European Journal of Scientific Research ISSN 1450-216X Vol.47 No.4 (2010), pp.562-573 EuroJournals Publishing, Inc. 2010 http://www.eurojournals.com/ejsr.

htm

Design of Sandwich Beam Element with Partial Composite Action

Pouria Shahani Faculty of Mechanical, University Technology Malaysia (UTM), Skudai, Johor E-mail: pouria90@Gmail.com Abstract Sandwich beams composed of three layers, the top and button layer as face sheet with low thickness and high stiffness and the middle layer as core with low modulus of elasticity are commonly used to span large openings such as in skyscrapers, because it prepare suitable properties for flexural stiffness with low density and absorbing energy without weight penalty. This paper deals with the effect of partial composite action on flexural rigidity of sandwich beams with considering of flexible shear connectors between interfaces of layers. Then, the relationships that express the equation of elastic stiffness matrix will be presented. The latter, are used in analysis of beams with finite element approach based on Timoshenko theory for solving the inconsistency of degree of freedom that is caused by relative shear slip. The flexural rigidity and shearing rigidity of composite layers must be taken into account when the finite element approach is used for calculating the deflection of sandwich beams. Keywords: Sandwich Beams, Elastic Stiffness Equation, Composite Action, Timoshenko Theory, Newmark interaction theory

1. Introduction
Sandwich beams have better strength to weight ratios and rigidity in the comparison to individual beams, because they are composed of hard and stiff faces and cores with light- weight materials (Gdoutos and Daniel, 2008). Such beams can resist more loading than the element of sandwich beams separately. These structures are used in high-rise buildings, or skyscrapers. In the state that vertical loads affected on layers of sandwich beams independently, the slabs hinder as individual element and the relative shear slip take place between the layers. Such structures are considered as a composite beam without composite action. Shear connection that happened in interface of layers, determine the behavior of sandwich structures. Beam manner with full composite action or partially composite action as a result of rigid or flexible shear connection respectively. If the beams withstand vertical loads unity that means shear connector can be propagate between layer interfaces for maintaining shear slip depends on that shear connector (Viest et al., 1997). The flexural rigidity of the beam with partial composite action depends on two slip strain furthermore sectional and materials parameters; therefore the relationship between moment and curvature of the composite beam is nonlinear. The finite element method is useful for gaining deflection of beams involving complex geometries, combined loading and material properties, in which the analytical solutions are not available (Budynas1999), so for composite sandwich structures this approach are used for calculating

Design of Sandwich Beam Element with Partial Composite Action

563

deflection. Account must be taken of the effect of relative shear slip, in finite element analysis of sandwich beams with partial composite action. For reaching this assumption, at the two ends of such beams, consider two independent axial degree of freedom, but inconsistency of degree of freedom take place in finite element analysis. (Faella and et al., 2001). To keep away from this problem, the elastic stiffness equation of composite beam element, with respect to relative slip, have to be derived (GueQiang and Jin-Jun, 2009). Because of the nonlinearity of relationship between moment and curvature of sandwich beam with partial composite action, which happened as a result of existence of sleep strain in flexural rigidity of such beams, the elastic stiffness equation cannot drive by using the equilibrium of internal and external moments of beams directly. For solving this problem, according to Newmark and at el. (1951) the elastic stiffness matrix is derived found on elastic interaction theory through the solution of the governing differential equilibrium equation of the composite beams. The elastic stiffness matrix for composite beams that composed of two layers has gained in previous researches (Gue-Qiang and Jin-Jun, 2009). The majority of those researches especially consisted on the composite that consist of concrete slabs laid on the steel beams. In this research, this method will extended for sandwich beams with three layers with different materials and sectional for top and bottom layers. The deflection of sandwich beams can gain by finite element analysis considering the Timoshenko theory (Reddy, 2005), or in the simple state of loading and supporting, the analytical solution based on Timoshenko Theory can be used (Wang, 1995). But in both of the above approach, the flexural rigidity and shearing rigidity for composite beams have to be considered. At the end of this paper, the equations related to flexural and shearing rigidity are derived and explained.

2. The Composite Action Effect on Elastic Stiffness of Composite Sandwich Beams

2.1. Beams with Partial Composite Action The strain diagram is given in Figure 1 Denote Cc and Cs as the distances from the neutral axes of any layer components to their top surfaces, respectively. Note that , , , and .
Figure 1: Composite beam with partial composite action: partial composite action section, strain distribution along sectional height, and internal forces.

A strain difference can be seen along the sandwich layers interface, which is defined as slip strain or . In partial composite action restrained slip occurs. The strain diagram is given in figure 1. The slip strain at the two top and bottom layers (faces) with the layers located in the middle (core) can then be expressed as

564

by

(1) - (2) The compression in the top and bottom slabs and the tension in the core of the beam are given (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) and k as the following : (8) (9) (10) Substituting 9 back into 3, yields (11) (12) By considering that: (13) From equations 12 and 13 is: From the equation 5, can be expressed as: Combining equations 2 and 7 yields: - Substituting 16 back into 7, denote Substituting equation 17 back into 16 yields: Substituting 17 back into 5 yields: From the figure 1, can be expressed: By considering that: (21) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) As shown in the figure 1 -

Pouria Shahani

The equilibrium of N and T, i.e. N=T, results in and can be expressed with Combining equations 1 and 6 yields

Substituting equation 9 back into 8 yields:

Substituting equation 8 back into equation 6: -

Design of Sandwich Beam Element with Partial Composite Action From equations 20 and 21 can be expressed: The equilibrium of internal and external moments with considering the figure 1 gives: With respect to the static, can be expressed
-

565 (22) (23.a) (23.b)

By approximating and with respect to Radius Zhyrasyvn, can be expressed

(23.c) Where bending stiffness of composite is beam with full composite action and is the bending stiffness of composite beam with partial composite action. (24) Because of the bending stiffness of the partially composite beam depends on the slip strain in addition to sectional and material parameters, then the relationship between moment and curvature of the composite beam is no longer linear. In next Section, the elastic stiffness equation of the partially composite beam, based on Newmark partial interaction theory, will be derived. 2.2. Elastic Stiffness Equation of Composite Beam Element 2.2.1. Basic Assumptions The following assumptions are employed in this section: I. Both faces and core layers are in elastic state. II. The shear stud is also in elastic state, and the shearslip relationship for single shear stud is (25) where K is the shear stiffness of a stud. III. The composite action is smeared uniformly on the face-core interface, although the actual shear studs providing composite action are discretely distributed. IV. The plane section of the faces slabs and the core remain plane independently, which indicates that the strains are linearly distributed along layers section heights, respectively. V. Lift-up of shear studs, namely pull-out of shear studs form the face slab, is prevented. The deflection of the core layer of the beam and the faces slab at the same position along the length is identical, or the layer components of the composite beam are subjected to the same curvature in deformation. 2.2.2. Differential equilibrium equation of partially composite beam The strains of the layers components at the interface can be expressed with internal forces as
-

(26.a) (26.b) (26.c)

Consider a differential unit of the top and bottom flange (see figure 2.), and the force equilibrium of the unit in horizontal is

566
Figure 2: Horizontal balances of the top and bottom layers.

Pouria Shahani

For top layer For bottom layer

The shear density transferred by single shear stud on the interface is: The slip strain at the interface of layers of the sandwich beams can then be expressed as Combining equations 27, 25 and 28 lead to
-

(27.a) (27.b) (28) (29) (30)

Equaling equations 26 to equation 30 result in -

By considering the assumptions, the moment curvature relationships are (33) (34) (35) (36) (37) And it leads to -

(31) (32)

By equation 23.a, one has

-

Substituting equations 33, 34, and 37 back into equation 32 leads to the following fourth order differential equilibrium equation of the partially composite beam between the interface of bottom and middle layer: (39) With adding equations 38 and 39, yields
-

Substituting equations 33, 34, and 36 back into equation 31 leads to the following fourth order differential equilibrium equation of the partially composite beam between the interface of top and middle layer (38)

(40)

Design of Sandwich Beam Element with Partial Composite Action From equation 35, can be expressed Two differentiate from the above equation, yields -

567 (41.a) (41.b)

(42) (43) (44) (45) (46)

Substituting equations 41.b-46 into equation 40, leads to

where defined as

is the shear modulus of the interface of composite beam. and are parameters that relevant to the material properties and section dimensions, and are (48) (49) (50)

(47)

2.2.3. Stiffness Equation of Composite Beam Element The typical forces and deformations of the beam element are as in figure 3.
Figure 3: The typical forces and deformation of the beam element

The moment at an arbitrary location distance x away from end 1 can be expressed with the end moment and the end shearQ1 The force balance also determines (51) (52) (53) (54) (55)

The solution of the fourth order differential equation 54 is where and are integration constants. Substituting equations 48-53 into equation 47, yield

568 as -

Pouria Shahani Integrating equation 55 twice results in the deflection of the composite beam element with slip (56)

Where and are also integration constants. Consider the following boundary conditions with considering the figure 3.

With use above boundary conditions into equation 56 with considering the crammer rules yields four simultaneous algebra equations as following:
-

(59.a)
-

(59.b)

(59.d) In most cases, the middle layer are connected to columns fixedly, and when the anchor-hold of negative reinforcement bars in top and bottom slabs has good performance, it is reasonable to assume that the slip between the middle layer and 2 up and bottom slabs at the ends of composite beams is negligible, namely (60.a) (60.b) Substituting equation 60 into equation 29 leads to (61.a) (61.b) Differentiate from equation 41.a, one has Substituting equations 34 and 51 into above equation, yields Three differentiate from equation 56, leads to (62) (63) (64) (65)

(59.c)

Substitute equation 64 back into 63, result in

Substituting equation 65 into equation 61.a, yields

Design of Sandwich Beam Element with Partial Composite Action -

569 (66.a)

Substituting equation 65 into equation 61.b, yields

From equation 59 and 66.a, with considering the following assumptions, M1, M2, Q1, and Q2 calculated: Assumption: (67.a) - (67.b) (67.c)
-

(66.b)

(67.d)

(67.e)
-

Substitute equation 59.b into 66.a, yields

-

(68)

Assume that

is equal to coefficient of
-

in equation 68
- -

(69) (70)

From equation 68 with considering to 69, one has Now, the equation 70 has to summarized as following -

(71.a) (71.b) (71.c) (72) (73)

Then rewrite equation 70 with considering the following assumptions So, one has Substitute assumption 67 in equation 66.b, lead to
-

(74.a)
-

(74.b)
-

From equations 74.a and 74.b, yields

- -

(74.c)
-

Substitute 74.c into back 66.b, yields

-

- -

(75) (76)

Extract the coefficient of

-

from equation 75, yields:

-

Substituting equation 76 into equation 75

570 -

Pouria Shahani

(77.a) (77.b) (77.c) (78) (79)

Substituting equation 77 into equation 75, yields From equation 73 and 78 with considering to crammer rules, one has
-

(80) -

Denominator of equations 79 and 80 are (81)

-4 4 -

Now, have to solve equation 81

-4 4 -

Numerator of equation 79 is With considering equations 71.a, 71.c, 77.a, and 77.c yields
-

(82) (83)

(84.a)
-

(84.b) After solving equation 83 by using equation 84 with considering equations 67.b, 67.c, 67.d, and - : 67.e, the coefficient of equation 83, can be written as Coefficient of
-4 t
t

- -4

(85.a)
-

Coefficient of
-

:
-

3 -

Coefficient of

-3

(85.b)

(85.c) Coefficient of t4:

Substituting equation 85 into equation 83, yields t From equation 79, one has

(85.d) (86)

Design of Sandwich Beam Element with Partial Composite Action Equation 87, is the solution of equation 79, with considering the following formula

571 (87) (88.a) (88.b) (88.c) (88.d)

That t1-t4 in equation 88 have gained by equation 85, and Ks have gained by equation 82. If the equation 80 has been considered At first, p1Z2 and p2Z1 with considering equations 71.b, 71.c, 77.b, and 77.c, will be calculated. Then Qs has been gained (89.a) Substituting equation 89 into equation 80 and considering equations 67 yields
-3 -

(89.b)

From equations 82 and 90, one has

(90) (91) (92.a)

Combining equations 91, 92, 87, and 88, lead to From equation 53, one has The matrix expression of equations 87, 91, and 92 is
- - - - - - - - - - - - -

(92.b) (92.c) (92.d) (93)

(94)

(95)

Or Where

(96) (97)

572

Equation 95 or 96 is the elastic stiffness equation for the composite beam element with partial is the corresponding elastic stiffness matrix composite action for three nonsymmetrical layers and of the element.

- -

- -

- -

- -

Pouria Shahani

(98)

3. Equivalent Flexural and Shearing Rigidity

For calculating the deflection of composite beams like sandwich beams, all of the formulas that use for individual beam can be used, but the different only is related to the flexural rigidity, EI, and shearing rigidity, . The equivalent values have to be used instead of the constant values of them. In the following, the relationships between them are summarized. In the table 1 and 2, is assumed that layers are composed of steel (St), aluminum (Al), and brass (Br). The letters h1, h2, and h3 is the height of each layer. x, t, and m are the width of layers. E, and G are modulus of elasticity, and shear modulus respectively, and I is moment of inertia.ks is introduced to account for the difference in the constant state of shear stress in the Timoshenko beam theory and the parabolic variation of the actual shear stress through the beam depth. The values of ks for various crosssectional shapes are given in Gere and Timoshenko (1991). When the deflections of composite beams like sandwich structures are calculated by finite element method, these two tables are useful. Because of sandwich beams categorize in wide beams, then, for calculating the deflection of them, Timoshenko theory has to be used.
Table 1: Equivalent flexural rigidity

Table 2:

Equivalent shearing rigidity

Design of Sandwich Beam Element with Partial Composite Action

573

4. Conclusion
Equation 90 or 91 is the elastic stiffness equation for the sandwich composite beam element with partial composite action for three nonsymmetrical layers and is the corresponding elastic stiffness matrix of the element, for sandwich beams with partial composite action. This equation can solve the inconsistency problem during the using of finite element analysis. The deflection resultant relationships for single span sandwich beams can be calculated by considering tables 1 and 2 and using the familiar formula that presented in any books related to Timoshenko theory like Reddy 3rd edition (2005). The above mentioned tables facilitate using individual beam solutions by engineering designers for the calculation of the deflection of composite beams.

References
[1] [2]

[3] [4] [5] [6]

[7] [8] [9]

Budynas R. G. (1999) advanced strength and applied stress analysis, 3rd edition, Prentica Hall Faella, C., Martinelli, E. and Nigro, E. (2001). One-dimensional finite element approach for the analysis of steel concrete composite frames, Proceedings of the First International Conference on Steel and Composite Structures, Pusan, Korea, 124552. Gdoutos E.E., Daniel I.M., (2008). Nonlinear and Eformation Behaviour of Composite Sandwich Beams, Applied Mechanics and Materials Vols 13-14 pp91-98. Gere,J,and Timoshenko S.P.(1991). Mechanics of materials.3rd Ed., Chapman and Hall, Ltd, London, England. Guo-Qiang Li, Jin-Jun Li, (2009). Advanced Analysis and Design of Steel Frames, John Wiley & Sons. Newmark, N. M., Siess, C. P., and Viest, I. M. (1951). Tests and analysis of composite beams with incomplete interaction, Proceedings of Society of Experimental Stress Analysis, V9 (1), 7592. Reddy J.N. (1995), an introduction to finite element method, 3rd edition, McGraw-Hill, Inc. Chapter 5, part 5.3 pp 261-274. Viest, I. M., Colaco, J. P., Furlong, R.W. et al. (1997). Composite Construction Design for Buildings, ASCE and McGraw Hill, New York. Wang C.M. (1995) Timoshenko Beam-Bending Solution in Terms of Euler-Bernoulli solution, journal of engineering mechanics.