Ijraset Journal For Research in Applied Science and Engineering Technology
Authors: Umang Jain, Dr. J. N. Vyas
DOI Link: https://doi.org/10.22214/ijraset.2022.47832
Certificate: View Certificate
With the development of science and technology in the field of structural engineering, it is possible to adopt pre- engineered buildings in both industrial and residential construction sectors. For important buildings it is more suitable to use pre engineered building as these are more safe and take less time in construction in comparison of RCC structures. In this paper, pre-engineered steel structure will be design and analyzed for wind and seismic analysis with different parameters using software Staadprov8i and analyzed with different loads on building i.e. dead load, live load, wind load, seismic load and load combinations on structure. The main objective of this work is to understand the concepts of PEB and find the least possible weight of structure and various displacement or significance of forces in each direction which will help the structure to be safe and stable. The pre-engineered construction concept involves pre-engineering and quality construction systems which will help to minimize the use of cost and time.
I. INTRODUCTION
Steel Industry is growing rapidly all around the world. To meet the increasing demand of construction, alternative ways of construction are developing. Advances in technology have greatly improved over the years, contributing tremendously to improving living standards through various new products and services. A pre-engineered building (PEB) is one such revolution. They use a defined stock of raw materials that have been time tested to meet a wide range of structural and architectural design specifications. The majority of steel structures being built are only low-rise buildings, which are generally of one storey only. Industrial buildings, a subset of low-rise buildings are normally used for steel plants, automobile industries, light, utility and process industries, thermal power stations, warehouses, assembly plants, storage, garages, small scale industries, showrooms, offices etc. The application of pre-engineered building concepts to low rise buildings is very economical due to its light weight and economical construction. PEB systems are extensively used in industrial and much other non-residential construction world-wide. These buildings were pre-designed or 'pre-engineered' into standard sizes, spans, bays and heights, and use standard details for fixing cladding, roofing, gutters, flashing, windows, doors etc. taking advantage of industrial practices of mass production of components economically.
II. PRE ENGINNERED BUILDING
In structural engineering, a pre-engineered building (PEB) is designed by a manufacturer to fabricated using a pre-determined inventory of raw materials and manufacturing methods that can efficiently satisfy a wide range of structural and aesthetic design requirements. Pre-engineering building primary frame structure is an assembly of I-shaped structural members. The I-shaped beams are usually formed in the factory by welding steel plates together to form the I-sections. The I-section beams are then assembled on site with bolted connections to form the entire frame of the pre-engineered building. Tapered sections are also used to achieve varying depth. The concept of PEB is the frame geometry which matches the shape of the internal stress (bending moment) diagram thus optimizing material usage and reducing the total weight of the structure. The use of steel structures is not only economical but also eco-friendly at the time when there is a threat of global warming. Here, “economical” word is stated considering time and cost. Time being the most important aspect, steel structures (Pre- fabricated) is built in very short period and one such example is Pre Engineered Buildings (PEB). Pre-engineered building are steel building wherein the framing members and other components are fully fabricated in the factory after designing and brought to the site for assembly, mainly by nut-bolts, thereby resulting into a steel structure of high quality and precision. Steel is an expensive material as compared to the rest but when it comes to the cost-savings during the life span of the structure, steel proves to be a very affordable material . Steel can also be made rust proof by the application of special coated paints. Apart from that, steel is an insect and termite resistant material and the maintenance cost is lower during its life span as compared to other materials. PEB are generally low rise buildings however the maximum eave height can go up to 30 metres, Clear span upto 90 meter wide are possible.
III. WIND ANALYSIS
The force exerted by the horizontal component of wind is to be considered in the design of buildings, towers etc. The wind force depends upon the velocity of wind, shape, size & location of buildings. Wind analysis calculation given below according to IS code
875 part 3:1987 ;
Design wind speed Vz = Vb k1 k2 k3 Where,
Vz =Design wind speed at any height z in m/s,
Vb =Basic wind speed calculated from wind speed map of India, k1=Probability factor (risk coefficient clause 5.3.1),
k2=Terrain, height and structure size factor (clause 5.3.2) and k3=Topography factor(clause 5.3.3)
Design wind pressure Pz=0.6 Vz2 Where,
Pz=Design wind pressure in N/m2 at height z and Vz =Design wind speed at any height z in m/s
Wind load on individual structural member such as roofs, walls and cladding given as:
F=(Cpe – Cpi) A Pz Where,
Cpe=External pressure coefficient, Cpi=Internal pressure coefficient,
A=Surface area of structural member or cladding unit and Pz=Design wind pressure in N/m2 at height z
IV. SEISMIC ANALYSIS
Earthquake is a natural procedure of shaking ground due to movement of tectonic plate. The force of earthquake is random so the design engineer need to care full predict of these force and analyze the structure under these random force. Earthquake loads are to be carefully modeled so as to assess the real behavior of structure with a clear understanding that damage is expected but it should be regulated.
Earthquake plays an influential role in analysis and design of structures. Seismic analysis is a branch of structural analysis that involves calculation of a building's (or non building's) earthquake response. Analysis is the process to determine the behavior of structure under specified load combinations.
A. Equivalent Static Lateral Force Method
This is a very simple method of analysis. The main assumptions in these method are that the lateral force is equivalent to actual loading.
In these method, the Base Shear which is total horizontal force on the structure is calculated on the basis of the structure mass and its fundamental time period of vibration. The total design lateral force or design seismic base shear (VB) along any principal direction shall be determined with the help of following expression:
VB = Ah W
Where,
Ah = Design horizontal acceleration spectrum using fundamental natural period Ta, W = seismic weight of all the Building
The Design horizontal Seismic Coefficient Ah for a Structure will be evaluated by expression:
Z = Zone Factor,
I = Importance Factor
Sa/g = Average response Spectrum Coefficient using soil type and fundamental time period R = Response reduction factor
Above the Value of W, Z, I, Sa/g, and R are dependent on the IS 1893 (Part 1): 2016
V. MODELING
In present study, single pitched roof industrial structure of portal frame type modeled. The steel structure of portal frame type analyzed using staadProV8i software.
IS codes we used for wind load calculation IS 875 (part 3) : 1987 and for seismic load calculation IS 1893 (part 1) : 2016.
The Behavior of industrial structure have been studied in terms of Displacement and unity check applied to achieve economical structure.
A. Structural Modeling
Table 1: Structural properties of model
Geometric Details |
||
Structure |
Industrial Structure |
|
Types of Buildings |
Portal Frame Single Pitched Roof Structure |
|
Plan Area |
1050 m2 |
|
Height of structure |
7.5 m |
|
Area (LxW) |
70mx15m |
|
Bay Spacing(Length wise) |
7.11 m |
|
Bay Spacing(Width wise) |
7.325 m |
|
No. of Story |
Ground floor only |
|
Roof Angle |
5.71 degree |
|
Length of canopy |
2.5m |
|
Brick wall height |
Upto 3m |
|
Purlin spacing |
1.55 m |
|
Location of structure |
Indore |
|
Member Properties (Main frame and Gable end) |
||
Size of Rafter |
Starting |
(350/600mm x 5mm W)/(200mm x 10mm F) |
Middle |
(350mm x 4mm W)/(165mm x 6mm F) |
|
|
End |
(350/550mm x 5mm W)/(150mm x 6mm F) |
Size of Column |
Higher end column |
(300/600mm x 5mm W)/(215mm x 10mm F) |
Lower end column |
(300/550mm x 5mm W)/(180mm x 8mm F) |
|
Middle column |
(350mm x 5mm W)/(165mm x 6mm F) |
|
Size of Canopy |
(300/500mm x 5mm W)/(165mm x 6mm F) |
|
Primary Load |
||
Dead Load(Main frame) |
0.635 KN/m |
|
Dead Load(gable end) |
0.342 KN/m |
|
Live Load (Main frame) |
4.41 KN/m |
|
Live Load (Gable end) |
2.2 KN/m |
|
Seismic Properties |
||
Seismic Zone |
III |
|
Zone Factor (Z) |
0.16 |
|
Response Reduction Factor (R) |
5 |
|
Importance Factor (I) |
1.0 |
|
Soil Type |
II |
|
Damping Ratio |
0.05 |
|
Analysis Software : StaadProV8i |
B. Design Parameters
Table 2: Properties of Design Parameters
Parameter |
Value |
Yield strength of steel |
|
FYLD (HR) |
345000KN/m |
FYLD (Pipe) |
250000KN/m |
|
|
Length in local Y axis for slenderness value kl/r, (Ly) |
1.65m (on column) |
Length in local Y axis for slenderness value kl/r, (Ly) |
1.55m (on rafter) |
Length in local Z axis for slenderness value kl/r, (Lz) |
8.96 m |
Length in local Z axis for slenderness value kl/r, (Lz) |
7.50 m |
Unsupported length for allowable bending stress (UNL) |
1.55 m (on rafter) |
Unsupported length for allowable bending stress (UNL) |
1.65m (on column) |
Cm value in local Y axis (CMY) |
0.9 |
Cm value in local Z axis (CMZ) |
0.9 |
K value in local Z axis, usually major axis (Kz) |
2 (Applied on all column full length) |
Allowable L/R in compression (MAIN 1) |
1 |
Allowable L/R in tension (TMAIN) |
1 |
Allowable L/R in compression (MAIN 350) |
350 |
VI. RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Wind and seismic analysis are being carried out in accordance with Indian Codes. The result are displayed in terms of displacements in X, Y and Z direction and Unity Check for optimized structure. As the structure is considered for pinned support connections there will be zero bending moment in X, Y and Z direction.
A. Displacement
Displacement is taken from the software which have been further checked for permissible limits criteria (L/240) according to IS 800:2007 clause 5.6.1 table no. 6. The results in terms of maximum and minimum deflection for X,Y and Z direction shown below.
Direction |
Node |
L/C |
X mm |
Y mm |
Z mm |
Max X |
70 |
42 0.9DL+ WLIP45 |
52.532 |
10.568 |
-0.327 |
Min X |
83 |
14 WRIS 180 |
-40.325 |
-8.536 |
-0.312 |
Max Y |
113 |
12 WRIS 135 |
-29.926 |
32.576 |
4.224 |
Min Y |
109 |
42 0.9DL+ WLIP45 |
42.583 |
-35.989 |
0.558 |
Max Z |
120 |
11 WRIP 135 |
-17.884 |
0.211 |
14.594 |
Min Z |
121 |
10 WLIS 90 |
25.639 |
0.148 |
-14.653 |
B. Unity Check
Unity check have been performed by optimizing structure several times to get stable and economical structure. Utilization ratio permissible limit is 0.95 and to avoid getting over safe structure we considered utilization ration between 0.5 and 0.95 which gives us stable and economical structure. The results for unity check taken from the software are shown below in table.
Beam |
Analysis Property |
Design Property |
Actual Ratio |
Allowable Ratio |
187 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.664 |
1 |
186 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.703 |
1 |
185 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.756 |
1 |
184 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.75 |
1 |
124 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.587 |
1 |
123 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.585 |
1 |
116 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.505 |
1 |
115 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.572 |
1 |
114 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.505 |
1 |
113 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.724 |
1 |
112 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.72 |
1 |
111 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.591 |
1 |
104 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.506 |
1 |
103 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.569 |
1 |
102 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.503 |
1 |
101 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.84 |
1 |
100 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.813 |
1 |
99 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.63 |
1 |
98 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.67 |
1 |
97 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.738 |
1 |
96 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.752 |
1 |
95 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.492 |
1 |
94 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.797 |
1 |
93 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.797 |
1 |
92 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.505 |
1 |
91 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.75 |
1 |
90 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.726 |
1 |
89 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.674 |
1 |
88 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.746 |
1 |
87 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.589 |
1 |
86 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.517 |
1 |
85 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.554 |
1 |
84 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.577 |
1 |
83 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.576 |
1 |
82 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.441 |
1 |
81 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.538 |
1 |
80 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.572 |
1 |
79 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.755 |
1 |
78 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.759 |
1 |
77 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.612 |
1 |
76 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.843 |
1 |
75 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.552 |
1 |
74 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.886 |
1 |
73 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.741 |
1 |
72 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.619 |
1 |
71 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.914 |
1 |
70 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.731 |
1 |
69 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.633 |
1 |
68 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.873 |
1 |
67 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.829 |
1 |
66 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.743 |
1 |
65 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.873 |
1 |
64 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.83 |
1 |
63 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.743 |
1 |
62 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.971 |
1 |
61 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.755 |
1 |
60 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.618 |
1 |
59 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.916 |
1 |
58 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.702 |
1 |
57 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.616 |
1 |
56 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.769 |
1 |
55 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.784 |
1 |
54 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.833 |
1 |
53 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.834 |
1 |
52 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.782 |
1 |
51 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.756 |
1 |
50 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.733 |
1 |
49 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.61 |
1 |
48 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.533 |
1 |
47 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.699 |
1 |
46 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.715 |
1 |
41 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.849 |
1 |
36 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.862 |
1 |
35 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.706 |
1 |
33 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.5 |
1 |
32 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.5 |
1 |
31 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.584 |
1 |
27 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.567 |
1 |
26 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.914 |
1 |
22 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.568 |
1 |
21 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.914 |
1 |
20 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.78 |
1 |
19 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.51 |
1 |
18 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.515 |
1 |
17 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.536 |
1 |
16 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.599 |
1 |
12 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.58 |
1 |
11 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.859 |
1 |
7 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.54 |
1 |
6 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.836 |
1 |
5 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.744 |
1 |
4 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.609 |
1 |
3 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.536 |
1 |
2 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.677 |
1 |
1 |
Taper |
Taper |
0.718 |
1 |
This study explains the behavior of modeled pre engineered building for two most important load factors wind load and seismic load, the conclusion are explained below based on the extracted results: 1) The analysis shows that the value of maximum and minimum deflection for X direction is 52.532 mm and -40.325 mm respectively. 2) The analysis shows that the value of maximum and minimum deflection for Y direction is 32.576 mm and -35.989 mm respectively. 3) The analysis shows that the value of maximum and minimum deflection for Y direction is 14.594 mm and -14.653 mm respectively. 4) On comparing the results we get that deflection is highest for X direction in comparison of Y and Z direction. X direction goes along width of the structure therefore width wise will attain highest deflection. 5) The Unity check results shows that the member properties are within limit between 0.5 and 0.95. Hence structure is stable and cost saving.
[1] Shivani Mehar, Ruchita Nar, Saddicha Jagdale and Gautami Kalal (2018). “Design of Industrial Warehouse”. International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)ISSN: 2278-0181http://www.ijert.orgIJERTV7IS020170 , www.ijert.orgVol. 7 Issue 02, February-2018302. [2] Shaik Kalesha, B.S.S. Ratnamala Reddy, Durga Chaitanya Kumar Jagarapu (2020) “An analytical study on pre engineered buildings using staad pro”. Elsevier, Article history:Received 24 February 2020Received in revised form 1 April 2020Accepted 5 April 2020 [3] Aejaz Ahmed Zende, A. V. Kulkarni and Aslam Hutagi (2013) “Comparative Study of Analysis and Design of Pre-Engineered-Buildings and Conventional Frames”. IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering (IOSR-JMCE) ISSN : 2278-1684 Volume 5, Issue 1 (Jan. - Feb. 2013), PP 32-43 www.iosrjournals.org [4] Dale C. Perry, Herbert S. Saffir, James R. McDonald, \"Performance of Metal Buildings in High Winds\", Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics. 36 (1990) 985-999 985, Elsevier Science Publishers. [5] Syed Firoz, Sarath Chandra Kumar B. S.Kanakambara Rao,\" Design Concept of Pre Engineered Building\", WERA Vol. 2, Issue 2,Mar-Apr 2012. pp.267- 272http://www.jjera.com/papers/Vol2_issue2/AS22267272.pdf [6] M.Suneethal Naresh Kumar, Gillela Reddy October 2016, \"Design and Analysis of Industrial Building with Gable Roof by using STAAD.PRO* International Joumal of Advance Technology In Engineering and Science. [7] Vaibhav B. Chavan, Vikas N. Nimbalkar And Abhishek P. Jaiswal, Vol.3, Issue 2, February 2014 \" Economic Evaluation Of Open And Hollow Stuctural Sections In Industrial Trusses\", Aci Structural Journal. [8] C.M. Meera, June 2013 \"Pre- Engineered Building Design of an Industrial warehouse\". International Journal of Engineering Sciences and Emerging Technologies. [9] Subhrakant Mohakul, Dr. Shaikh Yajdani, Abhay Dhurde,August 2014 \"Design of industrial storage shed and analysis of stresses produced on failure of a joint\". International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology. [10] Manan D. Maisuri, Hitesh K.Dhameliya, Hiten L.Kheni, Vol.1 Issue 12.December 2013,\"Review Of Comparison Between Conventional Steel And Tubular Steel Section For Multi Span Industrial Shed With Truss And Portal Frame\" International Journal of Advance Engineering and Research Development. [11] Shaiv Parikh \"Design of Steel Compression Members\" (According To IS: 800) [12] Design of steel structures by N. Subramaniam. [13] IS 875- Part II (1987), Indian Standard Code of Practice for Design Loads (Other Than Earthquake) for Buildings and Structures [14] IS 1893- Part I (2002) Indian Standard Criteria for Earthquake Resistant of Design of Structures. [15] IS 875- Part III (1987). Indian Standard Code of Practice for Design Loads (Other Than Earthquake) for Buildings and Structures.
Copyright © 2022 Umang Jain, Dr. J. N. Vyas. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Paper Id : IJRASET47832
Publish Date : 2022-12-02
ISSN : 2321-9653
Publisher Name : IJRASET
DOI Link : Click Here