Journal of Constructional Steel Research 66 (2010) 37–52

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Constructional Steel Research

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

Experimental study on inelastic mechanical behaviour of composite girders

under hogging moment

Jun He a,b , Yuqing Liu a,∗ , Airong Chen a , Teruhiko Yoda b

a
Department of Bridge Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai, China
b
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Waseda University, Tokyo, Japan

article info abstract

Article history: Negative bending moments acting on the support regions of continuous composite girders generate
Received 28 February 2009 tensile stresses in the concrete slab and compressive stresses in the lower steel profile. As a result,
Accepted 11 July 2009 the mechanical behaviour of these girders becomes strongly nonlinear, which needs special study. In
this paper, static experimental tests on four half-scale models of steel and concrete composite girders
Keywords: with different shear connectors such as studs and Perfo-Bond Strips (PBLs) under hogging moments are
Continuous composite girder bridge
cautiously conducted in order to investigate the reduction of flexural stiffness and the inelastic behaviour
Hogging moment
Studs
after cracking. In the test results, crack development, crack widths and strains of the composite section
PBL before and after cracking were observed. The crack width evaluation methods based on design codes
Crack width for steel and concrete composite girders under negative bending moment were compared. Crack widths
Tension stiffening should be controlled appropriately within an allowable value in the slab under service load. The strains
Force redistribution in reinforcing bars obtained through the static tests agreed well with the values calculated through the
application of the existing tension stiffening theory. The test specimens could be assumed to be a full
composite section until the ultimate state on the basis of load and slip relationship results of shear
connectors. It follows that analytical and experimental studies can be served as a basis for the design
of continuous composite bridges.
© 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction For steel and concrete continuous composite girder bridges,

Steel and concrete composite girders have been extensively
used in building and bridge constructions due to the benefits of
combining the two construction materials. Reinforced concrete is
in general inexpensive, massive and stiff, whilst steel is relatively
strong, lightweight and easy to assemble. The best use is given
by the two materials when concrete is used in the compressive
zone where steel may experience buckling, whilst steel is used in
the tensile zone where the concrete will crack. Simply supported
girders under positive bending enable full application of the
mechanical properties of the two materials. However continuous
composite girders are widely used in multistory buildings and
long span bridges for the advantages of higher span to depth
ratio, less deflection, noise reduction, more economical condition
and better seismic resistance etc., in comparison with simply
supported girders.
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +86 21 65983116x2609; fax: +86 21 65983450.
E-mail address: yql@mail.tongji.edu.cn (Y.Q. Liu).
0143-974X/$ – see front matter © 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jcsr.2009.07.005
when a concrete slab is in tension and a lower flange of a steel
girder is in compression under hogging moments near intermedi-
ate supports, there are weak points with regard to durability and
strength. Especially, concrete cracking affects the durability and
service life of bridges. Also, cracking of the slab increases deflec-
tions, reduces the effect of the continuity, and makes the structural
behaviour strongly nonlinear even in low stress levels. One of the
main factors affecting the stiffness of cracked reinforced concrete
slabs is the bond that develops between the reinforcement and
the concrete. It allows the transfer of tensile stresses between the
reinforcement and the un-cracked regions of concrete. This phe-
nomenon is called tension stiffening. In compliance with this de-
mand, a crack control procedure for composite girders has been
specified in Eurocode 4 [1]. This procedure is based on Hanswille’s
theory [2,3]. The design of composite girders in consideration of the
tension stiffening effect assumes a certain degree of stress trans-
mission by the concrete between the cracks. This is different from
the conventional technique to use ‘‘the steel girder plus reinforc-
ing bar section’’ as the resistance section which results in neglect-
ing the concrete subjected to the tensile force at the intermediate
support regions. When the tension stiffening effect is introduced
38 J. He et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 66 (2010) 37–52
into the design of continuous composite girders, positive bending
tends to become smaller and negative bending becomes larger than
that of the conventional design methods [4]. The design section,
therefore, changes depending on whether or not the tension stiff-
ening effect is taken into account.
Crack control is an important issue in steel and composite con-
tinuous bridges. There are two approaches for dealing with con-
crete cracking in composite bridges, one is to prevent cracking us-
ing prestressing methods and the other is to allow for the forma-
tion of cracks within the limit of acceptable widths. Prestressing
methods, however, are inconvenient and unreliable due to pre-
stressing losses by the long-term behaviour of concrete. Therefore,
it is considered that the control of crack width without prestressing
is a more economical and simple solution [5,6].
Some researchers have studied the cracking property of the
slabs in composite girder bridges, with a view to the influence of
reinforcement ratios, reinforcing bar diameters and spacings on
the width and spacing of cracks. And it is necessary to focus on local
weakening of the tensile capacity of a concrete slab caused by shear
connectors or transverse reinforcement since these factors may
influence the crack spacings and widths [5–8]. On the other hand,
compression in the steel profile can lead to either local phenomena
such as buckling of the bottom flange and/or of the web, or global
phenomena such as distortional lateral torsion buckling [9,10], so
that the width to thickness ratio of the steel flange and that of the
web should be considered carefully.
Generally, shear studs are not so stiff to prevent slip between
the slab and steel girder, even for full shear connection. A perfect
composite action without any slip cannot be expected due to the
deformation of shear studs which are often treated as ‘‘ductile’’
connectors [11]. The PBL was developed in the nineteen eighties
by the German company for the design of the third bridge over
the Caroni River in Venezuela [12,13]. Push-out test results show
that PBL shear connectors are advantageous from the viewpoint
of fatigue strength [14,15]. It is necessary to investigate the effect
of PBL shear connectors on crack formation and the mechanical
behaviour under hogging moments.
In this paper, static experimental tests on four half-scale
models of steel and concrete composite girders with different
shear connectors such as studs and PBLs under hogging moments
were cautiously conducted in order to investigate the reduction of
flexural stiffness and the inelastic behaviour after cracking. Crack
development, crack widths and strains of the composite section
before and after cracking were observed in the tests. A simple
plastic analysis was carried out to estimate the ultimate flexural
capacity of the continuous composite girder. Initial cracking load
and crack spacing were observed and the relations between
crack spacing and transverse reinforcement spacing were studied.
Particularly, the stiffness of the composite section during cracking
was evaluated, because it is important to estimate crack widths,
deflection and stress ranges under service load. The crack width
evaluation methods based on design codes for steel and concrete
composite girders under negative bending moment are compared
to grasp the differences of evaluated results. It was found that
crack widths could be controlled appropriately within an allowable
value in the slab under service load. The strains of reinforcing bars
obtained through the static tests approximately corresponded to
the values calculated through the application of existing tension
stiffening theory. And the test results showed that slips always
occurred for composite girders under hogging moment even
with complete shear connection between the steel and concrete
components. The test specimen could be considered as the full
composite section until the ultimate state which was determined
from the relationship between load and slip of shear connectors.
Therefore, it is expected that the results in this study can be served
as a basis for the design of continuous composite girder bridges.
2. Experimental study
2.1. Test specimens
A total of four simply supported composite girders were tested
to simulate a part of them [portion BCD, see Fig. 1(a)], which was
exposed to a negative bending moment adjacent to an internal
support of a continuous composite girder. The authors used two
types of specimens. Specimen CB-1 was made of normal concrete
with studs as shear connectors. Specimen CB-2 was the same as
Specimen CB-1, with the exception that the studs were replaced
by PBL shear connectors. The main characteristics and nominal
dimensions of the test specimens are shown in Fig. 1 and Table 1.
In the test specimens, the total lengths of the girders were
9.5 m. The thickness of concrete deck panels were 105 mm
without including haunch. There were 3 layers (upper, middle and
lower) longitudinal deformed reinforcing bars with the diameter of
14 mm in concrete slab, and the longitudinal reinforcement ratio
is 3.0%, the spacing and arrangement were shown in Fig. 1(c) and
(d). The arrangement of transverse reinforcement for specimen
CB-1 and CB-2 in the upper and middle layers was the same,
the longitudinal spacing at the middle was 75 mm, while at the
supported regions was 100 mm, and the diameter of them was
10 mm. However the arrangement of transverse reinforcement
in the lower layer was different due to the influence of shear
connectors, the transverse reinforcing bars penetrated the holes
with the same spacing of PBLs in specimen CB-2, while the spacing
of transverse reinforcing bars was two times in comparison with
that of studs in specimen CB-1, and the the diameter of them was
12 mm, the details of the arrangement were shown in Fig. 1(c)
and (d).
Three rows shear studs with diameter of 16 mm were welded
on the top flange, with a transverse spacing of 60 mm symmetric
about the centerline of the top flange and a longitudinal spacing of
75 mm at the middle section (100 mm at the supported section)
for specimen CB-1. Two perforated steel plates with a transverse
spacing of 120 mm and a longitudinal spacing of 150 mm (holes)
for specimen CB-2, as shown in Fig. 1(e).
Vertical stiffeners were welded at supports, loading points to
prevent shear buckling failure and crippling of the web before flex-
ural failure. Also, lateral bracings were installed at each end of the
beam to allow vertical deflection, however lateral displacements
and rotations were restricted to prevent lateral torsional buckling
of the beam.
2.2. Material properties
Mix proportion of concrete with a design compressive strength
of 50 N/mm2 is shown in Table 2. The material properties including
compressive strengths, tensile strengths and Young’s modulus
of three cubes at 28 days after the casting of the concrete are
given in Table 3. The characteristic tensile strengths are used in
prediction of the cracking resistance of the specimens. The mean
tensile properties of samples cut from the web, the flange and the
reinforcement of the girders are summarized in Table 4.
2.3. Loading and measurements
The tests were carried out in Structure Laboratory of Tongji
University. A concentrated load was applied upward on the bottom
of the steel girder by a hydraulic jack with loading capacity of
1500 kN to simulate the hogging moment. Roller supports and
reaction frames were set at both ends of the girder, and the loading
equipments are shown in Fig. 1(b) and Fig. 2. After the drying
shrinkage had stabilized, the preloading should be taken into
account to check the good contact between the support and loading
 J. He et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 66 (2010) 37–52 39

9500 2000
250 3937.5 5062.5 250 1500

320
2400
50

320
600

(a) Hogging moment region of a continuous (b) Side section/mm.

girder.

87.5
37.511×100=1100 79×75=5925 87.5 22×100=2200 62.5

30 80400 35

35400 110
20 15 4@100=400 80 6080 4@100=400 15 20
20 15

105
8 50

345 100 200 37.5 5×200=1000 187.5 39×150=5850 162.5 11×200=2200 62.5
1015(1005)
860(850)

13(8)
80
30
22(13)

62.5 63×150=9300 137.5

250

(c) Cross section/mm. (d) Reinforcing bars/mm.

40 2×60 40 11@100 80@75 22@100

16

40 120 40 150 150 150 t=16

70

40
15

(e) Shear connector/mm.

Fig. 1. Outline of test specimens.

Table 1
Details of test specimens.
Specimen Type Shear connectors Reinforcements
Transverse spacing (mm) Longitudinal spacing (mm) Transverse spacing (mm) Longitudinal spacing (mm)

CB-1-1 Stud 60 75(100)* 100 75(100)*

CB-1-2 Stud 60 75(100)* 100 75(100)*
CB-2-1 PBL 120 150 100 75(100)*
CB-2-2 PBL 120 150 100 75(100)*
Note: 75(100)* represents longitudinal spacing of 75 mm at the middle section (100 mm at the supported section).

Table 2
Mix proportion of concrete.
Strength (N/mm2 ) Aggregate size (mm) Slump (mm) W/C (%) Air (%) Unit content (Kg/m3 )
Water Cement Sand Aggregate Fly ash

50 5–25 120±30 32 4.5±1.5 155 430 712 1060 60

equipments, the reliability of all the test equipments and the divided into four levels by force control, the specimens were firstly
workability of all the measurement instruments. The loading was loaded to the crack initiation level of the slab, the second level load
40 J. He et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 66 (2010) 37–52

Table 3
Material properties of concrete.
Nominal strength (MPa) Axial compressive strength (MPa) Splitting tensile strength (MPa) Young’s modulus (MPa)
Sample value Representative value Sample value Representative value Sample value Representative value

47.7 2.26 34 200

50 50.2 50.7 3.68 3.34 36 800 35 300
54.1 3.34 34 800

Fig. 3. LVDTs arrangement.

Fig. 2. Loading equipment.

in Fig. 5. Fig. 6 shows the failure mode of the specimens under
the ultimate state, the compressive bottom flanges of specimen
Table 4 CB-1-1 and CB-2-2 were buckled locally at the point where the
Material properties of steel.
plate thickness changed, and the crack propagated throughout
Component Yield Tensile Elongation Young’s the slab. Comparison of specimens CB-1 and CB-2 shows that the
strength strength (%) modulus
relationships between load and displacement are almost the same
(MPa) (MPa) (MPa)
before the start of cracking, but the displacement of specimen CB-2
Flange & web (Q345) 355 500–590 32 2.08 × 105 becomes smaller than that of specimen CB-1 under the same load
Rebar (HRB335 Φ 10) 345 500–565 29 1.86 × 105
until the ultimate state. This is presumably because the rigidity
Rebar (HRB335 Φ 12) 350 505–570 30 1.84 × 105
Rebar (HRB335 Φ 14) 360 525–580 31 1.78 × 105 of the PBL connector affects the rigidity of the entire girder when
cracking has progressed to a certain degree.
Tables 5 and 6 showed the results of the load capacity and
to 1.7 times of the design load, the first and second levels were at an the stiffness of the test specimens under initial cracking level,
increment of 20 kN, the third level at an increment of 100 kN until cracking level with the width of 0.2 mm, reinforcement yield and
the reinforcement yields, then monotonically increased the load at the ultimate state respectively. The initial cracking load calculated
an increment of 50 kN up to the failure of the girders for the fourth with reference to the slab exhibiting maximum negative moment
level to investigate the load carrying capacity of the specimens. of composite section under elastic state has been estimated to
The duration of each test varied from 2 to 4 hours with 300–500 be 129 kN, was similar to the test value of CB-1, but slightly
collections of data.
smaller than that of CB-2. The average maximum load at test
Displacement transducers LVDTs (Linear Variable Differential
was about 1221 kN and the calculated ultimate load by a simple
Transformer) were used to measure the vertical deflection at the
plastic analysis was 1123 kN. The difference between the tested
mid-span and loading position of the girder, as shown in Fig. 3.
and calculated result was about 9%. Also, it was found that the
LVDTs were also installed to measure the relative displacements
loading capacity of specimens CB-2 with PBLs was slightly larger
(slips) between the steel girder and the concrete slab. At critical
than that of specimens CB-1 with studs, and the PBL connectors
sections, the strains were measured using 50 mm electrical gauges
improved the rigidity of the entire girder under both the normal
for the concrete slab and 5 mm electrical gauges for the steel
serviceability state and the ultimate state in comparison with stud
girder, reinforcement and shear connectors, as shown in Fig. 4.
connectors, as shown in Fig. 5.
After cracking, crack widths were measured with Omega gauges.
Fig. 7 shows the flexural stiffness at the loading section
In addition, load cells were located at the supports of the girder
under different loads for CB-1-2 and CB-2-2. Before cracking, the
to ascertain the reaction forces and to control possible deviations
stiffness of the composite section was similar to that of the un-
of the jacking forces throughout the tests. All the information
cracked composite section. However, after cracking, the cracks
obtained from the transducers, gauges, and load cells were
propagated and distributed, and then the stiffness of the section
automatically recorded by a data acquisition system at regular
reduced to cracked section (steel girder plus rebar). The moment
intervals during the tests.
redistribution begun to occur, but the stiffness did not directly
become equal to that of the cracked section even if crack had
3. Experimental results and discussion occurred. Thus, the tension stiffening effect between cracks should
be considered to evaluate more exact flexural stiffness of the
3.1. Load–displacement relationship composite section under hogging moments. The stiffness of the
specimen with PBL connectors is larger than that of studs after the
The relationships between load and displacement at mid-span crack initiated until the failure of the girder owing to the Perfo-
of the girder for each specimen until the ultimate state are shown Bond strip’s bending capacity.
 J. He et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 66 (2010) 37–52 41

Table 5
Load capacity of test specimens.
Specimen Design load (kN) Initial cracking (kN) 0.2 mm cracking (kN) Reinforcement yield (kN) Ultimate load (kN) Ultimate displacement (mm)
Test Cal. Ratio Test Test Test Cal. Ratio Test

CB-1-1 134 120 129 0.93 600 900 1200 1123 1.07 51.7
CB-1-2 134 120 129 0.93 500 950 1224 1123 1.09 50.0
CB-2-1 134 180 129 1.40 800 1075 1140 1123 1.02 43.7
CB-2-2 134 160 129 1.24 700 1050 1320 1123 1.18 51.3

Table 6
Stiffness of test specimens.
Specimen F /δ (×103 kN/m) M /φ (×103 kN m2 )
Initial cracking 0.2 mm cracking Reinforcement yield Initial cracking 0.2 mm cracking Reinforcement yield

CB-1-1 82 33 29 1610 676 625

CB-1-2 55 36 31 1428 625 502
CB-2-1 53 40 34 1233 944 886
CB-2-2 62 36 33 1405 834 768

3.2. Cracking Table 7

Crack spacing of test specimens.
Specimen Crack spacing (mm) Average transverse
3.2.1. Crack formation
reinforcement spacing (mm)
An initial cracking occurred at the top of concrete slab Minimum Maximum Average
near loading position. The cracking load was similar to the
CB-1-1 43 147 95 88
calculated value. With increasing of load, the cracks propagated
CB-1-2 36 153 94 88
and distributed. In the crack formation of composite girders, CB-2-1 40 138 89 88
there are three stages before yielding of the composite section: CB-2-2 42 142 92 88
Firstly, an un-cracked section stage before cracking; secondly,
cracks developed after cracking; and lastly, a crack stabilizing
much higher than the design loads, as shown in Table 5. In order
stage continued until yielding. Fig. 8 shows a schematic figure
to estimate the maximum crack width of the slab, test results were
of the average stress and strain relationship derived from the
compared with values of design equations for crack control.
bond-slip differential equation proposed by Hanswille. The state I
In this research, experimental results were compared with
corresponds to perfect bonding, while the state II corresponds to
design values according to AASHTO-LRFD [19], CEB/FIP-90 [20],
perfect cracking [16].
JSCE [21], JTG D62-2004 [18], were estimated as follows:
Fig. 9 shows the cracking pattern of CB-1-1 and CB-2-2 under
the state of initial cracking level, stabilized cracking level (300 kN), (1) AASHTO-LRFD
reinforcement yield (800 kN) and the level before girder failure p
(1150 kN), in which the horizontal coordinate represents the
ωmax = 1.08βc fs 3 dc A × 10−5 (1)
distance from the loading point, the gridding in blue stands for where ωmax is the maximum crack width; βc is the ratio of the
the place of reinforcement, and the line colored in red shows distances to the neutral axis from the extreme tension fiber and the
the cracks. The cracks run mostly in a direction tangential to the neutral axis from the centroid of the reinforcement; fs is the stress
bridge axis, which indicates that they were caused by the dominant calculated in the reinforcement at service loads; dc is the thickness
bending behaviour. The specimen CB-2-2 with PBL connectors of the concrete cover measured from the extreme tension fiber
had higher initial crack load and crack-resistant stiffness, also had to the center of the bar or wire located closest to it; A is the
smaller crack widths and crack spacings compared to the specimen effective tension area of concrete surrounding the flexural tension
CB-1-1 with stud connectors. reinforcement and having the same centroid as that reinforcement,
In the previous researches [5–8], it could be observed that the divided by the number of bars or wires.
crack spacing was very similar to the transverse reinforcement (2) CEB/FIP-90
spacing. Local weakening of the tensile capacity of the concrete
slab which was caused by shear connectors or transverse (a) Initial cracking
reinforcements can lead to the occurrence of cracks and can σs2 φ

fctm

influence the crack spacing. Thus, it can be said that the ω= × εs2 − β − εcs (2)
2τm (1 + nρs ) Es ρs
development of cracking in slab is decisively influenced by
transverse reinforcements. The crack spacing was measured, (b) Stabilized cracking
and the minimum, maximum and average crack spacings were
φ
 
fctm
recorded as shown in Table 7. It was found that the average ω= × εs2 − βm − εcs (3)
crack spacing was similar to the average spacing of the transverse 3.6ρs Es ρs
reinforcements. where ω is the crack width; σs2 , εs2 are the reinforcement stress
and strain at the cracking position respectively; εcs is the drying
3.2.2. Crack widths shrinkage strain; ρs is the reinforcement ratio, ρs = As /Ac , As ,
According to China Highway Standard Specification (JTG D60- Ac are the areas of reinforcement and concrete respectively; φ
2004) [17] for the design of girder bridges, the design load for the is the diameter of reinforcement; n is Young’s modulus ratio
test specimen is 134 kN, which includes dynamic effects by live of steel to concrete; τm is the average bonding stress; fctm is
loads. And also the value of crack width limitation for the concrete the concrete tensile strength; β and βm are the coefficients
slab under the serviceability limit state is 0.2 mm [18]. It was found of tension stiffening under initial and stabilized cracking state
that all the measured loads under this crack width limitation are respectively, β = 0.6, βm = 0.38.
42 J. He et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 66 (2010) 37–52

(a) Concrete slab.

(a) Force–deflection curve.

3000

2500

2000

1500

1000

(b) Steel girder. 500

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

(b) Moment–curvature curve.

Fig. 5. Relationship between load and displacement.

(c) Studs.

Fig. 6. Failure mode.

(d) PBLs. (b) Stabilized cracking

Fig. 4. Strain gauge arrangement.
σse
 
ω = k {4c + 0.7(cs − φ)} − εcs (5)
Es
 
(3) JSCE 1 1
σse = σs − βm fct − (6)
ρ ραst
(a) Initial cracking where Ncr is the axial force of the slab at initial cracking,
  Ncr = σm (1 + nρ ) Ac , σm is the mean stress of concrete
Ncr Ncr
ω = k {4c + 0.7(cs − φ)} −β − εcs (4) slab, n is Young’s modulus ratio of steel to concrete, ρ
Es As Es As is the reinforcement ratio, ρ = As /Ac ; As , Ac are the
 J. He et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 66 (2010) 37–52
EI (× 103 KN. m2)
Fig. 7. Stiffness of composite girders.
Fig. 8. Stress–strain curves of RC slab in tension.
areas of reinforcement and concrete respectively; σse is the
stress increment of reinforcing bar and is given by k =
1.0 for deformed bar; c is the concrete cover thickness of
reinforcement; cs is the reinforcement spacing; φ is the
diameter of reinforcement; Es is Young’s modulus of steel; εcs
is the concrete strain due to creep and shrinkage, in general,
εcs = −150µ; σs is the steel stress in the state II, in which
only steel girder and reinforcement are considered; fct is the
tensile strength of concrete; αst = (Ast Jst )/(Aa Ja ); Ast , Jst are
the area and the second moment of area of composite section
neglecting concrete (Ast = Aa + As ); Aa , Ja are the area and
the second moment of area of steel girder respectively; β and
βm are the coefficients of tension stiffening under initial and
stabilized cracking state respectively, β = 0.6, βm = 0.2.
(4) JTG D62-2004
The maximum crack width for rectangular, T and I shape section
reinforcement concrete component under bending moment was
estimated as follows:
σss
 
30 + d
ωR = C1 C2 C3
Es 0.28 + 10ρ
As + Ap
ρ=
bh0 + (bf − b)hf
Ms
σss =
0.87As h0
43
where ωR is the maximum crack width; C1 is the reinforcement
surface shape coefficient, C1 = 1.0; C2 is the load effect coefficient,
C2 = 1.0; C3 is the mechanical behaviour coefficient, C3 = 1.15
for slab under bending moment; σss is the reinforcement stress;
d is the diameter of reinforcement; ρ is the tensile reinforcement
ratio; bf and hf are the width and the thickness of the tensile slab;
Ms is the bending moment under short-term loading combination;
As is the longitudinal reinforcement area in tensile zone, h0 and b
are the effective height and the width of the section.
The values of crack width calculated according to different
codes were compared to test results, as shown in Table 8. It was
found that the test results agreed well with most of the calculated
values recommended by the codes both under the initial and
maximum crack states, except the maximum crack widths of the
test results were slightly larger than those of AASHTO equation.
3.3. Strain results of steel girder
The strain gauge sections and positions of the steel girder
are shown in Fig. 10. Fig. 11 shows the relationship between
load and strain on the steel girder, in which the normal strain
was measured along the vertical direction to investigate the
moment redistribution and neutral axis variation after concrete
slab cracking. In accordance with Eurocode 4, the sectional classes
of negative moment regions for the test models were regarded
as class 1, therefore, the sectional resistances could ensure plastic
moment without local buckling. In Fig. 11, the top steel flange of
specimen CB-1-1 and CB-2-2, the bottom steel flange of specimen
CB-1-2 and CB-2-1 at section E under maximum negative moment
yielded before the failure of the specimen, however, all the
specimens at section A did not yield until failure. At the maximum
load of about 1200 kN in test, most composite sections reached
plastic states, which were confirmed in Fig. 11.
For an elastic load at the design load 134 kN, the measured
section strain distributions in negative moment regions (section E)
were nearly the same as the calculated ones based on the Euler
beam theory, which is shown in Fig. 12. However, when the
load increased above the cracking load, the neutral axis moved
downward into the negative moment regions as indicated in
Fig. 13. As the load increased, the cracks developed widely in
the negative moment regions and therefore the composite section
became cracked section. Load and neutral axis relations at the
negative moment section are shown in Fig. 14. The initial neutral
axis in the elastic range was nearly the same as that of an un-
cracked section. As the load increased, the neutral axis moved
toward the axis of the cracked section, but after yielding of
the girder, the axis did not move downward. It means that the
composite section of the negative moment region was not an
entirely cracked section, but that some concrete section could be
effective due to tension stiffening effects.
3.4. Strain results of concrete slab
The splitting tensile strength of concrete is 3.34 MPa, and
the equivalent strain is 125µε according to Chinese concrete
structure design code (GB50010-2002) [22]. Fig. 15 shows the
strain gauge section and position at concrete slab, and Fig. 16
shows the relationships between the load and concrete strain at
the loading section. Some cracks initiated and propagated through
(7) the position of strain gauges, the crack width became large as the
load increased, and the value of the strain increased rapidly.
In Fig. 16, it was found that the strain increased linearly up to
(8)
the initial crack, and that the strains at the middle of the top slab
were 166µε , 148µε , 160µε and 125µε for each specimen under
the design load. After the first crack initiated, the strains increased
(9)
rapidly.
44 J. He et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 66 (2010) 37–52

-1500 -1000 -500 0 500 1000 1500 2000 -1500 -1000 -500 0 500 1000 1500 2000
CB-1-1(120kN) CB-2-2(180kN)
(a) Initial cracking/mm.

-1500 -1000 -500 0 500 1000 1500 2000 -1500 -1000 -500 0 500 1000 1500 2000
CB-1-1(300kN) CB-2-2(300kN)
(b) Stabilized cracking/mm.

-1500 -1000 -500 0 500 1000 1500 2000 -1500 -1000 -500 0 500 1000 1500 2000
CB-1-1(800kN) CB-2-2(800kN)
(c) Reinforcement yield/mm.

-1500 -1000 -500 0 500 1000 1500 2000 -1500 -1000 -500 0 500 1000 1500 2000
CB-1-1(1150kN) CB-2-2(1150kN)
(d) Before girder failure/mm.

Fig. 9. Crack formation and distribution (Note: The horizontal coordinate represents the distance from the loading point, the grid in blue stands for the place of reinforcement,
and the line colored in red shows the cracks.). (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

Table 8
Crack width of test specimens/mm.
Specimen (1) Test (2) AASHTO (3) CEB/FIP-90 (4) JSCE (5) JTG D62
Initial Max. Max. (2)/(1) Initial (3)/(1) Max (3)/(1) Initial (4)/(1) Max. (4)/(1) Max. (5)/(1)

CB-1-1 0.02 0.23 0.17 0.74 0.02 1.00 0.23 1.00 0.03 1.5 0.22 0.96 0.20 0.87
CB-1-2 0.03 0.20 0.17 0.85 0.02 0.67 0.23 1.15 0.03 1.00 0.22 1.10 0.20 1.00
CB-2-1 0.01 0.25 0.17 0.68 0.02 2.00 0.23 0.92 0.03 3.00 0.22 0.88 0.20 0.80
CB-2-2 0.02 0.16 0.17 1.06 0.02 1.00 0.23 1.44 0.03 1.5 0.22 1.38 0.20 1.25

Fig. 17 shows the strain distribution at the middle of the top

A B C D E F G H slab along the longitudinal direction, in which the value in abscissa
769 600 300 350 250 300 600 1331 represents the distance from the loading point. It was found that
Ft1 Ft2
Wt
the maximum strain was at the loading point before cracking, but
300 300
129 100

Wm
after cracking, some peak values emerged near the loading point,
Wb
and the strains changed greatly around the loading point. The
Fb1 Fb2 concrete strains of specimen CB-1 were slightly larger than those
of CB-2 under each load level, and PBL shear connectors showed
Fig. 10. Strain gauge section and position of steel girder. good strength property under hogging bending moment region.
 J. He et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 66 (2010) 37–52 45

(a) Section E.

(b) Section A.

Fig. 11. Load–sectional strain relationship of steel girder.

3.5. Strain results of reinforcement colored in dark blue shows the values calculated from using the
rigidity without concrete contribution. The values of εs2 and εsm
were calculated using the equations shown below [23,24].
3.5.1. Basic theory
The relationships between load and strain of reinforcement in (a) Maximum strain after the start of cracking εs2st (at the start of
stationary cracking)
the vicinity of the center of the girder for each specimen are shown
in Fig. 18, in which εs2 and εsm are the maximum and average Nscr
strain values calculated on the basis of Hanswille theory, the line εs2st = + εsh (10)
Es · As
46 J. He et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 66 (2010) 37–52

Neutral axis of
un-cracked section

Depth (m)

Depth (m)
Neutral axis of cracked section

-200 -150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 -2000 -1500 -1000 -500 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000

Depth (m)
Neutral axis of
un-cracked section
Depth (m)

Neutral axis of
cracked section

Fig. 12. Sectional strain distribution (section E) in vertical direction of test specimens.

Fig. 13. Variation of neutral axis.

(b) Average strain immediately after the start of cracking

εsmcr
Fig. 14. Load–neutral axis relationship of test specimens.
ft
εsmcr = εs2st − β (11) A B C E G H I
Es · ρs 769 600 600 600 600 1331
(c) Average strain immediately after the stationary of cracking
235 310 310 235

εsmst
2

1
3

ft
εsmst = εs2st − βm (12)
4

Es · ρs
5

where ft is the tensile strength of concrete, As is the section

area of reinforcing bar, Es is Young’s modulus of the reinforcing Fig. 15. Concrete strain gauges on the slab/mm.
 J. He et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 66 (2010) 37–52 47

bar, ρs is the reinforcement ratio, εsh is the drying shrinkage Table 9

strain, β , βm are the factors to express the magnitude of tension Bearing capacity of shear connectors.

stiffening at the initial cracking and stationary cracking (set at Shear Pcp Pu (kN) ηmean
0.6 and 0.4 respectively). connectors (kN)
EC4 AISC AASHTO GB JSCE Mean

3.5.2. Test results Stud 4.0 54.0 84.4 71.8 73.0 70.0 70.6 17.7
The strains of a longitudinal reinforcement in the middle of slab PBL 10.3 – – – – 24.8 24.8 2.4
near the loading point were measured, Fig. 19 shows the position
of reinforcement strain gauges, and the load–strain relationships
more than 50% of the top flange covered by a deck of sheet steel
were depicted in Fig. 20. The strain increased linearly and slowly
closures.
before cracking. After the start of cracking, the strain near the point
In AASHTO LRFD (2004), the nominal shear resistance of one
where the crack had occurred increased rapidly (a phenomenon
stud shear connector embedded in a concrete deck shall be taken
referred to as strain jump). Until the failure of the specimen,
the reinforcement was continuously deformed and the tension as Eq. (15)
stiffening effect of the reinforcements in the slab was confirmed.
Pu = φ 0.5As fc0 Ec ≤ φ As Fu
p
For the drying shrinkage strain, the authors assumed εsh = (15)
−150µ (conventional design value) for specimens. For the sake of where φ is the resistance factor for shear connectors, φ = 0.85.
comparing test results, the effect of drying shrinkage represents
As provided in the Chinese code for design of steel structures
only the parallel shift of the strain in the horizontal direction at the
(GB 2003) [26], the stud shear bearing capacity is determined by
stationary cracking state, such that εsh is added to the maximum
and average strain values in Eq. (10) to Eq. (12).
Pu = 0.43As fc Ec ≤ 0.7As γ fu
p
(16)
In these figures as a whole, the large strain values are
approximately equivalent to the calculated maximal strains. It where the units are N, mm; fc is the compressive strength of
can therefore be said that appropriate results were obtained by concrete prisms (MPa); and γ is the ratio of the ultimate tensile
using the above mentioned method of calculation with βm = 0.4. strength to the yield strength of the stud.
Although the measured strains scattered to a large extent, both the
In JSCE (2007), the nominal strength of one stud shear connector
maximum strain values as well as smaller ones were considered
embedded in solid concrete is given by
to be included in the measurement results. This indicates that it
is difficult to correctly evaluate the average strains based on the  q  
test results. However, an average strain value is required to ensure Pu = min 31Ass (hss /dss ) fcd0 + 10 000 /γb ; Ass fsud /γb (17)
the validity of β = 0.6, in the sense that the results obtained in
this study are insufficient. The authors therefore feel that further where the units are N, mm; Ass is the cross-sectional area of a stud
studies should be carried out on this issue in the future. shear connector (mm2 ); hss and dss are the height and diameter of
Fig. 21 shows the strain distribution of reinforcement in the the studs respectively, hss /dss > 4; fcd0
is the design compressive
middle of the slab along the horizontal direction before and after strength of concrete (MPa); fsud is the design tensile strength of the
cracking. For small values of load, the strain distribution along
stud; and γb is the material coefficient, γb = 1.3.
the length was small due to the composite un-cracked section.
As the load increased, cracks initiated and propagated, and the (b) PBL shear connector
strain of reinforcement increased rapidly, and the peak value of Several authors, such as Al-Darzi et al. [27], Iwasaki et al. [28],
reinforcement strain in the figure stood for the concrete crack Machacek and Studnika [29], Medberry and Shahrooz [30],
position. Oguejiofor and Hosain [31], Ushijima et al. [32], and Valente
and Cruz [33] have recently studied the behaviour of the PBL
3.6. Shear connectors connector, mostly from push-out tests. These authors concluded
that the structural response was influenced by several geometrical
3.6.1. Bearing capacity properties such as the number of holes, the plate height, length and
(a) Stud shear connector thickness, the concrete compressive strength, and the percentage
Eurocode 4 specified the design strength of stud shear of transverse reinforcement provided in the concrete slab. And the
connectors which are welded automatically, as Eq. (13) resistance capacity of PBL shear connectors was proposed by JSCE
  (2007) as follows
Pu = min 0.8fu (π d2 /4)/γv , 0.29α d2 fc0 Ec /γv
p
(13)
Pu = [1.45{(d2 − φst2 )fcd
0
+ φst2 fst } − 106.1 × 103 ]/γb
where the units are N, mm; d is the diameter of the studs; fu is
73.2 × 103 < (d2 − φst2 )fcd
0
+ φst2 fst < 488.0 × 103 (18)
the ultimate tensile strength of stud (MPa); fc0 is the compressive
strength of concrete cylinders (MPa); Ec is Young’s modulus of 0
where d is the diameter of the Perfo-Bond strip holes (mm), fcd is
concrete (MPa); γv is partial factor (=1.25); α is 0.2(H /d + 1) ≤ 1;
the design concrete compressive strength (N/mm ), φst (mm) and
2
and H is the height of the studs.
fst (N/mm2 ) are the diameter and tensile strength of transversal
In ANSI/AISC 360-05 [25], the nominal strength of one stud
reinforcement that pass through the holes, and γb is the material
shear connector embedded in solid concrete or in a composite slab
coefficient, γb = 1.3.
is given by
(c) Degree of shear connection
Pu = 0.5As
p
fc0 Ec ≤ Rg Rp As Fu (14) In the test specimen, it was intended that the shear connec-
where As is the cross-sectional area of a stud shear connector tions were installed to achieve full shear connections. Ultimate
(mm2 ); Fu is the specified minimum tensile strength of a stud shear strength of the shear connector was determined from equations
connector (MPa); Rg = 1.0 for any number of studs welded in a recommended by different codes, as shown in Table 9.
row directly to the steel shape; and Rp = 1.0 for studs welded To achieve full shear connections, a degree of shear connection,
directly to the steel shape and having a haunch detail with not η which is defined as the strength of the shear connection in a shear
48 J. He et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 66 (2010) 37–52

Fig. 16. Load–strain relationship on concrete slab (section E).

Fig. 17. Strain distribution in horizontal direction (No. 3 gauge).

span and as a proportion of the strength required for full shear

connections, should be higher than unity.
Pu
η= ≥1
Pcp
σy · Ar
Pcp = (19)
N
where Pu is the ultimate shear strength, and Pcp is a horizontal
force of concrete slabs or steel girders under full sectional plastic
moments, only the contribution of longitudinal main reinforcing
bars in concrete slab was considered for the safe side in design;
σy and Ar are the yield strength and the area of longitudinal
main reinforcing bars in concrete slab, N is the number of shear
connectors. As shown in Table 9, the degree of shear connection
Fig. 18. Load–strain relationship diagram of reinforcement. (For interpretation of
was to be estimated higher than unity according to Eq. (19). From
the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web
version of this article.) the test results, maximum slips were measured to be less than
0.2 mm until the maximum load (Fig. 24). It is expected that
the test specimens can develop full plastic moment of composite
A B C D E F G H I
sections. From Table 9, it is found that the bearing capacity of
769 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 1331
studs calculated by different codes were almost the same, but the
recommended formulas for PBL connectors have not been provided
by other codes except JSCE. Therefore, the formulas to estimate
exact ultimate bearing capacity of PBLs should be further studied.

3.6.2. Strain results

The strain gauge arrangement and numbering of shear connec-
Fig. 19. Position of reinforcement strain gauges. tors for the specimen are shown in Fig. 22, and the strain gauges
 J. He et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 66 (2010) 37–52 49

Strain (E-6) Strain (E-6)

Fig. 20. Load–strain relationship of reinforcement.

Fig. 21. Strain distribution in horizontal direction (at the center of the top slab).

were directed in the vertical direction on the studs while the strain
gauges were directed in horizontal direction on the Perfo-Bond
strip. Fig. 23 shows the load–strain relationships of stud and PBL
shear connectors, it was found that the strain increased approxi-
mately bi-linear as the load increased, while the increase of slope
after cracking was larger than that before cracking. Under the ulti-
mate state, however, the values of strain for shear connectors were
less than the yield strain. Therefore, the connection between the
steel girder and concrete slab was reliable. And the strain on Perfo-
Bond strip increased rapidly at the section of hole due to the area
reduction, as the No. 9 gauge in Fig. 23(c) showed (the gauge was
failed on CB-2-2 after loading level of 500 kN).
50 J. He et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 66 (2010) 37–52

2193,5 1969 2531 2756,5

687,5 712,5

30
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

(a) Studs.

662,5 1500 2025 2625 1950 737,5

1 2 34 9 56 78
150 150 150

75 75 75

(b) PBLs.

Fig. 22. Strain gauge position and numbering of shear connectors.

Strain(E-6)

(a) CB-1-1.

Fig. 24. Load–slip curve of test specimens.

3.6.3. Relative slips

Relative slips between the steel girder and the concrete slab
were measured when the load was applied. The load–slip rela-
tionships at both end of the specimen are shown in Fig. 24, in which
the maximum slips of the connector were measured to be less than
0.2 mm until the maximum load. Comparing with the push-out
tests results [27], the shear connectors were in the elastic state
Strain(E-6)
with small slips. From these results, it is considered that the shear
(b) CB-2-2.
connection would not reach the ultimate load state, thus the test
specimen could be assumed as the full composite section until the
ultimate load state.
In typical steel and concrete composite bridges, the behaviour
of shear connectors have a negligible effect on the flexural
behaviour of the bridges in the elastic range because the bridges are
designed with complete shear connection and adhesion/friction
effects on the shear stiffness are considerably high. However, in
the plastic region the behaviour of the shear connectors becomes
very important because the load distribution in three parts of the
composite girders, such as concrete slab, steel beam and shear
connectors changes according to the partial interaction of the shear
connectors. Fig. 25 shows the relative slips along the horizontal
direction under different load levels, the figures indicate that the
Strain(E-6) maximum slip occurs at around 1/4 span to the girder ends, it was
(c) Gauge No. 9 on PBL. probably caused by the effects of the friction forces at both ends by
reaction frame restriction and the more weak connection condition
Fig. 23. Load–strain curve of shear connectors. due to concrete cracking at 1/4 span.
 J. He et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 66 (2010) 37–52
(a) Studs.
(b) PBLs.
Fig. 25. Relative slip in horizontal direction.
4. Conclusions
The inelastic behaviour of steel and concrete composite girders
with different shear connectors such as studs and PBLs under
hogging moments have been experimentally investigated in this
study. The following conclusions may be drawn from the present
study:
(1) The initial crack load calculated with reference to the maxi-
mum negative moment of composite section and the ultimate
load calculated by a simple plastic analysis with cracked sec-
tion including reinforcements were similar to those of the test
results.
(2) The PBL connectors slightly improved the rigidity of the entire
girder under both the normal serviceability limit state and the
ultimate limit state in comparison with stud connectors with
reference to the load–displacement relationship.
(3) The crack width evaluation methods in respective design codes
for steel and concrete composite girders under hogging mo-
ments generally agreed with the test results. Crack widths can
be controlled appropriately within an allowable crack width in
the slabs under service loads. And the crack spacing was mainly
dependent on the transverse reinforcement spacing.
(4) The stiffness of the composite section was similar to that of the
un-cracked composite section before cracking. After cracking,
the stiffness of the section reduced to cracked section (steel
girder plus rebar) with increased load, however the stiffness
did not directly become equal to that of the cracked section
just after cracking occurred. Thus, the tension stiffening effect
between cracks should be considered to evaluate the more ex-
act flexural stiffness of the composite section under hogging
moments.
51
(5) It is considered that the shear connection would not reach the
ultimate limit state, thus the test specimens could be assumed
as the full composite section until the ultimate limit state. And
the slip behaviour would change according to the boundary
conditions of the composite girders.
Acknowledgments
This research is sponsored by National Nature Science Foun-
dations of China under Grant No. 50478110, National Key Tech-
nologies R&D Program under Grant No. 2006BAG04B01 and
Western China transportation construction technology Program
under Grant No. 2007-318-494-05. These supports are gratefully
acknowledged. The assistance for experimental studies from China
Communications Construction Corporation Second Highway Con-
sultants Co. Ltd and Tongji University is also appreciated. This pa-
per was written when the first author visited the Department of
Civil and Environmental Engineering of Waseda University in Japan
supported by China Scholarship Council (CSC). The assistance is
gratefully acknowledged.
References
[1] EUROCODE 4. EN 1994. Design of composite steel and concrete structures Part
1.1 General rules and rules for buildings. Brussels: CEN-European Committee
for Standardization; 2005.
[2] Hanswille G. Zur Rißbreitenbeschränkung bei Verbundträgern, Technisch-
Weissenschaftliche Mitteilungen, Institutfür Konstruktiven Ingenieurbau
Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Mittelilung Nr 1986: 86-1 [in German].
[3] Hanswille G. Cracking of concrete mechanical models of the design rules in
EUROCODE 4, Conf. report, Composite construction in steel and concrete III,
ASCE; 1997. p. 420–33.
[4] Oka Atsushi, Ohyama Osamu, Ruter Marcs. Effect of concrete tension stiffness
of dual continuous box girder bridges. In: The 57th annual conference of JSCE
2002. I-345. p. 689–90 [in Japanese].
[5] Shim CS, Chang SP. Cracking of continuous composite beams with precast
decks. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 2003;59:201–14.
[6] Ryu HK, Kim YJ, Chang SP. Crack control of a continuous composite two-girder
bridge with prefabricated slabs under static and fatigue loads. Engineering
Structures 2007;29:851–64.
[7] Ramm W, Elz S. Behaviour and cracking of slabs as part of composite beams
in regions with negative bending moments. In: Proceedings of an engineering
foundation conference, Composite construction in steel and concrete III. ASCE;
1996. p. 871–86.
[8] Navarro MG, Lebet JP. Concrete cracking in composite bridges: Tests, models
and design proposals. Structural Engineering International 2001;184–90.
[9] Kemp AR, Dekker NW. Available rotation capacity in steel and composite
beams. The Structure Engineer 1991;69(5):88–97.
[10] Kemp AR, Dekker NW, Trinchero P. Differences in inelastic properties of
steel and composite beams. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 1995;34:
187–206.
[11] Mottram JT, Johnson RP. Push tests on studs welded through profiled steel
sheeting. Structure Engineering 1990;68(5):187–93.
[12] Leonhardt F, Andrae W, Andrae HP. New, improved bonding means for
composite load bearing structure with high fatigue strength. Beton-und
Stahlbetonbau 1987;82(11):325–31.
[13] Zellner W. Recent designs of composite bridges and a new type of shear
connectors. In: Proceedings of the IABSE/ASCE engineering foundation
conference on composite construction. 1987. p. 240–52.
[14] Hosaka Tetsuya, Sugimmoto Ichiro. Recent steel-concrete composite bridges
in railways. Bridge and Foundation Engineering 2000;7:31–40 [in Japanese].
[15] Hosaka T, Kaoru M, Hirokazu I. Study on shear strength and design method
of perfobond strip. Journal of Structural Engineering. A. JSCE 2002;48(3):
1265–72 [in Japanese].
[16] Khan QZ, Honda T, Okui Y, Nagai M. A method for crack width evaluation
of continuous composite girder bridges accounting for shear-lag effect.
Structural Engineering/Earthquake Engineering, JSCE 2003;20(2): 131s–141s
[in Japanese].
[17] Ministry of Communication of China. General code for design of highway
bridges and culverts. JTG D60-2004. Beijing: China Communications Press;
2004 [in Chinese].
[18] Ministry of Communication of China. Code for design of highway reinforced
concrete and prestressed concrete bridges and culverts. JTG D62-2004. Beijing:
China Communications Press; 2004 [in Chinese].
[19] AASHTO. LRFD bridge design specifications, 3rd ed. Washington, DC. 2004.
[20] Comite Euro-International du Beton. CEB-FIP Model Code 1990. Thomas
Telford; 1993.
[21] Committee of steel structure: Standard Specification for steel and composite
structure (Design edition). JSCE. 2007.
52 J. He et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 66 (2010) 37–52
[22] Ministry of Construction of China. Code for design of concrete structure.
GB50010-2002. Beijing: China Communications Press; 2002 [in Chinese].
[23] Taniguchi N, Yoda T. Study on a crack formation for composite girders with
negative bending. Proceeding of the Japan Society of Civil Engineers 2001;
668/I(54):243–57 [in Japanese].
[24] Kamiya T, Taniguchi N, Ikariyama H, Yoda T. Experiment study on crack
behaviour with repeated load near the middle supports of continuous
composite girder. Proceeding of the Japan Society of Civil Engineers 2007;
63(1):25–34 [in Japanese].
[25] American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/AISC. Specification for structural
steel buildings. AISC 360-05. Chicago. 2005.
[26] Ministry of Construction of China. Code for design of steel structures.
GB50017–2003. Beijing: China Planning Press; 2003 [in Chinese].
[27] Al-Darzi SYK, Chen AR, Liu YQ. An experimental investigation on stud
and perfobond connectors with push-out test. In: Proceeding of the
13th international conference on steel and composite structures. UK:2007.
p. 455–62.
[28] Iwasaki H, Fujii K, Fukada K, Toyota T, Nakamura H. A consideration on slip test
methods for Perfobond shear connector focusing on concrete confinements.
In: 1st international conference on advances in experimental structural
engineering. 2005. p. 871–76.
[29] Machacek J, Studnicka J. Perforated shear connector. Steel and Composite
Structures 2002;2(1):51–66.
[30] Medberry SB, Shahrooz BM. Perfobond shear connector for composite
construction. AISC Journal 2002;2–12.
[31] Oguejiofor EC, Hosain MU. Numerical analysis of push-out specimens with
Perfobond rib connectors. Computers and Structures 1997;62(4):617–24.
[32] Ushijima Y, Hosaka T, Mitsuki K, Watanabe H, Tachibana Y, Hiragi H. An
experimental study on shear characteristics of perfobond strip and its rational
strength equations. In: International symposium on connections between
steel and concrete. 2001. p. 1066–75.
[33] Valente MIB, Cruz PJS. Experimental analysis of Perfobond shear connection
between steel and lightweight concrete. Journal of Constructional Steel
Research 2004;60:465–79.