Deepak Laata et al.

2019, 7:3 International Journal of Science,

ISSN (Online): 2348-4098 Engineering and Technology
ISSN (Print): 2395-4752
An Open Access Journal

Results and Analysis of Hexagrid and Diagrid

Systems in Multi Storey Buildings
M. Tech. Scholar Deepak Laata, Assistant Professor Mayank Mehandiratta
Department of Civil Engineering
Arya College of Engineering and Research Centre

Abstract- More recently, the diagrid structural system with tubular behavior is being employed as

structurally efficient as well as architecturally satisfying structural system for tall buildings. Perimeter

diagonals act as a facade, which governs the aesthetics of the building to a great degree. In order to
improve the efficient of tube-type structures in tall buildings, a new structural system called Hexagrid

(Beehive) is introduced in this paper. In the hexagrid structure system, almost all the conventional vertical
columns are eliminated. Hexagrid structural system consists of Hexagrid perimeter which is made up of a

network of multi-storey tall hex-angulated truss system. Hexagrid is formed by intersecting the diagonal

and horizontal components. The project is focused to horizontal hexagrid pattern which aims to investigate
the optimal angle and a topology of diagonal members in a hexagrid frame using finite element analysis and

to study the structural properties of hexagonal structures so as to compare their potential efficiency with

the conventional systems. This effect can be better appreciated by analyzing the results in terms of
interstorey drift, time period and displacement.

Keywords: Hexagrid, Diagrid, Displacements profile, Structural systems.

I. INTRODUCTION
segments to the perimeter of the honeycomb. The
In nature, bees have a fascinating, meticulous way of simplicity of the hexagonal shape creates an
forming their beehives, which serve as their homes, incredibly strong and smart design which provides
their protection and their source of life. great stability and security for the bees.
There is nothing new under the Sky. This does not
mean that everything has been built already but that 2. CHORD
the principle behind the design already exists. By Chord is a scalable peer-to-peer look up protocol
examining structures in nature we can see where the designed to construct an overlay network based on
principle exists and see how these principles are DHT. As described earlier, each node as well as
incorporated in structures today. One thing we have resource in the system is identified by a m-bit long
to keep in mind when comparing natural and node-id and resource-id (key) respectively, with each
manmade structures is that nature uses live materials node maintaining a subset of the resources. By
while a man uses inert ones and the two do not constructing and maintaining efficient routing
always behave in the same manner. The beehive's structures, a resource can be located in a maximum
internal structure is a densely packed matrix of of O(log2(N )) hops, where N is the number of nodes
hexagonal cells called a honeycomb. The bees use in the Chord overlay.
the cells to store food, and to house the “brood”.
The mechanism for mapping resources to nodes and
The hexagonal shape perfectly distributes and routing queries over the network. On bootstrapping,
disperses the external man-made or environmental each node contacts the bootstrapping server and
forces thus protecting its contents. The hexagon also receives a list of existing nodes. It then connects
allows simple expandability by adding hexagon itself in the chord overlay and starts to populate its

© 2019 Deepak lata et al. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons, which permits unrestricted
use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited.
Deepak Laata et al. International Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology, 2019, 7:3

routing tables by exchanging information with other Hexagrid system rests on a regular polygon with
nodes. Chord supports multiple joins and can six elements system. This system has an advantage
bootstrap large- scale DHT networks. of uniform distribution of stresses in itself due to
uniform angle of 120 degree between any two
elements but has disadvantage of very less lateral
stiffness.

II. LITERATURE REVIEW

Akshat and Gurpreet Singh (2018) reviewed

research published on the structural performance
of diagrid system. A first step toward a systematic
and comprehensive study is that regular patterns
are compared to alternative geometrical
configurations, obtained by changing the angle of
diagonals (variable-angle, VA) as well as by
changing the number of diagonal (variable-
density, VD) along the building height. Further it
discusses about the different diagrid patterns
generated and designed for an assumed building;
and how the resulting diagrid structures are
assessed under gravity and wind loads and various
performance parameters are evaluated on the
basis of the analyses results.
Fig. 1: The beehive’s internal structure.
Md. Arman (2018) analysed the performance of
The Hexagrid structural system recently evolved, high-rise buildings, it is especially important that
rarely executed is inspired by the ‘Beehive’ (one of an effective modeling technique be involved
the stable structure of nature). This structural because of the complexity of the real structural
system is made by arranging several hexagons of behavior and the difficulties of full scale
height equal to story height in a unique way as in measurement. The lateral performance of multi-
Beehive. storey buildings under different loading conditions
is greatly influenced by various parameters such as
structural stiffness and base to height ratio of the
building. Optimization and refinement of such
performance has become the focus as well as the
constraint for structural engineers in their design
practice.

Avnish Kumar Rai & Rashmi Sakalle (2017)

analysed a regular eleven storey RCC building with
plan size 16 m × 16 m located in seismic zone V &
III is considered for analysis. STAAD. Pro software
is used for modeling and analysis of structural.
Seismic zone is considered as per IS 1893(Part 1):
2002. The Comparison between the diagrid and
conventional building analysis results presented in
terms of a node to node displacement, bending
moment, storey drift, shear forces, an area of
reinforcement, and additionally the economical
aspect.
Fig. 2: Hexagrid System.

Page 2 of 6
Deepak Laata et al. International Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology, 2019, 7:3

Kona Narayana Reddy and Dr. E. Arunakanthi Method. All the loadings and the checks are
(2017) studied on the Oblique columns of different provided as per Indian Standards.
shapes in high rise building. In this work a high
rise building with Normal Columns & with III. STRUCTURAL MODELS
different locations of Oblique columns is
considered for analysis. In this paper, response A regular floor plan of 30 m x 30 m is considered
spectrum & Linear Static analysis were executed in both buildings. Storey height is 3m. The design
combined with a Numerical Building Model by this dead load and live load are 5 KN/m2 and 4 KN/m2
program, which were also compared following the respectively. Exterior wall load is taken negligible
analysis results. The results of the analysis on the in both the buildings. Both the building frames are
Axial forces, Base shear, Time period, Storey drift analyzed for seismic zone IV. Seismic parameters
and Displacements are compared. The results are are taken as per Indian code IS 1893 (Part 1): 2002.
presented in tabular and graphical form. The
results on the displacement are checked with Table 1: Geometry and load consideration
serviceability conditions and are compared and Type of structure Residential
presented in tabular form. building (G+69)
Plan dimension 30 x 30 m
Ravi Sorathiya and Prof. Pradeep Pandey (2017) Total height of 210 m
presented a stiffness-based design methodology building
for determining preliminary member sizes of RCC Height of each 3m
diagrid structures for tall buildings. A G+24, G+36, storey
G+48, G+60 storey RCC building with plan size 18 Diagrid section Steel section
m × 18 m located in surat wind and seismic is
Seismic load (as per Zone IV
considered for analysis. STAAD.Pro software is
IS code 1893 part-1)
used for modeling and analysis of structural
2
members. All structural members are designed as Dead load (5 KN/m ) 875- part 1
2
per IS 456:2000 and load combinations of seismic Live load (4 KN/m ) 875- part 2
forces are considered as per IS 1893(Part 1): 2002. Thickness of slab 150 mm
Comparison of analysis results in terms of beam Beam size 200 x 400 mm
displacement, Storey Drift, Bending Moment. This Column size 400 x 400 mm
cause economical design of diagrid structure
compared to conventional structure. IV. GENERATION OF BUILDING MODELS

Harshada A. Naik (2017) presented the literature The diagrid structure is composed of diagonal
review of different authors on behavior of diagrid members and hexagrid structure is composed of
structures under wind loading and seismic loading diagonal and vertical members have been
to understand the performance of diagrid modeled in staad pro. The pattern and size of
structures. This study gives good indications on hexagrid and diagrid was used as a study
parameters in terms of time-period, top-storey parameter. To examine the structural behavior of
displacement, inter-storey drift and storey shear. tall buildings with a diagrid and hexagrid system,
210 m high, 70 storey buildings were designed.
Viraj Baile (2017) analysed a 36-storeyed diagrid
building, simple frame building and a building
with various bracing systems have been modeled
and analyzed. The bracing systems are X-type, V-
type and Inverted V- type. The positions of the
bracings have also been varied. A total of 15
buildings have been modelled and analysed to
compare which system performs better a lateral
load resisting system. The modelling and analysis
has been performed on ETABS. The dynamic
analysis is performed by using Response Spectrum (a) Render view

Page 3 of 6
Deepak Laata et al. International Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology, 2019, 7:3

Shear Force
Magnitude of shear force for various models has
been plotted in figure number 6, it is determined
that in this comparative study maximum shear
force is in diagrid system whereas hexagrid system
(b) Size and pattern shows minimum shear force value which results in
balanced structure
Fig. 3: Diagrid system.

(a) Render view Fig. 6: Shear force comparison.

Bending Moment
Magnitude of bending moment for various models
has been plotted in figure number 7, it is determined
that in this comparative study maximum bending
moment is in hexagrid system whereas diagrid shows
minimum bending moment value which results in
(b) Size and pattern balanced section.

Fig. 4: Hexagrid system.

V. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Support Reaction
Magnitude of support reaction for various models
has been plotted in figure number 5, it is determined
that in this comparative study maximum support
reaction is in diagrid system whereas hexagrid
system shows minimum support reaction value.

Fig. 7: Bending moment comparison.

Deflection
Magnitude of maximum displacement for various
models has been plotted in figure number 8, below it
is determined that deflection is maximum in hexagrid
system whereas minimum in diagrid which indicates
that hexagrid system will require more supports as
Fig. 5: Axial force. compared to diagrid system.

Page 4 of 6
Deepak Laata et al. International Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology, 2019, 7:3

cost for the diagrid is reduces which makes it more

economical than the hexagrid system.

VI. CONCLUSION

The following points are concluded from above study

about diagrid and hexagrid structure.

 Study shows that diagrid structure decreases

bending moment which in results decreases
reinforcement requirement.
Fig. 8: Displacement comparison.
 It shows that lateral displacement can be
minimized by using diagrids.
Concrete Take Off
 Although volume of concrete used in building is
different, but diagrid shows more economical in
terms of steel used. Diagrid building saves about
33.21% steel without affecting the structural
efficiency.
 Due to diagonal columns on its periphery,
diagrid shows better resistance to lateral loads
and due to this, inner columns get relaxed and
carry only gravity loads. While in conventional
building both inner and outer column are
Fig. 9: Concrete comparison. designed for both gravity and lateral loads.
 A significant decrease of bending moment in
As shown in above chart amount of concrete in a interior columns of diagrid building is found in
hexagrid system will be comparatively higher than comparison to conventional building.
diagrid structure as outer R.C.C. columns are  The use of diagrids significantly decreases the
replaced by steel sections in diagrid frame. So the maximum shear force and maximum bending
concrete consumption in two cases for the moment in internal and perimeter beams. The
hexagrid system is much higher than the diagrid sign of maximum bending moment also changes
frame which makes the hexagrid system more in perimeter beams of diagrid building.
costly than the diagrid frame.  The diagrid configuration provides a reduction in
the span of perimeter beams at alternate floors,
Steel Take Off hence reducing the beam forces at alternate
floors.
 So from results and comparison with
conventional building, one can adopt hexagrid
structure for better lateral load resistance and
this becomes important for seismic zone IV.

REFERENCES

[1]. Akshat, Gurpreet Singh (2018), “A Review on

Structural Performance of Diagrid Structural
System for High Rise Buildings”, International
Fig. 10: Steel take off comparison.
Journal of Innovative Research in Science,
Engineering and Technology, 7(2), 1315-1322.
As shown in figure above it is clearly determined that
[2]. Md. Arman (2018), “Analysis & Designing G+10
as outer column are removed by diagrid system it
Storied Building by Struds & STAAD Pro
manages bending moment properly that
Software & Comparing the Design Results”,
reinforcement requirement including steel for diagrid
is comparatively less than bare frame. The overall

Page 5 of 6
 Deepak Laata et al. International Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology, 2019, 7:3

International Journal for Scientific Research & International Journal of Advanced Technology
Development, 6(1), 701-704. in Engineering and Science, 4(1), 226-236.
[3]. Avnish Kumar Rai, Rashmi Sakalle (2017), [14]. Deepa Varkey and Manju George (2015),
“Comparative Analysis of a High Rise Building “Dynamic Analysis of Diagrid System with
Frame with and Without Diagrid Effects under Complex Shape”, International Journal of
Seismic Zones III & V”, International Journal of Innovative Science, Engineering & Technology,
Engineering Sciences & Research Technology, 3(8), 484-488.
6(9), 95-101. [15]. Rohit Kumar Singh (2014), “Analysis and Design
[4]. Kona Narayana Reddy, Dr. E. Arunakanthi of Concrete Diagrid Building and its
(2017), “A Study on Multi-Storeyed Building Comparison with Conventional Frame Building”,
with Oblique Columns by using ETABS”, International Journal of Science, Engineering
International Journal of Innovative Research in and Technology, 2(6), 1330-1337.
Science, Engineering and Technology, 6(2),
1968-1974.
[5]. Ravi Sorathiya, Pradeep Pandey (2017), “Study
on Diagrid Structure of Multi-storey Building”,
International Journal of Advance Engineering
and Research Development”, 4(4), 512-524.
[6]. Harshada A. Naik (2017), “Review on
Comparative Study of Diagrid Structure with
Conventional Building”, International Journal of
Science Technology & Engineering, 3(9), 631-
632.
[7]. Viraj Baile (2017), “Comparative Study of
Diagrid, Simple Frame and Various Bracing
Systems”, International Journal of Innovative
Research in Science, Engineering and
Technology, 6(6), 11967-11975.
[8]. Pallavi Bhale, P.J. Salunke (2016), “Analytical
Study and Design of Diagrid Building and
Comparison with Conventional Frame Building”,
International Journal of Advanced Technology
in Engineering and Science, 4(1), 226-236.
[9]. Nijil George Philip (2016), “Analysis of Circular
Steel Diagrid Buildings with non-Uniform Angle
Configurations”, International Journal of
Scientific & Engineering Research, 7(10), 296-
303.
[10]. Manthan I. Shah (2016), “Comparative Study of
Diagrid Structures with Conventional Frame
Structures”, Int. Journal of Engineering Research
and Applications, 6(5), 22-29.
[11]. Nimisha. P (2016), “Structural Comparison of
Diagrid Building with Tubular Building”,
International Journal of Engineering Research &
Technology, 5(4), 57-60.
[12]. Saket Yadav, Vivek Garg (2015), “Advantage of
Steel Diagrid Building Over Conventional
Building”, International Journal of Civil and
Structural Engineering Research, 3(1), 394-406.
[13]. Kiran Kamath (2015), “A comparative study on a
circular plan with different angels of diagrid”,

Page 6 of 6