Static Push-Out Tests on 29 mm Diameter Shear Studs
Publication: Journal of Bridge Engineering
Volume 29, Issue 6
Abstract
Composite steel bridges in the United Sates are typically constructed using 22 mm-diameter (7/8 in.-diameter) shear studs. The number of shear studs on a girder can be significantly reduced by using larger-diameter studs. This study employed 11 push-out tests to investigate the static performance of 29 mm-diameter (1-1/8 in.-diameter) shear studs. An extensive welding investigation was conducted to develop the optimum welding parameters for 29 mm-diameter studs. Results from experiments showed the static strength of 29 mm-diameter studs satisfied stud strength equations in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications and Eurocode 4. The ductility of the 29 mm studs was comparable or better than that of 22 mm-diameter shear studs. Concrete cracking under service level loading was similar between specimens with 22 and 29 mm studs. Observations indicate that the minimum allowable stud penetration into the concrete deck may need to increase in order for the 29 mm-diameter studs to have good static performance. Using partial-depth precast concrete panels in the bridge deck reduced the static strength of both 22 and 29 mm-diameter shear studs in push-out specimens.
Practical Applications
Efficient steel bridge girder design makes use of a composite action between the concrete deck and the steel girders. Composite action is achieved by welding shear studs to the top flange of the steel girder during fabrication or erection. The number of shear studs needed is directly related to the individual stud strength, which is controlled by the stud diameter. The shear stud diameter most commonly used in steel bridge construction throughout most of the United States is 22 mm. This paper presents laboratory experiments evaluating the static strength of 29 mm-diameter shear studs. The test results showed that 29 mm-diameter shear studs have a static strength that satisfies US bridge design standards. Compared with 22 mm-diameter shear studs, the use of 29 mm-diameter shear studs is estimated to reduce the number of studs needed on a steel bridge girder by 40%. This reduction in the number of shear studs can enhance construction safety, reduce the cost of fabrication, and facilitate the use of partial-depth precast concrete deck panels, which in turn can increase the speed of construction.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Data Availability Statement
Some or all data, models, or code that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Data available include push-out test load and slip data for all specimens.
Acknowledgments
The research reported in this paper was supported by the Texas Department of Transportation as part of Research Project 0-7042, “Use of Larger Diameter Shear Studs for Composite Steel Bridges.” The authors gratefully acknowledge the advice, guidance, and support of the following TxDOT personnel: Jamie Farris, Jadé Adediwura, Doug Beer, Igor Kafando, Paul Rollins, Addisu Tilahun, and Greg Turko. The authors also gratefully acknowledge the following individuals for their advice and support: Clark Champney and Ian Houston of Nelson Stud Welding, John Holt of Modjeski and Masters, Ronnie Medlock of High Steel Structures, Dennis Noernberg of W&W-Afco Steel, Randy Rogers of Williams Brothers Construction, and Karl Frank, Consultant and UT Austin Professor Emeritus. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the project sponsor or of the individuals noted here.
References
AASHTO. 2020. AASHTO LRFD bridge design specifications. 9th ed. Washington, DC: AASHTO.
AASHTO. 2021. Bridge committee agenda item, LRFD bridge design specifications: Section 6, various articles, T-14 structural steel design, June 2, 2021. Washington, DC: AASHTO.
ASTM. 2015. Standard practice for capping cylindrical concrete specimens. ASTM C617/C617M-15. Washington, DC: ASTM.
ASTM. 2021. Standard test method for compressive strength of cylindrical concrete specimens. ASTM C39/C39M-21. Washington, DC: ASTM.
AWS (American Welding Society). 2020. Bridge welding code. AASHTO/AWS D1.5M/D1.5. Washington, DC: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials and American Welding Society.
Badie, S. S., A. F. Morgan Girgis, M. K. Tadros, and K. Sriboonma. 2011. “Full-Scale testing for composite slab/beam systems made with extended stud spacing.” J. Bridge Eng. 16 (5): 653–661. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000215.
Badie, S. S., M. Tadros, H. Kakish, D. Splittgerber, and M. Baishya. 2002. “Large shear studs for composite action in steel bridge girders.” J. Bridge Eng. 7 (3): 195–203. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0702(2002)7:3(195).
CEN (European Committee for Standardization). 2004. Design of composite steel and concrete structures, part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings. Eurocode 4, EN 1994-1-1. Brussels, Belgium: CEN.
Deng, X. 2023. “Static push-out tests and finite element studies on larger diameter shear studs for composite steel bridges.” Ph.D. thesis, Dept. of Civil, Architectural and Environmental Engineering, Univ. of Texas at Austin.
Dowell, R. K., and J. W. Smith. 2006. “Structural tests of precast, prestressed concrete deck panels for California freeway bridges.” PCI J. 51 (2): 76. https://doi.org/10.15554/pcij.03012006.76.87.
Hu, Y., H. Yin, X. Ding, S. Li, and J. Q. Wang. 2020. “Shear behavior of large stud shear connectors embedded in ultra-high-performance concrete.” Adv. Struct. Eng. 23 (16): 3401–3414. https://doi.org/10.1177/1369433220939208.
ISO (International Organization for Standardization). 2017. Welding – Arc stud welding of metallic materials. ISO Standard 14555. Geneva: IS O.
Kakish, H. F. 1998. “Composite action in bridge I-girder systems.” Ph.D. thesis, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Univ. of Nebraska.
Lee, P. G., C. S. Shim, and S. P. Chang. 2005. “Static and fatigue behavior of large stud shear connectors for steel-concrete composite bridges.” J. Constr. Steel Res. 61 (9): 1270–1285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2005.01.007.
Lin, Z., and Y. Liu. 2015. “Experimental study on shear behavior of large stud connectors.” J. Tongji Univ. (Nat. Sci.) 43 (12): 1788–1793.
Mundie, D. 2011. “Fatigue testing and design of large diameter shear studs used in highway bridges.” M.S. thesis, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Auburn Univ.
Ollgaard, J. G., R. G. Slutter, and J. W. Fisher. 1971. “Shear strength of stud connectors in lightweight and normal weight concrete.” Eng. J. Am. Inst. Steel Constr. 8 (2): 55–64.
Ovuoba, B., and G. S. Prinz. 2016. “Fatigue capacity of headed shear studs in composite bridge girders.” J. Bridge Eng. 21: 12. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000915.
Pallarés, L., and J. F. Hajjar. 2010. “Headed steel stud anchors in composite structures, part I: Shear.” J. Constr. Steel Res. 66 (2): 198–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2009.08.009.
Provines, J. T., and J. M. Ocel. 2019. Strength and fatigue resistance of clustered shear stud connectors in composite steel girders. Publication No. FHWA-HRT-20-005. Washington, DC: Federal Highway Administration.
Shim, C. S., P. G. Lee, and T. Y. Yoon. 2004. “Static behavior of large stud shear connectors.” Eng. Struct. 26 (12): 1853–1860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2004.07.011.
Slutter, R. G., and J. W. Fisher. 1966. Fatigue strength of shear connectors. Rep. No. 316.2. Bethlehem, PA: Fritz Engineering Laboratory, Lehigh Univ.
SSRC (Structural Stability Research Council). 2010. “Technical memorandum No. 7: Tension testing” and “Technical memorandum No. 8: Standard methods and definitions for tests for static yield stress.” In Stability design criteria for metal structures, 6th ed., edited by Ronald D. Ziemian, 412–455. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Texas DOT (Texas Department of Transportation) 2019a. Miscellaneous details: Steel girders and beams – SGMD. Austin, TX: Texas DOT.
Texas DOT (Texas Department of Transportation) 2019b. Prestressed concrete panels deck details. Austin, TX: Texas DOT.
Texas DOT (Texas Department of Transportation) 2019c. Prestressed concrete panel fabrication details. Austin, TX: Texas DOT.
Texas DOT (Texas Department of Transportation) 2021. Preferred practices for steel bridge design, fabrication, and erection. Austin, TX: Texas DOT.
Texas DOT (Texas Department of Transportation) 2023. Bridge design manual – LRFD. Austin, TX: Texas DOT.
Viest, I. M. 1956. “Investigation of stud shear connectors for composite concrete and steel T-beams.” J. Am. Concr Inst. 27 (8): 875–891.
Wang, J., J. Qi, T. Tong, Q. Xu, and H. Xiu. 2019. “Static behavior of large stud shear connectors in steel-UHPC composite structures.” Eng. Struct. 178: 534–542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.07.058.
Wang, J., Q. Xu, Y. Yao, J. Qi, and H. Xiu. 2018. “Static behavior of grouped large headed stud-UHPC shear connectors in composite structures.” Compos. Struct. 206: 202–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2018.08.038.
Yang, F., Y. Liu, and Y. Li. 2018. “Push-out tests on large diameter and high strength welded stud connectors.” Adv. Civ. Eng. 2018: 4780759. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/4780759.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Bridge Engineering
Volume 29 • Issue 6 • June 2024
Copyright
© 2024 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Sep 12, 2023
Accepted: Jan 27, 2024
Published online: Apr 12, 2024
Published in print: Jun 1, 2024
Discussion open until: Sep 12, 2024
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.