SHEAR CONNECTOR REQUIREMENTS FOR EMBEDDED STEEL SECTIONS

By Charles W. Roeder,1 Member, ASCE, Robert Chmielowski,2 Associate Member, ASCE,

and Colin B. Brown,3 Honorary Member, ASCE

ABSTRACT: The paper evaluates bond stress and shear connector requirements in encased steel structures,
which are sometimes known as steel reinforced concrete (SRC). Bond stress is important to the behavior of
SRC elements, and shear connectors are required if the bond stress demand exceeds that capacity. Past research
on bond stress is summarized and analyzed. An experimental study is described and evaluated. The results show
that the size of the encased section and the length of the bond affect the bond capacity. Confining reinforcement
has little impact upon the bond stress capacity, but increased confinement increases the post slip resistance. The
bond stress is distributed exponentially under service load but more uniformly after initial slip. Cyclic loading
results in deterioration of bond stress for loads greater than the slip initiation load. Shear connectors combined
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universite De Liege on 06/19/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

with natural bond stress may produce smaller load transfer than bond stress acting alone, and loads should be
transferred entirely either by bond or by mechanical methods. Design recommendations for bond stress and
shear connectors are developed for serviceability and ultimate load limit states.

INTRODUCTION
Steel sections have been encased in reinforced concrete col-
umns and walls for many buildings. This composite construc-
tion is sometimes known as steel reinforced concrete (SRC).
SRC components provide larger strength and stiffness than
steel or reinforced concrete construction at minimal cost.
These benefits require stress transfer between the steel and
concrete encasement, which may be accomplished by either
natural bond stress or shear connectors. Shear connectors are
expensive, and at present there are no rational rules for deter-
mining when and where they are required. This paper sum-
marizes a research study into the bond stress achieved with
SRC construction and the requirements for shear connector
design. The focus of this work is seismic design, but the con-
clusions from this paper are useful for other applications.
This paper reviews the use of SRC construction in the
United States, and then discusses the effect of shear stress (or
bond stress) transfer on the composite behavior of SRC com-
ponents. This leads to an evaluation of past research performed
on the bond stress issues throughout the world. The bond stress
permitted by building codes in the U.S., Europe, and Japan
are compared and noted. The gist of an experimental study,
which addresses several important issues previously raised and
expands the existing data base, is then presented. The accu-
mulated results are evaluated, and recommendations are made
regarding bond stress and shear connector requirements for
embedded steel sections for various performance levels in U.S.
practice.
BACKGROUND — BOND STRESS DEMAND
Virtually all major steel buildings constructed before 1960
involved a form of SRC construction. These buildings were
designed as bare steel frames, but the entire frame and its
connections were encased in concrete for fire protection. The
bare frame was designed to resist gravity and modest lateral
loads. However, engineers used the added strength and stiff-
1
Prof. of Civ. Engrg., Univ. of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195-2700.
2
Former Res. Asst., Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Univ. of Washington, Seattle,
WA.
3
Prof. Emeritus, Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Univ. of Washington, Seattle,
WA, and Courtesy Prof. of Civ. Engrg., Oregon State Univ., Corvalis,
OR 97331-2301.
Note. Associate Editor: C. Dale Buckner. Discussion open until July
1, 1999. To extend the closing date one month, a written request must
be filed with the ASCE Manager of Journals. The manuscript for this
paper was submitted for review and possible publication on April 9, 1998.
This paper is part of the Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 125,
No. 2, February, 1999. 䉷ASCE, ISSN 0733-9445/99/0002-0142 – 0151/
$8.00 ⫹ $.50 per page. Paper No. 18089.
142 / JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING / FEBRUARY 1999
ness to help resist loads and assure serviceability of the struc-
ture, based on their past observations of building performance
rather than extensive calculations or predictions of behavior.
Today the manner of use of SRC is actually based upon
construction sequence, since the steel frame must be erected
before the concrete is placed. As a consequence, SRC con-
struction takes a limited number of forms in U.S. practice. In
some situations the steel frame is first erected as a normal
braced or moment frame, and selected columns then encased
in concrete to increase their strength and stiffness. In others,
entire bays of the steel framing are encased within an SRC
shear wall where the steel sections serve as longitudinal wall
reinforcement. Stress transfer between the encased steel sec-
tion and the surrounding concrete is necessary to develop com-
posite action and achieve the full stiffness and resistance of
the SRC element. If the steel is to serve as tensile reinforce-
ment for the composite element, then either bond stress must
develop the tensile capacity of the steel or shear connectors
must be provided. Some SRC buildings have had many shear
connectors attached to the steel sections, while other buildings
rely entirely on natural bond between the steel and concrete.
Prototype structural designs to the general seismic provi-
sions of the Uniform Building Code (UBC) were completed
for concentrically braced frames with composite columns and
mixed steel frames with SRC shear walls. Static, dynamic re-
sponse spectra, and time history computer analyses were per-
formed (Emoto 1996) for these prototype structures; they
showed the locations of critical bond stress demand, and es-
timated these local values. The bond stress demand varies
widely for different structural systems and different locations
within the systems.
Maximum bond stress demand is greatest in braced frames
with SRC columns and in SRC shear wall systems. In braced
frames, axial forces in the braces transfer substantial vertical
force components to the SRC column at each brace-beam-
column joint, and large bond stress demand is required to dis-
tribute the force between the steel and concrete. The column
base of a braced frame and the column base for longitudinal
edge reinforcement of a shear wall are locations where bond
stress demands are usually the largest. These SRC elements
must often transfer their entire tensile capacity to the foun-
dation within a short distance near these points. These dis-
tinctions between bond stress demands at various locations are
important because natural bond stress may be used at locations
where the demand is smaller than the available bond stress
capacity. The goal of this paper is to establish the bond stress
capacity that can be reliably achieved so that shear connectors
can be located where demands exceed this capacity.

J. Struct. Eng. 1999.125:142-151.

 LITERATURE REVIEW — BOND STRESS CAPACITY
Past research considered the bond stress capacity of rein-
forcing bars embedded in concrete. Only the earlier studies on
nondeformed reinforcement are relevant to SRC applications,
and care must be used in interpreting these since they did not
always include mill scale, paint and corrosion, or other surface
conditions that may effect the bond stress capacity of steel
shapes.
Many studies (Bryson and Mathey 1962; Hawkins 1973;
Roeder 1984; Hamdan and Hunaiti 1991; Wium and Lebet
1991, 1992) have addressed the bond stress capacity of SRC
composite columns with push-out tests like that illustrated in
Fig. 1. In this test, the load is applied to the exposed steel at
the top of the specimen, and the reaction is provided solely
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universite De Liege on 06/19/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

through the concrete at the base. The bond stress capacity is

commonly evaluated as the maximum average bond stress,
which is the maximum load transferred between the steel and
concrete, divided by the total surface area of steel section em-
bedded within the concrete. Other studies have employed the
short column test, where the load is applied to the exposed
steel at the top of the column but where the reaction is pro-
vided to both the concrete and steel at the base of the speci-
men. In a short column test, as in a real column, the relative
slip between the concrete and steel is limited to a portion of
the column length, because the bottom part of the column has
full composite behavior provided by compatibility of the
strains in the steel and concrete. The maximum average bond
stress for short column tests must be based only on the load
that is transferred from the steel to the concrete, rather than
on the maximum load.
The earliest push-out testing (Bryson and Mathey 1962)
studied the effect of the surface condition of the steel on the
bond stress capacity. The steel sections were either freshly
sandblasted, sandblasted and allowed to rust, or left with nor-
mal rust and mill scale. Sections that were sandblasted or sand-
blasted and allowed to rust developed larger maximum average
bond stresses than those with mill scale. Once the steel core
slipped relative to the concrete encasement, the post slip bond
stress was similar for all surface conditions. They postulated
that the bond stress was primarily developed on the flange
surfaces. A later study (Hawkins 1973) examined the position
of casting and relative size of reinforcement. Specimens cast
in the horizontal position had smaller bond capacity than those
cast in the vertical position. This was attributed to the segre-
gation of aggregate and accumulation of water under the lower
flange of the horizontal steel section. The amount of confining
reinforcement did not consistently affect the bond stress ca-
pacity prior to significant slip, but an increase in confining
reinforcement increased the bond resistance after slip. The size
of the steel section had no effect on the bond behavior for
specimens, provided that the ratio of the embedment length to
the steel core depth was the same for all specimens.
Another study (Roeder 1984) considered the distribution of
bond stress over the member length. Strain gauges were placed
along the length of each specimen. The bond stress was found
to vary exponentially under service loads, but the distribution
was nearly uniform as the specimen approached its maximum
capacity. Relative slip was observed and attributed to cracks
developing in the concrete matrix along the concrete/steel in-
terface. These results were qualitatively the same as those ob-
tained on embedded plain steel rods under axial loading
(Womersley 1927) and torsion (Brown 1966). It was postu-
lated by Roeder that the specimen is permanently damaged by
the onset of cracking, and that load levels higher than the
initial slip load should be avoided for cyclic loading. These
tests suggested that the bond stress capacity increased with the
concrete strength. However, later studies (Hamdan and Hunaiti
1991; Wium and Lebet 1992) disagreed with this observation.
JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING / FEBRUARY 1999 / 143
FIG. 1. Typical Push-Out Test
Later push-out tests (Hamdan and Hunaiti 1991) examined the
effects of the concrete strength, surface condition, and tie re-
inforcement on the maximum average bond stress. The study
suggested that concrete strength had no effect but that adding
tie reinforcement to specimens with sandblasted steel surfaces
increased the maximum average bond stress.
Other researchers (Wium and Lebet 1992) performed both
short column and push-out tests. They postulated that bond
stress can be separated into two stages. The first stage occurs
prior to complete slip and is governed by adhesion or chemical
bonding between the cement paste and the steel. The second
stage occurs after complete slip and is characterized as a
purely frictional phenomenon. The tests showed that an in-
crease in flange cover from 50 mm to 150 mm (2 – 6 in.) in-
creased the force transfer after chemical debonding by 50%.
Increasing the amount of hoop reinforcement increased the
bond stress capacity somewhat. Steel sections that were small
relative to the concrete encasement had significantly larger
maximum average bond stress, but concrete shrinkage was
found to reduce the bond stress capacity slightly.
DESIGN VALUES USED FOR BOND STRESS
CAPACITY
While SRC construction has been used in numerous build-
ings, there is very little guidance for design in the United
States. The American Concrete Institute Specification (ACI
1995) recognizes the use of SRC columns, but requires that
shear transfer between the steel and concrete be based entirely
on direct bearing. No allowance is made for natural bond be-
tween the steel and concrete. The American Institute of Steel
Construction LRFD Specification (AISC 1994) permits the use
of SRC construction in both beams and columns. The AISC
provisions for columns require that all shear transfer be ac-
complished by direct bearing. However, the AISC specification
permits SRC beams with natural bond stress but no shear con-
nector requirements.
While the U.S. practice is not well defined, other countries
have established explicit design standards for SRC construc-
tion. The European countries have established EUROCODE4
(EUROCODE 1990), which permits the use of natural bond
of 0.5 MPa (75 psi) over the entire perimeter of the section

J. Struct. Eng. 1999.125:142-151.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universite De Liege on 06/19/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

FIG. 2. Effect of Concrete Strength and Surface Condition on Maximum Average Bond Stress

FIG. 3. Effect of Relative Length of Specimen on Maximum Average Bond Stress

for a length equal to the maximum dimension of the cross
section. The Japanese provisions permit the use of bond stress
of 0.2 f⬘c but not more than 0.45 MPa (64 psi) over the length
of the member. Clearly these specifications illustrate signifi-
cant differences from U.S. specifications.
EVALUATION OF PAST RESEARCH RESULTS
Past research provides consistent results when any one study
is independently considered, but reveals contradictions when
studies are compared. As a result, an analysis of all past test
data was made to better understand trends. Data from more
than 120 previous SRC bond stress experiments were identi-
fied, tabulated, and included in this evaluation. Fig. 2 shows
the maximum average bond stress for all push-out tests as a
function of concrete strength, except for those studies which
were designed to minimize bond on some part of the section.
144 / JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING / FEBRUARY 1999
There is considerable scatter in the data, and no discernible
trend with respect to the effect of concrete strength on the
bond stress capacity. Past research has reported that sandblast-
ing significantly increases bond stress capacity over that
achieved with normal mill-scale surfaces, bug Fig. 2 shows
that, on average, sandblasting has relatively little effect on the
bond stress capacity. The averages are about the same for both
mill scale and blast cleaned surfaces, although the largest and
lowest values are clearly attained with the blast-cleaned sur-
faces.
Past research (Roeder 1984; Wium and Lebet 1991) shows
that the bond stress is distributed exponentially before slip.
After slip, friction between the steel and concrete provides
some bond stress capacity, but past work has also indicated
that this frictional resistance must deteriorate as slip increases.
As noted earlier, bond stress capacity is commonly evaluated
as a maximum average — as if the transferred load is uniformly

J. Struct. Eng. 1999.125:142-151.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universite De Liege on 06/19/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

FIG. 4. Effect of Relative Size of Steel Section on Maximum Average Bond Stress

TABLE 1. Summary of Test Specimens and Results

Ratio of
Maximum post slip Maximum Maximum
Interface load load to average local bond
Test Reinforcing length Steel Concrete capacity maximum bond stress stress
specimen arrangement (mm) size encasement (KN) Test type load (MPa) (MPa)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
1 Spiral 1,060 W10 ⫻ 45 500 mm Dia. 1,876.6 Concentric 0.592 1.378 2.646
2 Spiral 1,060 W10 ⫻ 45 500 mm Dia. 1,716.4 Concentric 0.633 1.261 2.394
3 Pattern II 600 W10 ⫻ 45 450 ⫻ 450 mm 841.5 Concentric 0.699 1.082 1.516
4 Pattern II 600 W10 ⫻ 45 450 ⫻ 450 mm 853.1 Concentric with 0.735 1.082 3.036
10 cycles at
80%
5 Pattern II 1,060 W10 ⫻ 45 450 ⫻ 450 mm 1,608.2 Concentric 0.747 1.185 2.498
6 Pattern II 1,060 W10 ⫻ 45 450 ⫻ 450 mm 1,648.3 Concentric 0.788 1.199 1.898
7 Pattern II 1,524 W10 ⫻ 45 450 ⫻ 450 mm 2,231.7 Concentric 0.696 1.123 3.307
8 Pattern II 1,525 W10 ⫻ 45 450 ⫻ 450 mm 2,055.9 Concentric with 0.688 1.033 2.183
10 cycles at
60%
9 ACI Minimum 1,060 W10 ⫻ 22 450 ⫻ 450 mm 966.1 Concentric 0.552 0.854 3.218
10 ACI Minimum 1,060 W10 ⫻ 22 450 ⫻ 450 mm 999.0 Concentric with 0.552 0.903 1.817
10 cycles at
35%
11 ACI Minimum 1,060 W10 ⫻ 45 450 ⫻ 450 mm 1,453.4 Concentric 0.683 1.061 2.401
12 ACI Minimum 1,060 W10 ⫻ 45 450 ⫻ 450 mm 1,393.3 Concentric 0.556 0.992 2.713
13 ACI Minimum 1,060 W10 ⫻ 77 450 ⫻ 450 mm 1,535.7 Concentric 0.571 0.951 1.521
14 ACI Minimum 1,060 W10 ⫻ 77 450 ⫻ 450 mm 1,429.8 Concentric 0.604 0.888 3.163
15 ACI Minimum 1,060 W10 ⫻ 45 450 ⫻ 450 mm 1,312.7 Concentric with 4 0.50 NA NA
shear connec-
tors
16 ACI Minimum 1,060 W10 ⫻ 45 450 ⫻ 450 mm 1,246.0 Concentric with 8 0.40 NA NA
shear connec-
tors
17 ACI Minimum 1,060 W10 ⫻ 45 450 ⫻ 450 mm 1,269.1 75 mm eccentric- 0.61 NA 4.479
ity
18 ACI Minimum 1,060 W10 ⫻ 45 450 ⫻ 450 mm 1,024.39 150 mm eccen- 0.72 NA 3.727
tricity

distributed over the entire contact surface area of the specimen. of the deterioration noted as slip progresses. Fig. 3 shows sub-
As a consequence, the maximum average bond stress must be stantial scatter in the measured data, but the maximum average
significantly smaller than the maximum local bond stress ob- bond stress is lower for specimens that are relatively long com-
served with the exponential distribution. Further, the maxi- pared with the dimensions of the specimen. Past research
mum average bond stress should be somewhat smaller with (Wium and Lebet 1992) indicates that increasing the concrete
specimens in which the interface length is very long relative area, relative to the area of the steel, increases the maximum
to the cross section dimensions of the steel section, because average bond stress. This observation is verified in Fig. 4.
JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING / FEBRUARY 1999 / 145

J. Struct. Eng. 1999.125:142-151.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universite De Liege on 06/19/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
FIG. 5. Reinforcement Details for Test Specimens: (a) ACI Minimum; (b) Second Pattern; (c) Spiral Reinforcement
FIG. 6. Shear Connectors on Specimens 15 and 16
EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM
As experimental program (Chmielowski 1997) of 18 push-
out tests examined the effect of the size of steel core relative
to the encasing concrete, the confinement, the interface length,
eccentric loading, and the interaction of shear connectors with
the bond stress capacity. Table 1 summarizes the test speci-
mens and test results.
Fourteen of the specimens were tested as identical pairs so
that the variability in test results and the effect of cyclic load-
ing could be examined. Three different reinforcement arrange-
ments were selected to examine the effect of confinement on
the bond stress capacity. The first arrangement approximated
minimum ACI requirements with #3 ties at 200 mm (8 in.)
and eight #6 longitudinal bars [Fig. 5(a)]. The second arrange-
ment used #3 ties in both square and octagonal patterns at 100
mm (4 in.) with fourteen #6 longitudinal [Fig. 5(b)]. The final
arrangement used #3 spiral reinforcing with a 75 mm (3 in.)
pitch and twelve #6 longitudinal bars [Fig. 5(c)]. The steel
sections were W10⫻22, W10⫻45, and W10⫻77 sections and
three embedment lengths of the steel sections of 600 mm, 1060
146 / JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING / FEBRUARY 1999
J. Struct. Eng. 1999.125:142-151.
mm, and 1524 mm (24, 42, and 60 in.) were used. Specimens
15 and 16 had two and four 12.7 mm (0.5 in.) shear connec-
tors, respectively, welded to both outer flange faces of the steel
core, as depicted in Fig. 6. The shear connectors were 54 mm
(2.125 in.) in length to minimize interaction between the shear
connectors and the confining steel. The connectors were
welded by a commercial installation company and had a min-
imum tensile strength of 60 ksi.
Past research (Wium and Lebet 1991) suggested that the
concrete cover of the flanges affected the bond stress capacity.
To avoid this effect, the minimum clear cover was held con-
stant at approximately 100 mm (4 in.) for these tests. The
encasement was 450 mm (18 in.) square for all specimens with
normal tie reinforcement, and 500 mm in diameter (20 in.) on
specimens with spiral reinforcement. The steel shapes were
blast cleaned to remove mill scale, and the steel surface was
treated with the degreaser Trisodium Phosphate prior to cast-
ing of concrete.
Gauges were installed on each steel core to measure the
strain along the length of the steel/concrete interface. Fig. 7
illustrates one typical strain gauge spacing. The longitudinal
strain gauges were placed at close intervals near the top of the
specimen, since the bond stress is initially exponentially (Roe-
der 1984) distributed, with the greatest bond stress value and
most rapid variation near the top. This bond stress results in
a change in axial load. The axial load, the rate of change in
the axial load and the bond stress distribution needed to pro-
duce the change in axial load are estimated from strain mea-
surements along the specimen length. It has been suggested
(Bryson and Mathey 1962) that the bond stress is primarily
developed on the flanges of the section. Therefore the strain
gauges were placed on the inside of the flanges as shown in
the figure, thus maintaining the critical contact surface area on
the outside of the flanges. The gauges were protected by a
waterproof coating, and a light 18 mm (3.4 in.) steel channel
was placed over the gauges and wiring to isolate them from
the concrete. The channel was lubricated to prevent develop-
ment of extra bond stress capacity.
Standard commercial formwork was used for the specimens,
and a special plywood insert provided a 38 mm (1.5 in.) gap
between the bottom of the steel and the supporting base, as

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universite De Liege on 06/19/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
FIG. 7. Typical Strain Gauge Placement
depicted in Fig. 1. This gap allowed a large amount of slip
before the steel reacted on the base of the test machine. Tie
wire was used to prevent shifting of components during cast-
ing. Ready mix concrete with 9 mm (3/8 in.) pea gravel and
a superplasticizer were used. The design slump, water/cement
ratio, and concrete strength was 175 mm (7 in.), 0.33, and 35
MPa (5,000 psi), respectively. The concrete arrived with a
slump of 115 mm (4.5 in.). Five specimens (5, 6, 11, 13, and
14) used the original concrete, but additional superplasticizer
was added to enhance the concrete workability of the remain-
ing specimens.
The specimens were cast in the upright position. Concrete
was placed in three layers, and each layer was vibrated. After
casting, the specimens were covered with moist burlap and
plastic, and they were moistened regularly to facilitate curing.
Twenty-four cylinders were cast to provide concrete strength,
FIG. 8. Typical Force Deflection Curve
JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING / FEBRUARY 1999 / 147
J. Struct. Eng. 1999.125:142-151.
and they were cured in the same manner as the test specimens.
These cylinders showed a concrete strength of 36.5 MPa
(5,300 psi) for Specimens 5, 6, 11, 13, and 14 and 29.6 MPa
(4,300 psi) for other specimens. Tensile coupons from the steel
sections and rebar segments were cut (Chmielowski 1997) to
obtain yield and tensile strength. Yield stresses were higher
than 306 MPa (44.4 ksi) in all cases, and therefore inelastic
deformation of the steel did not contribute to the test results.
The tests were conducted after the specimens had cured for
at least 28 days. The load was applied concentrically to the
first 16 specimens by a 10.4 MN (2,400 kip) hydraulic test
machine, through a swivel and a machined steel plate, as
shown in Fig. 1. Specimens 17 and 18 had a deliberate eccen-
tricity to induce a combined axial load and bending moment.
Each specimen was placed in the testing machine and was
plumbed and leveled. A layer of hydrostone was placed be-
neath the specimen to provide uniform support and to distrib-
ute the load from the column base to the test machine. The
load was monitored using a calibrated linear variable differ-
ential transformer (LVDT) installed in the test machine. The
slip of the steel core with respect to the concrete encasement
was recorded by potentiometers attached to each flange of the
steel section. Voltage readings from the strain gauges, poten-
tiometers, and LVDT were recorded using a Hewlett Packard
computer and data acquisition system. The voltages were con-
verted into strain, bond stress, load, and displacement, and
critical data were displayed and plotted and monitored during
the test.
EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
The tests were carried out over a period of three weeks.
Each specimen was loaded to displacements well beyond com-
plete slip. Certain individual test results are shown in Table 1.
The maximum average bond stress, as described earlier, was
calculated by dividing the maximum load by the total interface
area. The maximum value of local bond stress is that calcu-
lated from the strain gauge measurements recorded at any level
during the test.
Fig. 8 shows a typical force deflection (or slip) curve. The
specimens had virtually no slip for loads up to 25 – 40% of the
maximum load capacity. However, local slip began at the top
of the specimen for loads above this threshold and then prop-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universite De Liege on 06/19/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
FIG. 9. Typical Force Distribution for Different Load Levels
agated down the specimen with increasing load. The maximum
load and maximum average bond stress were achieved when
the total slip at the top of the specimen was approximately 0.5
mm. After the maximum load was achieved, the slip proceeded
rapidly over the entire specimen length with reduced load ca-
pacity at increasing slip. The proportion of this reduced load
and the maximum load capacity at their maximum slip of each
specimen are stated in Table 1; the reduction is generally larger
for specimens with less confining reinforcement. All speci-
mens were loaded to a total slip of approximately 15 to 20
mm (0.6 – 0.8 in.).
The measured longitudinal strains were directly transformed
to axial forces in the steel section by the application of uniaxial
stress state and elastic stress-strain relationship. Fig. 9 shows
typical distributions of the force in the steel at locations along
the embedded length at 25, 75, and 100% of the maximum
load. The distribution was nearly exponential over a length of
approximately two times the depth of the steel section for all
specimens at loads of 25 – 50% of the maximum capacity. Prior
to significant slip, an intermediate zone of nearly constant
force distribution was noted. The strain in the steel and con-
crete are equal, and no bond stress transfer occurs in this in-
termediate region, because composite action is fully devel-
oped. This intermediate region is shorter for short specimens
and longer for long specimens, but the exponential variation
is nearly identical regardless of the specimen length. Finally,
another short region of bond stress transfer occurs at the bot-
tom of the specimen, where the total load of the specimen
exists in the concrete.
The distribution of force in the steel section approaches a
linear variation, as shown in Fig. 9, as the load approaches its
maximum value. A truly linear variation is never quite
achieved, particularly for the longer specimens, because of de-
terioration caused by the local interface slip.
The bond stress between the steel and concrete causes the
change in force distribution, and bond stress depends upon the
derivative or rate of change of the curves in Fig. 9. Fig. 10
shows typical bond stress distribution curves; the distribution
is nearly exponential for loads below slip and approaches a
constant value at loads approaching the maximum. The max-
imum bond stress obtained from these strain gauge measure-
ments are given in Table 1. The local bond stresses obtained
from strain gauge measurements have limitations in their ac-
148 / JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING / FEBRUARY 1999
J. Struct. Eng. 1999.125:142-151.
curacy because they are determined from small differences in
strains in adjacent gauges, and the limited resolution of each
strain gauge plays a larger role in the determination of bond
stress distribution than for the axial force distribution. Nev-
ertheless, these local bond stress measurements provide un-
derstanding of the bond stress capacity.
Specimens 10, 8, and 4 were subjected to cyclic loading. In
these tests, the specimens were loaded to 35, 60, and 80% of
the expected axial capacity, respectively, and then unloaded
and reloaded for 10 cycles to examine the effect of cyclic
inelastic behavior. These three load levels were selected as
representing significantly different levels of behavior. The 35%
loading results in cycling at the threshold of slip propagation.
At this load, slight local slip is possible with only a short
penetration into the specimen. Examination of the behavior
achieved by this specimen suggests that there is no significant
change in the bond stress behavior under cyclic loading. The
ultimate load achieved was somewhat larger than the resis-
tance achieved in Specimen 9, the companion, uncycled spec-
imen. Specimens 4 and 8 were cycled at 80% and 60% of the
maximum load, respectively. These loads are well above the
slip initiation load. At 60% loading, slip was expected over a
length greater than the depth of the steel section, and, at 80%
loading, slip should propagate over most of the specimen
length. Comparison of the measured strains in the first cycle
to subsequent cycles indicate significant deterioration in the
bond stress behavior with loading cycles at high initial load
states. The deterioration did not always result in a large re-
duction on the ultimate load capacity, but there were large
changes in local behavior. This observation indicates that serv-
iceable behavior under cyclic loading can be assured only if
the load cycles are kept at or below the threshold load for
local slip.
Specimen 15 and 16 had shear connectors welded to each
flange of the steel section, as illustrated in Fig. 6. The tests
were designed to examine the manner in which bond stress
and shear connectors work together in transferring forces be-
tween the steel and the concrete. Specimens 15 and 16 were
directly comparable to Specimens 11 and 12. The addition of
shear connectors resulted in a loss in total resistance, reduced
ductility, and greater deterioration in resistance after slip com-
pared with the behavior of Specimens 11 and 12, as can be
seen in Table 1. In both specimens, shear connectors caused
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universite De Liege on 06/19/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
FIG. 10. Typical Measure Bond Stress Distribution
significant spalling of the concrete, and some shear connectors
fractured in the heat affected metal outside of the weld. The
loads attained by these specimens were larger than the capacity
expected with the shear connectors acting alone. The length
of the shear connectors was limited to keep them within the
area of the concrete, and they were not long enough to guar-
antee their full force development. The data showed that shear
connectors require local deformation to achieve their resis-
tance, and this deformation disrupts the conditions required to
develop bond stress. The flange cover was approximately 100
mm, but it is plausible that greater cover with longer con-
nectors would have improved the interaction of the shear con-
nectors with the bond stress. Care must be exercised in draw-
ing conclusions from only two tests. However, these surprising
results suggest that force transfer should be developed by bond
stress alone or shear connectors alone rather than a combina-
tion of the two transfer mechanisms.
Specimens 17 and 18 were loaded eccentrically and are
comparable to the concentrically loaded Specimens 11 and 12.
The ultimate axial load capacity of Specimens 17 and 18 are
lower than those for Specimens 11 and 12, and this dominance
could suggest that bond stress is reduced by eccentric loading.
However, this conclusion would be misleading. Eccentric
loading places large bond stress demand on one flange while
reducing the demand (and even reversing the direction of the
demand) on the other flange. As a consequence, the actual
bond stress capacity is dramatically increased under combined
bending and compression rather than decreased. This is illus-
trated by comparing the maximum local bond stress values
obtained from strain gauge readings where the eccentrically
loaded specimens had maximum local bond stress values
50 – 100% larger than those for concentrically loaded speci-
mens. Also, the force-deflection behavior showed that eccen-
trically loaded specimens delayed the initiation of significant
slip. That is, the load associated with progression of local slip,
as illustrated in Fig. 8, was a significantly larger load with
eccentrically loaded specimens than for concentrically loaded
specimens. Finally, it is noted that none of these tests involve
yielding of the steel, but the eccentrically loaded test speci-
mens are closer to yielding than any of the other specimens.
The combined stress ratios are at 80 – 90% of yielding for both
of the eccentric load tests, and so local yielding due to residual
stress may have had some effect.
JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING / FEBRUARY 1999 / 149
J. Struct. Eng. 1999.125:142-151.
Confinement of concrete did not have a dramatic effect on
the maximum average bond stress, but it affected the post-slip
deterioration. Cracking patterns were observed on the concrete
surface before and during testing. Specimens with large
amounts of confining steel developed more cracking due to
shrinkage prior to testing, but less cracking during testing. The
stiffness of the confinement steel prevented the concrete from
shrinking and thus induced local concrete cracking during cur-
ing. During loading, the confinement steel restrained further
crack opening and improved the postslip performance. Spec-
imens with little confining steel has few shrinkage cracks, but
cracks under loading appeared to grow more quickly. The lo-
cation of cracking suggested that the flanges of the encased
section act as wedges which split the concrete under increased
load. These observations suggest that minimum confinement
is necessary to assure satisfactory postslip behavior, but that
large amounts of confining steel are not needed to achieve
good bond performance.
APPLICATION OF RESEARCH RESULTS TO
PRACTICE
Bond stress demand was described earlier in this paper. This
demand is variable and important, but it must be compared to
the bond stress capacity. Experimental research has considered
the capacity that can be achieved with SRC construction and
indicates that, in engineering design for safety, serviceability,
and economy, two criteria for deciding on the appropriateness
of using shear connectors are
• That shear connectors should not be used where the nat-
ural bond stress capacity exceeds the bond stress demand
• That shear connectors must be employed where the de-
mand exceeds the capacity
The demand can be determined by analysis for each struc-
tural design; however, a method is needed for translating ex-
perimental results into a reliable estimate of bond stress
capacity. A multivariable linear regression analysis was per-
formed for all push-out test data, and the L/d and As /At ratios
were primary variables which affect the bond stress capacity.
Here L and d are the length and depth of the steel section, and
As and At are the areas of the steel section to the total cross
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universite De Liege on 06/19/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
FIG. 11. Comparison of Prediction Resistance with Measured Resistance
FIG. 12. Proposed Bond Stress Evaluation Models
section of the composite member. The results of this regression
analysis indicate that
fBR = 2.91 ⫺ 0.300(L/d) ⫺ 14.97␳ (in MPa) (1)
Here ␳ = As /At ratio. The maximum average bond stress is
used in this statistical derivation, and fBR is a mean expected
value. It is desirable to design for a more reliable estimated
bond stress, and so (1) was reduced by 2 standard deviations
to obtain
fB2␴ = 2.5119 ⫺ 0.3900(L/d) ⫺ 19.1168␳ (in MPa) (2)
Eq. (2) provides an estimated confidence of 97.7% that the
true average bond stress will be larger than the value given in
the equation, and as a result it is more conservative and suit-
able for engineering applications. Eq. (2) indicates that no
bond is available when the L/d ratio is greater than approxi-
mately 6 or when ␳ is greater than 0.125. Nor is any bond
stress available when both of the ratios are moderately large
but below the above limits. It should be noted that there is
considerable scatter in the data, and fB2␴ is reduced signifi-
cantly by that scatter. There are two standard deviations be-
tween Eq. (1) and (2). Therefore, comparison of these equa-
tions shows a measure of the standard deviation or variance
150 / JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING / FEBRUARY 1999
J. Struct. Eng. 1999.125:142-151.
of the data, and permits bond stress estimates for higher or
lower confidence levels.
The maximum load that can be transferred by bond stress
depends on the bond stress capacity, the perimeter of the en-
cased section, and the bond length. It is tempting to use the
longest bond length, but this will not necessarily produce the
largest load transfer capacity. An optimization of the maximum
load capacity computed from (2) found that the maximum ca-
pacity will occur when
L/dcritical = 3.22 ⫺ 24.519␳ (3)
Thus, this ratio should be used in (2) when columns have a
longer length than the critical length defined in (3). In practice,
nearly all columns will use this critical length for defining their
bond stress capacity, and therefore (3) can be introduced into
(2) for these practical applications. Then,
fB2␴ = 1.256 ⫺ 9.554␳ (in MPa) (4)
The dimensionless parameter, ␳, is limited in practice to num-
bers such as 0.02, 0.04, or 0.06. For these values of ␳, the
bond stress capacity will be 1.06, 0.87, and 0.68 MPa (154,
126, and 99 psi), respectively, applied over the total perimeter
of the cross section for the length defined by (3). These esti-
mates of bond stress capacities are larger than the bond stress
values permitted by Japanese and European codes. It is rea-
sonable to compare these estimates to past test results. Fig. 11
compares predictions by (2) with the actual experimental load
capacity. The length used in the prediction was the shorter of
the critical length provided by (3) or the actual length of the
test specimen. The predicted resistance is divided by the total
load capacity of the specimen and plotted as a function of the
concrete strength in Fig. 11. Considerable scatter persists in
the results, but it can be seen that all but three specimens have
resulted below the predicted values (below the 1.0 line) and
that the predicted strength is a conservative estimate.
At the ultimate load performance level, this bond stress can
be uniformly distributed over the perimeter of the section and
a length equal to the lesser of either the column length or the
length defined by (3). Fig. 12 shows this recommended uni-
form distribution of bond stress capacity. Engineers have in-
creasing concern for the performance of structures under re-
peated loading and their serviceability limit states. The tests
 reported show evidence of interface deterioration when cyclic
loading is applied after initial slip between the steel and con-
crete. Thus, at the serviceability performance level, it is pro-
posed that a triangular bond stress distribution be used over a
length equal to two times the depth of the encased sections.
Fig. 12 also shows this serviceability requirement. The maxi-
mum average bond stress defined in (2) is also used for the
serviceability limit state, because it leads to a conservative
estimate of serviceability behavior. The maximum local bond
stress at condition of initiation of slip is invariably larger than
the average value. Further, the information needed to compute
local bond stress is missing from most of the past results, and
the use of the maximum average bond stress permits the use
of a larger data base and provides greater confidence in the
result. It should be emphasized that the bond stress check is
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universite De Liege on 06/19/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
only needed for the axial load transfer; bending appears to
develop a binding action that enhances the local bond stress
capacity. Finally, there is evidence that shear connectors do
not work well with natural bond stress, and therefore it is
recommended that the design for axial load transfer be accom-
plished entirely by bond stress or entirely by shear connectors,
rather than a combination of the two.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
This paper examines the bond stress transfer between steel
and concrete in SRC elements. Shear stress must be transferred
between the steel and concrete if the composite members are
to perform as desired. Analysis of prototype structures show
that the critical locations for bond stress demand are the at-
tachment of SRC shear walls and SRC columns of braced
frames to the foundation. However, brace-beam-column con-
nections in braced frames also have significant demand be-
cause of the vertical component of force transferred by the
brace.
More than 120 SRC bond stress tests and the results of
experiments described in this paper were evaluated to deter-
mine factors that affect the bond stress capacity. This evalua-
tion shows considerable scatter in the test results, but the rel-
ative size of the encased steel section compared with the
concrete encasement, the thickness of the concrete cover, and
the length of the bond stress region were all deemed to affect
the bond stress capacity. Individual previous studies have sug-
gested that the surface condition of the steel affected the bond
stress capacity, but this trend is less clear when all the avail-
able results are considered. Nevertheless, it is still recom-
mended that bond stress be employed only with blast cleaned
surface. The bond stress capacity does not appear to be related
to the strength of the concrete.
An experimental program was performed to address bond
stress capacity in SRC elements. These tests provided supple-
mental information that was combined with past research re-
sults. The experimental work showed that the confining rein-
forcement had little impact upon the maximum average bond
stress, but that increased confinement increased the postslip
resistance. These experiments supported observations that the
bond stress is distributed exponentially over length under ser-
vice load, and the distribution approaches a uniform value for
loads approaching the maximum capacity. Cyclic load tests
show no deterioration if cyclic loads were less than the slip
initiation load, and this initiation load is about 40% of the
maximum load capacity. Interface deterioration is significant
for loads larger than the slip initiation load.
Tests performed on two specimens with shear connectors
suggested that they induce local deformations and stress con-
centrations into the concrete encasement, which then acceler-
ates the deterioration of bond due to cracking along the inter-
face. Thus, it is recommended that, in design, either the loads
be transferred entirely by bond or entirely by mechanical
JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING / FEBRUARY 1999 / 151
J. Struct. Eng. 1999.125:142-151.
methods and not by any combination of the two. The obser-
vations regarding shear connectors and natural bond stress are
important and surprising. Further studies of this phenomenon
are recommended to establish the mechanics of the interaction.
Tests performed on two eccentrically loaded specimens re-
sulted in lower ultimate load capacities, but bond stresses that
were significantly greater than specimens loaded concentri-
cally.
The experimental results are combined with results from
past research, and these are used to establish a rational pro-
posal for a design method, which is provided in the previous
section.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work was funded by the National Science Foundation under a
Grant CMS-9520233, ‘‘Design Requirements for Shear Connectors in En-
cased Steel (SRC) and Concrete Filled Tube (CF T) Construction.’’ Dr.
S. C. Liu is the NSF Program Manager for this research. The financial
support is greatly appreciated. Cheryl Burwell and Daniel Morrow pro-
vided great help with this research through an NSF Research Experience
for Undergraduates supplemental grant. They helped the project signifi-
cantly, and this is greatly appreciated.
APPENDIX I. REFERENCES
ACI Committee 318. (1995). ‘‘Building code requirements for structural
concrete.’’ ACI 318-95, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills,
Mich.
ACI Committee 318. (1995). ‘‘Commentary.’’ ACI 318R-95, American
Concrete Inst., Farmington Hills, Mich.
AIJ. (1991). AIJ standards for structural calculation of steel reinforced
concrete structures. Architectural Institute of Japan, Shiba, Japan.
AISC. (1994). Manual of steel construction: Load and resistance factor
design, 2nd Ed., American Institute of Steel Construction, Chicago,
Illinois.
Brown, C. B. (1966). ‘‘Bond failure between steel and concrete.’’ J. of
the Franklin Inst., 282(5), 271 – 290.
Bryson, J. O., and Mathey, R. G. (1962). ‘‘Surface condition effect on
bond strength of steel beams embedded in concrete.’’ J. Am. Concrete
Inst., 59(3), 397 – 405.
Chmielowski, R. A. (1997). ‘‘Force transfer in steel columns encased in
concrete,’’ MS thesis, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash.
Emoto, J. (1996). ‘‘Bond shear demand in composite concrete and steel
members,’’ MS thesis, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash.
EUROCODE No. 4. (1990). Design of composite steel and concrete
structures. Part 1: General rules for buildings. Commission of Euro-
pean Communities, Luxembourg.
Hamdan, M., and Hunaiti, Y. (1991). ‘‘Factors affecting bond strength in
composite columns.’’ Proc., 3rd Int. Conf. on Steel-Concrete Compos-
ite Structures, Association for International Cooperation and Research
in Steel-Concrete Composites, Fukuoka, Japan, 213 – 218.
Hawkins, N. M. (1973). ‘‘Strength of concrete encased steel beams.’’ Civ.
Engrg. Trans. Inst. of Engrgs., CE15(1), (2), 39 – 46.
Roeder, C. W. (1984). ‘‘Bond stress in embedded steel shapes in con-
crete.’’ Composite and Mixed Construction, Proceedings of the U.S./
Japan Joint Seminar, Charles W. Roeder, Ed., New York, 277 – 240.
Wium, J. A., and Lebet, J. P. (1991). Composite columns: Force transfer
from steel section to concrete encasement. Ecole Polytechnique Fed-
erale, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Wium, J. A., and Lebet, J. P. (1992). Force transfer in composite columns
consisting of embedded HEB 300 and HEB 400 sections. Ecole Poly-
technique Federale, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Womersley, W. D. (1927). ‘‘Bond between concrete and steel.’’ Concrete
and Constr. Engrg., 22(2), 153 – 159.
APPENDIX II. NOTATION
The following symbols are used in this paper:
As =area of steel section;
At =area of total cross section of composite member;
d =depth of steel section;
fBR =average bond stress capacity from regression analysis;
fB2␴ =average bond stress capacity with two standard deviations
or 97.7% confidence level;
f ⬘c = strength of concrete;
L = length of steel section or bond stress interface length; and
␳ = As /At.