• Composites Research
• /
• v.21 no.5
• /
• pp.1-8
• /
• 2008

In recent years, the reversed L-shaped perforated shear connector has been developed to mitigate the problem associated with headed stud and Perforbond shear connector and to simulate the simultaneous failure of concrete and shear connector. And FRP perforated shear connector has been applied to composite concrete and FRP module in the FRP-concrete composite bridge deck. The design criterion of the reversed L-shaped and FRP perforated shear connector has not been established yet since the lack of experimental and analytical study results. In this paper, the existing design equations for the Perforated were briefly discussed and the equation fur the prediction of shear resisting capacity of the reversed L-shaped and FRP perforated shear connector was suggested based on the experimental test, FEM analysis. and the existing equation for the Perfobond. The predict results obtained by the suggested equation arc compared with the experimental results, the applicability and effectiveness of suggested equation was verified.

• Journal of the Korea institute for structural maintenance and inspection
• /
• v.22 no.2
• /
• pp.43-50
• /
• 2018

In this study, to investigate the shear connection material for the composite of steel plate and bottom plate, design standards and research cases for shear connectors in various countries around the world were analyzed and shear tests were performed on the Push-out specimens with a shear connection, which transmits the horizontal shear force developed on the contact surface between the steel plate and the concrete slab due to various vertical loads acting on the bridge deck. Through Push-out tests of shear studs, of which FRP bar instead reinforcement is placed, the shear stud evaluation formula of the steel strap bottom plate was suggested. The suggested equation suggested in this study has the safety factor of approximately three times compared to allowable strength of highway bridge design criteria. In addition, compared to existing DIN standards and Viest assessment equation, the results showed similar values(approximately, 5% error).