Figure 1
Composite beams cross-section examples: (a) traditional solution, (b) beam with composite dowels, (c) pre-cambered composite beam.
Figure 2
Steel-concrete composite beams with composite dowels (Adapted from Feldmann et al. [
44 M. Feldmann, M. Kopp, and D. Pak, “Composite dowels as shear connectors for composite beams – background to the german technical approval,” Steel Constr., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 80–88, 2016, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/stco.201610020.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/stco.201610020...
]).
Figure 3
Pre-cambered composite beams, Preflex [
1010 Christmann and Pfeifer. “The Preflex girder for bridge building.” https://www.cpbau.de/en/products/preflexgirder/ (accessed Sept. 01, 2022).
https://www.cpbau.de/en/products/preflex...
].
Figure 4
Typical section of a composite bridge with steel I-girders [1818 D. C. Iles, Design Guide for Steel Railway Bridges. Berkshire, UK: Steel Construction Institute, 2004.].
Figure 5
Development timeline of steel-plated connectors with drilled holes and composite dowel connectors (Adapted from Cardoso et al. [
2828 H. S. Cardoso, O. P. Aguiar, R. B. Caldas, and R. H. Fakury, “Composite dowels as load introduction devices in concrete-filled steel tubular columns,” Eng. Struct., vol. 219, Sep 2020, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.110805.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.20...
]).
Figure 6
Composite dowels geometry: (a) puzzle, (b) clothoidal.
Figure 7
Notation for the section along a composite dowel [
44 M. Feldmann, M. Kopp, and D. Pak, “Composite dowels as shear connectors for composite beams – background to the german technical approval,” Steel Constr., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 80–88, 2016, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/stco.201610020.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/stco.201610020...
].
Figure 8
Geometry notation for the double composite beam with composite dowels.
Figure 9
Composite dowels failure modes [
22 M. Kopp et al., “Composite dowels as shear connectors for composite beams – Background to the design concept for static loading,” J. Construct. Steel Res., vol. 147, pp. 488–503, Aug 2018, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2018.04.013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2018.04...
], [
44 M. Feldmann, M. Kopp, and D. Pak, “Composite dowels as shear connectors for composite beams – background to the german technical approval,” Steel Constr., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 80–88, 2016, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/stco.201610020.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/stco.201610020...
].
Figure 10
Reinforcement details in composite girder with reinforced concrete web and composite dowels [1414 Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik, Allgemeine Bauartgenehmigung der Stahl-verbundträger mit Verbunddübelleisten in Klothoiden- und Puzzleform, Z-26.4-56, 2018.].
Figure 6
Composite dowels geometry: (a) puzzle, (b) clothoidal.
Figure 7
Notation for the section along a composite dowel [
44 M. Feldmann, M. Kopp, and D. Pak, “Composite dowels as shear connectors for composite beams – background to the german technical approval,” Steel Constr., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 80–88, 2016, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/stco.201610020.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/stco.201610020...
].
Figure 8
Geometry notation for the double composite beam with composite dowels.
Figure 9
Composite dowels failure modes [
22 M. Kopp et al., “Composite dowels as shear connectors for composite beams – Background to the design concept for static loading,” J. Construct. Steel Res., vol. 147, pp. 488–503, Aug 2018, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2018.04.013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2018.04...
], [
44 M. Feldmann, M. Kopp, and D. Pak, “Composite dowels as shear connectors for composite beams – background to the german technical approval,” Steel Constr., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 80–88, 2016, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/stco.201610020.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/stco.201610020...
].
Figure 10
Reinforcement details in composite girder with reinforced concrete web and composite dowels [1414 Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik, Allgemeine Bauartgenehmigung der Stahl-verbundträger mit Verbunddübelleisten in Klothoiden- und Puzzleform, Z-26.4-56, 2018.].
Figure 9
Composite dowels failure modes [
22 M. Kopp et al., “Composite dowels as shear connectors for composite beams – Background to the design concept for static loading,” J. Construct. Steel Res., vol. 147, pp. 488–503, Aug 2018, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2018.04.013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2018.04...
], [
44 M. Feldmann, M. Kopp, and D. Pak, “Composite dowels as shear connectors for composite beams – background to the german technical approval,” Steel Constr., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 80–88, 2016, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/stco.201610020.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/stco.201610020...
].
Figure 10
Reinforcement details in composite girder with reinforced concrete web and composite dowels [1414 Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik, Allgemeine Bauartgenehmigung der Stahl-verbundträger mit Verbunddübelleisten in Klothoiden- und Puzzleform, Z-26.4-56, 2018.].
Figure 11
Sign convention for the cross-section’s internal and external effects [
77 S. G. Morano and C. Mannini, “Preflex beams: a method of calculation of creep and shrinkage effects,” J. Bridge Eng., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 48–58, 2006, http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/ASCE1084-0702200611:148.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/ASCE1084-07022...
].
Figure 12
Reference deck cross-section.
Figure 13
Courbon’s method: (a) girder bridge deck eccentrically loaded, (b) transverse section with equivalent loading, (c) transverse deflection profile and girder reaction (Adapted from Binjola [3434 A. K. Binjola, “Load distribution in girders bridges by different methods,” M.S. thesis, University of Roorkee, Roorkee, 1988.]).
Figure 14
Flowchart for the composite beams design.
Figure 13
Courbon’s method: (a) girder bridge deck eccentrically loaded, (b) transverse section with equivalent loading, (c) transverse deflection profile and girder reaction (Adapted from Binjola [3434 A. K. Binjola, “Load distribution in girders bridges by different methods,” M.S. thesis, University of Roorkee, Roorkee, 1988.]).
Figure 14
Flowchart for the composite beams design.
Figure 15
Cross-section geometry notation: (a) traditional composite beam; (b) composite beam with composite dowels; (c) pre-cambered composite beam.
Figure 16
Equivalent steel weight per unit deck surface to slenderness ratio.
Figure 17
TRA-S20-LH15-W deck cross-section (dimensions in mm).
Figure 18
Construction details of TRA-S20-LH15-W solution (dimensions in mm).
Figure 19
Equivalent steel weight per unit deck surface to slenderness ratio for beams with composite dowels.
Figure 20
PCB-S20-LH20-W deck cross-section (dimensions in mm).
Figure 21
Construction details of PCB-S20-LH20-W solution (dimensions in mm).
Figure 22
Equivalent steel weight per unit deck surface to slenderness ratio for pre-cambered composite beams.
Figure 23
PFX-S20-LH15-W deck cross-section (dimensions in mm).
Figure 24
Construction details of PFX-S20-LH15-W solution (dimensions in mm).
Figure 25
Cost analysis: (a) 20-meter span, (b) 25-meter span; (c) 30-meter span.
Figure 26
Cost analysis accounting for a beam height restriction: (a) 20-meter span, (b) 25-meter span; (c) 30-meter span.
Figure 16
Equivalent steel weight per unit deck surface to slenderness ratio.
Figure 17
TRA-S20-LH15-W deck cross-section (dimensions in mm).
Figure 18
Construction details of TRA-S20-LH15-W solution (dimensions in mm).
Figure 19
Equivalent steel weight per unit deck surface to slenderness ratio for beams with composite dowels.
Figure 20
PCB-S20-LH20-W deck cross-section (dimensions in mm).
Figure 21
Construction details of PCB-S20-LH20-W solution (dimensions in mm).
Figure 22
Equivalent steel weight per unit deck surface to slenderness ratio for pre-cambered composite beams.
Figure 23
PFX-S20-LH15-W deck cross-section (dimensions in mm).
Figure 24
Construction details of PFX-S20-LH15-W solution (dimensions in mm).
Figure 25
Cost analysis: (a) 20-meter span, (b) 25-meter span; (c) 30-meter span.
Figure 26
Cost analysis accounting for a beam height restriction: (a) 20-meter span, (b) 25-meter span; (c) 30-meter span.
Table 1
Equivalent cost for materials.
Table 2
Geometric information of the sections obtained: traditional solution.
Table 3
Geometric information of the sections obtained: composite beams with composite dowels.
Table 4
Geometric information of the sections obtained: pre-cambered composite beam.
Case
Short-term
Long-term
ULS
SLS
FLS
ULS
SLS
FLS
Mpl,Rd/Med or σel/σEd
VRd/ VL,Rd
VL,Rd/ VL,Rd
Displacement (mm)
VL,Rd/ VL,Rd
ΔτC/ λφΔτ
Δσc,lf./ λφΔσE,lf
Mpl,Rd/Med ou σel/σEd
VRd/ VL,Rd
VL,Rd/ VL,Rd
Displacement (mm)
VL,Rd/ VL,Rd
ΔτC/ λφΔτ
Δσc,lf./ λφΔσE,lf
TRA-V20-LH15-S
1.63
1.52
1.40
25.46
1.48
1.49
2.93
1.50
1.38
1.30
32.50
1.47
1.47
2.69
TRA-V20-LH20-S
1.53
1.09
1.10
27.07
1.17
1.15
4.60
1.50
1.09
1.03
38.92
1.17
1.15
4.30
TRA-V20-LH25-S
1.24
1.95
1.18
27.57
1.25
1.24
8.76
1.12
1.73
1.12
47.27
1.27
1.26
8.78
TRA-V25-LH15-S
1.65
1.13
1.39
31.42
1.48
1.63
3.11
1.47
1.12
1.35
39.76
1.53
1.69
2.92
TRA-V25-LH20-S
1.54
1.44
1.31
32.16
1.39
1.48
4.92
1.46
1.35
1.27
46.28
1.44
1.54
4.71
TRA-V25-LH25-S
1.24
1.53
1.03
32.02
1.09
1.19
9.50
1.12
1.44
1.03
54.43
1.16
1.28
9.57
TRA-V30-LH15-S
1.61
1.30
1.01
38.39
1.07
1.27
3.18
1.41
1.22
1.01
48.87
1.15
1.36
3.00
TRA-V30-LH20-S
1.48
1.66
1.33
38.46
1.41
1.63
5.14
1.41
1.55
1.37
55.15
1.55
1.78
4.91
TRA-V30-LH25-S
1.19
1.61
1.42
36.05
1.50
1.79
10.95
1.06
1.51
1.45
62.51
1.63
1.95
11.13
Case
Short-term
Long-term
ULS
SLS
FLS
ULS
SLS
FLS
Mpl,Rd/Med or σel/σEd
VRd/ VL,Rd
VL,Rd/ VL,Rd
Displacement (mm)
VL,Rd/ VL,Rd
ΔτC/ λφΔτ
Δσc,lf./ λφΔσE,lf
Mpl,Rd/Med or σel/σEd
VRd/ VL,Rd
VL,Rd/ VL,Rd
Displacement (mm)
VL,Rd/ VL,Rd
ΔτC/ λφΔτ
Δσc,lf./ λφΔσE,lf
PCB-V20-LH15-S
2.17
4.93
1.02
16.61
1.26
1.55
5.50
2.17
5.00
3.79
23.51
4.68
1.14
4.25
PCB-V20-LH20-L
1.42
3.53
1.01
20.65
1.25
1.49
7.14
1.42
3.56
1.57
30.95
1.93
1.06
5.17
PCB-V20-LH20-S
1.63
3.29
1.00
26.54
1.24
1.53
5.06
1.63
3.32
2.10
39.73
2.59
1.05
3.56
PCB-V20-LH25-S
1.10
2.17
1.25
27.43
1.54
1.88
8.54
1.48
2.17
1.49
45.36
1.84
1.19
5.47
PCB-V25-LH15-S
1.94
4.70
1.56
21.45
1.92
1.70
5.19
1.94
4.74
2.74
28.21
3.39
1.09
3.67
PCB-V25-LH20-S
1.60
2.84
1.10
31.31
1.36
1.80
5.67
1.60
2.87
3.38
31.79
4.16
1.21
3.89
PCB-V25-LH25-S
1.00
3.07
1.50
31.43
1.84
1.86
9.53
1.84
3.07
8.45
34.79
10.37
1.05
5.41
PCB-V30-LH15-S
1.59
4.63
1.16
29.69
1.43
1.57
4.69
1.59
4.71
2.67
38.62
3.29
1.07
3.60
PCB-V30-LH20-S
1.46
3.56
1.50
35.39
1.85
1.66
6.35
1.46
3.59
1.44
42.96
1.77
1.06
4.40
PCB-V30-LH25-S
1.45
3.34
1.55
36.14
1.89
1.99
10.08
1.09
3.34
1.24
39.70
1.52
1.18
6.20
Case
ULS
SLS
FLS
Mpl,Rd/Med or σel/σEd
VRd/ VL,Rd
VL,Rd/VL,Rd Deck
VL,Rd/VL,Rd C1
Displacement (mm)
VL,Rd/VL,Rd Deck
VL,Rd/VL,Rd C1
ΔτC/λφΔτ Deck
ΔτC/λφΔτ C1
Δσc,lf./ λφΔσE,lf
PFX-V20-LH15-S
1.31
1.31
1.33
1.05
17.83
1.41
1.11
1.43
1.13
5.09
PFX-V20-LH20-S
2.35
1.05
1.18
1.07
27.22
1.26
1.14
1.26
1.14
5.33
PFX-V20-LH25-S
2.72
1.06
1.11
1.93
29.67
1.18
2.04
1.18
2.04
9.81
PFX-V25-LH15-S
1.39
1.62
1.27
1.07
31.27
1.34
1.13
1.19
1.00
3.91
PFX-V25-LH20-S
1.31
1.66
1.03
1.13
31.67
1.09
1.20
1.20
1.32
6.08
PFX-V25-LH25-S
2.40
1.01
1.19
1.10
35.21
1.26
1.16
1.43
1.32
12.69
PFX-V30-LH15-S
1.35
1.26
1.35
1.25
24.55
1.44
1.32
1.74
1.60
6.22
PFX-V30-LH20-S
1.28
2.24
1.24
1.17
35.34
1.31
1.24
1.55
1.47
6.55
PFX-V30-LH25-S
2.19
1.14
1.20
1.17
38.76
1.26
1.24
1.61
1.58
16.00
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
