Eng. & Tech. Journal, Vol. 28, No.

24, 2010

Development of Three - Layer Composite Steel -

Concrete - Steel Beam Element with Applications
Dr. Jamal A. Farhan*& Dr. Hussain M. Hussain**
Received on: 12/7/2009
Accepted on: 6/5/2010

Abstract
In this study, a general linear one-dimensional finite element beam model is
developed for the analysis of the three layer composite steel- concrete- steel beams
which are a special case of the multi-layer
Connectors, concrete layer thickness, plate thickness, type of loading and
concrete compressive strength composite beams. The model is based on partial
interaction theory of composite beams where the flexibility of shear connectors is
allowed. A program is constructed using VISUAL BASIC language to analyze
this type of beams.
Numerical applications are presented to demonstrate the validity and
applicability of the present method. A parametric study is carried out to
demonstrate the effect of some parameters including the variation of shear
stiffness of shear on the behaviour of three-layer composite beams. The results of
the proposed programmed model shows a good agreement with those obtained by
finite elements method using ANSYS program (Release 11, 2007. The models
used in ANSYS program are shell element, brick element and combine element to
simulate the behaviour of steel plates, concrete part and shear connectors
respectively.
Keywords: Composite SCSS beams, Finite elements, Partial interaction,
parametric study, ANSYS

.
.
.( VISUAL BASIC)
,
,
.

(2007 ) .ANSYS

Introduction full use of its properties in order to

The aim of using or selecting any get best performance for the
material in construction is to make structure being constructed keeping

* College of Engineering, University of Anbar/ Anbar

** Building and Construction Engineering Department, University of Technology/Baghdad
6970

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 Eng. & Tech. Journal, Vol. 28, No.24, 2010 Development of Three - Layer
Composite Steel - Concrete - Steel
Beam Element with Applications

in mind the availability, strength, The system was originally

workability, durability of the devised for use in submerged tube
material and economy of tunnels by a team of local
construction [1] constructions in Cardiff, UK (Messrs
The most important and Tomlinson and partners in
frequently encountered combination conjunction with Sir Alexander Gibb
of construction materials is that of and partners ) [3]
steel and concrete applied for The important advantages of the
buildings as well as bridges. system are that the external steel
Although very different in nature , plates act as both primary
these two materials complement one reinforcement and permanent
another: formwork, and also as impermeable,
Concrete is efficient in and blast and impact resistant
compression and steel membrane.
reinforcement in tension. The full or partial depth shear
Steel components are connectors are used which transfer
relatively thin and prone to normal and shearing forces between
buckling, concrete can the concrete and the steel plates, and
restrain these against also act as transverse shear
buckling. reinforcement .[4]
Concrete also gives In this study a three-layer
protection against corrosion composite element is developed. The
and provides thermal element is used to analyze the steel-
insulation at high concrete-steel sandwiched (SCSS)
temperature. beams with partial composite action.
Steel brings ductility into the The Finite Element Method has been
structure used to derive the stiffness matrix of
Steel-concrete-steel sandwiched the one dimensional composite
(SCSS) construction or double skin element with 9 degrees of freedom
(DSC) construction is a special case per node.
of multi-layer composite A computer program is
constructions. It is a relatively new established using BASIC language
and innovative form of construction to analyze this type of beams. The
consisting of a layer of plain results of the program are compared
concrete, sandwiched between two with those obtained by ANSYS
layers of relatively thin steel plates, computer program and show a good
connected to the concrete by shear agreement.
connectors. SCSS construction was 2. Finite Element Formulation
originally considered as an 2.1 Basic Assumptions
alternative form of construction for In the analysis of three-layer
immersed tube tunnels as shown in composite beams by the finite
Figure (1). element method, the following
It has been used for a variety assumptions are introduced:
of offshore and onshore applications 1. The shear connection between the
including oil production and storage three components of a composite
vessels, caissons, core shear walls in beam is continuous along the
tall building and blast and impact length, i.e. discrete deformable
resistant structures [2]. connectors are assumed to be
replaced by a medium of

6971

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 Eng. & Tech. Journal, Vol. 28, No.24, 2010 Development of Three - Layer
Composite Steel - Concrete - Steel
Beam Element with Applications

negligible thickness having normal minus the losses in potential due to

and tangential modulus, as shown applied loads.
in Figure (2) =UV(1)
2. For each layer, Euler-Bernoulli
assumption of plane sections Where: = total potential energy.,
normal to neutral plane (or axis of U = strain energy. , V =losses in
the beam) before bending remain potential energy due to applied
plane and normal to the deflected loads.
axis after bending. This implies To get the equilibrium equations:
that distribution of strain is linear

over the depth of each layer. =0 (2)
Hence, no transverse shear ei
deformation in layers is assumed.
3. Only longitudinal normal strain, Where ei is any degree of freedom?
slip (connector shear strain) and
According to the degrees of
uplift (separation between layers)
freedom shown in Figure (2) and the
are taken into account.
deformation shown in Figure (3) the
4. The constitutive relations,
displacements and strains at interface
including the stress-strain relations
are as follows:
for layers and the load-slip relation
In component 1 (top layer element):-
for shear connectors are assumed
linear. dw(1) (1)
u (1) = u0(1) .z ,
5. The deformation in the structure is dx
assumed small such that
du(1) d 2 w(1) (1) (1) d 2 w(1) (1)
nonlinearity due to geometry is (1) = 0 . z =0 .z
negligible. dx dx2 dx2
6. Friction and bond effect between
layers are neglected(slip is In component 2 (intermediate layer
allowed). element):-
7. No shear lag is present in the layer
section, i.e. no variation of the dw( 2 ) ( 2 )
layers strain or stress across the u ( 2 ) = u0( 2 ) .z
width of the concrete section is
dx
allowed. du(2) d 2w(2) d 2w(2) (2)
(2) = 0 2 . z(2) =0(2) . .z
8. The load is applied in short terms dx dx dx2
so that the effects of long term
loading (creep and shrinkage) are In component 3 (bottom layer
neglected. element):-
2.2 Derivation of the Stiffness
Matrix
dw( 3) ( 3)
The derivation of the stiffness matrix u (3) = u 0(3) .z ,
can be achieved either by using the dx
minimum total potential energy du(3) d 2 w(3) (3) (3) d 2 w(3) (3)
principle or by using the principle of (3) = 0 . z = 0 . .z
virtual displacements. Here, for dx dx2 dx2
simplicity the principle of minimum
total potential energy is used. The Slip at interfaces
Slip between top layer element and
total potential energy is equal to the
intermediate layer element
strain energy stored in the body

6972

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 Eng. & Tech. Journal, Vol. 28, No.24, 2010 Development of Three - Layer
Composite Steel - Concrete - Steel
Beam Element with Applications

(1) (2) (1) (1) (2) (2)

s12 = u (bottomface) u (top face) = u ( z = dbot) u ( z = dtop )

dw(1) (1) dw(2) (2)

s12 = (u0(1) + .dbot) (u0(2) .dtop ) (3) For 2-nodes
dx dx
(3) (3) (3)
Slip between intermediate layer and uo = N1u01 + N2 u02
bottom layer is:

( axialdeformatio 3)
n in component
( 2) (3)
s 23 = u (bottom face) u (top face)
Theshapefunctions are :
dw(2) (2) dw(3) (3)
s23 = (u0(2) + .dbot )(u0(3) .dtop) (4) 1 x x
dx dx
N = and N =
1 2
The shear flow at interface: L L
ks .n
f(int erface) = .s
p w(1) = N3 w1(1) + N41(1) + N5 w2(1) + N6 2(1)
( per unit length(smeared model))
Also :
Where ks = shear stiffness of one w( 2 ) = N3 w1( 2) + N41( 2) + N5 w2( 2 ) + N6 2( 2 )
connector(force/unit slip)
n = no. of connectors in one row
p = spacing (or pitch) of connector And :
along the beam
w(3) = N3 w1( 3) + N 41( 3) + N5 w2( 3) + N6 2(3)
Separation at interface
a- Between the top and bottom layers where:
3x2 2x3 2x2 x3
N3 = 1 + N4 = x +
L2 L3 L L2
3x2 2x3 x3 x2
b- Between the intermediate and N5 = 2 3 N6 = 2
L L L L
bottom layers
) =w w (6)
(3) (2)
w(separation The principle of minimum potential
The normal force at interface: energy is used to derive the stiffness
k .n matrix (18x18) and nodal forces
q (interface) = n . w( seperation)
p vector (18x1).

kn = normal stiffness of one connector

(Force/unit separation)
Derivation

6973

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 Eng. & Tech. Journal, Vol. 28, No.24, 2010 Development of Three - Layer
Composite Steel - Concrete - Steel
Beam Element with Applications

To get the stiffness matrix (and the

nodal force vector), the following is
used: For ANSYS computer program,

Steel is a much simpler material to
= 0, = 0, = 0, = 0, = 0, = 0 represent compared to concrete. Its
(1 ) ( 2) ( 3) (1) (1) ( 2)
u u u w w
o1 o1 o1 1 1 1
strain-stress behavior can be
assumed to be identical in tension
and compression. A typical uniaxial
And so on. stress-strain curve for a steel
3. Material Modelling specimen loaded monotonically in
3.1 Concrete tension is shown in Figure (5). The
For the linear proposed model, only stress-strain diagram may be made
modulus of elasticity(Ec ) is needed for simplicity to consist of two
to define the concrete model. branches: A first branch starts from
According to ACI- code[5] : the origin with a slope equal to E s ,
up to yield stress f y . A second
Where fc is the cylinder branch is horizontal (perfectly
compressive strength of concrete in plastic) or, for practical use of
computers, is assumed to have a very
MPa and Ec is the modulus of
small slope(strain hardening) such as
elasticity of concrete in MPa.
10 4 Es and this last case is limited
While for ANSYS computer
to the strain 0.01 according to EC4
program, the uniaxial stress-strain [7].
relationship for concrete in
compression is defined according to 3.3 Shear Connectors
(Desayi and Krishnan) [6] as For the proposed model, the
follows: properties needed are the tangential
stiffness of the connector layer
( Ks ), and the normal stiffness of the
connector

where: f = stress at any strain , layer ( Kn ).

N/mm . , = strain at stress f .
2
The tangential stiffness ( Ks ) is
Ec = Initial modulus of elasticity for calculated from:
concrete (equation 7)
Figure (4) shows the simplified
compressive uniaxial stress-strain
relationship that was used in this
study( for ANSYS input data). where ks = shear stiffness of one
connectors (force/unit slip)= 100
3.2 Steel
kN/mm (AZIZ(8))
For the linear proposed model, only
n = no. of connectors in one row
modulus of elasticity (Es ) is needed
p = spacing (or pitch) of connector
to define the steel model. According
along the beam
to ACI- code[5] :
The normal stiffness ( Kn ) is
calculated from:

6974

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 Eng. & Tech. Journal, Vol. 28, No.24, 2010
kn = Normal stiffness of one
connector (force/unit separation)= 1
kN/mm (in tension)= 10 kN/mm
(in compression)
While for ANSYS program, only the
shear and normal stiffnesses ks and
kn are needed.
In this study, the relation
between force and displacement for
the shear connectors is modelled as
linear for the proposed and ANSYS
model, the shear and normal
stiffnesses are defined using the
experimental results carried out by
AZIZ[8].
4. Numerical Applications
To check the validity and accuracy
of the finite element model, two
examples are carried out, the first
presents the analysis of three layered
composite simply supported beam
under mid-span concentrated load
while the second concerns the
analysis of the same beam under
uniform load. Due to symmetry one
half of beam is considered in the
analysis. The analyzed beam is of
6000 mm length(center to center)
and 200 mm width, consists of
(figure 6):
Concrete part of 200mm depth
sandwiched between two
steel plates.
Two steel plates, each of 10mm
depth, one at the top of the beam
and the other is at the bottom of
beam.
Shear connectors between the
concrete and the two steel plates.
The shear connectors are of stud
type with 13 mm diameter.
4.1 Proposed Model Analysis
For the proposed model, the value of
fc = 25 MPa is adopted, thus from
6975
PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com
Development of Three - Layer
Composite Steel - Concrete - Steel
Beam Element with Applications
equation (7) the modulus of elasticity
equals to 23500MPa. According to
the tests carried out by AZIZ[8] the
value of the shear stiffness of head
stud connectors at 50% of ultimate
strength ranges from 106 kN/mm for
(13mm) diameter to 203 kN/mm for
(19mm) diameter. If the value of
ks =100 kN/mm is adopted, two
rows of shear connectors at 200mm
spacing are used
then K s = ks .n / p = 1 kN/mm2,
While the normal stiffness of the
connector layer Kn = kn .n / p .
Since this example is used for
comparing results then, Kn = Ks =
1 kN/mm2 in tension (separation)
and Kn = 10 kN/mm2 in
compression (contact) is adopted.
4.2 ANSYS Model
The shell43 element is used to
model the top and bottom steel plates
while solid65 brick concrete element
is used to model the concrete
sandwiched between the steel plates.
Combine39 is used to model shear
connectors, two types of this element
are used ,one exhibits displacement
in x-direction only to simulate the
resistance to horizontal shear while
the other exhibits displacement in y-
direction only to simulate the
resistance to normal force[9]. The
two types of this element can be
extinguished using KEYOP3
Command, then selecting (UX) for
the first type and (UY) for the
second.
4.3 Load data
The beam is analyzed under central
point and uniform load. Since the
analysis using the proposed model is
linearly elastic, while the nonlinear
material properties are considered
when the analysis is carried out by
ANSYS program, the load is taken
 Eng. & Tech. Journal, Vol. 28, No.24, 2010
nearly half of the failure load. The
failure load is found by ANSYS
program and it is equal to 120 kN
and 40 kN/m for concentrated and
uniform load respectively. Thus the
analysis is carried out using a
concentrated and uniform load equal
to 60 kN and 20 kN/m respectively.
Since one half of the beam is
considered, then the concentrated
load is taken 30 kN.
4.4 Results
Figures (7) to (9) show the values of
deflection, lower interface slip and
upper interface slip along the beam
under concentrated and uniform
loads. Tables (1) to (3) show the
difference of maximum deflection,
maximum lower interface slip and
maximum upper interface slip
between the present study and
ANSYS which are equal to 9.6%,
5.3% and 8% respectively.
4.5 Parametric study
In addition to the results above, a
parametric study is carried out to
demonstrate the effects of the
following factors on the behavior of
this type of beams:
1. Shear stiffness of connectors:
Figures (10.a), (10.b) and (10.c)
show the effect of this factor on
the behavior of the beam
(deflection, slip at lower and
upper interfaces). The reference
value of the stiffness is taken
(1000 N/mm2) which is
considered (100%). The other
values are (500 N/mm2 = 50%)
and (2000 N/mm2=200%)
2. Normal stiffness of connectors: To
investigate the effect of the this
factor on the behavior of the
beams (deflection, slip,
separation), three values of
tensile normal stiffness are
considered, KN=1000
N/mm2=100%, KN=500
6976
PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com
Development of Three - Layer
Composite Steel - Concrete - Steel
Beam Element with Applications
N/mm2=50%, and KN=2000
N/mm2=200%. From the results
it was found that the effect of
this parameter is very small and
can be neglected.
3.Concrete layer thickness: Figures
(11.a), (11.b) and (11.c) show the
effect of this factor on the
behavior of the beam (deflection,
slip at lower and upper
interfaces). The reference value of
thickness is taken (200mm),
which is considered (100%). The
other values are (300mm = 150%)
and (400 mm=200%).
4. Steel plates thickness: Figures
(12.a), (12.b) and (12.c) show the
effect of this factor on the
behavior of the beam (deflection,
slip at lower and upper
interfaces). The reference value of
thickness is taken (10mm), which
is considered (100%). The other
values are (15mm = 150%) and
(20 mm=200%).
5. Concrete compressive strength:
Figures (13.a), (13.b) and (13.c)
show the effect of this factor on
the behavior of the beam
(deflection, slip at lower and
upper interfaces). Three types of
concrete strength are taken in to
consideration,
fc = 20 ,30, and 40 MPa.
5. Conclusions
Based on the results obtained in this
investigation, the following can be
concluded:
1. The proposed method of the
finite element analysis with
the developed composite
beam element appears to be
valid and powerful for the
elastic analysis of the three
layered composite beams.
2. Comparison of the results of
the present study with that of
 Eng. & Tech. Journal, Vol. 28, No.24, 2010 Development of Three - Layer
Composite Steel - Concrete - Steel
Beam Element with Applications

ANSYS program, show that Structural Members",

the maximum difference in Butterworth Heinemann,
deflection is 9.6%. which are 1999, London, 259 pp.
considered reasonable [2] Wright, H.D., Oduyemi, T.O.S.
values. and Evans, H.R., "The
3. The significant factor which Experimental Behaviour of
affects the stiffness of the Double Skin Composite
three layered beam is the Elements", Journal of
shear stiffness of the Constructional Steel Research,
connectors. Vol. 19, 1991, pp. 97-110.
4. The normal stiffness of shear [3] Tomlinson, M., Chapman, M.,
connectors in tension has a Wright, H.D., Tomlinson, A. and
negligible effect on the Jefferson, A.D., "Shell
behavior of the three layered Composite Construction for
composite beams. Shallow Draft Immersed Tube
5. The lower interface slip is Tunnels", Proceedings of the
much greater than the upper ICE International Conference on
interface slip. This is due to Immersed Tube Tunnel
the restraint of the lower Techniques, Manchester, UK,
layer in the horizontal April 1989. Cited by Ref. [2].
direction and due to the [4] Roberts, T.M., Edwards, D.N.
tensile stress developed in and Narayanan, R., "Testing and
concrete at lower interface Analysis of Steel-Concrete-Steel
while the stress developed at Sandwich Beams", Journal of
top interface is of Constructional Steel Research,
compression type. Vol. 38, No. 3, 1996, pp. 257-
6. Increasing the concrete 279.
thickness decreases the [5] ACI Committee 318, "Building
deflection and slip. The Code Requirements for
effect of this parameter on Structural Concrete (ACI
the upper interface slip is 318M-2008) and Commentary
more than that on the lower (ACI 318RM-2008)",American
interface slip. Concrete Institute, Farmington
7. Increasing the steel plate Hills, USA, 2008.
thickness decreases the [6] Desayi, P. and Krishnan, S.,
deflection and lower "Equation for the Stress-Strain
interface slip, while it Curve of Concrete", Journal of
increases the upper interface the American Concrete Institute,
slip. Vol. 61, March 1964, pp. 345-
8. The increase in the 350.
compressive concrete [7] European Committee for
strength will decrease the Standardization (CEN), Eurocode
deflection and slip. 4, "Design of Composite Steel
Generally the rate of and Concrete Structures", Part
increase is small. 1.1: General Rules and Rules for
6. References Buildings, DD ENV 1994-1-1,
[1] Oehlers, D.J. and Bradford, M. EC4.
A., "Elementary Behavior of [8] Aziz, K.I., "Behaviour of Multi-
Composite Steel and Concrete Layer Composite Beams with

6977

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 Eng. & Tech. Journal, Vol. 28, No.24, 2010 Development of Three - Layer
Composite Steel - Concrete - Steel
Beam Element with Applications

Partial Interaction", Ph.D. composite Beams with Full and

Thesis, University of Partial Shear Connection",
Technology, 2005, 170 p. Journal of Constructional Steel
Research, Vol. 63, 2007, pp. 505-
[9] Queiroz F.D, Vellasco P.C.G.S
521
and Nethercot D.A, "Finite
Element Modeling of

TABLES
Table (1): Maximum deflection for central point load
Type of Analysis Present Analysis ANSYS Difference
Maximum Deflection(mm) 16.16 17.87 9.6%

Table (2): Maximum lower interface slip for central point load
Type of Analysis Present Analysis ANSYS Difference
Maximum Slip(mm) 0.4 0.38 5.3%

Table (3): Maximum Upper interface slip for central point load
Type of Analysis Present Analysis ANSYS Difference
Maximum Slip(mm) 0.13 0.141 8%

FIGURES

Figure (1) DSC construction in a submerged tube structure [2]

6978

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 Eng. & Tech. Journal, Vol. 28, No.24, 2010 Development of Three - Layer
Composite Steel - Concrete - Steel
Beam Element with Applications

6979

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 Eng. & Tech. Journal, Vol. 28, No.24, 2010 Development of Three - Layer
Composite Steel - Concrete - Steel
Beam Element with Applications

6980

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 Eng. & Tech. Journal, Vol. 28, No.24, 2010 Development of Three - Layer
Composite Steel - Concrete - Steel
Beam Element with Applications

6981

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 Eng. & Tech. Journal, Vol. 28, No.24, 2010 Development of Three - Layer
Composite Steel - Concrete - Steel
Beam Element with Applications

0.8 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
-2
0.6
-4
0.4
-6
50%KS
0.2 -8 100%KS
-10 200%KS
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 -12
-0.2
-14
50% KS
-0.4 100%KS -16

200%KS -18
-0.6
-20
-0.8
Distance from left sup port(mm) D istance f ro m lef t sup p o rt( mm)
(c) (a)
0.25

0.2

0.15

0.1

0.05

-0.05
0 1000 2000 6
3000 4000 5000 6000

-0.1 50% KS
-0.15 100% KS
200% KS
-0.2

-0.25
Distance from left support(mm)
(b)
Figurer (10.a) Variation Figure (10.b) Variation of Figure (10.c) Variation of
of deflection lower inter-face slip for upper inter-face slip for
for different different values (KS) different values (KS)

6982

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 Eng. & Tech. Journal, Vol. 28, No.24, 2010 Development of Three - Layer
Composite Steel - Concrete - Steel
Beam Element with Applications

0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 0.5
-2
0.4
-4 0.3

-6 0.2

-8 0.1

0
-10
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
-0.1
-12
-0.2 100%h
-14 100%h
-0.3 150%h
150%h 200%h
-16 -0.4
200%h
-18 -0.5
D istance f ro m lef t sup p o rt (mm) Distance from left support(mm)
(a) (c)

0.15

0.1

0.05

0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000

-0.05
100%h
-0.1 150%h
200%h
-0.15

D istance from left support(mm)

(b)
Figure (11.a) Variation of Figure(11.b)Variation of Figure (11.c)Variation of
deflection for different values lower slip for different lower slipfor different values
of concrete thickness values of concrete thickness of concrete thickness

6983

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 Eng. & Tech. Journal, Vol. 28, No.24, 2010 Development of Three - Layer
Composite Steel - Concrete - Steel
Beam Element with Applications

0 0.5
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 0.4
-2
100%h 0.3
-4
150%h
0.2
-6 200%h
0.1
-8
0
-10 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
-0.1
-12
-0.2 100%h
-14 150%h
-0.3
200%h
-16 -0.4
-18 -0.5
Di st a nc e f rom l ef t support ( mm) Distance fro m left suppo rt(mm)
(a) (c)
0.15

0.1

0.05

0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000

-0.05 100%h
150%h

-0.1 200%h

-0.15
Distance from left support(mm)
(b)
Figure (12.a) Variation of Figure (12.b) Variation of Figure (12.c) Variation
deflection for different values lower slip for different values of lower slipfor different
of plate thickness of plate thickness values of plate thickness

6984

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com

 Eng. & Tech. Journal, Vol. 28, No.24, 2010 Development of Three - Layer
Composite Steel - Concrete - Steel
Beam Element with Applications

0 0.5
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
-2 0.4

-4 0.3

Fc = 20 M Pa 0.2
-6
Fc = 30 M Pa
-8 Fc = 40 M Pa 0.1

0
-10
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
-0.1
-12
-0.2
-14 Fc = 20 MPa
-0.3 Fc = 30 MPa
-16 Fc = 40 MPa
-0.4
-18
-0.5
D istance from left supp ort(mm)
D ist ance f ro m lef t sup p o rt ( mm)
(a) (c)
0.15

0.1

0.05

0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000

-0.05

Fc = 20 M Pa
-0.1 Fc = 30 M Pa
Fc = 40 M Pa

-0.15
Distance from left support(mm)
(b)
Figure(13.b)Variation Figure(13.c)Variation of
Figure(13.a)Variation of deflection of lower slip for upper slip for different values
for different values of concrete different values of of concrete compressive
compressive thickness concrete compressive thickness
thickness

6985

PDF created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.pdffactory.com