Journal of Constructional Steel Research 185 (2021) 106863

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Constructional Steel Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jcsr

Behaviour and design of stainless steel-concrete composite beams

Yifan Zhou *, Brian Uy , Jia Wang , Dongxu Li , Zhichao Huang , Xinpei Liu
School of Civil Engineering, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia

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

Keywords: Stainless steel-concrete composite beam has been regarded as a new application that is widely applied in offshore
Stainless steel composite beam bridges and high-rise buildings and is attracting increasing interest from engineering community. The benefits
Analytical model brought by stainless steel, such as superior corrosion and fire resistance, high strength and ductility as well as
Finite element modelling
improved durability, could offer optimal and sustainable solutions for infrastructures and highways. However,
Design guidance
Bending behaviour
the current design provisions for composite beams are based on the assumption of an elastic-perfectly-plastic
Shear behaviour steel model which is different to stainless steel material with a rounded stress-strain curve and significant
strain hardening. To develop rational design guidance, this paper carried out a comprehensive experimental,
numerical and analytical study on the behaviour of stainless steel-concrete composite beams. A series of tests
were conducted on eighteen full-scale stainless steel composite beams under bending, shear as well as combined
bending and shear. Three dimensional finite element (FE) model was developed in ABAQUS and FE simulations
were carried out to complement the experimental program. New analytical models were proposed for predicting
the moment capacity of stainless steel-concrete composite beam. Additionally, a modified design approach for
shear capacity was recommended based on the design guidance in AS/NZS 2327. The applicability of current
moment-shear interaction defined in AS/NZS 2327 and EN 1994-1-1 was assessed by the obtained results.

1. Introduction bridges [8].

Stainless steel has become a competitive alternative to carbon steel
in structural applications, which is well-known for its aesthetic
appearance, superior corrosion resistance and improved durability
[1–3]. Stainless steel-concrete composite beam has been regarded as a
relatively new application and is attracting increasing interest from
engineering community. It is noted that, the traditional carbon steel-
concrete composite beams, which are widely applied in offshore
bridges and high-rise buildings [4,5] and exposed to harsh environment
with high salinity and humidity, have encountered the issue of corro­
sion. In this light, the utilisation of stainless steel in composite beam
provides an optimal solution for the offshore infrastructures. The
durability of structure is significantly improved and the maintenance
costs over the lifetime can be reduced [6]. Moreover, stainless steel has
significant fire resistance that can maintain satisfactory strength in very
high temperature. Thus, the stainless steel composite structure is
considered as a fire protection solution for high-rise buildings [7].
Additionally, excellent mechanical performance in terms of improved
fatigue resistance and high ductility is also well known as the advan­
tages of stainless steel, which can particularly benefit the buildings and
To promote the application of stainless steel in composite structures,
extensive experimental and numerical investigations have been carried
out on the behaviour of concrete-filled stainless steel tubular (CFSST)
columns. Young and Ellobody [9] and Lam and Gardner [10] demon­
strated the satisfactory behaviour of CFSST by tests on 14 and 12 stub
columns, respectively. More recently, Uy et al. [11] and Kazemzadeh
Azad et al. [12,13] conducted a series of experiments on short and
slender CFSST columns with austenitic, duplex and lean duplex stainless
steels being used. On the other hand, very limited research was found on
stainless steel-concrete composite beams, although significant studies on
carbon steel-concrete composite beams were carried out in terms of the
flexural behaviour, shear behaviour, as well as combined flexure and
shear behaviour. Back to the early age, Chapman [14] tested seventeen
simply supported composite beams with welded studs and proposed a
new design method for composite section and shear connectors.
Recently, the benefits of demountable shear connectors have been rec­
ognised by researchers. For example, Kwon et al. [15] constructed five
large-scale composite beams retrofitted with post-installed shear con­
nectors and a substantial increase in stiffness and strength was achieved
with a small number of bolts. Lam et al. [16] compared the beams with

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: yifan.zhou@sydney.edu.au (Y. Zhou).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2021.106863
Received 15 April 2021; Received in revised form 17 June 2021; Accepted 12 July 2021
Available online 31 July 2021
0143-974X/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Y. Zhou et al. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 185 (2021) 106863

bolted and welded shear connectors and the results showed the former
type had similar stiffness and superior ductility. Tan and Uy [17] and
Vasdravellis et al. [18,19] conducted a series of experimental tests on
composite beams subjected to combined loading conditions and
nonlinear FE analysis was also performed in these studies. In addition to
the flexural behaviour, the shear strength enhancement of composite
beam has been compared with bare steel beams by Johnson et al. [20]
and Ansourian [21]. Nie et al. [22,23] carried out an experimental test
on sixteen composite beams and quantified the strength contributed by
concrete slab which was 33–56%. Moreover, Vasdravellis and Uy [24]
and Liang et al. [25,26] tested composite beams with various lengths
and found out the moment resistance reduced when an acting shear
force exceeded 60% of the shear strength. Up to now, Shamass and
Cashell [27] was the only one that proposed analytical models for
stainless steel composite beams through continuous strength method,
with which the strain hardening effects were involved. Therefore, the
experimental and numerical investigation of the behaviour of stainless
steel-concrete composite beams is urgently required.
This paper presents a comprehensive experimental, numerical and
analytical study on the behaviour of stainless steel-concrete composite
beams under bending, shear as well as combined bending and shear. In
particular, a total of eighteen full-scale composite beams fabricated with
austenitic, duplex and lean duplex stainless steel were tested under
different loading conditions. To provide the interaction between con­
crete slab and stainless steel beam, two types of stainless steel shear
connectors (bolted connector and welded stud) were employed to avoid
the potential galvanic corrosion issues. Composite beams with full and
partial shear connection were both considered. Besides the experimental
tests, parallel three-dimensional FE models were developed and vali­
dated against experimental results, which were further used to extend
the available test database. The results obtained from experimental tests
and numerical simulations were used to assess the applicability of cur­
rent codes of practice, such as AS/NZS 2327 [28] and EN 1994-1-1 [29].
2.2. Pushout test
2.2.1. Pushout specimens and test setup
To assess the shear resistance (Fsc) of duplex and austenitic stainless
steel bolted connectors and welded studs, three stainless steel pushout
specimens with identical composite cross-section and material proper­
ties were constructed. Fig. 2 (a) shows the geometry and instrument
setup of pushout test, which were designed according to AS/NZS 2327
[28]. As shown in the figure, each specimen consisted of one stainless
steel beam, two concrete slabs (600 mm × 650 mm × 100 mm) and eight
stainless steel shear connectors. Stainless steel shear connectors were
installed in the beam flanges and embedded into the concrete slabs. A 2
mm bolt-to-hole clearance was employed for specimens with bolted
connectors, and the connectors were tightened into the stainless steel
beams by using a torque wrench with a torque load of 120 N.m. Stiff­
eners were welded to the beam tip to prevent the premature failure due
to the concentrated stress.
The pushout specimens were equipped with eight LVDTs, as shown
in Fig. 2(a). LVDT 1 was used to acquire the vertical displacement of
stainless steel beam. The horizontal separation of two concrete slabs was
obtained by LVDT 2, whereas the separations between stainless steel
beam and concrete slab were measured by LVDTs 5 and 6. Moreover, the
relative slips between stainless steel beam and concrete slab at two rows
of shear connectors were recorded by LVDTs 3, 4 and LVDTs 7, 8,
respectively. The pushout tests were performed using a testing machine
with a maximum capacity of 5000kN. The loading procedure followed
the guidance stated in AS/NZS 2327 [28]. An axial load was applied on
the top of the stainless steel beam up to 40% of the predicted ultimate
load resistance (Fu). A cyclic loading protocol ranging from 0.05Fu to
0.4Fu was repeated 25 times to examine the elastic behaviour of the
shear connectors. The specimens were thereafter loaded at a constant
displacement-controlled rate of 0.5 mm/min and terminated once the
load dropped to 0.8Fu.

2. Experimental programme 2.2.2. Bearing resistance of stainless steel shear connectors

2.1. Material test
The standard coupons were extracted from the spare stainless steel
plates, bolted connectors, welded studs and reinforcing bars to assess
their material properties. A testing procedure considering stress relax­
ation was followed [30]. The main properties of stainless steel, including
0.01% and 0.2% proof, as well as ultimate stress and ultimate strain are
summarised in Table 1, where E denotes the Young’s modulus, n and m
denote the exponents from Ramberg-Osgood model. The typical stress-
strain curves of stainless steel plates and shear connectors are illus­
trated in Fig. 1 (a) and (b), respectively.
Twelve concrete cylinders were tested to assess the concrete
compressive strength. The concrete cylinders were cast together with
concrete slabs and the mean values of the concrete compressive strength
at the age of 7th, 28th and testing days were 32, 37 and 42 MPa,
respectively.
Load-slip curves obtained from the stainless steel pushout tests are
illustrated in Fig. 2 (b), where the total load recorded by the loading cell
is plotted against the average slip of shear connectors. The failure mode
of tested specimens was concrete crushing along with bending of
embedded connector shanks. Bearing resistance (PRK) of each shear
connector is summarised in Table 2, which was determined by dividing
the total load by eight shear connectors. The bearing resistance of duplex
stainless steel bolted connector and welded stud were 111kN and 96kN,
respectively, whilst that of austenitic stainless steel bolted connector
was 102kN. According to AS/NZS 2327 [28], a reduction factor of 0.9 on
shear connector bearing resistance was employed for the calculation of
shear connection degree. In addition, the maximum slip su at failure was
evaluated, which satisfied the required minimum slip stated in AS/NZS
2327 [28] (6.6 mm) and EN1994-1-1 [29] (6 mm) for ductile shear
connectors. In this light, the duplex and austenitic stainless steel shear
connectors can be properly used in composite beams with partial shear
connection (PSC).

Table 1
Material test results for stainless steel sections.
Material E (GPa) f0.01 (MPa) f0.2 (MPa) fu (MPa) εu n m

Plates LD2101-5 mm 191 344 500 718 0.36 8.01 3.44

LD2101-8 mm 201 321 490 673 0.29 7.08 3.55
A304-5 mm 193 178 295 626 0.55 5.93 2.65
A304-8 mm 190 152 265 599 0.54 5.39 2.55
D2205-5 mm 182 309 470 683 0.27 7.14 3.41
D2205-8 mm 191 344 525 719 0.28 7.09 3.55
Shear connectors D2205bolt 196 157 690 1102 0.035 2.02 3.19
A316Lbolt 197 158 590 929 0.037 2.27 3.22
D2205stud 187 281 380 608 0.28 9.93 3.19
Reinforcement bars D2205 201 503 938 1116 0.024 4.81 3.94
A316L 192 288 750 962 0.19 3.13 3.73

2
Y. Zhou et al. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 185 (2021) 106863

Fig. 1. Stress-strain relationship of stainless steel sections.

Fig. 2. Pushout test setup and results.

2.3. Stainless steel-concrete composite beams tests performance. By adjusting the spacing between the shear connectors,
FSC or PSC was achieved for different stainless steel composite beams.
2.3.1. Test preparation Moreover, two layers of stainless steel reinforcement meshes were
A total of eighteen full-scale stainless steel-concrete composite placed inside the concrete slab to avoid any concrete splitting failure.
beams were designed and fabricated according to AS/NZS 2327 [28]. Both longitudinal and transverse reinforcement is 10 mm in diameter.
The typical cross-section of a composite beam is presented in Fig. 3 (a). The spacing between longitudinal and transverse reinforcement is 180
The details of specimens are summarised in Table 3, where Le denotes mm and 150 mm, respectively. In order to prevent the premature local
the effective length, a denotes the shear span and β denotes the shear buckling caused by concentrated stress, the stiffeners were welded to the
connection degree. All the specimens were labelled in a form of “spec­ web at the positions of the loading points and supports. In addition,
imen number-connector type and the level of shear connection degree”. different types of stainless steel, namely lean duplex, duplex and
For instance, Specimen CSSB1-BF was the composite stainless steel beam austenitic stainless steels, were used for the fabrication of beams, shear
CSSB1 with full shear connection (FSC) utilising bolted connectors. Each connectors and reinforcing meshes.
specimen consisted of a concrete slab, a welded stainless steel beam and The composite beams having various shear spans were tested under
a number of shear connectors. The concrete slab was designed to be 600 bending, shear and combined bending and shear. These tests were
mm wide and 100 mm thick, and the stainless steel beam was designed conducted by a hydraulic actuator with a capacity of 1000kN. Each
as per a compact universal beam 180UB18.1. The stainless steel bolted specimen was initially loaded at a constant rate of 1 mm/min until the
connectors and welded studs were 16 mm in diameter and 80 mm in first yield was reached, that the first yield was defined when the stainless
embedded height. The fully threaded bolted connectors were placed steel bottom flange first reached its 0.2% proof stress. Followed by an
through a 18 mm clearance hole and fastened with one embedded nut. unloading procedure to 10kN and the specimen was reloaded up to
All the bolted connectors had a same preload to guarantee consistent failure with an increased speed of 1.5 mm/min. A small amount of 10kN
was applied for unloading procedure was to maintain the contact sur­
faces in position. The test was paused at 20%, 40%, 60% and 80% of
Table 2 expected ultimate load to record the sequence of failure modes.
Specimen details and obtained results of pushout test. The tested stainless steel composite beams were equipped with a
Specimens Materials Connector types PRk (kN) 0.9PRk (kN) su (mm) series of linear variable displacement transducers (LVDTs), strain gauges
S1 D2205 Bolted connector 111 100 10.6 and inclinometers as illustrated in Figs. 3 (b) and (c). In particular, four
S2 D2205 Welded stud 96 86 9.2 and three LVDTs placed at the bottom flange were used to measure the
S3 A316L Bolted connector 102 92 9.8 vertical displacement of composite beams under four- and three-point

3
Y. Zhou et al. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 185 (2021) 106863

Fig. 3. Configuration of geometry and instrument setup for stainless steel-concrete composite beam tests.

Table 3
Specimen details of stainless steel-concrete composite beams.
Specimens Beam Le a Loading Connector Connector Connector spacing β
materials (mm) (mm) method* types materials (mm)

Bending test CSSB1-BF LD2101 5800 2000 FPL Bolt D2205 200 1
CSSB2-SF LD2101 5800 2000 FPL Stud D2205 200 1
CSSB3-BP LD2101 5800 2000 FPL Bolt D2205 400 0.7
CSSB4-SP LD2101 5800 2000 FPL Stud D2205 400 0.6
CSSB5-BF A304 5800 2000 FPL Bolt A316L 200 1
CSSB6-BF D2205 5800 2000 FPL Bolt D2205 200 1
CSSB7-BF LD2101 2000 1000 TPL Bolt D2205 200 1
CSSB8-SF LD2101 2000 1000 TPL Stud D2205 200 1
Shear test ** CSSB9-BF LD2101 550 275 TPL Bolt D2205 100 1
CSSB10-SF LD2101 550 275 TPL Stud D2205 100 1
CSSB11- LD2101 550 275 TPL Bolt D2205 100 0.7
BP
CSSB12-SP LD2101 550 275 TPL Stud D2205 100 0.6
CSSB13- A304 550 275 TPL Bolt A316L 100 1
BF
CSSB14- D2205 550 275 TPL Bolt D2205 100 1
BF
Combined bending and shear CSSB15- LD2101 1600 800 TPL Bolt D2205 100 1
test BF
CSSB16- LD2101 800 400 TPL Bolt D2205 100 1
BF
CSSB17-SF LD2101 1600 800 TPL Stud D2205 100 1
CSSB18-SF LD2101 800 400 TPL Stud D2205 100 1
*
FPL: four-point loading; TPL: three-point loading.
**
CSSB9-BF (Type A) and CSSB11-BP (Type B) were cut from CSSB1-BF; CSSB10-SF (Type A) and CSSB12-SP (Type B) were cut from CSSB2-SF; CSSB13-BF (Type B)
was cut from CSSB5-BF; CSSB14-BF (Type A) was cut from CSSB6-BF;

loading tests, respectively. Two additional LVDTs were installed at the
ends of beam to measure the interface slip between the concrete slab and
stainless steel beam. Strain gauges were located in sets of nine at the
critical sections (Section A, B and C) of the specimens as shown in Fig. 3
(a), where the strain developments at the concrete top surface, stainless
steel reinforcement, stainless steel beam flanges and webs were recor­
ded. Additionally, inclinometers were attached to the concrete top
surface at supports, with which the rotations of the specimen were
monitored during the tests.
2.3.2. Bending test
Eight stainless steel composite beams were tested in bending under a
simply support condition, in which Specimens CSSB1–6 were subjected
to four-point loading and Specimens CSSB7–8 were tested under three-

4
Y. Zhou et al.
point loading. In four-point bending test, a pure bending state was
observed in the mid span that stress and strain distributions under pure
moment can be produced. On the other hand, a complicated stress state
was noticed in three-point bending test that the influence on bending
behaviour by shear stress could be observed. The specimens under four-
point loading were loaded at one- and two-thirds of the effective length
through a distributed beam, which was placed on a pair of roller and pin.
As for the three-point loading test, the load was applied through a pin at
the mid span of the specimens. To avoid the stress concentration at the
loading and support points, 80 mm wide rigid steel plates were utilised
to spread the load. The detailed configurations of loading and instru­
ment setup for four-point and three-point loading are illustrated in
Figs. 3 (b) and (c). Different from Specimens CSSB1–2 and CSSB 5–6
having FSC, Specimens CSSB3–4 were designed as PSC composite beams
by increasing the spacing of shear connector from 200 mm to 400 mm.
2.3.3. Shear test
A group of six short composite beams (Specimens CSSB9–14) were
cut with various lengths (Type A and B) from the tested four-point
bending specimens (as shown in Fig. 3 (c)) to achieve different shear
connection degrees for the following three-point loading shear tests. It is
noteworthy that both the steel and concrete of these cut segments
remained in elastic during the previous bending tests, which could be
demonstrated by the recorded strain development in critical cross sec­
tion C.
2.3.4. Combined bending-shear test
The remaining four Specimens CSSB15–18 were tested under com­
bined bending and shear. Different levels of moment and shear were
achieved by adjusting the effective length (Le) of composite beams. In
these tests, all specimens were designed to be FSC composite beams and
tested under three-point loading.
3. Experimental results and discussions
3.1. Stainless steel-concrete composite beams under bending
3.1.1. Failure modes
The failure modes for stainless steel-concrete composite beams under
four-point and three-point bending are illustrated in Fig. 4. Specimens
CSSB1–6 experienced typical flexural failure in the four-point bending
test. During the test, flexural cracks initiated from the bottom of con­
crete slab at the loading points, which was observed when the load
Fig. 4. Photos of typical flexural failure modes observed in four-point and three-point bending tests.
5
Journal of Constructional Steel Research 185 (2021) 106863
reached around 60% of the ultimate load. Afterwards, significant plastic
strain was found at the bottom flange of stainless steel beams. The
concrete cracks gradually extended through the depth of concrete slab
across the pure bending region, followed by horizontal cracks appeared
at the mid layer of the concrete slab. The specimens failed in concrete
crushing on the top surface, which randomly appeared in pure bending
span of the composite beam. Additionally, for PSC composite beams, the
initiation of concrete cracks was observed at 75% of the ultimate load.
Noticeable end slips were found in PSC specimens, indicating that the
weak shear connectors had effect on the composite action between
stainless steel beam and concrete slab.
Typical flexural failure was also found in Specimens CSSB7–8 that
were subjected to three-point bending, where concrete cracks were
observed at 25% of ultimate load. Compared to Specimens CSSB1–6, the
premature cracks initiation of Specimens CSSB7–8 were mainly attrib­
uted to a higher stress concentration. The concrete crushing was finally
observed near the loading point together with significant plastic strain at
bottom flange.
3.1.2. Mid span moment-displacement curve
The mid span moment-displacement curves of stainless steel com­
posite beams obtained from the four-point and three-point bending tests
are illustrated in Figs. 5 (a) and (b), where the comparison of different
shear connector types, shear connection degrees, beam materials and
loading strategies are demonstrated. Results of the bending tests on
stainless steel-concrete composite beams are summarised in Table 4,
where Vu and Mu denote the maximum shear and moment of the tested
specimens, respectively. In addition, the initial stiffness (Ki.M) of each
specimen is also summarised, which is defined as the tangent to the
unloading branch of the moment-displacement curve [31]. From the
observations, the moment increased linearly at early stage. Soon after,
the curves exhibited non-linear behaviour before reaching the yield
point, which was defined as the point when the bottom flange of
stainless steel beam started yielding. The moment gradually developed
until severe concrete crushing occurred at concrete surface, which led to
the final failure.
Specimens CSSB1-BF and CSSB2-SF with different stainless steel
shear connector types exhibited similar initial stiffness. However, the
stiffness started to diverge once the curves behaved non-linearly, where
a weaker stiffness was observed for Specimen CSSB1-BF with stainless
steel bolted connectors. At this stage, the friction force induced by
intended pretension had been overcome at the interface. The slip be­
tween concrete slab and stainless steel beam was due to the 2 mm bolt-
Y. Zhou et al. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 185 (2021) 106863

Fig. 5. Moment vs. mid-span displacement curves for bending tests.

Table 4
Results of stainless steel composite beams from bending tests and analytical models.
Bending test Specimens Vu (kN) Mu (kNm) Ki.M (kNm/mm) MRPA (kNm) M/MRPA MSHA (kNm) M/MSHA MSHA.S (kNm) M/ MSHA.S

FPL CSSB1-BF 107 204 2.86 177 1.15 190 1.07 190 1.08
CSSB2-SF 108 206 2.89 177 1.16 190 1.09 190 1.09
CSSB3-BP 102 194 2.45 170 1.14 175 1.11 175 1.11
CSSB4-SP 101 192 2.73 165 1.16 170 1.13 170 1.13
CSSB5-BF 73 139 2.55 118 1.18 126 1.10 125 1.12
CSSB6-BF 108 205 2.62 177 1.15 190 1.08 190 1.08
TPL CSSB7-BF 213 213 21.74 175 1.22 190 1.12 190 1.12
CSSB8-SF 218 218 22.35 175 1.24 190 1.15 190 1.15

to-hole clearance and led to a reduction in stiffness. This slip was
recorded and further evidenced in Fig. 6 (a). Furthermore, the Specimen
CSSB1-BF with bolted connectors reached the similar ultimate moment
resistance as Specimen CSSB2-SF which employed the stainless steel
welded studs.
The flexural behaviour of stainless steel composite beams with
various levels of shear connection was also compared in Fig. 5 (a).
Regardless of the connector type, the PSC composite beams (CSSB3-BP
and CSSB4-SP) can still reach a high level of the load resistance,
compared to their counterparts with FSC. In addition, discrepancy in the
non-linear stage was found between Specimens CSSB1-BF and CSSB3-
BP. This was due to the fact that more bolted connectors were assem­
bled in Specimen CSSB1-BF and higher total pretension force was
applied. Thus, a higher interface friction delayed the commencement of
nonlinear stage, which is also reflected in the moment-end slip curves
shown in Fig. 6 (b). On the other hand, for composite beams with
stainless steel welded studs, both specimens with FSC (CSSB2-SF) and
PSC (CSSB4-SP) exhibited similar initial stiffness and non-linear
behaviour until the different ultimate load resistance was reached.
Fig. 5 (a) also illustrates the mid span moment-displacement curves
of composite beams utilising lean duplex (Specimen CSSB1-BF),
austenitic (Specimen CSSB5-BF) and duplex (Specimen CSSB6-BF)
stainless steels. As can be seen in the figure, duplex and lean duplex
stainless steel composite beams exhibited great similarity in terms of
stiffness and ultimate moment resistance. Although the initial stiffness of
austenitic stainless steel specimen was similar to the former two, the
sustained ultimate moment resistance of Specimen CSSB5-BF was only
around 68% of Specimen CSSB1-BF and CSSB6-BF. The lower moment
resistance was due to the lower material strength of austenitic stainless
steel, which can be demonstrated from the coupon test results.
Furthermore, composite beams made with various stainless steel grades
presented ductile flexural performance characterised by significant
vertical displacement during the bending test.
Figs. 5 (a) and (b) compare the behaviour of stainless steel composite

Fig. 6. Moment vs. end slip curves from bending test.

6
Y. Zhou et al.
beams under four-point and three-point loading. For the composite
beams under four-point bending, the maximum moment was reached
right before the failure of concrete slab. On the other hand, the
maximum moment resistance of specimens subjected to three-point
bending maintained for certain displacement before the failure
occurred. As seen from Table 4, the ultimate moment sustained by
composite beams under three-point bending were 5% higher than those
from four-point bending test. The difference was because the strain
hardening of bottom flange contributed to an increase in the moment
resistance once the stainless steel beam under three-point bending
reached the yielding near the loading point. However, the strain hard­
ening only took effect until the yielding was spread through the uniform
moment region for the beams under four-point bending. To the end, the
moment resistance improved by the strain hardening effect under the
former loading condition was always more significant than that under
the latter loading condition until failure. This phenomenon was origi­
nally specified by Reck et al. [32], which was known as inelastic reserve
strength.
3.1.3. Strain distributions
Strain evolution of stainless steel-concrete composite beams was
monitored by sets of strain gauges, which were arranged at the concrete
slab surface, upper layer of reinforcement, stainless steel flanges and
web. Accordingly, the strain distributions of mid-span section for FSC
and PSC composite beams are illustrated in Fig. 7.
Take Specimen CSSB1-BF with FSC as an example, the strain distri­
bution showed continuity across the interface, indicating that the shear
force was fully transferred between concrete slab and stainless steel
beam through the stainless steel bolted connectors. At yield point, the
bottom flange firstly achieved its yielding while the other region
remained elastic. The elastic neutral axis determined from the strain
distribution was 68 mm from top surface. As shown in the figure, when
the specimen reached the ultimate moment resistance, the extreme fibre
compressive strain was 2700 με, which denoted the concrete crushing
emerged in the concrete slab. Moreover, the development of plasticity
exhibited in the most region of stainless steel beam, where the maximum
tensile strain was over 12,000 με in the bottom flange. This large tensile
strain demonstrated the significant strain hardening developed in
stainless steel section prior to the final failure, which was also reflected
in the discrepancy of the plastic neutral axis determined from the test
and rigid plastic analysis (RPA) method. The inaccuracy in estimating
the neutral axis with RPA method was due to the ignorance of strain
hardening effect in stainless steel elements and consequently led to the
underestimation of moment capacity.
Fig. 7 also presents the strain distribution of Specimen CSSB4-SP
with PSC (β = 0.6). The recorded strains showed discontinuity at the
interface between concrete slab and stainless steel beam, as the stainless
steel welded studs were unable to provide enough shear force to fully
transfer the composite action. When the bottom flange of this specimen
reached its yielding strain, the strain in concrete slab was lower than
Fig. 7. Strain distribution of stainless steel-concrete composite beams under bending test.
7
Journal of Constructional Steel Research 185 (2021) 106863
that of FSC composite beam (CSSB1-BF), which explained the fact that
the initiation of concrete cracks in PSC composite beam occurred at a
relatively higher moment as discussed in Section 3.1.2. Two elastic
neutral axes were determined accordingly, with the first one extending
45 mm from the concrete slab and second one 5 mm below the interface.
Moreover, the extreme fibre compressive and tensile strain of PSC
composite beam at ultimate load level was much lower than that of FSC
counterparts, which was the reason that a lower moment resistance was
achieved for PSC specimens.
3.2. Stainless steel-concrete composite beam under shear
3.2.1. Failure modes
Six stainless steel-concrete composite beams CSSB9–14 experienced
shear failure in this loading condition. The typical shear failure modes
are presented in Fig. 8. During the test, minor vertical cracks at the
bottom of concrete slab initiated at a loading level of 30% ultimate shear
resistance. With the increasing applied load, the vertical cracks extended
through the depth of concrete slab and horizontal cracks were observed
along the length of the slab. The drop of load resistance was triggered by
the appearance of large diagonal concrete cracks. Afterwards, signifi­
cant diagonal buckling occurred in stainless steel beam web, which was
a result of the intended web stiffeners. At the end of the shear tests, the
composite beam exhibited significant ductile performance with large
vertical displacements. Compared with the FSC specimens, apparent end
slip was observed in the PSC composite beams.
3.2.2. Load-displacement curve
The shear test results of stainless steel-concrete composite beams are
summarised in Table 5 and the load-displacement response at mid span
is presented in Fig. 9. Generally, the load-displacement curves exhibited
a linear increment at the initial stage followed by a nonlinear transition
stage. The shear load gradually reduced with the diagonal cracks
propagating towards the loading point, which highlighted the loss of
concrete strength. Meanwhile, the shear load was redistributed to the
stainless steel beam until significant web buckling occurred.
As shown in Fig. 9 (a), limited influence on the initial shear stiffness
(Ki.V) was found by changing the types of shear connectors, although a
smaller shear stiffness was observed in Specimen CSSB9-BF at the
nonlinear stage owing to the bolt-to-hole clearance. Moreover, Speci­
mens CSSB9-BF and CSSB10-SF with different stainless steel shear
connectors attained similar shear capacity indicating that both bolted
connectors and welded studs can provide excellent composite action for
composite beams under shear.
Fig. 9 (a) also highlights the influence of shear connection degree on
the shear behaviour of stainless steel-concrete composite beams. Take
Specimen CSSB11-BP as an example, the specimen having shear
connection degree of 0.7 achieved 95% ultimate shear resistance of the
FSC counterparts (Specimen CSSB9-BF). The sustained load decreased
when the specimen had lower shear connection degree. It is also worth
Y. Zhou et al. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 185 (2021) 106863

Fig. 8. Photos of typical shear failure modes observed in shear test.

Table 5
Results of stainless steel composite beams from shear tests and design approaches.
Specimens Vu (kN) Ki.S (kN/mm) VAS/NZS2327 (kN) Vu/ VEN 1994-1-1 (kN) V u/ Vnew (kN) Vu/
VAS/NZS2327 VEN 1994-1-1 Vnew

CSSB9-BF 422 552 464 0.91 263 2.10 408 1.03

CSSB10-SF 444 535 464 0.96 263 2.04 408 1.09
CSSB11-BP 411 494 442 0.93 263 1.88 401 1.03
CSSB12-SP 402 572 434 0.93 263 2.22 393 1.02
CSSB13-BF 316 495 348 0.82 147 3.37 313 1.01
CSSB14-BF 450 542 464 0.97 263 2.06 390 1.15

noting that, unlike FSC composite beams, PSC specimens did not exhibit
a sharp peak at the ultimate load. This was due to that weak shear
resistance of stainless steel shear connectors led to interface slip and
consequently diminished the shear strength of stainless steel composite
beams. Moreover, the shear connection degree had limited influence on
the initial stiffness of composite beams.
The effect of different stainless steel grades was examined as illus­
trated in Figs. 9 (a) and (b). As can be seen, the shear capacities
sustained by lean duplex and duplex stainless steel composite beams
were approximately identical, which was 25% higher than that of
austenitic stainless steel composite beams. Besides, the initial stiffness of
austenitic stainless steel composite beam was lower than that fabricated
with duplex stainless steel. In addition, remarkable plastic deformations
were observed for all of the tested specimens after concrete failure,
which was contributed by the high ductility of stainless steel material.

Fig. 9. Load vs. mid-span displacement curves from shear test.

8
Y. Zhou et al.
Fig. 10. Photos of typical failure modes observed in combined bending and shear test.
3.3. Stainless steel-concrete composite beam under combined bending and
shear
3.3.1. Failure modes
Typical failure modes of tested specimens CSSB15–18 are presented
in Fig. 10, which were tested under combined bending and shear. The
critical failure mode was highly dependent on the shear span of com­
posite beams. The failure of Specimens CSSB15-BF and CSSB17-SF was
dominated by flexural failure, which was characterised by crushing of
concrete slab. Apparent diagonal cracks on concrete slab were also
observed during the test, indicating that the specimens sustained high
shear stress in the meantime. The failure of Specimens CSSB16-BF and
CSSB18-SF were governed by shear failure, which were represented by
significant concrete diagonal cracks and web buckling in stainless steel
beams.
3.3.2. Load-displacement curve
The mid span load-displacement curves of selected specimens are
illustrated in Fig. 11, which consist of the lean duplex stainless steel
composite beams under bending, shear and combined bending and
shear. These specimens were divided into two groups according to the
type of stainless steel shear connector, and in each group the shear span
of the specimens varied to achieve different levels of moment and shear.
The ultimate moment and shear resistances of the tested specimens are
summarised in Table 6 and are normalised by the maximum shear and
moment resistances. The maximum moment resistance (Mu.m) and shear
resistance (Vu.m) were defined by the Specimens CSSB9-BF/CSSB10-SF
and Specimens CSSB7-BF/CSSB8-SF for composite beams utilising bol­
ted and welded shear connectors, respectively. As evidenced in the table,
the moment capacity of composite beams has been limitedly decreased
when applied shear force was less than 60% Vu.m. On the other hand, an
intended moment of 75% Mu.m can reduce the shear capacity of the
composite beam to 93% Vu.m.
4. Finite element modelling
Three-dimensional FE models of stainless steel-concrete composite
beams were developed by using commercial program ABAQUS [33],
which was used to achieve two purposes, 1) to explore the mechanical
performance of composite beams; 2) to extend the test database and
facilitate the establishment of design solutions.
4.1. Geometry, boundary and loading conditions
The concrete slabs and shear connectors were modelled by eight-
node linear brick elements (C3D8R), while the stainless steel beams
utilised four-node shell elements with reduced integration (S4R).
Additionally, stainless steel reinforcement meshes were modelled by
truss elements (T3D2) and were embedded in the concrete slab. The
dimensions of numerical model were referred to the geometries of tested
9
Journal of Constructional Steel Research 185 (2021) 106863
specimens. The threaded bolt shank was simulated with a reduced area
equalled to 78% of bolt gross sectional area [34]. Fig. 12 shows the
detailed geometry of FE models.
The boundary and loading conditions were carefully prescribed in
the numerical model. The roller-pinned supports and axial load were
defined by reference points via “MPC” constraint. To simulate the
interaction between different composite components, a general contact
was defined with “Hard contact” in normal direction and a friction co­
efficient of 0.4 in the tangential direction [35]. A “tie” constraint was
used for the welded elements, such as welded studs and web stiffeners.
The pretension effect on bolted connectors was reproduced by applying
a thermal expansion coefficient defined in the temperature field [36].
Moreover, the dynamic explicit solver was adopted to analyse the
behaviour of stainless steel-concrete composite beams under bending,
shear as well as combined bending and shear. The explicit solver could
easily overcome the convergence problem involving complicated ge­
ometries and material nonlinearity [37]. To achieve accurate outcomes
with efficient computational costs, a mesh sensitive analysis was carried
out with a mesh of 4 mm being selected for critical elements.
4.2. Stainless steel material model
The stress-strain relationships of stainless steel beams, shear con­
nectors and reinforcements obtained from coupon tests were used as
inputs of FE model. A von Mises plasticity constitutive formulation
together with the isotropic hardening was employed to capture the
behaviour of lean duplex, duplex and austenitic stainless steels [38]. As
per ABAQUS manual [33], true stress-strain relationships of stainless
steel elements were adopted in FE model which were derived from the
engineering stress and strain obtained from the coupon results.
4.3. Concrete material model
The ascending branch of the concrete compressive stress-strain
relationship was proposed by Carreira and Chu [39] up to the
maximum compressive stress (f’c). The descending branch was followed
by an inverse function suggested by Pathirana et al. [40], for the purpose
of mirroring the post-peak behaviour of composite beam, where the
ultimate compressive strain was taken as 0.03 to eliminate the unreal­
istic overestimation of concrete strength [41]. In addition, a concrete
damage evolution law was defined, with which the concrete damage
performance can be well captured [42].
The tensile behaviour of concrete was defined to be linear up to the
ultimate tensile stress (f’t = f’c/10). For the descending branch of tensile
stress-strain curve, the tensile stress linearly reduced to zero with the
ultimate tensile strain recommended to be 0.1 [43].
4.4. Validation of finite element models
Results from the developed FE models were compared with the
Y. Zhou et al. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 185 (2021) 106863

Fig. 11. load vs. mid-span displacement curves from combined bending and shear test.

Table 6 between test and FE results was less than 10%. Therefore, the developed
Results of stainless steel composite beams under combined bending and shear FE model herein is reliable and can well predict the behaviour of
tests. stainless steel composite beams subjected to bending, shear, as well as
Specimens Vu (kN) Vu / Vu.m Mu (kNm) Mu / Mu.m
combined bending and shear.

CSSB7-BF 213 50% 213 100%

CSSB15-BF 262 62% 210 99% 5. Evaluation on codes of practice
CSSB16-BF 388 92% 155 73%
CSSB9-BF 422 100% 116 54% 5.1. Analytical model for moment capacity
CSSB8-SF 218 49% 218 100%
CSSB17-SF 270 61% 216 99%
CSSB18-SF 413 93% 165 76%
5.1.1. FSC stainless steel-concrete composite beams
CSSB10-SF 444 100% 122 56% The current design provisions, such as AS/NZS 2327 [28] and EN
1994-1-1 [29], employed RPA method for prediction of the bending
moment capacity (Mpl) for the traditional composite beam. This design
corresponding experimental data. Failure modes of the composite beams method assumed an elastic-perfectly-plastic material behaviour for steel
during the FE simulation was identified by one of the following situa­ section and neglected the strain hardening effect. Fig. 14 (a) presents the
tions: 1) concrete crushing; 2) stainless steel web shear buckling. For typical strain and stress distributions of composite beam predicted by
composite beams under bending test, concrete crushing was observed RPA method. The bending moment capacity is determined based on the
when the principal compressive strain at concrete top fibre reached the equilibrium of forces where the concrete slab reaches its maximum
ultimate strain. Moreover, in the simulation of the shear test, the diag­ compressive strength and steel sections are stressed to the yield strength.
onal buckling on stainless steel web can be straightforwardly observed Unlike the carbon steel that has a clear yielding point and minor strain
in ABAQUS. The comparisons in terms of the mid span load- hardening, stainless steel exhibits a rounded stress-strain curve and
displacement curve for selected specimens with different loading con­ significant strain hardening in post yielding stage. As evidenced in the
ditions are presented in Fig. 13. As observed, the results obtained from bending test conducted herein, a considerable level of strain hardening
FE model show a good agreement with the test results. The general trend developed in stainless steel beams prior to failure. The moment capac­
and initial stiffness of the tested specimens were well predicted by the ities obtained in four-point and three-point bending tests were 15% and
numerical models, whilst the discrepancy regarding the ultimate load 23% higher than that predicted by RPA method, respectively, owing to

Fig. 12. Finite element model of stainless steel-concrete composite beam.

10
Y. Zhou et al.
Fig. 13. Validation of FE model with experimental results.
the strength enhancement brought by strain hardening. In this case, a
new analytical model is required to accurately predict the moment ca­
pacity (Mpl) of stainless steel-concrete composite beams involving the
strain hardening effect.
To account for the strength contribution from strain hardening ef­
fect, a bi-linear stainless steel material model was modified based on the
coupon results and the methods proposed by [44–47], which is pre­
sented in Fig. 15. The modified stainless steel stress-strain curve exhibits
elastic behaviour up to the yielding point defined as (ε0.2, f0.2). The
strain hardening slope Esh can be determined by a line passing through
the yielding point and the specified maximum point (C2εu, fu). The
intersection of proposed line and original stress-strain curve is defined to
be the point (C1εu, fc1εu). The parameters C1 and C2 and strain hardening
slope Esh can be determined from the following expressions:
ε0.2 + 0.1(εu − ε0.2 )
C1 = (1)
εu
ε0.2 + 0.3(εu − ε0.2 )
C2 = (2)
εu
fu − f0.2
Esh = (3)
C2 εu − ε0.2
In addition to the modified material model, a strain hardening
analysis (SHA) method was proposed in this paper. The typical strain
and stress distributions developed by SHA method are illustrated in
Fig. 14 (b). The SHA model assumed the stainless steel sections were
stressed to post yielding strength (f0.2) region and the strain linearly
distributed through the depth of stainless steel beam section for FSC
composite beams. Accordingly, the stress can be determined based on
strain distribution by applying the modified bi-linear stainless steel
material model. Thus, the increment of stress (∆fh) brought by the strain
hardening effect at a depth (h) can be written as a function of the cor­
responding strain (εh).
11
Journal of Constructional Steel Research 185 (2021) 106863
∆f h = Esh (εh − ε0.2 ) (4)
The plastic neutral axis (dNA) and bending moment capacity (Mpl)
that account for the strain hardening effects can be therefore determined
by the equilibrium of strain distribution and internal forces. It should be
noted that the outer fibre concrete strain (εc) was assumed to be 0.003
[28] and the strain (εs) at the bottom outer fibre of stainless steel section
should be less than C1εu (the stress was assumed to be fC1εu if the strain
(εs) was greater than C1εu). Moreover, the reinforcement in concrete slab
under compression was neglected during the calculation, while the
reinforcement under tension was assumed to be stressed to its yielding
strength. The comparisons regarding the moment capacities (Mpl) ob­
tained by the proposed design model and experimental tests are sum­
marised in Table 4. It can be concluded that the accuracy of prediction
has been well improved by SHA method compared with RPA method.
The improvement in prediction accuracy by SHA method will be more
significant for composite beams consisting of stainless steel grade with
higher strain hardening effect or large-dimension of concrete slab.
Despite the improved prediction accuracy, the computational
complexity of detailed SHA method might limit its wide application,
owing to the demand of strain and stress calculation for each stainless
steel element. The stress distribution for composite section was therefore
modified with a simplified SHA method, as illustrated in Fig. 14 (c). A
linear strain distribution was still adopted in this model, while the stress
distribution of stainless steel beam section was modified as a rectangular
with a constant value of fs [27], which was the sum of the yielding stress
(fy) and the stress increment (∆f). The increment of stress (∆f) was
defined as half of the strength brought by strain hardening effect at the
bottom outer fibre of stainless steel section. The function of stress
increment (∆f) is expressed by Eq. (5)
∆f = 1/2Esh (εs − ε0.2 ) (5)
As the distribution of strain is continuous throughout the depth of
composite section, the plastic neutral axis (dNA) could therefore be
determined based on the equilibrium of internal forces and strain
Y. Zhou et al. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 185 (2021) 106863

Fig. 14. Analytical models for moment behaviour of stainless steel-concrete composite beams.

12
Y. Zhou et al.
Fig. 15. Modified bi-linear stainless steel material model.
gradient, which are given as:
( )
Fc − Frt − Fs = 0.85f c dNA bslab − f y Art − ∆f + f y As = 0
εc εs
= (7)
dNA Dcomp − dNA
Thus, the bending moment capacity (Mpl) can be obtained by the sum
of internal forces (Fc, Frt, Fs) times their corresponding lever arms. It is
noteworthy that the plastic neutral axis (dNA) and total internal force of
stainless steel beam (Fs) generated from detailed and simplified SHA
methods were the same, but the reduction in lever arms of Fs lead to a
conservative prediction on moment capacity by simplified SHA method.
The obtained results (MSHA.S) of tested specimens from simplified SHA
method are summarised in Table 4. It was evidenced that the predictions
from simplified SHA model could acquire similar accuracy as the
detailed SHA model for stainless steel composite beams.
5.1.2. PSC stainless steel-concrete composite beams
The simplified SHA method was also applicable to stainless steel
composite beam with PSC. The typical strain and stress distributions of a
composite section are presented in Fig. 14 (d), where two neutral axes lie
within concrete slab and stainless steel beam. With the known load
bearing capacity (Fsc) provided by shear connectors at the interface, the
neutral axis (dNA1) in concrete slab could be easily determined by the
equilibrium of forces (Fc, Frt and Fsc). The curvature (κ) herein could be
determined as a ratio of outer fibre concrete strain (εc = 0.003) over the
depth of first plastic neutral axis (dNA1). Meanwhile, the curvature (κ)
could also be expressed as the ratio of strain at outer fibre of stainless
steel beam over the distance from second neutral axis (dNA2) to bottom
surface, as it assumed that no separation between concrete slab and
beam section. The expression of curvature (κ) is given as,
Fig. 16. Effect of shear connection degree on moment capacity.
Journal of Constructional Steel Research 185 (2021) 106863
εc εs
κ= = (8)
dNA1 Dsteel − dNA2
The second neutral axis (dNA2) could therefore be obtained based on
the equilibrium of forces generated in stainless steel beam and shear
connectors. Finally, the bending moment capacity (Mpl) of stainless
steel-concrete composite beam with PSC could be calculated by internal
forces times their corresponding level arms. The maximum moment
resistance of tested specimens with partial shear connection obtained by
the simplified SHA method are summarised in Table 4.
A series of FE simulation was also conducted on stainless steel
composite beams with various degrees of shear connection. The ob­
tained experimental and numerical results are compared with those
calculated by the simplified SHA model as illustrated in Fig. 16. As per
required in AS/NZS 2327 [28], the moment resistance only considered
the contribution from steel beam when the shear connection degree was
zero. As evidenced in the plot, the obtained results from the simplified
SHA method showed reasonable and conservative predictions on
moment capacity of stainless steel composite beams with shear
(6) connection degree larger than 0.2. Owning to the fact that the composite
beam with low shear connection degree is not allowed in engineering
practice and the minimum shear connection degree is 0.4 as per AS/NZS
2327 [28], the proposed simplified SHA method was applicable for PSC
stainless steel composite beams.
5.2. Design approaches for shear capacity
5.2.1. FSC stainless steel-concrete composite beams
The design approach of shear capacity (Vcomp) for stainless steel
composite beams has not been outlined in existing codes of practice. The
current design approaches adopted in international standards AS/NZS
2327 [28] and EN 1994-1-1 [29] were developed for carbon steel
composite beams. As stated in EN 1994-1-1 [29], to obtain a conserva­
tive prediction, only the shear strength contributed by the steel web (Aw)
was considered, which is given as:
Vw = 0.6f y Aw (9)
To take the advantage of composite action, a design approach
including the shear strength of both steel web and concrete slab was
outlined in AS/NZS 2327 [28]. In this design approach, the ultimate
shear capacity (Vcomp) of composite beam was expressed as:
Vcomp = Vw + Vslab (10)
Vslab
(
= f(λsd ) bf Dslab
)0.7 √̅̅̅̅
f ′c (11)
f(λsd ) = 110λsd + 13 (12)
/
λsd = Dslab Dcomp (13)
The shear capacities (Vcomp) of tested specimens determined from
two design approaches were compared with the experimental results in
Table 5. In particular, EN 1994-1-1 [29] provided an overconservative
estimation on the shear capacity (Vcomp) as it neglected the contribution
from concrete slab. On the contrary, the results obtained from AS/NZS
2327 [28] exhibited overestimated predictions on shear capacity (Vcomp)
of stainless steel composite beams. The reason for this overestimation
was that the early failure of concrete slab limited the shear strength
development of stainless steel beam. Owing to this fact, it was unsafe to
assume the stainless steel web section stressed to shear yielding when
determining the shear capacity (Vcomp) of stainless steel composite
beam. In this view, the authors herein proposed a new design solution by
regression analysis method. Reduction shear strength of stainless steel
was employed and expressed as Eq. (14).
√ ̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
(14)
n
Vw = 0.6 0.15f 0.2 Aw
13
Y. Zhou et al.
where, n denotes the exponent from Ramberg-Osgood model based on
0.01% and 0.2% proof stress [48].
The results of tested specimens calculated by new expression (Vnew)
are listed in Table 5 and demonstrate conservative estimations on shear
capacities of stainless steel composite beams.
5.2.2. PSC stainless steel-concrete composite beams
The effect of shear connection degree on the shear capacity (Vcomp.β)
of carbon steel composite beams has been well evaluated by previous
studies [24,26,49] and such influences were also reflected in the current
code of practice AS/NZS 2327 [28]. It is believed that the shear strength
of composite beam is negatively influenced when shear connectors are
unable to provide full shear connection between concrete slab and steel
beam. As stated in AS/NZS 2327 [29], the influence on shear capacity
(Vcomp.β) of composite beam with PSC can be expressed by a reduction
factor (α):
Vcomp.β = αVcomp
1− β
α= +β
0.76λsd + 0.92
To evaluate if this design solution was still applicable for stainless
steel composite beam with PSC, a series of FE simulations was carried
out on lean duplex and austenitic stainless steel composite beams. The
geometry of FE model was identical to the Specimen CSSB9-BF in pre­
sent test programme. Different shear connection degrees were achieved
by modifying the diameters of the stainless steel shear connectors, whilst
the other conditions remain unchanged. As shown in Fig. 17, the ob­
tained results from the experimental tests, FE simulations and design
standard AS/NZS 2327 [28] are normalised by dividing Vcomp, which is
derived with Eqs. (10) and (15). As observed, the shear capacity of
stainless steel composite beams with PSC is improved with an increase of
shear connection degree, which can be conservatively predicted by AS/
NZS 2327 [28].
5.3. Comparison moment-shear interaction with the existing code of
practice
The moment-shear interaction behaviour of stainless steel composite
beam has been evaluated in this section. A series of FE simulations was
conducted to assess the influence of shear span on the moment and shear
resistances. The developed models had identical composite section but
varied in shear span. The moment-shear interaction diagrams predicted
by AS/NZS 2327 [28] and EN 1994-1-1 [29] are plotted in Fig. 18, in
which the moment (Mpl) and shear capacities (Vcomp) were calculated
based on the proposed methods in the Sections 5.1.1 and 5.2.1,
respectively. In addition, the obtained results from experimental tests
and FE simulations were also included. As shown in the figure, the
outcomes from the experimental tests and FE simulations follow the
Fig. 17. Effect of shear connection degree on shear capacity.
Journal of Constructional Steel Research 185 (2021) 106863
Fig. 18. Moment-shear interaction diagram of stainless steel-concrete com­
posite beam.
(15)
same trend of the interaction diagrams generated from codes of practice.
(16) The reduction in ultimate moment resistance of composite beams
emerges when the applied shear force is greater than 60% Vcomp.
Meanwhile, a reduction in the ultimate shear resistance can be observed
when the applied moment exceeds 50% Mpl.
6. Conclusions
This paper presented an experimental, numerical and analytical
study on the behaviour of stainless steel-concrete composite beams
subjected to bending, shear as well as combined bending and shear. A
total of eighteen full-scale composite beams made with lean duplex,
duplex and austenitic stainless steels were examined. In parallel with the
experimental tests, three-dimensional FE models were developed in
commercial programme ABAQUS and the verified FE models were
further employed for extensive numerical analysis. In addition, the in­
ternational codes of practice were evaluated by obtained experimental
and numerical results. Herein, new analytical models and design ap­
proaches were proposed for stainless steel-concrete composite beam.
Based on the study, the following conclusions can be made:
• All tested specimens under bending, shear as well as combined
bending and shear exhibited very high ductility owing to the
advantage of stainless steel members.
• The stainless steel-concrete composite beams with bolted connectors
exhibited similar ultimate moment resistance as those with welded
studs. However, the former possessed smaller flexural stiffness due to
the bolt-to-hole clearance. Moreover, the strain distribution of
composite section in the test was evidently different from the pre­
diction by RPA method owing to the significant strain hardening,
which can be explicitly found in stainless steel composite beams.
• The ultimate shear resistance of stainless steel composite beams with
bolted connectors and welded studs was approximately identical, but
the shear capacity could be reduced with the lower shear connection
degree.
• By comparing with experimental results, the developed FE model
was proved to be reliable to predict the behaviour of stainless steel-
concrete composite beams.
• Compared with the existing codes of practice (AS/NZS 2327 [31] and
EN 1994-1-1 [32]) designed for carbon steel composite beam, the
stainless steel-concrete composite beam could sustain higher flexural
capacity owing to its remarkable strain hardening effects.
• New simplified SHA model incorporating the strain hardening effects
were proposed for FSC and PSC stainless steel-concrete composite
beams, which could accurately predict the moment capacity, and
were suggested as a straightforward design tool for engineer
practice.
14
Y. Zhou et al.
• The design approach stated in AS/NZS 2327 [31] overestimated the
shear capacity of the stainless steel composite beams since the early
concrete failure limited the development of stainless steel strength. A
new design method was proposed by employing a reduced strength
of stainless steel, which showed conservative predictions on the
shear capacities.
• The design approaches stated in AS/NZS 2327 [28] and EN 1994-1-1
[29] could provide a reliable prediction on the moment-shear
interaction behaviour of stainless steel-concrete composite beams,
given that modified design methods for Mpl and Vcomp are used.
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.
Acknowledgements
This research work has been supported by Australian Research
Council under its Discovery Project Scheme (Project ID: DP180100418).
The authors would like to acknowledge Outokumpu and Stirlings per­
formance steel for the general donations of stainless steel plates. The
general donations of stainless steel bolted connectors from Bumax is also
gratefully acknowledged. A special thanks to assistance and advices
from Dr. Mohanad Mursi, Mr. Garry Towell and the technicians from J.
W.Roderick Laboratory.
References
[1] E. Mirambell, E. Real, On the calculation of deflections in structural stainless steel
beams: an experimental and numerical investigation, J. Constr. Steel Res. 54 (1)
(2000) 109–133.
[2] L. Gardner, M. Theofanous, Discrete and continuous treatment of local buckling in
stainless steel elements, J. Constr. Steel Res. 64 (11) (2008) 1207–1216.
[3] D. Li, B. Uy, F. Aslani, C. Hou, Behaviour and design of spiral-welded stainless steel
tubes subjected to axial compression, J. Constr. Steel Res. 154 (2019) 67–83.
[4] B. Uy, M. Bradford, Elastic local buckling of steel plates in composite steel-concrete
members, Eng. Struct. 18 (3) (1996) 193–200.
[5] B. Uy, Applications, behaviour and design of composite steel-concrete structures,
Adv. Struct. Eng. 15 (9) (2012) 1559–1571.
[6] A. Roufegarinejad, B. Uy, M. Bradford, A.J. Deeks, H. Hao, Behaviour and design of
concrete filled steel columns utilising stainless steel cross sections under combined
actions, in: Proceedings of the 18th Australasian Conference on the Mechanics of
Structures and Materials, Perth, Australia, 2004, pp. 159–165.
[7] L.H. Han, F. Chen, F.Y. Liao, Z. Tao, B. Uy, Fire performance of concrete filled
stainless steel tubular columns, Eng. Struct. 56 (2013) 165–181.
[8] J. Wang, B. Uy, D. Li, Y. Song, Fatigue behaviour of stainless steel bolts in tension
and shear under constant-amplitude loading, Int. J. Fatigue 133 (2020) 105401.
[9] B. Young, E. Ellobody, Experimental investigation of concrete-filled cold-formed
high strength stainless steel tube columns, J. Constr. Steel Res. 62 (5) (2006)
484–492.
[10] D. Lam, L. Gardner, Structural design of stainless steel concrete filled columns,
J. Constr. Steel Res. 64 (11) (2008) 1275–1282.
[11] B. Uy, Z. Tao, L.H. Han, Behaviour of short and slender concrete-filled stainless
steel tubular columns, J. Constr. Steel Res. 67 (3) (2011) 360–378.
[12] S. Kazemzadeh Azad, D. Li, B. Uy, Axial slenderness limits for austenitic stainless
steel-concrete composite columns, J. Constr. Steel Res. 166 (2020) 105856.
[13] S. Kazemzadeh Azad, D. Li, B. Uy, Axial slenderness limits for duplex and lean
duplex stainless steel-concrete composite columns, J. Constr. Steel Res. 172 (2020)
106175.
[14] J. Chapman, The behaviour of composite beams in steel and concrete, Struct. Eng.
42 (1964) 115–125.
[15] G. Kwon, M.D. Engelhardt, R.E. Klingner, Experimental behavior of bridge beams
retrofitted with postinstalled shear connectors, J. Bridg. Eng. 16 (4) (2011)
536–545.
[16] D. Lam, X. Dai, A. Ashour, N. Rehman, Recent research on composite beams with
demountable shear connectors, Steel Constr. 10 (2) (2017) 125–134.
[17] E.L. Tan, B. Uy, Experimental study on straight composite beams subjected to
combined flexure and torsion, J. Constr. Steel Res. 65 (4) (2009) 784–793.
15
Journal of Constructional Steel Research 185 (2021) 106863
[18] G. Vasdravellis, B. Uy, E.L. Tan, B. Kirkland, The effects of axial tension on the
sagging-moment regions of composite beams, J. Constr. Steel Res. 72 (2012)
240–253.
[19] G. Vasdravellis, B. Uy, E.L. Tan, B. Kirkland, Behaviour and design of composite
beams subjected to sagging bending and axial compression, J. Constr. Steel Res.
110 (2015) 29–39.
[20] R.P. Johnson, R.T. Willmington, Vertical shear in continuous composite beams,
Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. 53 (2) (1972) 189–205.
[21] P. Ansourian, Experiments on continuous composite beams, Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. 73
(1) (1982) 26–51.
[22] J. Nie, Y. Xiao, L. Chen, Experimental studies on shear strength of steel–concrete
composite beams, J. Struct. Eng. 130 (8) (2004) 1206–1213.
[23] J. Nie, L. Tang, Vertical shear strength of composite beams with compact steel
sections. Part I: Composite beams subjected to sagging moment, China Civ. Eng. 3
(2008).
[24] G. Vasdravellis, B. Uy, Shear strength and moment-shear interaction in steel-
concrete composite beams, J. Struct. Eng. 140 (11) (2014), 04014084.
[25] Q.Q. Liang, B. Uy, A. Bradford, H.R. Ronagh, Ultimate strength of continuous
composite beams in combined bending and shear, J. Constr. Steel Res. 60 (8)
(2004) 1109–1128.
[26] Q.Q. Liang, B. Uy, A. Bradford, H.R. Ronagh, Strength analysis of steel–concrete
composite beams in combined bending and shear, J. Constr. Steel Res. 131 (10)
(2005) 1593–1600.
[27] R. Shamass, K. Cashell, Analysis of stainless steel-concrete composite beams,
J. Constr. Steel Res. 152 (2019) 132–142.
[28] Australian/New Zealand standard AS/NZS 2327, 2017 Composite Steel-Concrete
Construction in Buildings, 2017.
[29] EN 1994-1-1, BS EN Eurocode 4: Design of Composite Steel and Concrete
Structures, 2004.
[30] Y. Huang, B. Young, The art of coupon tests, J. Constr. Steel Res. 96 (2014)
159–175.
[31] D. Lam, K. Elliott, D. Nethercot, Experiments on composite steel beams with
precast concrete hollow core floor slabs, Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Struct. Build. 140 (2)
(2000) 127–138.
[32] H.P. Reck, T. Peköz, G. Winter, Inelastic strength of cold-formed steel beams,
J. Struct. Div. 101 (11) (1975) 2193–2203.
[33] ABAQUS, 2016 Documentation, Dassault Systemes, Simulia, Providence, RI, USA,
2016.
[34] Y. Song, J. Wang, B. Uy, D. Li, Stainless steel bolts subjected to combined tension
and shear: behaviour and design, J. Constr. Steel Res. 170 (2020) 106122.
[35] X. Liu, A. Bradford, M.S. Lee, Behavior of high-strength friction-grip bolted shear
connectors in sustainable composite beams, J. Struct. Eng. 141 (6) (2015),
04014149.
[36] Y. Zhou, B. Uy, X. Liu, D. Li, Finite element modelling of stainless steel shear
connectors in composite beams, in: Proceedings of International Association of
Structural Engineering and Mechanics, ASEM19 Jeju Island, 2019.
[37] H.T. Thai, T.P. Vo, T.K. Nguyen, C.H. Pham, Explicit simulation of bolted endplate
composite beam-to-CFST column connections, Thin-Walled Struct. 119 (2017)
749–759.
[38] J. Wang, B. Uy, D. Li, Behaviour of large fabricated stainless steel beam-to-tubular
column joints with extended endplates, Steel Compos. Struct. 32 (1) (2019)
141–156.
[39] D.J. Carreira, K.-H. Chu, Stress-strain relationship for plain concrete in
compression, ACI J. Proc 82 (6) (1985) 797–804.
[40] S.W. Pathirana, B. Uy, O. Mirza, X. Zhu, Strengthening of existing composite steel-
concrete beams utilising bolted shear connectors and welded studs, J. Constr. Steel
Res. 114 (2015) 417–430.
[41] S.W. Pathirana, B. Uy, O. Mirza, X. Zhu, Bolted and welded connectors for the
rehabilitation of composite beams, J. Constr. Steel Res. 125 (2016) 61–73.
[42] U. Katwal, Z. Tao, M.K. Hassan, B. Uy, D. Lam, Load sharing mechanism between
shear studs and profiled steel sheeting in push tests, J. Constr. Steel Res. 174
(2020) 106279.
[43] S.W. Pathirana, B. Uy, O. Mirza, X. Zhu, Flexural behaviour of composite
steel–concrete beams utilising blind bolt shear connectors, Eng. Struct. 114 (2016)
181–194.
[44] S. Afshan, L. Gardner, The continuous strength method for structural stainless steel
design, Thin-Walled Struct. 68 (2013) 42–49.
[45] A. Liew, L. Gardner, Ultimate capacity of structural steel cross-sections under
compression, bending and combined loading, Structure 1 (2015) 2–11.
[46] M.N. Su, B. Young, L. Gardner, Testing and design of aluminum alloy cross sections
in compression, J. Struct. Eng. 140 (9) (2014), 04014047.
[47] L. Gardner, X. Yun, L. Macorini, M. Kucukler, Hot-rolled steel and steel-concrete
composite design incorporating strain hardening, Structure 9 (2017) 21–28.
[48] EN 1993-1-4, Eurocode 3: Design of Steel Structures - Part 1.4: General Rules-
Supplementary Rules for Stainless Steel, 2015.
[49] R.C. Donahey, D. Darwin, Web openings in composite beams with ribbed slabs,
J. Struct. Eng. 114 (3) (1988) 518–534.