3D Finite-Element Analysis of Shear Connectors With Partial Interaction

Structures and Buildings
Volume 169 Issue SB2

3D finite-element analysis of shear
connectors with partial interaction
Abbu, Ekmekyapar and zaka
Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers

Structures and Buildings 169 February 2016 Issue SB2
Pages 96107 http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/jstbu.14.00132
Paper 1400132
Received 13/12/2014
Accepted 24/06/2015
Published online 28/08/2015
Keywords: codes of practice & standards/composite structures/
solid mechanics
ICE Publishing: All rights reserved
3D finite-element analysis of
shear connectors with partial
interaction
Muthanna Abbu PhD
Mustafa zaka PhD
Researcher, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Gaziantep,

Gaziantep, Turkey; Department of Civil Engineering, Technical College,
Mosul, Iraq
Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Gaziantep,

Gaziantep, Turkey
Talha Ekmekyapar PhD

Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, University of
Gaziantep, Gaziantep, Turkey
A three-dimensional (3D) finite-element (FE) model with multiple elements was used to simulate a shear connector
with static loading. The behaviour of the steel-in-concrete connection was critical to the global behaviour of the
structural element. The geometry and material non-linearities of the studded steel beam shear connector were
included in the finite-element model. Contact regions between the concrete and steel elements were simulated using
surface-to-surface and embedment techniques. The resulting shear capacity for the studs was compared with several
codes of practice. The data for a loadslip curve of shear connectors in composite structures were limited to data
obtained from the experimental push-out tests. The model was used to estimate the loadslip curve and to analyse
the mechanical behaviour of the connectors such as the stress distribution which is usually difficult to evaluate
through testing. It was demonstrated that, after careful calibration against test data, the finite-element model was
able to predict accurate results for the slip. The reliability of the model was checked against the test results, and it
was found that the numerical results for the loadslip curve were in good agreement with the test results.
Notation
As
a
b
d
Ec
Es
Fu
fc0
fcu
fyc
fys
H
K
Ks
l
PAISC
LRFDS
PBS 5950
PEC4
PFEA
96
Steel area
constant for the idealised load/slip function of a
shear connector
constant for the idealised load/slip function of a
shear connector
diameter of a stud
elastic modulus in compression and tension for
concrete
elastic modulus for steel
ultimate tensile strength of a stud
compressive strength of a concrete cylinder
compressive strength of concrete
yield stress
yield stress for a shear connector
height of a stud
slop of the loadslip curve for a connector
slop of the Idealised loadslip curve for a
connector
length of a stud
shear connection capacity in the AISC load and
resistance factor design specification
shear connection capacity in BS 5950
shear connection capacity in Eurocode 4
load in the finite-element analysis; shear connection capacity in the finite-element analysis
Ptest
Pu
Q
Vmax
v
yc
1.
experimental load
shear resistance of a headed stud
shear load on a shear connector
shear strength
factor (= 02(H/d + l ))
slip at the steelconcrete interface
partial safety factor
average value of the yield strain
resistance factor for shear connectors
Introduction
Push-out tests are commonly used to determine the capacity of

shear connections and the loadslip behaviour of shear connectors. The established design methods for reinforced concrete
and for structural steel provide no solutions to the basic
problem of connecting steel to concrete. The force applied to
this connection is mainly, but not entirely, longitudinal shear.
As with bolted and welded joints, a connection is a region of
severe and complex stress that defies accurate analysis, and so
methods of connection have been developed empirically and
verified by tests but laboratory tests require a significant
amount of time, are very expensive and, in some cases, are
impractical. However, the finite-element method has become,
in recent years, a powerful and useful tool for the analysis of a
Downloaded by [ UNIVERSITY OF MORATUWA] on [14/11/16]. Copyright ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.


wide range of engineering problems. Several researchers have

investigated the three-dimensional (3D) finite-element (FE)
modelling of stud shear connectors.
The results from the model were compared with the tested
results, to understand better the cracking behaviour of the connections. A preliminary finite-element model that when compared and matched with the tested results gives more
information on the cracking behaviour of each connection was
also created. LINK8 elements (line elements with three translational degrees of freedom) were used to model the steel plate,
welded rebar and shear studs.
A finite-element model was developed by Lam and Ellobody

(2005) to simulate the loadslip characteristic of the shear stud
without a head in a solid reinforced-concrete slab. The model
takes into account the linear and non-linear material properties
of the concrete and the shear stud. The finite-element results
compared well with the results obtained from the experimental
push-off tests and specified data from the codes.
Bursi et al. (2005) investigated the seismic performance of
moment-resisting frames consisting of steelconcrete composite
beams with shear connections. Three-dimensional finiteelement models of the substructures using the ABAQUS code
and based on shell elements were established in order to evaluate different modelling assumptions and local effects, and nonlinear spring elements were adopted to trace the behaviour of
the shear connectors as well as the bondslip between the slab
and the reinforcing bars.
Queiroz et al. (2007) reported an investigation that focused on
the modelling of composite beams with full and partial shear
connections using the ANSYS software. A three-dimensional
model was proposed, in which all the main structural parameters and associated non-linearities were included (the concrete slab, steel beam and shear connectors). In addition, nonlinear springs were used to represent the shear connectors.
Two-dimensional finite-element models employing plane stress
elements were established by Wang and Chung (2008), in order
to examine the structural behaviour of simply supported composite beams with large rectangular web openings. Shear connectors with non-linear deformation characteristics were
incorporated into the models through the use of both vertical
and horizontal springs.
Sakr et al. (2008) presented a uniaxial non-linear finiteelement procedure for modelling the long-term behaviour of
composite beams at the serviceability limit state. The nonlinear loadslip relationship of shear connectors as well as the
creep, shrinkage and cracking of concrete slab were accounted
for in the proposed finite-element procedure. An analytical
model to simulate the time-dependent behaviour of composite
beams was presented in this study.
An accurate non-linear finite-element model of a push-out specimen was developed by Nguyen and Kim (2009), to investigate
the capacity of large stud shear connectors embedded in a solid
slab. The material non-linearities of the concrete, headed stud,
steel beam and rebar were included in the finite-element model.
A finite-element model was created using ANSYS for each of
the connections tested in the laboratory by Julander (2009).
A simulation of the non-linear structural behaviour of timberto-concrete composite beams using screws was presented by
Oudjene et al. (2013). The screws were modelled using a onedimensional beam element, while the timber and concrete
members were modelled, in detail, using three-dimensional
solid elements.
Tahmasebinia et al. (2013) undertook a probabilistic study to
evaluate the influence of material uncertainties on the numerically simulated structural response of composite steelconcrete
floors consisting of concrete slabs cast on steel profiled sheeting and connected to steel beams by means of shear connectors. The numerical analyses were performed using a threedimensional finite-element model with all components of the
composite member being modelled by means of solid elements
developed using the commercial software ABAQUS.
Several finite-element models of a laboratory specimen were
developed by Abbu et al. (2013) using different approaches
available within the ANSYS software. A good representation
for shear connectors was used, and rigid link elements
extended the models with full interaction composition.
Gattesco and Giuriani (1996) studied the behaviour of the connectors in four specimens: two of them were subjected to
monotonically increasing loading while the others were subjected to cyclic loading. A direct shear test was proposed,
which gave useful information both on the shape of the load
slip curves and on the damage accumulation at the end of each
cycle.
Shim et al. (2004) evaluated the ultimate slip capacity and
strength for large studs through push-out tests on large stud
shear connectors, beyond the limitation of current design
codes. Static behaviour was also investigated.
Numerous push-out tests of shear studs embedded in normalstrength concrete were conducted by Shim et al. (2010). The
tests were used to evaluate both the shear stud capacity and
the loadslip curve of the connectors.
Mirza and Uy (2010) studied the behaviour of shear connection in composite beams with both solid and profiled sheeting
slabs subjected to axial and shear forces. They developed a
three-dimensional finite-element half-symmetric model with
shear studs placed at two levels.
97


Push-out tests were conducted by Liu et al. (2012) to investigate the difference in behaviour between single-stud and multistud connectors. A new expression for the stud loadslip
relationship was proposed.
against the test results from several experimental investigations,

as discussed in section 4.
Gyoung Kwak and Hwang (2010) introduced a numerical

model to simulate the bondslip behaviour in composite beam
bridges. Based on a linear bond stressslip relation along the
interface, the slip behaviour was implemented in a finiteelement formulation.
Pavlovic et al. (2013) suggested alternative analyses for
shear connectors (bolts and headed studs), to gain better
insight into the failure modes of shear connectors, in order to
improve the competiveness of prefabricated composite
structures.
Guezouli and Alain (2011) proposed an accurate and efficient
two-dimensional non-linear finite-element model, to investigate
the mechanical behaviour of the shear connection between a
prefabricated concrete slab and a steel girder in composite
bridges. A numerical investigation was carried out to study the
influence of the friction coefficient on the load slip behaviour
of the specimen and the distribution of internal deformations
and forces within it.
A total of 12 push-out tests were carried out by Shen and
Chung (2011), to obtain the shear resistance of shear studs in
standard push-out tests where the shear studs are under a
direct shear force. The loadslippage curves of the test specimens were analysed rationally, to provide two standardised
loadslippage curves to describe the structural behaviour of the
connections during the entire loading range.
It can be seen from the work detailed above that most of the
research used line elements to represent the shear connectors in
composite structures. Some used springs, which are also twonode element. Due to the complexity of the three-dimensional
stressstrain state and the interaction between a shear connector and concrete, there has been little success in the numerical
modelling of the push-off test. The main objective of this study
is to develop a three-dimensional finite-element model using
ANSYS to simulate the behaviour of headed shear stud connectors, which are commonly used in composite box girder
bridges. Push-out tests are usually used to investigate the behaviour of shear connections: however, these are often costly
and time consuming. Finite-element modelling of shear connection can provide an efficient alternative to full-scale pushout tests.
The main objective of this study was to develop an accurate
and efficient three-dimensional finite-element model to investigate the behaviour of headed stud shear connections. The
finite-element program ANSYS was used in the analysis. The
results obtained from the finite-element analysis were verified
98
2.
Design code calculation methods
2.1 Eurocode 4
In Eurocode 4 (BSI, 1994b), the shear resistance of a headed
stud is determined by
1:
p
0 292 fc0 Ec
Pu
v
2:
Pu
0 8 Fu 2 =4
v
whichever is smaller, where Fu is the ultimate tensile strength

of a stud; fc0 is the compressive strength of a concrete cylinder;
Ec is the elastic modulus of concrete, v is a partial safety
factor; and = 02(H/d + l ) < l, where H is the height of a stud,
d is the diameter of a stud and l is the length of a stud. The
partial safety factor v is taken as 125.
2.2 American Institute of Steel Construction
In the American Institute of Steel Construction's (AISC) load
and resistance factor design specification (LRFDS) (AISC,
1999), the nominal shear resistance of one stud shear connector embedded in a concrete deck is
3:
Pu 0 5As
p
fc0 Ec As Fu
where is the resistance factor for shear connectors (= 085).

2.3 BS 5950
In BS 5950 (BSI, 1968), the shear resistance of a headed stud
is determined by
4:
Pu 0 25 d 2
5:
Pu 0 6 Fu
p
0 8fc0 Ec
d 2
4
whichever is smaller.
3.
Slip calculations
Slip can be defined as the longitudinal differential displacement at the interface between concrete and steel. As the shear
connectors used in this study are headed studs, which can be
classified as flexible connectors, interface slip, which represents
the slip between concrete and steel, cannot be completely prevented. The interaction between the steel and the concrete is


therefore incomplete, producing a differential strain at the

interface of the materials, according to Johnson and May
(1975). The shear flow at the interface is related to the number
and spacing of shear connectors provided between the two
materials, and the properties of the shear connectors such as
the shear stiffness (K ). K can be defined as the slope of the
loadslip curve for a connector. In the other words, K is the
load per connector required to produce unit slip, and this is
assumed constant for the elastic range.
increases further, the stiffness is reduced gradually and eventually reaches the shear strength Vmax.
Shear connections in composite beams are obviously essential.

The nature of the composite action includes large shear forces
at the interface between the steel and concrete. Traditionally,
these shear forces are carried by means of a shear stud welded
to the steel, which is then embedded into the concrete deck.
When a cast-in-place deck is used, embedding of the shear
studs is simple. Shear studs are shop-welded, and the deck is
poured around them. However, if the deck is prefabricated,
pockets are left in the precast slabs that correspond to the
location of the shear studs on the steel. These pockets are then
filled with a non-shrink grout, which hardens to achieve the
composite action according to Abbu (2003).
Yam and Chapman (1968) presented a study for the inelastic
behaviour of simply supported composite beams, based on
Newmarks model. A non-linear behaviour is assumed for
the shear connectors, which is presented in the exponential
form as
6:
Q a1 eb
where a and b are constants for the idealised load/slip function

of a shear connector, is the slip at the steelconcrete interface
and Q is the shear load on a shear connector.
4.
Finite-element model
4.1 General concepts

In this study, the push-out test model was simulated using a
finite-element program. In order to obtain accurate results
from the finite-element analysis, all components in the shear
connection must be properly modelled. Inelastic analyses were
carried out with a three-dimensional finite-element model, and
a non-linear geometry and materials analysis of the shear connectors was undertaken. The superstructure consisting of a
concrete and steel girder and shear connector was considered
as the push-out model. The main components influencing the
behaviour of the shear connection in the composite beam were
the concrete slab, the steel beam and the shear connectors, as
shown in Figure 2.
4.2 Finite-element mesh

As noted in the literature reviewed above on the finite-element
modelling of shear connectors, most of the research considered
push-out tests, with less numerical work on shear connectors
and that which was provided modelled a shear connector as a
single element. In this study, shear connectors were modelled
as a three-dimensional body with multiple elements. A threedimensional model was proposed in which the concrete slab
and shear connectors were modelled with solid elements, while
the steel girder was modelled with shell elements, because of
the clear difference in thickness between these structural parts.
Modelling and analysis of push-out tests combine many of the
A typical loadslip curve determined from a push-out test as

formulated in Eurocode 4, as shown in Figure 1, represents
linear variation up to nearly half of the strength. When the slip
Load
469
Vmax
05Vmax
Idealised loadslip curve
Ks
Typical loadslip curve

1
9
61
(ultimate)
(05Vmax) (Vmax)
Shear
Figure 1. Idealised loadslip curve of a shear connector
15
0
Figure 2. The geometry of the specimen (units in mm)
99


challenges encountered in the interaction and load sharing

between structural steel and concrete components.
4.5
In this study, two models were considered, with two types of

solid elements for concrete and shear connectors, to form a
brick model and a tetrahedral model, while the steel beam in
both models was modelled using shell elements.
For concrete and shear connectors, the SOLID185 element
was used to mesh these parts in the brick model: it was
defined by eight nodes having three degrees of freedom at each
node. SOLID285 was used for the tetrahedral model: it was
defined by eight nodes having six degrees of freedom at each
node. The steel girder was meshed using SHELL181, which is
a four-node element with six degrees of freedom at each node.
The meshed numerical models of the push-out test are shown
in Figure 3.
4.3 Interaction and restriction conditions
A series of surface-to-surface contact elements allowed a rigidto-flexible surface interaction to be modelled. Contact elements
provided a rich set of initial adjustment and interaction models
in addition to the standard unilateral contact, it offered the
options of bonded, no-separation and rough sliding contact.
The bonded contact option was especially useful.
4.4 Loading and boundary conditions
A static concentrated load was applied at the centre of the steel
web. A single point load was applied to the model, on the top of
the steel girder for the finite-element model of the push-out test.
Material model
4.5.1 Concrete
To model the behaviour of the reinforced concrete slab in the
push-out test, concrete was treated as an elasticplastic
material. The concrete then behaved as a linearelastic
material. Using BS 8110 (BSI, 1997), the average values of the
yield strain (yc), Youngs modulus of concrete (Ec) and the
yield stress ( fyc) can be calculated from
7:
yc 0 00024
8:
fyc 0 8 fcu
9:
Ec
fyc
yc
where fcu is the compressive strength of concrete.
4.5.2 Steel girder

The steel beam was modelled with a yield stress of 275 N/mm2
in this study. It is believed that the effect of the steel beam is
insignificant in a push-off test. Its function is to allow for the
transmission of applied load to the connectors, and hence the
(a)
Figure 3. Meshed finite-element models of the push-out test:

(a) brick model; (b) tetrahedral model
100
p
fcu
(b)


characteristic loadslip characteristic in the steelconcrete

interface can be studied.
140
120
100
Load: kN
4.5.3 Shear connector

The shear stud material is of great importance in modelling
the shear interaction between steel and concrete, since the
region around the stud is subject to severe and complex stresses. In the present study, the following values were used for the
stud material: an elastic modulus Es of 200 000 N/mm2 and a
yield stress for a shear connector fys of 4708 N/mm2.
80
60
Brick model
Tetra model
Lam and Ellobody (2005) finite-element model
Lam and Ellobody (2005) experiment
Valente (2007) experiment
Qian and Li (2006) experiment
Fu and Lam (2006) experiment
40
20
5.
Results and validation of the proposed

model
The validity of the finite-element model in this study was confirmed by comparison with the results from push test experiments from previous studies undertaken by other authors. Two
cases, the brick and tetrahedral models, using the proposed
finite-element model were analysed in this study. The brick
model meshed with hexahedral solid elements for steel shear
connectors and the concrete slab, while the tetrahedral model
meshed with tetrahedral solid elements. The steel beam in both
models meshed with shell elements.
10
12
Slip: mm
Figure 4. Comparison of the finite-element analysis with other

results
The push-out test specimen SP1 in the experimental study of

Lam and Ellobody (2005) was investigated in this study. The
geometry of the specimen is shown in Figure 2.
with a concrete recess over the steel beam equal to 50 mm

(similar to CP 117). In the perpendicular direction, the disatnce was taken as 300 mm, with the total length of the concrete slab being 619 mm (similar to Eurocode 4: BSI, 1994b).
The steel beam used in the test was a 254 254 UC 73. The
flanges of the steel beam were not greased, so natural adhesion
was not prevented.
This push-out test specimen was similar to the standard pushout test specimen in CP 117 (BSI, 1994a), but only one stud is
connected to each flange since it is assumed that the load is
transferred equally from the steel beam to each shear connector. The push-off test specimen shown in Figure 2 consisted of
two 254 254 UC 73 (W10 49) concrete slabs of 50 N/mm2
strength attached to the flanges of a steel beam (619 mm long,
469 mm wide and 150 mm thick), and one stud connector
attached to each flange with a shank diameter of 19 mm and
height of 100 mm. The distance from the connector to the concrete edges, in the direction of loading, was taken as 200 mm,
The average loadslip curve derived from the test of Lam and
Ellobody (2005) and the curve obtained from the proposed
finite-element analysis compare well in Figure 4. It can be seen
that the brick model curve has good agreement with the results
of Lam and Ellobody (2005), while the tetrahedral model
curve shows a little difference until the slip reaches the maximum displacement at failure of the elements. As a result, when
the slip reaches the maximum displacement at failure of the
tetrahedral elements the force vanishes. Both the experimental
and brick model results show a similar maximum slip at
failure. In contrast, the finite-element model proposed by
Experiment load: kN
Finite-element load,
PFEA: kN
Finite-element maximum
slip at fail: mm
Results
Load, Ptest:
kN
Maximun slip
at fail: mm
Brick
model
Tetrahedral
model
Brick
model
Tetrahedral
model
Present study
Lam and Ellobody (2005)
Fu and Lam (2006)
Valente (2007)
Qian and Li (2006)
1304
1289
1336
1294
119
80
112
22
1279
1166
1321
85
77
168
Table 1. Comparison of shear connection capacity and slip

obtained from tests and finite-element analysis
101

Model
Brick
Tetrahedral

PFEA: kN
PEC4: kN
1279
1321
1368
PAISC
LRFDS:
kN
1711
PBS
5950
1123
PFEA/PEC4
PFEA/PAISC
094
097
075
077
LRFDS
PFEA/PBS
5950
114
118
Table 2. Comparison of the shear connection capacity obtained

from the finite-element analysis and current codes of practice with
a concrete strength of 40 N/mm2
Lam and Ellobody (2005) is noticeably different from the

experimental results, as also seen in Figure 4.
Additionally, when the curve of the idealised slipload curve in
Figure 1 is studied and compared with the brick model curve,
it was found that the finite-element modelling of the loadslip
behaviour matched the experimental loadslip behaviour
reasonably well.
(a)
(b)
Figure 5. Stud mesh types: (a) brick element; (b) tetrahedral

element
Load direction
Fu and Lam (2006) created a test model to study a stud shear

connector of 19 mm diameter and with a concrete strength of
50 N/mm2. They performed the direct shear test under monotonic loading. The present study used the same push-out
arrangement as in the tests by Fu and Lam (2006). Figure 4
shows good agreement between the capacities of the headed
stud shear connectors obtained from the tests of Fu and Lam
(2006) and the proposed finite-element analyses. The capacity
and the maximum slip at the failure of the shear connections
obtained from the tests and the finite-element analyses are presented in Table 1 for comparison. Good agreement was
achieved between the experimental and numerical results for
all of the push-out tests.
Load direction
182246
141728
10121
606919
201738
161987
121469
809509
404328
0008527
387132
299601
212069
124537
0370057
343366
255835
168303
0807715
0067601
(a)
(b)
Figure 6. Interface slips: (a) brick elements at a load of 1279 kN;

(b) tetrahedral elements at a load of 1321 kN
102


Valente (2007) studied the characterisation of different types of

shear connection devices used in composite elements of steel
and concrete. In the single push-out test, a single shear connector of 19 mm diameter was tested individually. Figure 4 shows
good agreement between the capacities of the headed stud
shear connectors obtained from the tests of Valente (2007) and
the proposed finite-element analyses.
performance of stud shear connection, slip capacity and ultimate strength. A series of push-out specimens was tested for
this evaluation. Figure 4 shows good agreement between the
capacities of the headed stud shear connectors obtained from
the tests of Qian and Li (2006) and the proposed finiteelement analyses.
Qian and Li (2006) presented an experimental study on the

influence of concrete material ductility on the crucial
004386
104453
208862
313272
417681
522485
156658
261067
365476
469885
In addition, the shear capacity of the stud shear connectors

obtained from the finite-element study was compared in
Table 2 with the nominal design strength of shear connectors
0006426
231639
463272
694904
926537
115823
347455
579088
810721
104235
(a)
(b)
Figure 7. Stress flow section: (a) brick elements at a load of

1279 kN; (b) tetrahedral elements at a load of 1321 kN
Load direction
552108
108713
571171
Load direction
211905
160309
315097
263501
418289
366693
771825
469885
11044
59079
(a)
213161
161801
315883
264522
418604
367244
469965
(b)
Figure 8. Von Mises stress: (a) brick elements at a load of

103


calculated by the design codes of Eurocode 4 (BSI, 1994b), the

AISC LRFDS (AISC, 1999) and BS 5950 (BSI, 1968).
finite-element analysis compared well with the experimental

results, as shown in Table 1. Consequently, the finite-element
models successfully predicted the shear connection capacity as
well as the loadslip behaviour of the headed shear stud with a
common diameter, when compared with the experimental
results and design standards British (BS 5950: BSI, 1968),
European (Eurocode 4: BSI, 1994b) and US (LRFDS: AISC,
1999). It was shown that Eurocode 4 gave a good correlation
A maximum difference of 5% was observed between the experimental and numerical results for the stud of 30 mm diameter
in the tests by Lee et al. (2005). The mean value for the
Ptest/PFEA ratio is 099, with a corresponding coefficient of
variation of 001. The maximum slip obtained from the
Load direction
Load direction
0294725
058945
0884174
11789
0147362
0442087
0736812
103154
132626
0275885
0551771
0827656
110354
0137943
0413828
0689713
0965598
124148
(a)
(b)
Figure 9. Von Mises plastic strain: (a) brick elements at a load of

Load direction
Load direction
Near contact
Sliding
Near contact
(a)
Figure 10. Contact status: (a) brick elements at a load of

104
Sliding
(b)


with the experimental and numerical results, while BS5950

(BSI, 1968) and the LRFDS may overestimate the shear
capacity of the headed studs.
concrete is similar to the failure mode of the shear connector.

Von Mises stresses for the shear connectors are plotted in
Figure 8. The von Mises plastic strain with partial shear interaction at the working load is shown in Figure 9. The contact
status between shear connectors and the steel beam is provided
in Figure 10, which shows sliding between the shear connector
and the surrounding concrete and sticking between the steel
plate and the concrete deck. Finally, the contact pressure and
the contact gap distance for the shear connector in brick and
tetrahedral elements are shown in Figures 11 and 12,
respectively.
The mesh types considered are outlined in Figure 5 for the

shear connectors with brick and tetrahedral elements.
Figure 6 compares the interface slip for numerical models. It
can be observed that the computed interface slip for the brick
and tetrahedral models gives good agreement with the test
results. It can be seen from Figure 7 that the stress flow in
Connector bottom
Connector bottom
82224
41112
164448
123336
20556
246672
328896
287784
370008
355227
177613
710454
53284
(a)
106568
888067
142091
124329
159852
(b)
Figure 11. Contact pressure: (a) brick elements at a load of

Load direction
0606755
0471921
0337086
0202252
0067417
0539338
0404504
0269669
0134835
Load direction
0514778
0400383
0285988
0171593
057198
045758
0343185
022879
0114395
(a)
(b)
Figure 12. Contact gap distance: (a) brick elements at a load of

105


6.
Abbu M, Ekmekyapar T and zaka M (2013) 3D FE modelling
Conclusions
The full-scale push-out test is time consuming and costly, so

numerical analysis is used, once verification of the numerical
model with experimental results has been established. The
main objective of this study was to develop a three-dimensional finite-element model using finite-element software to
simulate the behaviour of headed shear stud connectors. The
results of this model were compared with experimental results.
The model proved to be effective in terms of predicting the
loadslip response for studs subjected to a concentrated load,
longitudinal slip at the steelconcrete interface and the shear
force carried by the studs. It is also able to investigate a structure with partial shear connection. Comparisons against experimental results and against alternative numerical analyses
indicated that the model can be used to perform extensive
parametric studies.
This study has investigated the influence of material parameter
uncertainties on the non-linear response of a composite structure by means of a finite-element method. Three-dimensional
finite-element models, with all components of the composite
member being modelled by means of solid and shell elements,
were implemented using commercial software and analysed
using an explicit formulation. All materials were assumed to
be non-linear, except for concrete. Contact properties were
specified between concrete and steel elements using a surfaceto-surface technique.
It is important to consider the actual loadslip relationship of
the shear connection in order to obtain better predictions of
deflections and stresses in composite structures. The solid stud
is the most realistic simulation approach used for modelling a
shear connector. The solid stud simulation requires that the
contact elements be used for the horizontal joint and the
contact surface between the flange and the headed stud. The
solid stud is the closest simulation of the actual shear
connector.
The proposed model showed good congruence of the service
load results obtained between the numerical and experimental
results. The numerical simulations also allowed the behaviour
of the composite system to be analysed from a global standpoint based on forcedisplacement curves, and from a located
standpoint, by determining the stresses in the regions of the
connectors and in other components of the model. The stresses
in both steel and concrete in the regions of the connections
tended to be distributed along the length of the connectors,
with greater concentrations at the steelconcrete interface.
REFERENCES
Abbu M (2003) Behaviour and Strength of Multi-layer Beam
with Unequal Lengths Components. MSc thesis, University

of Al-Mustansirya, Baghdad, Iraq.
106
of composite box girder bridge. Proceedings of the 2nd

International Balkans Conference on Challenges of Civil
Engineering, Tirana, Albania, pp. 487494.
AISC (American Institute of Steel Construction) (1999) Load and
Resistance Factor Design Specification for Structural Steel
Building. AISC, Chicago, IL, USA.
BSI (1968) BS 5950-3-1:1968: Code of practice for design of
simple and continuous composite beams. BSI, London,
UK.
BSI (1994a) CP 117-5:1994: Composite construction in
structural steel and concrete. Simply supported beams in
building. BSI, London, UK.
BSI (1994b) EN 1994-1-1: Design of composite steel and
concrete structures. General rules and rules for buildings.
BSI, London, UK.
BSI (1997) BS 8110-1:1997: Structural use of concrete.
Code of practice for design and construction. BSI,
London, UK.
Bursi OS, Sun FF and Postal S (2005) Non-linear frames with full
analysis of steelconcrete composite and partial shear
connection subjected to seismic loads. Journal of
Constructional Steel Research 61(1): 6792.
Fu F and Lam D (2006) Experimental study on semi-rigid
composite joints with steel beams and precast hollow core
slabs. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 62(8):
771782.
Gattesco N and Giuriani E (1996) Experimental study on stud
shear connectors subjected to cyclic loading. Journal of
Guezouli S and Alain L (2012) Numerical analysis of frictional
contact effects in push-out tests. Engineering Structures
40(7): 3950.
Gyoung Kwak H and Hwang J (2010) FE model to simulate
bond-slip behavior in composite concrete beam bridges.
Computers and Structure 88(1718): 973984.
Johnson RP and May IM (1975) Partial interaction design of
composite beams. Structural Engineer 53(8): 305311.
Julander JL (2009) Finite Element Modelling of Full Depth
Precast Concrete Transverse Bridge Deck Connections.
MSc thesis, Utah State University, Logan, UT, USA.
Lam D and Ellobody E (2005) Behavior of headed stud shear
connectors in composite beam. Journal of Structural
Engineering 131(1): 96107.
Lee P-G, Shim C-S and Chang S-P (2005) Static and fatigue
behavior of large stud shear connectors for steelconcrete
composite bridges. Journal of Constructional Steel Research
61(9): 12701285.
Liu Y, Dongyan X, Zhen Y and Jun H (2012) Static behavior
of multi-stud shear connectors for steelconcrete
composite bridge. Journal of Constructional Steel Research
74(7): 17.
Mirza O and Uy B (2010) Effects of the combination of axial
and shear loading on the behaviour of headed stud steel
anchors. Engineering Structures 32(1): 93105.


Nguyen HT and Kim SE (2009) Finite element modelling of
with local aggregates in Hong Kong. Procedia Engineering

14(12): 10981105.
Shim CS, Lee PG and Yoon TY (2004) Static behavior of large
stud shear connectors. Engineering Structures 26(12):
18531860.
Shim CS, Lee PG and Chang SP (2010) Push-out tests on shear
studs in high strength concrete. Proceedings of FraMCoS-7,
Fracture Mechanics of Concrete and Concrete Structures,
Jeju, Korea.
Tahmasebinia F, Ranzi G and Zona A (2013) Probabilistic threedimensional finite element study on composite beams with
steel trapezoidal decking. Journal of Constructional Steel
Research 80(1): 394411.
Valente M (2007) Experimental Studies on Shear Connection
Systems in Steel and Lightweight Concrete Composite
Bridges. PhD thesis, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal.
Wang AJ and Chung KF (2008) Advanced finite element
modelling of perforated composite beams with flexible
shear connectors. Engineering Structures 30(10):
27242738.
Yam LCP and Chapman JC (1968) The inelastic behaviour
of simply supported composite beams of steel and
concrete. Proceedings of the Institute of Civil Engineers
41(4): 651683.
push-out tests for large stud shear connectors. Journal of

Oudjene M, Meghlat EM, Ait-Aider H and Batoz L (2013)
Non-linear finite element modelling of the structural
behaviour of screwed timber-to-concrete composite
connections. Composite Structures 102(8): 2028.
Pavlovic M, Markovic Z, Veljkovic M and Budevac D (2013)
Bolted shear connectors vs. headed studs behaviour in
push-out tests. Journal of Constructional Steel Research
88(9): 134149.
Qian Sa and Li VC (2006) Influence of concrete material
ductility on shear response of stud connections. ACI
Material Journal 103(1): 6066.
Queiroz FD, Vellasco GS and Nethercot DA (2007) Finite
element modelling of composite beams with full and
partial shear connection. Journal of Constructional Steel
Research 63(4): 505521.
Sakr M, Sakla A and Sherief SS (2008) Long-term deflection of
cracked composite beams with nonlinear partial shear
interaction: I-finite element modelling. Journal of
Shen MH and Chung KF (2011) An investigation into shear
resistances of headed shear studs in solid concrete slabs
WHAT DO YOU THINK?
To discuss this paper, please email up to 500 words to the

editor at journals@ice.org.uk. Your contribution will be
forwarded to the author(s) for a reply and, if considered
appropriate by the editorial panel, will be published as
discussion in a future issue of the journal.
Proceedings journals rely entirely on contributions sent in
by civil engineering professionals, academics and students. Papers should be 20005000 words long (briefing
papers should be 10002000 words long), with adequate
illustrations and references. You can submit your paper
online via www.icevirtuallibrary.com/content/journals,
where you will also find detailed author guidelines.
107

3D Finite-Element Analysis of Shear Connectors With Partial Interaction

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

3D Finite-Element Analysis of Shear Connectors With Partial Interaction

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Structures and Buildings

Volume 169 Issue SB2

Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers

Mustafa zaka PhD

Researcher, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Gaziantep,

Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Gaziantep,

Talha Ekmekyapar PhD

Push-out tests are commonly used to determine the capacity of

Structures and Buildings