e-ISSN: 2582-5208

International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering Technology and Science

Volume:03/Issue:07/July-2021 Impact Factor- 5.354 www.irjmets.com

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF PRE-ENGINEERED BUILDING AND

CONVENTIONAL STEEL BUILDING BY STAAD PRO
Mr. Hitesh Jibhkate*1, Prof. Dilip L. Budhlani*2
*1Research Scholar, Civil Engineering, Guru Nanak Institute Of Technology,
Nagpur, Maharashtra, India.
*2Professor, Civil Engineering, Guru Nanak Institute Of Technology, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India.
ABSTRACT
In the design of steel structures The pre-engineering building (PEB) system is a modern technology that
provides structures that are cost-effective, environmentally friendly, and long-lasting. Prior to the
implementation of the PEB system in steel structure construction, the conventional steel building (CSB) method
was employed, which provided time-consuming and costly design. The CSB is more expensive since it consumes
more steel due to the utilisation of a consistent cross-section of the hot-rolled section throughout the member
length. However, only bolted connections are given at the construction site based on the loading effect built-up
section employed in PEB. PEB saves time and provides a lightweight construction, making it preferable to CSB
when the span is considerable and column-free area is necessary. The structure members are designed and
manufactured in the facility before being transported to the construction site and erected. A G+3 industrial
warehouse is constructed and examined in this study in accordance with Indian standard code IS 800-2007.
(LSM). STADD-pro software was used to conduct the warehouse building study. A comparison is also presented
in this research between pre-engineered buildings (PEB) and conventional steel buildings (CSB). IS 800:2007 is
used in the design and analysis of the CSB (LSM). The purpose of this study is to discuss the most cost-effective
tonnage frame and the possible reasons for the variation in findings. A comparison study is also conducted for
the hot-rolled section used in CSB and the cold-formed purlins used in PEB.
Keywords: STADD-Pro, Tapered Section, Pre-Engineered, Sustainable, Conventional Steel Building, Built-Up
Sections, Hot Rolled Sections, Optimizations, Minimum Weight.
I. INTRODUCTION
The large part of the Indian economy is contributed by the construction industry. The researcher makes an
effort not only to make a structure economical but also to make it eco-friendly. As compared to other
construction materials steel is a very expensive material. With the help of paints making steel rustproof. In
recent, PEB is modern technology is introduced in steel structure. In steel structure design the Pre-engineering
building system a modern technology that provides economical, Sustainable and eco-friendly structures.
Whereas before the introduction of the PEB system in steel structure construction conventional steel building
system is used this is to provide time-consuming, costly design. The pre-engineering building is costly due to
more consumption of steel because of using a uniform cross-section of the hot-rolled section throughout the
member length. However, based on the loading effect built-up section used in PEB and only bolted connections
are provided at the construction site. PEB provides lightweight, less time consuming, and it is advantageous
over CSB when the span is large and column-free space required. The design and manufacturing of structure
members are done at plant and later it’s transported to the construction site and the erection process will take
place.
1.1Concept of Conventional Steel Building Steel is now used all around the world due to its ductility and
flexibility. Steel bends rather than crushes when subjected to strong loading. Steel is recyclable and bendable,
making it eco-friendly due to less waste generation. Hot rolled steel section is used in CSB. Where members are
made in factories and then brought to the job site. Welding processes are used to connect separate parts.
1.2Concept of Pre Engineered Building Pre-Engineering Building is a material that combines the tapered
built-up section, hot roll section, and cold-formed section. The structural engineer creates the PEB's major and
secondary members. Instead of hot-rolled sections, built-up tapered sections are employed for key components
such as column and rafter. The secondary members are the girts and purlins that support the sheeting. These
members are constructed from a cold-formed segment. The sizes of the sections are determined by the bending
moment diagram. PEB is lightweight, less time intensive, and superior to CSB when the span is large and
www.irjmets.com @International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering, Technology and Science
[699]
 e-ISSN: 2582-5208
International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering Technology and Science
Volume:03/Issue:07/July-2021 Impact Factor- 5.354 www.irjmets.com
column free room is necessary. The design and production of structure members are completed at the plant,
after which they are transferred to the construction site and the erection process begins.

Figure 1.Pre-Engineered Building

II. METHODOLOGY
STADD-pro is used in this work to do a comparative analysis of the G+3 Industrial warehouse structure in
Nagpur. The construction is clear span framed and measures 30 metres wide by 75 metres long, with 10 bays,
sidewall bay spacing of 7.5 metres, end wall bay spacing of 6 metres, and each storey height of 3 metres. In this
paper, the analysis and design of a 30-meter-wide 3D PEB structure are accomplished by employing wind load
as the critical load for the structure and the Indian code I.S 800:2007 Limit state technique (LSM).
In addition, the CSB structure 3D frame with the same dimensions is an analysis and design using an affordable
roof truss and Indian standard code. All three of the structures mentioned above are designs that are then
compared to assess the economic output. The hot-rolled section used in CSB and the cold-formed purlins used
in PEB are also compared. The designs are created utilising Indian and American standards, as well as STADD-
Pro.
III. OBJECTIVES
The following are the work's objectives:
• Using STADD-pro software, compare Pre-Engineered Buildings (PEB) and Conventional Steel Buildings.
• Analyze and design the building in accordance with Indian standard code I.S 800:2007. (LSM).
• Calculate the steel consumption in both the design and manufacturing systems.
• Reduce steel usage and compare the outcomes for both design procedures.
• Determine which design procedure is more efficient.
IV. BUILDING PARAMETER
Table 1 Building parameter

www.irjmets.com @International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering, Technology and Science

[700]
 e-ISSN: 2582-5208
International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering Technology and Science
Volume:03/Issue:07/July-2021 Impact Factor- 5.354 www.irjmets.com

Figure 2.Column Layout Plan

Figure 3.Conventional Steel Building (CSB) Section

Figure 4. Pre-Engineered Building (PEB) Section

www.irjmets.com @International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering, Technology and Science

[701]
 e-ISSN: 2582-5208
International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering Technology and Science
Volume:03/Issue:07/July-2021 Impact Factor- 5.354 www.irjmets.com
V. LOAD CALCULATION
The load acting on a structure over its entire life plays a vital role in its design. It should ensure that the
structure is appropriately designed; else, the building will fail. IS: 875-1987 can be used to calculate the load
operating on a structure. Wind load is considered a crucial load for this warehouse structural frame.
5.1 Dead load Self-weight and structural components, such as dead loads of G.I roof sheeting, purlin, sag rod,
bracing, and insulation, are examples of dead loads acting on the roof. According to Indian code, the dead acting
on a 2D and 3D frame of PEB is determined (IS 875-1987 part 1). The dead load acting on a roof, ignoring self-
weight, is 1.687kN/m. The load in PEB is uniformly distributed per metre of rafter length. Furthermore, 3D and
2D PEB frames are designed in accordance with the Indian standard IS 800:2007. (LSM). In the case of a 3D CSB
frame, the dead load is applied to the truss in the form of an analogous point load, i.e. 2.581 KN at an
intermediate panel position and half of this load, 1.29 KN, at an end panel point. Each mezzanine beam is
subjected to a dead load of 23.437kN/m.
5.2 Live load The live load action on the inaccessible roof is carried out in accordance with Indian standard
code IS 875 (Part 2) – 1987. It is assumed as 0.75 KN/m2 for the structure, with a reduction of 0.02 KN/m2 for
each rise of one degree above 10 degrees of roof slope. According to Indian code, the total uniformly distributed
live load per running metre of rafter on a PEB 3D frame is 5.625 KN/m, but on a CSB 3D structure, the live load
acts as a point and is taken to be 7.57kN at intermediate panel points and half this 3.785 KN at ends. Each
mezzanine beam is subjected to a live load of 22.5kN/m.
Table 2. Dead load and Live load calculation
PEB STRUCTURE CSB STRUCTURE
LOAD ON RAFTER LOAD ON TOP CHORD AS PER IS 875
LOAD AS PER IS 875: 2015 AT END PANEL POINT
AT INTERMEDIATE
PANEL POINT
DEAD LOAD 1.687 kN/m 2.581 kN 1.29 kN
LIVE LOAD 5.625 kN/m 7.57 kN 3.785 kN
LOAD ON MEZZANINE BEAM
DEAD LOAD 23.437 kN/m 23.437 kN/m 23.437 kN/m
LIVE LOAD 22.5 kN/m 22.5 kN/m 22.5 kN/m
5.3 Wind load Wind load is calculated according to IS: 875 (Part3) –2015. The structure located at Nagpur and
the basic wind speed for the location of the building is 44 m/s from the code. On a PEB rafter and sidewall, wind
load is applied as U.D.L. In the case of CSB, the point load applied on the panel point but the sidewall, it's applied
as U.D.L. Six different wind combinations acting on rafter and sidewall are shown in tables 3and 4
Table 3. wind load calculation for CSB as per IS 875-2015 part3
COLUMN (kN/m) CSB PANEL POINT (kN)
CASE LEFT RIGHT WINDWARD LEEWARD
INTERMEDIATE END INTERMEDIATE END
WL1 5.71 -0.32 -7.29 -3.64 -1.97 -0.98
WL2 -0.32 5.71 -1.97 -0.98 -7.29 -3.64
WL3 3.17 -2.85 -11.23 -5.61 -5.91 -2.96
WL4 -2.85 3.17 -5.91 -2.96 -11.23 -5.61
WL5 -1.9 -1.9 -5.91 -2.96 -2.26 -1.13
WL6 -1.9 -1.9 -2.26 -1.13 -5.91 -2.96
WL7 -4.44 -4.44 -9.85 -4.92 -6.208 -3.10
WL8 -4.44 -4.44 -6.2 -3.1 -9.85 -4.92
www.irjmets.com @International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering, Technology and Science
[702]
 e-ISSN: 2582-5208
International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering Technology and Science
Volume:03/Issue:07/July-2021 Impact Factor- 5.354 www.irjmets.com
Table 4. wind load calculation for PEB as per IS 875-2015 part3
CASE COLUMN (kN/m) PEB Rafter (kN/m)
Left Right Windward Lee ward
WL1 5.71 -0.32 -4.69 -1.27
WL2 -0.32 5.71 -1.29 -4.69
WL3 3.17 -2.85 -1.14 -3.81
WL4 -2.85 3.17 -3.81 -1.14
WL5 -1.9 -1.9 -3.81 -1.46
WL6 -1.9 -1.9 -1.46 -3.81
WL7 -4.44 -4.44 -6.35 -3.99
WL8 -4.44 -4.44 -3.99 -6.35
5.4 load calculation
Loads combinations can be taken as per IS: 800-2007 (LSM). For both system analyses, thirteen load
combinations are considered.
VI. STADD PRO PROCEDURE
For design, analysis and modeling of structure STADD Pro. Software is used. This software support several
country standards including Indian standard. In this Software, the Modeling of structure, properties, load and
loading combination specification, applied analysis and design are carryout. The utilization ratio in the STADD
Pro analysis shows the suitability of the component according to codes. If the value is greater than 1 its shows
the component is overstressed, and if less than 1 indicates under stress and means it’s suitable for design.
Table 5. Calculation for rafter
Sr. No. Description CSB (IS 800:2007) PEB (IS 800:2007)
1 Length (m) 30 30
2 Displacement Maximum (mm) 30.063 104.078
3 Axial Force (kN) 967.401 459.152
4 Shear Force (kN) 134.877 119.443
5 Bending Moment (kN-m) 281.981 521.235
6 Steel Quantity (kN) 84.793 19.839

Table 6. Calculation for Main column

Sr. No. Description CSB (IS 800:2007) PEB (IS 800:2007)
1 Section Size ISWB 600 Web 500~750 x 6mm
Flange 240 x 12 mm
2 Length (m) 12 12
www.irjmets.com @International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering, Technology and Science
[703]
 e-ISSN: 2582-5208
International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering Technology and Science
Volume:03/Issue:07/July-2021 Impact Factor- 5.354 www.irjmets.com

3 Displacement Maximum (mm) 4.357 8.708

4 Axial Force (kN) 1457.177 1101.241
5 Shear Force (kN) 251.052 249.763
6 Bending Moment (kN-m) 533.195 402.965
7 Steel Quantity (kN) 15.671 8.636

Table 7. Calculation for Mezzanine column

Sr. No. Description CSB (IS 800:2007) PEB (IS 800:2007)
1 Section Size 2ISMC Web 500 x 6mm
Flange 270 x 12 mm
2 Length (m) 9 9
3 Displacement Maximum (mm) 4.418 7.1940
4 Axial Force (kN) 1616.16 1585.411
5 Shear Force (kN) 12.171 25.808
6 Bending Moment (kN-m) 19.831 39.0
7 Steel Quantity (kN) 7.42 6.745

Table 8. Calculation for Mezzanine beam

Sr. No. Description CSB (IS 800:2007) PEB (IS 800:2007)
1 Section Size ISMB 500 Web 650~300 x 6mm
Flange 190 x 10 mm
2 Length (m) 6 6
3 Displacement Maximum (mm) 5.928 9.022

www.irjmets.com @International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering, Technology and Science

[704]
 e-ISSN: 2582-5208
International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering Technology and Science
Volume:03/Issue:07/July-2021 Impact Factor- 5.354 www.irjmets.com

4 Axial Force (kN) 195.229 214.919

5 Shear Force (kN) 220.754 223.308
6 Bending Moment (kN-m) 247.654 309.301
7 Steel Quantity (kN) 5.116 2.779

Table 9. Calculation for Mezzanine joist

Sr. No. Description CSB (IS 800:2007) PEB (IS 800:2007)
1 Section Size ISWB 600 Web 500 x 6mm
Flange 230 x 10 mm
2 Length (m) 7.5 7.5
3 Displacement Maximum (mm) 4.255 9.397
4 Shear Force (kN) 59.023 54.964
5 Bending Moment (kN-m) 110.667 103.057
6 Steel Quantity (kN) 9.794 4.379

Table 10. Calculation for Purlin

Sr. No. Description CSB (IS 800:2007) PEB (IS 800:2007)
1 Section Size ISMC 250 Z300 X 75 X 3.15
2 Length (m) 7.5 7.5
3 Displacement Maximum (mm) 3.193 3.717
4 Shear Force (kN) 17.810 11.140
5 Bending Moment (kN-m) 26.673 16.684
6 Steel Quantity (kN) 2.247 1.751

www.irjmets.com @International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering, Technology and Science

[705]
 e-ISSN: 2582-5208
International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering Technology and Science
Volume:03/Issue:07/July-2021 Impact Factor- 5.354 www.irjmets.com

VII. DISCUSSION
Software analysis results of structure and literature studies suggest that the PEB structure is more economical
and advantageous over CSB.
VIII. CONCLUSION
The following are the different conclusions of the project.
 Displacement :-
The PEB structure model designed by IS 800:2007 has more displacement as compared to CSB structure due to
less weight of the structure.
 Support Reaction :-
The PEB structure model designed by IS 800:2007 has less support reaction as compared to CSB structure due
to less weight of the structure.
 Axial , shear Force and Bending Moment :-
The PEB structure model designed by IS 800:2007 has less axial, shear force and Bending Moment as compared
to CSB structure.
 Steel Quantity:-
The PEB structure model designed by IS 800:2007 lightweight as compared to CSB structure. PEB structure is
64% lighter as compared to CSB Structure.
 Wind Resistance:-
The PEB structure model designed by IS 800:2007 higher resistance to wind as compared to CSB structure.
 Purlin:-
The cold formed purlin is 32.5% lighter as compared to Hot rolled Purlin.
IX. REFERENCES
[1] IS 875 (part-1) “Code of practice for design loads (other than earthquake) for building and structures”,
Dead loads, New Delhi,.
[2] IS 875 (part-2) “Code of practice for design loads (other than earthquake) for building and structures”,
Imposed loads, New Delhi, .
[3] IS 875 (part-3) “Code of practice for design loads (other than earthquake) for building and structures”,
Wind loads, New Delhi, .
[4] AISC: American Institute of Steel Construction-2011, Manual of Steel Construction.
[5] MBMA: Metal Building Manufactures Association-1996, Metal Building Systems Manual
[6] C.M. Meera (2013). Pre-Engineered Building Design of an Industrial warehouse. International Journal
of engineering sciences & Emerging Technologies (2013) 2231-6604.
[7] Milind Bhojkar and Milind Darade (2014).Comparison of Pre Engineering Building and Steel Building
wit Cost and Time Effectiveness. International Journal of Innovative Science, Engineering & Technology
(IJISET), Vol. 1 Issue 10.
[8] G. Sai Kiran, A. Kailasa Rao, R. Pradeep Kumar (August 2014) . “Comparison of Design Procedures for
Pre Engineering Buildings (PEB): A Case Study”. International Journal of Civil, Architectural, Structural
&Construction Engineering (IJCASCE), Volume 8, No. 4.
[9] Vrushali Bahadur, Prof. R.V.R.K.Prasad (January -February 2013) on “Comparison between Design and
www.irjmets.com @International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering, Technology and Science
[706]
 e-ISSN: 2582-5208
International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering Technology and Science
Volume:03/Issue:07/July-2021 Impact Factor- 5.354 www.irjmets.com
Analysis of Various Configuration of Industrial Sheds. International Journal of Engineering Research
and Applications (IJERA), Vol. 3, Issue 1, pp.1565-1568.
[10] Swati Wakchaure, N.C. Dubey “Design and Comparative Study of Pre-Engineered Building”,
International Journal of Engineering Development and research- (IJEDR) ISSN: 2321-9939 volume 4,
Issue 2, 2016
[11] Bhojkar Milind and Darade Milind (December 2014) on “Comparison of Pre Engineering Building and
Steel Building with Cost and Time Effectiveness”. International Journal of Innovative Science,
Engineering & Technology (IJISET), Vol. 1 Issue 10
[12] Aijaz Ahmad Zende. al, (2013) “Comparative Study of Analysis and Design of Pre-Engineered-Buildings
and Conventional Frames”, IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering. Volume 5, Issue 1.

www.irjmets.com @International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering, Technology and Science

[707]