JOURNAL OF MATERIALS AND ENGINEERING STRUCTURES 10 (2023) 273–282 273

Research Paper

Structural Analysis and Simulation of Innovative Composite Building

Consisting of LGS and Load Bearing Ferrocast Wall Panels Using FEM

Mrudula S. Kulkarni a,*, Arun Purandare b, Saarim Momin c, Sumant Shinde c

a
Professor, Civil Engineering, [Link] Karad MIT, World Peace University Pune, Maharashtra, India
b
Senior Structural Consultant, member ASCE,
c
Research Assistant,[Link] Karad MIT, World Peace University Pune, Maharashtra, India

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Article history : In the construction of any structure, the most important factor considered today are cost
of construction and ability of the building to resist loads and earthquakes. Research is
Received : 29 August 2022
going on about various precast composite technologies to get a structurally strong system
Revised : 19 April 2023 yet with reduced time and cost of construction, thus making it an affordable structural
system for modular construction. Considering these factors, light gauge steel or commonly
Accepted : 28 April 2023
known as cold formed steel and precast ferrocement composite structures are gaining
Keywords: popularity in the Indian construction industry. This article is an attempt to review
structural behaviour of innovative use of LGS and Ferrocement, sandwich panel
Finite element analysis composite construction. In the present research work, Finite Element analysis is done for
Light Gauge Steel typical residential building made of precast ferrocement panels combined with light gauge
steel composite structure. Finally, stresses in the ferrocement element are checked with
Ferrocement composite experimental values thus determining the load carrying capacity of the structure subjected
permissible stresses to dead, live and seismic loads. Overall proving this load bearing composite construction
system to be more effective with respect to speed of construction, cost of construction and
earthquake resistance affordability at the same time enhanced structural performance. Thus, a practically
enhanced solution to substitute the conventional RCC structure is possible using this LGS
Ferrocast/ferrocement composite construction technology. The assumption for this
composite technology is that all ferrocement structural components are factory made in
custom sizes under strict quality control as to achieve desired permissible stresses.

1 Introduction

The cost of RCC construction in India is increasing exponentially day by day. Also, a major amount of resources are
wasted during its construction and after its demolition [1]. For the low rise buildings light gauge steel framing structure can
be effectively used for residential as well as commercial buildings and industrial sheds [2-4]. This type of construction is also

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [Link]@[Link]

e-ISSN: 2170-127X,
274 JOURNAL OF MATERIALS AND ENGINEERING STRUCTURES 10 (2023) 273–282

used for non-structural framing, such as interior partitions or cladding for external walls [5, 6]. This form of construction was
actually developed for interior partitions generally at commercial office spaces. The basic needs of the construction industry
are fulfilled by such types of structures and thus they have a considerable acceptance in the industry in various structural and
non structural ways [3-6].

Fig. 1(a) – Section of Ferrocement-LGS panel sandwich wall unit

Various codes can be used to design light gauge steel framed structures as per local requirements and are based on factory
made galvanised light gauge steel. As no heat is utilised while creating light gauge steel section, which is through a cold
formed method, this method creates high tensile and light weight sheets [7, 8]. The surface of the sheet is covered with a zinc
alloy which covers the steel surface completely and thus seals it from corrosive action of the environment. This framing of
light gauge steel can be covered by various types of claddings depending upon the requirement and/or availability. These
claddings will act as wall panels of the system [9]. They include gypsum boards, metal insulated panels, reinforced concrete
panels, wood panels, fibre cement sheets, ferrocement composites and many more. Of all the mentioned varieties, ferrocement
composite sheets are being widely researched and used today. A Ferrocast panel is a thin cement mortar precast panel,
reinforced with closely spaced weld mesh layers [10].

Fig. 1(b) – Floor Beam to slab connection details.

The LGS ferrocement panel wall system is produced by LGS section and Ferrocast panels assembled at site thus forming
structural wall system and framework of a building eg. Varying sizes of walls and floors. The Ferrocast panels are factory
manufactured in standard dimensions [3, 4, 6]. The framing of LGS is erected on site. The panels are connected to LGS frame
on either side of LGS section using various methods for connection [6]. The assembly of this wall is done using various
special types of self tapping screws and bolts. After assembling Ferrocast panels on either side of LGS the total thickness of
wall unit is 125 mm.
In the present study, finite element modelling is done for ferrocement/ Ferrocast panel and light gauge steel, composite
wall unit. It is subjected to loads combination. The proposed wall is LGS section placed between two panels made of
ferrocement with design and sectional details as shown in figure1(a). The proposed dimensions of the LGS section 89x40x1
mm with yield strength higher than 450 MPa and ferrocement panel are 600x900x18 mm precast in factory as customised
product.
The study is carried out using STAAD PRO software. A complete line model is created of typical G+5 storied structure,
as shown in part line diagram fig No.2. The finite element model of a representative single load bearing wall, which is
subjected to the total loads which act at the ground floor of the same G+5 building is done. The load combination of dead
 JOURNAL OF MATERIALS AND ENGINEERING STRUCTURES 10 (2023) 273–282 275

load, live load are applied as uniformly distributed intensity on composite wall, as line load on wall panel units as walls are
designed as load bearing. The boundary condition at applied at connection of wall panel unit and plinths with all degrees of
freedom constrained. At mutually perpendicular wall panels, boundary conditions allow translation in horizontal plane due
to lateral force at each floor level. Thus the entire model acts as box structure and utilises strength by virtue of stiffness of
box. The stresses that will thus occur in the ferrocement plates and LGS section will be checked for its capacity which is
obtained by laboratory experimentation and published by the author earlier [6, 7, 9-12]. The discussion over the obtained
results gives fare idea of structural behaviour of this innovative composite construction and utilisation of composite material
strength for G+ 5 constructions.

Fig. 1(c) – LGS Frame and floor fixing details

Fig. 1(d) – Details of wall connection Fig. 1(e) – Details of LGS Cross members

2 Materials and Methods

Modelling approach of G+5 model and the finite element wall model are described in this section. Two main materials
are considered in this study light gauge steel and ferrocement. The specifications of these materials vary according to the
requirements of the structure and studies conducted in the past. Mainly the ferrocement panels used in the structure will be
observed.
276 JOURNAL OF MATERIALS AND ENGINEERING STRUCTURES 10 (2023) 273–282

2.1 Light gauge steel

The strength of steel used for plates in the early 1960s was 250MPa. Strengths of 550MPa are now possible thanks to
advancements in the production of steel and its alloys [7]. We are using yield strength of steel as minimum 450 MPa.
Galvanized sheets are also an option for longer life. In LGS sections, these plates serve as the primary material input for
softwear. The steel plate thickness that is available to the manufacturer determines the thickness of the sections. The
thicknesses range from 0.7 mm to 2.3 mm, though they do vary slightly depending on the source [8]. Self-tapping screws are
used to join the vertical and horizontal wall portions together [9]. The CVC former machine is used to make hole on the outer
section. The screws that are often used for this connection are 4mm in diameter and of appropriate length [2, 4, 6]. Capacities
of typical sections are given in IS code 801. For instance, 89x41x1.2 mm is 3502 kg and for 89x41x1.5 mm is 4800 kg. Here
we have used Indian standard section details only because author intends to target Indian construction scenario at present.
Similar section details can be available in any other code of standards.

Fig. 1(f) – Section of typical Ferrocement-LGS frame

2.2 Precast Ferrocement panels: Ferrocast or Ferrocast

The author in their previous research have extensively experimented with mix design of mortar for precasting process of
Ferrocast panels [6, 11]. The preferred cement is regular Portland cement in grades 41 or 53. Pozzolana cement is not
recommended since the mortar needs to develop early strength. Given the strength-gain characteristics of the cement and the
additives used in the mortar mix, the mix design is appropriately modified. The strength and workability during casting are
the most crucial factors for creating the mortar mixture for the Ferrocast panels. Concrete’s plastic qualities, such as
workability, setting time, and early strength increase, can be altered using additives [6, 11]. A variety of steel mesh types
have been employed throughout the years to create ferrocement products. We are using weld mesh [12]. The optimum range
for wire diameters is from 1.0mm to 1.5mm [13]. The ideal wire spacing is between 15 mm and 25 mm. For typical
application, a mean value of 20 mm x 20 mm spacing in both directions is chosen. These requirements are used to make
Ferrocast panels. The capacity of a single ferrocement panel will be 12x18x1200=21744 kg per panel.

Fig. 1(g) – Reinforcement details of ferrocement pane

 JOURNAL OF MATERIALS AND ENGINEERING STRUCTURES 10 (2023) 273–282 277

3 Finite Element Method modelling and analysis

An approved working drawing of a G+5 typical building is modelled in STAAD Pro. The part framing plan is shown in
the figure 2a,2b which shows cold rolled channel sections 90x40x1.6 mm used as columns and 150x50x3.15 mm used as
beam sections. The entire structure consists of light gauge steel frames. The vertical LGS sections in load bearing walls are
placed at a distance of 600 mm or less as per the required dimension for connection purpose.

Fig. 2(a) – Ground floor framing plan used for G+5 building (Refer detail ‘A’ fig. 2 (c) for clarity

Fig. 2(b) – First floor framing plan used for G+5 building (Refer detail ‘B’ fig. 2 (c) for clarity

Fig. 2(c) – Details from floor plans use

The input loading conditions for the model are as stated below:
(1) Dead load, consisting of Self weight – Generated from STAAD Pro, Wall load – 1 kN/m, Slab load – 2 kN/m2
(Slab – 1.25 kN/m2& Floor finish – 0.75 kN/m2)
(2) Live load, in accordance with IS 875 part 2, live load – 2 kN/m2
(3) Seismic load in accordance with IS 1893 – 2016, Earthquake Zone – III (Pune, India region), response reduction
factor – 5, importance factor – 1.2, earthquake directions – X & Z, seismic loads generated by inputs given to the software.
278 JOURNAL OF MATERIALS AND ENGINEERING STRUCTURES 10 (2023) 273–282

Following thirteen load combinations used in the model as per Indian standards code of practice.
1.5(DL+LL), 1.2(DL+LL+EQX), 1.2(DL+LL+EQZ), 1.2(DL+LL-EQX), 1.2(DL+LL-EQZ), 1.5(DL+EQX),
1.5(DL+EQZ), 1.5(DL-EQX), 1.5(DL-EQZ), 0.9DL+1.5EQX, 0.9DL+1.5EQZ, 0.9DL-1.5EQX, 0.9DL-1.5EQZ.
Country wise these load combinations may vary but not much. The local earthquake parameters will have impact on load
combinations.

Fig. 3 – 3D view of G+5 model and stress indicators

3.1 Finite element wall model

A ferrocement and LGS composite load bearing wall is modelled for second phase of finite element analysis. The loads
which are acting on the ground floor load bearing wall, of the main G+5 model are entirely transferred to the finite element
wall model. In meshing the elements of size is maintained as 60 mm x 90 mm. Ferrocement plate elements are assigned
thickness of 18 mm and light gauge steel plate elements are assigned thickness of 1 mm. Their respective material properties
like Modulus of elasticity, yield stress poisons ratio are assigned. The load bearing cross-section of LGS and Ferrocement
panels resting on plinth beam, transfer the load to plinth beam below. Accordingly, the common nodes of wall panel system
and plinth beam are applied with boundary conditions to constrain the all the displacements as shown in figure 6. The analysis
is run to obtain parameters at each node like displacements, stresses in LGS as well as Ferrocement panels at each node.

Fig. 6 – Finite element meshed sandwich wall model Fig. 7: Analysis of wall, stress contour plot
 JOURNAL OF MATERIALS AND ENGINEERING STRUCTURES 10 (2023) 273–282 279

The post processing indicates the results of displacements and stresses in ferrocement panel and LGS sections in the form
of output list as well as in the form of coloured contour plot for easy understanding. The colour contour plot gives idea of
level of stresses as indicated in fig 7. The model is thus checked for stresses obtained after analyzing it and are compared
with the available experimental values. Thus we have analysis of entire G+5 system and from this analysis the part analysis
of panel at ground floor is carried out for in-plane loading obtained from G +5 analysis. Both the models were analyzed one
after the other. Modelling was done simultaneously. Output of one model was the input of the second model. Results obtained
from G+5 model include, the maximum load observed at the ground floor wall of the structure. The maximum load will be
the reaction offered at the top of ground floor wall to the majorly contributing loads which include dead, live and seismic
loads. The worst possible scenario was thus obtained by using thirteen load combinations as stated above. The maximum
concentrated load thus obtained at column was 213 kN. This point load was acting when the columns were spaced at 0.6
meter centre to centre. Hence, this load was further converted to distribute on small plates as uniformly distributed load where
the nodes were created at 0.06 meters centre to centre distance. This load is further equally distributed on both panels of the
load bearing ferrocement LGS composite wall. Thus a nodal load of 10.65 kN was applied on every node of the finite element
wall

4 Discussion

Results obtained from finite element wall model include, the stresses developed in the ferrocement and light gauge steel
plates. The maximum stresses are checked for exceeding the limiting value. The maximum stress obtained as per Von Mises
failure theory. The flexural stress in light gauge steel section is observed to reach 335.61 N/mm2 at top and 334.61 N/mm2 at
the bottom. While the capacity of one LGS channel section 89 * 41*1 mm LGS section as per IS code is 47 KN (4800 kg).
The yield stress of steel is 450 MPa, hence only 60% capacity of LGS steel section is used leaving 40% spare capacity [14,
15]. Similarly, the maximum obtained Von Mises failure stresses in ferrocement plate is evaluated by experimental study,
and is observed to be 13.01 N/mm2 at top and 14.017 N/mm2 at the bottom, while tensile strength of ferrocement of M30
grade is 25 MPa, without surface crack [14]. These stresses are seen near the edges of the panels as indicated by corresponding
colour code given in fig no. 7. The capacity of one ferrocement panel having two layers of square weld mesh, each strand 25
mm centre to centre, 3 mm cover to reinforcement and 18 mm overall thickness of panel is found to be 21.33 KN (21744 kg)
per panel. Hence the total load carrying capacity of one composite sandwich wall panel (600 mm by 900 mm by 125 mm
thick) is approximately 89 KN. Thus with this load bearing composite utilises 60% all tensile capacity of ferrocement leaving
more than 40% spare capacity for G +5 construction. This gives us enough space for getting some factor of safety for
unforeseen parameters that may affect the overall stability of structure. In the same manner authors developed a G+8 model
and analysed it. The utilization of LGS and ferrocement panel in the composite structure showed that the LGS steel section's
capacity was almost entirely utilized. This was demonstrated by the flexural stress in the light gauge steel section reaching
528.81 N/mm2 at the top and 526.93 N/mm2 at the bottom, which is near the yield stress of the steel at 550 [Link]
experimental studies carried out on the ferrocement plate showed that it also utilized almost complete capacity. The maximum
Von Mises failure stresses in the ferrocement plate were observed to be 22.49 N/mm2 at the top and 24.38 N/mm2 at the
bottom, which is well within the tensile strength of ferrocement of M30 grade at 25 MPa without surface crack.
The permutation and combination of structural form and use of strength capacity of composite material, this technology
and design approach may give us useful solution for future development. The authors hope for future in this technology
development [3, 4].
In the above study, considered stresses in the finite element analysis are the Von Mises failure stresses. The importance
of considering these stresses is that this criteria states that if the Von Mises stresses of the material when acted upon by a set
of loads are less than the yield stress of the material, then the material will not yield. The grade of ferrocement used in our
study is M30 which provides a yield stress of 25 N/mm2 according to the extensive tests carried out by author in MIT, World
Peace University (Pune) [12, 13, 15-19]. The stresses obtained through the finite element analysis are less than the yield
stress, thus ensuring safety of the structure as a whole. Similarly, the light gauge steel plates in the model show Von Mises
stresses less than the typical yield stress of steel that is 550 N/[Link] both the material properties considered and used for
G+5 storied model turn out to be analytically safe for further research, prototypes, full scale construction.
280 JOURNAL OF MATERIALS AND ENGINEERING STRUCTURES 10 (2023) 273–282

5 Conclusion

(1) Due to variety of steel with 450- 550 MPa yield stress, only 60% of the LGS steel section's capacity is being utilized,
leaving 40% available. Also, as from the experimental studies conducted, which gives us a result of 25 MPa strength for M30
concrete grade used, only 60% of ferrocement capacity is utilized, leaving 40% spare capacity. Results obtained are
satisfactory according the tests conducted in the earlier studies, leaving sufficient factor of safety. The analytical viability of
the structure is thus established and validated with experimental results for the contemplated loads and other technical
considerations.
(2) This keeps enough scope for any unforeseen circumstances or variability in loading and/or environmental conditions.
Also, the study shows that this composite structure analytically safe for the building in given circumstances based on the
parameters considered. This composite technology allows us to construct G+8 building. At this level the entire strength of
LGS and Ferrocement panels is utilised hence with G+8 there is no spare capacity available or there is no factor of safety
remaining. While with G+5 building, we still have spare load bearing capacity (almost 40%)available that gives with factor
of safety upto 1.6.
(3) This analytical study and its mapping with experimental stress values is useful step to establish this method of
construction as innovative technology. This method ensures quality and speed of construction along with structural stability
as per prevailing code of practice.
(4) This technology definitely is futuristic and meets SDG goals in many ways like no wastage of water and other
materials at site, low over heads, reduced transportation cost, low carbon footprint, less housekeeping and less hazardous and
better safety at site.
(5) Detailed further research and typical cases, actual constructed case studiesare needed to establish this composite
technology to prove and promote its effectiveness. Hence this method of construction surely showcases futuristic trend to
follow.

6 Future scope

The authors are also involved in full size actual construction of this structure. It is a matter of time that this method of
construction is adopted as innovative technique and many structures are seen around using this construction method. Thus
authors are hopeful of progressive and futuristic scope of this composite construction technology. In this research, authors
have solely checked the analytical viability of the materials and building as a whole. Further research can be conducted with
different building plans and different loading conditions. Also, further full scale experimental research can be done supporting
this theory which has been put forward in the paper. Experimental research and supporting the analysis will lead to overall
more impact about the concept and viability. As main requirements in today’s construction industry are earthquake resistance,
reduction in construction cost, environmental impact and quick assembly, the concept used in the project happens to be
beneficial to the future construction practices. These being all the advantages of the technology used in the above study, it
holds a greater importance for developing a new technology in the near future.

Fig 8 a – LGS frame Fig8 b – Ferrocement panels fixed on LGS frame

 JOURNAL OF MATERIALS AND ENGINEERING STRUCTURES 10 (2023) 273–282 281

Fig 8c – Full scale construction of G+2 and a completed vila using LGS Ferrocast composite technology

Acknowledgement

The authors acknowledge the guidance by Dr. Arun Purandare and investor M/s Ferrobuild Ltd while anticipating the
behaviour of Ferrocement LGS composite construction. Also the actual full scale construction of this system by Dr. Purandare
gave good judgement about the outcome of this research work.

REFERENCES

[1]- M. Rashmi, N. Jayaramappa, B. Annapurna, Experimental Study on Ferrocement Panels Under Static Loading, in
Impact of global atmospheric changes on natural resources. (2018). 335-338.
[2]- A.N. Purandare, M. Kulkarni. Ferrocast Structural Elements For Mass Housing For Low Income Group In India. in
3 rd Residential Building Design & Construction Conference. Penn state University USA. (2016).
[3]- P. Pawar, P. Minde, M. Kulkarni, Analysis of challenges and opportunities of prefabricated sandwich panel system:
A solution for affordable housing in India. Materials Today: Proceedings, 65 (2022) 1946-1955.
doi:10.1016/[Link].2022.05.193.
[4]- S. Shinde, P. Minde, M. Kulkarni, Analysis of LGS- ferrocement composite construction technology as a cost-
effective & sustainable alternative to RCC. Materials Today: Proceedings, 65 (2022) 1011-1018.
doi:10.1016/[Link].2022.04.122.
[5]- C. Londhe, P. Minde, Ferrocement: Cost Effective & Sustainable Construction Material for Low Cost Urban
Housing in India. Gis Science Journal, 8(3) (2021).
[6]- Arun Purandare, M. Kulkarni, Theory and behaviour of Ferrocement in Construction. Kindle Edition ed.: IIPE
publications, 2020.
[7]- N. Usefi, P. Sharafi, H. Ronagh, Numerical models for lateral behaviour analysis of cold-formed steel framed walls:
State of the art, evaluation and challenges. Thin-Walled Structures, 138 (2019) 252-285.
doi:10.1016/[Link].2019.02.019.
[8]- M. Lawan, M. Tahir, S. Ngian, A. Sulaiman, Structural performance of cold-formed steel section in composite
structures: A review. Jurnal Teknologi, 74(4) (2015) 65-175.
[9]- A. Jayaraman, S. Athibaranan, A. Mohanraj, Flexural behaviour of light gauge cold formed steel members
comparison of is code and euro code. International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology, 4(06)
(2015).
[10]- T.M.U. Skudai, A review study on cold-formed-ferrocement composites. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied
Sciences, 7(9) (2013) 103-111.
[11]- S.N. Mhadeshwar, A.M. Naik, Experimental performance, mathematical modelling and development of stress block
parameter of ferrocement beams with rectangular trough shaped skeletal steel. International Research Journal of
Engineering and Technology (IRJET), 4(06) (2017) 1387-1393.
[12]- D.G. Gaidhankar, M. Kulkarni, S.K. Inamdar, Behavior of Ferrocement Panels Using Welded Square Mesh.
International Journal for Research & Development Intechnology, 8(4) 2349-3585.
[13]- R.J. Phalke, D.G. Gaidhankar, Flexural Behaviour of Ferrocement Slab panels using welded square mesh by
incorporating steel fibers. International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology, 3(5) (2014) 756-763.
282 JOURNAL OF MATERIALS AND ENGINEERING STRUCTURES 10 (2023) 273–282

[14]- P.S. Parande, D.G. Gaidhankar, Behaviour of ferrocement composite in direct tension by using welded square mesh.
International journal of research in advent technology, 2(7) (2014).
[15]- D. Gaidhankar, M. Kulkarni, A.R. Jaiswal, Ferrocement composite beams under flexure. International Research
Journal of Engineering and Technology, 4(10) (2017) 117-124.
[16]- N.M. Kulkarni, D. Gaidhankar, Analysis and design of ferrocement panels an experimental study. Volume-1, Issue-
5, pg, (2013) 2319-9598.
[17]- A. Kale, D.M.S. KULKARNI, In plane shear behaviour of ferro-cement panels using finite element method.
International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET), 7 (2020) 604-614.
[18]- B.Y. Desai, J. Patel, Experimental analysis of ferrocement panels in flexure. International Journal of Innovative
Research in Science, Engineering and Technology, 5 (2016) 12.
[19]- D.G. Gaidhankar, M. Kulkarni, A. Akhtar, Behaviour of Ferrocement Panel under Impact Loading. International
Refereed Journal of Engineering and Science (IRJES), 7(7) 1-11.