Flexural behavior of composite reinforced concrete t beams cast in steel channels

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308

(Print), ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March - April (2013), © IAEME

215

FLEXURAL BEHAVIOR OF COMPOSITE REINFORCED CONCRETE

T-BEAMS CAST IN STEEL CHANNELS WITH HORIZONTAL

TRANSVERSE BARS AS SHEAR CONNECTORS

Dr. Laith Khalid Al- Hadithy 1

, Dr. Khalil Ibrahim Aziz 2 (Ph.D.) ,

Mohammed Kh. M. Al-Fahdawi 3

(M .Sc)

1 Department of Civil Engineering, Al-Nahrain University , Iraq

2 Department of Civil Engineering, Anbar University , Iraq

3 Department of Civil Engineering, Anbar University , Iraq

ABSTRACT

With the purpose of evaluating the influence of both the size and configurations of

horizontal shear connectors in simply supported reinforced concrete T-beams of webs

partially cast in steel channels, an experimental program was carried out using three large-

scale composite reinforced concrete beam models of the configuration, constituents,

geometry, and interconnection defined above have been manufactured, loaded up-to-failure.

Laboratory observed and measured responses were interpreted to predict the fracture patterns

in addition to the ultimate bending moment capacity, flexural stiffness, and flexural integrity

from variations of the midspan deflection and relative longitudinal end slip with load.

The privilege of the present horizontal-bar shear connector over the traditional

headed-stud style in reinforced concrete T-beams cast in steel channel has been verified and

evaluated by a comparative investigation with the findings of a recent previous experimental

study on such composite reinforced concrete T-beams with the competitive headed-stud shear

connectors , from which beams with new horizontal-bar shear connector have revealed

substantially higher ultimate bending moment capacity ,flexural stiffness and flexural

integrity (represented by the measured relative longitudinal end-slip). Enhancement realized

in the mechanical parameters specified above are 43%, 33% and 33% respectively.

Keywords: Reinforced Concrete, Composite Structure, T-beam, Steel Channel,

Shear Connecter, Ultimate Load, Horizontal Transverse Bars.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING AND

TECHNOLOGY (IJCIET)

ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print)

ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online)

Volume 4, Issue 2, March - April (2013), pp. 215-230 © IAEME: www.iaeme.com/ijciet.asp

Journal Impact Factor (2013): 5.3277 (Calculated by GISI) www.jifactor.com

IJCIET

© IAEME



216

1. INTRODUCTION

The present study deals with the flexural behavior of simply supported composite

reinforced concrete beams shown in Fig 1consisting of T-section reinforced concrete prisms

cast in steel channels with transverse horizontal bars across beam web extending between

opposite holes in the two flanges of the steel channel acting as shear connectors.

The flexural behavior to be studied includes: ultimate flexural resistance, load

deflection relation, moment curvature relation, load- longitudinal slip (at beam ends) relation,

and mode of failure (type and shape).

The suggested study comprises the following aspects:

i.Superiority of the present shear connectors in producing high flexural performance (given

by the five flexural criteria mentioned above) over the corresponding performance of the

traditional headed studs.

ii.Effect of varying the configuration of the longitudinal distribution.

In each of the two above aspects, five specified large scale models of the present type of

composite beam were fabricated, loaded and tested, three of which are discussed in this

paper.

2. REVIEW

Few research dealing with reinforced concrete beams cast in steel channels were

done. Taylor in 1979[1] made an experimental study on a variety of simply supported beams

using two types of testing. Taylor and Burdon, in 1972[2] reported tests on six simply

supported composite beams having the cross section shown in Fig.2 with mild steel channel

as tensile reinforcement.

Yousif, in 1982 [3],made an experimental study by using four simply supported

reinforced concrete T-beam cast in to steel channels ,simulating them as parts of a continuous

beam at support section ,tested to investigate their behavior in shear and in hogging bending.

Test data was critically analyzed to suggest the methods of prediction of shear and flexural

loads, and to explore the possibilities of the application of simple plastic theory for the

analysis of continuous composite reinforced concrete beam.

Fig.1 Cross- section of a typical composite reinforced concrete T-beam with

horizontal shear connectors



217

Abdu Al-Razag in 1985 [4], made another experimental study by using six simply

supported reinforced concrete T-beam casts in steel channels, to investigate the behavior of

sagging moment regions. He suggested a computerized method of analysis based on the

theoretical moment-curvature relationship for sagging moment section. By that program, the

computerized methods for the short term deflection at service load can be calculated based on

gross concrete section, neglecting reinforcement.

Abdul-Hussein[5] in 2007 ,presented a three-dimensional finite element analysis to

predict the behavior of composite T-concrete beam with web partly cast in steel channel. The

general purpose finite element software ANSYS (version 9.0) has been used during this

analysis. The nonlinearity of materials due to cracking and crushing of the concrete, yielding

of steel channel and reinforcing bars, and interface at the steel channel-concrete were

considered. The study was performed to study the influence of several parameters such as

strength of concrete, the degree of connection and span/depth ratio on the behavior of load-

deflection curve and the ultimate load.

Al-Hadithy and Al-Kerbooli [6] in 2008, made four reinforced concrete beams of

rectangular cross-section and four corresponding composite ones consisting of reinforced

concrete prisms cast in steel channel with shear connectors were manufactured , loaded ,and

tested in the laboratory to measure mid-span deflections, and to observe fracture criteria. The

reinforced concrete prism of each of the four composite beams is of rectangular cross-section

and identical to its corresponding reinforced concrete beam .A parametric study on the effect

of flange width of the steel channel shows that a 40% increase in the ultimate load capacity

can be realized by a one-third increase in that parameter with a slight decrease in ductility

ratio.

Al-Ta'ai, A.A [7] in 2009, presented study three-dimensional finite element analysis

to predict the behavior of a special form, cost-effective type of composite construction, a

composite reinforced concrete T-beam enclosed by a large steel channel in the entire concrete

web and connected in soffit of the beam by shear connectors with and without construction

joint at flange-web junction. Parametric study includes the influence of parameters on large

steel channel instead of small steel channel for composite reinforced concrete T-beam

without construction joint; including removal of internal reinforcement, thickness of steel

channel, yield strength of steel channel, concrete compressive strength, degree of partial

connection, coefficient of friction, ratio of compressive reinforcement and Poisson's ratio.

This study compared the analytical results from the ANSYS of finite element models with

tested beams for two types of composite reinforced concrete with small steel channel (T-

beam and inverse T-beam), as two beams for each type. The analytical results show good

agreement with the experimental results.

Only two previous published investigations have met (in the present study) regarding

the use of horizontal transverse shear connectors in the initially low-cost concrete beams cast

into steel channel. The target of those two researches was to reduce the cost even further.

Clark and Nelson[8 ] conducted in 1974, the first of those two investigations in

which a push-off test was carried out on transverse-bolt shear connectors (passing through

holes in the flanges of the channel )as defined by Fig 1 to ascertain their strength. The results

of their test are summarized in Table1 in which the values of the maximum load are the

averages from two push-off tests. The tabulated results show that in all cases the failure loads

were appreciable higher than the characteristic strength of the corresponding stud, but

certainly not twice these values.



218

Table 1 Results of push –off tests by Clark and Nelson[8]

Thereafter, Cunningham [9] in 1977, carried out a push-off test on another possible

type of transverse shear connectors; the transverse plain bar placed through holes in the

channel which –in comparison with the bolt-is significantly cheaper. The results of their

push-off test are given in Table 2.

Table 2-2 Results of Push – off by Cunningham [9]

3. EXPERIMENTAL WORK

3.1 Description of test specimens Three beams were fabricated, loaded and tested .All the beams were simply supported

having 2000mm whole length and span. A typical model perspective, profile and cross-

section are shown in Fig2 from which it is seen that the flange width and thickness are

350mm and 80mm, respectively. Depth and breadth of the web are 90mm and

80mm, respectively. Depth of the T-beam web part cast in a steel channel of a depth is equal

to the breadth of the reinforced concrete web. Sectional dimension of the used steel channels

are shown in Fig 2 with details of their shear connectors.

3.2 Materials

Normal weight concrete used in the fabricated beams was produced by using Ordinary

Portland Cement (Type1) according to ASTM C150-86[10] produced by Kubasia cement

plant. In addition, the natural normal-weight sand from Al-Anbar west region was used as

fine aggregate, and crushed gravel of 10mm maximum size as coarse aggregate. Both the fine

and coarse aggregates used in the present work are subjected to sieve analysis according to

Iraqi specification. Mix ratio for concrete constituents was 1:2:3 by weight for cement, sand

and gravel, respectively. Water/cement ratio was 0.45 by weight.

Diameter of

bolt(mm)

Over size of

holes(mm)

Maximum load per

shear connectors

(kN)

12

12

12

16

0.4

1.6

2.4

1.6

69

72

68

110

Diameter of

bolt(mm)

Over size of

holes(mm)

Maximum load per

shear connectors

(kN)

12

12

12

16

0.4

1.6

2.4

1.6

69

72

68

110



219

3.3 Constitutional properties According to B.S.1881 [11], 100mm concrete cubes representative to the three beams

were tested for compression at age of 28 days. Corresponding values for the modulus of elasticity

Ec were computed according to Eq.17 , page 45 in ref. [11]. The mechanical properties of the

concrete , steel channels. horizontal shear connector and reinforcing steel bars for the three

beams are given in Table 3.

Fig.2 Typical Beam

Beam M1(uniform close

shear connector

Beam M2(non-uniform

shear connector

)

Beam M3(uniform

shear connector



220

Details of the steel channel and horizontal shear connector

Table 3: Mechanical properties of used material

Concrete

(28days age)

Reinforcing Steel

Bars

Steel Channel

and shear

connector

fcu Ec fy fu Es fy fu Es

Bea

m M

ark

M1 38.05 27610

41

4

48

6

21

00

00

31

7

40

0

19

32

00

M2 33.227 26645

M3 25.154 25030

(all number are in MPa)

Transverse Bar

Fig.2: Details of the tested beams (All dimensions are in mm)

350

A-A : Typical beam cross-section



221

3.4 Fabrication and casting

Plate 1 show the steel channels with the horizontal shear connectors ,while plate

2shows a typical test specimen before casting of concrete, from which it is realized that the

cages of reinforcement were first placed at their appropriate positions in the framework

(each consisting of the permanent steel channel and two attached temporary vertical plates

aligned with flanges of the steel channel ) after lubricating the inside vertical temporary faces

and before placement of concrete for easy removal of the side forms after hardening of the

concrete mix. Positioning of the transverse bolts by passing through precisely located holes in

the flanges of the steel channel was subsequent to the positioning of the reinforcement cage.

Plate 1 :The steel channel with horizontal transverse bars as shear connectors

Plate2: Typical specimen before casting of showing the three constituents prior to casting

;i.e. the steel channel, the horizontal shear connectors, and reinforcement

4. INSTRUMENTATION AND TESTING PROCEDURE

A convenient test frame was available in the heavy structures laboratory in the

University of Technology. The tests were done using the 2500 kN capacity Universal Testing

Mechine shown in plate 3. The test prototypes were subjected to a central 1- m length

uniformly distributed load applied at the top (compression) surface of the prototype. Two

series of steel I-Joists with rollers, steel plates and rubber pads were employed as a load

transfer device for the four prototypes .Details of the test setup are shown in Fig3 . Three dial

gauges having the smallest division of 0.01 mm were employed for each test prototype to

measure the mid span deflection and the two relative longitudinal end slips at concrete - steel

channel web interfaces at each load increment.

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN

(Print), ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March

Fig 3

The testing machine has three scale loads :

2500kN) with a capacity of 2500

dimensions of the testing machine make it more adequate to test actual models in addi

large scale models. These features of testing machine satisfy the test requirements of such

stiff and highly interactive composite structural systems.

Plate 3: The universal testing machine

5. PRESENTATION AND INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS

The mechanically measured (by deflectometers) displacements in the laboratory

are the consecutively increasing midspan deflections and the horizontal relative end

steel-concrete interfaces with the monotonic increasing

previously shown in Fig3. Those measured displacements are shown in

respectively .


6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March - April (2013), © IAEME

222

Fig 3 Test set-up for loading of beam

The testing machine has three scale loads : 0 to 500kN, 0 to 1500kN and (

2500kN as shown in Plate 3. The high capacity, stiffness and

dimensions of the testing machine make it more adequate to test actual models in addi


stiff and highly interactive composite structural systems.

: The universal testing machine ( 8551M.F.L.system)

INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS


are the consecutively increasing midspan deflections and the horizontal relative end

concrete interfaces with the monotonic increasing loads applied up to failure as

. Those measured displacements are shown in Figs. 4 and 5


April (2013), © IAEME

kN and (0 to

The high capacity, stiffness and

dimensions of the testing machine make it more adequate to test actual models in addition to



are the consecutively increasing midspan deflections and the horizontal relative end-slips at

loads applied up to failure as

Figs. 4 and 5 ,



223

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000

Loa

d

KN

Deflections (x 0.01 mm)

beam M1

beam M2

beam M3

as

defined

in Fig.2

It may be noticed here that values of the ultimate crushing stress (i. e .characteristic strength;

Fcu) of the concrete are not same for the three investigated beams - as given in Table 3. To

find out the exclusive effects of the horizontal shear connectors amounts and distributions on

flexural behavior and integrity the observed load values are modified ( then presented in Figs

.4 and 5 ) to eliminate the effect of variation in Fcu values. The modifications are done by

multiplying the observed load value of the concerned beam by the ratio (β) obtained by the

following relation:

…..(1)

where:

fcu,o= Characteristic strength of concrete of beam M3

fcu,i = Characteristic strength of concrete of beam M-i concerned , i =1 , 2 or 3 .

β= Beta.

Laboratory test results presented in Figs. 4and5 have then been interpreted to

quantitatively bring out the enhancements achieved in the principal properties within the two

main studied mechanical properties of composite reinforced concrete beams , namely ;

"Flexural Behavior" and "Integrity" due to introducing horizontal shear connectors of various

amounts and distributions .

Fig 4: Load~Mid-span deflection curves for the three composite reinforced concrete T-beams

with 8mm-diameter horizontal transverse shear connectors.



0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 20 40 60

Loa

d

KN

Longitudinal slip at ends x

Fig.5: Load relative end-slip curves for the three composite reinforced concrete T

with 8mm-diameter horizontal transverse shear connectors.

Subsequent observed behavior of loading process (after failure)

for which a view for a typical tested beam is given in

45O inclined symmetric failure surface including portions of crushed concrete in the compressed

flange of the T-beam.

Plate 4: Fracture Pattern for a Typical



224

80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220

Longitudinal slip at ends x0.01mm

beam M1

beam M2

beam M3

slip curves for the three composite reinforced concrete T

diameter horizontal transverse shear connectors.

Subsequent observed behavior of loading process (after failure) is the resulting fracture pattern

for which a view for a typical tested beam is given in Plate 4 . The dominant fracture pattern is a

inclined symmetric failure surface including portions of crushed concrete in the compressed

: Fracture Pattern for a Typical Tested Beam



220 240

slip curves for the three composite reinforced concrete T-beams

is the resulting fracture pattern-

. The dominant fracture pattern is a

inclined symmetric failure surface including portions of crushed concrete in the compressed



225

6. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

6.1 Measured Response They are represented by the load- midspan deflection and the load~longitudinal end

slip relationships exhibited in Fig 4 and 5, respectively.

a) Drawn from Fig4 is the fact that model M1 gives the higher resistance (ultimate bending

moment) and flexural stiffness, where mid-span deflections at the ultimate stages of

models M2 and M3 are lower by 15% and 30% , respectively than that of model M1.

b) Concerning the longitudinal end relative slip at interfaces (which refers to the flexural

integrity of the composite beam), its value for M1 (at load level of M2 and M3) is the

least, where it is about 84% and 44% of those given byM2and M3, respectively. These

are inspected from Fig 5.

6.2 Observed responses

c) Observation of Fig5: Since differences between deflection and relative end-slip responses

between model M1 and M2 are relatively small, and M2 consumes about 60% the

number of the costly shear connector of model M1, model M2 is regarded as the

optimum model (among the three compared ones).

d) Mode of failure. With reference to plate 4 all of the tested prototypes failed due to

compression failure. Here concrete crushing occurred at some points in the flange within

the flange central compression zone directly beneath the 1-m length uniformly distributed

load (resembling the fracture pattern obtained in a previous experimental investigation on

beams of the same type but with headed stud shear connectors [12] ) . A symmetric two –

sided inclined fracture surface begun at each of the two ends of the partial uniform load .

6.3 Comparison between present study and a recent one To evaluate the superiority of the horizontal transverse –bar shear connector

(presently used in reinforced concrete T-beams cast in steel channels) over the traditional

vertical headed stud , a comparison has been made with one of the models of the

experimental work of Al-Hadithy and Al-Alusi [12]. That model is similar to model M2 of

the present work (even in the distribution of shear connectors). The individual difference is

the use of the traditional vertical headed stud in the previous comparable study [12] .

Diameter of shanks of the previous headed studs and the present horizontal transverse bars

are the same.

a) Flexural stiffness This comparison is represented by the load~mid-span deflection relationships up to

failure for the two comparative beams which are given by Table (4) and Fig.(6). It is shown

that the maximum ultimate loads for the previous and the present beams are 58 kN and 83kN,

respectively (which means that replacing the formal type of shear connectors by the present

one increases the ultimate flexural capacity of the composite reinforcement concrete beam

by 43%). Moreover, the stiffness of the present model is larger (by 1/0.75=1.33) than the

stiffness of the former one.



226

Table 4 Experimental deflection values for various load increments up to failure for beam

model M2 and the corresponding beam model of Ref. [12]

b) Flexural integrity The longitudinal horizontal slip along planes of interface between the reinforced concrete

web bottom end and the surrounding bottom steel channel is the most direct measurement of the

"Flexural Integrity" of the composite reinforced concrete beam which is necessary to realize the

hoped "composite action” . The natural bond between concrete and the steel channel prevents

that slip just in the initial load stage (whenever the bond strength increases, the occurance of slip

will be late). Hence, it can be considered that initial slip is the loss in bond and crushing of

concrete surrounding the interlocking devices.

To evaluate the efficiency of the horizontal transverse-bar shear connectors (in

realizing the flexural integrity of the present reinforced concrete T-beams cast in steel channels)

over the traditional vertical headed stud, a comparison has been made with the same comparative

model of the experimental work of Al- Hadithy and Al-Alusi [12]. This comparison is

represented by the load~end longitudinal slip for the two comparative beams which is given in

Table (5) and Fig.(7).It is shown that the longitudinal end slip of the former model [12]

decreased by 25% when the traditional headed stud is replaced by horizontal transverse bar shear

connector of the same longitudinal distribution and spacing (model M2 of the present work). This

means that the new horizontal shear connector increases the flexural integrity by the same

average percentage.

The reason behind this phenomenon is the attributed to the high flexural stiffness of

horizontal transverse shear connector in the comparison with the vertical headed stud of the same

shank diameter.

In addition, there is a stress concentration near the base of the headed stud. High stresses,

reaching four times the concrete cube strength, are possible here because the concrete is

restrained by the steel flange, the connector and the reinforcement. The two major modes of

failure are crushing of the concrete surrounding the connector (for studs with large diameter) and

connector shearing off at the base (for slender studs). The strength of concrete can influence the

mode of failure, as well as the failure load. It appears that the stud strength is roughly

proportional to the square of its diameter and to the square root of concrete strength[13,14].

Mid span deflection x 0.01mm

Percent P Partial uniform

load (KN) ∆1 (modelM2) (present study)

∆2 (with Headed stud

[12] ∆1/∆2

10% 6 47 48 0.979 20% 12 98 100 0.980 30% 18 143 156 0.910 40% 24 188 238 0.789 50% 30 236 321 0.735 60% 36 305 412 0.740 70% 42 365 511 0.714 80% 48 417 620 0.672 90% 54 518 760 0.681

100% 60 712 1180 0.603 average 0.708

��

�� 2� 0.75



0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0 200 400

Lo

ad

k

NTable Experimental end- slip values for various load increment up to failure for beam model

M2 and the corresponding beam model of

Fig. 6: Experimental load ~ mid

corresponding beam of

Percent P Partial uniform

load (KN)

10% 6

20% 12

30% 18

40% 24

50% 30

60% 36

70% 42

80% 48

90% 54

100% 60

(ultimate load head stud)

(ultimate load M2)



227

400 600 800 1000 1200

Deflection x 0.01mm

headed stud (Al- Hadithy and Al-Alusi)

horiz. s. c (present study)

slip values for various load increment up to failure for beam model

2 and the corresponding beam model of Ref. [12]

mid –span deflection up to failure for beam model M2 and the

corresponding beam of Ref. [12]

End longitudinal slip at interface x

0.01mm

Partial uniform

load (KN)

δ1

M2

δ2

Headed stud[12]

7 3

15 5.4

22 8.5

28 12.5

34 17.5

40 28

46 56

51 84

54 119

61 149



1400

Alusi)

slip values for various load increment up to failure for beam model

span deflection up to failure for beam model M2 and the

δ1/δ2

2.3

2.7

2.58

2.24

1.94

1.428

0.82

0.607

0.453

0.409



Fig. 7: Experimental Load ~ end

corresponding comparative

7. CONCLUSIONS

1. Effects of the amount and the

connector is obvious. The use of the

connectors(close near supports and far near mid

bending moment capacity with maintaining the

span wise length moderate (not high).

2. The privilege of the horizontal transverses

studs( used by Al-Hadithy and Al

in steel channels) in increasing the

been evaluated experimentally where

properties have been gained ,respectively.

3. The second main improvement in the flexural behavior achieved by this shear connector

change is the flexural integrity

channel, which is measured by the growth of the longitudinal horizontal end re

slip(between the steel channel and the abutting concrete) with increasing the lateral load. It has

been proved experimentally that the flexural integrity rises by

type replacement (based on investigating the relative en

concrete T-beam cast in steel channels with headed

4. Cracking and ultimate lateral loads :Transition from the case of distant stud distribution (lower

bound)to the case of moderate non

in the cracking and the ultimate lateral load values, respectively. O

the situation of the stud distribution upper bound

decreases in the defined stage loads not exceeding

by 33%.



228

end –slip relationships for the present beam M2 and The

corresponding comparative experimental beam of Ref. [12]

Effects of the amount and the spanwise distribution of the horizontal transverse

connector is obvious. The use of the non-uniform spanwise distribution of such shear

close near supports and far near mid-span) raises the flexural stiffness and ultimate

ty with maintaining the average number of shear connectors in unit

moderate (not high).

The privilege of the horizontal transverses-bar shear connectors over the traditional headed

Hadithy and Al-Alusi[12] in composite reinforced concrete T

in steel channels) in increasing the ultimate moment capacity and the flexural stiffness

been evaluated experimentally where 43% and 33% percentages in those two flexural

,respectively.

cond main improvement in the flexural behavior achieved by this shear connector

flexural integrity of the composite reinforced concrete T-beam cast in steel

channel, which is measured by the growth of the longitudinal horizontal end re


been proved experimentally that the flexural integrity rises by 33% with this shear connector

type replacement (based on investigating the relative end-slip in the composite reinforced

beam cast in steel channels with headed-stud shear connectors of Ref. [12]).

Cracking and ultimate lateral loads :Transition from the case of distant stud distribution (lower

bound)to the case of moderate non-uniform stud distribution causes 49% and 45%

in the cracking and the ultimate lateral load values, respectively. Oppositely, transition from

stud distribution upper bound to the moderate distribution

in the defined stage loads not exceeding 11%, whilst reducing stud quantity and cost



relationships for the present beam M2 and The

distribution of the horizontal transverse-bar shear

distribution of such shear

) raises the flexural stiffness and ultimate

number of shear connectors in unit

bar shear connectors over the traditional headed

inforced concrete T-beams cast

the flexural stiffness has

percentages in those two flexural

cond main improvement in the flexural behavior achieved by this shear connector -type

beam cast in steel

channel, which is measured by the growth of the longitudinal horizontal end relative


with this shear connector-

slip in the composite reinforced

Ref. [12]).

Cracking and ultimate lateral loads :Transition from the case of distant stud distribution (lower

45% increases

ppositely, transition from

moderate distribution causes slight

, whilst reducing stud quantity and cost



229

REFERENCES

[1] Taylor, R. and Burdon, P. "Test on a New Form of Composite Construction ",Proceedings,

Institution of Civil Engineers, Part 2, Vol. 53, December 1973, pp.471-485.

[2] Taylor, R. and Al-Najmi, A.Q.S ."Composite Reinforced Concrete Beams in Hogging

Bending", Proceedings, Institution of Civil Engineers, Part2, Vol.69, September 1980,

pp.801-812.

[3] Yousif ,M., "Flexural Behavior of Composite Reinforced Concrete Beams ",M.Sc. Thesis

Basrah University ,Basrah, Iraq ,1982.

[4] Abd Al-Razag ,N.," Flexural Behavior of Composite Reinforced Concrete Beams", M.Sc.

thesis Basrah university ,Basrah, Iraq ,1985.

[5] Abdul Hussein, A.A., "Finite element analysis of composite T-concrete beam with web

partly in steel channel " M.Sc. Thesis ,Department of Building and construction, University

of Technology, April 2007, p.101.

[6] Al-Hadithy and Al-Kerbooli , O.K.F., "Experimental and Finite element investigation of

composite Beams Consisting of reinforced Concrete Prisms Cast into Steel Channels

",Department of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering, Nahrain university ,2008,

pp.1-8.

[7] Al-Ta'ai, A.A., "Behavior of Composite Reinforced Concrete T-Beams With Webs Cast

in Steel Channel " M.Sc. Thesis ,Department of Building and construction, University of

Al–Mustansiriya, April 2009,p.173.

[8] Taylor R., Clark D.S.E. and Nelson J.H."Tests on a New Type of Shear Connector for

Composite Reinforced Concrete." Proc. Instn civil. Engrs, Part 2,1974 , Vol.57 mar., pp

.177.

[9] Taylor R. and Cunningham P."Tests on Transverse Bar Shear Connector for Composite

Reinforced Concrete ".proc. instnciv. Engrs, part 2,1977,Vol.63 Dec.,pp.913-920.

[10] ASTM C150-86 , " Standard Specification for Portland Cement " Annual Book of ASTM

Standards , Vol. 04.02 , 1988,pp.89-93 .

[11] BS 8110,Part 2:"structural use of concrete " British Standard Institution ,1997, pp 3- 45.

[12] Al-Hadithy, L. k. and Al-Alusi, M. R "Experimental Comparative Study on Composite RC

T-Beams Behavior With Diverse Distributions of Headed Studs in Sagging –Moment

Tensioned Concrete Media". Submitted to publishing.

[13] Ollgaard, J. G., Slutter, R.G. & Fisher, J. W., “Shear Strength of Stud Connectors in Light

Weight and Normal-Weight Concrete”, J. Amer. Inst. Steel Construction, Vol. 8, April

1971, pp. 55-64.

[14] Johnson, R.P. , '' Design of Composite Beam with Deep Haunches'', Proc. Instn. Civ.

Engrs., Part 2, vol.51, January 1972, pp. 83-90.

[15] Ansari Fatima-uz-Zehra and S.B. Shinde, “ Flexural Analysis of Thick Beams using Single

Variable Shear Deformation Theory”, International Journal of Civil Engineering &

Technology (IJCIET), Volume 3, Issue 2, 2012, pp. 292 - 304, ISSN Print: 0976 – 6308,

ISSN Online: 0976 – 6316.

[16] Mohammed S. Al-Ansari, “Flexural Safety Cost of Optimized Reinforced Concrete

Beams”, International Journal of Civil Engineering & Technology (IJCIET), Volume 4,

Issue 2, 2013, pp. 15 - 35, ISSN Print: 0976 – 6308, ISSN Online: 0976 – 6316.

[17] Vidula S. Sohoni and Dr.M.R.Shiyekar, “Concrete–Steel Composite Beams of a Framed

Structure for Enhancement in Earthquake Resistance”, International Journal of Civil

Engineering & Technology (IJCIET), Volume 3, Issue 1, 2012, pp. 99 - 110, ISSN Print:

0976 – 6308, ISSN Online: 0976 – 6316.



230

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The writers of the present work wish to Acknowledge the information provided by the

authors of ref.[12] which forms a part of the research program concerning “Behavior and

Properties of T-Section Composite Reinforced Concrete Beams” that work (given in ref.[12] )

was submitted to publishing but it has not seen the publishing light yet. (29/5/2011)

ا��آ�� ك ا� ��ء �� T �� !��/ #.��ن ,$��+� ا�*�� آ�وا ) '%&% ا�$�#�" ا�0#

�% ا�?"%اوي. ، م��42 إ �اه�9 �8&8. ، د 5��1 ��4% ا��%&3�. د�, ��.4 %��,3

1- A� %�A�,�D ا��"�&C/ آ��A ا�"�%�A/ #$9 ا�"�%�A ا�

2- A� %�A�,�D ا� ��ر/ آ��A ا�"�%�A/ #$9 ا�"�%�A ا�

3- A� %�A�,�D ا� ��ر/ آ��A ا�"�%�A/ #$9 ا�"�%�A ا�

�� ا��ة ��ك ا��ء �� # ا ��ي أ !� ��ي �� !�آ�- ,�+ *�() '!& ا %را� ا ��/! �1 ��ت ا ��# ا

T 2%2%� #3- )! % #5& �4��ت ا ��3ة أ��< =3>; 4%2% ��7#- ��5 �%ام روا85 67 أ 5��?! B! 2 C#4( ذ @ ا /��ك . وا)!� � أ 1 �- و,�7 ا �!(-15�7 ا? �= >� < ,�% ا ��2�Eت – ا E>�ل �< . ا��Gق ا �/�< أ

�!� H�H ;#�?( I(�35�� 85ا� )I )�!#�- , ذج =& ا 1 ��ت ا ��# ا !/�� ا !�آ� ا ! !��H ا �J( ا �E%�< وا !�1و� ا�- إ + 7#�س #�5�7 G, )!�(م ا��ء �Oأ )JP �7; أ�!�ط ا �� ! �< ا )JP �5 , ا 4 + ا )JP و= I(�S4 32�R ا

1�7 #& ا !�%د)#& ��35وا !�=#- ا��T# ا !%رو� =& ا, ا��ء . &!' 2 H�B ا�W �ف 5#& آ( =& ا 1 ��ت اا�W �ف �< آ!# و)�ز2; روا85 ا 63 و)I اW #�ر ا�=B( =& 5#& )�@ ا 1 ��ت =& C#4 ا !�3و= وا ��P و=�3ر� - =;

. درا� ا�Wى

# ,& روا85 ا 63 ا�� 3# اZ63 ا �< ا 1 ��ت ا ��# ,�+ ) رأ�#-( �3#%2)!\ درا� و5#�ن ا= #�زات روا85 ا)�*T +�, ��/! �< a2�R &, -#7�� %2%4 =�3ر� �E =; درا� )`�2�# ��P� +�, -35_ ا 1 ��ت ا ��# ا 5��?! وا )�*T �3# آPJ\ ,& إن , و��5 �%ام روا85 67 رأ�#- Z63 ا و=& )�@ ا !�3ر� =; ا 1 ��ت أ ��و2- ,�+ روا85 ا

< ,�% ا ��2�Eت( �5 ا��ء و)!�=#- ا��T#, اWZ#�ة )! �@ =�3و= ا��ء 7?�ى�< = !�B 35#�س ا��Gق ا �/�< أ (b/�5 2%#�3 ) .,�+ ا �ا <% 43 و% 33( أ,�+ =& ا 1 ��ت أ ��و2- ,�+ روا85 ا 63 ا