Structures 59 (2024) 105560

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/structures

Monitoring and analysis on shrinkage behavior of post-combined

orthotropic steel-naturally cured UHPC composite deck
Chen Xu a, Yang Jiang a, Qindong Xu a, Lewei Tong b, Zhiping Lin c, Qingtian Su a, *, Xiyao Yu d
a
Dept. of Bridge Engineering, College of Civil Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai, China
b
Dept. of Building Engineering, College of Civil Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai, China
c
Fujian Expressway Group Co. Ltd, Fujian, China
d
Survey and Design Institute, China Railway 18th Bureau Group Co. Ltd, Tianjin, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Shrinkage of naturally cured Ultra-high Performance Concrete (UHPC) at an early age may induce considerable
Post-combined group studs steel-UHPC com­ secondary stress on steel-UHPC composite decks and even UHPC cracks, which can result in durability and safety
posite bridge deck shrinkage effect finite problems. A novel post-combined steel-UHPC composite bridge deck was presented in this paper. Particularly,
element simulation
UHPC at the parts with group-arranged stud connectors on the steel deck was not cast until the rest parts without
studs shrunk to a certain extent. The secondary stress was expected to be reduced by this post-combination
operation. Two full-scale segmental steel-UHPC composite decks were prepared for monitoring and simula­
tion. According to the monitoring results of the initial 240 h, the shrinkage-induced UHPC strain developed much
more rapidly in the specimen with the novel post-combination operation while the induced compressive steel
strain was 20 % lower. It was consistent with the simulation analysis results works with assumed time-dependent
material constitutions. Furthermore, parametric analysis work was conducted to investigate the effects of post-
combination operation details on the low shrinkage constraint feature, which includes the free shrinkage extent
at the part without studs and the stud configuration details in particular. The research outcome provides an
efficient way of addressing the shrinkage-induced problems in steel-UHPC composite decks.

1. Introduction
Orthotropic steel decks have been widely adopted in various types of
steel bridges in terms of light self-weight. Such a thin-walled deck sys­
tem generally consists of a deck plate, longitudinal ribs, and transverse
ribs. Compared with concrete decks, orthotropic steel decks have a more
complex structure and connection details which are vulnerable to fa­
tigue damages induced by traffic loads [1,2].
Combining an additional layer of ultra-high performance concrete
(UHPC) with an orthotropic steel deck through connectors can enhance
the deck stiffness, effectively promoting resistance to fatigue damages.
The compressive strength and tensile strength of UHPC are normally
more than 120 MPa and 8 MPa, respectively. The material usually
performs a remarkable tensile stiffening behavior in a large range of the
inelastic strain, which is meaningful to crack resistance. However, UHPC
shrinkage is particularly large due to the material composition feature,
such as low water-binder ratio, high reactive powder content, and lack
of coarse aggregates. The early-age shrinkage can be over 800με in 90
days, including large autogenous and small drying parts. And the
shrinkage during the initial 7 days can reach 50–90 % [3–8]. Together
with a large early-age modulus of UHPC, the UHPC layer of a steel-UHPC
composite deck may confront a high level of shrinkage-induced stress
and even cracks, which results in safety and durability challenges to
components and structures.
Additives, higher reinforcement ratio, steam curing strategy, coarse
aggregates, and internal curing methods have been available alterna­
tives to address the shrinkage-induced effect. Cheung et al. (2011) pre­
sented an investigation showing that for UHPC with a low water/binder
ratio, adding shrinkage-reducing admixture(SRA) was more effective in
reducing shrinkage than replacing Portland cement with sulfoaluminate
cement(SAC) [9]. Yoo et al. (2015) provided studies describing the ef­
fect of SRA and reinforcement ratio on autogenous shrinkage of UHPC
and concluded that the SRA and lower reinforcement ratio were favor­
able for improving restrained shrinkage behavior [10]. Zhu et al. (2020)
presented a study showing a comparison of the shrinkage-induced stress
in UHPC-RC composite components respectively under normal curing

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: sqt@tongji.edu.cn (Q. Su).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2023.105560
Received 20 July 2023; Received in revised form 6 November 2023; Accepted 8 November 2023
Available online 7 December 2023
2352-0124/© 2023 Institution of Structural Engineers. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
C. Xu et al.
and steam curing [11]. Free shrinkage during the period of HC contin­
ually and rapidly increased, and the restrained shrinkage ratio of com­
posite components under normal and steam curing were respectively 57
% and 80 %. Li et al. (2019) presented a study on the shrinkage property
of the UHPC with coarse aggregates, showing that the reduction of the
autogenous shrinkage could reach 20 % at most [12]. Wang et al. (2019)
presented a study on the basic performance of reinforced UHPC bridge
deck with coarse aggregates, showing that the coarse aggregates
contributed to a much lower material shrinkage compared to the UHPC
without coarse aggregates while the strength performance was little
affected [13]. Kang et al. (2018) investigated the usage of SAP in
heat-treated UHPC and concluded that the internal curing by SAP was
effective in reducing the shrinkage and cracking risk of the heat-treated
UHPC [14]. Rostami et al. (2021) presented an experimental investiga­
tion showing that superabsorbent polymers(SAP) substantially
contribute to a total shrinkage reduction and the reduction extent of the
plastic and autogenous shrinkage was highly dependent on the particle
sizes of the SAP [15]. Zhao et al. (2020) conducted a study on autoge­
nous shrinkage of early-age high-performance concrete by adding
porous shale waste brick(PSWB) as lightweight internal curing aggre­
gate, showing that PSWB addition resulted in obvious expansion at an
early stage and effectively reduced the shrinkage later [16].
The abovementioned alternatives can effectively address the
shrinkage-induced stress in a steel-UHPC composite deck due to the
constraint effect by altering the process of UHPC shrinkage or lowering
the constraint. Generally, they can be regarded as material modification
methods for the reinforced UHPC. In this paper, a novel post-combined
orthotropic steel-naturally cured UHPC composite deck is proposed from
the perspective of structure and construction, which aims to achieve a
low constraint effect on UHPC shrinkage. Specifically, studs are welded
on the steel deck in groups. UHPC is cast at the places without group
studs at first, thus can shrink with a relatively lower constraint. After the
early-age shrinkage is largely finished, places with the studs will be cast
with UHPC. In other words, the post-combined composite deck may
efficiently mitigate the shrinkage-induced stress and cracking risk.
However, there have been few related literatures so far, neither a
particular shrinkage performance observance nor a detailed mechanical
performance investigation.
This paper presents a study on the shrinkage behavior of the post-
combined steel-UHPC composite deck. A long-term monitoring work
was carried out to investigate the shrinkage effect of both post-combined
and conventional composite bridge decks. Additionally, simulation and
parametric analyses were conducted to study the influence of post-
combination operations on the shrinkage effect in detail.
2. Experimental works
2.1. Test specimens
As listed in Table 1, two full-scale segmental composite decks were
prepared for shrinkage effect monitoring. The two specimens (DNN and
DNG) were respectively a normal composite deck specimen and a post-
combined composite deck specimen for comparison. Compared with a
uniform arrangement in DNN, studs in DNG were arranged in groups for
a post-combination operation. The UHPC of DNN was cast at one time,
while that of DNG contains two steps. The diameter and height of stud
shear connectors were respectively 13 mm and 35 mm. Particularly, the
Table 1
Specimen arrangement (unit: mm).
Specimen Stud arrangement Cast method Post-cast time (hour)
DNN Uniform One-casting - 190 × 200
DNG Group Post-combination 45
The spacing or the dimension* was expressed in the format of L-T and the same below. L represented the longitudinal direction, i.e. the direction along the long side; T
represented the transverse direction, i.e. the direction along the short side.
2
Structures 59 (2024) 105560
longitudinal and transverse stud spacing in a group of DNG was 65 mm
and 50 mm, while the ones in DNN were 190 mm and 200 mm. The stud
amount was the same in the two specimens. An outdoor ambient curing
policy was adopted for the UHPC curing.
As shown in Fig. 1, a pre-cast work was conducted in beam direction
for a UHPC zone without stud shear connectors, which was about 45 h
before a post-cast operation for zones with shear connectors. The cast
time difference of 45 h was determined considering the practical con­
struction process as well as the rapid shrinkage of UHPC in the early
period. The connection rebar was set across the pre-cast zone and each
post-cast zone. In addition, a transverse floor beam was welded for a
subsequent loading test, which was not presented in this study.
The specimen layouts were separately shown in Fig. 2(a) and (b). The
total length and width were 2000 mm and 1380 mm. The thickness of
the UHPC slab and the steel deck was 60 mm and 12 mm, respectively.
The diameter and spacing of embedded reinforcement were 16 mm and
300 mm with an 18 mm cover thickness at the top.
2.2. Material properties
The composition of the UHPC included cement, silica fume, silica
sand, water, and steel fiber. As Table 2 shows, the water/binder ratio
was 0.155. 17-mm steel fiber with a straight hook was added and the
aspect ratio was 340. Superplasticizer and a kind of expanding agent
HCSA were added and the content was 1 wt % and 3 wt %, respectively.
Table 3 lists the mechanical property of the UHPC based on material
property tests. In particular, 100 mm × 100 mm× 400 mm prisms were
used for the flexural strength test, 100 mm cubic specimens were used
for the cubic compressive strength test and
150 mm × 150 mm× 300 mm prisms were used for testing elastic
modulus and axial compressive strength. Table 4 lists the tested prop­
erties of steel plates, studs, and rebar. Each of the tests contained three
test specimens.
2.3. Monitoring setup and sensor deployment
Fig. 3 shows the sensor deployment for monitoring. There were four
FBG (Fiber Grating) strain sensors within a UHPC slab and one FBG
sensor mounted underneath a steel deck in a specimen for 80-day lon­
gitudinal UHPC shrinkage effect monitoring. An FBG thermal sensor was
mounted in a specimen for UHPC interior temperature monitoring. The
strain sensors were mainly distributed in three positions along the lon­
gitudinal direction. The positions at 1–1 and 3–3 sections had local
group studs in DNG while the one at 2–2 section had no stud nearby. The
three positions all had studs around in the DNN specimen. In addition,
the precision and range of the adopted FBG sensors were 1 με and
− 2500~10000 με. Besides, a fluctuation of around ± 20 με was detected
at a constant temperature of 15 ◦ C.
Fig. 3 also illustrates the specimen boundary condition. Specimens
were fully supported by wood to mitigate the dead-load-induced UHPC
creep effect. The monitoring started once the first batch of UHPC cast
work (Fig. 1) was completed. The shrinkage-induced strain data were
sampled every half an hour. The ambient temperature, relative humid­
ity, and weather were also recorded.
Stud spacing* Post-cast hole spacing* Post-cast hole dimension*
- -
65 × 50 600 × 620 220 × 175
C. Xu et al. Structures 59 (2024) 105560

Fig. 1. Two casting batches in the post-combined composite deck specimen (DNG).

Fig. 2. Dimensions of the bridge deck test specimens (units: mm).

3
C. Xu et al. Structures 59 (2024) 105560

Table 2
Mixing percentage proportion of UHPC (by weight).
Binder Silica sand/Binder Steel fiber/Binder Water/Binder Superplasticizer/Binder HCSA/Binder

Cement Silica fume Mineral powder

0.625 0.187 0.187 0.863 0.136 0.155 0.01 0.03

Particularly, there were 7 days among the early 10 days when material
Table 3
shrinkage was supposed to develop rapidly having records of rainfall
UHPC material properties (units: MPa).
and over 80 % relative humidity. In other words, the UHPC slabs were
Age Flexural Tensile Cube Axial Elastic cured and monitored in a humid environment. According to Fig. 4(b)
(days) strength strength compressive compressive Modulus
and (c), the exterior temperature was mainly in the range from 0 to 10
strength strength
degrees centigrade in the early 60 days during the monitoring, which
7 27.5 7.2 92.9 92.2 42400 was consistent with the interior temperature variation trend.
28 26.5 8.3 96.1 110.6 51900
120 23.2 - 144.0 - 52600

3.2. Shrinkage-induced strain on steel decks

Table 4 Fig. 5 depicts the early 240-hour shrinkage-induced strain develop­

Steel material properties (units: MPa). ment at the position of T1 (Fig. 3a) on steel decks. The negative and
Component Size Yield Ultimate Elastic positive values respectively mean the compression and tension status.
Strength strength Modulus The time zero corresponds to the moment when the cast of UHPC was
Steel deck 12 mm 470 562 208000 finished.
plate According to Fig. 5, the strain on steel decks of DNN and DNG
U-rib steel 8 mm 454 562 214000
fluctuated at a low level during the early 20 h. The fluctuation was
plate
Rebar Φ16mm 469 623 199000 believed resulted from unexpected artificial interruption. The strain
Stud 13 × 35 mm - 599 - trend became consistent on both specimens after the 26th hour for the
UHPC initial setting, and therein the compressive strain on DNN became
larger and developed more rapidly than that on DNG. The difference
3. shrinkage results and discussion between DNN and DNG at the 26th hour was 13 με and then increased to
48 με at the 240th hour. The shrinkage-induced strain on DNG reached
3.1. The relative humidity and temperature around − 120 με at the 240th hour, 30 % lower than that on DNN. In
addition, data of DNN was missed at around the 100th hour due to a
Fig. 4(a)~(c) respectively shows the variation history of daily device error.
average relative humidity, rainy weather, and UHPC interior and exte­ Fig. 6(a) and (b) respectively show the daily strain development
rior temperature. The UHPC interior temperature monitoring started at including the maximums, the minimums, and the averages at T1
the moment when cast work was completed, and the exterior tempera­ (Fig. 3a) on the steel deck plates of DNN and DNG. The negative and
ture monitored by vibrating wire strain gauges mounted on UHPC slap- positive values respectively mean the compression and tension status.
top surfaces started 19 days later. The time zero corresponds to the moment when the cast of UHPC was
According to Fig. 4(a), there were 41 record days with rainfall during finished.
the entire monitoring. The ambient relative humidity during the entire According to Fig. 6, the steel strain values of DNG were smaller than
period was higher than 50 % and the mean value was about 80 %. those of DNN. The largest compressive strain in DNN was over − 200 με,

Fig. 3. Monitoring setup for DNN and DNG (units: mm).

4
C. Xu et al.
Fig. 4. Monitoring results of relative humidity, rain, and temperature.
Fig. 5. Early steel plate strain development at T1 position (Fig. 3a).
while that in DNG was only around − 125με. They were respectively
derived on the 21st and 14th day of monitoring. Afterward, the
compressive strain on DNN appeared comparatively stable but that on
DNG tended to reduce. Strain variation on T1 was mainly due to the
UHPC shrinkage near point T1. Therefore, this phenomenon reflected
the UHPC strain varying trend. Ambient rainfall brought random
hydrops on the UHPC slab. Surface sensor cover hats might hinder
moisture in the local area from evaporation. Therefore, the local UHPC
in DNG would expand and hence the negative strain on the deck plate
would decrease.
3.3. Shrinkage-induced strain in UHPC
Fig. 7(a) and (b) respectively show the monitored early 240-hour
strain development at U1 and U2 positions (Fig. 3a) in UHPC slabs of
DNN and DNG. The negative and positive values respectively mean
5
Structures 59 (2024) 105560
shrinkage and expansion status. The time zero corresponds to the
moment when the cast of UHPC was finished.
According to Fig. 7, the strain at U1 and U2 positions during the
initial 26 h was small. Material flow status with low modulus made
sensor hard to capture material strain variations. When UHPC gradually
hardened at around the 26th hour according to Fig. 7, an obvious strain
variation with a consistent trend could be monitored by sensors. Even
though initial shrinkage and expansion were respectively observed at U1
and U2 positions, the strain development toward shrinkage of DNG
appeared faster at DNG specimen, especially at U1 position. Considering
the 26th hour as the time zero, shrinkage-induced strain at the U1 po­
sition of DNG was around − 60 με, 20 % larger than that in DNN. It
means the shrinkage constraint of DNG was lower compared with DNN.
Moreover, the maximum UHPC strain during the initial 240 h was about
50 με, which was found in DNG specimen. It can be seen the shrinkage
kept developing in DNG specimen after a post-combination operation
configured at the 45th hour. It seems that the group arrangement of
studs could also result in a weaker shrinkage restraint.
Fig. 8(a) and (b) respectively show the monitored daily shrinkage
development during the entire monitoring period at the U1 position in
UHPC slabs of DNN and DNG. They include the daily maximums, min­
imums, and averages. In total, the shrinkage-induced strain level was
rather low than the conventional UHPC shrinkage level, for the strain
was constrained partially, and high RH as well as the expanding agent
HCSA retarded the UHPC shrinkage. Specifically, compared with the
values in DNN, those in DNG appeared larger in the early 20 days.
Particularly, the strain at U1 on DNN reached − 73 με, while that on DNG
was over − 76 με. Positive maximums could be observed sometimes on
DNN from the 21st to the 40th day. It indicated slight material expan­
sions. This was mainly due to local water accumulations from ambient
rainfall, which was explained afore in Chapter 3.1. Moreover, ambient
C. Xu et al. Structures 59 (2024) 105560

Fig. 6. Daily strain development at T1 (Fig. 3a) on the steel plates in the whole monitoring period.

Fig. 7. Early UHPC shrinkage-induced strain development.

Fig. 8. Strain development at the position of U1 (Fig. 3a) of the UHPC in the whole process.

temperature variation was believed to be more influential after the early that observed at U1 due to the same reasons.
days.
Fig. 9(a) and (b) respectively show the monitored daily shrinkage
3.4. UHPC shrinkage-induced strain distribution
development during the entire monitoring period at the U2 positions
(Fig. 3a) of DNN and DNG. They include the daily maximums, mini­
Fig. 10(a) and (b) respectively show the maximum of the daily
mums, and averages. Compared with the values in DNN, those in DNG
compressive strain averages at U1, U2, and U3 positions (Fig. 3) in DNN
appeared larger in the early 20 curing days. Particularly, the strain at U2
and DNG during the early 240 h and the entire 80 days. The horizontal
on DNN reached − 34 με, while that on DNG was over − 53 με. Similar to
axis values represent the distances from sensor positions to specimen
that observed in Fig. 8, an obvious shrinkage strain reduction in DNG
centers in the longitudinal direction. And the vertical axis values are the
from the 21st to the 40th day could be observed in Fig. 9(b). It was
strains, considering the second day as the time zero. Compared with
caused by the random hydrops due to rainfall and cover hats. The strain
DNN, the strain value was generally larger in DNG with group studs. The
development at U2 after the early 20 days appeared similar feature with
UHPC shrinkage had a week constraint due to the stud groups, leading to

6
C. Xu et al. Structures 59 (2024) 105560

Fig. 9. Strain development at the position of U2 (Fig. 3a) of the UHPC in the whole process.

Fig. 10. Minimum UHPC strain distribution in the longitudinal direction of DNN and DNG.

a larger monitored shrinkage value. Concerning the strain distribution,
it appeared similar in the two specimens.
Fig. 11(a) and (b) respectively show the maximum of the daily
compressive strain averages at U3 and U4 positions (Fig. 3) in DNN and
DNG during the early 240 h and the entire 80 days. The vertical axis
value means the distances from sensor positions to the steel-UHPC in­
terfaces. And the horizontal axis value means the UHPC strain, consid­
ering the second day as the time zero. Compared with the strains at the
lower position, the strain at the higher position appeared larger. It tells
that UHPC shrunk more near the UHPC exterior surface, which was
common in both DNN and DNG. A closer distance to the exterior surface
could result in a lower constraint extent and faster moisture evapora­
tion. Hence a larger shrinkage process could be observed. Moreover, the
strains on DNG were larger than those observed in DNN.
4. Shrinkage effect analysis
The monitored results as presented above showed a shrinkage-
related response of a post-combined steel-UHPC composite deck under
a situation similar to real engineering practices. However, ambient
perturbations from temperature, humidity, and rainfalls could introduce
data noises, especially in the long-term monitoring process. Therefore, a

Fig. 11. Minimum UHPC strain distribution in the thickness direction of DNN and DNG.

7
C. Xu et al. Structures 59 (2024) 105560

supplementary parametric study on the effects of post-combination

operation details on the early-shrinkage behavior of a composite deck
was conducted. In particular, the reliability of the parametric study was
verified by comparing monitored results with a FEM simulation. Then,
the influences of post-combination operation procedure, stud amount,
and stud location on the UHPC shrinkage constraint extent were dis­
cussed in detail.

4.1. Model setup and simulation algorithm

4.1.1. Model introduction

Table 5 lists the FEM models for simulation and parametric analysis Fig. 13. Fitted curve of the shrinkage process.
works. The models N-O and G-O were used for simulating the monitored
shrinkage effect. They corresponded to the specimen DNN and DNG, interaction. Table 6 lists the detailed stiffness coefficients of cohesive
respectively. The variable parameters in the parametric analysis behaviors [18,19].
included the UHPC free shrinkage before post-combination (R, sketched Fig. 13 shows the assumed time-dependent UHPC shrinkage consti­
in Fig. 13), post-cast zone dimension (D, sketched in Fig. 12), and tution during the initial 240 h, which was applied in analysis works.
transverse and longitudinal spacing between post-cast positions (T or L, There were about 30 % of shrinkage occurred during the initial 48th
sketched in Fig. 12). The UHPC free shrinkage before a post-combination hour. Particularly, the shrinkage action was simulated by material
operation was indexed by a relative free shrinkage ratio, defined by a temperature variation.
free shrinkage before post-combination to the total free UHPC shrinkage
(− 122.5 με). Moreover, the other geometrical dimensions of the models 4.2. Material constitution
were the same.
Fig. 12 shows the FEM model setup. C3D8R solid elements, S4R shell Fig. 14 shows the tensile and compressive constitutions of UHPC
elements, and T3D2 truss elements were respectively used to simulate introduced into FE analysis, which were in terms of the material test
the UHPC slabs, the steel decks, and the reinforcement. The reinforce­ results. The detailed relationships between inelastic strain and stress
ment was embedded in the UHPC. The studs were simulated by the were governed by Ref. [20] as Eqs. (1)–(4) express. In the equations, E0
connector elements, and an elastic stud shear stiffness was set to be is the elastic modulus, E is the secant modulus in material hardening and
280 kN/mm according to executed push-out test results [17]. softening stages, d is the damage, σ is the stress and ε is the material total
UHPC element activation and deactivation operations were intro­ strain including elastic and inelastic strains, γ is the material elastic limit
duced in the analysis to simulate the post-combination operation. Time- strain, i.e. the strain corresponding to the end of the elastic regime, εpk is
dependent UHPC modulus development during the early shrinkage the strain corresponding to the maximum stress, α and β are fitting
period and material-damaged plasticity constitutions were both factors.
assumed for the analysis. These models would be presented later.
d = (E0 − E)/E0 (1)
Moreover, two highlighted lines of L1 and L2 along the UHPC slab
surface were for the later post-process analysis on the longitudinal strain {0 ,ε < γ
and stress distribution feature. Particularly, L1 was at the transverse d= { } (2)
center of the entire composite deck while L2 crossed one row of post-cast 1 − exp − [(ε − γ)/α]β ,ε ≥ γ
holes.
The damaged plasticity constitution of UHPC can be expressed as Eq.
4.1.2. Boundary and loading conditions 4–3:
As shown in Fig. 12, the models were vertically supported by two { Eε ,ε < γ
analytical rigid plates through a contact algorithm at the rib positions. It d= { } (3)
was consistent with that configured in the monitoring works. A Hard Eεexp − [(ε − γ)/α]β ,ε ≥ γ
contact in the normal direction and tangential Friction with a coefficient
of 0.3 was introduced in the analysis. Cohesive constitutions were εpk − γ εpk − γ
β= ( / ) , α = [( )/ ]1/β (4)
introduced as well for simulating interface interactions. They were the εpk ln Eεpk σpk εpk − γ βεpk
steel deck-UHPC slab interaction and the pre-cast and post-cast

Table 5
FE analysis models (unit: mm).
Model name Relative free shrinkage ratio* (%) Stud arrangement type Stud amount Post-cast hole dimension** Post-cast hole net distance

Longitudinal Transverse Longitudinal Transverse

N-O 30 normal 90 - - 600 620

G-O group 220 175
G-R1 0
G-R2 8
G-R3 15
G-R4 42
G-R5 90
G-D1 30 310 245
G-T1 220 175 820
G-L1 135 400 620

Relative free shrinkage ratio* meant the percent ratio of relatively free shrinkage before post-combination to the total UHPC shrinkage. The spacing of the studs in the
stud group is linearly along with the post-cast hole dimension**, i.e., 65 mm × 50 mm with the dimension 220 mm × 175 mm, and 90 mm × 70 mm with the
dimension 310 mm × 245 mm. The spacing of the uniformly arranged studs in N-O is 190 mm × 200 mm.

8
C. Xu et al. Structures 59 (2024) 105560

Fig. 12. FE model setup of model G-O (D refers to the plane dimension, and T or L refers to the spacing direction).

According to Fig. 16, the simulation accuracy on the steel decks was
Table 6
better than that on UHPC. This was because the latter was more sensitive
Stiffness coefficient of cohesive behavior (units: MPa/mm).
to ambient random perturbations such as rainfall, temperature varia­
Contact interfaces Knn Kss Ktt tion, local uneven water evaporation, etc. The lack of simulation of the
UHPC to steel deck 24 24 24 microscopic interaction constitutions between steel fibers and cemen­
First-cast to Post-cast 184.43 184.43 184.43 titious material aggravated the data fluctuation as well. However, it was
believed errors were still in an acceptable range and the tendency
simulated was consistent with the experimental results.
Fig. 15 shows an assumed modulus variation feature during the early
period. It is noteworthy that the damage evolution curve as shown in
4.3.2. Deformation and interlayer slips
Fig. 14 was assumed unchanged even during the early curing time since
Fig. 17(a) and (b) show deflection comparisons at UHPC slab bot­
the probability of shrinkage-induced damage evolution should be low at
toms between the two simulation models (N-O and G-O) along path L1
the early stage. Therefore, the assumption was believed rational.
(Fig. 12) respectively at the 48th hour and the 240th hour. A shrinkage-
Moreover, the materials of the steel structure and the reinforcement
induced bending could be observed. And the deformation in G-O was
applied the same constitution model. The elastic modulus was
smaller than that in N-O, which indicates the shrinkage effect was
210,000 MPa and the yield stress was 450 MPa.
relatively lower in G-O. Compared with that at the 48th hour, the
deformation difference between the two models decreased at the 240th
4.3. Simulation results

4.3.1. Simulation verification

Fig. 16 shows a comparison between the monitoring and the simu­
lation results at several measuring positions of T1, U1, and U2 during the
initial 240 h. Consistency in trend could be observed, especially for the
measuring point T1 on the steel deck plate as shown in Fig. 16 (a) and
(b). There was a data vacancy at T1 of the normal specimen DNN at
around the 96th hour due to an instrumental error. The simulation error
at the U1 positions as shown in Fig. 16 (c) and (d) could be explained by
that the early expansion in the first 48 h was unconsidered in the
simulation. It resulted in a relatively stable deviation relative to the
monitoring test results. Comparatively, deviations in Fig. 16(e)
appeared to be the largest while a good comparison consistency in the
UHPC simulation could be observed in Fig. 16(f), though deviation
Fig. 15. Evolvement process of UHPC’s elastic modulus.
began to increase after the 144th hour.

Fig. 14. Constitutive relationship of UHPC.

9
C. Xu et al. Structures 59 (2024) 105560

Fig. 16. Comparison of the strain development between the monitoring test and the simulation.

hour. It could be explained by a composite effect when the post-cast
UHPC hardened.
Fig. 18(a)–(d) show longitudinal interlayer slip comparisons be­
tween the two models respectively at the 48th and 240th hour along
paths L1 and L2. It shows the slip values were larger along L1 than L2.
Moreover, post-cast holes in G-O were larger than those in N-O at the
same positions. In addition, the slip difference increased from the 48th
hour to the 240th hour, which suggested that the local constraint
without studs in G-O was still lower after the post-cast UHPC hardened.
However, the slip magnitude was small, which would not be discussed
further in the parametric analysis.
4.3.3. Shrinkage-induced strain distributions
Fig. 19(a)~(d) show UHPC strain comparisons between the two
models respectively at the 48th and 240th hour along paths L1 and L2
(Fig. 12). It is common that the strain was lower in the center and higher
at the edges. This was because the shrinkage constraint extent was lower
at the edges.
According to Fig. 19(a) and (c), the strain in G-O was slightly larger
than that in N-O along L1. And the difference increased along with the
shrinkage development. Fig. 19 (b) and (d) display that the strain along
L2 was higher than that in N-O, especially at the positions between the
post-cast holes. These indicated that the shrinkage effect in G-O was
lower.
In addition, large strain fluctuations could be observed at the

Fig. 17. Distribution of the vertical deformation along path L1 (L1 refers to Fig. 12).

10
C. Xu et al. Structures 59 (2024) 105560

Fig. 18. Distribution of the longitudinal interfacial slip along paths L1 and L2 (L1 and L2 refer to Fig. 12).

Fig. 19. Distribution of the UHPC longitudinal strain along paths L1 and L2 (L1 and L2 refer to Fig. 12).

positions with post-cast holes in Fig. 19(d). This was mainly caused by
local strain concentrations of connector elements, which would not
happen in real practice.
Fig. 20(a)~(d) show steel deck top surface strain comparisons be­
tween the two models respectively at the 48th and 240th hour along
paths L1 and L2. They show in common that strain at the edges was
lower, which indicated lower shrinkage-induced compressive stress on
steel. Meanwhile, the strain in G-O was smaller than that in N-O, espe­
cially near the middle. And the difference increased along with the
shrinkage development.

11
C. Xu et al.
Fig. 20. Distribution of the steel deck plate longitudinal strain along paths L1 and L2 (L1 and L2 refer to Fig. 12).
4.4. Parametric analysis result and discussion
4.4.1. Effect of UHPC shrinkage before post-combination
Several parametric models were established and analyzed to explore
the effect of the UHPC shrinkage before post-combination on the
shrinkage behavior of a composite deck. It was reflected by a relative
free shrinkage ratio, defined by the ratio of free UHPC shrinkage before
post-combination to the total free shrinkage (− 122.5 με). The model
attributes were listed in Table 6. The relative free shrinkage ratio varied
from 0 % to 90 %.
Fig. 21(a) and Fig. 21(b) respectively show the longitudinal strain
distribution of the UHPCs and the deck plates along path L1 in G-O and
G-R5 at the 240th hour. The comparison between models along L2 was
also conducted but not presented due to the difference was less obvious.
According to Fig. 21(a), the difference between the two models was 5
% at most and it was at near-edge positions between post-cast zones,
while the largest value was 3 % near center zones. According to Fig. 21
(b), the difference between the curves was more obvious around the
center zone, which was over 10 %.
These comparisons tell that a larger relative free shrinkage ratio
between pre-cast and post-cast works could be beneficial to lower the
Fig. 21. Distribution of the 240th-hour longitudinal strain along L1 (refers to Fig. 12) in G-O and G-R5.
12
Structures 59 (2024) 105560
shrinkage-induced strain on composite decks. However, the effect
seemed to be not so remarkable in general. The interfacial interaction
introduced in the analysis was an important factor.
Furthermore, Table 8 shows a detailed strain difference comparison
along path L1 among the parametric models, which was reflected by a
strain ratio maximum in a certain range around the specimen center.
When the relative free shrinkage ratio reached 90 % (G-R5), the
UHPC strain was increased by 10 % at most along L1 compared with G-
R0, and the steel strain was reduced by 14 %. It indicated a feature that
the shrinkage-induced secondary internal stress could be reduced by the
post-combination operation.
Fig. 22 shows the maximum UHPC interfacial stress between pre-cast
and post-cast parts along the longitudinal direction in G-O and G-R5.
The positive values mean stress was in tension. The values in G-R5 were
smaller than that in G-O, for shrinkage was less restrained.
In addition, it can be seen the interfacial stress in each part with
group studs appeared to be larger when the inter-surface was neared to
the specimen center. This was caused by that both the pre-cast and post-
cast parts tended to shrink to their geometrical centers.
C. Xu et al. Structures 59 (2024) 105560

Table 8 4.4.3. Effect of post-cast holes’ transverse location

Strain comparison along L1 in the models applying different relative free Fig. 25(a) and (b) respectively show the longitudinal strain distri­
shrinkage ratios. bution of the UHPC and the deck plate along path L1 in G-O and G-T1 at
Model Relative free shrinkage ratio Max. of (G-Ri / G-R1 along L1) the 240th hour. The difference between G-O and G-T1 was the trans­
number (%) or Max. of (G-O / G-R1 along verse stud groups spacing, which was respectively 620 mm and 820 mm.
L1) The comparison between models along L2 was also conducted but not
UHPC steel deck presented since the difference was less obvious.
strain strain Fig. 25 (a) shows that the strain level of the UHPC along the trans­
G-R1 0 - - verse center line was over 10 % higher in G-T1. Fig. 25 (b) shows
G-R2 8 1.01 0.987 opposite results of the strain on the deck plate (around − 20 %~− 29 %).
G-R3 15 1.02 0.976 These indicated that the shrinkage constraints at the transverse middle
G-O 30 1.04 0.956
G-R4 42 1.06 0.941
positions declined as the stud groups’ spacing got larger.
G-R5 90 1.10 0.860
4.4.4. Effect of post-cast holes’ longitudinal spacing
Note: the maximum values were derived within the range of
Fig. 26(a) and (b) respectively show the longitudinal strain distri­
− 700 mm~700 mm in the longitudinal direction.
bution of the UHPC and the deck plate along path L1 in G-O and G-L1 at
the 240th hour. The difference between G-O and G-L1 was the stud
groups’ longitudinal spacing, which was respectively 600 mm and
400 mm.
Fig. 26 (a) shows that the strain level in the UHPC along the trans­
verse center line in G-L1 was similar to that in G-O. Fig. 26 (b) shows
similar results of the strain on the deck plate as well (only − 2.5%~ 5%).
These indicated that the shrinkage effects remained almost unchanged
as the stud groups were arranged in a smaller spacing.

5. Conclusions

The shrinkage effect of a novel post-combined UHPC composite

Fig. 22. Interfacial stress maximum between the pre-cast UHPC and the post-
cast UHPC in G-O and G-R5.
bridge deck and a normal UHPC composite deck were monitored for 80
days and compared with each other. Meanwhile, simulation and para­
metric analysis were also conducted for further investigation. The main
conclusions are as follows:

4.4.2. Effect of post-cast holes’ dimension

Fig. 23(a) and (b) respectively show the longitudinal strain distri­
bution of the UHPC and the deck plate along path L1 in G-O and G-D1 at
the 240th hour. The difference between G-O and G-D1 was the post-cast
holes’ dimensions, which were respectively 220 mm × 175 mm and
310 mm × 245 mm. Comparisons along L2 were not presented since the
difference was similar but less obvious.
According to Fig. 23(a), the UHPC strain level in G-D1 was around
− 15 % lower than that in G-O. Fig. 23 (b) illustrates that the strain level
on the deck plate was 15~30 % larger in G-D1. It indicated that
dimension enlargement of the post-cast holes could aggravate the
shrinkage effects.
Fig. 24 shows the interfacial stress maximal values between pre-cast
and post-cast UHPC along the longitudinal direction in G-O and G-D1.
The positive values mean stress was in tension, indicating that enlarging
the post-cast holes’ dimension would cause larger interfacial stress. Fig. 24. Interfacial stress maximum between the pre-cast UHPC and the post-
cast UHPC in G-O and G-D1.

Fig. 23. Distribution of the 240th-hour longitudinal strain along L1 (refers to Fig. 12) in G-O and G-D1.

13
C. Xu et al.
Fig. 25. Distribution of the 240th-hour longitudinal strain along L1 (refers to Fig. 12) in G-O and G-T1.
Fig. 26. Distribution of the 240th-hour longitudinal strain along L1 (refers to Fig. 12) in G-O and G-L1.
(1) Based on the monitoring of strain effects, the initial setting time
of UHPC after a cast work was at the approximately 26th hour in
an environment with a relatively low temperature. The strain on
the steel deck plate of the post-combined specimen at the 240th
hour was around − 120 με, which was 30 % smaller than the
conventional specimen. The maximum early strain in the hard­
ened UHPC of the post-combined specimen at the 240th hour was
around − 60 με, which is 20 % larger. The post-combined oper­
ation provided a lower extent of UHPC shrinkage constraint.
(2) In the simulation, a time-dependent UHPC modulus development
model during the early shrinkage period, a UHPC-damaged
plasticity constitution, and a shrinkage curve based on moni­
toring results were introduced. The simulation results were
consistent with the monitoring results, which showed that the
shrinkage-induced stresses were larger in the center of the slab
than at the edges.
(3) According to the parametric analysis results, a relative free
shrinkage ratio ranging from 8 % to 90 %, achieved by corre­
sponding post-combination operations, could lead to reductions
of steel strain ranging from 1 %~14 %. And the shrinkage
constraint could be also adjusted by changing the post-cast holes’
dimension and spacing.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of
China [grant number 51978501]; 2022 Transportation Science and
14
Structures 59 (2024) 105560
Technology Project of Fujian Province [grant number 202126]; National
Key R&D Program of China [grant number 2017YFC0703402]; and
Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [grant number
22120210437].
References
[1] Li ZX, Chan THT, Ko JM. Fatigue damage model for bridge under traffic loading:
application made to tsing ma bridge. Theor Appl Fract Mech 2001;35(1):81–91.
[2] Wolchuk R. Lessons from weld cracks in orthotropic decks on three European
bridges. J Struct Eng 1990;116(1):75–84.
[3] Zhang X, Liu Z, Wang F. Autogenous shrinkage behavior of ultra-high performance
concrete. Constr Build Mater 2019;226:459–68.
[4] Soliman AM. Early-age shrinkage of ultra-high performance concrete: mitigation
and compensating mechanisms. London: The University of Westem Ontario; 2011.
[5] Habel K, Charron JP, Denari E. Autogenous deformations and viscoelasticity of
UHPFRC in structures, part I: experimental results. Mag Concr Res 2006;58(3):
135–45.
[6] Loukili A, Khelidj A, Richard P. Hydration kinetics, change of relative humidity,
and autogenous shrinkage of ultrahigh-strength concrete. Cem Concr Res 1999;29
(4):577–84.
[7] Garas VY, Kahn LF, Kurtis KE. Short-term tensile creep and shrinkage of ultra-high
performance concrete. Cem Concr Compos 2009;31(3):147–52.
[8] HU GQ. .. Research on the shrinkage performance of ultra-high performance
concrete under different curing condition. Changsha: Hunan University; 2015.
[9] Cheung AKF, Leung CKY. Shrinkage reduction of high strength fiber reinforced
cementitious composites (HSFRCC) with various water-to-binder ratios. Cem Concr
Compos 2011;33(6):661–7.
[10] Yoo D, Banthia N, Yoon Y. Effectiveness of shrinkage-reducing admixture in
reducing autogenous shrinkage stress of ultra-high-performance fiber-reinforced
concrete. Cem Concr Compos 2015;64:27–36.
[11] Zhu Y, Zhang Y, Hussein Husam H, et al. Experimental study and theoretical
prediction on shrinkage-induced restrained stresses in UHPC-RC composites under
normal curing and steam curing. Cem Concr Composit 2020;110:103602.
[12] Li C, Chen BC, Wei JG. Shrinkage and mechanical properties of UHPC with coarse
aggregate. J Traffic Transp Eng 2019;19(5):11–20.
[13] Wang Y, Shao XD, Cao JH. Experimental study on basic performances of reinforced
UHPC bridge deck with coarse aggregates. J Bridge Eng 2019;24(12).
[14] Kang S, Hong S, Moon J. Shrinkage characteristics of heat-treated ultra-high
performance concrete and its mitigation using superabsorbent polymer based
internal curing method. Cem Concr Compos 2018;89:130–8.
C. Xu et al.
[15] Rostami R AJ, Klemm FCR. Almeida. reduction of shrinkage by superabsorbent
polymers (SAP) in fibre reinforced mortars. Constr Build Mater 2021;288:123109.
[16] Zhao HT, Ding J, Li SH, et al. Effects of porous shale waste brick lightweight
aggregate on mechanical properties and autogenous deformation of early-age
concrete. Constr Build Mater 2020;261.
[17] Zhang B.Y. Experimental study on shrinkage effect and static behavior of post-
combined Steel-UHPC composite Deck. (In Chinese).
15
Structures 59 (2024) 105560
[18] Qing Y, Fang L, Zhou D. Mechanical behavior analysis of assembled shear bonds
considering successive casting interface bonding deformation. J China Three
Gorges Univ (Nat Sci) 2021;43(1):54–9.
[19] Feng Z, Li CX, Li HC. Interfacial bond performance of ultrahigh performance
concrete wet joints. J Chin Ceram Soc 2021;49(11):2393–404.
[20] Yang KJ, Li G, Chen LM. Construction and application of RPC damage plastic
constitutive model. Proc 23rd Natl Conf Struct Eng 2014:170–6.