# Study on Shear Resistance and Structural Performance of Corrugated Steel-Concrete Composite Deck
## 3 Influence of the Structural Parameters of the Shear Stud on Its Shear Resistance
Figure 11: Load slip curves for load group B: (**a**) \(h_{s}\) = 230 mm; (**b**) \(h_{s}\) = 200 mm; (**c**) \(h_{s}\) = 180 mm; (**d**) \(h_{s}\) = 160 mm. The load slip data obtained in the roll-out test model simulations for each of the above groups of shear stud shear keys were averaged and divided by two to obtain the shear performance index of individual shear studs with different height-to-diameter ratios and collated as shown in Table 5.  
With the increase in the height-to-diameter ratio of the shear connection key of the shear stud \(h_{s}/d_{s}\), the shear load capacity also increases accordingly. For group A of \(d_{s}\) = 16 mm, the shear load capacity and shear stiffness of the pins with a height-to-diameter ratio of 14.4, 12.5, and 11.3 are 23%, 17%, and 6% higher than those with a height-to-diameter ratio of 10.0, respectively; for group B of \(d_{s}\) = 19 mm, the shear load capacity and \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Group**} & \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} **Group** \\ **Number** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} **Height-to-** \\ **Diameter Ratio** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} **Shear Load** \\ **Capacity \(N_{u}\)** \\ **(kN)** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} **Calculated Shear** \\ **Bearing Capacity** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{\
\begin{tabular}{c} **N\({}_{0}\)/N\({}_{u}\)** \\ **(kN)** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{
\begin{tabular}{c} **Calculated** \\ **Stiffness \(K_{s}\)** \\ **(kN/mm)** \\ \end{tabular} } \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{A} & A-1 & 14.4 & 104.8 & 54.0 & 0.52 & 445.9 \\  & A-2 & 12.5 & 99.5 & 54.0 & 0.54 & 423.4 \\  & A-3 & 11.3 & 90.4 & 54.0 & 0.60 & 384.6 \\  & A-4 & 10.0 & 85.1 & 54.0 & 0.63 & 362.1 \\  & B-1 & 12.1 & 121.0 & 86.7 & 0.72 & 433.5 \\  & B-2 & 10.5 & 118.0 & 86.7 & 0.73 & 422.7 \\  & B-3 & 9.5 & 112.5 & 86.7 & 0.77 & 403.0 \\  & B-4 & 8.4 & 106.3 & 86.7 & 0.82 & 380.9 \\  & C-1 & 10.4 & 148.5 & 121.0 & 0.77 & 471.9 \\  & C-2 & 9.1 & 144.5 & 121.0 & 0.84 & 447.1 \\  & C-3 & 8.2 & 143.2 & 121.0 & 0.84 & 443.1 \\  & C-4 & 7.3 & 139.9 & 121.0 & 0.91 & 432.9 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: Comparison of shear resistance of shear studs by group. shear stiffness of pins with a height-to-diameter ratio of 12.1, 10.5, and 9.5 are 14%, 11%, and 5% higher than those with a height-to-diameter ratio of 8.4, respectively; for group C of \(d_{s}\) = 22 mm, the shear load capacity and shear stiffness for height-to-diameter ratios of 10.4, 9.1, and 8.2 are 6%, 3%, and 2% higher than those for a height-to-diameter ratio of 7.3, respectively. The height-to-diameter ratio of the spigot is an important factor influencing the shear resistance of the spigot. The influence of the height-to-diameter ratio is reflected in the fact that the ultimate shear capacity and shear stiffness of the spigot are generally increased with an increase in the height-to-diameter ratio. When the diameter of the shear stud is 16 mm or 19 mm, the shear bearing capacity increases significantly with the increase in the height-to-diameter ratio; when the diameter of the shear stud is 22 mm, the increase in the height-to-diameter ratio can also lead to an increase in the shear bearing capacity of the shear stud, but the increase is smaller. Overall, in practical engineering applications, taking into account the space occupied by the shear studs, the height restriction, and the cost, it is advisable to control the height-to-diameter ratio of the shear studs to around 9-12. The calculated and simulated values for groups B and C are close to each other, while the difference between the two values for group A is larger. \(N_{0}/N_{u}\) is between 0.52 and 0.91. The height of the shear studs, \(h_{s}\), was not taken into account, resulting in the shear bearing capacity of the shear studs being generally less than the actual bearing capacity of the shear studs.