Journal of Constructional Steel Research 60 (2004) 481–491

www.elsevier.com/locate/jcsr

A new simplified method for the design

of composite slabs
Michel Crisinel a,
, Frederic Marimon b
a
Steel Structures Lab (ICOM)-Construction Mitallique, Ecole polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne
(EPFL), Lausanne CH-1015, Switzerland
b
E.T.S Enginyeria Industrial de Barcelona, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Catalonia, Spain

Abstract

Although composite slabs are simple and economic construction elements, the verifica-
tions that are required for their design (structural safety, serviceability) are long and compli-
cated. Current design methods found in standards and guidelines rely on the results of costly
and time-consuming large-scale laboratory tests.
In this paper, a new design approach for the prediction of composite slab behaviour is
proposed. This new approach combines results from standard materials tests and small-scale
tests with a simple calculation model (referred to herein as the ‘‘New Simplified Method’’) to
obtain the moment–curvature relationship at the critical cross-section of a composite slab.
Unlike other recently proposed methods, the calculation method described herein does not
rely on computer driven numerical simulations. Results obtained using this new design
approach have been verified by comparison with large-scale tests.
# 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

The use of thin-walled steel profiled sheeting in combination with a concrete

layer (Fig. 1) results in an optimum solution to the construction of building floors.
In fact, these structural components contribute to a significant cost reduction dur-
ing construction (no form work, quick installation, reduced dimensions, reduced
weight) and provide a satisfactory solution for the strength, serviceability and
economic requirements of commercial and residential buildings.

Corresponding author. Tel.: +41-21-693-24-27/25; fax: +41-21-693-28-68.
E-mail address: michel.crisinel@epfl.ch (M. Crisinel).

0143-974X/$ - see front matter # 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/S0143-974X(03)00125-1
482 M. Crisinel, F. Marimon / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 60 (2004) 481–491

Fig. 1. Composite floor with steel profiled sheeting.

On the other hand, the verifications that are required for the design of these
structural elements (i.e. strength, serviceability) can be long and complicated. In
fact, they require the consideration of secondary effects that are not easy to model.
Examples of these effects include local buckling of the thin steel sheeting, partial
connection between the steel and concrete, punching shear due to concentrated
loads, dynamic effects, anisotropy, etc.
Normally, fabricators of steel sheeting provide engineers and builders with
design tables for commonly used spans and thicknesses in order to facilitate the
design of composite slabs. However, engineers who need to justify their calcula-
tions, or design slabs with non-standard dimensions generally will not have the
necessary information required to carry out the calculations on which these design
tables are based. This is because the information in the tables is determined using
current design methods that require experimental values. Similarly, a fabricator
wanting to develop a new sheeting profile currently does not have the means neces-
sary to predict the degree to which it will be able to act compositely with the cast-
in-place concrete.
Complications in the design of composite slabs, as mentioned above, have led
numerous researchers to develop new methods through the application of numeri-
cal solutions. This allows the designer to simulate the behaviour of composite slabs
using a numerical model, while decreasing (or eliminating) the number of large-
scale tests needed for design. In order to simulate the behaviour of the steel–con-
crete slab numerically, it is nevertheless necessary to know the behaviour of the
various slab components. This includes the material behaviour of the sheeting, con-
crete, reinforcing steel, etc. as well as the characteristic mechanisms acting at the
steel–concrete interface of the composite slab. Instead of using large-scale tests to
determine these mechanisms, small-scale tests have been developed that can provide
 M. Crisinel, F. Marimon / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 60 (2004) 481–491 483

Fig. 2. Shear-bond design method (m&k method).

this information while, at the same time, providing a less costly and more flexible
alternative to large-scale testing.

2. Existing methods

Two design methods for the verification of composite slabs are described in
Eurocode 4 [1]—the shear-bond method [2] (also known as the m&k method [3])
and the partial connection method [4] (see Figs. 2 and 3). These methods are based
on a test program composed of at least six full-scale slab specimens (length 2–4 m,
width approximately 1 m, thickness 100–200 mm). Using these methods, the num-

Fig. 3. Partial connection design method.

484 M. Crisinel, F. Marimon / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 60 (2004) 481–491

ber of tests needed to determine the behaviour of the various existing commercial
products under service and ultimate loading becomes rather significant and testing
programs become very expensive.
Due to the semi-empirical nature of these two methods, neither model can be
said to result in a clear picture of the physical behaviour of the steel–concrete con-
nection. It would be very useful for practising structural engineers to develop a
design model and a set of associated design rules based on a more physical
interpretation of the connection behaviour. It is for this reason that the develop-
ment of a simple method is fundamental for the improvement of such structural
elements. Such a method should be based on a realistic theoretical model and a
simple and inexpensive test program, requiring a reduced number of small-scale
specimens.
Over the last decade, several attempts have been made to develop new design
methods for composite slabs based on the idea of using experimental values from
small-scale tests instead of the standard large-scale tests [5–7]. The objectives of
these developments have been threefold:

– to move away from the use of expensive and awkward large-scale tests,
– to propose a design model that resembles the models used for the design of
steel–concrete composite beams, and
– to take into account parameters that are ignored by the existing methods.

A disadvantage of many of the new methods is their dependence on results from

numerical simulations. These simulations, carried out with the aid of a computer,

Fig. 4. Daniels pull-out test: specimen (a), and typical shear stress vs. slip result (b).
 M. Crisinel, F. Marimon / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 60 (2004) 481–491 485

predict the behaviour of the slab and determine its flexural and longitudinal shear
resistance.
Recent work done by the Steel Structures Lab (ICOM) at the Swiss Federal
Institute of Technology in Lausanne (EPFL) has led to the development of a New
Simplified Method capable of predicting the behaviour of composite slabs [8]. The
proposed approach can be applied to slabs that exhibit both non-ductile and duc-
tile behaviour. It uses parameters describing the longitudinal shear connection
between the steel sheeting and concrete obtained from small-scale tests such as the
one developed at ICOM by Daniels [5] (Fig. 4). The effect of supplementary para-
meters such as friction and end anchorage can also be taken into account.

3. New design approach

The physical model representing the composite slab in the New Simplified
Method can be likened to a composite beam. The steel sheeting is modelled as an
I-section with the same area and moment of inertia as the original sheeting section.
Similarly, the concrete is modelled as a rectangular section with a moment of iner-
tia and area identical to the original concrete section. The behaviour of the com-
posite slab is determined at the critical cross-section, that is, at the location of the
maximum sagging moment.
Material behaviour of the slab components is taken as elastic–perfectly plastic
for the steel (in tension and in compression) and concrete in compression, and as
elastic with brittle failure for the concrete in tension. Bernoulli’s assumption that
plane sections remain plane is presumed. Furthermore, the curvatures of the steel
and concrete elements are assumed to remain equal before and after slip has
occurred (i.e. no vertical separation between the concrete cover and the sheeting).
3.1. Steel–concrete connection

The steel sheeting-to-concrete connection properties are required as input data

for the New Simplified Method. These data can be obtained from a small-scale
pull-out test, which gives two variables: the load applied to the concrete blocks and
the slip between the steel and concrete. In order to use this information in the
method, it must be converted into a longitudinal shear stress, s, vs. longitudinal
slip, s, relationship (Fig. 5) where s is assumed to be distributed uniformly over the
projected area of the concrete.
For slabs with non-ductile steel–concrete connection behaviour (Fig. 5a), an elas-
tic-perfectly brittle model can be used to describe the s–s relationship at the inter-
face. su,1 is taken as the characteristic longitudinal shear stress value that is used in
the simplified method.
For slabs exhibiting ductile connection behaviour (Fig. 5b), two characteristic
values are considered: su,1 attained at first slip and su,2 (and the corresponding slip)
equivalent to the maximum longitudinal shear stress attained in the small-scale
test.
486 M. Crisinel, F. Marimon / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 60 (2004) 481–491

Fig. 5. Non-ductile (a) and ductile (b) s–s relationships obtained from small-scale tests and correspond-
ing models.

It is also possible to include the influence of concentrated frictional resistance

that can occur over the supports of the composite slab in the New Simplified
Method. A coefficient of friction can be obtained from measured values, such as
those found in Ref. [6].
Regarding these tests, it should be noted that a series of comparison tests is cur-
rently planned for several laboratories with the objective of showing the repeat-
ability of pull-out tests in one laboratory and the reproducibility of the results
between different laboratories [9]. The final objective will be to define very precisely
the operating procedures for the preparation and testing of the specimens in order
to validate the proposed pull-out test procedure used in the New Simplified
Method. The global quality (test and design methods) can thus be improved thanks
to the dialog between laboratories and the sharing of mutual knowledge and
experiences.

3.2. Basic principles of method

The New Simplified Method is based on the determination of a tri-linear

moment–curvature relationship at the critical section of the composite slab. Each
portion of the relationship represents a different ‘‘phase’’ of the moment–curvature
diagram (Fig. 6):

Phase I: Linear elastic behaviour, without concrete cracking and without slip
(total interaction between steel and concrete).
Phase II: Elastic or elasto-plastic behaviour, with concrete cracking and without
slip (total interaction).
Phase III: Non-linear elasto-plastic behaviour, with concrete cracking and with
slip (partial interaction).

In addition to these phases, it is also possible to define the three points that cor-
respond with the upper limit of each phase:
M. Crisinel, F. Marimon / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 60 (2004) 481–491 487

Fig. 6. Simplified moment–curvature relationship.

Fig. 7. Schematic representation of three phases at the critical cross-section.

488 M. Crisinel, F. Marimon / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 60 (2004) 481–491

Point 1: Start of concrete cracking.

Point 2: Initiation of slip between sheeting and concrete; attainment of
maximum shear stress due to chemical adhesion, su,1. For non-ductile composite
slabs, this second point represents the point of rupture, that is, the maximum
moment has been attained.
Point 3: Maximum mechanical longitudinal shear stress at interface reached,
su,2; connection rupture (infinite slip).

Fig. 7 shows the modelled cross-section, the strain distribution over the critical
cross-section and the resulting forces for the three phases (and corresponding
upper limits) described above.

4. Comparison of method to test results

Experimental, simulated (FEM model) and simplified moment vs. curvature (M–
/) relationships at the critical section for non-ductile and ductile composite slabs
are shown in Fig. 8. The FEM model was validated through comparison with
large-scale tests. These relationships are compared at the critical cross-sections of
simple span composite slabs loaded by two concentrated forces at the quarter
spans (Ls ¼ L=4, see Fig. 2). For experimental values obtained during the large-
scale testing of composite slabs, only the moments at first slip (Mtest,slip) and at
ultimate load (Mtest,ult) are shown since curvature was not measured during these
tests.
This comparison shows: (1) very good correlation between the simplified method
results and the numerical simulations; (2) good agreement between the calculated
moments and moments from the slab bending tests, both at the first slip and ulti-
mate load levels.

Fig. 8. Moment–curvature relationships for non-ductile (a) and ductile (b) composite slabs.
 M. Crisinel, F. Marimon / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 60 (2004) 481–491 489

5. Why a new design method?

One could ask the question: of what importance is the development of a new
method for the design of composite slabs? The answer to this question is given here
by way of a discussion of the advantages of the proposed method both for the
practising structural engineer and for the profiled sheeting producer.

5.1. For the structural engineer

The present tendency in the domain of civil engineering structures is a move

towards the harmonisation of design methods. The most visible example of this is
the current revision of the European Standards or ‘‘Eurocodes’’ which will eventu-
ally become the unique design standard for civil engineering structures in Europe.
To achieve this harmonisation, it is necessary to adopt identical design principles in
each code for the verification of structural elements of the same type. For example,
the following comparison can be made between the calculations of cross-sectional
resistance for composite beams and composite slabs.

Composite beams

– Calculation of bending resistance: uses the stress distribution given by the curva-
ture of the composite cross-section.
– Calculation of vertical shear resistance: only the web of the steel section con-
tributes to shear resistance.
– Calculation of longitudinal shear resistance: the number of shear connectors
depends on the longitudinal shear forces at the steel–concrete interface; the
design shear resistance of the connectors is given by push-out tests on small-scale
specimens.

Composite slabs

– Calculation of bending resistance: uses the stress distribution given by the curvature
of the composite cross-section.
– Calculation of vertical shear resistance: only the concrete part of composite cross-
section contributes to shear resistance; the composite slab is treated as a rein-
forced concrete slab.
– Calculation of longitudinal shear resistance: currently requires full-scale testing of
composite slabs.

The proposed New Simplified Method is an attempt to harmonise the longitudi-

nal shear resistance calculations for these two types of composite elements by
replacing bending tests of full-scale composite slabs by pull-out shear tests of small-
scale specimens. The bending resistance of the composite slab is then determined
by applying a certain curvature to the critical cross-section until failure of the
490 M. Crisinel, F. Marimon / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 60 (2004) 481–491

connection occurs by exceeding the longitudinal shear resistance (this procedure is

similar to the design of composite beams with partial shear connection). Given the
shear stress values, s obtained by way of pull-out tests, and using an Excel spread-
sheet for the calculation of the M–/ relationship for the given structural system, it
is possible to calculate the partial shear connection moment of resistance of any
composite slab, and from there, to proceed to the verification for the ultimate limit
state.

5.2. For the profiled sheeting producer

The producer is faced with the task of improving composite slab performances
within the constraints of a research and development budget. At present, in order
to provide load tables or charts for only one sheeting profile, he must conduct a
minimum of six full-scale slab tests. This number increases with the number of
parameters (protective coating of the profiled sheeting, end anchorage of the slab,
etc.) and can constitute a significant cost. If the profiled sheeting producer wants to
improve his product by changing the shape of the profile or modifying the emboss-
ments on the sheet walls, he must first develop and build a new profiling tool
before conducting new full-scale composite slab tests. This can be a very costly
process.
With the New Simplified Method, the producer can manually fabricate new
small-scale steel profile samples, cast them into pull-out specimen (see Fig. 4a) and
test them in a relatively inexpensive way. With this procedure, he will be able to
develop and put new products on the market in a much more economically feasible
manner. Load tables and charts can also be produced using the simplified method
without need of full-scale testing.

6. Conclusions

The New Simplified Method presented in this paper facilitates the calculation of
the load-carrying capacity of composite slabs by considering three phases of the
M–/ behaviour observed in composite critical cross-sections. It requires knowledge
of the geometric dimensions of the slab, the material properties (steel and concrete)
and the characteristic behaviour of the steel–concrete connection as determined
with tests on small-scale specimen.
Some technical aspects that require further analysis in order to improve our con-
fidence in the method and extend its range of applicability are as follows:

– The effect of the shear strain distribution along the length of the slab span,
– The effect of vertical separation between the profiled sheeting and the concrete
slab,
– The reduction of the mechanical connection strength due to elongation of the
sheeting in bending,
 M. Crisinel, F. Marimon / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 60 (2004) 481–491 491

– The generalisation of the method to cross-sections other than mid-span critical

sections and to other loading arrangements (i.e. non-uniform or asymmetrically
distributed loads), and
– The adaptation of the pull-out test procedure to profiles with brittle behaviour.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Technical Research and Consulting on Cement
and Concrete (TFB) of the Swiss Cement Industry and the Swiss Commission for
Technology and Innovation (CTI) for their financial support of the theoretical and
experimental work carried out for this project.
Thanks and recognition are also given to Pascal Guignard of Calatrava Valls,
Zurich (formerly of the Steel Structures Lab, ICOM), Ann Schumacher and Ahti
Lääne of ICOM, who were instrumental in the development of the New Simplified
Method. Thanks is also extended to Thomas Lang, of Swiss Federal Railways,
Bern (formerly of ICOM) and Philippe Edder of ICOM for their contributions to
the work presented herein.

References
[1] ENV 1994-1-1. European pre-standard Eurocode 4: design of composite steel and concrete struc-
tures: part 1-1 general rules and rules for buildings, CEN, Brussels; 1992.
[2] Schuster RM. Composite steel-deck-reinforced concrete systems failing in shear-bond. Preliminary
Report Ninth Congress IABSE Amsterdam. Zürich: IABSE; 1972, p. 185–91.
[3] Porter ML, Ekberg Jr. CE. Design recommendations for steel deck floor slabs. ASCE J Struct Div
1976;102(11):2121–36.
[4] Bode H, Sauerborn I. Zur Bemessung von Verbunddecken nach der Teilverbundtheorie. Stahlbau
1992;61(Heft 8):241–50.
[5] Daniels BJ. Comportement et capacité portante des dalles mixtes: modélisation mathématique et
étude expérimentale. Thèse no. 895, Ecole polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne; 1990.
[6] Patrick M. Shear connection performance of profiled steel sheeting in composite slabs. Doctoral
Thesis, School of Civil and Mining Engineering, The University of Sydney; 1994.
[7] Veljkovic M. Behaviour and resistance of composite slabs: experiments and finite element analysis.
Doctoral Thesis, University of Technology, Luleå, Sweden; 1996.
[8] Crisinel M, Schumacher A, Lääne A. Nouvelle méthode de calcul des dalles mixtes à tôles profilées,
Tracés no. 03, Lausanne, 2002, pp. 7–15.
[9] Lääne A, Edder Ph. Pull-out tests on steel–concrete composite slab small-scale specimens. Ecole
polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne, Report ICOM 451; 2002.