Structures 33 (2021) 3798–3809

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/structures

Experimental evaluation and analysis of flexural response of sandwich

beam panels with an expanded polystyrene core
Sourav Chakraborty, Supraj Reddy, Kolluru V.L. Subramaniam *
Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad, Hyderabad, TS 502285, India

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The flexural behaviour of sandwich beam panels with integrated reinforcement and expanded polystyrene (EPS)
Sandwich beams core is evaluated at different shear span to depth (a/d) ratios. The sandwich beam is a lightweight, thin member
Panels consisting of two reinforced concrete structural wythes with diagonal truss-type connectors. In this experimental
Flexure
study, the strain profiles are measured accurately using digital image correlation (DIC) to study the level of
Shear
EPS
composite action in flexure. The measured strain profiles indicate a significant level of independent bending in
Non-composite behaviour the two wythes that are accommodated within the shear deformation of the core. The cracking moment of the
a/d ratio beam panels depends on the a/d ratio. The stresses obtained from sectional analysis and composite beam theory
do not account for the shear deformation of the EPS core and significantly over-estimate the initial stiffness and
cracking load. Flexural response predicted by sandwich beam theory considering an anti-plane core is derived
and used to estimate the stress and strain states in the beam panel cross-section. The sandwich beam theory gives
a correct representation of the experimentally measured strain profile in flexure and an accurate estimate of the
cracking load. The dependence of the flexural cracking moment on the a/d ratio is also accurately predicted. The
displacement profiles from DIC indicate that the flexural cracking in the sandwich panel produces a hinge-type
opening of the crack. The progressive opening of the hinge produces a localized flexural failure, and the con­
ventional sectional analysis derived from composite beam theory gives a conservative prediction of the ultimate
flexural capacity.

1. Introduction
Lightweight construction, which uses sandwich core construction for
structural slabs and walls, is increasingly being used for rapid and
affordable construction and meets the increasing demand for housing
[32,33]. Typical sandwich core panels consist of two thin reinforced
concrete wythes separated by a lightweight core. Reinforcement in the
wythes is provided in the form of welded wire mesh or conventional
reinforcement. The wythes are the primary structural elements, which
are connected by different types of shear connectors. The level of in­
ternal longitudinal interface shear transfer provided by the connectors
results in different degrees of composite behaviour of the sandwich
panel. The sandwich core slab panels can be used for precast elements or
in-situ casting [19,25]. Besides a weight reduction, this form of con­
struction offers rapid construction and other environmental benefits
[32,33]. Additionally, the use of insulating core material provides
enhanced thermal and acoustic performance.
Pre-engineered panels with 3-D reinforcement consisting of 2 layers
of steel mesh with shear connectors are used for producing the sandwich
beam panels (as shown in Fig. 1). The 3-D reinforcement provides the
required integrity to the pre-engineered panel for handling, trans­
portation, and erection. After casting, the integrated 3-D reinforcement
is the primary structural reinforcement in the sandwich core panel,
which may be augmented with additional conventional reinforcement
for providing structural capacity. The flexural behaviour of the sand­
wich beams is influenced by the individual flexural behaviour of the
wythes and the relative motion between the wythes. Analytical formu­
lations for predicting the stress state in the wythes under flexure have
typically used the sectional analysis [29,15]. The assumption of a
continuous strain profile across the cross-section leads to an over-
prediction of the elastic stresses [15]. In refined procedures consid­
ering the layered beam analysis, the slip between the layers is consid­
ered as the reason for discontinuity at the interface between the beams
[16,26,10,24]. Using the prediction of the multi-beam models provides a
simplistic representation of stress states in flexure, which is derived in
terms of levels of composite action, as shown in Fig. 1(b). The multi-

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: kvls@iith.ac.in (K.V.L. Subramaniam).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2021.06.088
Received 29 April 2020; Received in revised form 15 May 2021; Accepted 22 June 2021
Available online 7 July 2021
2352-0124/© 2021 Institution of Structural Engineers. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
S. Chakraborty et al.
Fig. 1. (a) Schematic representation of the sandwich beam panel with integrated reinforcement; (b) Strain distributions in the sandwich core beams assuming
different levels of composite action between the wythes, fully composite response in conformity with the sectional analysis, partially composite, and non-composite.
Fig. 2. The prefabricated integrated reinforcement and EPS core used in the sandwich panel: (a) photograph; and (b) schematic view of the reinforcement and
EPS core.
layer beam representation requires an estimate of the slip accommo­
dated in the EPS core to estimate the level of individual flexure in the
concrete wythes. Additionally, the zig-zag theory has also been applied
to analyze stress states in the sandwich beams [17,1,2].
The current design procedures for using the sandwich core panels as
roof and floor slabs are largely empirical and derived from experimental
observations. The very complex flexural behaviour of the sandwich core
beams due to the combined effects of material nonlinearity, and un­
certainty in the level of shear transfer between the wythes, combined
with a lack of mechanistic understanding of the flexural response has
resulted in the use of simplified analytical procedures backed with
experimental data. The level of composite action between the wythes
varies with the size of the panels tested, and the type of shear connector
used [21,6,8,23,20,5,18,30,13,31]. The interpretation of the available
data in the literature is often difficult due to the lack of proper analytical
models, which would provide a mechanistic understanding of the
measured response. In the absence of a proper analytical framework to
study the actual behaviour of the sandwich core beams, the stress states
in the wythes are primarily derived from finite element simulations
[11,12]. Practical design methodologies for flexural capacity evaluation
use sectional analysis based on the conventional beam theory [25]. The
conventional beam theory gives conservative estimates of the ultimate
sectional capacity. The initial elastic response and the cracking loads are
grossly under-estimated by the sectional analysis [15]. The validity of
calculating the ultimate capacity using conventional theories, which
implicitly assume composite action, has not been verified. The
3799
Structures 33 (2021) 3798–3809
verification of any theory for predicting the flexural response of a
sandwich beam is also hampered by the lack of experimental strain
measurements from the beams.
This study focuses on investigating the flexural response of sandwich
beam panels made with pre-engineered monolithic integrated rein­
forcement in the form of two-wire meshes with a 3-D arrangement of
truss-shaped shear connectors and an expanded polystyrene (EPS) core.
The diagonal truss connectors have previously been assumed to provide
shear transfer between the wythes, justifying the applicability of con­
ventional beam theory for predicting the flexural response of the sand­
wich beam panels [6]. In the experimental program, the one-way
flexural response of the beam panels is evaluated at different shear
slenderness ratios. The wire meshes serve as internal reinforcement in
the concrete wythes of the beam panels. The strain state in the sandwich
beam panel under flexure is experimentally determined and used to
validate the prediction of sandwich beam theory. The stress state in the
sandwich beam panel is also verified using finite element analysis. The
post-cracking response in the sandwich beam panel is evaluated, and the
flexural capacity of the sandwich core panels is established.
2. Materials and methods
Pre-fabricated panels with integrated 3D reinforcement and a core of
EPS were used to fabricate sandwich core panels with concrete wythes.
The 3D reinforcement consisted of two 50 mm × 50 mm welded steel
wire meshes of galvanized steel, with welded diagonal shear connectors
S. Chakraborty et al.
Fig. 3. A schematic of the flexural testing configuration of the beam panel and the cross-section of the beam (all dimensions in mm).
Fig. 4. Photograph of the test setup with the DIC setup: 1. 300 kN actuator; 2.
Loading Beam; 3. Test Specimen; 4. Roller Supports; 5. DIC Camera; 6. A
computer for image acquisition; 7. Light Source for DIC.
of diameter 2.5 mm. The spacing between the welded wire meshes was
equal to 100 mm. The diagonal shear connectors were provided at a
spacing of 100 mm in both directions. A schematic diagram of the
reinforcement and a photograph of the pre-fabricated integrated rein­
forcement with EPS core are shown in Fig. 2. The reinforcing steel used
in the welded wire meshes and the diagonal truss connectors conformed
to Fe 650 grade steel. The Young’s modulus of the steel was 200 GPa,
and the yield stress at 0.2% offset strain was equal to 650 MPa. The
ultimate stress of the steel was 1100 MPa.
The mixture proportions by mass of the concrete used in the wythes
were cementitious material: fine aggregate: coarse aggregate: water =
1.0:2.5:2.4:0.5. In the cementitious material, the mass proportion of
cement: fly ash was 0.7:0.3. A commercially available cement con­
forming to IS 3812 and siliceous fly ash meeting the requirements of IS
1727 was used. The specific gravities of the cement and the fly ash were
3.1 and 2.5, respectively. Crushed granite fine aggregate with a specific
gravity of 2.67 and fineness modulus of 2.83 was used. The coarse
aggregate was crushed granite with a specific gravity equal to 2.67. Two
different size fractions of coarse aggregate fractions 10–4.75 mm and
20–10 mm were used in equal proportions.
The concrete was prepared in a drum mixer. The ingredients were
loaded into the mixer in the decreasing order of sizes and dry mixed for
two minutes. Water was then added gradually in the rotating mixer and
allowed to mix for an additional 5 min. Beams panels of dimensions 150
mm (height), 1500 mm (length), and 150 mm width were cast. The
thickness of the two concrete wythes was equal to 40 mm. A typical
cross-section of the beam is shown in Fig. 3(b). The 3D reinforcement
with the EPS was cut to the required shape and placed in a mould. The
two wythes were cast simultaneously in the mould. After casting, the
beam panels were kept covered to prevent drying. The beam panels were
removed from the moulds 24 h after casting and wrapped with wet
3800
Structures 33 (2021) 3798–3809
burlap. The burlap was kept wet for 28 days after casting. Standard 150
mm cubes were also made from each concrete batch to evaluate
compressive strength.
2.1. Flexural test
The cross-section of the beam panel was 150 mm × 150 mm. Each
beam panel contained two rows of diagonal truss connectors, which
were spaced 100 mm apart. The flexural reinforcement in each wythe
consisted of 3, 2.5 mm wires in the longitudinal direction. The truss
connectors were placed symmetrically about the mid-plane of the beam.
The beam panels were tested in flexure using a closed-loop servo-hy­
draulic testing machine. Three-point loading was applied to the beams at
two different shear span to depth (a/d) ratios equal to 3.0 and 4.0. Shear
span to depth ratio is a parameter to control the effect of shear in a beam.
The lower shear span to depth ratio makes the loading condition more
shear dominant. Five beam panels were tested at each a/d ratio. The
loading fixtures conformed to the requirements of ASTM C 1699. The
loading and supports were steel rollers, which allowed swivelling to
minimize torque in the beam panel during loading. A schematic diagram
of the flexural testing configuration and a photograph of the test setup
are shown in Figs. 3 and 4, respectively.
The flexure test was controlled using the deflection measured at the
centre of the beam panel. Two linear variable displacement transducers
(LVDTs) were mounted at mid-span, one on each side, to measure the
deflection of the specimen. The net deflection of the specimen was
increased at a constant rate of 0.04 mm/min up to a value of span/900
(L/900). After that, up to a deflection of L/150, the loading rate was
increased to 0.08 mm/min. Beyond L/150 and up to failure, the loading
rate was kept constant at 0.158 mm/min.
2.2. Digital image correlation
Full-field surface displacements were obtained from the beam panels
using the digital image correlation (DIC) technique. Two-dimensional
DIC was performed on the digital images of the beam panels recorded
during the flexure test. The image of the un-deformed specimen
(referred to as the reference image) was captured before initiating the
loading. Digital images of the specimen were captured at regular in­
tervals during the test. Spatial correlation between the reference image
and the images captured under loading was performed to generate
continuous profiles of surface displacement.
A speckle pattern was sprayed on the surface of the beam panel. The
speckle pattern was created by painting the surface white and then using
a mist of black paint. A random pattern of black dots created in the
process represents a unique sprayed-on speckle pattern. Digital images
of the specimen were acquired using a 5-megapixel camera, which was
fitted with a 50 mm lens. The camera was placed at a distance of 1 m
from the specimen surface. The physical calibration of the pixels was in
S. Chakraborty et al. Structures 33 (2021) 3798–3809

Fig. 5. Load response of 3D reinforced sandwich beams in three-point bending tested at: (a) a/d = 3.0 and (b) a/d = 4.0.

(a)

(b)
Fig. 6. Crack pattern at failure in beam panels tested at: (a) a/d of 3 and (b) a/d of 4.

the range of 12–14 pixels per mm. The speckle pattern was stored as a
grayscale map over the surface of the beam. The sprayed-on speckle
pattern represents a unique grayscale variation across the surface of the
beam, which was matched between the deformed and the reference
images using a spatial domain cross-correlation analysis. The image
analysis was performed using the commercially available software VIC
2DTM. The correlation was performed over smaller portions of the im­
ages called subsets [27,28,7]). Subsets of size 35 × 35 pixels were used
for the correlation analysis. The analysis provides accuracy on the scale
of the pixel in the digital representation of the image. A quantic B-spline
interpolation of the greyscale values was performed to provide sub-pixel
scale accuracy in the measured displacements [9,22]. The strains were

3801
S. Chakraborty et al. Structures 33 (2021) 3798–3809

(a) (b) (c)

(d) (e) (f)

Fig. 7. Contours of εxx from DIC from beam panel with a/d = 3 (a) Load Point1; (b) Load Point 2; Load Point 3; with a/d = 4: (d) Load Point 1; (e) Load Point 2; (f)
Load Point 3.

load response of the beams tested with a/d = 4. Typical photographs of

150 failed specimens are shown in Fig. 6(a) and (b). In the failed specimens,
the large opening of the main flexural crack is evident.
Y Distance(mm)

FEM 100
Composite Theory
Sandwich Theory
DIC 50
0 response before cracking, immediately after cracking, and in the hard­
-0.0004 -0.0002 0 0.0002 0.0004
Strain in X Direction
Fig. 8. Comparison of εxx for a beam tested at a/d = 3 at an applied load equal
to 6 kN.
calculated from the gradients of the displacement field. The random
error in the measured displacement for the setup used in this study was
in the range of 0.02 pixels.
3. Experimental results
The load–deflection responses recorded from the beam panels are
shown in Fig. 5. The responses from two specimens which show the
range of observed responses are shown in the graph for clarity. The
initial elastic load responses are shown in the insets for clarity. The
initial load response was linear up to cracking. A flexural crack was
identified at the mid-span location directly below the load point. The
cracking was immediately followed by a decrease in the load. The load
essentially dropped and then remained constant, before exhibiting a
strain hardening response with increasing deflection. In the post-
cracking load response, the flexural crack at the mid-span continued
to open. The final failure was produced by rupturing the steel even
before the crushing of concrete in compression. The rupturing of steel
was also evident in the load drop following the attainment of peak load
in the load response. The rupturing of the three wires in the mesh along
the longitudinal direction is evident in the three-step decrease in the
3.1. Analysis of digital image correlation
The contours of strain in the X-direction corresponding to load-
ening zone (identified as Points 1, 2, and 3 on the load response of beam
tested at a/d of 3 and 4) are shown in Fig. 7. The strain contours just
prior to cracking are essentially continuous. At Point 2 on the load
response, a through crack is clearly identified below the point of load
application. The crack introduces a displacement discontinuity, which
introduces a jump in the contours. The break in the contours indicates
that the crack is formed over the entire depth of the beam. On increasing
the deflection (at Point 3), the flexural crack at the mid-span continues
to open and widen across the depth of the beam. No other cracks were
identified over the length of the shear span.
The variation of strain in the linear part of the load response at an
applied load of 6 kN from a beam with an a/d = 3, obtained from an
analysis of DIC contours is shown in Fig. 8. The strains in the X-direction,
εxx, across the depth of the beam were obtained at discrete locations, as
shown marked in Fig. 7(a). The origin of the coordinate system used for
analyzing the strains is shown in Fig. 7. The load point is located at a
distance of 25 mm from the origin of the coordinate system used in
Fig. 7. In Fig. 8, the top and bottom wythes are shown marked for clarity
and are located at Y = 40 and 110 mm. The strains along the depth of the
sandwich beam panel are plotted for distinct guage points identified
with a set of boxes (G1, G2, G3), 80 pixels × 80 pixels in size. The guage
points were located at a distance of 20 mm from the centerline (the point
of load application), as shown in Fig. 3. The line joining the guage points
was perpendicular to the axis of the beam (shown in Fig. 7(a)). Due to
the significant level of noise in the measurement close to the edges, there
is a significant variation in the values. The measurements in the top
wythe were also influenced by the large compression in the presence of

3802
S. Chakraborty et al. Structures 33 (2021) 3798–3809

is identified at X = 25 mm (relative to the coordinate system shown in

Fig. 9. Variation of Ux at different points identified in the load response of the
beam tested with an a/d = 3.
the loading point close to the top edge. The measured strains, however,
are very different from the strain profile expected under the plane sec­
tion assumption. The strain gradients in the top and bottom wythes show
similar patterns. While both wythes show a significant bending about
their respective axes, strain reversal is clearly identified in the bottom
wythe. The independent bending of the two wythes is accommodated
within the shear deformation of the EPS core. An accurate representa­
tion of the stress state in the sandwich beam panel, therefore, requires
consideration of the shear deformation of the EPS core.
The displacement in the X-direction, Ux, along a line with fixed Y
coordinate located at a distance 25 mm above the bottom face of the
beam (shown marked in Fig. 7) at different points in the load response
(shown marked in Fig. 5) are shown in Fig. 9. The formation of the crack
Fig. 7), where a discontinuity develops in the Ux. The stress concentra­
tion produced by the crack formed at the location X = 25 mm and
subsequent crack propagation is associated with a sharp gradient in Ux
within a small region (values of X close to 25 mm). There is an abrupt
increase in the Ux with X at X = 25 mm. The UX in the far-field regions
away from the localized region varies linearly with a small slope. The
variation of UX in the far-field remains essentially constant with X. The
Ux for X > 26 mm and X < 23 mm continue to increase in magnitude
with increasing deflection of the beam.
In the spatial cross-correlation, there is a loss of correlation within a
finite region close to the crack. The crack produces a physical discon­
tinuity in the medium. Since the cross-correlation was performed using
smaller subsets, the subsets physically overlapping with the crack have
poor correlations. From physical calibration, there was a loss of corre­
lations over a width of 3.5 mm centred on the crack. The result of the
breakdown of correlations over the finite width was to produce a local
rise in the displacements at the edge of the crack and a smearing of the
displacement gradient. An asymptote-matching procedure, which does
not rely on the local displacements close to the crack, was developed to
accurately estimate the crack opening displacement. The physical sep­
aration is determined by the asymptotic trends in the far-field
displacement. Along a line of a constant Y coordinate, the asymptotic
displacement profiles with the X-coordinate are produced by flexure.
The details of the asymptote matching procedure for estimating crack
opening displacement along the crack are presented elsewhere [9,22].

Crack opening displacement (mm)

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
0
2nd Point
Y Distance (mm)

-50 3rd Point

4th Point
-100 5th Point

-150

Fig. 10. Plot of the crack opening displacement across the depth of a beam with a/d = 3.

Fig. 11. Typical crack opening due to the formation of the hinge.

Table 1
A comparison of the experimental and analytical derived cracking and ultimate moment capacities.
Experimental Prediction using sectional analysis Prediction sandwich beam
theory

a/ Compressive strength#, fck Cracking moment [range]* Ultimate moment [range]* Cracking moment Ultimate moment Cracking Moment& (kNm)
d (MPa) (kNm) (kNm) (kNm) (kNm)

3 53 1.75 [1.6 to 1.9] 2.4 [2.2 to 2.6] 2.9 2.11 1.7

4 38 1.3 [1.2 to 1.4] 1.8 [1.6 to 2.1] 2.12 2.096 1.4
#
The compressive strength from companion cubes.
&
Calculated using the corresponding compressive strength of concrete
*
The range of values from five beam panels are listed.

3803
S. Chakraborty et al.
Fig. 12. (a) Schematic of the Finite Element model; and (b) Contours of stress at an applied load of 6 kN from finite element analysis.
Fig. 13. Dimensions and cross-section of the sandwich beam.
Straight-line equations were fitted to the far-field displacements on
either side of the crack. The slopes of the fitted linear equations to the
displacements were found to be nominally equal. The displacement
discontinuity produced by the crack opening was determined from the
difference in the intercepts of the line equations fitted to the far-field
displacements.
The asymptote matching procedure was used to determine the crack
opening at different depths across the depth of the beam. A plot of the
crack opening width along the depth of the beam for the beam with a/d
= 3 is shown in Fig. 10. To produce the crack opening profile, the crack
opening displacement was determined along horizontal lines spaced 6.0
mm apart (at 80 pixels spacing). The crack opening displacement pro­
files plotted in the figure correspond to the different points identified in
the load response (marked in Fig. 5). The crack opening profiles indicate
that at Load Point 2, the flexural crack is formed in the bottom wythe
and immediately propagates through the entire thickness of the bottom
wythe and the EPS core. The flexural crack also propagates for some
distance into the top wythe of concrete. The available data indicates that
the flexural response in three-point bending is dominated by the for­
mation and opening of a crack at the mid-span. The crack essentially
opens up like a hinge with an increasing deflection at the mid-span.
Since no additional cracking was observed in the shear span, the shear
spans essentially remain elastic, and the additional deflection is pro­
duced by the opening of the crack. The strain contours indicate a very
small region of concrete close to the top, which is un-cracked. The hinge-
like opening of the flexural crack at the mid-span results from a small
region of concrete in compression in the top wythe and the steel rein­
forcement across the crack in the bottom wythe. The continued opening
of the crack produces an increasing strain in the tension steel in the
bottom wythe. With a continued opening of the crack, the resistance in
flexure is derived from the tensile stress in steel. The load responses after
3804
Structures 33 (2021) 3798–3809
cracking identified with a constant load and the strain hardening re­
sponses are therefore identified with the moment-rotation response of a
cracked reinforced section. The increase in deflection of the beam at a
constant load is attributed to the sudden decrease in stiffness between
the un-cracked and the cracked sections. The strain hardening in the
steel stress–strain response produces the hardening observed in the load
response. The ultimate failure is produced by the rupture of the steel
reinforcement across the crack before the concrete in the top fibre gets
crushed.
A schematic representation of the beam in flexure after cracking is
shown in Fig. 11. In this representation, the flexural resistance is derived
from the hinge formed between the concrete in compression at the top
and the steel reinforcement in tension at the bottom. While the steel in
the top wythe also contributes to the tensile force, its contribution to the
moment resistance is small considering the small lever arm from the
compressive stress resultant. The applied shear at the hinge is resisted by
the shear resistance of the un-cracked concrete at the top wythe and the
dowel action of the steel reinforcement. With an increasing rotation of
the hinge, there is an insignificant change in the area of compression,
resulting in a hinge type opening behaviour. The final failure is deter­
mined by the ultimate capacities of steel reinforcement in tension and
the concrete in compression.
4. Analysis of results
4.1. Analysis considering sectional analysis
The flexural response of the sandwich core panel is analyzed
considering sectional analysis within the constraints imposed by the
beam theory. The moment–curvature response of the composite beam
cross-section was developed following the provisions of ACI 318R [3].
S. Chakraborty et al.
Fig. 14. Sandwich beam deflections.
Assuming a linear strain profile, the cracking and ultimate moments
were predicted and are shown in Table 1. In deriving the predictions
from the sectional analysis, the respective compressive strength of the
concrete was used for estimating the modulus of elasticity and the
modulus of rupture of concrete. The modulus of elasticity of concrete (E)
in the wythes was estimated from its compressive strength using the
empirical relationship given in IS 456 [14] as
√̅̅̅̅̅
E = 5000 fck (1)
where fck is the compressive cube strength of concrete. The compressive
strength of the concrete obtained from testing companion cubes are
listed in Table 1. The strain profile predicted by the sectional analysis is
plotted in Fig. 8 for comparison. The sectional analysis erroneously
predicts that both wythes are bent in single curvature. The stresses in the
elastic state are therefore incorrectly predicted [29].
The cracking moment predicted by sectional analysis is listed in
Table 1. The tensile strength of the concrete wythe was taken as the
√̅̅̅̅̅̅
modulus of rupture equal to 0.7 fck obtained from the empirical for­
mula suggested in IS 456 [14]. The ultimate condition was obtained as a
3805
Structures 33 (2021) 3798–3809
Fig. 15. Deformation in the beam produced by the shear deformation of the
core and the flexure of the wythes.
Fig. 16. Deflection according to ordinary bending theory.
rupture of steel. It can be seen that the cracking moment predicted by
the sectional analysis is significantly over-predicted. The ultimate
moment capacity obtained from the sectional analysis, however, closely
matches the value obtained experimentally. The cracking moment ob­
tained experimentally varies with the a/d ratio. The beam theory,
however, predicts the same cracking moment. This indicates that the
application of the beam theory, assuming complete composite action, is
incorrect for the stress analysis prior to cracking. In the post-cracking
response, which was produced by the opening of a flexural hinge at
the location of the highest moment, the beam theory provides an
acceptable representation for the ultimate failure condition.
4.2. Evaluation of stress response using sandwich beam theory
The sandwich beam consists of two structural wythes, which are
separated by a lighter and less stiff core. An analytical framework for the
sandwich core beams has been developed which considers the defor­
mation of the core. The 3D reinforced sandwich core with EPS represents
the case of a sandwich beam with an anti-plane core is an idealized core
S. Chakraborty et al. Structures 33 (2021) 3798–3809

range between 180 and 270 MPa. An effective shear modulus of 250
MPa was used in the analysis.
The strain state in Beam 1 tested at a/d = 3 at an applied load equal
to 6 kN predicted by the sandwich beam theory is shown in Fig. 8. The
material properties of concrete and the core were those obtained from
matching the elastic response of the beam. The predictions of the theory
are based on a value of effective shear modulus of the core and the truss
connectors. The patterns of strain in both wythes obtained from sand­
wich beam theory indicate significant bending about their respective
axes. The stress state in the bottom wythe at the mid-span location
predicted by the theory agrees favourably with the values obtained from
DIC analysis. The measured strain in the top wyhte obtained from DIC
has a significant influence of the load point compression, which there­
fore indicates a higher level of comcpression. The theory predicts that
the two wythes are essentially independently bending about their
respective neutral axes. The strain obtained from the sectional analysis
following composite beam theory is also plotted in the figure for refer­
ence. It can be seen that the measured strains in the beam are signifi­
cantly different from those predicted by sectional analysis under the
assumption of plane sections remaining plane after bending. The
Fig. 17. Deflections due to shear deformations of core alone. cracking load was predicted by the sandwich theory and is listed in
Table 1. The cracking loads obtained from the sandwich beam theory
in which the modulus of elasticity in planes parallel with the wythes is provides a close match with the experimental values. Further, the
zero but the shear modulus in planes perpendicular to the wythes is sandwich beam theory predicts the dependence of the cracking moment
finite. A detailed derivation of the stress analysis of the sandwich core on the a/d ratio. The cracking moment decreases with the a/d ratio.
beam with an anti-plane core is presented in Appendix I. For the beam
shown in Fig. 3, the stress across the cross-section predicted by sandwich 5. Evaluation of results and discussion
beam theory is given as
PL
{[(
2x
)
2
]
c + 2t 2 Finite element analysis was also performed to evaluate the stress
σ=± 1− − (β1 coshax − sinhax) ± (β1 coshax states in the wythes. A detailed finite element model of the sandwich
4 L aL 2I aL
} core beam was developed considering the wire meshes, the diagonal
t
− sinhax) truss elements, EPS core and concrete wythes as shown in Fig. 12. The
2If
wire mesh and the truss connectors were modelled using the one-
(2) dimesional T3D2 elements available in ABAQUS. The concrete and
EPS layers were modelled using C3D8R elements. No of the elements
where P is the applied load, L is the span of the beam given by the centre-
along the width of the beam is 30 and along the length of the beam is
to-centre distance between the supports, x is the distance from load, c is
300. The material properties for the steel wire mesh, the EPS and the
the thickness of the core, t it the thickness of the concrete wythes, I is the
concrete wythes were those determined from the experimental program.
second moment of area of the wythes about the centroid of the sand­
The E and Poisson’s ratio (ν) of the steel were taken as 200 GPa and 0.3,
wich, If is the sum of the second moments of area of the wythes about
respectively. The E and G of the EPS were taken as 600 MPa and 250
their own centroids, and
MPa, respectively. The E and ν of the concrete were taken as 31.6 GPa
β1 = tanhθ (3) and 0.2, respectively.
The strain across the depth of the beam for an applied load equal to 6
aL kN predicted by the finite element analysis is plotted in Fig. 8. The
θ= (4)
2 strains from the finite element analysis provide a favourable comparison
with the experimentally measured values and the prediction of the
AG
a2 = ( ) (5) sandwich beam theory. The results of the finite element analysis confirm
EIf I − If /I the strain profiles produced by the flexure of the two wythes and the
axial strains across the depth of the EPS core. The strains obtained from
bd2 the finite element analysis clearly indicates flexural deformations with
A= (6)
c nearly identical strain gradients in the two wythes. The strain profile in
where E is the modulus of elasticity of concrete in the wythe, and G is the the EPS core indicates a gradient in the opposite sense of the two wythes.
effective shear modulus of the core. The values of strains from the finite element analysis also compare
In the sandwich beam theory, the EPS core with the integrated steel favourably with the results of the analytical prediction and the experi­
reinforcement is represented as an equivalent elastic material with an mental values.
effective shear modulus. The equivalent shear modulus of the core was Analysis of strains and displacement reveals that plane sections do
obtained by matching the initial stiffness of the sandwich beam panel not remain plane under applied flexure. There is a significant strain
predicted by the sandwich beam theory with the experimental value. gradient produced by individual flexure of the two wythes. After
The core shear modulus was changed until the theoretical cracking, under the condition of equal applied moment gradients on
load–deflection response before cracking matched with the experi­ either side of the critical section, a flexural hinge is created locally at the
mental load response. This procedure was repeated for all the beams. crack. The sudden decrease in the stiffness with the formation of the
The geometric properties of the sandwich beam are shown in Fig. 3. A crack results in the observed load drop. The hinge is very compliant and
match between the load responses predicted by the sandwich beam the subsequent deformation response is produced by the opening of the
theory and those obtained experimentally are shown in Fig. 5 (in the hinge. The strain hardening of the wire mesh produces the observed
insets). The effective shear modulus of the EPS core was obtained in the increase in the load with increasing deformation. The behaviour of the
local hinge with linearly decreasing applied moments indicates a nearly

3806
S. Chakraborty et al. Structures 33 (2021) 3798–3809

linear displacement profile. Therefore, locally at the hinge, the condi­
tions required for the application of the sectional analysis are satisfied.
The ultimate moment capacity by the application of sectional analysis
under the assumption of plane sections, therefore, provides a close es­
timate of the maximum moment.
Previous studies have focussed on the use of 4-point bending to study
the flexural behaviour of sandwich core panels [15,11,12]. The analysis
of 4-point bending using the sandwich beam theory shows a very com­
plex behaviour within the constant moment region [4]. In the constant
moment region, the requirements plane sections are not satisfied
resulting in significant shear deformation of EPS. The shear deformation
within the region with no applied shear cannot be explained using
conventional analysis. In the shear spans, the shear deformation of the
EPS core is produced by the applied shear and the individual flexure in
the two wythes. The likely location of cracking predicted by the appli­
cation of the sandwich beam theory is at the point of load application.
This has also been observed experimentally [15]. Immediately following
cracking, the lack of symmetry in the applied moment gradients in the
shear span and the constant moment region creates a very complex
displacement pattern and stress state [11,12]. Interpretations of the
results from 4-point loading, therefore, require careful analysis. The
complex stress state in the sandwich panel results in multiple cracking
and a strain hardening type of response [15]. However, the failure in
four-point is produced by localization of deformation at one location,
resulting in the opening of the flexural crack [15]. The conventional
sectional analysis, therefore, provides a favourable prediction of the
moment capacity. A careful analysis of stress states in the different
flexural configurations is required to develop consistent design guide­
lines for the use of these panels as slab and beam elements.
6. Findings and conclusions
1. There is little composite action before cracking in the beam provided
by rows of 2.5 mm diagonal shear connectors provided at 100 mm
spacing. A significant portion of the internal flexural resistance is
derived from the flexural resistance offered by the two wythes
bending about their respective axes. The relative displacement be­
tween the bottom of the top wythe and the top of the bottom wythe is
accommodated within the shear deformation of the EPS core.
2. The cracking load obtained from the sandwich theory closely
matches the experimental value. The composite beam theory
significantly over predicts the cracking load. The mechanism of in­
ternal resistance in the sandwich beam, therefore, depends more on
the individual flexure of the two wythes.
3. The cracking moment of the sandwich beam panel depends upon the
a/d ratio. The sandwich beam theory, with the effective shear
modulus of the core obtained from matching the initial linear
response accurately, predicts the decrease in the cracking moment
with a/d ratio.
4. After cracking, the response of the cracked section exhibits a hinge
type behaviour and the ultimate failure is by the localized opening of
the hinge. The load resistance at the cracked section is derived from
concrete in compression and steel reinforcement in the bottom
wythe. The hinge is produced by pivoting action around the concrete
in compression. A conservative estimate of the flexural capacity is
obtained from the conventional sectional analysis.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.

The analysis of data from the experiments for sandwich beam panels Acknowledgement
tested with a/d = 3.0 and 4.0 are presented. The predictions of strains
from the sectional analysis, finite element analysis and the sandwich The authors would like to acknowledge support from IITH_001, UAY
beam theory are compared with the experimental values. The following Phase – II, of the Ministry of the Human Resource Development of the
conclusions are drawn from the findings presented in this paper. Government of India.

Annexure 1.

A general analytical framework for the analysis of sandwich core beams has been presented in Allen [4] and the analysis for the case of three-point
bending of beams is developed here. The 3D reinforced sandwich core with EPS represents the case of a sandwich beam with an antiplane core. The
flexure analysis of the sandwich beam theory for the case of anti-plane core and thick faces is presented. The sandwich beam illustrated in Fig. 13,
consists of two skins or wythes each of thickness t, separated by a thick layer, or core, of low-density material of thickness c. The overall depth of the
beam is d = (c+2t) and the width is b. All three layers are firmly bonded together and the wythe material is much stiffer than the core material. It is also
assumed that the wythe and core materials are both isotropic. In the idealization, the core is idealized core with a zero modulus of elasticity in planes
parallel with the wythes but the shear modulus in planes perpendicular to the wythes is finite.
Sandwich beam subjected to a load undergoes two distinct sets of displacements, w1, and w2, as shown in Fig. 14. The first represents the ordinary
bending deflection, w1 associated with a shear force which is shared between the wythes and the core, Q1. The second, w2, represents the shear
deflection of the core. Due to the shear deformation of the core (shown in Fig. 15), the wythes and the longitudinal Centre-line of the beam tilt, and the
relationship between the slope of the beam, dw2/dx, and the core shear strain γ may be obtained. The wythes participate in this extra deflection by
bending about their own axes. In doing so, they support an extra shear force Q2. The sum of Q1 and Q2 is the shear force Q applied to the beam.
A deflection w1 occurs in accordance with ordinary bending theory, as shown in Fig. 16. This deflection is associated with a bending moment M1
and a shear force Q1, the latter being given as (see Fig. 17)
( ) ’’’
− Q1 = Dw’’’
1 = E I − If w1 + EIf w1
’’’
(7)

where,

E = modulus of elasticity of wythes.

3 2
I = the second moment of area of wythes about the centroid of the sandwich = bt6 + btd2 .
bt 3
If = sum of the second moments of area of the wythes about their own centroids = 6.

The first term on the right-hand side of the above equation represents the shear force carried by the beam as a whole, supposing the wythes to

3807
S. Chakraborty et al. Structures 33 (2021) 3798–3809

undergo only uniform extensions or contractions without bending locally. In this state, the shear stress τ is uniform across the thickness of the core (c)
and diminishes linearly to zero across the thickness of each wythe. The first term may, therefore, be replaced by − bdτ, where τ is the shear stress in the
core :

− Q1 = − bdτ +EIf w’’’

1 (8)

Also,
q1 = − Q’1 ; (9)

Q1 = M1’ (10)

M1 = − Dw’’1 ; (11)

As a result of the shear stress τ, the core undergoes a shear strain γ = Gτ (G is the modulus of rigidity of the core material) which corresponds to an
additional transverse beam deflection w2, as shown in Fig. 16. The wythes must share this extra deflection and, in order to do so, they must be
subjected to additional distributed loads q2, shear forces Q2 and bending moments M2 such that,
q2 = − Q’2 (12)

Q2 = M2’ ; (13)

M2 = − EIf w’’2 (14)

The total loads, shear forces, bending moments, and deflections are given by:
q = q1 + q2 (15)

Q = Q1 + Q2 (16)

M = M1 + M2 (17)

w = w1 + w2 (18)
Shear deformation of the beam with thick wythes is shown in Fig. 15.
The distance de (shown in Fig. 15) is equal to d(dw2/dx). It is also equal to distance cf (Fig. 15), which in turn is equal to γc.
dw2 c
=γ (19)
dx d

d
γ = w’2 (20)
c
The core shear stress, τ = Gw’2 dc.
Substitution for τ in Eq. (7) yields:
2
1 (21)where A = c .
− Q1 = − AGw’2 +EIf w’’’ bd

Rearrangement of Eq. (8) and the substitution Q1 = − Dw’’’

1 .
( ) ( )
D If Q1 If
w’2 = − 1− w’’’
1 = 1− (22)
AG I AG I
Total shear force is:
Q = Q1 + Q2 = Q1 − EIf w’’’
2 (23)

2 from (22) in the Eq. (23) and is given as

The fundamental equation of equilibrium of the sandwich beam is obtained by substitution for w’’’

Q// 2 2
1 − a Q1 = − a Q (24)

and
AG
a2 = ( )
If
EIf 1 − I

where AG is often referred to as the effective shear stiffness of the whole beam and If is the moment of inertia of the wythes and I is the moment of
inertia of the sandwich beam.
In any particular problem in which Q is a given function of x, this equation can be solved for Q1 . The quantities M1, w1, q1 may be obtained by
integration and differentiation. The slope w’2 may be found from Eq. (8) and the related quantities M1, w2, q2 again obtained by integration and
differentiation.
For the case of the simply supported beam with centre-point loading, the solution of Eq. (24) provides the displacement along the span, which is
used to determine the internal shear and moment distributions and the resulting stresses in the wythes. By using the differential Eq. (24), we get

3808
S. Chakraborty et al. Structures 33 (2021) 3798–3809

( )2
PL3 PL If
wmax = − − 1− φ1 (25)
48EI 4AG I
( )
P If
τmax = − 1− φ2 (26)
2bd I
{ }
PL c + 2t t
σ1 = − σ4 = φ3 + (1 − φ3 ) (27)
4 2I 2If
{ }
PL c + 2t t
σ2 = − σ3 = φ3 − (1 − φ3 ) (28)
4 2I 2If

where,
sinhθ + β1 (1 − coshθ)
φ1 = 1 −
θ
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
φ2 = 1 − (1 − β21 )

β1
φ3 = 1 −
θ
aL
θ=
2
AG
a2 = ( )
If
EIf 1 − I

References [17] Iurlaro L, Ascione A, Gherlone M, Mattone M, Di Sciuva M. Free vibration analysis
of sandwich beams using the Refined Zigzag Theory: an experimental assessment.
Meccanica 2015;50(10):2525–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11012-015-0166-4.
[1] Abrate S, Di Sciuva M. Equivalent single layer theories for composite and sandwich
[18] Pantelides CP, Surapaneni R, Reaveley LD. Structural performance of hybrid
structures: a review. Compos Struct 2017;179:482–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
GFRP/steel concrete sandwich panels. J Compos Constr 2008;12(5):570–6.
compstruct.2017.07.090.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2008)12:5(570).
[2] Abrate S, Di Sciuva M. Multilayer Models for Composite and Sandwich Structures.
[19] PCI. PCI Sandwich Wall Committee. State-of-the-art of precast/prestressed
In: Beaumont PWR, Zweben CH, editors. Comprehensive Composite Materials II.
sandwich wall panels. PCI J 1997;42(2):1–60.
Elsevier; 2018. p. 399–425.
[20] Pessiki S, Mlynarczyk A. Experimental evaluation of the composite behavior of
[3] ACI 318-14. Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary;
precast concrete sandwich wall panels. PCI J 2003;48(2):54–71. https://doi.org/
2014, American Concrete Institte, Detroit, MI, U.S.A.; 2014.
10.15554/pcij.03012003.54.71.
[4] Allen H. Analysis and Design of Structural Sandwich Panels. Headington Hill Hall,
[21] Pfeifer DW, Hanson JA. Precast concrete wall panels: flexural stiffness of sandwich
Oxford, U.K: Pergamon Press; 1969.
panels. Spec Publ 1965;11:67–86. https://doi.org/10.14359/16692.
[5] Benayoune A, Samad AA, Trikha DN, Ali AA, Ellinna SHM. Flexural behaviour of
[22] Reddy KC, Subramaniam KVL. Experimental investigation of crack propagation
pre-cast concrete sandwich composite panel–experimental and theoretical
and post-cracking behaviour in macrosynthetic fibre reinforced concrete. Mag
investigations. Constr Build Mater 2008;22(4):580–92.
Concr Res 2017;69(9):467–78. https://doi.org/10.1680/jmacr.16.00396.
[6] Bush TD, Stine GL. Flexural behavior of composite precast concrete sandwich
[23] Salmon DC, Einea A, Tadros MK, Culp TD. Full scale testing of precast concrete
panels with continuous truss connectors. PCI J 1994;39(2):112–21. https://doi.
sandwich panels. Struct J ACI 1997;94(4):354–62.
org/10.15554/pcij.03011994.112.121.
[24] Schnabl S, Saje M, Turk G, Planinc I. Analytical solution of two-layer beam taking
[7] Chu TC, Ranson WF, Sutton MA. Applications of digital-image-correlation
into account interlayer slip and shear deformation. J Struct Eng, ASCE 2007;133
techniques to experimental mechanics. Exp Mech 1985;25(3):232–44.
(6):886–95.
[8] Einea A, Salmon DC, Tadros MK, Culp T. A new structurally and thermally efficient
[25] Seeber KE, Andrews R, Baty JR, Campbell PS, Dobbs JE, Force G, et al. State-of-the-
precast sandwich panel system. PCI J 1994;39(4):90–101.
art of precast/prestressed sandwich wall panels. PCI J 1997;42(2):92–134.
[9] Gali S, Subramaniam KVL. Evaluation of crack propagation and post-cracking
[26] Sousa Jr JBM, da Silva AR. Analytical and numerical analysis of multi-layered
hinge-type behavior in the flexural response of steel fiber reinforced concrete. Int J
beams with interlayer slip. Eng Struct 2010;32:1671–80.
Concr Struct Mater 2017;11(2):365–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40069-017-
[27] Sutton MA, Wolters WJ, Peters WH, Ranson WF, McNeill SR. Determination of
0197-4.
displacements using an improved digital correlation method. Image Vis Comput
[10] Gara F, Ranzi G, Leoni G. Displacement-based formulations for composite beams
1983;1(3):133–9.
with longitudinal slip and vertical uplift. Int J Numer Methods Eng 2006;65:
[28] Sutton MA, McNeill SR, Jang J, Babai M. Effects of subpixel image restoration on
1197–220.
digital correlation error estimates. Opt Eng 1988;27(10). 271070-271070.
[11] Gara F, Ragni L, Roia D, Dezi L. Experimental behaviour and numerical analysis of
[29] Tabatabaiefar HR, Mansoury B, Zand MJK, Potter D. Mechanical properties of
floor sandwich panels. Eng Struct 2012;36:258–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
sandwich panels constructed from polystyrene/cement mixed cores and thin
engstruct.2011.12.011.
cement sheet facings. J Sandwich Struct Mater 2015;19(4):456–81.
[12] Gara F, Ragni L, Roia D, Dezi L. Experimental tests and numerical modelling of wall
[30] Tomlinson D, Fam A. Experimental investigation of precast concrete insulated
sandwich panels. Eng Struct 2012;37:193–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
sandwich panels with glass fiber-reinforced polymer shear connectors. Struct J ACI
engstruct.2011.12.027.
2014;111(3):595–606.
[13] Hassan T, Rizkalla S. Analysis and design guidelines of precast, prestressed
[31] Woltman G, Tomlinson D, Fam A. Investigation of various GFRP shear connectors
concrete, composite load-bearing sandwich wall panels reinforced with CFRP grid.
for insulated precast concrete sandwich wall panels. J Compos Constr, ASCE 2015;
PCI J 2010;55(2):147–62.
17(5):711–21.
[14] IS 456-2000 Plain and Reinforced Concrete - Code of Practice, Bureau of Indian
[32] Yee AA. Social and environmental benefits of precast concrete technology. PCI J
Standards, Manak Bhavan, New Delhi, India.
2001;46(3):14–9. https://doi.org/10.15554/pcij.05012001.14.19.
[15] Joseph DJ, Prabakar J, Alagusundaramoorthy P. Precast concrete sandwich one-
[33] Yee AA. Structural and economic benefits of precast/prestressed concrete
way slabs under flexural loading. Eng Struct 2017;138:447–57. https://doi.org/
construction. PCI J 2001;46(4):34–42. https://doi.org/10.15554/
10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.02.033.
pcij.07012001.34.42.
[16] Kroflič A, Planino I, Saje M, Čas B. Analytical solution of two-layer beam including
interlayer slip and uplift. Struct Eng Mech 2010;34(6):667–83. https://doi.org/
10.12989/sem.2010.34.6.667.

3809