Engineering Structures 192 (2019) 1–17

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct

Structural behaviour of steel-timber composite (STC) beam-to-column T

connections with double angle web cleats subjected to hogging bending
moment
⁎
F. Nouri, H.R. Valipour , M.A. Bradford
Centre for Infrastructure Engineering and Safety, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, UNSW Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: This paper deals with an experimental study of steel-timber composite (STC) beam-to-column connections with
Rotation capacity double web angles, with the aim of developing an efficient composite flooring system that exhibits superior
Semi-rigid structural performance yet is simple and cost-effective from a construction perspective. The experimental pro-
Steel-timber composite gram involved the testing of six cruciform subassemblies representing internal beam-to-column connections
Web angle
subjected to negative (hogging) bending moments. In four specimens, STC beams were connected to the flanges
of a universal column by double web angles. Additionally, a specimen with bare steel beams and another spe-
cimen with steel-concrete composite (SCC) beams were fabricated and tested to provide benchmarks for com-
paring the structural behaviour of the STC with bare steel and SCC beam-to-column connections. It is shown that
the STC connections exhibit semi-rigid behaviour with negative bending moment and rotation capacities larger
than that of SCC connections. Lastly, an analytical model which is an extension of the existing component-based
method is proposed for estimating the negative bending moment capacity of the STC connections with double
web angles.

1. Introduction
Composite floors are widely used in the building industry, owing to
their versatility, ease of construction and satisfactory performance
under service, ultimate state and extreme loading conditions.
Significant attention has been paid to the development of new com-
posite floors with the focus being steel-concrete and/or timber-concrete
composite (TCC) floors. In particular, the behaviour of the shear con-
nection (between the slab and beams) which has a significant role in the
structural performance of the composite floors have been the subject of
extensive experimental and numerical studies in the past three decades
[1,2]. Laboratory static and cyclic push-out tests have been carried out
to obtain the load-slip response [3–5], and to evaluate the composite
efficiency, stiffness, strength, ductility and fatigue life of different types
of connectors, i.e. shear studs, bolts, grouted pockets and the like [6].
Moreover, 4-point bending tests have been conducted on composite
beams with steel trapezoidal decking [7], and deconstructable bolted
shear connectors [8] to evaluate the service stiffness, peak load carrying
capacity, failure modes and load versus deflection response of compo-
site floors.
Steel-concrete composite floors comprising of reinforced concrete
(RC) slabs connected to steel girders are the most commonly used
composite solutions in the construction industry. However, steel and
concrete both are carbon and energy-intensive materials with a con-
siderable contribution to anthropogenic CO2 emissions. Owing to ad-
vancements in manufacturing engineering wood products such as la-
minated veneer lumber (LVL), cross-laminated timber (CLT) and glued
laminated timber (GLT) with improved dimensional stability and me-
chanical properties, attempts have been made to reduce the self-weight
and improve the sustainability of composite floors by replacing the steel
beams with light-weight timber joists and developing timber-concrete
composite floors [2]. Extensive experimental and analytical studies
undertaken in the past decade have demonstrated the acceptable
structural performance of these floors in service (short- and long-term
deflections and vibration), ultimate and extreme loading conditions.
Innovative shear connectors with higher stiffness and strength than that
of the conventional mechanical shear connectors have been proposed
for TCC floors/beams [2,9,10] and long-term performance of the TTC
beams with screw shear connectors have been also studied experi-
mentally and numerically [11,12]. However, the typically permanent
connections between the cast in-situ concrete slabs and steel girders or
timber joists are not conducive to deconstruction and recycling or

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: h.valipour@unsw.edu.au (H.R. Valipour).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.04.092
Received 7 August 2018; Received in revised form 29 March 2019; Accepted 29 April 2019
Available online 07 May 2019
0141-0296/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
F. Nouri, et al.
reusing the construction materials [9].
Apart from replacing steel beams with timber joists, the reinforced
concrete slabs have been also replaced with prefabricated timber (e.g.
CLT, LVL, plywood) panels to develop light-weight and sustainable
timber-timber composites floors [13–15]. Moreover, in recent years a
new composite solution comprising of steel beams and prefabricated
timber (i.e. LVL and/or CLT) slabs has been proposed that can sig-
nificantly reduce the self-weight (dead load), improve the sustainability
and facilitate deconstruction, recycling and reusing of the structural
floors [16]. In the proposed steel-timber composite (STC) floor, the
heavy concrete slabs are replaced with prefabricated lightweight CLT
and/or LVL panels which can be connected to the steel beams using
screws, bolts, adhesives or shear studs embedded in pockets of grout.
Push-out and 4-point bending tests have been conducted to obtain the
load-slip/displacement response, stiffness, peak load carrying capacity
and failure modes of STC connections and beams, respectively. The
load-slip behaviour of the bolt and screw shear connectors for steel-
CLT/LVL composite beams have been studied by Hassanieh et al.
[17,18]. In another study by Hassanieh et al. [19], structural perfor-
mance of the bolts embedded in grout pockets as shear connectors for
steel-CLT connection have been evaluated. Moreover, Loss et al.
[20–22] evaluated behaviour of different shear connectors for STC
floors with prefabricated ultra-light modular components used as steel
beams. Apart from the steel-to-timber composite joints, positive
bending moment response of the STC beams with CLT and LVL slabs
and screw or bolt shear connectors have been experimentally studied
[23,24]. Additionally, non-linear finite element simulations have been
performed to evaluate the structural behaviour of STC connections and
beams [24,25]. The results of laboratory experiments and numerical
simulations have demonstrated the acceptable performance of STC
beams subjected to sagging bending moment [23,24]. However, the
structural behaviour of STC beam-to-column connections subject to
hogging bending moment is yet to be investigated. The relatively high
tensile strength of CLT slabs acting compositely with steel beams can be
exploited to increase the stiffness and negative (hogging) bending
moment capacity of the nominally pinned and semi-rigid STC beam-to-
column connections in service and ultimate limit states.
The bending moment capacity, rotational stiffness and ductility of
the beam-to-column connections can significantly influence the global
and local behaviour of steel frames subjected to static, cyclic and dy-
namic loads. The bending moment-rotation response and the plastic
capacity of the beam-to-column joints are also used to classify and
design the connections as rigid, semi-rigid and pinned [26–29]. An
essential part of designing steel frames is to determine the type (or
behaviour) of connections based on the beam-to-column construction
details and vice versa.
Double angle web cleats (comprised of two equal or unequal angles
bolted or welded to the web of the beam and flange of the column) are
typically classified as pinned connections with negligible rotational
stiffness. Simplicity of the fabrication, high constructional tolerance
and ease of assembly and disassembly are among major reasons which
make bolted double angle web cleats a desirable connection for con-
ventional steel frames. Several studies have focused on development of
empirical moment-rotation models [30–33], as well as analytical
methods [34–36] for predicting the structural behaviour, stiffness and
bending moment capacity of double angle web cleats. Moreover, ex-
perimental and numerical studies have been conducted to mitigate the
possible failure of angle web cleats due to combined effect of shear and
catenary tensile forces following a column loss scenario [37–39].
However, there are few studies dealing with the effect of slabs and
composite action on the moment-resisting capacity and stiffness of the
composite beam-to-column joints with double angle web cleats. For
instance, a simple mechanical model for double web and top-and-seat
angle connections was proposed by de Oliveir et al. [40] and the con-
tribution of the concrete slabs in the progressive collapse resistance of
composite frames with web angle connections was studied by Yang
2
Engineering Structures 192 (2019) 1–17
et al. [41] and Kang et al. [42–44].
This paper deals with an experimental investigation of STC beam-to-
column connections with double angle web cleats. The continuity of
CLT slabs across the column can provide for significant hogging
bending moment resistance and rotational stiffness even for a nomin-
ally pinned double angle web cleat connection. Accordingly, laboratory
experiments are conducted on four cruciform subassemblies comprising
of two STC beams connected to the flanges of a universal column (UC
profile) with double web angles. Additionally, two cruciform sub-as-
semblies, i.e. a bare steel and a steel–concrete composite (SCC) beam,
are fabricated and tested to provide a benchmark against which the
structural performance of the STC beam-to-column connections can be
evaluated. Lastly, an analytical model which is an extension of the EC3/
EC4 component-based model is proposed to estimate the hogging
bending moment capacity of the STC connections with double angle
web cleats.
2. Details of subassemblies and experimental program
Six cruciform joints: one bare steel (CJ1), four steel-timber com-
posite subassemblies (CJ2 to CJ5) and one steel-concrete composite
subassembly (CJ6) representing an internal joint of a frame with the
span length of 6 m were fabricated and tested. The schematic outline of
the steel-timber and steel-concrete composite cruciform subassemblies
are shown in Fig. 1. The cruciform subassemblies represent the internal
joints of a 12-storey (38.4 m high) office building with simple steel-
timber composite (STC) floor and a reinforced concrete shear core at
the middle. The building had three 6 m long spans in each direction.
The uniform permanent action (Dead load G) and imposed action (Live
load Q) considered for design of the building were G = 2.5 kPa (in-
cluding self-weight) and Q = 3 kPa. The building was designed for
dead, live and wind load according to Australian standard AS1170 [45]
loading requirements. A charring rate of 0.6 mm/min was adopted for
the CLT panels and accordingly a 72 mm thick sacrificial layer was
considered in the design of the CLT slabs to achieve a 2-h fire rating.
The thickness of the CLT slabs and the adopted 75% degree of com-
posite action between the CLT and steel beam [23] were also satisfied
the deflection and vibration control requirements of the BS EN338 [46].
The short-term deflection of the STC floor under G + 0.7Q service load
[47] was less than the span length/500 limit considered for the
building. The first natural frequency of the STC floor obtained from a
frequency eigen value analysis was 8.5 Hz that complied the minimum
8 Hz natural frequency requirement of BS EN1995-1 [48]. The thickness
of the angle web cleats, size of the bolts used in the steel beam-to-
column connection and the edge distance of the bolts satisfied the EC3
[49] and AS4100-1998 (R2016) [50] provisions.
The overall structural performance of the STC sub-assemblies (CJ2
to CJ5) were benchmarked against the bare steel CJ1 and steel-concrete
composite CJ6 specimens and accordingly the contribution of the
composite action and of the CLT slabs to the stiffness and bending
moment capacity of the connections were evaluated. The main variable
in the STC specimens CJ2 to CJ5 was the type of connection between
the two CLT slab panels across the column. Three distinctive alter-
natives for preserving continuity of the timber slabs across the columns
were considered: (i) a continuous CLT panel (Fig. 2a), (ii) a spline
connection with a bolted 6 mm thick steel plate (Fig. 2b) and (iii) a
spline connection with bolted 45 mm thick laminated veneer lumber
(LVL) panels as shown in Fig. 2c. In specimen CJ6, the continuity of the
concrete slab was preserved by reinforcing steel bars running con-
tinuously across the column line (Fig. 2d). The use of LVL panels for
connecting the CLT slabs of the STC subassembly CJ5 was based on the
common practice in the timber construction industry. However, appli-
cation of the steel plates in the CLT-to-CLT spline joints of the speci-
mens CJ3 and CJ4 was considered with respect to the promising results
obtained from the previous laboratory experiments [51,52]. The CLT-
to-CLT spline connections (Fig. 2b and c) was assumed to be tension
F. Nouri, et al. Engineering Structures 192 (2019) 1–17

Fig. 1. Schematic outline and cross-section of the tested (a) SCC and (b) STC cruciform subassemblies.

joints loaded parallel to the grain [53] and thickness of the steel plates
and LVL panels in the CLT-to-CLT spline connections were determined
using AS4100-1998 (R2016) [50] and AS1720.1 requirement for safe-
guarding the connections against bolt row shear out, plug shear and
bearing failure. The centre-to-centre (c/c) spacing of the M16 bolts in
the LVL spline joint (Fig. 2c) was 100 mm and it satisfied the between-
fastener spacing of 5D = 80 mm specified in AS1720.1 [53]. The edge
distance and c/c spacing of the bolts in the perpendicular to the
loading/grain direction was 75 mm and 150 mm (Fig. 2c), respectively
and they satisfied the minimum 2D = 32 mm (edge distance) and
4D = 64 mm requirements of AS1720.1 [53]. The end distance of the
M16 bolts (in the CLT and LVL panel) was 100 mm and it was slightly
less than 7D = 112 mm recommended by AS1720.1 [53], however, the
end distance of the bolts still complied with the 5D = 80 mm absolute
minimum end distance requirements of AS1720.1 [53]. Moreover,
thickness of the LVL panel in subassembly CJ5 was selected such that

Fig. 2. Details of the CLT-to-CLT slab connections across the columns in specimens (a) CJ2, (b) CJ3 and CJ4, (c) CJ5 and (d) CJ6.

3
F. Nouri, et al.
the ductile failure in the M16 bolted connections (Fig. 2b and c) occur
long before onset of the brittle tensile failure in the LVL panels. The
characteristic tensile strength of the LVL was taken 25 MPa and ac-
cordingly the tensile capacity of each LVL panel was
25 MPa × 45 mm × 300 mm = 337.5 kN. The shear capacity of the
M16 bolt connections was 120 kN and it was taken from previous push
out tests [17].
To determine the influence of the web angle depth on the bending
moment and rotation capacity and failure mode of a STC beam-to-
column connection, two of the tested subassemblies, i.e. CJ1 and CJ4,
had extended (i.e. 250 mm deep) double web angles whereas, in the
other subassemblies, the double web angles were 150 mm deep. The
maximum 250 mm depth of the (extended) web angles was selected
with respect to the clear depth of the web of 310UB40.4 profile. Also, in
the preliminary design of the bare steel specimen CJ1 with the extended
web angles, it was ensured that the rotational stiffness kθ of the con-
nection remains well below the 0.5E. Ib/lb limit (E, Ib and lb being the
elastic modulus, second moment of the area and span length of the
310UB40.4 beam in the originally designed STC building [54]) and
accordingly the bare steel subassembly remains a nominally pinned
connection according to the standard provisions.
The geometric outline and dimensions of the sub-assemblies, the
end supports (boundary conditions), the arrangement of the shear
connectors and a description of each specimen and depth of the double
angle webs and the CLT-to-CLT connections are provided in Fig. 3 and
Table 1.
Composite action between the steel beam and CLT slab was pro-
vided by a pair of 16 × 100 mm lag (coach) screws (Fig. 1b) with
200 mm spacing along the beam. The size and spacing of the lag screw
shear connectors (between the CTL slab and steel beam) were selected
with respect to previous laboratory experiments [23] to achieve a de-
gree of composite action around 75% which had been considered in the
preliminary design of the STC building.
For the connection of the steel beam to concrete slab 16 × 100 mm
shear studs (Fig. 1a) with the same spacing as that of the STC sub-
assemblies were used. The shear studs were welded to the top flange of
the beams for the SCC specimen, and for the STC subassemblies holes
were predrilled in the top flange of the steel beams and soffit of the CLT
slabs for installation of the lag screw shear connectors. The size and
spacing of the lag screw shear connectors for the steel-timber composite
subassemblies were determined with respect previous push-out and 4-
point bending test results [17,23]. The shear stud size and spacing
provided near to fully composite action (exceeding 90% composite ef-
ficiency) in the SCC beams, but only partial composite action (75
composite efficiency) could be achieved in the STC beams. The double
angle web cleats were connected to the flange of the column and web of
the steel beams using 75 mm long M20 high strength bolts and the steel
plates and LVL panels in the spline joints (Fig. 2b and c) were connected
to the CLT slabs using 150 mm long M16 high strength bolts.
Hot-rolled universal steel profiles, viz. 310UB40.4 and 250UC72.9
were used respectively for the beams and column in the fabricated sub-
assemblages, while the thicknesses and width of both the timber and
concrete slabs were 120 mm and 1000 mm respectively. The concrete
slab in specimen CJ6 was reinforced with 5N16 reinforcing steel bars
placed at the middle of slab cross-section, with 4N16 bars being con-
tinued along the slab and the fifth steel bar curtailed across the column
(Fig. 2d). In addition, N10 steel bars were used in the transverse di-
rection to fulfil the minimum requirements for shrinkage and tem-
perature reinforcement.
To avoid stress concentrations due to binding of the beam flange
against the column flange, a clearance of 25 mm between the flange of
the column and edge of the beam was provided to allow for large ro-
tations of the beam without the development of any unwanted moments
in the joint [49].
4
Engineering Structures 192 (2019) 1–17
3. Material properties
3.1. Cross-laminated timber (CLT) and laminated veneer lumber (LVL)
The CLT panels comprised of five layers of cross-wise (C24) Spruce
wood as per the requirements of BS EN338 [46]. The layout and or-
ientation of timber lamellae in the CLT slabs are shown in Figs. 1b and
2a–c. The mean density (490 kg/m3) and moisture content (12%) of the
CLT panels at the time of testing were measured utilising the oven dry
method of AS/NZS2098.1 [55]. Four-point bending tests according to
CEN/EN 408 [56] were conducted on five identical specimens, resulting
in a mean elastic modulus of E = 11.3 GPa and a bending strength of
fb = 33 MPa for the CLT panels. Additionally, uniaxial tensile tests were
conducted on five dogbone specimens, and the uniaxial tensile tests
revealed the mean tensile strength of the CLT to be ft = 25 MPa. In
subassembly CJ5, hySPAN laminated veneer lumber (LVL) panels made
of Radiata Pine veneers were used in the spline joints to ensure the
continuity of the CLT slab across the column. The mean compressive
and tensile strength of the LVL panels obtained from uniaxial com-
pression and tension tests on five identical specimens were 58 MPa and
51 MPa, respectively. The design characteristic mechanical properties
of the LVL and CLT panels are provided in Table 2.
3.2. Steel profiles, steel plates and reinforcing steel bars
The universal beams (310UB40.4) and columns (250UC72.9) were
of Grade 300PLUS, complying with the requirements of AS/NZS 3679.1
[57]. The dimensions of the steel sections are summarised in Table 3,
with characteristic yield and ultimate strengths of fy = 320 MPa and
fu = 440 MPa respectively. The results of uniaxial tension tests on
coupons of UB profiles identical to that of the current study were taken
from previous tests conducted by Ataei et al. [58], giving a mean yield
strength and ultimate strength of fy = 365 MPa and fu = 505 MPa, re-
spectively. All the web angles and steel plates used in the fabrication of
the specimens were made of Grade 300PLUS steel having nominal
mechanical properties the same as those of the universal profiles [57].
The mean yield and ultimate tensile strength of the web angles (ob-
tained from uniaxial tension tests on three identical coupons) were
fy = 350 MPa and fu = 495 MPa, respectively.
3.3. Connectors
Three types of mechanical fasteners: (i) high strength (M20 and
M16) bolts, (ii) mild steel lag screws and (iii) headed shear studs were
used in the fabrication and assembly of the composite cruciform spe-
cimens. The high strength M20 and M16 bolts were of Grade 8.8 having
proof yield strength of fy = 660 MPa and ultimate strength of
fu = 830 MPa; complying with the requirements of AS1110.1 [59]. The
16 mm diameter lag screws and stud shear connectors had a char-
acteristic yield strength of fy = 240 MPa and ultimate strength of
fu = 400 MPa.
The N16 and N10 bars used for reinforcing the concrete slab in
cruciform specimen CJ6 were made of normal ductility (Class N) steel
with a characteristic yield strength of fy = 500 MPa. The mean yield
and ultimate strength of the N16 bars (obtained from uniaxial tension
tests) were fy = 580 MPa and fu = 730 MPa, respectively. The stress-
strain diagrams for the lag screws, high strength bolts and reinforcing
steel bars obtained from previous uniaxial tension tests [60] are de-
picted in Fig. 4a and b.
3.4. Concrete
Uniaxial compression tests conducted on three identical concrete
cylinders (150 mm diameter and 300 mm height) revealed the mean
compressive strength of concrete to be fcm = 60 MPa at the time of the
testing specimen CJ6.
F. Nouri, et al. Engineering Structures 192 (2019) 1–17

Fig. 3. Geometry, dimensions and details of the (a) STC and (b) SCC beam-to-column cruciform subassemblies with double angle web cleat connections.

Table 1
Designation and connection details of the tested subassemblies.
Specimen Steel beam-to-column connection, depth (mm) Slab type Slab connections

CJ1 Extended double web angle, 250 mm No slab (bare steel) –

CJ2 Double web angle, 150 mm Continuous CLT –
CJ3 Double web angle, 150 mm Adjoining CLT Bolted 400 × 300 × 6 mm steel plate
CJ4 Extended double web angle, 250 mm Adjoining CLT Bolted 400 × 300 × 6 mm steel plate
CJ5 Double web angle, 150 mm Adjoining CLT Bolted LVL panel (spline)
CJ6 Double web angle, 150 mm Continuous concrete Continuous reinforcement

5
F. Nouri, et al. Engineering Structures 192 (2019) 1–17

Table 2
Characteristic mechanical properties of the CLT and LVL panels (in MPa).
Bending fb Tension || to grain ft Shear in beams fs Compression || to grain fc Compression L to grain fp Elastic modulus E Shear modulus G

CLT 24 18 4.6 24 2.7 11,500 690

LVL 50 25 4.6 41 12 13,200 660

Table 3 actuator with a maximum traveling distance of 200 mm to generate the

Dimensions of the steel sections (in mm).
Section Section depth Flange width Flange thickness
d bf tf
310UB40.4 304 165 10.2
250UC72.9 254 254 14.2
4. Fabrication of specimens, instrumentation and test setup
In the first stage of the fabrication, the M20 snug tight bolts were
used to connect the double angle web cleats to the web of steel beams
and flange of the column while specimens being supported by props
carrying the self-weight of the assembly and preventing possible un-
wanted rotation of the beams under their self-weight. A 2 mm clearance
between the holes and M20 bolt shank was provided to facilitate the
assembly of cruciform specimens. In the second stage, the top flange of
the beams and soffit of CLT slabs were predrilled at the locations of the
lag screw shear connectors; the diameter of holes predrilled in the soffit
of the CLT slabs being 2 mm smaller than the diameter of lag screws.
Following this, the timber panels were lifted by crane and placed on top
of the steel beams and the lag screws were installed. In the last stage of
the assembly, the predrilled steel plates and LVL panels were placed at
the location of spline joints (connecting the CLT slabs) and the M16
bolts connecting the steel and LVL plates to the CLT panels were in-
stalled and tightened to an approximate shank tension of 7 kN
(equivalent to a 0.05fy post-tensioning stress; fy being the yield strength
of the bolts). Galvanised square 50 × 50 × 3 mm washers were used in
conjunction with M16 bolts (where the bolt heads or nuts were in
contact with any timber surface) to prevent stress concentrations and
compressive damage perpendicular to the grain due to the high post-
tensioning forces.
The experimental program involved testing the six cruciform spe-
cimens to simulate the behaviour of composite beam-to-column con-
nections with double angle web cleats subjected to negative bending.
To simplify the test setup, the cruciform subassemblies were flipped
over and placed on two roller supports at both ends (Fig. 5). A dis-
placement-controlled load was applied to the column using a 500 kN
negative bending moment in the beam-to-column connections. Two
Web thickness
linear strain conversion transducers (LSCT −1 and −2) were placed
tw under and on top of the column to measure the vertical displacement of
the column. The travel distance of the actuator (measured by an LVDT)
6.1 was also utilised to validate the results obtained from the measurements
8.6
of LSCTs (Fig. 6a). In addition, two LSCTs −3 and −4 were mounted
the at far right and far left ends of the composite beams to measure the
relative slip between the slab and steel (Fig. 6a). A 500 kN load cell was
used to measure the load during the testing and to validate the load
data against the actuator’s built-in load cell. As illustrated in Fig. 6a,
four inclinometers were mounted on the steel beams at four locations
(two inclinometers on the sides of the column and another two in-
clinometers at the roller supports) to measure the in-plane and out-of-
the-plane rotations of the specimens. The in-plane rotations were used
to establish moment-rotation diagrams and out-of-the-plane rotations
were used to ensure that the experimental results were not affected by
unwanted distortions or out-of-plane rotations of the specimens. The
difference between the rotations measured by inclinometer-1 and −2
(Fig. 6a) was used to check the unsymmetrical tilting or twisting of the
specimen and to ensure the validity of the test results.
The magnitude of the strains in the steel sections and timber slabs,
as well as the strain distribution through the STC/SCC cross-sections,
were determined by 32 strain gauges installed at four distinctive cross-
sections along the composite beams (Fig. 6b). The first group of the
strain gauges were twenty 5 mm long (FLA-5-11-3L) strain gauges
mounted on the steel beams 125 mm from the column flange and
400 mm from the column flange (on both sides of the column). The
second group were twelve 60 mm long (PLW-60-11-3L and PL-60-11-
1L) strain gauges mounted at the two cross-sections, i.e. 125 mm and
400 mm away from the column flange on the timber and concrete slabs
(Fig. 6b).
The protocol of BS EN 26891 [61] was followed during the loading
of the subassemblies. The displacement-controlled loading regime at a
rate of 2 mm/min was adopted for the testing program, where the
specimens were loaded up to 40 percent of the estimated load carrying
capacity and then unloaded to 10 percent of the peak load. At this stage,
the stability of the specimen and efficiency of the test set up were

Fig. 4. Uniaxial stress-strain plots for (a) lag screw and 8.8 bolts [18] and (b) longitudinal reinforcing bars.

6
F. Nouri, et al. Engineering Structures 192 (2019) 1–17

Fig. 5. Outline of the test set up, end supports and loading configuration.

Fig. 6. Location of (a) LSCTs and inclinometers and (b) steel and timber strain gauges.

carefully monitored and testing was continued by reloading the spe-
cimen at the same rate until the failure or excessive deflections took
place. The tests (reloading of the specimens) were stopped when the
load dropped significantly (more than 20% of the peak load) or the
beam-to-column connections underwent excessive rotation which was
manifested by binding of the steel beam flange against the column.
Accordingly, the ultimate load carrying capacity of the tested sub-
assembly was either the peak load or the load corresponding to the
binding of the beam flange against the column.
5. Results and discussion
5.1. Failure modes
The peak load carrying capacity of the STC specimens was asso-
ciated with six distinctive failure modes and damage patterns: (i) tensile
failure of the outermost lamellas of CLT slabs, (ii) rolling shear in the
CLT lamellas loaded perpendicular to the grain, (iii) excessive rotation
of the beam followed by binding of the steel beam against the column
flange, (iv) severe or mild crushing of the CLT panels around the bolt
connectors, (v) bolt row plug shear and (vi) splitting of the LVL panels
in the direction perpendicular to the direction of loading (Fig. 7a–g).
The failure mode of the steel-concrete composite specimen (CJ6) was
associated with cracking of concrete slab (Fig. 7h) and yielding of the

7
F. Nouri, et al. Engineering Structures 192 (2019) 1–17

Fig. 7. Failure modes observed in specimen (a) CJ2, (b) CJ2, (c) CJ3 and CJ4, (d) CJ3 and CJ4, (e) CJ3 and CJ4, (f) CJ5, (g) CJ5 and (h) CJ6.

steel bars as evidenced by the strain gauge data. The bare steel spe-
cimen (CJ1) had ductile behaviour associated with excessive rotation of
the beam and bearing failure of the beam web (around the M20 bolt
holes). No sign of fracture in the M20 bolts connecting the double angle
web cleats to beam web and column flange was observed. In addition,
the sufficient edge distance provided for the M20 bolt holes was ef-
fective in safeguarding the specimens against brittle failures associated
with bolt line shear-out and block tear-out.
Tensile failure of the outermost lamellae of the CLT panel (loaded
parallel to the grain as shown in Fig. 7a) was the dominant failure mode

8
F. Nouri, et al. Engineering Structures 192 (2019) 1–17

in specimen CJ2. Also, in specimen CJ2, rolling shear occurred (Fig. 7b)
in the second and fourth lamellas (loaded perpendicular to the grain) at
the early stages of the loading.
The failure modes of STC specimens CJ3 and CJ4 (with surface steel
plate CLT-to-CLT spline joints) were very similar, irrespective of the
length of the web angles. The failure of specimen CJ3 (with 150 mm
long web angles) and CJ4 (with 250 mm long web angles) involved a
mix of different modes, i.e. excessive rotation of the beam and binding
of the steel beam against the column flange (Fig. 7c), severe crushing of
the CLT slabs around the M16 bolt connectors (Fig. 7d) and bolt row
plug shear in the outermost lamellae of the CLT slab (Fig. 7e) which
resulted in a gradual decline of the load carrying capacity. For speci-
mens CJ3 and CJ4, the tests were stopped upon the binding of the beam
on the column flange.
Specimen CJ5 failed in a mixed mode that involved mild crushing of
the CLT panels around the M16 bolts (Fig. 7f) and splitting of the LVL
panels in the direction perpendicular to the loading direction (Fig. 7g).
Furthermore, rolling shear failure of the CLT lamellas loaded perpen-
dicular to grain was observed at the early stages of loading specimen
CJ5.
Specimen CJ6 (with a reinforced concrete slab) exhibited ductile
behaviour and a failure mode manifested by the development of large
cracks in the concrete slab (Fig. 7h) and excessive plastic strains in the
reinforcing bars demonstrated by the load vs strain results. The load
carrying capacity of the specimen CJ6 declined upon yielding of steel
reinforcement and the test stopped following excessive beam rotations
and binding of the beam against the column flange.

5.2. Load vs displacement and moment vs rotation responses of cruciform

joints

The evolution of the total load P versus column displacement Δ and

bending moment M versus rotation θ of the tested subassemblies are
shown in Fig. 8a and b, respectively. The bending moment M at the face
of the column was calculated by multiplying the support reactions (or
one-half of the applied load P) by the lever arm which was taken as the
distance (1.2 m) between the face of the column and the supports
(Fig. 3a). The inclinometers used for measuring the in-plane rotation θ
of the beams were also used to monitor the unwanted twisting (out-of-
plane) rotation of the specimens due to any possible imperfections in
the fabrications, boundary conditions and loading. The in-plane rota-
tion θ obtained from the inclinometers were also compared with Δ/1.2
ratio and it was observed that with good accuracy θ ≈ Δ/1.2. Among
tested specimens, only CJ6 exhibited signs of small twist at the final
stages of loading (Fig. 9a), however, the in-plane rotation of the spe-
cimen CJ6 on the left and right side of the column remained nearly
symmetric throughout the whole test (Fig. 9b). The other STC sub-
assemblies had negligible twist as evident from the inclinometer data
which are not reported here.
The point corresponding to the maximum load carrying capacity of
the specimens in Fig. 8a was considered as the ultimate point (Δu, Pu).
The ultimate load Pu and the ultimate displacement Δu for all the spe-
cimens are given in Table 4. For STC subassemblies, the yield load Py
and yield displacement Δy were estimated using the IS EN 12512:2002
[62] provisions, in which the onset of yielding (Δy, Py) on load-dis-
placement diagram is defined as the intersection of the line passing
through the points corresponding to 10% and 40% of ultimate load and
the line having a slope 1/6 of the slope of the first line and passing
through the ultimate load point (Δu, Pu). However, the yield load Py of
the specimen CJ6 (with reinforced concrete slab) was determined with
respect to the load versus strain results of the reinforcing steel bars and
the corresponding yield displacement Δy was obtained from the load
versus displacement diagram shown in Fig. 8a. The yield load Py and
the yield displacement Δy for all subassemblies are summarised in
Table 4. Additionally, ductility/deformability index μ = Δu/Δy of the
subassemblies is provided in Table 4. Among the STC subassemblies,
Fig. 8. (a) Total load vs vertical displacement and (b) bending moment vs ro-
tation.
CJ2 with a continuous CLT slab had the lowest ductility index μ,
whereas the highest ductility index belonged to the STC specimens (CJ3
and CJ4) with bolted steel spline connections between the two CLT
slabs. Furthermore, specimen CJ2 had the lowest overstrength factor,
i.e. Pu/Py = 1.13. The very low ductility index and overstrength factor
of the specimen CJ2 should be attributed to brittle tensile failure of the
continuous CLT slab panel due to hogging bending moment effects.
The length of web angles was found to have some effect on the
ductility index of the STC connections. More specifically, specimen CJ4
with extended (250 mm long) web cleats had slightly (around 25%)
higher ductility index μ than that of the specimen CJ3 (with 150 mm
long web cleats). Increasing the length of the web cleats from 150 mm
in CJ3 to 250 mm in CJ4 also slightly increased the overstrength factor
(i.e. Pu/Py) from 2.14 for specimen CJ3 to 2.39 for specimen CJ4.
The ultimate bending moment capacity Mu of the subassemblies was
calculated using Mu = (Pu / 2) × (l = 1.2 m) and the results are given
in Table 4. Specimen CJ4 (with the extend web angles and steel plate
spline CLT-to-CLT joint) had the highest ultimate bending moment
capacity Mu (max) = 118.3 kN m, and the minimum bending moment
capacity Mu (min) = 28.8 kN m belonged to the bare steel specimen CJ1
(without CLT slab). It is noteworthy that the ultimate bending moment
capacity of the specimen CJ1 was not associated with failure of the
specimen and the testing of CJ1 was stopped due to excessive rotation
of the STC beams and binding of the steel beam flange against the
column. Among the subassemblies with CTL slab and 150 mm long web
angles (i.e. CJ2, CJ3 and CJ5), specimen CJ5 (with LVL spline

9
F. Nouri, et al. Engineering Structures 192 (2019) 1–17

To classify the STC beam-to-column connections based on their

Fig. 9. (a) Bending moment vs out-of-plane rotation (twist) and (b) bending
moment vs in-plane rotation measured by inclinometer-1 and −2 for specimen
CJ6.
connection) had the lowest bending moment capacity, i.e. Mu = 48.5
kN m, and specimen CJ2 (with continuous CLT slab) had the highest
bending moment capacity, i.e. Mu = 93.5 kN m. This demonstrates the
significant influence of the CLT-to-CLT slab connection type/stiffness
on the ultimate bending moment capacity of the STC beam-to-column
connections. Also, the enhancing effect of the composite action and
continuity of the CLT slabs on the load carrying capacity of the STC
beam-to-column connections is evident from the Mu (or Pu) values given
in Table 4. For instance, the ultimate bending moment resistance of the
specimen CJ4 (extended web cleat + steel plate spline connection) is
over four times bigger than that of the specimen CJ1 (extended web
cleat without CLT slab). The results in Table 4 reveal that the STC
subassemblies with continuous CLT slab (i.e. CJ2) and/or with surface
steel plate spline connections (i.e. CJ3 and CJ4) have an ultimate
bending moment capacity Mu comparable to that of the SCC sub-
assembly (i.e. CJ6).
strength [49], the plastic bending moment capacity Mp of the beam is
calculated using AS4100-1998(R2016) [50] provisions and the ultimate
bending moment capacity Mu of the connections is compared with
0.25Mp = 50.6 kN m [49]. The bending moment capacity Mu (see
Table 4) of all the STC connections (except CJ5 with LVL spline joints)
is bigger than 0.25Mp = 50. 6 kN m. The SCC subassembly CJ6 (with
RC slab) also has an ultimate bending moment capacity Mu bigger than
0.25Mp. This demonstrates that the SCC subassembly and the STC
connections with the web cleats and continuous CLT slab and/or spliced
CLT slabs with surface steel plate spline joints can be classified as
partial strength connections [49]. However, the experimental results
confirmed that the bare steel subassembly with web cleats (e.g. spe-
cimen CJ1) is a nominally pinned connection with ultimate bending
moment capacity Mu being significantly smaller than 0.25Mp, regard-
less of the depth of the web cleats (i.e. 150 mm and/or 250 mm).
The service rotational stiffness ks,0.4 defined as the slope of the lines
between the 0.1Mu and 0.4Mu points and the ultimate rotational stiff-
ness ks,0.8 defined as the slope of the line between the 0.1Mu and 0.8Mu
points (on the M-θ diagrams in Fig. 8b) are also provided in Table 4.
Among the STC subassemblies, CJ2 with a continuous CLT slab had the
highest service ks,0.4 and ultimate ks,0.8 rotational stiffness and CJ5 with
LVL spline connection had the lowest service ks,0.4 and ultimate ks,0.8
rotational stiffness. Increasing the depth of angle web cleats (from
150 mm in CJ3 to 250 mm in CJ4) improved the bending moment ca-
pacity by 38% and the service and ultimate rotational stiffness by 29%
and 31%, respectively. It is seen that the service rotational stiffness
ks,0.4 of the specimen CJ6 (with reinforced concrete slab) is significantly
higher than that of the STC specimens (i.e. CJ2 to CJ5).
To classify the STC connections based on their stiffness, the
equivalent stiffness of the beams in the originally designed building
(lb = 6.0 m spans) is calculated and the rotational stiffness of the con-
nections is compared with 0.5E. Ib/lb [49], where E is the elastic
modulus and Ib is the second moment of the area of steel beam. The
rotational stiffness of all the STC connections and the SCC connection
CJ6 (see Table 4) is bigger than 0.5E. Ib/lb = 1.44 kN m/mrad. Ac-
cordingly, the STC beam-to-column connections and the SCC connec-
tion tested in this study can be treated as semi-rigid connections.
However, the bare steel specimen CJ1 should be classified as a simple
connection, because the rotational stiffness of the specimen CJ1 is
significantly smaller than 0.5E. Ib/lb. This demonstrates that the com-
posite action between the CLT slab and steel beam in conjunction with
the continuity of the CLT slabs (provided by the surface spline con-
nections) has the potential to increase stiffness of the nominally pinned
joints above the minimum stiffness required by EC3 [49] for the semi-
rigid connections.
5.3. Load vs slip response
Two LSCTs (i.e. LSCT −3 and −4) were mounted on the web of the
steel beams at each end of the composite beams (Fig. 6a) to monitor the
relative slips between the steel beam and timber or concrete slabs. The
load versus average slip responses of the STC cruciform subassemblies

Table 4
Summary of the test results including yield and ultimate points, stiffness and ductility index of the STC subassemblies.
Specimen Py (kN) Pu (kN) Δy (mm) Δu (mm) Mu (kN m) θu (mrad) Ductility Stiffness (kN m/mrad)

μ = Δu/Δy ks,0.4 ks,0.8

CJ1 35.32 48.00 37.09 127.47 28.8 104.22 3.44 0.61 0.93
CJ2 136.97 155.75 17.81 33.00 93.5 24.84 1.85 5.34 3.63
CJ3 66.55 142.50 13.28 117.54 85.5 98.57 8.85 3.15 1.68
CJ4 82.55 197.25 12.17 134.28 118.3 83.13 11.04 4.06 2.21
CJ5 38.72 80.75 11.04 93.48 48.5 71.65 8.47 2.20 1.36
CJ6 118.40 166.50 14.81 49.44 99.9 43.07 3.34 11.75 4.21

10
F. Nouri, et al.
Fig. 10. Load versus average slip of the STC subassemblies.
are plotted in Fig. 10. The slip values in Fig. 10 are the average of
relative horizontal displacements measured by LSCT-3 and −4. The
relative slip between the timber slab and steel beams demonstrate the
partial shear interaction (partial composite action) in the STC sub-
assemblies. However, the relative slip in the SCC subassembly (CJ6)
was negligible, which is demonstrative of the near full composite action
provided by the headed shear studs. Since the size and spacing of the
screw shear connectors (i.e. degree of composite efficiency) are the
same for all the STC specimens, Fig. 10 reveals that secant stiffness of
the load-slip diagrams should have some correlations with the overall
stiffness of the subassembly and/or the stiffness of the CLT-to-CLT slab
connection. This is consistent with the results of previous laboratory
tests conducted on the STC subassemblies with flush end plate [51] and
fin plate [63] connections.
5.4. Strain in CLT slab
The magnitude and distribution of strains in the timber panels were
determined by twelve strain gauges installed at two distinct cross-sec-
tions (125 and 400 mm away from the column face on each side). The
load versus average strain for the STC specimens are plotted in Fig. 11.
The composite action and significant contribution of the CLT slabs in
the overall load carrying capacity of the beam-to-column connections is
evident from the tensile and compressive strains developed in the top
and bottom fibres of the CLT slabs. The magnitude of the strains de-
veloped in the top and bottom fibres of the timber slabs was within the
same range for all STC specimens, except for CJ2. The significantly
higher levels of tensile and compressive strains in specimen CJ2 can be
attributed to higher stiffness of the continuous CLT slab (in CJ2) com-
pared to the timber slabs with spline connections.
5.5. Strains in steel reinforcement
In specimen CJ6 with a concrete slab, the strain in the two long-
itudinal steel bars on one side of the column at the most critical cross-
section (i.e. the face of the steel column) were measured using 5 mm
long steel strain gauges and the load versus the strain results are plotted
in Fig. 12. The development of tensile strains well-above the yield strain
of the reinforcement confirms the contribution of continuous reinfor-
cing bars to the negative bending moment capacity of the CJ6 sub-
assembly and indicates the ductile behaviour of the SCC subassembly.
The slight increase in the load carrying capacity of the cruciform con-
nection CJ6 after the onset of first yield in the first reinforcing bar can
be attributed to the engagement of the side continuous reinforcing bars
(furthest from the column, bar 2 in Fig. 2d) until yielding of all four
steel bars.
11
Engineering Structures 192 (2019) 1–17
5.6. Strain in steel girder
Twenty strains gauges installed at two distinct cross-sections
(125 mm and 400 mm away from the column face on each side) were
used to determine the magnitude and evolution of longitudinal strains
at different stages of loading. The load versus the average strains in the
top and bottom flanges of the steel beams are plotted in Fig. 13. It is
seen that the steel profiles in STC cruciform specimens predominantly
experience compressive strains. Comparing magnitude of the strains
with the yield strains of the Grade 300Plus steel shows that stresses in
the steel profiles remain below the yield strength.
6. Component-based model for STC beam-to-column connection
In this section, a simplified method inspired by EC3 [49] compo-
nent-based approach is proposed to estimate the negative bending
moment capacity of an STC beam-to-column connections with double
angle web cleats. The behaviour of the constituent components (web
angle, beam web, column flange, bolts, slab-to-slab connection) under
different loading conditions (tension, compression and shear) and the
complex interaction between the components can affect the overall
bending moment resistance and alter the failure modes which should be
distinguished carefully. Accordingly, care should be taken when the
stiffness and capacity of each component is addressed to ensure that all
possible failure scenarios can be captured by the model.
6.1. Steel components
The capacity, stiffness and failure mode of each steel component are
adopted from EC3 [49] and incorporated into the proposed model. The
possible failure modes which govern the capacity of the steel compo-
nent are shear and tensile failure of the bolts connecting web angle to
the beam and column, tear out of the angle web cleats and beam web,
bearing failure of the angle web cleats and beam web, failure of the
angle web cleats under tension which is controlled by the angle bending
capacity and net and gross cross-section failure of the steel components.
The shear resistance Fv,Rd of a single bolt is obtained from,
α v fub As
Fv, Rd =
γM 2 (1)
when the shear plane passes through the threaded portion of the bolt,
and from
0.6fub A
Fv, Rd =
γM 2 (2)
for bolts in which the shear plane passes through the unthreaded
part of bolts, where αv can be taken as 0.6 for more ductile bolts and 0.5
for less ductile bolts, fub is the ultimate tensile strength of the bolts and
it is taken 830 MPa, γM2 is a partial safety factor for joints and in this
study γM2 = 1.0, and A and As the gross area and tensile/shear stress
area of the bolt respectively.
Additionally, the stiffness of a single bolt in shear can be estimated
from
Kv = d 2fub (3)
where d is the diameter of the bolt.
When tensile failure of the bolts connecting the web angle to the
column flange govern the failure and load carrying capacity of the
connections with angle web cleats, the tensile capacity Ft,Rd of the bolts
can be estimated from [49]
0.9fub As
Ft , Rd =
γM 2 (4)
and stiffness of the bolts under tension can be calculated using
Kt = 1.6EAs / Lb (5)
F. Nouri, et al. Engineering Structures 192 (2019) 1–17

Fig. 11. Load versus longitudinal strains in top and bottom fibres of CLT the slab at cross-sections (a) 125 mm and (b) 400 mm away from the face of column.

Veff , Rd = fu Ant / γM 2 + (1/ 3 ) f y Anv / γM 0 (6)

where fu is the ultimate strength of the steel profile Ant the net area
subjected to tension and Anv the net area subjected to shear.
For predicting the bearing resistance of the bolted connection, the
expression

k1 αb fu dt
Fb, Rd =
γM 2 (7)

is used, where k1 = min(2.8e1/ d 0 − 1.7; 1.4p2 / d 0 − 1.7; 2.5) ,

p 1
αb = min (αd, 1) , αd = 3d1 − 4 and t is the thickness of the plate (angle
0
sections).
Bearing stiffness of a single bolt against a steel plate is also obtained
from
Fig. 12. Load versus longitudinal strains in reinforcing bars of SCC specimen at
the critical cross-section located at the vicinity of the column. Kb = 24kb kt d fu (8)

where kb = 0.25 e1/ d + 0.5 ≤ min(1.25, kb2 = 0.25p1 / d + 0.375) and

where E is the elastic modulus of steel and Lb the bolt’s elongation kt = 0.093 t j ⩽ 2.5, e1 is the distance from bolt-row to the free edge of the
length. plate, p1 the bolt spacing in the direction of loading and tj thickness of
The block shear (tear out) resistance of the beam web or web angle the component.
is obtained from An equivalent T-stub under tension is usually considered for
checking failure of the angle legs under tension and bending. EC3

12
F. Nouri, et al.
Fig. 13. Strains in (a) top and (b) bottom flange of the steel beams at cross-sections 125 mm and 400 mm away from the face of the column.
considers three distinctive failure modes for the equivalent T-stub with
or without backing plates (as reinforcement for the column flange). The
load carrying capacity of the equivalent T-stub can be calculated with
respect to the provisions in EC3 [49]. In this study, the T-stub is treated
as a fixed-fixed beam which is 126 mm long (the centre-to-centre dis-
tance of the bolts connecting the double angles to the column flange),
12 mm thick (the thickness of the angles) and has an effective width of
beff = 75 mm. Accordingly, the bending stiffness kwa of the web cleats
for each row of bolts (in tension) is approximated by
k wa = 16Ebeff (t /l)3 = 207 kN/mm .
6.2. CLT-to-CLT slab connection/joint
The development of predominantly tensile stresses in the top fibres
of the CLT slabs with spline connections was confirmed by the timber
strain data (Fig. 11). Because of this, the load to be considered in the
CLT-to-CLT spline connection is simplified to a tensile force which
causes a shear force (shear failure) in the bolt connectors of the spline
joints. Furthermore, mixed failure modes are not considered and only
four distinctive failure modes are considered for the CLT-to-CLT slab
connections. The contribution of the perpendicular to the grain loaded
lamellae in the ultimate loading capacity is ignored, because the tensile
strength of lamellae so loaded is dramatically (approximately an order
of magnitude) smaller than the lamellas loaded parallel to the grain.
Accordingly, for the specimen CJ2 (with continuous CLT slab), the
tensile capacity of the CLT panel at the face of the column is obtained
from
13
Engineering Structures 192 (2019) 1–17
ft(net) = ft Anet(CLT) = ft wnet(CLT) t1 (9)
where ft is the tensile strength of the CLT in || to the grain direction and
it is taken ft = 18 MPa (see Table 2) and Anet(CLT) is the net cross section
of the CLT slab at the face of the column. wnet(CLT) is width of the net
cross section of the CLT slab at the face of the column and it is
wnet(CLT) = 1000 mm–250 mm (column width) = 750 mm and
t1 = 30 mm is thickness of the outermost lamella of the CLT panel
(loaded || to the grain). The capacity of the continuous CLT slab (in
specimen CJ2) obtained from Eq. (9) is ft(net) ≈ 405 kN.
To be consistent with the assumptions made for calculating the
tensile capacity of the continuous CLT slab, the stiffness kt of the con-
tinuous CLT slab (specimen CJ2) is estimated by,
1 1 1
= +
kt kCLT k sc (10)
where ksc is the total stiffness of the lag screw shear connectors over the
STC beam length and kCLT is the stiffness of the CLT slab panel (at the
connection zone) and it is obtained from kCLT = ECLT Anet(CLT) / lCLT ,
where ECLT = 11.5 GPa is the elastic modulus of the CLT (see Table 2)
and l CLT = 250 mm is the distance between the centreline of the
column and the first row of the screw shear connectors (Fig. 3). The slip
modulus of a pair of S16 lag screw shear connectors is 8.5 kN/mm
according to Hassanieh et al. [17] push-out tests. If a linear distribution
of the slip along the STC beam is assumed, then ksc = (total number of
the screw shear connectors/2) × (slip modulus of a pair of shear con-
nectors)/2 = (14/2) × (8.5 kN/mm)/2 ≈ 30 kN/mm. The stiffness of
F. Nouri, et al.
the CLT slab (kCLT = 3450 kN/mm) is significantly bigger than the
stiffness of the shear connectors (i.e. ksc ≈ 30 kN/mm), thereby Eq.
(10) yields kt≈ksc≈ 30 kN/mm.
6.2.1. Bolted steel plate/LVL plate (spline) connection
The first possible failure mode is associated with fracture of the net
section or yielding of the gross section of the surface steel plate (see
Fig. 2b) in the spline connection. The maximum tensile strength ft(net) of
the steel plates in tension is calculated with respect to the yield strength
fy, ultimate strength fu, gross cross-section area Ag and net cross-section
of the steel plate An as,
ft(net) = min (f y Ag , fu An ) (11)
The second failure mode of spline joints is associated with crushing
of the CLT panels due to excessive bearing stresses in front of the bolted
connectors (Fig. 7d and f). This timber crushing may occur in con-
junction with yielding/rupture of the high strength bolt connectors as
demonstrated in previous push-out tests [17]. With some modifications
that account for cross-wise layup of the CLT panels, the provisions of
the timber European Yield Model (EYM) described in EC5 [64] can be
used to calculate the load carrying capacity of the steel-CLT and LVL-
CLT spline connections corresponding to the second failure mode. In
this study, the capacity of a pair of M16 bolts in the spline connections
fvs(max) = 120 kN is taken directly from the laboratory push-out tests of
Hassanieh et al. [17,19]. It is noteworthy that the capacity of a pair of
M16 bolts obtained from the modified EC5 model is 114 kN [25] which
closely correlates with the 120 kN capacity adopted from the experi-
ments.
The edge distance of the bolts (connectors) can affect the failure
mode of the spline connections. An inadequate edge distance can lead
to bolt row block shear (tear out) with significant reduction in the load
carrying capacity of the connection. Accounting for two shear failure
planes and assuming a uniform distribution of shear stress along the
shear planes, the shear capacity of the connection governed by tear out
in the outermost lamellae of the CLT can be estimated by
fvso = 2fv, l lso t1 (12)
where fv,l is the shear strength in the longitudinal-radial direction for
C24 Spruce and is taken fv,l = 6.9 MPa, lso is the distance between the
furthest bolt to the free edge of the CLT panel and it is taken lso ≈
140 mm (for CJ3 and CJ4) and t1 = 30 mm is thickness of the first layer
of the timber panel. The tear out capacity of a spline joint with a pair of
M16 bolts obtained from Eq. (12) is fvso = 58 kN and the total capacity
of the CLT-to-CLT spline joints with four rows of bolts (specimens CJ3
and CJ4), based on the tear out failure mode is 4 × 58 kN = 232 kN. In
specimen CJ5 with LVL panel spline joint (see Fig. 2c), the farthest bolt
edge distance is lso ≈ 190 mm and t1 = 20 mm, accordingly the total
capacity of the CLT-to-CLT connection based on the tear out failure
mode is approximately 200 kN.
In addition to the tear out mode, a plug shear failure (Fig. 7e) may
occur depending on the spacing as well as the edge distances of the
bolts/connectors. Zarnani et al. [65] considered six different failure
modes based on the configuration of the CLT panels and accordingly
proposed a stiffness-based formula for estimating the plug shear capa-
city of the CLT connections as
∑K ∑K ⎞
fvto = min ⎛ft Ath
⎜ , f Ava ⎟
⎝ K h v, r Ka ⎠ (13)
Eq. (13) predicts the plug shear capacity of the connection based on
three parallel springs representing stiffness of the head tensile plane Kh,
bottom shear plane K and adjacent shear planes Ka.
The onset of block tear out and plug shear can potentially reduce the
loading capacity of the CLT-to-CLT connections and it is essential to
take account of these failure modes and the corresponding failure loads
in the component-based models of the STC beam-to-column
14
Engineering Structures 192 (2019) 1–17
connections.
In the CLT-to-CLT spline connections with LVL panels, a mixed
failure mode that involved splitting of the LVL was also observed
(Fig. 7g). An approximate failure load corresponding to the splitting of
the LVL panels obtained from
fvso = λ ft , t lsp tLVL (14)
is considered in the component-based model. In Eq. (14), λ is a
modification factor which is a function of edge distance, size and spa-
cing of connectors, ft,t the tensile strength in the transverse (radial and
tangential) direction and for the hySpan LVL is taken ft,t = 6 MPa, lsp
the distance from the second row of the bolts (first loaded bolt group) to
the free end/edge and tLVL = 45 mm the thickness of the LVL panel.
Splitting of the LVL panels in the spline joints may result from the large
tensile stresses developing in the direction perpendicular to the loading
direction.
The stiffness kt of the CLT-to-CLT spline connections with surface
steel plate and/or LVL panel is obtained from,
1 1 1 1
= + +
kt k sc kbc kPlate (15)
where ksc ≈ 30 kN/mm is the total stiffness of the lag screw shear
connectors over the STC beam length, kbc is the total stiffness of the
M16 bolts connecting the steel plate and/or LVL panel to the CLT slabs
(see Table 2) and kPlate is the stiffness of the steel plate and/or LVL
panel (at the connection zone) and it is obtained from
kPlate = EPlate A(Plate) / l Plate , where EPlate is the elastic modulus of the
surface plate and it is taken 200 GPa for steel and 13.2 GPa for LVL, l
Plate is the distance between the centreline of the column and the first
row of the M16 bolt connectors and it is taken 70 mm for steel plate and
100 mm for the LVL panel (see Fig. 2b and c) and APlate is the area of the
plate. For subassemblies CJ3 and CJ4 with steel plate,
APlate = 2 × 6 mm × 300 mm = 3600 mm2 and for subassembly CJ5
with LVL panel, APlate = 2 × 45 mm × 300 mm = 27000 mm2. The slip
modulus of a pair of M16 bolt connectors (at 60% of the peak load) in
the steel-LVL and steel-CLT joint is approximately 21 kN/mm and 10
kN/mm, respectively [17,18]. If the M16 bolt shear connectors are
treated as parallel springs, then kbc for specimens CJ3 and CJ4 can be
obtained from kbc = 4 × 10 kN/mm = 40 kN/mm. However, in spe-
cimen CJ5 with LVL plate spline joints, 1/kbc = 1/(4 × 10 kN/
mm) + 1/(4 × 21 kN/mm) and accordingly, kbc = 27 kN/mm. Plug-
ging ksc, kbc and kPlate in Eq. (15), yields kt≈ 17 kN/mm for specimens
CJ3 and CJ4 and k t≈ 14 kN/mm for specimen CJ5.
6.3. Centre of rotation and ultimate bending moment capacity
Equilibrium of the horizontal forces including the axial force in the
CLT panel, the shear force in the bolts because of bearing, and the force
in the bolted steel plate/LVL panels (at the interface of the spline
connection) can be used to determine the location ȳ of centre of rota-
tion as
n
∑i = 1 Ki yi
y¯ = n
∑i = 1 Ki (16)
where Ki is the overall stiffness of the component(s) i located at the
distance yi from the furthest (reference) top fibre of the STC cross-
section and ȳ is the location of the centre of rotation measured in re-
lation to the furthest top fibre of the STC cross-section (Fig. 14).
It should be noted that each stiffness Ki comprises of several spring/
stiffness components as shown in Fig. 14. Those components to be
considered for a double angle web cleat connection are (i) the stiffness
of the bolts in tension kbt, (ii) the stiffness of the web angle in bending
kwa, (iii) the stiffness of bolts in shear kbs, (iv) the bearing stiffness of the
beam web kbwb and (v) the bearing stiffness of the web angle kwab. An
elastic-perfectly plastic model is adopted for all stiffness components
F. Nouri, et al. Engineering Structures 192 (2019) 1–17

Fig. 14. Components of the STC joints and corresponding lever arms (a) double angle web cleat, (b) extended double angle web cleat.

Table 5
Comparison between experimental and analytical bending moment capacity.
Specimen Capacity Ft (kN) Stiffness kt (kN/mm) Capacity Fb (kN) Stiffness kb(i)a (kN/mm) Lever arm ytb (mm) Analytical Mr (kN m) Experiment Mu (kN m)

CJ2 405 30 310 58[98] 30 91 93.5

CJ3 232 17 310 58[98] 6 70 85.5
CJ4 232 17 310 58[98] 6 94 118.3
CJ5 200 14 310 58[98] 45 52 48.5

a
kb(i) is the equivalent stiffness at the location of each M20 bolt connecting the web of the beam to the web angle. The values in [ ] are used when the bolts are not
in tension, i.e. kbt → ∞.
b
The lever arm was measured with respect to the farthest top fibre of the CLT slab.

and the elastic stiffness of the component is calculated using Eqs. (3),
(5) and (8) and considering number of shear planes. The yield force Ft,
max in the slab-to-slab joint and the maximum Fb(i), max in bolt i are
determined according to the weakest link theory, so that
Ft,max = min (ft (net ) , fvso , fvs (max) , fvto )
and
Fb(i),max = min (Ft , Rd , Veff , Rd, Fb, Rd )
and the maximum rotation of the connection is specified accord-
ingly, to ensure that force in the weakest component remains below
values obtained from Eq. (17).
The maximum bending moment resistance Mr of the STC beam-to-
column connection can be calculated using bending moment equili-
brium (Fig. 14), so that
n
Mr = Ft |yt − y¯| + ∑ Fb(i) |yb(i) − y¯|
i=1 (18)
while the maximum force in the weakest component is limited by
Eq. (17). The right subscript t and b(i) denote the slab-to-slab compo-
(17a) nent and the bolt (i) components, respectively. It is noteworthy that
maximum capacity of the bolt components Fb and/or the maximum
capacity of the CLT-to-CLT slab connections Ft are calculated using
(17b) nominal (and/or characteristic) strength of the materials without con-
sidering any strength reduction factors and/or safety factors.
The bending moment resistance of STC beam-to-column connec-
tions CJ2 to CJ5 predicted by the analytical model are compared with
the experimental bending moment capacity in Table 5. The correlation
between the analytical and the experimental bending moment capacity
is reasonable, with the analytical model mostly underestimating the
bending moment resistance of the STC connections. This can be partly

15
F. Nouri, et al.
attributed to the use of characteristic strength of the materials (parti-
cularly timber) in the analytical model. Additionally, the accuracy of
the analytical model has been dramatically affected by the simplifying
assumptions (e.g. uniform distribution of the stresses) made at different
stages of the calculations and the implications of these assumptions on
the capacity of the weakest link, that governs the failure load. For ex-
ample, the analytical bending moment capacity of specimens CJ3 and
CJ4 are 18% and 20% smaller than the experimental results and this
significant underestimation of the loading capacity should be attributed
to Eq. (12) which only provides a conservative estimation of the tear
our failure load (i.e. Ft = 232 kN in Table 5) of the CLT-to-CLT spline
joints in CJ3 and CJ4.
7. Concluding remarks
In an innovative steel-timber composite (STC) flooring system, the
relatively high tensile strength of the timber slabs acting compositely
with the steel beams can be exploited in the hogging bending moment
regions (where the beams are connected to the columns), provided the
continuity of the timber slabs across the column is preserved. To in-
vestigate this, geometrically identical STC and steel–concrete composite
(SCC) beam-to-column cruciform subassemblies with double angle web
cleats and different timber slab-to-slab connections were tested.
Moreover, a simple analytical procedure was proposed for estimating
the bending moment capacity of the STC connections with double web
angles. The following remarks can be made with respect to the results of
the laboratory experiments and analytical model.
• Compared to the structural response of the bare steel subassembly,
the STC subassemblies demonstrated the significant contribution of
the composite action to the overall stiffness and loading capacity of
the STC beam-to-column connections.
• The cruciform STC subassembly with a continuous timber slab had
the highest service (40% of the peak load) and ultimate (80% of the
peak load) stiffness and the highest peak load carrying capacity.
However, the cruciform STC subassembly with continuous timber
slabs had the lowest ductility index.
• The STC subassembly with a bolted 6 mm spline steel plate con-
nection between the two timber slabs had a load carrying capacity
comparable to that of the steel-concrete composite subassembly.
The bending moment capacity of the STC connection was only 14%
lower than its SCC counterpart.
• Extending depth of the angle web cleats (from 150 mm to 250 mm)
significantly improved the stiffness and load carrying capacity of the
STC beam-to-column connections. The stiffness increased by ap-
proximately 30% and load carrying capacity by 38%.
• In contrast to conventional SCC connections, the STC connections
tend to develop more complex failure modes that typically involve
crushing, splitting, block tear out and plug shear failure of timber
slabs as well as yielding and fracture of mechanical fasteners.
Acknowledgement
The work in this paper was partially funded by a Research Grant
awarded to the second author by Faculty of Engineering at UNSW
Sydney. This support is acknowledged with thanks.
Appendix A. Supplementary material
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.04.092.
References
[1] Spacone E, El-Tawil S. Nonlinear analysis of steel-concrete composite structures:
state of the art. J Struct Eng 2004;130:159–68. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
16
Engineering Structures 192 (2019) 1–17
0733-9445(2004) 130:2(159).
[2] Yeoh D, Fragiacomo M, De Franceschi M, Heng Boon K. State of the art on timber-
concrete composite structures: literature review. J Struct Eng 2011;137:1085–95.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000353.
[3] Henderson IEJ, Zhu XQ, Uy B, Mirza O. Dynamic behaviour of steel-concrete
composite beams with different types of shear connectors. Part I: Experimental
study. Eng Struct 2015;103:298–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.08.
035.
[4] Bezerra LM, Barbosa WCS, Bonilla J, Cavalcante ORO. Truss-type shear connector
for composite steel-concrete beams. Constr Build Mater 2018;167:757–67. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.01.183.
[5] He S, Mosallam AS, Fang Z, Zou C, Feng W, Su J. Experimental study on CFSC
encased shear connectors in steel-concrete composite joints with UHPC grout.
Constr Build Mater 2018;173:638–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.
2018.04.086.
[6] Xu C, Su Q, Sugiura K. Fatigue behavior of the group stud shear connectors in steel-
concrete composite bridges. J Constr Steel Res 2017;138:196–207. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jcsr.2017.07.006.
[7] Ranzi G, Bradford MA, Ansourian P, Filonov A, Rasmussen KJR, Hogan TJ, et al.
Full-scale tests on composite steel-concrete beams with steel trapezoidal decking. J
Constr Steel Res 2009;65:1490–506. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2009.03.006.
[8] Ataei A, Bradford MA, Liu X. Experimental study of composite beams having a
precast geopolymer concrete slab and deconstructable bolted shear connectors. Eng
Struct 2016;114:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.10.041.
[9] Khorsandnia N, Valipour H, Schänzlin J, Crews K. Experimental investigations of
deconstructable timber-concrete composite beams. J Struct Eng
2016;142:04016130. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001607.
[10] Boccadoro L, Zweidler S, Steiger R, Frangi A. Bending tests on timber-concrete
composite members made of beech laminated veneer lumber with notched con-
nection. Eng Struct 2017;132:14–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.11.
029.
[11] Fragiacomo M. Long-term behavior of timber-concrete composite beams. II: nu-
merical analysis and simplified evaluation. J Struct Eng 2006;132:23–33. https://
doi.org/10.1061/A ͑ SCE͒0733-9445͑2006͒132: 1͑23͒.
[12] Khorsandnia N, Schänzlin J, Valipour H, Crews K. Time-dependent behaviour of
timber-concrete composite members: numerical verification, sensitivity and influ-
ence of material properties. Constr Build Mater 2014;66:192–208. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.05.079.
[13] Branco JM, Kekeliak M, Lourenço PB. In-plane stiffness of traditional timber floors
strengthened with CLT. RILEM Book Series 2014;9:725–37. https://doi.org/10.
1007/978-94-007-7811-5_65.
[14] Jacquier N, Girhammar UA. Tests on glulam-CLT shear connections with double-
sided punched metal plate fasteners and inclined screws. Constr Build Mater
2014;72:444–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.08.095.
[15] Masoudnia R, Hashemi A, Quenneville P. Evaluation of effective flange width in the
CLT composite T-beams. In: WCTE 2016 – World conf timber eng, 2016.
[16] Hassanieh A. Development of steel-timber composite system for large scale con-
struction. PhD dissertation. UNSW; 2017.
[17] Hassanieh A, Valipour HR, Bradford MA. Load-slip behaviour of steel-cross lami-
nated timber (CLT) composite connections. J Constr Steel Res 2016. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2016.03.008.
[18] Hassanieh A, Valipour HR, Bradford MA. Experimental and analytical behaviour of
steel-timber composite connections. Constr Build Mater 2016;118:63–75. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.05.052.
[19] Hassanieh A, Valipour HR, Bradford MA. Composite connections between CLT slab
and steel beam: experiments and empirical models. J Constr Steel Res
2017;138:823–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2017.09.002.
[20] Loss C, Piazza M, Zandonini R. Connections for steel–timber hybrid prefabricated
buildings. Part I: experimental tests. Constr Build Mater 2016;122:781–95. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.12.002.
[21] Loss C, Piazza M, Zandonini R. Connections for steel–timber hybrid prefabricated
buildings. Part II: innovative modular structures. Constr Build Mater
2016;122:796–808. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.12.001.
[22] Loss C, Frangi A. Experimental investigation on in-plane stiffness and strength of
innovative steel-timber hybrid floor diaphragms. Eng Struct 2017;138:229–44.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.02.032.
[23] Hassanieh A, Valipour HR, Bradford MA. Experimental and numerical investigation
of short-term behaviour of CLT-steel composite beams. Eng Struct 2017;144:43–57.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.04.052.
[24] Hassanieh A, Valipour HR, Bradford MA. Experimental and numerical study of
steel-timber composite (STC) beams. J Constr Steel Res 2016. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.jcsr.2016.04.005.
[25] Hassanieh A, Valipour HR, Bradford MA, Sandhaas C. Modelling of steel-timber
composite connections: validation of finite element model and parametric study.
Eng Struct 2017;138:35–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.02.016.
[26] Nethercot DA. Semirigid joint action and the design of nonsway composite frames.
Eng Struct 1995;17:554–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/0141-0296(95)00012-V.
[27] Chan SL, Chui PPT. Non-linear static and cyclic analysis of steel frames with semi-
rigid connections; 1999. 10.1016/B978-008042998-4/50002-8.
[28] Chen W-F, Kishi N. Semirigid steel beam to column connections: data base and
modeling. J Struct Eng 1989;115:105–19. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-
9445(1989) 115:1(105).
[29] Kishi N, Hasan R, Chen WF, Goto Y. Study of Eurocode 3 steel connection classi-
fication. Eng Struct 1997;19:772–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(96)
00151-4.
[30] Wu FH, Chen WF. A design model for semi-rigid connections. Eng Struct
F. Nouri, et al.
1990;12:88–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/0141-0296(90)90013-I.
[31] Hong K, Yang JG, Lee SK. Parametric study of double angle framing connections
subjected shear and tension. J Constr Steel Res 2001;57:997–1013. https://doi.org/
10.1016/S0143-974X(01)00019-0.
[32] Prabha P, Rekha S, Marimuthu V, Saravanan M, Palani GS, Surendran M. Modified
Frye-Morris polynomial model for double web-angle connections. Int J Adv Struct
Eng 2015;7:295–306. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40091-015-0100-y.
[33] Kong Z, Kim SE. Moment-rotation model of single-web angle connections. Int J
Mech Sci 2017;126:24–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2017.03.008.
[34] Lee SS, Moon TS. Moment-rotation model of semi-rigid connections with angles.
Eng Struct 2002;24:227–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(01)00066-9.
[35] Loureiro A, Reinosa JM, Gutiérrez R, Moreno A. New proposals on the calculation of
the flexural resistance in angle connections. J Constr Steel Res 2011;67:613–22.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2010.11.018.
[36] Kong Z, Kim SE. Moment-rotation behavior of top-and seat-angle connections with
double web angles. J Constr Steel Res 2017;128:428–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jcsr.2016.09.010.
[37] Yang B, Tan KH. Robustness of bolted-angle connections against progressive col-
lapse: experimental tests of beam-column joints and development of component-
based models. J Struct Eng 2013;139:1498–514. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
ST.1943-541X.0000749.
[38] Fu Q, Yang B, Hu Y, Xiong G, Nie S, Zhang W, et al. Dynamic analyses of bolted-
angle steel joints against progressive collapse based on component-based model. J
Constr Steel Res 2016;117:161–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2015.10.010.
[39] Zhong W, Meng B, Hao J. Performance of different stiffness connections against
progressive collapse. J Constr Steel Res 2017;135:162–75. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.jcsr.2017.04.021.
[40] de Oliveira TJL, de Miranda Batista E. Modelling beam-to-girder semi-rigid com-
posite connection with angles including the effects of concrete tension stiffness. Eng
Struct 2009;31:1865–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2009.03.025.
[41] Yang B, Tan KH, Xiong G. Behaviour of composite beam-column joints under a
middle-column-removal scenario: component-based modelling. J Constr Steel Res
2015;104:137–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2014.10.003.
[42] Yang B, Tan KH. Behavior of composite beam-column joints in a middle-column-
removal scenario: experimental tests. J Struct Eng 2014;140:04013045. https://doi.
org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000805.
[43] Yang B, Tan KH, Xiong G, Nie SD. Experimental study about composite frames
under an internal column-removal scenario. J Constr Steel Res 2016;121:341–51.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2016.03.001.
[44] Kang S-B, Tan KH, Liu H-Y, Zhou X-H, Yang B. Effect of boundary conditions on the
behaviour of composite frames against progressive collapse. J Constr Steel Res
2017;138:150–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2017.07.005.
[45] SA (Standards Australia). Structural design actions Set. AS/NZS 1170; 2002.
[46] BSI (British Standards Institution). Structural timber. Strength classes. London;
2009.
17
Engineering Structures 192 (2019) 1–17
[47] SA (Standards Australia). Structural design actions—Permanent, imposed and other
actions. AS/NZS 11701:2002; 2002.
[48] BSI (British Standards Institution). Eurocode 5: Design of timber structures.
General. Common rules and rules for buildings. BS EN 1995-1-12004+A22014;
2014.
[49] CEN (European Commitee for Standardization). Design of steel structures - Part 1-8:
Design of joints. Eurocode 3; 2006, 1.
[50] SA (Standards Australia). Steel Structures. AS4100-1998; 2016.
[51] Keipour N, Valipour HR, Bradford MA. Steel-timber composite beam-to-column
joints: effect of connections between timber slabs. J Constr Steel Res
2018;151:132–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2018.09.019.
[52] Keipour N, Valipour HR, Bradford MA. Experimental study of steel-timber compo-
site (STC) beam to steel column joints having a flush end-plate. Eng Struct
2018;174:906–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.08.009.
[53] SA (Standards Australia). Timber structures-Design methods. AS 17201-2010; 2010.
[54] CEN (European Commitee for Standardization). Design of composite steel and
concrete structures Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings. Eurocode 4;
2004. p. 1–117. 10.1680/dgte4.31517.
[55] SA (Standards Australia). Methods of test for veneer and plywood Moisture content
of veneer and plywood. AS/NZS 20981:2006; 2016.
[56] CEN (European Commitee for Standardization). Timber structures - Structural
timber and glued laminated timber - determination of some physical and me-
chanical properties. CEN - EN 408; 2012.
[57] SA (Standards Australia). Structural steel Hot-rolled bars and sections. AS/NZS
36791:2010; 2010.
[58] Ataei A, Bradford MA, Valipour HR. Experimental study of flush end plate beam-to-
CFST column composite joints with deconstructable bolted shear connectors. Eng
Struct 2015;99:616–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.05.012.
[59] SA (Standards Australia). ISO metric hexagon precision bolts and screws. AS 1110-
1984; 2000.
[60] SA (Standards Australia). Mechanical properties of fastenersmade of carbon steel
and alloy steel. AS 42911-2000; 2015.
[61] BSI (British Standards Institution). Timber structures. Joints made with mechanical
fasteners. General principles for the determination of strength and deformation
characteristics. BS EN 268911991; 1991.
[62] BSI (British Standards Institution). Timber structures. Test methods. Cyclic testing
of joints made with mechanical fasteners. BS EN 125122001; 2001.
[63] Nouri F, Bradford M, Valipour H. Steel-timber composite beam-to-column con-
nections with shear tab. J Struct Eng 2018. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)st.1943-
541x.0002274.
[64] CEN (European Commitee for Standardization). Design of timber structures.
Eurocode 5; 2011.
[65] Zarnani P, Quenneville P. New design approach for controlling brittle failure modes
of small-dowel-type connections in Cross-laminated Timber (CLT). Constr Build
Mater 2015;100:172–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.09.049.