IOP Conference Series:

Materials Science and

Engineering

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS You may also like

- An Automatic Identification Method for the
Structural Performance of Pre Engineered Photoelectron Boundary at Mars
Yuqi Wang, Yutian Cao, Jun Cui et al.
Building: A Comparative Study - Polyaniline Electrode Activation in Li Cells
Michael Charlton, T. D. Hatchard and M.
N. Obrovac
To cite this article: V Vishnu Sai et al 2021 IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng. 1197 012086
- A Comparative Study of the Pre-
Engineered Building and Conventional
Steel Building
M. Varshitha and B D V Chandra Mohan
Rao
View the article online for updates and enhancements.

This content was downloaded from IP address 106.193.87.20 on 31/01/2025 at 17:59

International Conference on Advances in Civil Engineering (ICACE 2021) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 1197 (2021) 012086 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/1197/1/012086

Structural Performance of Pre Engineered Building: A

Comparative Study
V Vishnu Sai1*, P Poluraju2 and B Venkat Rao3
1
P.G Student, Department of Civil Engineering, V R Siddhartha Engineering College,
Kanuru, Vijayawada, Krishna (Dist.), Andhra Pradesh.
2
Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, K L Deemed to be University,
Vaddeswaram, Guntur (Dist.), Andhra Pradesh.
3
Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, V R Siddhartha Engineering
College, Kanuru, Vijayawada, Krishna (Dist.), Andhra Pradesh.
*Corresponding author’s email ID: [email protected].

Abstract: Technological advancements have greatly aided in improving quality of life through
variety of new products and services. Pre Engineered Building (PEB) is among such
technological advancement in the structural engineering. PEB concept provides optimum design,
good aesthetic view, fast rate of construction and reduction in erection time. PEB satisfies a
broad range of custom design needs and applications. This methodology is adaptable not only
because of its high quality pre-designing and prefabrication, but also of its flexibility. In the
current study, the comparison has been made on the structural performance of multiple bay
system with different wind zones [Locations: Vijayawada and Hyderabad]. Analysis and design
have been carried out using STAAD.Pro software. The structural performance of pre-engineered
building has been assessed through the shear force (SF) and bending moment (BM) magnitudes.
Based on the output of SF and BM of pre-engineered components through Staad. Pro analysis,
the geometrical properties of pre-engineered sections have been decided. Results concludes
structure weight located in Vijayawada is 11.04% higher than that of the structure in Hyderabad.

Keywords: Pre-Engineered Building, wind zones, shear force, bending moments, STAAD. Pro
1. Introduction
Steel is naturally ductile and versatile, it is the material of choice for construction. The steel industry is
expanding very fast in almost every country. A number of technologies, systems, and products are
developed in the construction industry, the PEB concept is one of them. The main concept in the PEB
is geometry of frame matches the shape of bending moment diagram. As a result, slender tapered frame
elements are used. To achieve this configuration, built-up tapered I sections are used. This leads to the
optimisation of the material usage thereby reducing the weight of the structure. Use of PEB structure
has been limited to Northern America and Mid East till 1990’s after which outspread to Asia and Africa
regions. The PEB construction concept has now gained widespread acceptance and commercial success.
International contractors and designers who earlier only stipulated conventional steel construction, now
begun to specify the approach towards PEB. No other building technique match PEB when it comes to
speed and value form excavation to occupancy. Pre-engineered building has many advantages which
made the PEB industry’s explosive growth in recent years. The advantages include: Reduction of
construction time, Lower cost, Flexibility of expansion, large clear spans, Quality control, Low
maintenance, seismic reliability, architectural versatility, environment friendly. Components of PEB are
Primary members and secondary members. Columns, Rafters, Base plate, Crane Girder, Bracings and
Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
International Conference on Advances in Civil Engineering (ICACE 2021) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 1197 (2021) 012086 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/1197/1/012086

Mezzanine floor comes under primary members. Purlins, Girts, eave gutter, sag rods etc. comes under
secondary members. PEB are installed with various structural accessories like canopies, sliding doors,
gutters, louvers, turbo ventilators etc. Pre-engineered buildings are typically low-rise structures. Some
of the applications of Pre-engineered buildings are Industrial Buildings and Workshops, warehouses,
supermarkets, indoor stadiums, outdoor stadium with canopies, Aircraft Hangers etc. Kalesha, et al.
(2020) made study on PEB technique. They concluded that effective sizes in PEB structures are smaller
than CSB structures so PEB is low-cost. The weight of PEB is almost about 50% or less compared to
the steel used in conventional steel structures. Kiran et al. (2014) analyzed and designed an industrial
structure according to the Indian standards, IS 800-1984, IS 800-2007 and also by referring MBMA-96
and AISC-89. They concluded that loading as per Indian codes is greater than MBMA code and also
observed that in industries most of the projects are done with AISC/MBMA. Aditya et al. (2016) done
comparative study between Conventional Steel Building (CSB) and PEB. PEB structures are 25 % low
consumption of time and 30% lighter than CSB. They conveyed that PEB structures can be easily
designed by simple design procedure. PEB structures have huge benefits than CSB in economy, speed
of construction & simple erection. Hence they concluded that PEB has wide scope in India however less
preferred. Sharma (2007) made analysis, design and comparison of Pre-Engineered industrial building
with the CSB by mainly comparing the bending moments at different sections. Result concludes even
though PEB give clear spans, it weighs minimum 27% - 30% low compared to CSB. Darshana (2012)
compared the PEB design by IS 800 and AISC codes. And observed that calculation of wind coefficient
using MBMA/AISC is much simplified as compared to IS code. Deflection limits of IS codes are higher
than deflection limits of by MBMA/AISC. Thakar et al. (2013) Comparative study of PEB by varying
depth of width and spacing of structure. They concluded that as spacing of portal increased steel
consumption is decreased by primary members and increased for secondary members.
2. Description of the Pre Engineered Structure
An industrial PEB located at different locations such as Vijayawada and Hyderabad with same structural
configuration details have been analysed and designed according to Indian Standard Codal provisions
using STAAD. Pro software, comparison study has been made.
2.1 Structure details
The structural configuration for multiple bay system for different wind zones have been presented in
Table 1.
Table 1 Structural Configuration
Location Vijayawada Hyderabad
Length 70 m 70 m
Width 75 m 75 m
Eave Height 5m 5m
Bay spacing 10 bays @ 7 m bay spacing 10 bays @ 7 m bay spacing
Basic wind speed 50 m/sec 44 m/sec
Seismic zone III II

2.2 Load calculations

The Dead Load (DL), Live Load (LL) and Wind Load (WL) calculations are done as per IS code and
presented as follows:

2
International Conference on Advances in Civil Engineering (ICACE 2021) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 1197 (2021) 012086 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/1197/1/012086

2.2.1 Calculation of Dead load according to IS 875 (Part 1)-1987

In addition to self-weight, we must account for imposed dead loads caused by secondary elements such
as roof sheeting, purlins, and so on.
Weight of purlin: 5 kg/m2
Weight of sheeting: 5 kg/m2
Total Dead load: 5 kg/m2 + 5 kg/m2 = 10 kg/m2: 0.1 kN/m2
Dead load = 0.1 x 7 (Bay Spacing = 7 m)
= 0.7 kN/m
2.2.2 Calculation of Live load according to IS 875 (Part 2)-1987
All loads that the structure is subjected to during erection, maintenance, and use during its lifetime are
considered live loads.
As per Table 2 of the IS: 875 (Part 2)-1987(Imposed loads on various types of roofs)
Live load = 0.75 kN/m2
= 0.75 x 7 (Bay Spacing = 7 m)
= 5.25 kN/m
2.2.3 Calculation of Wind load according to IS 875 (Part 3)-2015
Basic wind speed (Vb)
Design wind speed (Vz) = Vb x K1 x K2 x K3 x K4 (Clause 6.3)
Where, K1 = probability factor (risk coefficient)
K2 = terrain roughness and height factor
K3 = topography factor
K4 = importance factor for the cyclonic region
Design wind pressure Pz = 0.6 Vz2 (Clause 7.2)
Design wind pressure Pd = Kd x Ka x Kc x Pz (Clause 7.2)
Where, Kd = wind directionality factor
Ka = area averaging factor and
Kc = combination factor
Wind load on individual members,
F = (Cpe - Cpi) x A x Pd (Clause 7.3.1)
Where, Cpe = external pressure coefficient,
Cpi = internal pressure coefficient,
A = surface area of structural element or cladding unit,
Pd = design wind pressure
Various wind load cases
Wind Load 1 (WL 1): Wind direction towards Right
Wind angle = 00
+0.5 internal pressure coefficient
Wind Load 2 (WL 2): Wind direction towards Left
Wind angle = 00
+0.5 internal pressure coefficient
Wind Load 3 (WL 3): Wind direction towards Right

3
International Conference on Advances in Civil Engineering (ICACE 2021) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 1197 (2021) 012086 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/1197/1/012086

Wind angle = 00
-0.5 internal pressure coefficient
Wind Load 4 (WL 4): Wind direction towards Left
Wind angle = 00
-0.5 internal pressure coefficient
Wind Load 5 (WL 5): Wind direction towards Right
Wind angle = 900
+0.5 internal pressure coefficient
Wind Load 6 (WL 6): Wind direction towards Left
Wind angle = 900
-0.5 internal pressure coefficient
Final wind coefficients (Cpe-Cpi) for various wind load cases for Vijayawada location shown in Tables
2 and 3.
Table 2 Final wind coefficients for Vijayawada location
WL1 WL2 WL3 WL4 WL5 WL6
Left Column 0.3 -1.1 1.3 -0.1 0.3 1.3
Rafter -1.375 -1.375 0.9 0.9 -1.2 -0.2
Right Column -1.1 0.3 -0.1 1.3 -1.1 -0.1

F = (Cpe - Cpi) A Pd
Table 3 Final wind loads for Vijayawada location

WL1 WL2 WL3 WL4 WL5 WL6

Left Column 3.045 -11.165 13.195 -1.015 3.045 13.195
Rafter -12.705 -12.705 8.316 8.316 -11.088 1.848
Right Column -11.165 3.045 -1.015 13.195 -11.165 -1.015

Final wind coefficients (Cpe-Cpi) for various wind load cases for Hyderabad location shown in Tables 4
and 5.
Table 4 Final wind coefficients for Hyderabad location
WL1 WL2 WL3 WL4 WL5 WL6
Left Column 0.3 -1.1 1.3 -0.1 0.3 1.3
Rafter -1.375 -1.375 0.9 0.9 -1.2 -0.2
Right Column -1.1 0.3 -0.1 1.3 -1.1 -0.1

F = (Cpe - Cpi) A Pd

Table 5 Final wind loads for Hyderabad location

WL1 WL2 WL3 WL4 WL5 WL6
Left Column 2.12 -7.78 9.19 -0.707 2.12 9.19
Rafter -8.80 -8.80 5.76 5.76 -7.68 -1.28

4
International Conference on Advances in Civil Engineering (ICACE 2021) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 1197 (2021) 012086 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/1197/1/012086

Right Column -7.78 2.12 -0.707 9.19 -7.78 -0.7

2.3 Load combinations

The load combinations for both strength and serviceability are as follows:
Load Combination of Strength
1. 1.5 DL + 1.5 LL
2. 0.9 DL + 1.5 EL/WL
3. 1.2 DL + 1.2 WL/EL
4. 1.2 DL + 0.6 WL/EL + 1.2 LL
5. 0.9 DL + 1.5 WL
Load Combination of Serviceability
1. 1.0 DL + 1.0 LL
2. 1.0 DL + 0.8 WL +0.8 LL
3. 1.0 DL +1.0 WL/EL
3. Analysis and Design of Pre-Engineered Buildings using STAAD.Pro
STAAD. Pro is a software that helps in the modelling, analysis, and design of structures. In comparison
to manual techniques, STAAD. Pro gives accurate results. STAAD.Pro has been more successful for
modelling, analysis, and multi-material design in 2D and 3D. It comes with intuitive, user-friendly
visualisation tools, as well as powerful analysis and design capabilities with a variety of other modelling
and design software products. The software consists of various country standards, including Indian
standards. STAAD.Pro has been the tool of choice for analysing and designing in the world.
Considerations
1) Wind Load according to IS 875 (Part 3)-2015 for location Vijayawada is 50 m/sec, for
Hyderabad is 44m/sec.
2) Internal Pressure Coefficient is considered as +/-0.5 (Since %of opening between 5-20%).
3) Column base considered as Pinned support.
3.1 STAAD.Pro Procedure
Modelling the structure, applying properties, specifications, loads and load combinations, analysing and
designing the structure are all part of the procedure. The front view and 3D View of ware house have
shown in Figures 1 and 2.

Figure 1 Front view of ware house

5
International Conference on Advances in Civil Engineering (ICACE 2021) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 1197 (2021) 012086 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/1197/1/012086

Figure 2 3D view of ware house

4. Results and Discussion
The pre-engineered building is analysed and designed using STAAD Pro. With different wind zones,
output results are discussed in this section.
From the STAAD.Pro output, it is observed that Steel take off (total weight of steel) for the structure
located in VIJAYAWADA is 1074.10 kN and Steel take off (total weight of steel) for the structure
located in HYDERBAD is 955.51 kN

TOTAL WIEGHT OF STEEL

1100
1080
1060
WIEGHT OF STEEL(KN)

1040
1020
1000
980 1074.1
960
940
920 955.51
900
880
VIJAYAWADA HYDERABAD
Figure 3 Total weight of steel for different locations

4.1 Comparison of moments and shear forces

The BM and SF on typical frame for different locations are shown in the figures 4, 5, 6 and 7

6
International Conference on Advances in Civil Engineering (ICACE 2021) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 1197 (2021) 012086 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/1197/1/012086

Figure 4 Bending moments on typical frame for Vijayawada location

Figure 5 Bending moments on typical frame for Hyderabad location

Figure 6 Shear Force on typical frame for Vijayawada location

7
International Conference on Advances in Civil Engineering (ICACE 2021) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 1197 (2021) 012086 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/1197/1/012086

Figure 7 Shear Force on typical frame for Hyderabad location

5. Conclusion
Based on the results below shown conclusions are drawn
1. It is observed that the weight of structure located in Vijayawada is 11.04% higher than that of
the structure in Hyderabad.
2. The section sizes of columns and rafters are less for the structure located in Hyderabad when
compared to the structure located in Vijayawada. As the BM and SF are less for the structure
located in Hyderabad.
3. The parameters that affect the structural weight and section sizes are Wind speed and Seismic
Zone.
References
1. IS: 875 (Part 1) – 1987 Code of Practice for Design Loads (Other than Earthquake) for
Buildings and Structures (Dead Load)
2. IS: 875 (Part 2) – 1987 Code of Practice for Design Loads (Other than Earthquake) for Buildings
and Structures (Imposed Load)
3. IS: 875 (Part 3) – 2015 Code of Practice for Design Loads (Other than Earthquake) for Buildings
and Structures (Wind Load)
4. IS 1893(Part 1) –2016 Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures
5. IS: 800 – 2007 Indian Standard General Construction in Steel – Code of Practice.
6. Shaik, K., BSS, R. R., & Jagarapu, D. C. K. (2020). An analytical study on pre-engineered
buildings using staad pro. Materials Today: Proceedings, 33, 296-302.
7. Kiran, G. S., Rao, A. K., & Kumar, R. P. (2014). Comparison of design procedures for pre
engineering buildings (PEB): a case study. International Journal of Civil, Architectural,
Structural & Construction Engineering (IJCASCE), 8(4), 4.
8. Mehendale, A. P., Gupta, A. K., & Desai, D. B. (2016). Overview of Pre-Engineered
Buildings. Imperial Journal of Interdisciplinary Research, 2(6), 1421-1425.
9. Sharma, H. (2017). A Comparative Study on Analysis & Design of Pre-Engineered &
Conventional Industrial Building. International Journal for Innovative Research in Science &
Technology, 3(10).
10. Zoad, M. D. P. (2012). Evaluation of pre-engineering structure design by IS-800 as against pre-
engineering structure design by AISC. International Journal of Engineering Research &
Technology (IJERT), 1(5), 8.
11. Thakar, J. D., & Patel, P. G. (2013). Comparative study of pre-engineered steel structure by
varying width of structure. International journal of advanced engineering technology, 4(3), 56-
62.