Engineering Structures 210 (2020) 110419

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

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

Study on composite beams with prefabricated steel bar truss concrete slabs T
and demountable shear connectors
⁎
Hao Du, Xiamin Hu , Yanfei Meng, Guohui Han, Kaikai Guo
College of Civil Engineering, Nanjing Tech University, Nanjing 211816, China

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

Keywords: In the conventional steel-concrete composite beams, the composite action is achieved by welded stud connectors
Composite beam which are encased into the cast-in-place concrete slab. This makes the deconstruction and reuse of the structural
Steel bar truss concrete slab components almost impossible. A sustainable and prefabricated composite structural system was developed in
Demountable shear connector this study wherein the steel beam is attached to the prefabricated steel-bars truss concrete slab using the de-
Prefabricated
mountable bolted connectors. Twelve push-out specimens were designed and tested to assess the shear behavior
Push-out test
Load carrying capacity
of the bolted connectors. The test results showed that the shear bearing capacity of the bolted connectors with
the prefabricated steel-bars truss concrete slab increased 7.0% over that of the bolted connectors with the
prefabricated normal concrete slab. Three full-scale composite beams with various shear connection ratios were
constructed and loaded to failure. For direct comparison, a similar composite beam was constructed with the
same section size and shear connectors, but using the cast-in-place concrete slab. The flexural capacity of the
composite beams with 68% shear connection and full shear connection increased 9.8% and 15.8% compared to
the composite beam with 46% shear connection, respectively. The mechanical behavior of the composite beam
with the prefabricated concrete slab was comparable with that of the composite beam with cast-in-place concrete
slab. The load carrying capacity of the composite beam can be predicted by the simplified model in Eurocode 4
and the plastic model.

1. Introduction connectors can be dismantled to replace the damaged structural ele-

Steel-concrete composite beams possess excellent mechanical be-
havior with regard to load carrying capacity and bending stiffness,
making them popular in modern steel structure buildings. Owning to
the sufficient composite action, the steel beam and the concrete slab can
work together as one unit, and the mechanical properties of each
structural component are utilized efficiently [1,2]. The welded stud
connectors are extensively used as the shear connectors in the compo-
site beams owning to their excellent mechanical behavior and rapid
installation procedure. Many previous researchers have investigated the
shear performance of welded headed stud connectors [3–12]. At pre-
sent, the buildings tend to be designed for high-performance, low power
consumption, sustainability and recyclability. However, it is difficult to
deconstruct the conventional composite beams, and the structural
components are not reusable because the composite action is achieved
by welded stud connectors which are encased into the cast-in-place
concrete slab [13–15].
Compared with the conventional composite beam containing
welded stud connectors, the composite beam with demountable shear
ments. This reduces the life-cycle cost of buildings and improve the
recyclability and sustainability of the structural components. The de-
mountable shear connectors can also be conveniently utilized in the
prefabricated construction of steel-concrete buildings and bridges,
which improve construction efficiency and shorten construction time
[15,16]. Dallam [17] conducted experimental studies on high strength
bolted connectors. The results demonstrated that the relative slips at
interface were very small until the friction was overcome. Kwon et al.
[18,19] studied the shear behavior of the post-installed bolted con-
nectors which were used in existing non-composite floor systems to
develop composite action. The results indicated that the post-installed
connectors had higher fatigue strength than the headed stud con-
nectors. Pavlovíc et al. [20] conducted the experiment and finite ele-
ment analysis on the bolted and headed stud connectors to investigate
the shear resistance, shear stiffness and ductility. The results showed
that the bolted connectors achieved about 95% of shear resistance of
headed stud connectors, while the shear stiffness of bolted connector
was reduced about 50% compared to the headed stud connectors.
Furthermore, Chen et al. [21] investigated the effects of the bolt

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: huxm_njtech@163.com (X. Hu).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.110419
Received 30 September 2019; Received in revised form 19 January 2020; Accepted 21 February 2020
Available online 27 February 2020
0141-0296/ © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
H. Du, et al. Engineering Structures 210 (2020) 110419

Concrete
Top bars
Support bars

Cross bars

Bottom bars

Bottom sheet

(a) Configuration details (b) Application in the steel building

Fig. 1. Steel bar truss concrete slab.

Prefabricated Connector pocket Bolt connector Connector pocket Prefabricated

concrete slab concrete slab

Steel bar truss deck

Steel beam Steel beam

Fig. 2. Sustainable and prefabricated structural system.

Table 1 diameter and steel-concrete contact surface properties on the shear

Main parameters of push-out specimens. behavior of through-bolt connectors.
Test series Bolt diameter Concrete grade of Concrete Concrete Slab
There have been many previous studies on the mechanical perfor-
(mm) connector pocket grade of slabs mance of composite beams with demountable shear connectors
[22–26]. Kwon et al. [22] carried out experimental research on the
DBC1 16 C30 C30 PS composite beams retrofitted with post-installed shear connectors. The
DBC2 16 C40 C30 PS
DBC3 16 C30 C30 PN
results showed that the structural performance of the retrofitted com-
DBC4 16 — C30 CS posite beams was obviously improved compared to the non-composite
beam. Moynihan and Allwood [23] conducted bending tests on three
Note: PS: prefabricated steel-bars truss concrete slab; PN: prefabricated normal composite beams with different spans to find that the composite beam
concrete slab without steel-bars truss deck; CS: cast-in-place steel-bars truss with bolted connectors performed in a similar manner to the beam with
concrete slab. headed stud connectors. Liu et al. [25] established the finite element
models for the composite beams with bolted connectors. Parametric

Shank Nut Nut

294
100
washer
120 120
140

130
140

400
8
460

140
200
190

130

Connector
pocket 12 12
50

Fig. 3. Details of push-out specimen (mm).

2
H. Du, et al. Engineering Structures 210 (2020) 110419

400 Table 4
Test results for push-out specimens.
100 200 100
Specimens Maximum load (kN) Slip at maximum load Failure mode
Top bar(8 mm) (mm)
Cross bar(4.5 mm)
Test Average Test Average
15 90

Bottom bar(8 mm)

1 347.04 342.39 12.32 Concrete
DBC1 2 359.32 12.36 13.18 crushing
Bottom sheet(0.5 mm) Support bar(8 mm) 3 320.80 14.86
1 440.04 425.36 11.02 Bolt fracture
Fig. 4. Details of steel bar truss deck (mm). DBC2 2 409.09 14.98 13.14
3 426.96 13.41
1 315.32 319.92 10.62 Concrete
Table 2 DBC3 2 328.79 10.08 10.20 crushing
Mechanical properties of bolted connector and steel beam. 3 315.86 9.91
1 366.84 359.44 11.49 Concrete
Materials Yield strength (MPa) Ultimate tensile strength (MPa) DBC4 2 334.08 11.02 11.36 crushing
3 377.41 11.58
Steel beam web 251 423
Steel beam flange 263 434
Bolted connector 660 886
Steel reinforcement 362 468
developed in this study, as shown in Fig. 2. The demountable bolted
connectors were installed on the steel beam flange, and then the steel
beam was assembled together with the prefabricated steel-bars truss
Table 3 concrete slab through pouring concrete into the connector pockets. This
Mechanical properties of Concrete. structural system has several advantages, including efficient construc-
tion, low power consumption, sustainability and recyclability. Twelve
Specimens Compressive strength of concrete in Compressive strength of
connector pocket (MPa) concrete slabs (MPa) push-out specimens were designed and tested to study the shear be-
havior of the bolted connectors. Three full-scale composite beam spe-
DBC1 30.9 29.8 cimens with various shear connection ratios were constructed and
DBC2 40.3 29.4
loaded to failure. For direct comparison, a similar composite beam was
DBC3 28.8 30.7
DBC4 — 30.9 constructed using the same section size and shear connectors, but using
the cast-in-place concrete slab. Moreover, the theoretical methods were
presented to calculate the shear resistance of the demountable bolted
connectors and the flexural capacity of the composite beams.

Test Machine
Test specimen
Dispalcement Dispalcement
transducer transducer
Fig. 5. Push-out test setup.
analyses were conducted to investigate the influences of longitudinal
reinforcement ratio, bolt spacing, diameter of hole and bolt pretension
on the mechanical behavior.
The steel bar truss concrete slab is a composite of concrete, corru-
gated sheet and steel bar truss which can replace wood formwork to
bear the construction loads in the construction phase and bear the
structure load during the service stage [27]. Fig. 1 presents the details
of the steel bar truss concrete slab. In the prefabricated construction of
steel-concrete buildings and bridges, the steel bar truss concrete slabs
can be utilized, which shorten the construction time and reduce tem-
porary support. In addition, the steel bar truss concrete slab has good
performance of cracking resistance and fire resistance [28,29].
A sustainable and prefabricated composite structural system was
2. Push-out tests
2.1. Description of Push-out specimens
Four groups of push-out specimens were designed and tested, and
three replicate specimens were included in each group. The main
parameters of the specimens are listed in Table 1. The test series DBC1
and DBC2 were designed to study the influence of the concrete strength
of the connector pocket on the shear behavior of the demountable
bolted connectors. For direct comparison, the test series DBC3 was
constructed with the same section size and shear connectors, but using
the prefabricated normal concrete slab without steel bar truss deck. The
test series DBC4 was constructed with the cast-in-place steel bar truss
concrete slab. Each test specimen consisted of one rolled H-section steel
beam and two concrete slabs, as shown in Fig. 3. The concrete slabs
were 460 mm high, 400 mm wide and 120 mm thick. Two Grade
8.8 M20 bolted connectors were installed on each side of the steel beam
using a wrench to apply pretension force of 120 kN [30]. The bolted
connectors had embedded depth of 100 mm inside the concrete slabs.
The connector pocket in the precast concrete slabs was 140 mm wide
and 140 mm high. The details of steel bar truss deck used in the con-
crete slab are shown in Fig. 4.
2.2. Material properties
Tables 2–3 present the mechanical properties of each structural
component obtained from material tests. The yield strength and ulti-
mate tensile strength for the bolted connector, the steel reinforcement
and steel beam were evaluated through the tensile coupon tests [31].
The cubic compression tests on the concrete were conducted based on
GB/T 50081 [32].

3
H. Du, et al. Engineering Structures 210 (2020) 110419

(a) Crushing failure of concrete (b) Fracture failure of bolted connectors

Fig. 6. Failure modes of demountable bolted shear connectors.

Table 5
Comparison between the experimental and calculated results.
Authors Specimens Test Vu,t (kN) Theoretical Vu,c (kN) Vu,c/Vu,t

This paper DBC1-1 86.76 75.40 0.87

DBC1-2 89.83 75.40 0.84
DBC1-3 80.20 75.40 0.94
DBC2-1 110.01 93.37 0.85
DBC2-2 102.27 93.37 0.91
DBC2-3 106.74 93.37 0.87
DBC3-1 78.83 76.64 0.97
DBC3-2 82.20 76.64 0.93
DBC3-3 78.97 76.64 0.97
DBC4-1 91.71 76.64 0.84
DBC4-2 83.52 76.64 0.92
DBC4-3 94.35 76.64 0.81
Dai et al. [13] Test1 75.00 70.37 0.94
Test2 93.50 79.44 0.85
Test3 107.50 95.42 0.89
Fig. 7. Load-slip curves of push-out specimens.
Test4 71.90 74.97 1.04
Test5 81.50 77.92 0.96
2.3. Test setup and procedure Test6 90.00 87.86 0.98
Test7 71.60 66.41 0.93
Hawkins [15] 1S 105.50 104.63 0.99
Fig. 5 presents the push-out test set-up and the arrangement of the 2S 111.90 125.96 1.13
displacement transducers. Two displacement transducers were 3S 98.20 101.62 1.03
mounted at the central part of specimens to measure the relative slips 4S 123.30 143.20 1.16
throughout the loading process. To check the performance of the push- 5S 100.40 123.52 1.23
6S 86.70 105.12 1.21
out test set-up and the measuring instruments, the applied load was 7S 121.10 132.50 1.09
increased at the rate of 0.5 kN/s until 10% of the estimated ultimate 8S 130.20 161.05 1.24
load (Fest) was reached, which was then unloaded. After that, the load 9S 96.30 81.53 0.85
was increased to 0.4 Fest with the rate of 0.5 kN/s. Finally, the dis- 10S 105.50 92.68 0.88
11S 102.70 81.14 0.79
placement control mode with the rate of 0.2 mm/min was adopted to
12S 93.60 81.14 0.87
apply the further load. 13S 89.90 67.07 0.75
14S 125.70 95.51 0.76
15S 115.60 116.09 1.00
2.4. Test results and discussion Ataei et al. [24] PT1 193.60 174.16 0.90
PT2 127.20 111.47 0.88
Table 4 lists the experimental results and failure mechanisms ob- PT3 207.60 174.16 0.84
served from push-out tests. The results demonstrated that the shear Means 0.95
Coefficient of Variation (%) 13.1
bearing capacity of the bolted connectors using concrete strength of
40 MPa in the connector pockets increased 24.2% over that of the
bolted connectors using concrete strength of 30 MPa in the connector
the steel bar truss concrete slab. In addition, the comparison between
pockets. Comparison between the test series DBC1 and DBC3 showed
test series DBC1 and DBC4 showed that the shear bearing capacity of
that the shear bearing capacity of the bolted connectors using the
the bolted connectors using prefabricated concrete slab was approxi-
prefabricated steel-bars truss concrete slab increased 7.0% over that of
mately equal to that of the bolted connectors using cast-in-place con-
the bolted connectors using the prefabricated normal concrete slab,
crete slab.
which was primarily attributable to the enhanced cracking resistance of

4
H. Du, et al.
Fig. 8. Details of composite beam specimens.
Two types of failure modes of demountable bolted connectors were
observed: crushing failure of concrete and fracture failure of bolted
connectors (Fig. 6). The failure mechanism of DBC1, DBC3 and DBC4
was crushing failure of concrete coupled with bending deformation of
bolted connectors (Fig. 6(a)). For test series DBC2, it was observed that
when the applied load reached its peak, the shear failure of the bolted
connectors suddenly occurred (Fig. 6(b)).
The load-slip curves of demountable bolted connectors are shown in
Fig. 7. During the early loading period, the relative slip at the interface
increased linearly as the applied load increased. When the load reached
approximately 70% of the maximum load, the slips increased rapidly
with the increase of the load. The shear stiffness of the bolted con-
nectors decreased continuously throughout this process. After reaching
the ultimate load, the different failure modes of bolted connectors ex-
hibited various load-slip behavior. When the crushing failure of con-
crete occurred on the bolted connectors, the load decreased slowly as
the slip increased. When the failure mechanism was shear failure of the
bolted connectors, the load dropped sharply with the increase of slip.
Overall, the demountable bolted shear connectors in the composite
beam showed good ductility performance, owning to the bending de-
formation of the bolted connectors.
3. Calculation methods for shear resistance of bolted connectors
Push-out tests were conducted to study the shear performance of
bolted connectors in the composite beam having cast-in-place concrete
slab in previous research [33]. The results showed that when the
crushing failure of concrete occurred on the bolted connectors, the load
carrying capacity of bolted connectors was improved with the increase
of concrete strength, bolt diameter and embedded length of bolt into
concrete. When the failure mode was shear failure of the bolted
5
Engineering Structures 210 (2020) 110419
connectors, the load carrying capacity was improved along with the
bolt strength and bolt diameter increasing. The analytical models for
calculating the load carrying capacity of bolted connectors were pro-
posed based on the various failure modes. When the failure mode was
crushing failure of concrete, the shear bearing capacity VuI can be cal-
culated as:
VuI = 0.22(h/ d )0.4Ad fc Ec (1)
where fc is the axial compressive strength of concrete; h is the em-
bedded length of bolted connectors into the concrete slab ; d is the
diameter of bolt connectors; Ad is the section area of bolted connectors;
Ec is the elastic modulus of concrete.
The corresponding theoretical method for the fracture failure of
bolted connectors VuII was based on EN1993-1-8 [34] as follows:
VuII = α v Ad fu (2)
where fu is the tensile strength of bolted connectors; αv = 0.6 for classes
4.6, 5.6 and 8.8; αv = 0.5 for classes 4.8, 5.5, 6.8 and 10.9.
Table 5 shows the comparisons between the experimental results of
the bolted connectors obtained from this paper, Dai et al. [13], Hawkins
[15] and Ataei et al. [24] and the calculated results. The effects of
concrete strength, bolt diameter, embedded length of bolt into concrete
were considered in the calculation method for load carrying capacity of
bolted connectors. The results showed that the calculation method can
be used to predict the load carrying capacity of bolted connectors.
4. Bending tests on composite beams
4.1. Composite beam specimens
Three full-scale composite beams (PCB1, PCB2 and PCB3) with
H. Du, et al.
Fig. 9. Bolted connectors layout of composite beam specimens.
various shear connection ratios were constructed and loaded to failure
(Fig. 8). Composite beam PCB1 was designed with full shear connec-
tion. A total of forty Grade 8.8 M20 bolted connectors were installed
along with the beam (Fig. 9(a)). Composite beam PCB2 was designed
with 68% shear connection, constructed with a total of thirty bolted
connectors (Fig. 9(b)). Composite beam PCB3 was designed with 46%
shear connection, constructed with a total of twenty-two bolted con-
nectors (Fig. 9(c)). For direct comparison, a fully connected composite
beam CB1 was constructed with the cast-in-place concrete slab. The
spacing and number of bolted connectors for composite beam CB1 was
6
Engineering Structures 210 (2020) 110419
equivalent to that of composite beam PCB1.
The yield strength and ultimate tensile strength of the steel beam
obtained from the tensile coupon tests were 256 MPa and 429 MPa,
respectively. The compressive strength of the concrete slab obtained
from the cubic compression tests was 30.3 MPa. The compressive
strength of the concrete used in the connector pockets was 29.4 MPa.
4.2. Test setup and procedure
Fig. 10 shows the static destructive test setup of the composite
H. Du, et al. Engineering Structures 210 (2020) 110419

Table 6
Reaction frame Hydraulic servo actuator Test results of composite beams.
Specimen Degree of Py (kN) Pu (kN) δy (mm) δu (mm) Failure mode
Spreader beam
shear
connection
Composite beam
CB1 100 363.6 629.7 17.1 67.9 CC + FS
PCB1 100 373.7 637.7 17.4 69.7 CC + FS
PCB2 68 350.2 604.4 18.8 83.5 CC + FS
PCB3 46 320.5 550.6 16.4 67.11 CC + FS

Notes: CC: crushing failure of concrete slab; FS: flexural failure of steel beam.
Roller support Pin support
strain distributions across mid-span section of the composite beam.

Fig. 10. Configuration of bending test set-up. 4.3. Test results and discussion

beams. The composite beam specimens were placed under simply
supported boundary condition through the roller and pin supports in-
stalled at the end of beams. Two-point symmetric loading were adopted
on the composite beams by using a 1000 kN hydraulic servo actuator.
The length of pure bending zone was 1200 mm. To assess the perfor-
mance of the bending test set-up and the measuring instruments, the
applied load was increased at a rate of 0.5 kN/s until 10% of the esti-
mated maximum load was reached, then unloaded. The applied load
was then increased with the rate of 10 kN per step until the load
reached 80% of the estimated maximum load. Finally, the displacement
control mode with a rate of 2 mm/min was adopted to apply further
load.
The displacement transducers and strain gauges were placed at
different positions along the composite beams to quantify the structural
performance, as shown in Fig. 11. The support settlement and the de-
flection deformation at the mid-span were measured with three trans-
ducers. To evaluate the relative slip at the steel-concrete interface, six
displacement transducers were installed along longitudinal direction of
the composite beams. Eleven strain gauges were also used to obtain the
4.3.1. Failure mode
The experimental results of four composite beam specimens are
presented in Table 6, where: Py is the applied load when the bottom
flange of the steel beam yielded, Pu is the ultimate load, δy is the de-
flection of the composite beam at the mid-span when the steel beam
yielded, δu is deflection of the composite beam at mid-span upon
reaching the maximum load.
It was found that the crack pattern and failure mode of the com-
posite beam specimens were similar. When the load reached approxi-
mately 54% of the maximum load, the first cracking appeared on the
concrete slab at the mid-span of the composite beams. As the increase of
applied load, more flexural cracks occurred on the concrete slab around
the mid-span and the cracks further expanded, as shown in Fig. 12(a).
When the load reached to approximately 80% of the maximum load,
the horizontal cracks were observed on the concrete slab at mid-span.
Upon reaching the ultimate load, the crushing failure of concrete slab
and the flexural failure of steel beam were observed (Fig. 12(b), (c)).
There were clearly visible interface slips at the end of composite beam
PCB2 and PCB3, as shown in Fig. 12(d).

4000

100 1300 1200 1300 100

Load

300 300 300 300 300

180 180 180 60

60 60

displacement transducer at the mid-span

90

displacement transducer at the support

90

displacement transducer at the steel-concrete interface

90

Strain gauge

Fig. 11. Layout of beam measurements.

7
H. Du, et al. Engineering Structures 210 (2020) 110419

(a) Cracks on the side of concrete slab (b) Crushing failure of concrete slab

(c) Overall flexural failure (d) Relative slip at the steel-concrete interface
Fig. 12. Failure mode of composite beam PCB2.

800 capacity of the composite beams with 68% shear connection and full
CB1
shear connection increased 9.8% and 15.8% over that of the composite
700 PCB1
PCB2 beam with 46% shear connection, respectively. In effect, the flexural
600 PCB3 capacity of composite beams was improved with the degree of shear
connection increasing. The flexural capacity of composite beam
500 PCB1with prefabricated concrete slab was approximately equal to that
Load (kN)

of composite beam CB1 with cast-in-place concrete slab.

400
4.3.3. Relative slip
300
The relative slips at the interface under the action of bending load
200 were caused by shear deformation of the flexible shear connectors. The
distributions of relative slips along the length of the composite beams
100 under different loading levels are shown in Fig. 14. During the initial
loading period, the relative slips of composite beam specimens were
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 small due to the excellent interfacial bonding between the steel beam
and the concrete slab. Once the applied load reached about 20% of the
Deflection (mm) ultimate load, the slips increased rapidly with further increase in load
Fig. 13. Load-deflection curves of composite beam specimens. due to bond failure at the steel-concrete interface. For the composite
beams with shear connection ratio of 68% and 46%, the beam-end slip
at ultimate load increased 220% and 285% over that of the fully con-
4.3.2. Load-deflection behavior
nected composite beam, respectively. It was concluded that the relative
Fig. 13 presents the load-deflection curves of the composite beam
slips increased as the degree of shear connection decreased. In addition,
specimens. It was found that at the initial loading stage, the deflection
the relative slips of composite beam PCB1with prefabricated concrete
increased linearly as the applied load increased. When the load reached
slab was approximately equal to that of composite beam CB1 with cast-
about 60% of the maximum load, the deflection increased rapidly with
in-place concrete slab.
further increase in load and the bending stiffness of the composite
beams degraded continuously due to yielding of the bottom flange of
the steel beam and the development of the relative slip at the interface. 4.3.4. Sectional strain distribution
The strain distributions along the height of the cross-section at the
After the load reached its peak point, it decreased slowly as the de-
flection increased. The test results demonstrated that the flexural mid-span of composite beams are shown in Fig. 15. The strain dis-
tributions of the cross-section of composite beams CB1 and PCB1 were

8
H. Du, et al. Engineering Structures 210 (2020) 110419

5.5 5.5
5.0 P/Pu=0.2 5.0 P/Pu=0.2
4.5 P/Pu=0.4 4.5 P/Pu=0.4
4.0 P/Pu=0.6 4.0 P/Pu=0.6
P/Pu=0.8 P/Pu=0.8
3.5 3.5
P/Pu=0.9 P/Pu=0.9

Slip (mm)
Slip (mm)

3.0 3.0
P/Pu=1.0 P/Pu=1.0
2.5 2.5
2.0 2.0
1.5 1.5
1.0 1.0
0.5 0.5

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
Distance to the mid-span (mm) Distance to the mid-span (mm)
(a) Composite beam CB1 (b) Composite beam PCB1

5.5 5.5
5.0 P/Pu=0.2 5.0 P/Pu=0.2
4.5 P/Pu=0.4 4.5 P/Pu=0.4
P/Pu=0.6 P/Pu=0.6
4.0 4.0
P/Pu=0.8 P/Pu=0.8
3.5 3.5
P/Pu=0.9 P/Pu=0.9
Slip (mm)

3.0 Slip (mm) 3.0 P/Pu=1.0

P/Pu=1.0
2.5 2.5
2.0 2.0
1.5 1.5
1.0 1.0
0.5 0.5

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
Distance to the mid-span (mm) Distance to the mid-span (mm)
(c) Composite beam PCB2 (d) Composite beam PCB3
Fig. 14. Load-slip curves of composite beam specimens.

almost continuous during the early loading period, which demonstrated
that full composite action was produced at the steel-concrete interface.
The top flange of steel beam was subjected to tension and the neutral
axis of the composite beam fell into the concrete slab as the load in-
creased. The strain distribution at the interface exhibited small dis-
continuity owning to the interface slips. The section strain of the fully
connected composite beams as one unit were according with the plane
section assumption.
The discontinuity of the strain distributions of composite beams
PCB2 and PCB3 became more prominent due to the larger interface slip.
The plane section assumption was inapplicable for the composite cross-
section as one unit, but the section strains of each component were in
accordance with the plane section assumption. The top flange of the
steel beam experienced compressive strains and the neutral axis gra-
dually moved downwards as the applied load further increased until
about 20 mm below the interface. In addition, the separation of the two
neutral axes in the concrete slab and the steel beam increased as the
degree of shear connection decreased.
5. Plastic model for load carrying capacity of composite beam
5.1. Composite beam with full shear connection
The mechanical performance of the composite beams is significantly
influenced by the degree of shear connection. In the structural analysis
of the fully connected composite beam, the plane section assumption
was applicable for the cross section as one unit, and the tensile strength
of the concrete was not considered. When the neutral axis is located in
the cross section of the concrete slab ( fc be hc ⩾ fy As ), the plastic stress
distributions of the composite cross section are presented in Fig. 16(a).
The depth of the compressive zone of the concrete can be determined
by:
fy As
x=
fc be (3)
The load carrying capacity of the fully connected composite beam
Mu, f can be taken as:
Mu,f = fc be xy (4)
where: fc is the compressive strength of concrete, be is the effective
width of the concrete slab, hc is the thickness of the concrete slab, As is
the cross-sectional area of the steel beam, fy is the yield strength of the
steel beam in tension or compression, x is the distance from the top of
the concrete slab to the neutral axis, y is the distance from the tensile
resultant force of the steel beam to the compressive resultant force of
the concrete slab.
When the neutral axis is located in the cross section of the steel
beam ( fc be h c < fy As ), the plastic stress distributions of the composite
cross section are presented in Fig. 16(b). The cross section area of the
steel beam under compressive Ac is calculated as the following equa-
tion:
fy As − fc be hc
Ac =
2fy (5)
The load carrying capacity of the fully connected composite beam

9
H. Du, et al. Engineering Structures 210 (2020) 110419

150 150

100 P/Pu=0.2 100 P/Pu=0.2

Neutral axis P/Pu=0.4 Neutral axis P/Pu=0.4
Distance to the interface (mm)

Distance to the interface (mm)

50 50
P/Pu=0.6 P/Pu=0.6
0 P/Pu=0.8 0 P/Pu=0.8
P/Pu=0.9 P/Pu=0.9
-50 -50
P/Pu=1.0 P/Pu=1.0
-100 -100

-150 -150

-200 -200

-250 -250

-300 -300
-5000 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 -5000 0 5000 10000 15000 20000
Strain(με) Strain(με)
(a) Composite beam CB1 (b) Composite beam PCB1

150 150

100 Concrete neutral axis P/Pu=0.2 100 P/Pu=0.2

Concrete neutral axis
P/Pu=0.4 P/Pu=0.4
Distance to the interface (mm)

Distance to the interface (mm)

50 50
P/Pu=0.6 P/Pu=0.6
0 P/Pu=0.8 0 P/Pu=0.8
Steel neutral axis P/Pu=0.9 P/Pu=0.9
-50 -50 Steel neutral axis
P/Pu=1.0 P/Pu=1.0
-100 -100

-150 -150

-200 -200

-250 -250

-300 -300
-5000 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 -5000 0 5000 10000 15000 20000
Strain(με) Strain(με)
(c) Composite beam PCB2 (d) Composite beam PCB3
Fig. 15. Strain distributions at mid-span of composite beams.

Mu, f can be determined by: 5.2.2. Plastic model

The load carrying capacity of the partially connected composite
h
Mu,f = fc be h c ⎛x − c ⎞ + fy Sat + fy Sac beam can also be predicted by an equivalent method. The longitudinal
⎝ 2⎠ (6) shear force which depends on the shear performance and the number of
where: Sat is the static moment of the steel cross section in tension about shear connectors is equivalent to the internal normal force of the steel
the neutral axis, Sac is the static moment of the steel cross section in beam and the concrete slab. Therefore, the compression force in the
compression about the neutral axis. concrete slab can be calculated by the total of shear bearing capacity of
shear connectors from the cross-section of zero bending moment to the
cross-section of the maximum bending moment. When the neutral axis
5.2. Composite beam with partial shear connection of the steel beam is located in the top flange ( fy As − 2fy bf t f ⩽ nVu ), the
plastic stress distributions of the composite cross section are presented
5.2.1. Simplified model in Fig. 17(a). The distance from the concrete neutral axis to the top of
Compared with the fully connected composite beam, the load car- the concrete slab x2 is determined by the following equation:
rying capacity of the partially connected composite beam was reduced
due to the decrease of the composite action. The plane section as- nVu
x2 =
sumption for the cross section as one unit is inapplicable for the com- fc be (8)
posite beam with partial shear connection. However, the plane section
assumption is still applicable for each sub-component after deforma- The distance from the steel neutral axis to the top of the steel beam
tion. Based on Eurocode 4 [35], the load carrying capacity of the par- x1 is calculated as:
tially connected composite beam Mup can be determined by a simplified fy As − nVu
calculation method as: x1 =
2fy bf (9)
Mup = Ms + η (Muf − Ms) (7)
Finally, the load carrying capacity of the partially connected com-
where: Ms is the plastic load bearing capacity of the steel beam, Mu, f is posite beam Mu, p is taken as:
the plastic load bearing capacity of the fully connected composite
beam, Mu, p is the plastic load bearing capacity of the partially con- h x x x
Mu, p = fy As ⎛ s + hc − 2 ⎞ − 2fy bf x1 ⎛ 1 + hc − 2 ⎞
nected composite beam, η is the degree of shear connection. ⎝ 2 2 ⎠ ⎝ 2 2⎠ (10)

10
H. Du, et al. Engineering Structures 210 (2020) 110419

Neutral axis
fc
_ f cbex

x
hc
M

y
+
fyAs
hs

fy

(a) Neutral axis in concrete slab

fc
f cb ex
_
hc

x
_ fyAc
fy

fy(As-Ac)
hs

Neutral axis +

fy

(b) Neutral axis in steel beam

Fig. 16. Plastic stress distributions for the fully connected composite beam.

Concrete neutral axis

fc
_ f cb e x
x2

M
hc

_ fybfx1
fy
x1

Steel neutral axis

tw + fy(As-bf x1)
hs

tf

bf fy

(a) Steel neutral axis in the top flange

Concrete neutral axis

fc
_ f cb ex
x2
hc

y1

fybf tf M
y2

_
x1

y3

fy fytw(x1-tf)
tw Steel neutral axis
hs

+
fy(As-Ac)
tf

bf fy

(b) Steel neutral axis in the web

Fig. 17. Plastic stress distributions of the partially connected composite beams.

where: bf is the flange width of the steel beam, Vu is the shear bearing neutral axis to the top of the concrete slab x2 can be determined by:
capacity of the shear connector, n is the number of the shear con-
nectors, tf is the flange thickness of the steel beam. nVu
x2 =
When the neutral axis of steel beam is assumed to be in the web fc be (11)
( fy As − 2fy bf t f > nVu ), the plastic stress distributions of the composite
cross section are presented in Fig. 17(b). The distance from the concrete The distance from the steel neutral axis to the top of the steel beam
x1 is calculated as:

11
H. Du, et al. Engineering Structures 210 (2020) 110419

Table 7 connectors with concrete strength of 30 MPa in the connector

Comparison between the experimental and calculated results. pockets. The shear bearing capacity of the bolted connectors with
Authors Specimens Test Simplified model Plastic model the precast steel-bars truss concrete slab increased 7.0% over that of
Mu,t (kN in Eurocode 4 the bolted connectors with the precast normal concrete slab.
m) Furthermore, the shear bearing capacity of the bolted connectors
Mu,c1 Mu,c1/ Mu,c2 Mu,c1/Mu,t using precast concrete slab was approximately equal to that of the
(kN m) Mu,t (kN m)
bolted connectors using cast-in-place concrete slab.
This paper CB1 409.3 431.6 1.05 431.6 1.05 (2) Two types of failure modes of demountable bolted connectors were
PCB1 414.5 431.6 1.04 431.6 1.04 observed: crushing failure of concrete and fracture failure of bolted
PCB2 392.9 365.3 0.93 393.3 0.98 connectors. The calculation methods were developed for both
PCB3 357.5 321.1 0.90 349.6 0.98
failure modes. The comparison results showed that the shear re-
Kwon et al. DBLNB-30BS 2984.1 2807.3 0.94 3173.2 1.06
[22] HTFGB-30BS 3311.8 2825.0 0.85 3220.9 0.97 sistance of bolted shear connectors can be accurately calculated
HASAA-30BS 3088.5 2803.5 0.91 3172.5 1.03 based on the analytical model.
Ataei et al. CB1 1191.0 1072.3 0.90 1072.3 0.90 (3) The bending test results of composite beams showed that the flex-
[24] CB2 1022.0 1072.3 1.05 1072.3 1.05
ural capacity of the composite beams with 68% shear connection
CB3 979.0 1056.2 1.08 924.4 0.94
CB4 954.0 832.0 0.87 839.9 0.88 and full shear connection increased 9.8% and 15.8% compared to
Lam et al. CB-DSC 323.6 310.4 0.96 332.4 1.03 the beam with 46% shear connection, respectively. The flexural
[26] CB-WSC 316.5 309.8 0.98 332.3 1.05 capacity of composite beams was improved as the shear connection
Nie et al. SB1 143.5 130.4 0.91 134.2 0.94 ratio increased. In addition, the mechanical behavior of the com-
[36] SB2 175.6 152.5 0.87 156.6 0.89
posite beam with the prefabricated concrete slab was approxi-
SB3 160.9 151.4 0.94 156.1 0.97
SB4 119.5 113.2 0.95 117.3 0.98 mately equal to that of the composite beam with the cast-in-place
SB5 132.5 127.4 0.96 126.7 0.96 concrete slab.
Means 0.95 0.98 (4) The load carrying capacity of the composite beam can be predicted
Coefficient of Variation (%) 7 6
by the simplified model in Eurocode 4 and the plastic model. The
calculated results determined by the plastic model were more ac-
fy As − nVu − 2fy bf t f curate than those based on the simplified model in Eurocode 4.
x1 = + tf However, the simplified model in Eurocode 4 is simple in compu-
2fy tw (12) tation and usable in application.
The flexural capacity of the composite beam with partial shear
connection Mu, p can be taken as: CRediT authorship contribution statement

Mu, p = fy (As − Ac ) y3 − fy tw (x1 − t f ) y2 − fy bf t f y1
where: y1 is the distance from compressive resultant force of the steel
beam flange to the compressive resultant force of the concrete slab,
t x
y1 = 2f + hc − 22 , y2 is the distance from compressive resultant force of
the steel beam web to compressive resultant force of the concrete slab,
x +t −x
y2 = hc + 1 2f 2 , y3 is the distance from tensile resultant force of the
steel beam to compressive resultant force of the concrete.
5.3. Comparisons between test results and theoretical results
Table 7 shows the comparisons between the experimental results
and the calculated results, where: Mu,t is the test results of the flexural
capacity of the composite beams, Mu,c1 is the calculated results based on
the simplified model in Eurocode 4, Mu,c2 is the calculated results de-
termined by the plastic model. The comparisons indicated that the load
carrying capacity of the composite beam can be predicted by the sim-
plified model in Eurocode 4 and the plastic model. The calculated re-
sults based on the plastic model were more accurate than those de-
termined by the simplified model in Eurocode 4. However, the
simplified model in Eurocode 4 is simple in computation and usable in
application.
6. Conclusions
In this study, a total of twelve push-out tests on bolted shear con-
nectors were conducted and bending tests on four full-scale composite
beams were carried out to evaluate the mechanical performance of the
composite beams with prefabricated steel bar truss concrete slabs and
demountable bolted connectors. The conclusions can be summarized as
follows:
(1) The push-out test results showed that the shear bearing capacity of
the bolted connectors with concrete strength of 40 MPa in the
connector pockets increased 24.2% over that of the bolted
(13) Hao Du: Conceptualization, Methodology, Data curation,
Investigation, Writing - original draft. Xiamin Hu: Writing - review &
editing. Yanfei Meng: Investigation. Guohui Han: Validation. Kaikai
Guo: Investigation, Supervision.
Declaration of Competing Interest
We declare that we have no conflicts of interest to this work. We
declare that we do not have any commercial or associative interest that
represents a conflict of interest in connection with the work submitted.
Acknowledgements
The research was supported by National Key Research and
Development Program of China (No. 2017YFC0703405) and National
Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 51678295), (No. 51478220).
The authors also thank Associate Mrs. Tong Zhang for revising and
proofreading this manuscript.
References
[1] Han Q, Wang Y, Xu J, Xing Y. Static behavior of stud shear connectors in elastic
concrete–steel composite beams. J Constr Steel Res 2015;113:115–26.
[2] Xing Y, Han Q, Xu J, Guo Q, Wang Y. Experimental and numerical study on static
behavior of elastic concrete-steel composite beams. J Constr Steel Res
2016;123:79–92.
[3] Xu C, Kunitomo S. Analytical investigation on failure development of group studs
shear connector in push-out specimen under biaxial load action. Eng Fail Anal
2014;37:75–85.
[4] Kim JS, Kwark J, Joh C, Yoo SW, Lee KC. Headed stud shear connector for thin
ultrahigh-performance concrete bridge deck. J Constr Steel Res 2015;108:23–30.
[5] Luo Y, Hoki K, Hayashi K, Nakashima M. Behavior and strength of headed stud-
SFRCC shear connection I: Experimental study. J Struct Eng 2016;142(2):04015112.
[6] Luo Y, Hoki K, Hayashi K, Nakashima M. Behavior and strength of headed stud-
SFRCC shear connection II: Strength evaluation. J Struct Eng
2016;142(2):04015113.
[7] Qi J, Wang J, Li M, Chen L. Shear capacity of stud shear connectors with initial
damage: Experiment, FEM model and theoretical formulation. Steel Compos Struct
2017;25(1):79–92.

12
H. Du, et al.
[8] Wang J, Guo J, Jia L, Chen S, Dong Y. Push-out tests of demountable headed stud
shear connectors in steel-UHPC composite structures. Compos Struct
2017;170:69–79.
[9] Huo J, Wang H, Zhu Z, Liu Y, Zhong Q. Experimental study on impact behavior of
stud shear connectors between concrete slab and steel beam. J Struct Eng
2018;144(2):04017203.
[10] Wang J, Qi J, Tong T, Xu Q, Xiu H. Static behavior of large stud shear connectors in
steel-UHPC composite structures. Eng Struct 2019;178:534–42.
[11] Xu X, Liu Y, He J. Study on mechanical behavior of rubber-sleeved studs for steel
and concrete composite structures. Constr Build Mater 2014;53:533–46.
[12] Xue D, Liu Y, Yu Z, He J. Static behavior of multi-stud shear connectors for steel-
concrete composite bridge. J Constr Steel Res 2012;74(8):1–7.
[13] Dai XH, Lam D, Saveri E. Effect of concrete strength and stud collar size to shear
capacity of demountable shear connectors. J Struct Eng 2015;141(11):04015025.
[14] Liu XP, Bradford MA, Lee MSS. Behavior of high-strength friction-grip bolted shear
connectors in sustainable composite beams. J Struct Eng 2015;141(6):04014149.
[15] Hawkins N. Strength in shear and tension of cast-in-place anchor bolts. Anchorage
Concrete 1987;SP-103:233–55.
[16] Yang F, Liu Y, Jiang Z, Xin H. Shear performance of a novel demountable steel-
concrete bolted connector under static push-out tests. Eng Struct 2018;160:133–46.
[17] Dallam LN. High strength bolt shear connectors-Pushout tests. ACI J
1968;65(9):767–9.
[18] Kwon G, Engelhardt MD, Klingner RE. Behavior of post-installed shear connectors
under static and fatigue loading. J Constr Steel Res 2010;66(4):532–41.
[19] Kwon G, Engelhardt MD, Klingner RE. Parametric studies and preliminary design
recommendations on the use of postinstalled shear connectors for strengthening
noncomposite steel bridges. J Bridge Eng 2012;17(2):310–7.
[20] Pavlović M, Marković Z, Veljković M, Buđevac D. Bolted shear connectors versus
headed studs behaviour in push-out tests. J Constr Steel Res 2013;88:134–49.
[21] Chen YT, Zhao Y, West JS, Walbridge S. Behaviour of steel-precast composite gir-
ders with through-bolt shear connectors under static loading. J Constr Steel Res
2014;103:168–78.
[22] Kwon G, Engelhardt MD, Klingner RE. Experimental behavior of bridge beams
13
Engineering Structures 210 (2020) 110419
retrofitted with postinstalled shear connectors. J Bridge Eng 2011;16(4):536–45.
[23] Moynihan MC, Allwood JM. Viability and performance of demountable composite
connectors. J Constr Steel Res 2014;99:47–56.
[24] Ataei A, Bradford MA, Liu X. Experimental study of composite beams having a
precast geopolymer concrete slab and deconstructable bolted shear connectors. Eng
Struct 2016;114:1–13.
[25] Liu X, Bradford MA, Chen QJ, Ban H. Finite element modelling of steel–concrete
composite beams with high-strength friction-grip bolt shear connectors. Finite Elem
Anal Des 2016;108:54–65.
[26] Lam D, Dai X, Ashour A, Rahman N. Recent research on composite beams with
demountable shear connectors. Steel Constr 2017;10(2):125–34.
[27] GB/T 368-2012: Steel-bars truss deck, Standardization Administration of China,
China, 2012.
[28] Chen A, Wan H, Sun L, Feng R. Experimental study on bending behavior of steel bar
truss composite slab. Build Struct 2015;45(8):59–63. [in Chinese].
[29] Liu P, Wan H. Experimental study on steel bar truss concrete composite beams.
Struct Eng 2016;32(3):155–61. [in Chinese].
[30] ANSI/AISC 360-05. Specification for structural steel buildings. USA: American
Institute of Steel Construction; 2005.
[31] ASTM A370-05: Standard test methods and definitions for mechanical testing of
steel products, West Conshohocken, PA; 2005.
[32] GB/T 50081: Standard for test method of mechanical properties on ordinary con-
crete, Standardization Administration of China, China; 2016.
[33] Du H, Zhang B, Hu X, Kou L, Xia Y. Experimental study on shear behavior of bolt
connectors in steel-concrete composite beams. J Building Struct
2017;38(S1):308–14. [in Chinese].
[34] EN1993-1-8: 2005, Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures-part 1-8: Design of joints,
European Committee for Standardization, Brussels, Belgium; 2005.
[35] EN 1994-1-1: 2004, Eurocode 4: design of composite steel and concrete structures-
Part 1-1: General Rules and Rules for Buildings, European Committee for
Standardization, Brussels, Belgium; 2004.
[36] Nie J, Jian F, Cai CS. Experimental study of partially shear-connected composite
beams with profiled sheeting. Eng Struct 2018;30:1–12.