimension values
values
values of
ofthe
of the
the elements
elements
elements werewere
were adopted
adopted
adopted according
according
according to literature
tothe
to the the literature
literature [28,53,54],
[28,53,54],
[28,53,54], andand
and with
with
with respect
respect
respect tothe
to tomas-
the the
mas-
master
ter andand
terand slave
slave
slave surfaces.
surfaces.
surfaces. TheThe
The S4RS4R
S4R element
element
element waswas
was a quadrilateral
aaquadrilateral
quadrilateral element
element
element withwith
with fourfour
four nodes.
nodes.
nodes. This
This
This element
element
element had had
hadreducedreduced
reduced integration.
integration.
integration. According
According
According tothe
to to the ABAQUS,
theABAQUS,
ABAQUS, Dassault
Dassault Dassault
Systèmes,
Systèmes, Systèmes,
software
software
software
[33], the[33],
[33],the C3D8R
C3D8R theelement
C3D8R
elementelement
hadeight
had had
eight eightreduced
nodes,
nodes, nodes, reduced
reduced integration,
integration,
integration, supported
supported supported plastic
plasticanalysis
plastic analysis
analysis
withlarge
with with large deformations,
largedeformations,
deformations,and andallowedand
allowedthe allowed the
thevisualization visualization
visualizationof ofthe
thecrack of the
crackin
inthecrack
theCDP in the
CDPmodel.
model.CDPThe
The
model. The
T3D2element
T3D2 T3D2
elementhad element
had2-node had
2-nodelinear2-node linear
lineardisplacement.
displacement. displacement.
Figure5.5.5.Discretization.
Figure
Figure Discretization.
Discretization.
3.6.
3.6.Results
3.6. Results
Results
The
Theresults
The results
results are
arepresented
are presented
presented in inFigure
inFigure
Figure 6 and Table
66and
and 3, in3,3,
Table
Table which MFE M
inwhich
in which isMFE
the
FEisisbending
thebending
the moment
bending mo-
mo-
of finite
ment
ment ofelement
of finite model,
finiteelement
element MTest M
model,
model, isTest
M the
Test isisbending
thebending
the moment
bending moment
moment of experimental
ofexperimental
of experimental tests,
tests,
tests,
δFE isisisthe
δδFEFE the
the
midspan
midspanvertical
midspan vertical displacement
verticaldisplacement
displacementof ofthe thefinite
the finiteelement
finite element
element models,
models,
models, and
and and
δδTestδis
Test isthe
Testtheis mid-pan
the mid-pan
mid-pan verti-
verti-
vertical
cal displacement
caldisplacement
displacement ofthe
of of tests.
the the tests.
tests. ItItwas
was It possible
was possible
possible to observe
toobserve
to observe the yielding
theyielding
the yielding atthe
at theat the flange,
lower
lower lower
flange,
flange,
and in
and inandtheinCB1
the the and
CB1 CB1
and andCB2CB2
CB2 models,
models,
models, thethe
the cracking
cracking
cracking was
was
was observedin
observed
observed inthe
in the lower
the lower
lower partpartof ofthe
of the
the
PCHCSs, according
PCHCSs,according
PCHCSs, to
accordingto Lam
toLam [17].
Lam[17]. The
[17].The behaviors
Thebehaviors
behaviorsofof the CB3
ofthe
theCB3 and
CB3and CB4
andCB4 models
CB4models were
modelswere similar
weresimilar to
similar
those
to presented
to those
those presentedin Batista
presented in and Landesmann
in Batista
Batista and Landesmann
and Landesmann [18]; that is,that
[18];
[18]; there
that is,was
is, a propagation
there
there was aa propagation
was of cracksof
propagation of
that started
cracks
cracks thatin
that the central
started
started in thepart
inthe of the
central
central part
part PCHCS
ofthe
of and
thePCHCS
PCHCS extended over theover
andextended
and extended entire
over the
the width.
entirewidth.
entire width.
Sustainability 2021, 13, x 8 of 24
600 600
500 500
400 400
M (kN.m)
M (kN.m)
300 300
200 200
Test Test
100 FE 100 FE
0 0
0 10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40 50
Mid-span vertical displacement (mm) Mid-span vertical displacement (mm)
(a) (b)
1000 1200
800 1000
800
M (kN.m)
M (kN.m)
600
600
400
400
Test Test
200 FE 200 FE
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 0 20 40 60
Mid-span vertical displacement (mm) Mid-span vertical displacement (mm)
(c) (d)
Figure 6.
Figure 6. Validation results: (a)
Validation results: (a) CB1
CB1 model;
model; (b)
(b) CB2
CB2 model;
model; (c)
(c) CB3
CB3 model;
model; and
and (d)
(d) CB4
CB4 model.
model.
Table 3. Comparison of finite element analyses and tests results.

Table 3. Comparison of finite element analyses and tests results.
MTest δTest MFE δFE
Model MTest δTest MFE δFE MFE/Mtest δFE/δtest
Model (kN.m) (mm) (kN.m) (mm) MFE /Mtest δFE /δtest
(kN.m) (mm) (kN.m) (mm)
CB1 497 32 496 33 1.00 1.03
CB1 497 32 496 33 1.00 1.03
CB2
CB2 474
474 35
35 485485 34 34 0.95
0.95 0.97
0.97
CB3
CB3 846
846 70
70 895895 71 71 0.95
0.95 1.00
1.00
CB4
CB4 985
985 37
37 1015
1015 35 35 1.03
1.03 0.95
4. Numerical Model: Parametric Study

The following were the general considerations for
for the
the parametric
parametric study:
study:
1. The
The thickness
thickness of of the
the concrete
concrete topping
topping waswas 50
50 mm;
2. The
The total
total transverse
transverse reinforcement
reinforcement length
length was
was 1000 ++ g,g, in
in mm;
mm;
3. A welded
A welded steel
steel mesh
mesh with
with 4.2
4.2 mm mm ××100100mm mmwas
wasconsidered
considered[20,25];
[20,25];
4. LP26 units
LP26 units (Figure
(Figure 7), with ffcc ==40
7), with 40MPa
MPaand andgg==7070mm,
mm,were
wereconsidered;
considered;
5. For the
For the steel
steel beam, the ASTM A572 Gr.50 Gr.50 steel
steel was
was adopted
adopted (f(fyy == 345
345 MPa).
MPa). The
The
Young’s
Young’s module and the Poisson’s ratio were 200 GPa and 0.3, respectively;
respectively;
6. The composite
The composite beamsbeams were
were simply
simply supported,
supported, andand subjected
subjected toto four-point bending.
The loads
The loads were
were spaced in L/4 L/4from fromeach
eachsupport.
support. Stiffeners
Stiffeners were
were placed at the support
and points
and points ofof loads;
loads;
7.
7. The midspan vertical displacement of
The midspan vertical displacement of aa maximum
maximum value
value equal
equaltotoL/100 was adopted
L/100 was adopted
as a stopping criterion
as a stopping criterion [25]. [25].
The studied parameters are shown in Table 4.
ability 2021, 13, x
Figure 7. LP26 units (in mm).

The studied parameters are shown in Table 4.
Table 4. Parametric study.
Parameters Variation
Section
Parameters W360x51,Variation
W460x74, and W530x72
In situ concrete
Section
Parameters
strength (MPa) 25, 30, and 40
W360x51, W460x74, and W530x72
Transverse reinforcement diameter (mm) 25, 30,12.5,
10, and 16
In situ concrete strength (MPa)
TransverseShear-stud
reinforcementspacing (mm)
diameter
Section
(mm) 10,125,
and 40
12.5,175,
andand
16 275
W36
Shear-stud spacing (mm)
In situ concrete strength 125, (MPa)175, and 275
5. Results and Discussion
In Transverse
5. Results andsection,
this Discussion reinforcement
the results diameter
are discussed, according to the steel(mm)
cross-sections that
wereInanalyzed.
this section,
Atthe
theresults
end ofare
thisdiscussed, according
section, the to the
results are steel cross-sections
compared that were
with the resistant cal-
analyzed. At the end Shear-stud
of this section, the spacing
results are (mm)
compared with the resistant calculation
culation procedures for Steel-Concrete composite beams, as well as with the results pre-
procedures for Steel-Concrete
sented in Ferreira et al. [25], composite
consideringbeams,
a 150 as
mm well as with
depth thePCHCS
of the results presented in
with concrete
Ferreira
topping.et al. [25], considering a 150 mm depth of the PCHCS with concrete topping.
5. Results and Discussion
5.1.
5.1.W360x51
W360x51Section
Section
In this section, the results are discussed, according
Considering
Consideringaa spacing
spacing between shear studs
between shear studsofof120
120mm,
mm,forfor
thethe midspan
midspan vertical
vertical dis-
displacement
placement at 15 mm, only the region where the beam was supported reached theyield
at 15 mm, only the region where the beam was supported reached the yield
were analyzed. At the end of this section, the results are
strength.
strength.The
Themaximum
maximumvon vonMises
Misesstresses
stressesininthe
thelower
lowerflange,
flange,web,
web,and
andupper
upperflange
flange
were
were approximately 290 MPa, 260 MPa, and 115 MPa, respectively. When thecomposite
approximately 290 MPa, 260 MPa, and 115 MPa, respectively. When the
culation procedures for Steel-Concrete composite beams composite
beam reached the ultimate strength, for the midspan vertical displacement at 26 mm, the
beam reached the ultimate strength, for the midspan vertical displacement at 26 mm, the
lower flange and approximately 1/4 of the web depth were in the plastic regime. The yield
sented in Ferreira et al. [25], considering a 150 mm dep
lower flange and approximately 1/4 of the web depth were in the plastic regime. The yield
strength was reached in none of the regions where the shear studs were located. The von
strength was reached in none of the regions where the shear studs were located. The von
topping.
Mises stresses in the upper flange were approximately 200 MPa. The ultimate strength was
Mises stresses in the upper flange were approximately 200 MPa. The ultimate strength
governed by excessive cracking of the PCHCS (Figure 8).
was governed by excessive cracking of the PCHCS (Figure 8).
5.1. W360x51 Section

Considering a spacing between shear studs of 120 m
placement at 15 mm, only the region where the beam w
strength. The maximum von Mises stresses in the lowe
were approximately 290 MPa, 260 MPa, and 115 MPa, re
beam reached the ultimate strength, for the midspan ver
lower flange and approximately 1/4 of the web depth we
strength
Figure was reached
8. Final configuration for W360x51,in
c none
f = 25 MPa, φ =of theandregions
10 mm, where the sh
120 mm of spacing.
Figure 8. Final configuration for W360x51, fc = 25 MPa, ϕ = 10 mm, and 120 mm of spacing.
Mises
With thestresses
variation of in the upper
the transverse flange
reinforcement were
rate and in situapproximately
concrete strength,
waswere
there
9).
governed
no differencesby excessive
in the shear-slip andcracking of the
moment-deflection PCHCS
relationships (Figu
(Figure

With the variation of the transverse reinforcement rate and in situ concrete strength,
there were no differences in the shear-slip and moment-deflection relationships (Figure 9).
800 1000
800
600
M (kN.m)
600
V (kN)
400
φ=10 mm 400 φ=10 mm
200 φ=12.5 mm φ=12.5 mm
φ=16 mm
200 φ=16 mm
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 0 10 20 30
Slip (mm) Mid-span vertical displacement (mm)
(a) (b)
800 1000
800
600
M (kN.m)
600
V (kN)
400
φ=10 mm 400 φ=10 mm
200 φ=12.5 mm φ=12.5 mm
φ=16 mm
200 φ=16 mm
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 0 10 20 30
(c) (d)
Figure 9. Influence
Figure of transverse
9. Influence reinforcement
of transverse reinforcementfor for the
the W360x51 sectionwith
W360x51 section with 120
120 mmmm of spacing:
of spacing: (a) Shear-slip
(a) Shear-slip relationship
relationship
for fcfor
= 25 MPa; (b) moment-deflection relationship for f = 25 MPa; (c) shear-slip relationship for f
fc = 25 MPa; (b) moment-deflection relationship for fc = 25 MPa; (c) shear-slip relationship for fc = 40 MPa; and (d)
c c = 40 MPa; and (d)
moment-deflection
moment-deflection relationship forforfc f=c =
relationship 4040MPa.
MPa.
This
This cancanbebeexplained
explained as as aa function
function of of the
thedepth
depthand andarea
areaofofthe steel
the cross-section
steel cross-section in
in relation to the depth and effective area of the PCHCS
relation to the depth and effective area of the PCHCS and concrete topping. Uponand concrete topping. Uponreach-
reaching the ultimate strength, as shown in Figure 8, the neutral plastic axis (NPA) was
ing the ultimate strength, as shown in Figure 8, the neutral plastic axis (NPA) was in the
in the concrete topping, a factor that generates excessive tensile stresses in the PCHCS.
concrete
This cantopping,
be concluded a factor that
since generates
in the excessive tensile
final configuration, the upperstresses
part ofin the
the PCHCS.
PCHCS, This can
which
bewas
concluded
in the region of pure bending, was damaged. Another important observation was thewas in
since in the final configuration, the upper part of the PCHCS, which
thefragile
region of pureofbending,
behavior the composite was damaged.
beams, sinceAnother important
the slip values at theobservation
steel-concretewas the fragile
interface
behavior
were less ofthan
the 6composite
mm, a parameterbeams,that since the slip4 values
Eurocode at thetosteel-concrete
[4] considers characterize the interface
ductile were
behavior
less than 6 (Figure 9). Due to this
mm, a parameter thatfragile behavior,
Eurocode 4 [4]with the variation
considers of parameters,
to characterize such be-
the ductile
as transverse
havior (Figure reinforcement
9). Due to thisrate and in
fragile situ concrete
behavior, withstrength, there were
the variation no significant
of parameters, such as
differences in terms of stresses, both in the shear studs and in the transversal
transverse reinforcement rate and in situ concrete strength, there were no significant dif- reinforcement,
considering the ultimate strength. Some examples are illustrated in Figure 10. For the
ferences in terms of stresses, both in the shear studs and in the transversal reinforcement,
models with fc = 25 MPa, it was observed that the smaller the transverse reinforcement
considering
diameter, the thelower
ultimate
the vonstrength. Some examples
Mises stresses in the shear are illustrated
stud. For fc = in 25 Figure
MPa, the 10.von
For the
models
Mises with
stressesfc =in 25
theMPa,
shear it wasshowed
studs observed that the
a variation smaller
of only 6 MPa. theOn transverse reinforcement
the other hand, for
diameter, the lower the von Mises stresses in the shear stud. For f
fc = 40 MPa, there were no variations between the von Mises stresses in the shear studs with Mises
c = 25 MPa, the von
stresses in the shear
the variation of the studs showed
transverse a variation
reinforcement of only The
diameter. 6 MPa. On the other
observations for fchand, for fc = 40
= 30 MPa
werethere
MPa, similar.
were no variations between the von Mises stresses in the shear studs with the
variation of the transverse reinforcement diameter. The observations for fc = 30 MPa were
similar.
(a) (b)
FigureFigure 10.von
10. The The Mises
von Mises stresses
stresses
(a) in in headedstuds
headed studs for
for the
theW360x51
W360x51section andand
section spacing
(b)of 120ofmm:
spacing 120(a)
mm:fc = 25
(a)MPa
fc = and φ = and
25 MPa
10 mm; (b) fc = 40 MPa and φ = 16 mm.
ϕ =Figure
10 mm; (b) f = 40 MPa and ϕ = 16 mm.
10. The cvon Mises stresses in headed studs for the W360x51 section and spacing of 120 mm: (a) fc = 25 MPa and φ =
10 mm; (b) fc = 40 MPa and φ = 16 mm.
On the other hand, for the shear-stud spacing at 175 mm and 225 mm, for the mid-
On the other hand, for the shear-stud spacing at 175 mm and 225 mm, for the midspan
span vertical displacement at 15 mm, the behavior was similar to the models with 120 mm
vertical displacement at 15 mm, the behavior atwas similar to
225the models
for thewith 120 mm
ofOn the
spacing.other hand, for
However, at the
the shear-stud spacingthe
ultimate strength, 175 mm and
midspan vertical mm,
displacements mid-were
of spacing.
span vertical
greater However,
displacement
than at the ultimate
at 15 mm,
in the previous strength,
the behavior
situation, with thewas the midspan
similar to
maximum vertical
the models
value displacements
equal towith consid- were
120 mm
36 mm,
greater
of than
spacing. in the
However, previous
at the situation,
ultimate with
strength, the
the maximum
midspan value
vertical equal to 36
displacements
ering φ = 16 mm, fc = 40 MPa, and 175 mm of spacing. For the situation in which the spacing mm, considering
were
greater
ϕ =was than
16 mm,
225 mm,in the
fc =the previous
40 midspan
MPa, andsituation,
175 mm
vertical with the maximum
of spacing.
displacement value
For the
reached equal to
situation
42 mm, 36 mm,
in which
considering consid-
themm
φ = 10 spacing
ering
wasand φ =fc16
225 = mm,
mm, fc =midspan
the
25 MPa. 40 MPa, and
Regarding 175ultimate
vertical
the mm of spacing.
displacement
strength, Forreached
thecomposite
the situation
42 mm,in which the spacing
considering
beams with ϕ = 10 mm
shear-stud
was 225
fc =mm,
andspacing the
175midspan
25ofMPa. mmRegardingvertical
and 225 thedisplacement
mm ultimate
made reached
strength,
better use 42
of thethe mm, considering
composite
steel section; beams
that φ =with
10 mmshear-stud
is, approximately
and fc = 25 MPa. Regarding the ultimate strength, the composite beams with shear-stud
half the
spacing webmm
of 175 depthandreached
225 mm plastification
made better (Figure
use of 11).
theThen,
steelthe greater
section; theis,
that spacing be-
approximately
spacing of the
175shear
mm and 225the mmbetter
madethebetter
use use of steel
the steel section; that is, approximately
halftween
the web depthstuds,
reached plastification of the
(Figure section.
11). Then, the greater the spacing between
half the web depth reached plastification (Figure 11). Then, the greater the spacing be-
the shear studs, the better the use of the steel section.
tween the shear studs, the better the use of the steel section.
(a)
(a)
(b)
(b)
Figure 11. Final configuration for the W360x51 section: (a) 175 mm of spacing, fc = 40 MPa, and
ϕ = 16 mm; and (b) 225 mm of spacing, fc = 25 MPa, and ϕ = 10 mm.
Sustainability 2021,
tainability 2021, 13, 13,
x x 12 12
o
Sustainability 2021, 13, 4230 Figure

Figure 11. 11. Final
Final configuration
configuration forfor
thethe W360x51
W360x51 section:
section: (a) (a)
175175
mmmm of spacing,
of spacing, fc =f40
c =of
12 4025MPa,
MPa, andanφ
16 mm;
16 mm; andand
(b)(b)
225225
mmmm of spacing,
of spacing, c = MPa,
fc =f25 25 MPa,
andand
φ =φ10= mm.
10 mm.
The The
Thevariation
variation
variation inboth
in in both
both thethe
the transverse
transverse
reinforcement
reinforcement raterate rate (Figures
(Figures
(Figures 12 and12 12
and
13) and
and the13)
13) andand
the
situsitu
in concrete
concrete strength
strength
situ concrete strengthshowed
showed significant
significant
showed differences
differences
significant differences in in
thethe
in the shear-slip
shear-slip
shear-slip and
and and moment-d
moment-defl
moment-
tion relationships.
tion relationships.
deflection relationships.
800800 1000
1000
600600 800800
M (kN.m)
M (kN.m)
V (kN)
V (kN)
600600
400400
φ=10
φ=10 mm mm 400400 φ=10
φ=10 mm mm
200200 φ=12.5
φ=12.5 mm mm φ=12.5
φ=12.5 mm mm
φ=16
φ=16 mm mm
200200 φ=16
φ=16 mm mm
0 0 0 0
0 0 2 2 4 4 6 6 0 0 10 10 20 20 30 30 40 40
SlipSlip
(mm)(mm) Mid-span
Mid-span vertical
vertical displacement
displacement (mm)
(mm)
(a)(a) (b)(b)
Figure
Figure 12. Influence
12.Figure
Influence of transverse
of transverse
reinforcement
of transverse reinforcement for for
for thethe
the W360x51
W360x51
W360x51 section,
section,
section, c = fMPa
fc =f40 c = MPa
40 40 MPa and175
and175
and175 mm ofmm mm of
(a)spacing:
of spacing:
spacing: (a) (a)
shear-slip shear-slip
shear-slip
relationship;
relationship; andand(b)(b)
relationship; moment-deflection
moment-deflection
and relationship.
relationship.
(b) moment-deflection relationship.
800 800 1000

1000
800800
600 600
M (kN.m)
M (kN.m)
600600
V (kN)
V (kN)
400 400
φ=10φ=10
mm mm 400400 φ=10φ=10
mm mm
200 200 φ=12.5
φ=12.5 mm mm φ=12.5
φ=12.5 mm mm
φ=16φ=16
mm mm 200200 φ=16φ=16
mm mm
0 0 0 0
0 0 2 2 4 4 6 6 0 0 20 20 40 40
SlipSlip
(mm)(mm) Mid-span
Mid-span vertical
displacement (mm)
(mm)
(a) (a) (b)(b)
Figure
13.Figure
of transverse
reinforcement
of transverse for for
reinforcementfor the W360x51
theW360x51
the W360x51 section,
section,
section, =fc40
fc = 40fcMPa =and
40
MPa MPa
225 mmand
and 225
of 225
mmmm
spacing: of of spacing:
(a) spacing:
shear-slip (a) (a) shear
shear-
slipslip relationship;
relationship; andand
relationship; (b)
(b)(b)
and moment-deflection
moment-deflection
moment-deflection relationship.
relationship.
relationship.
As shown in the illustrations, even with the variation of the transverse reinforcement
As As
rateshown
shown
and in situ
in
in the the illustrations,
illustrations,
concrete strength,even
evenwith
the initial
withthethe variation
variation
stiffnesses
of the
of theofcomposite
the transverse
transverse reinforcemen
beams reinforcement
modeled r
andand in in situ
situ
were concrete
concrete
similar, showing strength,
strength, thethe
that the initial
initial stiffnesses
stiffnesses
differences of these of of the
the
relations composite
composite
were beams
beams
significant modeled
modeled
in the non- were wers
ilar,ilar, showing
showing
linear that
branch. thatthethe differences
differences
Although the ultimate ofmoment
of thesethese relations
relations
had anwere were significant
significant
approximate valuein inthe
forthe the nonlinear
nonlinear
models br
bran
Although illustrated
Although thethe (ϕ = 10
ultimate
ultimate mm, =
moment
moment
ϕ 12.5 mm,
hadhad and
an an = 16 mm),
approximate
approximate
ϕ the
value models
valueforfor with
thethe = 10
models
models
ϕ mm and
illustrated
illustrated (φ (φ
=
ϕ = 12.5 mm showed similar behavior in the shear-slip and moment-deflection relation-
mm,mm, φ =φ12.5 = 12.5mm, mm, andand φ =φ16 = 16mm),mm), thethe models
models withwith φ =φ10 = 10
mm mm andand φ =φ12.5 = 12.5 mm mm sh
show
ships, and were different from the model with ϕ = 16 mm (Figures 12 and 13). According to
similar
similar behavior
behavior in in
the the shear-slip
shear-slip and and moment-deflection
moment-deflection relationships,
relationships,
Lam et al. [22], with the increase in the transverse reinforcement rate, the flexural strength and and were were dif
differ
from
from thethe
capacitymodelmodel with
increases, withφ =φ
but = 16
16 mm
reduces mm
the (Figures
(Figures
ductility, 12 12
andand
leading 13). 13). According
According
to fragile rupture.to Lam to Lam et al.
et al. [22],
[22], wi
with
increase
increase Another
in in the
the important
transverse
transverse observation
reinforcement
reinforcement wasrate,
that in the
rate,
the no model
flexural
flexural presented
strength
strength forcapacity
the W360x51
capacity increases,
increases, butb
section did the composite beams show ductile behavior. Thus, it was possible to conclude
duces
duces thethe ductility,
ductility, leading
leading to fragile
to fragile rupture.
rupture.
that in all models analyzed for W360x51 section, the ultimate strength was characterized
Another
Another
as fragile. important
important
In most observation
observation
observations for bothwas was
175that
mmthat in225
inand
no no
modelmodel
mm presented
presented
of spacing, for
the for
von the
theMises W360x5s
W360x51
tion
tion did did
stressesthethe thecomposite
incomposite
shear studs beams
beams
were show
lessshow ductile
thanductile
the models behavior.
behavior.
with 120 Thus,
mm Thus, it was
it was
of spacing. Forpossible
possible
example, to to con
conclu
that
that in all
for in
f all
= 25models
MPa, analyzed
considering for
the W360x51
175 mm and section,
c models analyzed for W360x51 section, the ultimate strength was characteriz
225 mm the
models, ultimate
the von strength
Mises was
stresses characte
in
as as the
fragile. shear
fragile. In studs
In
most most were lower than for
observations
observations thefor
model
both both with
175 175
mm120mmmm
and of225
and spacing.
225mm mmAofsimilar
of situation
spacing,
spacing, thethevon von
Mi
occurred for fc = 30 MPa. On the other hand, for fc = 40 MPa, there were models in which
stresses
stresses in thein the shearshear studsstudswere were lessless
than thanthethe models
models with
the von Mises stresses in the shear studs, considering 175 mm and 225 mm of spacings,
with 120120 mm mm of spacing.
of spacing. ForFor exa
examp
forforfc =fc25= 25MPa, MPa, considering
considering thethe 175175mm mm and and
225225 mm mm models,
models, thethevon vonMisesMises stresses
stresses in
shear
shear studs studs were were lowerlower thanthan thethemodelmodel with with120120 mm mm of of spacing.
spacing. A similar
A similar situatio
situation
curred
curred forfor fc =fc30 = 30
MPa. MPa. OnOn thethe other
other hand,hand, forforfc =fc40
= 40
MPa, MPa, theretherewerewere models
models in whic
in which
vonvon MisesMises stresses
stresses in the
in the shear
shear studs,
studs, considering
considering 175175 mm mm and and225225mm mm of spacings,
of spacings, w
5.2. W460x74 Section 13 of 25
Considering 120 mm of spacing between the sh

were greater than the model with 120 mm of spacing. This was observed specifically for
displacement at 15 mm, only the region in which th
transversal-reinforcement diameters equal to 10 mm and 12.5 mm.
5.2.yield
W460x74 strength.
Section The von Mises stresses in the lower
Considering 120 mm of spacing between the shear studs, for the midspan vertical
290 MPa, 290 MPa, and 120 MPa, respectively. When
displacement at 15 mm, only the region in which the beam was supported reached the
timate
yield strength,
strength. The the inupper
von Mises stresses flange
the lower flange, web, and approximatel
and upper flange were
290 MPa, 290 MPa, and 120 MPa, respectively. When the composite beam reached its
plastic
ultimate regime.
strength, Theandvon
the upper flange Mises
approximately 1/4stresses inwere
of the web depth thein the
upper
plastic regime. The von Mises stresses in the upper flange were 230 MPa. The ultimate
strength
strength was
was governed governed
by excessive cracking by
of theexcessive cracking of the P
PCHCS (Figure 14).
Figure 14. Final configuration for the W460x74 section, f = 25

Figure 14. Final configuration for the W460x74 section, fc = 25 MPa, ϕ = 10 mm, and 120 mmc
of spacing.
With the transverse reinforcement rate variation and in situ concrete strength, there
With the transverse reinforcement rate variation
were no differences in the shear-slip and moment-deflection relationships (Figure 15).
As noted, there were no significant differences in the behavior of these analyzed
were no differences in the shear-slip and moment-de
composite beams, because the ultimate strength was achieved by excessive cracking of the
PCHCS, a situation analogous to the W360x51 section. Another important observation was
the fragile behavior of the composite beams, a situation similar to the W360x51 section.
1000 1400
Due to this fragile behavior, with the variation of the parameters such as transverse rein-
forcement rate and in situ concrete strength, there were small differences in the magnitude
1200
of the von Mises stresses, specifically in the shear studs. Some examples are illustrated in
800 Figure 16.
1000
M (kN.m)
600
V (kN)
800
400 600
φ=10 mm
φ=12.5 mm 400
200 φ=16 mm 200
0 0
0 2 4 6 0 10
Slip (mm) Mid-span ver
Figure 14. Final configuration for the W460x74 section, fc = 25 MPa, φ = 10 mm, and 120 mm of spacing.
With the transverse reinforcement rate variation and in situ concrete strength, there
were no differences in the shear-slip and moment-deflection relationships (Figure 15).
1000 1400
1200
800
1000
M (kN.m)
600
V (kN)
800
400 600
φ=10 mm φ=10 mm
φ=12.5 mm 400 φ=12.5 mm
200 φ=16 mm φ=16 mm
200
0 0
0 2 4 6 0 10 20 30 40
(a) (b)
1000 1400
1200
800
1000
M (kN.m)
600
V (kN)
800
400 600
φ=10 mm φ=10 mm
φ=12.5 mm 400 φ=12.5 mm
200 φ=16 mm
φ=16 mm 200
Sustainability 2021, 13,0x 0 14 of 24
0 2 4 6 0 10 20 30 40
(c) (d)
was the fragile behavior of the composite beams, a situation similar to the W360x51 sec-
Figure 15.
Figure 15. Influence of transverse
Influence of transverse reinforcement
tion. Due for the
thebehavior,
to this fragile
reinforcement for W460x74 section
W460x74 section andvariation
with the
and 120 mm
120 mm ofofofspacing: (a)
(a) shear-slip
the parameters
spacing: such
shear-slip relationship
as transverse
relationship
for f c = 25 MPa; (b) moment-deflection relationship for fc = 25 MPa; (c) shear-slip relationship for fc = 40 MPa; and (d)
reinforcement
for fc = 25 MPa; (b) moment-deflection rate and for
relationship in situ concrete
fc = 25 strength,
MPa; (c) there
shear-slip were small
relationship for fdifferences in the
(d)mag-
c = 40 MPa; and
moment-deflection relationship for fc =the
nitude 40 MPa.
moment-deflection relationship for fof
c = 40 von
MPa. Mises stresses, specifically in the shear studs. Some examples are illus-
trated in Figure 16.
As noted, there were no significant differences in the behavior of these analyzed com-
posite beams, because the ultimate strength was achieved by excessive cracking of the
PCHCS, a situation analogous to the W360x51 section. Another important observation
(a) (b)
Figure 16.
Figure 16. The
The von
von Mises
Misesstresses
stressesin
inheaded
headedstuds
studsfor
forthe
theW460x74
W460x74section and
section 120
and mm
120 of of
mm spacing: (a)(a)
spacing: fc =fc25= MPa andand
25 MPa φ=
10 mm; and (b) f c = 40 MPa and φ = 16 mm.
ϕ = 10 mm; and (b) fc = 40 MPa and ϕ = 16 mm.
For the fcc == 25

25 MPa models, the smaller the transverse reinforcement diameter, the
lower the von Mises stresses in the shear studs. There was no variation in the stresses in
the shear studs for ffcc = 25 MPa. A similar situation occurred for for ffcc = 30 MPa models.
models. For
the fcc ==40
40MPa
MPamodels,
models, the
the von
von Mises
Mises stresses
stresses in
in the
the shear studs varied with the variation
of the transverse reinforcement diameter. Unlike the ffcc = 25 MPa models, the smaller the
transverse reinforcement diameter,
diameter, the greater
greater the von Mises
Mises stresses
stresses in the shearshear studs.
studs.
This variation reached approximately 20 MPa between
MPa between φ = ϕ = 10 mm and φ
ϕ = 16 mm.
Considering the
Considering the models
modelswith
with175
175mmmmandand225225
mmmm of of spacing,
spacing, it was
it was possible
possible to
to ob-
observe
serve twotwo different
different situations.
situations. In relation
In relation to the
to the 175 175
mmmm of spacing,
of spacing, for midspan
for the the midspan
ver-
tical displacement at 15 mm, the yield strength was not reached in any region of the steel
profile. The maximum von Mises stresses in the lower flange, web, and upper flange were
290 MPa, 290 MPa, and 120 MPa, respectively. When the composite beams reached the
ultimate strength, only part of the lower flange was in the plastic regime (Figure 17a). For
225 mm of spacing between shear studs, the ultimate strength was characterized with the
the shear studs for fc = 25 MPa. A similar situation occurred for fc = 30 MPa models. Fo
the fc = 40 MPa models, the von Mises stresses in the shear studs varied with the variation
of the transverse reinforcement diameter. Unlike the fc = 25 MPa models, the smaller the
transverse reinforcement diameter, the greater the von Mises stresses in the shear studs
Sustainability 2021, 13, 4230 This variation reached approximately 20 MPa between φ = 10 mm and φ = 16 mm.
15 of 25
Considering the models with 175 mm and 225 mm of spacing, it was possible to ob
serve two different situations. In relation to the 175 mm of spacing, for the midspan ver
tical displacement at 15 mm, the yield strength was not reached in any region of the stee
vertical displacement at 15 mm, the yield strength was not reached in any region of the
profile.
steel TheThe
profile. maximum
maximum von Mises
von Misesstresses
stressesin
inthe
the lower flange,web,
lower flange, web,andand upper
upper flange were
flange
290 MPa,
were 290 290
290 MPa, MPa,
MPa,and 120
and 120MPa,
MPa,respectively. Whenthe
respectively. When the composite
composite beams
beams reached the
reached
ultimate
the strength,
ultimate strength,only
onlypart
partof
ofthe
the lower flangewas
lower flange wasininthetheplastic
plastic regime
regime (Figure
(Figure 17a).17a). Fo
225 225
For mmmm of spacing
of spacingbetween
betweenshear
shear studs, theultimate
studs, the ultimatestrength
strength was
was characterized
characterized withwith the
the lower
lower flange,half
flange, halfthe
the web
web depth,
depth,and andpart of the
part upper
of the flange,
upper whichwhich
flange, were inwere
the region
in the region
of
of the loading application point, in the plastic regime (Figure 17b). This was theinmodel in
the loading application point, in the plastic regime (Figure 17b). This was the model
which the composite action took advantage of the strength of the steel profile.
which the composite action took advantage of the strength of the steel profile.
(a)
(b)
Figure
Figure 17.
17. Final
Final configuration forthe
configuration for theW460x74
W460x74section:
section:
(a)(a)
175175
mm mm of spacing,
of spacing, fc =f40
c = MPa,
40 MPa,
andand φ =
10ϕ mm; and (b) 225 mm of spacing, f = 40 MPa, and φ = 16
= 10 mm; and (b) 225 mm of spacing, fc = 40 MPa, and ϕ = 16 mm.
c mm.
The variation
The variation in
inboth
boththe
thetransverse reinforcement
transverse rate rate
reinforcement and the
andinthesituinconcrete
situ concrete
strength (Figures 18 and 19) showed significant differences in the shear-slip and moment-
1000 1400
1200
800
1000
M (kN.m)
600
V (kN)
800
400 600
fc=25 MPa fc=25 MPa
fc=30 MPa 400 fc=30 MPa
200 fc=40 MPa fc=40 MPa
200
0 0
0 2 4 6 0 10 20 30 40
(b)
(b)
Figure 17. Final configuration for the W460x74 section: (a) 175 mm of spacing, fc = 40 MPa, and φ =
10Figure 17. (b)
mm; and Final configuration
225 for the
mm of spacing, W460x74
fc = 40 section:
MPa, and φ = 16(a)mm.
175 mm of spacing, fc = 40 MPa, and φ =
10 mm; and (b) 225 mm of spacing, fc = 40 MPa, and φ = 16 mm.
The variation in both the transverse reinforcement rate and the in situ concrete
The variation in both the transverse reinforcement rate and the in situ concrete
1000 1400
1000 1400
1200
800 1200
800 1000
M (kN.m)
600 1000
V (kN)
M (kN.m)
600 800
V (kN)
800
400 600
400 fc=25 MPa 600 fc=25 MPa
fc=25
fc=30 MPa
MPa 400 fc=25
fc=30 MPa
MPa
200 fc=30 MPa 400 fc=30 MPa
200 fc=40 MPa 200 fc=40 MPa
0 0
00 2 4 6 00 10 20 30 40
0 2Slip (mm) 4 6 0
Mid-span 10 20 30 (mm) 40
(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure 18.
Influenceofofininsitu
situconcrete
concretestrength
strengthforfor the
the W460x74
W460x74 section,
section, ϕ =φ12.5
= 12.5
mm mm
andand
175175
mmmm of spacing:
of spacing: (a) shear-
(a) shear-slip
Figure
slip 18. Influence
relationship; of in situ concrete strength
andmoment-deflection
(b) moment-deflection for the W460x74 section, φ = 12.5 mm and 175 mm of spacing: (a) shear-
relationship.
relationship; and (b) relationship.
slip relationship; and (b) moment-deflection relationship.
1000 1400
1000 1400
1200
800 1200
800 1000
M (kN.m)
600 1000
V (kN)
M (kN.m)
600 800
V (kN)
800
400 600
400 fc=25 MPa 600 fc=25 MPa
fc=25
fc=30 MPa
MPa 400 fc=25
fc=30 MPa
MPa
200 fc=30 MPa 400 fc=30 MPa
200 fc=40 MPa 200 fc=40 MPa
0 0
00 00 10 20 30 40 50
2 4 6 8
0 2 4 6 8 0 10 vertical
Mid-span 20 displacement
30 40(mm) 50
Slip (mm)
(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure 19. Influence of in situ concrete strength for the W460x74 section, φ = 16 mm and 225 mm of spacing: (a) shear-slip
Figure
Figure 19.19. Influence
Influence
relationship; and (b)of of
in in situ
situ concrete
concrete
moment-deflection strength
strength forfor
thethe
relationship. W460x74
W460x74 section,
section, ϕ=φ 16
= 16
mmmm and
and 225
225 mmmm
of of spacing:
spacing: (a)(a) shear-slip
shear-slip
relationship; and (b) moment-deflection relationship.
relationship; and (b) moment-deflection relationship.
These differences were observed for the concrete with the highest strength and trans-
Thesedifferences
These differenceswere
were observed for the concrete with thethe
highest strength and and
trans-
versal-reinforcement diameters equal tofor themm
12.5 concrete
and 16withmm. Figurehighest strength
18 shows that the
versal-reinforcement diameters
transversal-reinforcement equal
diameters to 12.5
equal mm mm
to 12.5 and 16andmm. FigureFigure
16 mm. 18 shows that the
18 shows
that the greater the concrete strength, the greater the initial stiffness of the composite beam,
although the values for the ultimate moment were analogous, since the ultimate strength
was governed by the slab. However, as the spacing between the connectors increased;
that is, the interaction degree was reduced, as illustrated in Figure 19, the model with
fc = 30 MPa showed a different behavior in the shear-slip and moment-deflection relation-
ships. This change in behavior was previously presented in Araújo et al. [20] and Ferreira
et al. [25]. The authors reported that when the compressive strength of the in situ concrete
was close to 40 MPa, the failure mode could occur in the shear stud, and for resistance
values below 30 MPa, the failure could be governed by the in situ concrete.
Another important observation was that for models with 225 mm of spacing, consid-
ering the W460x51 section, the composite beams showed ductile behavior; that is, the slip
at the steel–concrete interface was greater than 6 mm. Thus, it was possible to conclude
that in all models analyzed for the W460x51 section and 225 mm of spacing, the behavior
at the steel–concrete interface was characterized as ductile, according to prescriptions
of Eurocode 4. For the fc = 25 MPa models, the von Mises stresses in the shear studs,
considering 175 mm and 225 mm of spacing, were greater than the models with 120 mm
of spacing. A similar behavior occurred for fc = 30 MPa models. For fc = 40 MPa, there
were models in which the von Mises stresses in the shear studs, considering 175 mm and
225 mm of spacings, were much higher than the models with 120 mm of spacing. This was
observed for all transverse reinforcement diameters analyzed.
spacings, were much higher than the models with 120 mm of spacin
for all transverse reinforcement diameters analyzed.
5.3. W530x72 Section
Considering 120 mm of spacing, for the midspan vertical displac
region
5.3. W530x72 where
Section the composite beam was supported and the lower flan
Considering 120 mm of spacing, for the midspan vertical displacement at 15 mm, the
resistance. The maximum von Mises stresses in the lower flange, w
region where the composite beam was supported and the lower flange reached the yield
were 345
resistance. The MPa,
maximum 316vonMPa, and 230
Mises stresses MPa,
in the lowerrespectively. When
flange, web, and upper the com
flange
were
the345ultimate
MPa, 316 MPa, and 230 MPa,
strength respectively.
(Figure 20), forWhenthethe composite
midspan beam reached the
vertical displace
ultimate strength (Figure 20), for the midspan vertical displacement at 22 mm, the lower
lower
flange and flange and 1/4
approximately approximately
of the web depth 1/4
wereof theplastic
in the webregime.
depth were in the pla
Figure
Figure 20. 20.
FinalFinal configuration
configuration for thesection,
for the W530x72 W530x72fc = 40section,
MPa, ϕ =fc16
= 40
mm,MPa, φ =mm
and 120 16 mm, a
of spacing.
TheThe ultimate
ultimate strength
strength was governed was governed
by excessive crackingbyofexcessive
the slab. It iscracking
important of th
toto
notenote that
that in theseinmodels,
thesethere
models, thereusewere
were a better of the asteel
better use
section, of the steel se
in comparison
with the previous cross-sections. This was due to the fact that the steel section had a depth
with
and area the previous
greater cross-sections.
than the other This So,
steel sections studied. was thedue to thetofact
NPA tended move that the stee
in the
and area
direction of thegreater than
steel section, the that
a factor other steelthesections
favored resistance studied. So, the
of the hollow-core NPA te
slab,
thus reducing tension stresses. With the variation of the transverse reinforcement rate and
direction of the steel section, a factor that favored the resistance of
in situ concrete strength, there were no differences in the shear-slip and moment-deflection
thus reducing
relationships (similar totension
previous stresses. With the
situations). Regarding thevariation of theintransverse
von Mises stresses the shear re
studs, there were no significant differences, reaching values between
in situ concrete strength, there were no differences in the shear-slip 556 and 570 MPa.
On the other hand, considering 175 mm of spacing between the shear studs, for the
tion relationships
midspan vertical displacement (similar
at 15 mm, toonly
previous
the supportsituations).
region reached Regarding the von
the yield strength.
shear studs, there were no significant differences, reaching values b
The von Mises stresses in the lower flange, web, and upper flange were 316 MPa, 288 MPa,
and 116 MPa, respectively. At the ultimate strength (Figure 21a), the midspan vertical
MPa. was 21 mm. In this loading stage, the lower flange was in the plastic regime.
displacement
For 225 mm of spacing, with the midspan vertical displacement at 15 mm, the results
were similar to the previous beam. However, the maximum von Mises stresses in the lower
flange, web, and upper flange were 288 MPa, 288 MPa, and 116 MPa, respectively. At
the ultimate strength (Figure 21b), with the midspan vertical displacement at 38 mm, the
lower flange, half the web depth, and the upper flange were in the plastic regime. With
the variation of the transverse reinforcement rate and the in situ concrete strength, it was
possible to verify some differences in the shear-slip and moment-deflection relationships
(Figures 22 and 23).
On the other hand, considering 175 mm of spacing between the shear studs, for the
midspan vertical displacement at 15 mm, only the support region reached the yield
strength. The von Mises stresses in the lower flange, web, and upper flange were 316 MPa
Sustainability 2021, 13, 4230 288 MPa, and 116 MPa, respectively. At the ultimate strength (Figure 21a),18the
of 25midspan
vertical displacement was 21 mm. In this loading stage, the lower flange was in the plastic
regime.
(a)
(b)
Sustainability 2021, 13, x Figure 21.Final

Figure 21. Finalconfiguration
configurationfor for
the the W530x72
W530x72 section:
section: (a) 175(a)
mm175ofmm of spacing,
spacing, fc = 40
fc = 40 MPa, MPa,
and = and
ϕ 18 φ=
of 24
16 mm; and (b) 225 mm of spacing, f = 40 MPa, and
16 mm; and (b) 225 mm of spacing, fc = 40 MPa, and ϕ = 16 mm.
c φ = 16 mm.
For 225 mm of spacing, with the midspan vertical displacement at 15 mm, the results
1000 1400 However, the maximum von Mises stresses in the
were similar to the previous beam.
1200 were 288 MPa, 288 MPa, and 116 MPa, respectively
lower flange, web, and upper flange
800
At the ultimate strength (Figure1000
21b), with the midspan vertical displacement at 38 mm
M (kN.m)
600
V (kN)
800 and the upper flange were in the plastic regime. With
the lower flange, half the web depth,
400 600
the variation of the transverse reinforcement rate and the in situ concrete strength, it was
φ=10 mm
possible to verify φ=10 mm
400in the shear-slip and moment-deflection
φ=12.5 some
mm differences relationships
200 φ=12.5 mm
φ=16 mm
(Figures 22 and 23). 200 φ=16 mm
0 0
0 2 4 6 0 10 20 30 40
(a) (b)
Figure of transverse
22. Influence of transversereinforcement forthe
reinforcement for theW530x72
W530x72 section,
section, fc =MPa
fc = 25 25 MPa and
and 175 175
mm of mm of spacing:
spacing: (a) shear-
(a) shear-slip
slip relationship; and(b)
relationship; and (b)moment-deflection
moment-deflection relationship.
relationship.
1000 1400
1200
800
1000
M (kN.m)
600
V (kN)
800
400 600
φ=10 mm φ=10 mm
φ=12.5 mm 400 φ=12.5 mm
200 φ=16 mm φ=16 mm
200
200 φ=16 mm 200 φ=16 mm
0 0
0 2 4 6 0 10 20 30 40
(a) (b)
Figure 22. Influence of transverse reinforcement for the W530x72 section, fc = 25 MPa and 175 mm of spacing: (a) shear-
slip relationship; and (b) moment-deflection relationship.
1000 1400
1200
800
1000
M (kN.m)
600
V (kN)
800
400 600
φ=10 mm φ=10 mm
φ=12.5 mm 400 φ=12.5 mm
200 φ=16 mm φ=16 mm
200
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 0 10 20 30 40 50
(a) (b)
1000 1400
1200
800
1000
M (kN.m)
600
V (kN)
800
400 600
φ=10 mm φ=10 mm
φ=12.5 mm 400 φ=12.5 mm
200 φ=16 mm φ=16 mm
200
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 0 10 20 30 40 50
(c) (d)
Figure
Figure 23. 23. Influence
of transverse reinforcement
reinforcement for for
thethe W530x72
W530x72 section
section andand
225225
mmmm of spacing:
of spacing: (a) (a) shear-slip
shear-slip relationship
relationship
for f c = 25 MPa; (b) moment-deflection relationship for fc = 25 MPa; (c) shear-slip relationship for fc = 30 MPa; and (d)
for fc = 25 MPa; (b) moment-deflection relationship for fc = 25 MPa; (c) shear-slip relationship for fc = 30 MPa; and (d)
moment-deflection relationship for fc = 30 MPa.
moment-deflection relationship for fc = 30 MPa.
It was
It was observed
observed that
that forforthethe models
models with
with 175175mm mmof of spacing,
spacing, there
there were
were some
some differ-
differ-
ences in the relationships presented in Figure 22, considering a transverse
ences in the relationships presented in Figure 22, considering a transverse reinforcement reinforcement
diameter
diameter of 12.5
of 12.5 mm mm andand
fc =fc25–30
= 25–30 MPa.
MPa. OnOnthethe other
other hand,
hand, forfor
thethe models
models withwith
225225
mmmm
of of spacing,
spacing, these
these differenceswere
differences wereobserved
observed(Figure
(Figure23)23) for
for aa transverse
reinforcementdi-
ameterofof16
diameter 16mm
mmandandsimilar
similarstrength
strengthvalues
valuesforfor concrete.
concrete. It is
It is important
important to to note
note that
that thethe
behaviors shown in Figures 22 and 23 were similar to those presented
behaviors shown in Figures 22 and 23 were similar to those presented in Figures 12 and 13. in Figures 12 and
13.
5.4. Design
5.4.
InDesign
this section, the results are presented in a summarized way, considering the ductile
behavior In(Figure 24), the
this section, themaximum
results are midspan
presentedvertical displacementway,
in a summarized for the service limit
considering thestate
ductile
forbehavior
composite floors (Figure 25), and SCI P401 [19] procedure (Figure 26); and
(Figure 24), the maximum midspan vertical displacement for the service limit considering
thestate
strength models forfloors
for composite shear(Figure
studs presented in [19,20].
25), and SCI Considering
P401 [19] procedurefull interaction
(Figure and
26); and con-
that NPA lies in the concrete slab (Equations (4)–(10)), in which Aa is the steel-section cross-
sectional area, Cc is the concrete-flange axial strength, fy is the steel-section yield strength, L
is the composite-beam length, Mpl is the plastic moment of the composite section, QR is the
shear-connector strength, tc is overall depth of the concrete flange (including the concrete
topping), Ta is the axial strength of the steel section in tension, and L ϕ is the transverse
reinforcement length.
∑ QR ≥ Aa f y (4)
0.85 f c btc ≥ A a f y (5)
Cc = 0.85 f c ba (6)

L/4
b≤ (7)
2Lφ + g
Ta = A a f y (8)
and 225 mm of spacing). On the other hand, for all W460x74 and W530x72 models, con-
below the limit value, specifically for all models of full interaction (Figure 25). Therefore,
degree" zone (MFE ≤ MRk). The

For partial interaction, the linear method was used, according to Eurocode 4 (Equa-
tion (11)), in which Mpl,a is the plastic moment of the steel section, Mpl,FULL is the plastic
sidering 225 mm of spacing, ductile behavior was observed. This means that the greater
vertical displacement. Finally, considering the calculation procedures mentioned in this
observations that were shown to be unsafe (MFE > MRk) were verified for models in which
the area of the steel cross-section and the greater the spacing between the shear studs, the
placement limit for floors (L/200), according to Eurocode 4, 52 observations were found
i.e., 120 mm providing full interaction. On the other hand, for the other spacings, partial
moment of the composite section with full shear connection, and η is the ratio of the sum
interaction degrees were 1.0, 0.7, and 0.5, respectively. As shown in Figure 24, only one
situation for the W360x51 section presented a ductile behavior (fc = 25 MPa, φ = 10 mm,
20 of 24
of the strength of the shear studs provided to the sum of the strength of the shear studs
interaction was considered. Therefore, for the spacings of 120 mm, 175 mm, 225 mm, the
another observation was that the smaller the interaction degree, the greater the midspan
For a presentation of the results, a hypothesis of the minimum spacing was made;
20 of(11)
greater the sliding in the steel–concrete interface. Respecting the midspan vertical dis-
and 225 mm of spacing). On the other hand, for all W460x74 and W530x72 models, con-
For partial interaction, the linear method was used, according to Eurocode 4 (Equa-
tion (11)), in which Mpl,a is the plastic moment of the steel section, Mpl,FULL is the plastic
sidering 225 mm of spacing, ductile behavior was observed. This means that the greater
vertical displacement. Finally, considering the calculation procedures mentioned in this

the area of the steel cross-section and the greater the spacing between the shear studs, the
placement limit for floors (L/200), according to Eurocode 4, 52 observations were found
moment of the composite section with full shear connection, and η is the ratio of the sum
degree"(fc = 25 MPa, φ = 10 mm,
24
of the strength of the shear studs provided to the sum of the strength of the shear studs
(11)
greater the sliding in the steel–concrete interface. Respecting the midspan vertical dis-
(7)
20 of (8)
(9)
(10)
25
(9)
(10)
W530x72:40-16-0.5 W530x72:40-16-0.5 W530x72:40-16-0.5 W530x72:40-16-0.5

W530x72:40-12.5-0.5 W530x72:40-12.5-0.5 W530x72:40-12.5-0.5 W530x72:40-12.5-0.5
W530x72:40-10-0.5 W530x72:40-10-0.5 W530x72:40-10-0.5 W530x72:40-10-0.5
W530x72:30-16-0.5 W530x72:30-16-0.5 W530x72:30-16-0.5 W530x72:30-16-0.5
W530x72:30-12.5-0.5 W530x72:30-12.5-0.5 W530x72:30-12.5-0.5 W530x72:30-12.5-0.5
W530x72:30-10-0.5 W530x72:30-10-0.5 W530x72:30-10-0.5 W530x72:30-10-0.5
W530x72:25-16-0.5 W530x72:25-16-0.5 W530x72:25-16-0.5 W530x72:25-16-0.5
W530x72:25-12.5-0.5 W530x72:25-12.5-0.5 W530x72:25-12.5-0.5 W530x72:25-12.5-0.5
W530x72:25-10-0.5 W530x72:25-10-0.5 W530x72:25-10-0.5 W530x72:25-10-0.5
W530x72:40-16-0.7 W530x72:40-16-0.7 W530x72:40-16-0.7 W530x72:40-16-0.7
W530x72:40-12.5-0.7 W530x72:40-12.5-0.7 W530x72:40-12.5-0.7 W530x72:40-12.5-0.7
W530x72:40-10-0.7 W530x72:40-10-0.7
were found in the conservative

W530x72:40-10-0.7 W530x72:40-10-0.7
W530x72:30-16-0.7 W530x72:30-16-0.7
"Section":"In situ concrete strength"-"Diameter"-"Interaction degree"
W530x72:30-16-0.7 W530x72:30-16-0.7
"Section":"In situ concrete strength"-"Diameter"-"Interaction degree"
)η
M pl = M pl ,a + ( M pl ,FULL − M pl ,a )η
W530x72:30-12.5-0.7 W530x72:30-12.5-0.7
Figure 24. Maximum steel–concrete interface slips at ultimate behavior.
W530x72:30-12.5-0.7 W530x72:30-12.5-0.7
section presented a ductile behavior

Figure 25. Maximum midspan vertical displacement at ultimate behavior.
W530x72:30-10-0.7 W530x72:30-10-0.7
(Figure 26). at ultimate behavior.

W530x72:30-10-0.7 W530x72:30-10-0.7
Figure 26. Comparison of finite element models vs. analytical procedures.

Figure 25. Maximum midspan vertical displacement at ultimate behavior.
W530x72:25-16-0.7 W530x72:25-16-0.7 W530x72:25-16-0.7
pl ,a
W530x72:25-16-0.7
pl , FULLbehavior.
W530x72:25-12.5-0.7 W530x72:25-12.5-0.7 W530x72:25-12.5-0.7 W530x72:25-12.5-0.7

W530x72:25-10-0.7 W530x72:25-10-0.7 W530x72:25-10-0.7 W530x72:25-10-0.7
−M
W530x72:40-16-1.0 W530x72:40-16-1.0 W530x72:40-16-1.0 W530x72:40-16-1.0

a 

2 2
strength"-"Diameter"-"Interaction
W530x72:40-12.5-1.0 W530x72:40-12.5-1.0
strength"-"Diameter"-"Interaction
W530x72:40-12.5-1.0 W530x72:40-12.5-1.0
a
W530x72:40-10-1.0 W530x72:40-10-1.0 W530x72:40-10-1.0 W530x72:40-10-1.0

W530x72:30-16-1.0 W530x72:30-16-1.0 W530x72:30-16-1.0
≤ tc
W530x72:30-16-1.0
d +t −
W530x72:30-12.5-1.0 W530x72:30-12.5-1.0 W530x72:30-12.5-1.0 W530x72:30-12.5-1.0

2Lφ + g
W530x72:30-10-1.0 W530x72:30-10-1.0
,a at ultimate
W530x72:30-10-1.0
≤ tc
W530x72:30-10-1.0
M pl = Ta  + tc − c
W530x72:25-16-1.0 W530x72:25-16-1.0 W530x72:25-16-1.0 W530x72:25-16-1.0

Ta = Aa fy
Ta fcb
W530x72:25-12.5-1.0 W530x72:25-12.5-1.0 W530x72:25-12.5-1.0 W530x72:25-12.5-1.0

L / 4
W530x72:25-10-1.0 W530x72:25-10-1.0 W530x72:25-10-1.0 W530x72:25-10-1.0

W460x74:40-16-0.5 W460x74:40-16-0.5 W460x74:40-16-0.5
2 2
W460x74:40-16-0.5
d
0.85 f c b
+(M
Ta
0.85
W460x74:40-12.5-0.5 W460x74:40-12.5-0.5 W460x74:40-12.5-0.5 W460x74:40-12.5-0.5

W460x74:40-10-0.5 W460x74:40-10-0.5 W460x74:40-10-0.5 W460x74:40-10-0.5
b≤
W460x74:30-16-0.5 W460x74:30-16-0.5 W460x74:30-16-0.5
W460x74:30-16-0.5
a
W460x74:30-12.5-0.5 W460x74:30-12.5-0.5
T
W460x74:30-12.5-0.5 W460x74:30-12.5-0.5
W460x74:30-10-0.5 W460x74:30-10-0.5 slips W460x74:30-10-0.5 W460x74:30-10-0.5
a=
W460x74:25-16-0.5 W460x74:25-16-0.5 W460x74:25-16-0.5 W460x74:25-16-0.5

W460x74:25-12.5-0.5 W460x74:25-12.5-0.5
a=
pl
W460x74:25-12.5-0.5 W460x74:25-12.5-0.5
pl
W460x74:25-10-0.5 W460x74:25-10-0.5 W460x74:25-10-0.5 W460x74:25-10-0.5
M =M Figure 24. Maximum steel–concrete interface

W460x74:40-16-0.7 W460x74:40-16-0.7 W460x74:40-16-0.7 W460x74:40-16-0.7
M
W460x74:40-12.5-0.7 W460x74:40-12.5-0.7 W460x74:40-12.5-0.7 W460x74:40-12.5-0.7

W460x74:40-10-0.7 W460x74:40-10-0.7 W460x74:40-10-0.7 W460x74:40-10-0.7
of 60 observations
W460x74:30-16-0.7 W460x74:30-16-0.7 W460x74:30-16-0.7
needed for full shear connection.
W460x74:30-16-0.7
needed for full shear connection.

W460x74:30-12.5-0.7 W460x74:30-12.5-0.7 W460x74:30-12.5-0.7
pl
W460x74:30-12.5-0.7
considered
W460x74:30-10-0.7 W460x74:30-10-0.7 W460x74:30-10-0.7 W460x74:30-10-0.7
W460x74:25-16-0.7 W460x74:25-16-0.7 W460x74:25-16-0.7 W460x74:25-16-0.7
W460x74:25-12.5-0.7 W460x74:25-12.5-0.7 W460x74:25-12.5-0.7 W460x74:25-12.5-0.7
W460x74:25-10-0.7 W460x74:25-10-0.7 W460x74:25-10-0.7 W460x74:25-10-0.7
W460x74:40-16-1.0 W460x74:40-16-1.0 W460x74:40-16-1.0
W360x51
W460x74:40-16-1.0
W460x74:40-12.5-1.0 W460x74:40-12.5-1.0 W460x74:40-12.5-1.0 W460x74:40-12.5-1.0
midspan
W460x74:40-10-1.0 W460x74:40-10-1.0 W460x74:40-10-1.0 W460x74:40-10-1.0
concrete
situ concrete
W460x74:30-16-1.0 W460x74:30-16-1.0 W460x74:30-16-1.0 W460x74:30-16-1.0
W460x74:30-12.5-1.0 W460x74:30-12.5-1.0 W460x74:30-12.5-1.0 W460x74:30-12.5-1.0
W460x74:30-10-1.0 W460x74:30-10-1.0 W460x74:30-10-1.0 W460x74:30-10-1.0
Maximum was
W460x74:25-16-1.0 W460x74:25-16-1.0 W460x74:25-16-1.0 W460x74:25-16-1.0
W460x74:25-12.5-1.0 W460x74:25-12.5-1.0 W460x74:25-12.5-1.0 W460x74:25-12.5-1.0
W460x74:25-10-1.0 W460x74:25-10-1.0 W460x74:25-10-1.0 W460x74:25-10-1.0
situthe
W360x51:40-16-0.5 W360x51:40-16-0.5 W360x51:40-16-0.5 W360x51:40-16-0.5
interaction
section, a total
W360x51:40-12.5-0.5 W360x51:40-12.5-0.5 W360x51:40-12.5-0.5 W360x51:40-12.5-0.5
W360x51:40-10-0.5 W360x51:40-10-0.5 W360x51:40-10-0.5 W360x51:40-10-0.5
situation for
W360x51:30-16-0.5 W360x51:30-16-0.5 W360x51:30-16-0.5 W360x51:30-16-0.5
W360x51:30-12.5-0.5 W360x51:30-12.5-0.5 W360x51:30-12.5-0.5 W360x51:30-12.5-0.5
"Section":"In
"Section":"In
W360x51:30-10-0.5 W360x51:30-10-0.5 W360x51:30-10-0.5 W360x51:30-10-0.5
W360x51:25-16-0.5 W360x51:25-16-0.5 W360x51:25-16-0.5 W360x51:25-16-0.5
W360x51:25-12.5-0.5 W360x51:25-12.5-0.5 W360x51:25-12.5-0.5 W360x51:25-12.5-0.5
W360x51:25-10-0.5 W360x51:25-10-0.5 W360x51:25-10-0.5 W360x51:25-10-0.5
full25.
W360x51:40-16-0.7 W360x51:40-16-0.7 W360x51:40-16-0.7 W360x51:40-16-0.7
W360x51:40-12.5-0.7 W360x51:40-12.5-0.7 W360x51:40-12.5-0.7 W360x51:40-12.5-0.7
W360x51:40-10-0.7
Figure
W360x51:40-10-0.7 W360x51:40-10-0.7 W360x51:40-10-0.7
W360x51:30-16-0.7 W360x51:30-16-0.7 W360x51:30-16-0.7 W360x51:30-16-0.7
W360x51:30-12.5-0.7 W360x51:30-12.5-0.7 W360x51:30-12.5-0.7 W360x51:30-12.5-0.7
W360x51:30-10-0.7 W360x51:30-10-0.7 W360x51:30-10-0.7 W360x51:30-10-0.7
W360x51:25-16-0.7 W360x51:25-16-0.7 W360x51:25-16-0.7 W360x51:25-16-0.7
W360x51:25-12.5-0.7 W360x51:25-12.5-0.7 W360x51:25-12.5-0.7 W360x51:25-12.5-0.7
W360x51:25-10-0.7 W360x51:25-10-0.7 W360x51:25-10-0.7 W360x51:25-10-0.7
W360x51:40-16-1.0 W360x51:40-16-1.0 W360x51:40-16-1.0 W360x51:40-16-1.0
Araújo et al.
W360x51:40-12.5-1.0 W360x51:40-12.5-1.0 W360x51:40-12.5-1.0 W360x51:40-12.5-1.0
W360x51:40-10-1.0 W360x51:40-10-1.0 W360x51:40-10-1.0
SCI P401
W360x51:40-10-1.0
W360x51:30-16-1.0 W360x51:30-16-1.0 W360x51:30-16-1.0 W360x51:30-16-1.0

Sustainability 2021, 13, x
W360x51:30-12.5-1.0 W360x51:30-12.5-1.0
Sustainability 2021, 13, x

W360x51:30-12.5-1.0 W360x51:30-12.5-1.0
W360x51:30-10-1.0 W360x51:30-10-1.0 W360x51:30-10-1.0 W360x51:30-10-1.0
FE
W360x51:25-16-1.0 W360x51:25-16-1.0 W360x51:25-16-1.0 W360x51:25-16-1.0
W360x51:25-12.5-1.0 W360x51:25-12.5-1.0 W360x51:25-12.5-1.0 W360x51:25-12.5-1.0
W360x51:25-10-1.0 W360x51:25-10-1.0 W360x51:25-10-1.0 W360x51:25-10-1.0
1500
1200
900
600
300
0
50
40
30
20
10
50
40
30
20
10
0
10
0
Mid-span vertical displacement (mm) Slip (mm) Mid-span vertical displacement (mm) M (kN.m)
For partial interaction, the linear method was used, according to Eurocode 4 (Equation
(11)), in which Mpl,a is the plastic moment of the steel section, Mpl,FULL is the plastic moment
of the composite section with full shear connection, and η is the ratio of the sum of the
strength of the shear studs provided to the sum of the strength of the shear studs needed
for full shear connection.

M pl = M pl,a + M pl,FULL − M pl,a η (11)
situation for the W360 × 51 section presented a ductile behavior (fc = 25 MPa, ϕ = 10 mm,
and 225 mm of spacing). On the other hand, for all W460 × 74 and W530 × 72 models,
considering 225 mm of spacing, ductile behavior was observed. This means that the greater
the area of the steel cross-section and the greater the spacing between the shear studs,
the greater the sliding in the steel–concrete interface. Respecting the midspan vertical
displacement limit for floors (L/200), according to Eurocode 4, 52 observations were found
Sustainability 2021, 13, x vertical displacement. Finally, considering the calculation procedures mentioned21inofthis 24
section, a total of 60 observations were found in the conservative zone (MFE ≤ MRk ). The
observations that were shown to be unsafe (MFE > MRk ) were verified for models in which
full interaction was considered (Figure 26).
Figure 26. Comparison of finite element models vs. analytical procedures.
5.5. Comparative Analyses
5.5. Comparative Analyses
In this section, a comparison of the models developed in the present work was
In this with
performed section, a comparison
those ofFerreira
presented by the models
et al.developed in27).
[25] (Figure the present work was per-
formed with those presented by Ferreira et al. [25] (Figure 27).
1500
150 mm
265 mm
1200
M (kN.m)
900
600
300
0
W360x51:25-10-1.0
W360x51:25-12.5-1.0
W360x51:25-16-1.0
W360x51:30-10-1.0
W360x51:30-12.5-1.0
W360x51:30-16-1.0
W360x51:40-10-1.0
W360x51:40-12.5-1.0
W360x51:40-16-1.0
W360x51:25-10-0.7
W360x51:25-12.5-0.7
W360x51:25-16-0.7
W360x51:30-10-0.7
W360x51:30-12.5-0.7
W360x51:30-16-0.7
W360x51:40-10-0.7
W360x51:40-12.5-0.7
W360x51:40-16-0.7
W360x51:25-10-0.5
W360x51:25-12.5-0.5
W360x51:25-16-0.5
W360x51:30-10-0.5
W360x51:30-12.5-0.5
W360x51:30-16-0.5
W360x51:40-10-0.5
W360x51:40-12.5-0.5
W360x51:40-16-0.5
W460x74:25-10-1.0
W460x74:25-12.5-1.0
W460x74:25-16-1.0
W460x74:30-10-1.0
W460x74:30-12.5-1.0
W460x74:30-16-1.0
W460x74:40-10-1.0
W460x74:40-12.5-1.0
W460x74:40-16-1.0
W460x74:25-10-0.7
W460x74:25-12.5-0.7
W460x74:25-16-0.7
W460x74:30-10-0.7
W460x74:30-12.5-0.7
W460x74:30-16-0.7
W460x74:40-10-0.7
W460x74:40-12.5-0.7
W460x74:40-16-0.7
W460x74:25-10-0.5
W460x74:25-12.5-0.5
W460x74:25-16-0.5
W460x74:30-10-0.5
W460x74:30-12.5-0.5
W460x74:30-16-0.5
W460x74:40-10-0.5
W460x74:40-12.5-0.5
W460x74:40-16-0.5
W530x72:25-10-1.0
W530x72:25-12.5-1.0
W530x72:25-16-1.0
W530x72:30-10-1.0
W530x72:30-12.5-1.0
W530x72:30-16-1.0
W530x72:40-10-1.0
W530x72:40-12.5-1.0
W530x72:40-16-1.0
W530x72:25-10-0.7
W530x72:25-12.5-0.7
W530x72:25-16-0.7
W530x72:30-10-0.7
W530x72:30-12.5-0.7
W530x72:30-16-0.7
W530x72:40-10-0.7
W530x72:40-12.5-0.7
W530x72:40-16-0.7
W530x72:25-10-0.5
W530x72:25-12.5-0.5
W530x72:25-16-0.5
W530x72:30-10-0.5
W530x72:30-12.5-0.5
W530x72:30-16-0.5
W530x72:40-10-0.5
W530x72:40-12.5-0.5
W530x72:40-16-0.5
"Section":"in situ concrete strength"-"Diameter"-"Interaction degree"
Figure
Figure 27.
27. Comparative
Comparative analyses
analyses between
between 150
150 mm
mm and
and 265
265 mm
mm PCHCS
PCHCS depth
depth with
with concrete
concrete topping.
topping.
As
As noted,
noted,in insome
somemodels,
models,thethehigher
higherPCHCS
PCHCS provided
provided greater strength.
greater strength.This differ-
This dif-
ence reached
ference a maximum
reached a maximum of 30%, considering
of 30%, the ratio
considering of theof150
the ratio themm-depth
150 mm-depthPCHCS mod-
PCHCS
els to the
models to 265 mm-depth
the 265 mm-depth PCHCS
PCHCS models.
models. These
Thesevalues
valueswere
weremeasured
measuredconsidering
considering the
W360x51 section. With the increase
W360 × 51 section. With the increase in in the steel cross-section (sections
steel cross-section (sections W460 W460x74
× 74 and
W530x72),
W530 × 72), this difference
this differencewas
wasnotnotsososignificant.
significant.This
Thisdemonstrated
demonstratedthat thatfor
for the
the models
studied,
studied, itit was
was not
not advantageous
advantageous to to increase
increase the
the depth
depth of the PCHCS, since the collapse
was
was determined
determined by the slab. In In addition,
addition, the
the greater
greater the
the depth
depth of of the
the hollow-core
hollow-core slab, the
greater
greater the
the weight
weight ofof the
the structural
structural system
system duedue to
to the
the higher
higher consumption
consumption of of concrete,
concrete, and
thus the higher the costs. Therefore, from a sustainable and structural-efficiency point of
view, the 150 mm depth PCHCS was the best option of the models studied.
6. Conclusions
Steel-Concrete composite beams with precast hollow-core slabs are a sustainable so-
thus the higher the costs. Therefore, from a sustainable and structural-efficiency point of
view, the 150 mm depth PCHCS was the best option of the models studied.
6. Conclusions
Steel-Concrete composite beams with precast hollow-core slabs are a sustainable
solution, and a better understanding of their parameters will yield more efficient designs.
The present study developed a reliable finite element model to investigate some limitations
imposed in the design recommendations of Steel-Concrete composite beams with precast
hollow-core slabs, such as hollow-core-slab depth, transverse reinforcement rate, and
shear-stud spacing. A parametric study was carried out, considering a 265 mm hollow-core
unit with a concrete topping, since the SCI P401 recommendation is only applicable for
150–250 mm-deep hollow-core units. The parameters investigated were the in situ concrete
strength, the transverse reinforcement rate, the interaction degree, and the steel cross-
section. In total, 81 models were analyzed. The numerical results were compared with
models of Steel-Concrete composite beams models, considering a 150 mm hollow-core unit
with a concrete topping. In general, for the models that were considered under the partial-
interaction hypothesis, there was a better efficiency of the structural system, providing
greater deformations. Therefore, when designing Steel-Concrete composite beams with
hollow-core slabs, considering partial interaction is a viable option, since it reduces the
cost of the project, due to the smaller number of shear studs to be used, as well as the labor.
Specifically, considering the parameters analyzed, it was concluded that:
1. In all models, the ultimate strength was reached by excessive cracking of the precast
hollow-core slab. This occurred because the neutral plastic axis lay within the -core
slab, a factor that generated tensile stresses. Thus, dimensioning Steel-Concrete
composite beams with deeper hollow-core slabs is not advantageous. This is because
the resistance is governed by the concrete slab, a factor that does not take advantage of
the steel section. Therefore, in these analyzed models, there was a waste of material.
2. The greater the area of the steel cross-section, the greater the use of the steel section.
When there is a larger steel cross-section, there is an increase in the plastic axial
strength of the steel profile. This increase causes the neutral plastic axis to descend
toward the steel profile, causing only compression stresses in the hollow-core slab.
3. The greater the spacing of the shear studs, the greater the use of the steel section.
When considering the hypothesis of partial interaction, as presented for the models
with 175 mm and 225 mm of spacing, the structural system can achieve ductile
behavior, a factor that favors the ability of the structural elements to deform without
reaching the ultimate strength. The use of a smaller number of shear connectors
(175 mm and 225 mm models) provided resistance equivalent to the 120 mm models.
Therefore, using a lower amount of material for the design of a structural system, as
was the case with modeled Steel-Concrete composite beams, from the point of view
of sustainability, there is a reduction in the embodied energy, since a smaller number
of installed connectors will require a smaller amount of electricity consumption.
4. The transverse reinforcement rate had little influence on the ultimate strength of the
models analyzed. This was because in most models, the fragile behavior was verified.
5. With the variation of the in situ concrete strength, there were no significant differences
in the ultimate strength. Therefore, the use of lower in situ concrete strength can be
advantageous; that is, the lower the concrete resistance, the greater the possibility
that the plastic neutral axis will lie within the steel section. However, it is worth
mentioning that the strength of concrete is also related to durability, a factor that
certainly influences the life cycle of the structural element. The greater the durability
of the structural system, the less the need for excessive maintenance, thus contributing
to the reduction of waste and embodied energy.
6. Ductile behavior was observed for models with 225 mm of spacing, considering the
W460 × 74 and W530 × 72 sections. It also was verified that the lower the interaction
degree, the greater the midspan vertical displacement, which may exceed the limit
of L/200.
7. Regarding the verification of strength with the calculation procedure, some models
that considered full interaction proved to be unsafe (MFE ≤ MRk ). On the other hand,
all observations considering partial interaction proved to be safe (MFE > MRk ).
8. The numerical models with a 265 mm hollow-core unit presented greater resistance
than the models with a150 mm hollow-core unit, considering the W360 × 51 section.
However, for the W460 × 74 and W530 × 72 sections, there were no significant
differences. The basic difference between the models compared was 115 mm of
precast concrete. Therefore, for the numerical models evaluated, using a smaller
amount of precast concrete provided a better efficiency of the structural system.
The use of a lower volume of concrete in a structural project provides a reduction
in the structure’s own weight, and in terms of sustainability, a lower amount of
CO2 emissions.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, F.P.V.F. and K.D.T.; methodology, F.P.V.F., K.D.T. and
S.D.N.; software, F.P.V.F.; validation, F.P.V.F.; investigation, F.P.V.F.; writing—original draft prepa-
ration, F.P.V.F., K.D.T., C.H.M. and S.D.N.; writing—review and editing, F.P.V.F., K.D.T., C.H.M.
and S.D.N.; visualization, K.D.T., C.H.M. and S.D.N.; supervision, S.D.N.; project administration,
S.D.N.; funding acquisition, F.P.V.F. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of
the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) (grant number
#2018/22803-1).
Acknowledgments: The authors would like to thank Construção Metálica—Gerdau Aços Brasil for
making available the data related to COPPETEC, PEC-18541.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. Cabeza, L.F.; Boquera, L.; Chàfer, M.; Vérez, D. Embodied energy and embodied carbon of structural building materials:
Worldwide progress and barriers through literature map analysis. Energy Build. 2021, 231, 110612. [CrossRef]
2. Whitworth, A.H.; Tsavdaridis, K.D. Genetic algorithm for embodied energy optimisation of steel-concrete composite beams.
Sustainability 2020, 12, 3102. [CrossRef]
3. Whitworth, A.; Tsavdaridis, K. Embodied energy optimization of steel-concrete composite beams using a genetic algorithm.
Procedia Manuf. 2020, 44, 417–424. [CrossRef]
4. European Committee for Standardization. EN 1994-1-1: Eurocode 4—Design of Composite Steel and Concrete Structures—Part 1-1:
General Rules for Buildings; European Committee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium, 2004.
5. Ibrahim, I.; Elliott, K.; Abdullah, R.; Kueh, A.; Sarbini, N. Experimental study on the shear behaviour of precast concrete hollow
core slabs with concrete topping. Eng. Struct. 2016, 125, 80–90. [CrossRef]
6. Baran, E. Effects of cast-in-place concrete topping on flexural response of precast concrete hollow-core slabs. Eng. Struct. 2015, 98,
109–117. [CrossRef]
7. Girhammar, U.A.; Pajari, M. Tests and analysis on shear strength of composite slabs of hollow core units and concrete topping.
Constr. Build. Mater. 2008, 22, 1708–1722. [CrossRef]
8. Araújo, D.D.L.; Sales, M.W.R.; Silva, R.P.M.; Antunes, C.D.F.M.; Ferreira, M.D.A. Shear strength of prestressed 160 mm deep
hollow core slabs. Eng. Struct. 2020, 218, 110723. [CrossRef]
9. Albero, V.; Saura, H.; Hospitaler, A.; Montalvà, J.; Romero, M.L. Optimal design of prestressed concrete hollow core slabs taking
into account its fire resistance. Adv. Eng. Softw. 2018, 122, 81–92. [CrossRef]
10. De Nardin, S.; El Debs, A.L. State of the art of Steel-Concrete composite structures in Brazil. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Civ. Eng. 2013,
166, 20–27. [CrossRef]
11. Lam, D. Capacities of headed stud shear connectors in composite steel beams with precast hollowcore slabs. J. Constr. Steel Res.
2007, 63, 1160–1174. [CrossRef]
12. Tawadrous, R.; Morcous, G. Shear strength of deep hollow-core slabs. ACI Struct. J. 2018, 115, 699–709. [CrossRef]
13. Ahmed, K.E.-S.; Abdulrahman, M.; Alhozaimy, A.M. Web shear resistance of prestressed precast deep hollow core slabs. Struct. J.
2016, 116, 139–150. [CrossRef]
14. De Souza, P.T.; Kataoka, M.N.; El Debs, A.L.H. Experimental and numerical analysis of the push-out test on shear studs in hollow
core slabs. Eng. Struct. 2017, 147, 398–409. [CrossRef]
15. Ahmed, I.M.; Tsavdaridis, K.D. Life cycle assessment (LCA) and cost (LCC) studies of lightweight composite flooring systems. J.
Build. Eng. 2018, 20, 624–633. [CrossRef]
16. Dong, Y.H.; Jaillon, L.; Chu, P.; Poon, C. Comparing carbon emissions of precast and cast-in-situ construction methods—A case
study of high-rise private building. Constr. Build. Mater. 2015, 99, 39–53. [CrossRef]
17. Lam, D. Composite Steel Beams Using Precast Concrete Hollow Core Floor Slabs. 1998. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Nottingham,
Nottingham, UK, 1998.
18. Batista, E.M.; Landesmann, A. Análise experimental de vigas mistas de aço e concreto compostas por lajes alveolares e perfis
laminados. COPPETEC, PEC-18541 2016. Unpublished.
19. Gouchman, G.H. Design of Composite Beams Using Precast Concrete Slabs in Accordance with EUROCODE 4; The Steel Construction
Institute: London, UK, 2014.
20. Araújo, D.D.L.; Sales, M.W.R.; de Paulo, S.M.; de Cresce El, A.L. Headed steel stud connectors for composite steel beams with
precast hollow-core slabs with structural topping. Eng. Struct. 2016, 107, 135–150. [CrossRef]
21. Lam, D.; Elliott, K.S.; Nethercot, D.A. Experiments on composite steel beams with precast concrete hollow core floor slabs. Proc.
Inst. Civ. Eng. Struct. Build. 2000, 140, 127–138. [CrossRef]
22. Lam, D.; Elliott, K.; Nethercot, D. Parametric study on composite steel beams with precast concrete hollow core floor slabs. J.
Constr. Steel Res. 2000, 54, 283–304. [CrossRef]
23. El-Lobody, E.; Lam, D. Modelling of headed stud in steel-precast composite beams. Steel Compos. Struct. 2002, 2,
24. Hicks, S.J.; Lawson, R.M. Design of Composite Beams Using Precast Concrete Slabs; The Steel Construction Institute:
London, UK, 2003.
25. Ferreira, F.P.V.; Martins, C.H.; De Nardin, S. A parametric study of steel-concrete composite beams with hollow core slabs and
concrete topping. Structures 2020, 28, 276–296. [CrossRef]
26. Ferreira, F.P.V.; Martins, C.H.; De Nardin, S. Advances in composite beams with web openings and composite cellular beams. J.
Constr. Steel Res. 2020, 172, 106182. [CrossRef]
27. Walraven, J.C.; Mercx, W.P.M. The bearing capacity of prestressed hollow core slabs. Heron 1983, 28, 1–46.
28. Nguyen, T.H.; Tan, K.-H.; Kanda, T. Investigations on web-shear behavior of deep precast, prestressed concrete hollow core slabs.
Eng. Struct. 2019, 183, 579–593. [CrossRef]
29. Joo, H.-E.; Han, S.-J.; Park, M.-K.; Kim, K.S. Shear tests of deep hollow core slabs strengthened by core-filling. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10,
1709. [CrossRef]
30. Michelini, E.; Bernardi, P.; Cerioni, R.; Belletti, B. Experimental and numerical assessment of flexural and shear behavior of
precast prestressed deep hollow-core slabs. Int. J. Concr. Struct. Mater. 2020, 14, 1–17. [CrossRef]
31. Brunesi, E.; Bolognini, D.; Nascimbene, R. Evaluation of the shear capacity of precast-prestressed hollow core slabs: Numerical
and experimental comparisons. Mater. Struct. 2014, 48, 1503–1521. [CrossRef]
32. Palmer, K.D.; Schultz, A.E. Experimental investigation of the web-shear strength of deep hollow-core units. PCI J. 2011, 56,
33. ABAQUS 6.18 (2016) FEA computer software, Version 6.12, Product.
34. Ferreira, F.P.V.; Rossi, A.; Martins, C.H. Lateral-torsional buckling of cellular beams according to the possible updating of EC3. J.
Constr. Steel Res. 2019, 153, 222–242. [CrossRef]
35. Ferreira, F.P.V.; Martins, C.H. LRFD for lateral-torsional buckling resistance of cellular beams. Int. J. Civ. Eng. 2019, 18,
36. Rossi, A.; Ferreira, F.P.V.; Martins, C.H.; Júnior, E.C.M. Assessment of lateral distortional buckling resistance in welded I-beams. J.
Constr. Steel Res. 2020, 166, 105924. [CrossRef]
37. Ferreira, F.P.V.; Martins, C.H.; De Nardin, S. Assessment of web post buckling resistance in steel-concrete composite cellular
beams. Thin-Walled Struct. 2021, 158, 106969. [CrossRef]
38. Ferreira, F.P.V.; Martins, C.H.; De Nardin, S. Sensitivity analysis of composite cellular beams to constitutive material models and
concrete fracture. Int. J. Struct. Stab. Dyn. 2021, 21, 2150008. [CrossRef]
39. Ferreira, F.P.V.; Tsavdaridis, K.D.; Martins, C.H.; De Nardin, S. Buckling and post-buckling analyses of composite cellular beams.
Compos. Struct. 2021, 262, 113616. [CrossRef]
40. Ferreira, F.P.V.; Tsavdaridis, K.D.; Martins, C.H.; De Nardin, S. Ultimate strength prediction of Steel-Concrete composite cellular
beams with PCHCS. Eng. Struct. 2021, 236, 112082. [CrossRef]
41. Chen, S.; Jia, Y. Numerical investigation of inelastic buckling of Steel-Concrete composite beams prestressed with external tendons.
Thin-Walled Struct. 2010, 48, 233–242. [CrossRef]
42. Zhou, W.-B.; Yan, W.-J. Refined nonlinear finite element modelling towards ultimate bending moment calculation for concrete
composite beams under negative moment. Thin-Walled Struct. 2017, 116, 201–211. [CrossRef]
43. El-Lobody, E.; Lam, D. Finite element analysis of steel-concrete composite girders. Adv. Struct. Eng. 2003, 6, 267–281. [CrossRef]
44. Hillerborg, A.; Modéer, M.; Petersson, P.-E. Analysis of crack formation and crack growth in concrete by means of fracture
mechanics and finite elements. Cem. Concr. Res. 1976, 6, 773–781. [CrossRef]
45. Lubliner, J.; Oliver, J.; Oller, S.; Oñate, E. A plastic-damage model for concrete. Int. J. Solids Struct. 1989, 25, 299–326. [CrossRef]
46. Lee, J.; Fenves, G.L. Plastic-damage model for cyclic loading of concrete structures. J. Eng. Mech. 1998, 124, 892–900. [CrossRef]
47. Genikomsou, A.S.; Polak, M.A. Finite element analysis of punching shear of concrete slabs using damaged plasticity model in
ABAQUS. Eng. Struct. 2015, 98, 38–48. [CrossRef]
48. Duvaut, G.; Lions, J.L. Inequalities in Mechanics and Physics; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1976; Volume 219.
49. Behnam, H.; Kuang, J.; Samali, B. Parametric finite element analysis of RC wide beam-column connections. Comput. Struct. 2018,
205, 28–44. [CrossRef]
50. Stress-strain relationship for plain concrete in compression. ACI J. Proc. 1985, 82, 797–804. [CrossRef]
51. Carreira, D.J.; Chu, K.H. Stress-strain relatonship for reinforced concrete in tension. J. Am. Concr. Inst. 1986, 83, 21–28.
52. Pathirana, S.W.; Uy, B.; Mirza, O.; Zhu, X. Flexural behaviour of composite steel–concrete beams utilising blind bolt shear
connectors. Eng. Struct. 2016, 114, 181–194. [CrossRef]
53. Liu, X.; Bradford, M.A.; Chen, Q.-J.; Ban, H. Finite element modelling of Steel-Concrete composite beams with high-strength
friction-grip bolt shear connectors. Finite Elem. Anal. Des. 2016, 108, 54–65. [CrossRef]
54. Sjaarda, M.; Porter, T.; West, J.S.; Walbridge, S. Fatigue behavior of welded shear studs in precast composite beams. J. Bridge Eng.
2017, 22, 04017089. [CrossRef]
55. Guezouli, S.; Lachal, A. Numerical analysis of frictional contact effects in push-out tests. Eng. Struct. 2012, 40, 39–50. [CrossRef]
56. Crisfield, M. A fast incremental/iterative solution procedure that handles “snap-through”. Comput. Struct. 1981, 13,
55–62. [CrossRef]
57. Crisfield, M.A. Snap-through and snap-back response in concrete structures and the dangers of under-integration. Int. J. Numer.
Methods Eng. 1986, 22, 751–767. [CrossRef]
58. Maewal, A.; Nachbar, W. Stable postbuckling equilibria of axially compressed, elastic circular cylindrical shells: A finite-element
analysis and comparison with experiments. J. Appl. Mech. 1977, 44, 475–481. [CrossRef]

Steel-Concrete Composite Beams With Precast Hollow-Core Slabs: A Sustainable Solution

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Steel-Concrete Composite Beams With Precast Hollow-Core Slabs: A Sustainable Solution

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

sustainability

Abstract: Industrialization of construction makes building operation more environmental friendly

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral

Sustainability 2021, 13, 4230. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13084230 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Table 2. Concrete Damage Plasticity input parameters [25,38,40].

Parameter Value Ref.

Sustainability 2021, 13, 4230 6 of 25

Figure 3. Surface-to-surface interactions.

Table 3. Comparison of finite element analyses and tests results.

4. Numerical Model: Parametric Study

Sustainability 2021, 13, x 9 of 24

Figure 7. LP26 units (in mm).

5.1. W360x51 Section

Sustainability 2021, 13, x 10 of 24

Sustainability 2021, 13, x 11 of 24

Sustainability 2021, 13, 4230 Figure

800 800 1000

Considering 120 mm of spacing between the sh

Figure 14. Final configuration for the W460x74 section, f = 25

For the fcc == 25

Sustainability 2021, 13, x 15 of 24

Sustainability 2021, 13, x Figure 21.Final

degree" zone (MFE ≤ MRk). The

vertical displacement. Finally, considering the calculation procedures mentioned in this

vertical displacement. Finally, considering the calculation procedures mentioned in this

W530x72:40-16-0.5 W530x72:40-16-0.5 W530x72:40-16-0.5 W530x72:40-16-0.5

were found in the conservative

section presented a ductile behavior

(Figure 26). at ultimate behavior.

Figure 26. Comparison of finite element models vs. analytical procedures.

W530x72:25-12.5-0.7 W530x72:25-12.5-0.7 W530x72:25-12.5-0.7 W530x72:25-12.5-0.7

W530x72:40-16-1.0 W530x72:40-16-1.0 W530x72:40-16-1.0 W530x72:40-16-1.0

W530x72:40-10-1.0 W530x72:40-10-1.0 W530x72:40-10-1.0 W530x72:40-10-1.0

W530x72:30-12.5-1.0 W530x72:30-12.5-1.0 W530x72:30-12.5-1.0 W530x72:30-12.5-1.0

W530x72:25-16-1.0 W530x72:25-16-1.0 W530x72:25-16-1.0 W530x72:25-16-1.0

W530x72:25-12.5-1.0 W530x72:25-12.5-1.0 W530x72:25-12.5-1.0 W530x72:25-12.5-1.0

W530x72:25-10-1.0 W530x72:25-10-1.0 W530x72:25-10-1.0 W530x72:25-10-1.0

W460x74:40-12.5-0.5 W460x74:40-12.5-0.5 W460x74:40-12.5-0.5 W460x74:40-12.5-0.5

W460x74:30-16-0.5 W460x74:30-16-0.5 W460x74:30-16-0.5

W460x74:25-16-0.5 W460x74:25-16-0.5 W460x74:25-16-0.5 W460x74:25-16-0.5

W460x74:25-10-0.5 W460x74:25-10-0.5 W460x74:25-10-0.5 W460x74:25-10-0.5

M =M Figure 24. Maximum steel–concrete interface

W460x74:40-12.5-0.7 W460x74:40-12.5-0.7 W460x74:40-12.5-0.7 W460x74:40-12.5-0.7

needed for full shear connection.

W360x51:30-16-1.0 W360x51:30-16-1.0 W360x51:30-16-1.0 W360x51:30-16-1.0

Sustainability 2021, 13, x

"Section":"in situ concrete strength"-"Diameter"-"Interaction degree"

You might also like