Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 2724–2738

www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct

Advanced finite element modelling of perforated composite beams

with flexible shear connectors
A.J. Wang, K.F. Chung ∗
Department of Civil and Structural Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong, China

Received 28 April 2007; received in revised form 29 February 2008; accepted 1 March 2008
Available online 28 April 2008

Abstract

An extensive research and development programme has been undertaken by the authors to develop advanced analysis and design tools for
practical design of long span composite beams in buildings. Both two- and three-dimensional finite element models employing solid and shell
elements with material, geometrical and interfacial non-linearity were established to examine the full range structural behaviour of composite
beams. In this paper, two-dimensional finite element models employing plane stress elements are established to examine the structural behaviour
of perforated composite beams, and shear connectors with non-linear deformation characteristics are incorporated into the models through the use
of both vertical and horizontal springs.
It is demonstrated that after careful calibration against test data, the finite element models are able to predict the load carrying capacities of
composite beams with large rectangular web openings against ‘Vierendeel’ mechanism satisfactorily. Moreover, a number of important structural
quantities such as local axial and shear forces together with local bending moments acting onto the composite and the steel tee sections at
failure are obtained after data analyses. Together with the load carrying capacities, these quantities compare favourably with the values obtained
from a design method proposed previously by the authors, and hence, this provides quantitative justification to the proposed design method.
Furthermore, the finite element models provide detailed information on the structural behaviour of shear connectors along the beam length, such
as the longitudinal shear forces, the pull-out forces as well as the slippage of the shear connectors. Based on the findings of the finite element
modelling, a number of recommendations on the design and construction of perforated composite beams are suggested.
c 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Composite beam; Perforated section; Web opening; Shear connector; Vierendeel mechanism; Finite element method; Bending; Shear

1. Structural behaviour of composite beams with large web
openings
In modern commercial buildings with composite floor
systems, there is always a need to incorporate building services
within the floor zones while at the same time minimize the
depth of floor zones in order to reduce the overall height of
the buildings. A common method of incorporating services
within the floor–ceiling zone of composite buildings is to
create large web openings in the floor members. The web
openings are often rectangular or circular in shape in the form of
either discrete openings or a series of openings along the floor
beams. However, it should be noted that the presence of large
web openings often leads to a significant, or even sometimes
∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: cekchung@polyu.edu.hk (K.F. Chung).
severe penalty on the structural behaviour of floor members,
depending on the shapes, the sizes, and the locations of the
web openings. In addition to the usual modes of failure in
unperforated floor members, three additional modes of failure
may take place at the perforated sections:
(i) shear failure
(ii) flexural failure, and
(iii) ‘Vierendeel’ mechanism.
An overall review on the design recommendations by
Lawson [1], Darwin [2], Redwood and Cho [3], Oehlers
and Bradford [4] shows that, in general, there are two
design approaches in assessing the structural behaviour of
perforated beams [5,6], namely, (i) Tee Section Approach,
and (ii) Perforated Section Approach. A close study [7–9]
of the existing design rules for perforated beams reveals that
for beams with single web openings, many design rules are

c 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

0141-0296/$ - see front matter

doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.03.001
 A.J. Wang, K.F. Chung / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 2724–2738
Fig. 1. Global and local actions in a composite beam with large rectangular
web opening.
developed for openings of small to medium sizes, i.e. the
opening dimensions along section depth and member length
are less than or equal to half of the section depth. Moreover,
both the design assumptions and the design methods are very
different from one another, ranging from highly analytical
formulation with very specific applications to purely empirical
expressions for general design. As many of these design
methods are ‘over-developed’ to generate simplified design
expressions for specific steel building products, there is little
comprehension in working through the design calculations.
Hence, it is highly desirable to develop comprehensive and
rational design methods which are applicable to both steel and
composite beams with large web openings. Moreover, it should
allow a designer to work at different levels of calculation efforts
required corresponding to the levels of structural economy
adopted.
1.1. Proposed unified design method
A rational unified design method for steel and composite
beams with rectangular web openings are reported by Chung
et al. [9] which is based on plastic section analysis methods
and formulated in accordance with analytical structural design
principles.
Consider a composite beam with a large rectangular web
opening under global shear force, VSd and global moment,
M Sd , at the centre of the web opening as shown in Fig. 1(a).
Local forces and moments are induced in the top composite and
the bottom steel tee sections above and below the web opening,
2725
as shown in Fig. 1(b). Depending on the loading and the support
conditions of the composite beam as well as the position
of the web opening along the beam span, the interaction
among the co-existing axial forces N T , shear forces VT and
moments MT acting onto the top composite and the bottom
steel tee sections at both the low moment side (LMS) and the
high moment side (HMS) of the perforated composite section
vary significantly, leading to completely different structural
behaviour of the composite beam. In general, the ‘Vierendeel’
mechanism is often critical, especially in composite beams
with long rectangular web openings located within the one-
third span. For structural adequacy against the ‘Vierendeel’
mechanism for both the top composite and the bottom steel tee
sections, the following expressions should be checked:
(a) Top composite tee sections
MT tl,Rd + MT th,Rd ≥ VT t,Sd × a − N T,Sd (z H − z L ) (1)
(b) Bottom steel tee sections
MT bl,Rd + MT bh,Rd ≥ VT b,Sd × a (2)
where
VT t,Sd ,VT b,Sd are the shear forces resisted by the top
composite and the bottom steel tee sections
respectively due to the global shear force,
VSd ;
MT tl,Rd ,MT th,Rd are the local moment resistances of the
top composite tee sections at the LMS and
the HMS of the web opening due to the
‘Vierendeel’ moment;
MT bl,Rd ,MT bh,Rd are the local moment resistances of the
bottom steel tee sections at the LMS and
the HMS of the web opening due to the
‘Vierendeel’ moment;
N T,Sd is the axial force resisted by the top
composite and the bottom steel tee sections
due to global bending, M Sd ;
z L , z H are the moment arms between the axial
forces acting on the top composite and the
bottom steel tee sections at the low and
the high moment sides of the web openings
respectively; and
a is the length of the web opening.
If either of the above inequalities does not hold, then part of
the shear force acting on the tee section should be distributed to
the other tee section. Iterations should be performed until both
inequalities do not hold which implies the occurrence of the
‘Vierendeel’ mechanism.
It should be noted that in the presence of high local axial
forces, N T,Sd , and high local shear forces, VT,Sd , due to global
action, the moment resistances of both the top composite and
the bottom steel tee sections at both the LMS and the HMS
of the web opening shall be reduced in general. For details of
the formulation of the proposed design method, refer to Chung
et al. [9].
Fig. 2(a) plots the variation of the reduced moment
resistances of the top composite and the bottom steel tee
2726 A.J. Wang, K.F. Chung / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 2724–2738
(a) Local interaction curve.
Fig. 2. Structural performance of composite beams with large rectangular web openings.
sections against the co-existing local axial and shear forces.
By equating the reduced modified moment resistances of the
four tee sections against the applied ‘Vierendeel’ moment,
VSd × a, the ultimate loads of the composite beams with
large rectangular web openings are obtained. This allows the
generation of a global interaction curve between the applied
shear force, VSd , and the applied moment, M Sd , of the
perforated composite section at failure as shown in Fig. 2(b).
The global interaction curve prescribes the maximum co-
existing global shear force, VSd , and global moment, M Sd , at
the centre of the web opening of a composite beam located
at various positions along the length of the beam member.
Consequently, engineers may confirm the structural adequacy
of the perforated sections of composite beams easily with the
aid of the global interaction curve.
1.2. Numerical and experimental studies
A number of numerical investigations of composite beams
with partial shear connection were reported by Oehlers and
Sved [10], Wang [11], Hassan and Mourad [12], Baskar
et al. [13] and Queiroz et al. [14]. With the carefully selected
stress–strain curves of both reinforced concrete and steel
sections as well as the non-linear load–slippage curves of
shear connectors, it was demonstrated that those finite element
models were able to predict the structural behaviour of simply
supported or continuous composite beams. Moreover, a finite
element study on composite castellated beams was reported by
Megharief and Redwood [15] where web-post instability was
successfully modelled using shell elements.
An extensive experimental investigation on the effects of
partial shear connection in the hogging moment regions of
composite beams was reported by Loh et al. [16,17] where
a total of eight composite beams with typical connection
details in low to medium rise sway frames were tested.
The main parameters under investigation included the degree
of shear connection, the steel reinforcement ratios, and the
effect of repeated loading. In addition, three push-out tests
(b) Global interaction curve.
were also conducted to obtain the load–slippage curves of
the shear connectors. It was found that the proposed partial
shear connection design was applicable to simply supported
composite beams as well as continuous composite beams.
More recently, a total Lagrangian finite element model for
the second-order non-linear inelastic analyses of composite
beams and columns was formulated by Pi et al. [18,19] in which
an accurate rotation matrix was used in the position analysis
and the non-linear strain derivations. The total deformation
in the composite members was assumed to result from two
successive motions: (i) displacements and finite rotations
of the cross-section, and (ii) a superimposed relative slip
displacement between the steel and the concrete components
in the deformed configuration. It should be noted that the
relative slip at the interface between the steel and the concrete
components was considered as an independent displacement in
the formulation. Hence, both the shear strains and the shear
stresses produced by the interaction between the slip and the
in-plane bending were readily incorporated in the finite element
model. Moreover, the second-order non-linear equilibrium
equations of the finite element model was solved with the
use of a consistent tangent modulus matrix which improved
the incremental–iteration solution process and minimized any
accumulation of errors.
Advanced numerical models using three-dimensional ele-
ments were established to examine the structural behaviour of
headed shear connectors in composite beam construction by
Lam and Ellobody [20]. The models were shown to be effective
in simulating the load–slippage curves of headed shear studs
in solid reinforced concrete slabs in push-out tests [21], and
hence, it provided detailed information on the different modes
of failure observed in tests. A comprehensive parametric study
using the proposed models was also conducted by Ellobody and
Young [22], and comparison of the predicted shear resistances
on headed shear studies in composite slabs with profiled steel
deckings with codified values was reported. However, it should
be noted that while the ascending parts of the load–slippage
curves of the shear connectors were modelled satisfactorily, the
 A.J. Wang, K.F. Chung / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 2724–2738
Table 1
Mechanical properties of test specimens
Test Failure load PT (kN) Mode of failure
CD4 207 + 207 Vierendeel
RP5 251 Vierendeel
maximum slippage of the shear connectors obtained from the
models was typically limited to 2–5 mm.
1.3. Advanced finite element modelling of composite beams
An extensive research and development programme has
been undertaken by the authors to develop advanced analysis
and design tools for practical design of long span composite
beams. Both two- and three-dimensional finite element models
employing solid and shell elements with material, geometrical
and interfacial non-linearity were established to examine the
full range structural behaviour of composite beams. A detailed
investigation using two-dimensional finite element models on
simply supported composite beams under sagging and hogging
moments was conducted, and the investigation was fully
presented in the literature [23]. It should be noted that shear
connectors with non-linear deformation characteristics were
readily incorporated into the models through the use of both
vertical and horizontal springs; the stiffnesses of the springs are
obtained from tests and design data in the literature.
Moreover, careful calibration on three-dimensional finite
element models against the test results of ten continuous
composite beams exhibiting significant moment re-distribution
was presented [24] in detail. It was demonstrated that
the proposed models were not only fully compatible with
the prescriptive design methods but also able to design
continuous composite beams beyond various limitations
imposed implicitly in prescriptive design methods.
2. Objectives and scope of work
In order to examine the structural behaviour of simply
supported composite beams with large rectangular web
openings, the two-dimensional finite element models developed
for composite beams by the authors [23,24] are adopted in the
present study, and web openings are introduced into the models.
The scope of the work of the present study includes:
• To establish finite element models which are capable
to predict the structural behaviour of simply supported
composite beams with large rectangular web openings.
• To examine both the load carrying capacities and the internal
force distributions of the perforated composite beams, and
to compare with those obtained from the design method
proposed previously by the authors.
• To examine the effect of flexible shear connectors in simply
supported composite beams with large rectangular web
openings.
2727
Measured yield strength of steel beam (N/mm2 ) Measured strength of concrete (N/mm2 )
Top flange Bottom flange Web Cylinder strength Cube strength
306.0 284.3 335.8 30.8 38.5
301.5 301.5 325.4 18.8 23.5
Detailed calibration of the finite element models against
test data of simply supported composite beams with large
rectangular web openings is also presented in this paper.
Moreover, the structural behaviour of those composite beams
with shear connectors of different deformation characteristics
are examined. It should be noted that no local buckling in the
steel sections of the composite beams is allowed in the proposed
finite elements, and hence, the steel sections should be either
plastic or compact according to relevant section classification.
3. Finite element studies
In order to investigate the structural behaviour of simply
supported composite beams with large rectangular web
openings and flexible shear connectors, a numerical study
with the general purpose finite element package ABAQUS
(Version 6.3, 2002) was carried out and fully reported in this
paper. Since the principal mode of failure involved only in-
plane deformation, a two-dimensional finite element model was
adopted for simplicity.
The test results of two composite beams with large
rectangular web openings were selected from the literature to
calibrate the finite element models. The first test was conducted
by Clawson and Darwin [25], namely Test CD4, while the
second test was conducted by Redwood and Poumbouras [26],
namely Test RP5. It should be noted that a solid concrete slab
was used in Test CD4 while a composite slab with trapezoidal
steel deck was used in Test RP5. Both the failure loads and
the observed modes of failure are summarized in Table 1.
Moreover, the measured concrete strengths and the measured
steel strengths are also provided. All the measured mechanical
properties of the concrete slabs and the steel sections are
adopted in the finite element models.
3.1. Finite element models
In the finite element models [23], iso-parametric four-noded
two-dimensional plane stress elements, CPS4R, are used to
model both the concrete slabs and the steel sections. Hence,
there are two translational displacements and one rotation at
each node of the plane stress elements while two in-plane direct
stresses and one in-plane shear stress are incorporated in each
side of the elements. It should be noted that according to the
geometry of the composite beams, the thicknesses of the plane
stress elements are assigned to be equal to the widths of the
concrete flanges, the widths of the flanges of the steel sections,
and also the thicknesses of the webs of the steel sections. The
width of the concrete flanges in the composite beams is taken as
either the actual width or the effective width of the test beams,
whichever is smaller. The effective width of the concrete flange
2728 A.J. Wang, K.F. Chung / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 2724–2738

(a) Steel. (b) Concrete.

Fig. 3. Material models of steel and concrete.

Fig. 4. Perforated composite beam with solid concrete slab — Test CD4.

in a composite beam is equal to a quarter of the beam span
according to established design practice.
The material models of steel are presented in Fig. 3(a), and
a bi-linear stress–strain curve under uni-axial loading condition
as well as an elliptical failure surface under bi-axial loading
condition are adopted.
For concrete under uni-axial loading condition, a non-
linear stress–strain curve is adopted in the material model of
concrete; the material models of concrete are presented in
Fig. 3(b). It should be noted that the compressive strength of
concrete, pc , is taken to be its cylinder strength while its tensile
strength, pt , is taken as only 10% of its compressive value.
Cracks in the concrete are assumed to be fully opened at a
tensile strain of 0.1%, and the limiting compressive strain of
concrete against crushing is taken to be 0.35%. For concrete
under bi-axial loading condition, the Drucker–Prager failure
criterion is adopted [13]. Moreover, it should be noted that
the concept of ‘smeared layers’ is adopted, and ‘smeared
reinforced concrete layers’ are employed in the finite element
models to avoid numerical divergence during solution iterations
[13,14].
The general test set-ups and the dimensions of the composite
beams of Tests CD4 and RP5 are shown in Figs. 4 and 5
together with their finite element models respectively.
3.2. Deformation characteristics of shear connectors
In order to simulate composite action in a composite beam
between the concrete slab and the steel section, each shear
connector at the steel/concrete interface is modelled with a
horizontal spring and a vertical spring for shear and axial
deformation respectively. However, it should be noted that
while 19 mm diameter headed shear studs were adopted in both
tests, no information on the actual load–slippage curves of the
shear studs was available.
 A.J. Wang, K.F. Chung / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 2724–2738 2729

Fig. 5. Perforated composite beam with slab of profiled steel decking — Test RP5.

Fig. 6. Load–slippage curves for shear connectors.

According to the typical test data of a 19 mm headed
shear stud in a solid concrete slab reported by Lawson [27],
the stiffness of the horizontal spring, K s , is taken to be
100 kN/mm as the upper bound value and 50 kN/mm as
the lower bound value, as shown in Fig. 6(a). Alternatively,
the load–slippage curve of the headed shear stud may be
represented analytically [28] as follows:
Fs = Ps (1 − e−βs )α (3)
where Fs is the longitudinal shear force developed in the headed
shear stud at a slippage of s (in mm);
Ps is the shear resistance of the headed shear stud;
2730 A.J. Wang, K.F. Chung / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 2724–2738
α is a non-dimensional parameter with its value between 0.5
and 1.5; and
β is a parameter with a unit of mm−1 ; its value is typically
between 0.5 and 2.0.
As shown in Fig. 6(a), the typical load–slippage curve of
the headed shear stud reported by Lawson may be represented
by Eq. (3) with α = 1.2 and β = 2.0. In order to determine
its shear resistance, reference is made to various design rules
given in national and regional codes of practice [29–33] on the
characteristic shear resistances of the shear connectors. After a
trial and error process, Ps is assigned to be 72 kN as a maximum
and 50 kN as a minimum.
Owing to the presence of the profiled steel deckings
in composite slabs, there are significant differences in the
load–slippage curves of shear connectors in terms of stiffness
and strength when compared with those of shear connectors in
solid concrete slabs. These reductions depend largely on the
shapes of the profiled steel deckings, the arrangements of the
shear connectors as well as the concrete materials. Hence, it is
important to investigate the effects of load–slippage curves of
shear connectors with different deformation characteristics on
the overall structural behaviour of the composite beams. In the
present study, a total of nine different shear connectors with
different stiffnesses and resistances are adopted as follows:
Linear elastic behaviour
(1) E-R — Elastic with infinite stiffness
(2) E-100 — Elastic with K s = 100 kN/m
(3) E-50 — Elastic with K s = 50 kN/m.
Bi-linear behaviour
(4) P-R-72 — Elasto-plastic with infinite stiffness, and
Ps = 72 kN
(5) P-100-72 — Elasto-plastic with K s = 100 kN/m, and
Ps = 72 kN
(6) P-50-72 — Elasto-plastic with K s = 50 kN/m, and
Ps = 72 kN
(7) P-50-50 — Elasto-plastic with K s = 50 kN/m, and
Ps = 50 kN.
Non-linear behaviour
(8) N-72 — Non-linear with α = 0.8 and β = 2.0 in Eq. (3),
and Ps = 72 kN
(9) N-50 — Non-linear with α = 1.0 and β = 2.0 in Eq. (3),
and Ps = 50 kN.
As shown in Fig. 6, the nine different shear connectors
represent extreme and typical values found in composite beams
with both solid concrete slabs and composite slabs with
trapezoidal steel decks. It should be noted that owing to the
lack of test data, the stiffness of the vertical spring of the shear
connector, K v , is taken as that of the horizontal spring, K s while
the pull-out resistance of the shear connector, Pv , is taken as
half of its shear resistance, Ps .
The finite element models are built in such a way that
they will provide not only the load carrying capacities of
the composite beams, but also more detailed information
such as local forces and bending moments in both the top
composite and the bottom steel tee sections above and below
the web openings respectively after rational data analysis on
the numerical results. Hence, the ‘Vierendeel’ mechanism with
the formation of plastic hinges in both the top composite and
the bottom steel tee sections at the critical cross-sections of the
web openings will be examined in detail. Moreover, the effects
of shear connectors with different deformation characteristics
on the overall structural behaviour of composite beams with
large web openings will also be examined thoroughly.
4. Numerical results
Fig. 7(a) illustrates the deformed shape of the composite
beam in Test CD4 at failure together with the stress distributions
in the top composite and the bottom steel tee sections above and
below the web opening. It is evident that the mode of failure of
the composite beam in Test CD4 is the ‘Vierendeel’ mecha-
nism, and large local bending stresses are present at the critical
cross-sections of the top composite and the bottom steel tee sec-
tions, as shown in Fig. 7(b). Similarly, the deformed shape of
the composite beam in Test PR5 is shown in Fig. 8(a), and it
matches well with the observed failure mode, the ‘Vierendeel’
mechanism. Moreover, large local bending stresses in the top
composite and the bottom steel tee sections above and below
the web opening are also illustrated in Fig. 8(b), with very high
stresses in both the concrete and the steel materials.
4.1. Load deflection curves
The load deflection curves predicted from the finite
element models with shear connectors of different deformation
characteristics are plotted in the same graphs of the measured
data in Figs. 7(c) and 8(c) for Tests CD4 and RP5 respectively.
It should be noted that while the mid-span deflection, ∆, of the
composite beam in Test CD4 is plotted in Fig. 7(c), the relative
deflection across the web opening, δ, of the composite beam in
Test RP5 is plotted in Fig. 8(c); this allows direct comparison
with test data.
In general, the predicted load deflection curves derived from
the numerical studies compare very well with the experimental
data. It should be noted that in Test CD4 where a solid concrete
slab is adopted in the composite beam, the load deflection curve
of the finite element model with shear connectors P-100-72 is
found to follow closely with the test data. In Test RP5 where
a composite slab with trapezoidal steel deck is adopted in the
composite beam, the measured load deflection curve is found
to be bounded by those of the finite element models with shear
connectors P-50-72 and P-50-50. Hence, this confirms that it is
necessary to allow for the different deformation characteristics
of shear connectors in solid concrete slabs and composite
slabs with profiled steel deckings in finite element modelling.
Moreover, only small differences are found among the load
deflection curves of the perforated composite beams using shear
 A.J. Wang, K.F. Chung / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 2724–2738 2731

(a) Deformed shape. (b) Direct stress distribution of perforated section.

(c) Load–deflection curves.

Fig. 7. Results of finite element modelling — Test CD4.

(a) Deformed shape. (b) Direct stress distribution of perforated section.

(c) Load–deflection curves.

Fig. 8. Results of finite element modelling — Test RP 5.

2732 A.J. Wang, K.F. Chung / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 2724–2738

Table 2
Comparison of load carrying capacities

Test Failure loads

Experiment, PT (kN) Finite element method (FEM), PFEM (kN) Proposed design method (PDM) PPDM (kN)
P-R-72 P-100-72 P-50-72 P-50-50
CD4 414 419 381 365 – 416
RP5 267 – 291 287 253 249

Table 3
Comparison of local moments and forces for Test CD4

Case: P-100-72 FEM (P = 416 kN) PDM (P = 416 kN)

LMS HMS LMS HMS
Top tee 14.8 60.0 −5.5 84.8
74.8 79.3
Vierendeel moment (kN m) Bottom tee 6.9 15.0 8.5 14.3
21.9 22.8
Total 96.7 102.1

Axial force (kN) Top tee 363.8 369.8 320.5 320.5

Bottom tee 364.7 359.4 320.5 320.5

Top tee Concrete 80 83 38 38

155 160 169 169
Shear force (kN) Steel 75 77 131 131
Bottom tee 53 52 41 41
Total 208 212 210 210

connectors with non-linear and bi-linear load–slippage curves.
Hence, it is considered to be appropriate to adopt bi-linear
load–slippage curves to describe the deformation characteristic
of shear connectors with appropriate values of the stiffnesses
and the resistances in finite element modelling.
4.2. Load carrying capacities
The load carrying capacity of a perforated composite beam
is defined as the load level at which the maximum direct strain
in the least yielded steel tee section reaches the following value:
r
py Dc py
εmax = 6 × × (4)
Es (Dc − h) 275
where
p y is the measured yield strength of the steel section;
E s is the measured Young’s modulus, and it may be taken as
205 kN/mm2 in the absence of test data;
Dc is the depth of the composite section; and
h is the depth of the web opening.
According to the proposed failure criterion, the load carrying
capacities of the two finite element models with various
shear connectors are summarized in Table 2 together with the
measured capacities. It is shown that comparison between the
measured and the predicted load carrying capacities is good.
In addition, it is found that both the stiffnesses and the
resistances of shear connectors are very important to the
load carrying capacities of the perforated composite beams.
The maximum difference in the load carrying capacities of
the perforated composite beams with different types of shear
connectors is shown to be around 15%. This reflects the
different deformation states of the composite beams at the
same limiting strains in the steel sections largely owing to
the different flexibilities of the shear connectors. Hence, the
deformation characteristics of shear connectors are shown to
be very important to the overall structural behaviour of the
perforated composite beams, in particular, their load carrying
capacities. Moreover, representative load–slippage curves of
shear connectors are also essential in finite element modelling
for accurate prediction of the structural behaviour of perforated
composite beams.
4.3. Comparison with proposed design method
Both the composite beams in Tests CD4 and RP5 are
analyzed with the proposed design method [9] for comparison
with the finite element results. As shown in Table 2, the
load carrying capacities of both tests obtained from the finite
element models and the proposed design method agree very
well with each other.
Moreover, the local ‘Vierendeel’ moments obtained from
the finite element models and the proposed design method
are presented in Tables 3 and 4 for Tests CD4 and RP5
respectively. It is interesting to note that although there
are small discrepancies in the local ‘Vierendeel’ moment
resistances between the HMS and the LHS of the top composite
tee sections, the total ‘Vierendeel’ moments for both the
top composite tee sections and the bottom steel tee sections
obtained from those two methods agree very well. It is believed
that the discrepancy is due to the difference in the flexural
rigidities of cracked concrete between the finite element models
 A.J. Wang, K.F. Chung / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 2724–2738 2733

Table 4
Comparison of local moments and forces for Test RP5

Case: P-50-50 FEM (P = 249 kN) PDM (P = 249 kN)

HMS LMS HMS LMS
Top tee 0.7 29.6 −6.2 39.1
30.3 32.9
Vierendeel moment (kN m) Bottom tee 3.9 7.6 5.0 8.1
11.5 13.1
Total 41.8 46.0

Axial force (kN) Top tee 277.4 280.8 256.6 256.6

Bottom tee 280.8 279.2 256.6 256.6

Top tee Concrete 41 25 27 28

87 92 94 94
Shear force (kN) Steel 46 67 67 66
Bottom tee 34 34 30 30
Total 121 126 124 124

and the proposed design method. In the finite element models,

‘controlled cracking’ occurs in the smeared reinforced concrete
layers in composite slabs with the consideration of both ‘tensile
stiffening’ and ‘tensile softening’ in the concrete as shown in
Fig. 3(b). However, in the proposed design method, the concrete
in the composite tee sections is assumed to have zero tensile
strengths, and fully cracked under tension.
Furthermore, the local axial forces and the local shear forces
acting on both the top composite and the bottom steel tee
sections obtained from these two methods also match very well.
This shows that the assumptions in the proposed design method
on the distributions of local axial forces, shear forces and
moments in the top composite and the bottom steel tee sections
are simple, and yet adequately accurate for design purposes.
Consequently, it is demonstrated that the finite element models
do not only provide quantitative justification to the structural
adequacy of the proposed design method, but also serve as
advanced analysis and design tools whenever detailed structural
behaviour of perforated composite beams is needed.

4.4. Local distributions of stresses and strains

The distributions of direct stresses and strains at the

perforated composite sections at failure in Tests CD4 and RP5
are plotted in Figs. 9 and 10 respectively. The limiting strains of
the steel sections as well as the concrete cracking and crushing
strains are also plotted in the same figures for easy reference. It
should be noted that the direct strains vary linearly across both
the composite top tee sections and the steel bottom tee sections,
and they exceed the respective limiting strains of the materials
significantly at various locations. Hence, the tee sections are
under large local moments with substantial yielding, and plastic
hinges are readily formed in the tee sections leading to the
‘Vierendeel’ mechanism of the perforated composite beams.

4.5. Deflection profiles of composite beams

Fig. 11 presents the deflection profiles of both composite Fig. 9. Distributions of stress and strain at the perforated composite section in
beams in Tests CD4 and RP5 with shear connectors of Test CD4.
2734 A.J. Wang, K.F. Chung / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 2724–2738

Table 5
Maximum forces in shear connectors with different deformation characteristics
Test Force (kN) Shear connectors with different deformation characteristics
E-R E-100 E-50 P-R-72 P-100-72 P-50-72 P-50-50 N-72 N-50
Fs 1 × 127.1 1 × 57.6 – 5 × 72.0 3 × 72.0 3 × 72.0 – 2 × 72.0 –
CD4
Fv 1 × 34.3 1 × 45.5 – 3 × 36.0 2 × 36.0 2 × 36.0 – 2 × 36.0 –
Fs – 1 × 67.1 1 × 50.5 – 1 × 69.1 2 × 56.0 4 × 50.0 – 4 × 48.4
RP5
Fv – 1 × 35.0 1 × 27.8 – 1 × 34.0 1 × 32.2 1 × 25.0 – 1 × 23.9
Notes: (a) The values are given in the following format: n × F where n denotes the number of shear connectors along the beam length with the value of the maximum
force. F denotes the value of the maximum force. (b) The values in bold and italics represent shear connectors at full resistances, and Pv = 0.5 × Ps .

beams. Moreover, the deformation characteristics of shear

connectors have significant effects on the deflection profiles of
the perforated composite beams as their maximum deflections
are found to vary by 20%–60% when compared among
themselves.

4.6. Forces in shear connectors

The longitudinal shear force, Fs , and the vertical pull-out

force, Fv , of shear connectors with different deformation char-
acteristics are plotted in the same graphs in Figs. 12 and 13 for
Tests CD4 and RP5 respectively. It should be noted that large
pull-out forces are induced in those shear connectors in the
vicinity of the web openings which have been neglected in the
past. As these pull-out forces reach the tension resistances of
the shear connectors adopted in the models in some cases, such
forces should be considered properly in design. The maximum
forces in the shear connectors with different deformation char-
acteristics along the beam length are summarized in Table 5.
After careful examination of the results, it should be noted that:
(a) Among the models with elastic analyses, the magnitudes of
both Fs and Fv of most shear connectors in the composite
beams with large web openings follow broadly with those
of unperforated composite beams, as shown in Figs. 12(a)
and 13(a). However, the magnitudes of both Fs and Fv of
those shear connectors in the vicinity of the web openings
are increased typically by 30%–50% with a maximum value
at 127.1 and 34.3 kN respectively as shown in Table 5. In
general, such increases in both Fs and Fv of those shear
connectors are necessary in order to mobilize the local mo-
ment resistances of the top composite tee sections against
the local ‘Vierendeel’ moment. Moreover, the increments
in the magnitudes of both Fs and Fv depend heavily on the
deformation characteristics of the shear connectors.
(b) Among the models with non-linear analyses, similar in-
creases in both Fs and Fv of those shear connectors in the
Fig. 10. Distributions of stress and strain of the perforated composite section vicinity of the web openings are found for mobilization of
in Test RP5. the local moment resistances of the top composite tee sec-
tions against the local ‘Vierendeel’ moment. Owing to the
limited shear resistance in each of the shear connectors,
different deformation characteristics for direct comparison; the more shear connectors are mobilized through slippage as
corresponding applied loads are equal to two-thirds of the load permitted by their ductility, when compared with those in
carrying capacities of the beams. It is shown that in both elastic unperforated composite beams, as shown in Figs. 12(b) and
and non-linear analyses, the presence of large rectangular web 13(b). It should be noted that as shown in some cases in
openings introduces additional deflections to the composite Table 5, almost all the shear connectors along the length
 A.J. Wang, K.F. Chung / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 2724–2738
Fig. 11. Deflection profiles along the beams.
of the web openings are fully stressed in both the longitu-
dinal and the vertical directions. Hence, those shear con-
nectors are under very large shear and tension forces at the
same time, and it is essential to ensure structural adequacy
of those shear connectors in practice.
4.7. Slippage of shear connectors
Fig. 14 plots the variations of slippage s of shear connectors
with different deformation characteristics along the beam
lengths. It should be noted that in unperforated composite
beams, the predicted maximum slippages occur at the ends
of the composite beams, as commonly envisaged, and the
maximum end slippages are found to range from 0.5 to 1.0 mm.
However, for composite beams with large rectangular web
openings in Tests CD4 and RP5, the maximum slippage occurs
in the vicinity of the web openings instead. The maximum
slippage in both perforated composite beams is found to be
increased considerably by a factor of 1.5–2, being in the range
of 1.5–2 mm, depending on the deformation characteristics of
the shear connectors. Consequently, the shear connectors are
required to deform significantly more in the vicinity of the
web openings, and it is necessary to ensure that these shear
connectors are able to deform adequately without significant
reduction in their resistances in practice.
2735
5. Conclusions
In order to examine the structural behaviour of simply
supported composite beams with large rectangular web
openings, two-dimensional finite element models employing
plane stress elements are established. Shear connectors with
non-linear deformation characteristics are incorporated into the
models through the use of both vertical and horizontal springs.
The finite element models are carefully calibrated against
test data of two composite beams with large rectangular web
openings, one with a solid slab and the other a composite slab.
It should be noted that no local buckling in the steel sections
of the composite beams is allowed in the finite element models,
and hence, the steel sections should be either plastic or compact
according to relevant section classification. It is found that:
1. The finite element models are able to simulate the structural
behaviour of simply supported composite beams with
large rectangular web openings over the entire deformation
history with excellent co-relation with test data. Comparison
between the measured and the predicted load carrying
capacities against the ‘Vierendeel’ mechanism is found to
be highly satisfactory.
2. Moreover, a number of important structural quantities in
the perforated composite sections such as local axial and
shear forces together with local bending moments acting
onto the composite and the steel tee sections at failure are
2736 A.J. Wang, K.F. Chung / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 2724–2738
Fig. 12. Internal force distributions in shear connectors — Test CD4.
obtained after data analyses. Together with the load carrying
capacities, these quantities compare favourably with the
values obtained from the design method proposed previously
by the authors. Consequently, it is shown that the finite
element models not only provide quantitative justification to
the structural adequacy of the proposed design method, but
also serve as advanced analysis and design tools whenever
detailed structural behaviour of perforated composite beams
is needed.
3. The deformation characteristic of shear connectors is very
important in predicting the structural behaviour of composite
beams with large rectangular web openings. Moreover,
the finite element models are able to provide detailed
structural information of the perforated composite beams,
such as the longitudinal shear forces, the pull-out forces
as well as the slippage of the shear connectors along the
entire beam length. In general, it is important to have
‘true’ representation of the load–slippage curves of shear
connectors in evaluating the load carrying capacities of
composite beams. In the absence of measured load–slippage
curves, bi-linear curves with conservative design values on
the stiffnesses and the resistances of the shear connectors
may be adopted.
4. A close examination of the results of the finite element
models reveals that large pull-out forces are induced
in the shear connectors in the vicinity of the web
openings, and such pull-out forces have been neglected
in the past. Moreover, the shear connectors are required
to deform significantly more when compared with those
in the unperforated versions of the composite beams.
Consequently, it is essential to ensure that all the shear
connectors in perforated composite beams are able to resist
large co-existing shear and tension forces at large slippage
in ultimate limit state. It should be noted that up to the
present, there is relatively little information on this topic,
and more test data are needed for the rational development
of an appropriate design method for shear connectors under
co-existing shear and tension forces.
It should be noted that the proposed advanced finite
element models are readily extended to cover composite
beams with different and practical constructional features,
such as composite beams with web openings of different
sizes and shapes, composite beams with reinforced web
openings, composite beams with asymmetric steel sections
and eccentric web openings, and continuous perforated steel
and composite beams. Hence, researchers and engineers are
strongly encouraged to further develop the proposed finite
element models to exploit the full structural advantages offered
by composite construction.
Acknowledgement
The project leading to the publication of this paper is
supported by the Research Committee of The Hong Kong
Polytechnic University (Project No. G-W039).
 A.J. Wang, K.F. Chung / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 2724–2738 2737

Fig. 13. Internal force distributions in shear connectors — Test RP5.

(a) Test CD4. (b) Test RP5.

Fig. 14. Slippage of shear connectors.

References Construction; 1990.

[1] Lawson RM. Design for openings in the webs of composite beams.
In: CIRIA/Steel construction institute. CIRIA Special Publication and SCI
Publication 068; 1987.
[2] Darwin D. Steel and composite beams with web openings. Steel design
guide series, vol. 2. Chicago (IL, USA): American Institute of Steel
[3] Redwood RG, Cho SH. Design of steel and composite beams with web
openings. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 1993;25:231–48.
[4] Oehlers DJ, Bradford MA. Composite steel and concrete structural
members: Fundamental behaviour. Pergamon; 1995.
[5] Chung KF, Ko CH. Harmonization on practical design of steel and
composite beams with large web openings for full integration with
2738 A.J. Wang, K.F. Chung / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 2724–2738
building services. In: Proceedings of the second structural engineering
world congress. Yokohama (Japan): CD Publication; 2002.
[6] Ko CH. A unified approach for steel and composite beams with web
openings. M.Phil. thesis. The Hong Kong Polytechnic University; 2002.
[7] Chung KF, Lawson RM. Simplified design of composite beams with large
web openings to EC 4. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 2001;57:
135–63.
[8] Ko CH, Chung KF. A review of recent developments on design of
perforated beams. In: Proceedings of the third international conference
on advances in steel structures. 2002. p. 121–8.
[9] Chung KF, Ko CH, Wang AJ. Design of steel and composite beams
with web openings — Verification using finite element method. Steel and
Composite Structures 2005;5(2–3):203–33.
[10] Oehlers DJ, Sved G. Composite beams with limited-slip-capacity shear
connectors. Journal of Structural Engineering 1995;121(6):932–8.
[11] Wang YC. Deflection of steel–concrete composite beams with partial
shear interaction. Journal of Structural Engineering 1998;124(10):
1159–65.
[12] Hassan AFM, Mourad SA. Numerical modelling of composite beams with
web openings. Journal of Engineering and Applied Science 2002;49(1):
89–107.
[13] Baskar K, Shanmugam NE, Thevendran V. Finite-element analysis of
steel–concrete composite plate girder. Journal of Structural Engineering
2002;128(9):1158–68.
[14] Queiroz FD, Vellasco PCGS, Nethercot DA. Finite element modelling
of composite beams with full and partial shear connection. Journal of
Constructional Steel Research 2007;63:505–21.
[15] Megharief J, Redwood R. Behaviour of composite castellated beams.
Journal of Constructional Steel Research 1998;46(1–3): Paper No. 60.
[16] Loh HY, Uy B, Bradford MA. The effects of partial shear connection in
the hogging moment regions of composite beams Part I — Experimental
study. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 2004;60(6):897–919.
[17] Loh HY, Uy B, Bradford MA. The effects of partial shear connection in
the hogging moment regions of composite beams Part II — Analytical
study. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 2004;60(6):921–62.
[18] Pi YL, Bradford MA, Uy B. Second order nonlinear inelastic analysis
of composite steel–concrete members I: Theory. Journal of Structural
Engineering 2006;32(5):751–61.
[19] Pi YL, Bradford MA, Uy B. Second order nonlinear inelastic analysis of
composite steel–concrete members II: Applications. Journal of Structural
Engineering 2006;32(5):762–71.
[20] Lam D, Ellobody E. Behaviour of headed stud shear connectors in
composite beam. Journal of Structural Engineering 2005;131(1):96–107.
[21] Ellobody E, Young B. Performance of shear connection in composite
beams with profiled steel sheeting. Journal of Constructional Steel
Research 2006;62(7):682–94.
[22] Lam D, Ellobody E. Behaviour of headed stud shear connectors in
composite beams. Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE 2005;131(1):
96–107.
[23] Wang AJ, Chung KF. Integrated analysis and design of composite beams
with flexible shear connectors under sagging and hogging moments. Steel
and Composite Structures 2006;6(6):459–78.
[24] Chung KF, Wang AJ. Advanced finite element modelling of continuous
composite beams with flexible shear connectors exhibiting moment
redistribution. Steel and Composite Structures [in press].
[25] Clawson WC, Darwin D. Composite beams with web openings. SM report
no. 4. Lawrence (Kansas): University of Kansas Center for Research;
1980.
[26] Redwood RG, Poumbouras G. Tests of composite beams with
web openings. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 1983;10:
713–721.
[27] Lawson RM. Commentary on BS5950: Part 3: Section 3.1 composite
beams. The Steel Constitute Institute; 1990. SCI-P-078.
[28] Gattesco N. Analytical modelling of nonlinear behaviour of composite
beams with deformable connection. Journal of Constructional Steel
Research 1999;52:195–218.
[29] Australian Institute of Steel Construction and Standards Australia. SAA
HB91 (1997). Composite beam design handbook in accordance with
AS2327.1 – 1996.
[30] Australian Standards. AS2327.1 – 1996. Composite structures. Part 1:
Simply supported beams.
[31] British Standards Institution. BS5950: Structural use of steelwork in
building. Part 3 Section 3.1: Code of practice for design of composite
beams. 1990.
[32] British Standards Institution. DDENV 1994-1-1 Eurocode 4: Design of
composite steel and concrete structures. Part 1.1: General rules and rules
for buildings. 2004.
[33] The Buildings Department of the Government of Hong Kong SAR. Code
of practice for the structural use of steel, 2005. Chapter 10: Composite
structures.