Buy article PDF
The purchased file will be sent to you
via email after the payment is completed.
US$ 35
|
Steel and Composite Structures Volume 46, Number 1, January10 2023 , pages 75-92 DOI: https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2023.46.1.075 |
|
|
|
Shear behaviour of thin-walled composite cold-formed steel/PE-ECC beams |
||
Ahmed M. Sheta, Xing Ma, Yan Zhuge, Mohamed A. ElGawady, Julie E. Mills and El-Sayed Abd-Elaal
|
||
| Abstract | ||
| The novel composite cold-formed steel (CFS)/engineered cementitious composites (ECC) beams have been recently presented. The new composite section exhibited superior structural performance as a flexural member, benefiting from the lightweight thin-walled CFS sections with improved buckling and torsional properties due to the restraints provided by thinlayered ECC. This paper investigated the shear performance of the new composite CFS/ECC section. Twenty-eight simply supported beams, with a shear span-to-depth ratio of 1.0, were assembled back-to-back and tested under a 3-point loading scheme. Bare CFS, composite CFS/ECC utilising ECC with Polyethylene fibres (PE-ECC), composite CFS/MOR, and CFS/HSC utilising high-strength mortar (MOR) and high-strength concrete (HSC) as replacements for PE-ECC were compared. Different failure modes were observed in tests: shear buckling modes in bare CFS sections, contact shear buckling modes in composite CFS/MOR and CFS/HSC sections, and shear yielding or block shear rupture in composite CFS/ECC sections. As a result, composite CFS/ECC sections showed up to 96.0% improvement in shear capacities over bare CFS, 28.0% improvement over composite CFS/MOR and 13.0% over composite CFS/HSC sections, although MOR and HSC were with higher compressive strength than PE-ECC. Finally, shear strength prediction formulae are proposed for the new composite sections after considering the contributions from the CFS and ECC components. | ||
| Key Words | ||
| CFS; composite beams; contact buckling; PE-ECC; shear buckling; shear strength; yielding | ||
| Address | ||
| Ahmed M. Sheta 1)UniSA STEM, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia 2) Structural Engineering Department, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt Xing Ma: UniSA STEM, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia Yan Zhuge: UniSA STEM, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia Mohamed A. ElGawady: Department of Civil, Architectural & Environmental Engineering Missouri University of Science and Technology, MO, USA Julie E. Mills: UniSA STEM, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia El-Sayed Abd-Elaal: 1)UniSA STEM, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia 2)Structural Engineering Department, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt | ||