www.ijemr.net ISSN (ONLINE): 2250-0758, ISSN (PRINT): 2394-6962
30 Copyright © 2018. IJEMR. All Rights Reserved.
Volume-8, Issue-1 February 2018
International Journal of Engineering and Management Research
Page Number: 30-34
Failure Analysis and Design of Workshop Building Considering Earth
Quake and Wind Pressure
Rupesh Kumar Sahu1 and Dr. Manoj Kumar Rath
2
1M.Tech Scholar, Department of Civil Engineering, Centurion Institute of Technology, INDIA
2Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Centurion Institute of Technology, INDIA
1Corresponding Author: [email protected]
ABSTRACT Steel is one of the most widely used material for
building construction in the world .The inherent strength,
toughness and high ductility of steel are characteristics that
are ideal for seismic design .This paper presents design and
analysis of a steel structure (Workshop building ) considering
Earthquake and Wind pressure. Beams and columns of the
structure are designed and analyzed up to failure condition
by increasing Earthquake, Wind load and live load. Now a
day large number of application software’s are available in
the civil engineering field. All these software’s are developed
as the basis of advanced. The seismic analysis & design of
multistory steel building is carried out using Software
Computer Aided Design i.e., (STAAD Pro.).
Keywords— Earthquake, STAAD.Pro., Steel structure,
Wind pressure
I. INTRODUCTION
In developed countries a very large percentage
of multi-storied buildings are built with steel whereas steel
is not so commonly used in construction of multi-storied
frames in India even though it is a better material than
reinforced concrete. The use of steel in multi-story
building construction results in many advantages for the
builder and the user. Steel structures can have a variety of
structural forms like braced frames and moment resistant
frames suitable to meet the specific requirements. Steel
frames are faster to erect compared with reinforced
concrete frames resulting in economy. The elements of
framework are usually prefabricated in the factory under
effective quality control thus enabling a better product.
The steel frame construction is more suitable to withstand
lateral loads caused by wind or earthquake.
Steel frames are broadly classified as braced-
frames and moment-resisting frames depending on the type
of configuration and beam-to-column connection provided. Moment resisting frames rely on the ability of the frame
itself to act as a partially or fully rigid jointed frame while
resisting the lateral loads. Due to their flexibility, moment
resisting frames experience a large horizontal deflection
called drift, especially in tall buildings but can be used for
medium rise buildings having up to ten stories. Braced
Frames are usually designed with simple beam-to-column
connections where only shear transfer takes place but may
occasionally be combined with moment resisting frames.
In braced frames, the beam and column system takes the
gravity load such as dead and live loads. Lateral loads such
as wind and earthquake loads are taken by a system of
braces. Usually bracings are provided sloping in all four
directions because they are effective only in tension and
buckle easily in compression. Therefore in the analysis,
only the tension brace is considered effective. Braced
frames are quite stiff and have been used in very tall
buildings.
From model generation, analysis and design to
visualization and result verification, STAAD Pro is the
professional’s choice for steel, concrete, timber, aluminum
and cold-formed steel design of low and high-rise
buildings, culverts, petrochemical plants, tunnels, bridges,
piles and much more. To perform an accurate analysis a
structural engineer must determine such information as
structural loads, geometry, support conditions, and
materials properties. The results of such an analysis
typically include support reactions, stresses and
displacements. This information is then compared to
criteria that indicate the conditions of failure.
II. OBJECTIVE
www.ijemr.net ISSN (ONLINE): 2250-0758, ISSN (PRINT): 2394-6962
31 Copyright © 2018. IJEMR. All Rights Reserved.
Analysis and design up to failure condition of
beams and columns of a steel structure considering
Earthquake and Wind Pressure.
III. INTRODUCTION OF STAAD.Pro
It is one of the effective software which is used
for the purpose of analysis and design of structure by the
structural engineers. My project is aimed to complete with
the help of STAAD Pro .It gives more precise and accurate
results than manual techniques.
Advantages of STAAD pro
1. Extremely Flexible Modeling Environment.
2. Broad Spectra of Design Codes.
3. International Best Seller.
4. Interoperability and Open Architecture.
5. Covering All Aspects of Structural Engineering.
6. Quality Assurance.
7. Extremely Scalable.
8. Easy Reports and Documentation.
IV. MIX DESIGN OF CONCRETE FOR
FOUNDATION OF THE STRUCTURE
MATERIAL TESTING
Specific Gravity Of Cement=2.92
Specific Gravity Of Fine Aggregate=2.35
Specific Gravity Of Coarse Aggregate=2.62
Grading Of Fine Aggregate= (Zone-III)
MIX DESIGN
1. GRADE DESIGNATION = M30
2. CEMENT =RAMCO CEMENT
3. TARGET MEAN STRENGTH =38.25 N/MM2
(IS 10262 2009)
4. W/C RATIO =0.44 (IS 456 ,TABLE 5)
5. WATER CONTENT =197 KG (IS 10262,
TABLE NO 2)
6. CEMENT CONTENT=W/C=0.44
C=197/0.44
C=447 KG
7. VOLUME OF COARSE AGGREGATES = 0.64
8. VOLUME OF FINE AGGREGATES =0.36
MIX CALCULATION PER UNIT VOLUME OF
CONCRETE
a) Volume of concrete = 1 m3
b) Volume of cement =mass of cement/ specific
gravity of cement X 1/1000 =447/2.92 X 1/1000
=0.15 m3
c) Volume of water = mass of water/ specific gravity
of water X 1/1000 =197/1 X 1/1000 =0.197 m3
d) Volume of aggregates = (a -(b+c)) = (1-
(0.15+0.19))=0.66 m3
e) Mass of coarse aggregates = d X volume of
coarse aggregates X specific gravity of coarse
aggregates X 1000 = 0.66 X 0.64 X 2.62 X 1000
=1106 kg
f) Mass of fine aggregates = d X volume of fine aggregates X specific gravity of fine aggregates
X 1000 = 0.66 X 0.36 X 2.35 X 1000 =558 kg
g) Cement, fine aggregates and coarse aggregates
ratio =447/447 :558/447:1106/447 =1:1.24:2.47
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST Compressive strength after 7 days =24.21 n/mm
2
Compressive strength after 28 days =40 n/mm2
TENSILE STRENGTH TEST
12mm diameter vizag tmt rod of 30 cm length is
used for Tensile Strength Test. Test is done in Universal
Testing Machine.
Fig.1 Result of Tensile Test
V. ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF
STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS
The modeling analysis is done in the STAAD.Pro
Fig.2 3D modelling in STAAD.Pro
www.ijemr.net ISSN (ONLINE): 2250-0758, ISSN (PRINT): 2394-6962
32 Copyright © 2018. IJEMR. All Rights Reserved.
ANALYSIS AND DESIGN CONSIDERING EARTH
QUAKE
Earthquake forces are generated by the dynamic
response of the building to earthquake induced ground
motion. This makes earthquake actions fundamentally
different from any other imposed loads.
Fig.3(A) Earthquake load
Fig.3(B) Earthquake load
ANALYSIS AND DESIGN CONSIDERING WIND
LOAD
Wind is defined by its strength and direction of
blowing. Sometimes because of unpredictable nature of
wind it takes so devastating form during some Wind
Storms that it can upset the internal ventilation system
when it passes into the building.
Fig.4(A) Wind Load
Fig.4(B) Wind Load
LIVE LOAD AND DEAD LOAD
Live load is a civil engineering term that refers to
a load that can change over time. The weight of the load is
variable or shifts locations, such as when people are
walking around in a building. Anything in a building that
is not fixed to the structure can result in a live load, since it
can be moved around. Dead loads are static forces that are
relatively constant for an extended time. They can be in
tension or compression.
Fig.5 Member Load
Fig.6 Floor Load
www.ijemr.net ISSN (ONLINE): 2250-0758, ISSN (PRINT): 2394-6962
33 Copyright © 2018. IJEMR. All Rights Reserved.
Fig.7 Bending Z
Fig.8 Shear Y
Fig.9 (A) Steel Design Result
Fig.9 (B) Steel Design Result
Fig.10 Shear Bending
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
0
10
20
30
40
-2 -4 -6 -8 -10 -15 -20 -30
NO
OF
BEA
M F
AIL
LIVE LOAD IN KN/M2
FAILURE DUE TO LIVE LOAD
FAILUREDUE TOLIVELOAD
0
20
40
60
80
1 2 3 5 7 10 15 20 30
NO
OF
BEA
N F
AIL
EARTH QUAKE LOAD
FAILURE DUE TO EARTH QUAKE
FAILUREDUE TOEARTHQUAKE
0
20
40
60
80
1 2 3 5 7 10 15 25
NO
OF
BEA
M F
AIL
WIND LOAD
FAILURE DUE TO WIND LOAD
FAILUREDUE TOWINDLOAD
www.ijemr.net ISSN (ONLINE): 2250-0758, ISSN (PRINT): 2394-6962
34 Copyright © 2018. IJEMR. All Rights Reserved.
VI. CONCLUSION
It can be clearly observed that increase in live
load, earth quake load and wind load causes failure of
beams and columns in the structure. Up to -6 kn/m2 beams
and columns resists the load (live). When it is -8 kn/m2,
failure occurs in the structure. Like this due to increase in
earthquake and wind load beams and columns fails in the
structure.
REFERENCES
[1] Joseph, L.M., Poon, D., & Shieh, S. (2006). Ingredients
of high-rise design: taipei 101, the world’s tallest building.
Structure Magazine, 40-45.
[2] Ettouney, M. & Glover, N. (2002). Engineering of
architectural systems. Journal of Architectural
Engineering, 8(1), 7-9.
[3] Ettouney, M., Alampalli, S. & Agrawal, A. (2005).
Theory of multihazards for bridge applications. Journal of
Bridge Structures: Assessment, Design and Construction,
Taylor & Francis, 1(3), 281-291.
[4] Duthinh, D. & Simiu, E. (2010). Safety of structures in
strong winds and earthquakes: Multihazard considerations.
Journal of Structural Engineering, 136(3), 330-333.
[5] Crosti, C., Duthinh, D. & Simiu, E. (2011). Risk
consistency and synergy in multihazard design. Journal of
Structural Engineering, 137(8), 884-849.
[6] Singh, J.P. (1985). Earthquake ground motions:
Implications for designing structures and reconciling
structural damage. Earthquake Spectra, 1(2), 239-270.
