Effect of shear connector spacing and layout on the shear connector capacity in composite beams

A three dimensional nonlinear finite element model has been developed to study the behaviour of composite beams with profiled sheeting oriented perpendicular to its axis. The analysis of the push test was carried out using ABAQUS/Explicit with slow load application to ensure a quasi-static solution. Both material and geometric nonlinearities were taken into account. Elastic-plastic material models were used for all steel components and the Concrete Damaged Plasticity model was used for the concrete slab. The post-failure behaviour of the push test was accurately predicted, which is crucial for realistic determination of shear capacity, slip and failure mode. The results obtained from finite element analysis were verified against the experimental push tests conducted in this research and also from other studies. After validation, the model was used to carry out an extensive parametric study to investigate the effect of transverse spacing in push tests with double studs placed in favourable and staggered positions with various concrete strengths. The results were also compared with the capacity of a single shear stud. It was found that shear connector resistance of pairs of shear connectors placed in favourable position was 94% of the strength of a single shear stud on average, when the transverse spacing between studs was 200 mm or more. For the same spacing, the resistance of staggered pairs of studs was only 86% of the strength of a single stud. The strength of double shear studs in favourable position was higher than that of the staggered pairs of shear connectors.

[1]  Dennis Lam,et al.  Capacities of headed stud shear connectors in composite steel beams with precast hollowcore slabs. , 2007 .

[2]  Jawed Qureshi,et al.  Behaviour of Headed Shear Stud in Composite Beams with Profiled Metal Decking , 2012 .

[3]  A. Hillerborg,et al.  Analysis of crack formation and crack growth in concrete by means of fracture mechanics and finite elements , 1976 .

[4]  K. F. Chung,et al.  Composite column design to Eurocode 4 : based on DD ENV 1994-1-1: 1994 Eurocode 4: design of composite steel and concrete structures: part 1.1: general rules and rules for buildings , 1994 .

[5]  Brian Uy,et al.  Effects of the combination of axial and shear loading on the behaviour of headed stud steel anchors , 2010 .

[6]  A. Hillerborg.  The theoretical basis of a method to determine the fracture energyGF of concrete , 1985 .

[7]  Ehab Ellobody,et al.  Performance of shear connection in composite beams with profiled steel sheeting , 2006 .

[8]  M. U. Hosain,et al.  Behaviour of headed studs in composite beams: push-out tests , 1988 .

[9]  Jianqiao Ye,et al.  Behaviour of Headed Shear Stud in a Push Test using Profiled Steel Sheeting , 2009 .

[10]  Stephen Hicks,et al.  Strength and Ductility of Headed Stud Connectors Welded in Modern Profiled Steel Sheeting , 2009 .

[11]  G. H. Couchman,et al.  Strength and ductility of headed stud shear connectors in profiled steel sheeting , 2010 .

[12]  Brian Uy,et al.  Behaviour of headed stud shear connectors for composite steel-concrete beams at elevated temperatures , 2009 .

[13]  R P Johnson,et al.  EXISTING RULES AND NEW TESTS FOR STUD SHEAR CONNECTORS IN TROUGHS OF PROFILED SHEETING. , 1998 .

[14]  H. D. Wright,et al.  The behaviour of through-deck welded shear connectors: an experimental and numerical study , 2001 .

[15]  A W Beeby,et al.  CONCISE EUROCODE FOR THE DESIGN OF CONCRETE BUILDINGS. BASED ON BSI PUBLICATION DD ENV 1992-1-1: 1992. EUROCODE 2: DESIGN OF CONCRETE STRUCTURES. PART 1: GENERAL RULES AND RULES FOR BUILDINGS , 1993 .

[16]  Comite Euro-International du Beton,et al.  CEB-FIP Model Code 1990 , 1993 .