STRUCTURAL BEHAVIOUR OF COMPOSITE SLABS

Author: - Sunil Saxena ME (Structure), Delhi College of Engineering, Delhi Co-Author: Dr Dulal Goldar HOD-Civil& Environment Deptt.,, Delhi College of Engineering, Delhi Co-Author: - Dr. M.S. Mohamed Ali Sahib Sr. Scientist, Central Road Research Institute, New Delhi 110 020
INTRODUCTION Composite slabs comprise of profiled steel decking as the permanent formwork to the underside of concrete slabs spanning between support beams. The decking acts composite with the concrete under service loading. It also supports the loads applied to it before the concrete has gained adequate strength. COMPOSITE PROFILED SLAB: The behaviour of a composite profiled slab is extremely complex and the exact nature of the bond between concrete and steel is still not well understood because of the slip at the interface between the profiled sheet and the concrete element. The partial action that is partial interaction and partial shear connection, associated with the slip cause both the flexural strength and the shear strength of the composite slab to vary along its length. ADVANTAGE:Fast track construction, Excellent structural properties, Roof, wide-span and higher, Adding to the strength, and prevents roofcollapse in case of earthquakes, Avoid cost of plastering the bottom of slab, de shuttering, and the time and effort needed in removal of shuttering, Safe working platform for workmen. DISADVANTAGE:Behaviour of a composite profiled slab is extremely complex, High cost of profiled Steel Sheet, Profiled steel sheet may Corrode due to change of weather, Regular maintenance required. MATERIAL PROPERTIES: a) Profiled Steel sheet: The yield strength of profiled steel sheet to be used in construction of composite slab should not be less than 220 MPA with BS-2989-1992 or BS EN 10147-1992. Profiled Steel sheet Thickness: - The nominal bare metal thickness of sheet should not be less than 0.70 mm where Profiled Steel sheets are used only as permanent shuttering. However the thickness of sheet to be used should be supported with adequate theoretical evidence or test data. b) Ductility of Reinforcement:Where account is taken in design of the efficiency of continuity over a support, to ensure that reinforcement has adequate ductility the steel fabric or reinforcement should satisfied minimum elongation. c) Concrete:Concrete should be as per BS-8110. d) Aggregate Size:Should not be greater of the least: 0.4

(D

D p ) , B p 3 and20 mm nominal size.

Concrete Slab
Min 50 mm

Ds-Dp Dp

Ds
(min 90 mm)

Profiled Steel Sheet Fig 1.6 : Cross Section of Composite Slab

METHOD OF ANALYSIS A-THEORITICAL GRILLAGE ANALOGY APPLIED TO COMPOSITE SLAB The Grillage Analogy Method is a computer-oriented method. The method is general, simple, sufficiently accurate, easy to comprehend and convenient to work upon for analysis of composite slab. The method consists of converting the composite slab a network of rigidly connected beams at discrete nodes i.e. idealizing the composite slab in to an equivalent grillage. The deformations at the two ends of a beam element are related to the bending and torsional moments through their bending and torsional stiffness.
A)

GRILLAGE IDEALIZATION OF COMPOSITE SLAB

Some basic guidelines regarding location, direction, number and spacing of the longitudinal and transverse grid lines forming the idealised grillage mesh of Composite slab are described here: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii) (viii) (ix) (x) Grid lines are to be adopted along Lines of Strength. The direction of longitudinal grid line is ordinarily parallel to the free edge of the deck. For composite slab supported on discrete bearings, longitudinal grid lines are placed along the centre of each bearing. One longitudinal grid line along centre line of each edge beam, if they exist, is also provided. Total number of longitudinal members generally be kept between five and seven . The minimum distance between longitudinal grid lines is limited to 2 to 3 times the slab depth and the maximum separation of longitudinal members should not be more than one fourth of the effective span. In general, transverse grillage members should be at right angles to longitudinal members. The end transverse grid lines are placed along the centre line of bearings on each side. The spacing of transverse grid lines should be small. Ordinarily, one grid line along the centre of bearings at each end and one at the centre of span are provided initially and then other grid lines are placed in between them. As far as possible, the spacing of each of longitudinal as well as transverse grid lines, are kept uniform. It is important that the idealized grillage is supported at the same positions as the actual deck.

A
L

Grid-Lines

x=0

x=L/2

x=L Section A-A

Plan of Solid Slab

B. EXPERIMENTAL FIXING OF SHEAR KEY:-

For shear key we have provided 8 mm dia @ 150 mm c/c MS bars have been welded to Profiled steel sheet.

8 mm @ 150 c/c Support Line

8 mm @ 150 c/c

B
Support Line
Centre Line of PSS Profiled steel sheet

SHUTTERING:Side shuttering is fixed to Profile steel sheet as per height of casting. PREPARATION OF CONCRETE MATERIAL: Equivalent to the M-35 grade of concrete after a number of trials. CASTING OF CONCRET: -

Before casting of slab and cubes and cylinders the cube and cylinder moulds are properly as per standard norms. INSTRUMENTATION:Two type of instrumentation are used : 1) 2) C. Measurement of surface strain by using electrical resistance strain gauge and Deflectometer is for determining of deflection. The slab deflection is measured NUMERICAL STUDY AND DISCUSSION ON RESULTS

at mid span and at quarter span with the deflectometer (Dial gauge) with least count of 0.01 mm on the datum bar. The salient feature of three slabs are described below:Case Study :- Case study done on Three different height of concrete. Composite Slab -Size of Profiled Steel Sheet: 2000 mm X 840 mm

Support Line

1800

2000

Support Line

100
dn 113.3 55.6 113.3

840
50.1 100.0

88.2 Profiled Steel Sheet

Thickness of Profiled steel Sheet: -

0.70 mm

Loading arrangement for Testing:- As shown in Fig.

2000
370 100 100

370

S u p p o r t L in e

1800

P o s itio n o f L o a d S u p p o rt L in e
100

Load C o n c re te P ro file d S te e l S h e e t R o lle r

100

S e c A -A

100

S u p p o rt
Average Thickness of Concrete (d) : - Case 1 - 94 mm, Case 2 - 100 mm, Case 3 - 150 mm Manufactured by:- M/s Colour Roof India Limited -Mumbai. Instrument used during testing of slab: Deflectometer, Strain Gauge, Load jack. Load cell. THEORITICAL & EXPERIMENTAL LOADING CARRYING CAPACITY OF SLAB S.No. Slab Name CS-1 CS-2 CS-3 Thickness Concrete 94 100 150 Of Load CapacityActual 50.00 42.00 64.00 KN KN KN Load CapacityTheoritical 50.00 38.08 58.60 KN KN KN % Variation

1. 2. 3.

mm mm mm

0.00% 9.34% 8.44%

CROSS SECTION PHOTO OF FAILURE SLAB CONCLUSIONS From the experimental and analytical investigations carried out in the present study, the following major conclusions can be arrived at. Load tests performed on three Composite slabs for Ultimate Load carrying capacity showed that the variation in theoretical capacity and actual capacity is 8% to 9%. The major failure mode of the composite slab is due to the de-bonding between the Profiled steel sheet and concrete. After realising the maximum moment the failure of the composite slab was not sudden as indicated in the moment curvature relationship. The analytical procedure used for prediction of the deflection was not very accurate. The theoretical deflection varied heavily from the actual deflection the elastic limits. However, the actual deflection remained within the permissible limits, that is, less than L/350. This may be due de-bonding between the sheet and concrete. After the onset of de-bonding cracks, the flexural rigidity of the cross section gradually reduces. Therefore, there is deviation in the calculated deflection and the actual deflection. The analysis of composite slab shows that the failure was not due to shear stress flow de-bonding.

REFERENCES
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. British Standard Institution, Structural use in steelwork in building, BS-5950-1994, London. British Standard Institution, Structure of concrete, BS-8110, London. Company Literature of BHP steel, Australia. Company Literature of Colour Roof India Limited, Mumbai Company Literature of Japan Metal Building systems (P) Ltd, Hyderabad.

6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15.

Hambly, E.C. (1990), Bridge Deck Behaviour, Champman and Hall Ltd., London IS: 456 2000, Plain and Reinforcement Concrete code of practice Bureau of Indian Standard, Manak Bhawan, New Delhi.. IS: 516 1959, Method of test for Strength of concrete, Bureau of Indian Standard, Manak Bhawan, New Delhi. IS: 5816 1970, Method of Test for Splitting tensile strength of concrete cylinders Bureau of Indian Standard, Manak Bhawan, New Delhi.. Johnson R.P., Composite structure of Steel and concrete-Vol-1 Blackwell Scientific Publications. Mohamed ALI M.S. OEHLERS, D.J. and BRADFORD, M.A. Shear peeling of steel plates adhesively bonded to the sides of reinforced concrete beams. Accepted by Proceedings Institution of Civil Engineers UK, Buildings and Structures. Mullett D.L., Composite floor system, Blackwell Scientific Publications. Schuster RM, Composite steel deck concrete floor system, journal of structure Division, ASCE 1976: 102 (ST5): 899917 Surana, C.S. and Aggarwal, R. (1998), Grillage Analogy in Bridge Deck Analysis, Narosa Publishing House, New Delhi Wright HD. A plate model for composite slab analysis. Thin Walled Structures 1990:10(4) : 299- 328.