Effect of Harp and Perimeter Bracing on PEB Subjected to Wind Loading

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN:2395-0056

Volume: 09 Issue: 11 | Nov 2022 www.irjet.net p-ISSN:2395-0072

Effect of Harp and Perimeter Bracing on PEB Subjected to Wind Loading

1Chaitra Goswami, 2Rakesh Chaudhary, 3Ankush Kumar Jain

1M.Tech Student, 2,3Assistant Professor, Civil Engineering Department Poornima University, Jaipur, India ***

Abstract - Lateral (i.e. wind) loads are unreliable loads that cause production, overturning moments, planechanges, etc., leadingto structural failure. A PEB consists of a series of 2D frames that repeat at regular distances. These frames are stabilized longitudinally by bracing. Cross frames support in-plane loads without longitudinal struts, so the columns act as bending supports, requiring large columns and large foundations. Unlike this arrangement, special roof support arrangements such as perimeter arrangements and harps can be used instead. In current work, STAAD Pro is used to perform dynamic analysis of 3D industrial structures with different support placement configurations to determine the suitability of support placement types and provide insight into the study of different types, media placement.

Three PEB hangars were simulated in this study: a bare-framePEB hangar (without supports), a PEBhangar withperimeter supports and a PEB hangar with harp supports. The framework is analyzed in terms of shear forces, bending moments, displacements, normal forces and steel mass. The results show that the perimeter reinforcement is relatively more effective than the barereinforcement and the harp reinforcement.

Keywords: PEB, Harp Bracing, Perimeter Bracing, Bare Frame, Steel Structure

1. INTRODUCTION

Indiahasthesecondfastestgrowingeconomyintheworldandalotofitisduetoitsconstructionindustry,whichisrightnextto agricultureinitseconomiccontributiontotheregion.Initscontinuousdevelopment,theconstructionindustryhasdiscovered, invented and developed a number of technologies, systems and products, one of which is the design of pre-engineered buildings(PEBs).Incomparisontobeingassembledonsite,PEBsareshippedtothesitefromasinglesupplierwithasimple structuralsteelstructurewithattachedfactoryfinishedcladdingandroofingcomponentsasafullfinishedproduct.Bybolting the different building components together as per requirements, the structure iserected on the ground. Potential design softwareisusedtobuildPEBs.Conventionalbuildingdesignhasbeenrevolutionizedbytheonsetoftechnologicaldevelopment thatenables3Dmodelinganddetailingoftheplannedstructureandcoordination.Pre-EngineeredBuildings(PEB)areIndia's future.TheadvantagesofPEBshavejuststartedtobeunderstoodbymostoftheIndianbusinesscommunity.

1.1 Pre-Engineering Building

Inthe1960s,thewordPre-engineeringbuildingScientificSoundingcameintobeing.Theideaofpre-engineeredbuildings requiressteelconstructionsystemsthatarepre-designedandprefabricated.ThefoundationofthedefinitionofthePEBliesin providingthesectionatalocationonlyasneededatthatlocation.Thesebuildingswerepre-designedintostandardsizes, spans,baysandheightsandusedstandarddetailsforrepairingcladding,roofing,gutters,flashing,windows,doors,etc.to economicallytakeadvantageofindustrialmassmanufacturingpracticesofcomponents.

1.2 Crane System

Forvariousmaterialandequipmenthandlingactivitieswithin,“thesepre-engineeredbuildingscanbefittedwithoverheadcranes, semi-gentrycranes,wall-mountedcranes,monorailsandunder-slungcranes.Thesestructuresarebuiltforcranecapacitiesfrom 1MTto250MT.Thecranerunwaybeams(GantryGirders)aresimplysupportedbyformedpartswithandwithoutcapchannels andplatformsandladdersformaintenance”.

1.3 Mezzanine Systems

Forcranecapacitiesrangingfrom1megatonneto250megatonne,thesebuildingsareplanned.Thecranerunwaybeams(Gantry Girders)areprotectedbybuilt-upsectionswith/withoutcapchannelsandplatformsandladdersformaintenance.Aconcreteslab

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN:2395-0056

Volume: 09 Issue: 11 | Nov 2022 www.irjet.net p-ISSN:2395-0072

iscastasafinishedsurfaceonthemetaldeck.Itisalsopossibletousesteelcheckeredplatesasthetopsurface.Suchmezzanines areusedincompaniesforofficespace,storageorequipmentsupport.

1.4 Fascias

Variousstructuralaccessoriescanbefittedwithpre-engineeringsteelbuildings,includingmezzaninefloors,canopies,fascias, internalpartitions,etc.Fasciaisusedtocoverthebuilding'sgableroofslopPre-engineeringsteelbuildingcanbefittedwith variousstructuralaccessories.Thesteelbuildingwherevariouscomponentsofthebuildingarebuiltindetailandassembledin theplantisshippedtotheenderectedatthesite.

1.5 Harp Bracing

Asaresult,newperimetralbracingsystemwithahigherlevelofefficacyisrequired.Asuspendedbridge,or"harpbridge,"isused asametaphorforthesolutiontotheproblem(Fig.6).Thelargebendingmomentresistedbythedeckiscontrolledbyvarious partsworkingunderaxialtensiletensioninaharpbridge.Whenitcomestodimensioning,thisisthemostconservativestep.

1.6 Perimetral Bracing

Others,incontrasttothepreviousdesign,demonstratebetteroverallstructurebehavior.Someauthors,suchasMonfort(1991) andGarcimartn(1998),advocatedtheuseofso-calledbracingbeams.Thesebeams,alongwithtypicalbracing,formanon-roof perimetralbracingsystemlinkedtoabracingendwallframe.Thegoalistoproducezeroeavedeflectioninthecolumn,resulting inareductionincolumnsectionandfoundationsize.Thebracingbeamisthenconnectedatitsextremestothebracingendwall frame,whichthusdirectsallhorizontalloadstothefoundations.

Fig.1.1RoofPerimetralBracing(Martínezetal.,2004)

2. METHODOLOGY

Industrialwarehouseismajorlyconstructedinsteelandareusedforstorageunitsorasworkshops.Itconsistsarecolumns, rafters,tiebeams,purlinsandcladding.Thecolumnandrafterconnectionaremomentresistingconnectionintheshedandall otherconnectionsareusuallyshearconnections.Claddingsactsasacoveringmaterialfortheroof.Thepresentindustrialware houseisapre-engineeredbuildingwherethesectionsusedarebuiltupsections.Thereare3typesofshedsconsideredforthe analysisinSTAADPRO,firstonebeing,bareframeshedwithnobracings.SecondisPEBshedwithperimeterbracingwhere bracingisintheperimeterofthebuilding.ThirdisPEBshedwithharpbracing.

2.1 Section Size and Support Condition

Builtupsectionsareusedforthecolumnsandrafters.Fortiebeamsandbracingspipesectionsisconsidered.Sectionsproperties foraretabulatedinthebelowtable.Fixedsupportisappliedtothestructure.’

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN:2395-0056

Volume: 09 Issue: 11 | Nov 2022 www.irjet.net p-ISSN:2395-0072

Table 2.1 Built Up Section

Description Dimensionofcolumnand Rafter-2(m) DimensionofRafter-1(m)

Depthofsectionatstartnode 0.45 0.6

Depthofsectionatendnode 0.6 0.45

Thicknessofweb 0.008 0.008

Widthoftopflange 0.35 0.35 Thicknessoftopflange 0.008 0.008 Properties

Table 2.2 Section Properties

Description Section property Bracings PIP889M PIP1016H PIP1397H

3. MODELING AND ANALYSIS

3.1 Loads

Figure 2.1 PEB Shed With Tapered Sections

Thedifferenttypesofloadsthatareappliedonthestructurearedeadloads,liveloadsandwindload.Allthethreemodels presentinourstudyareappliedwiththeseloadsandtheyareanalysed.

I. Dead load. II. Live load. III. Wind load.

2022, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.529 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN:2395-0056

Volume: 09 Issue: 11 | Nov 2022 www.irjet.net p-ISSN:2395-0072

3.1.1 Dead load:

Figure 3.1 Self Weight of the PEB

Figure 3.2 Sheeting Load on PEB

3.1.2 Live load:

Figure 3.3 Live Load on PEB

2022, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.529 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN:2395-0056

Volume: 09 Issue: 11 | Nov 2022 www.irjet.net p-ISSN:2395-0072

3.1.3Wind load:

Figure 3.4 Wind Load in +X Direction

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Figure 3.5 Wind Load in -X Direction

4.1 PEB with Bare Frame: Inthismodel,therearenobracingsmodelled.Thesecondbayofthemodelisselectedto tabulatetheresults.

Bending Moment in Rafters

Figure 4.1 Bending Moment Variation along the Rafter in Model -1 Shear Force in Rafters

Figure 4.2 Shear Force Variations along the Rafter in Model-1

2022, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.529 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN:2395-0056

Volume: 09 Issue: 11 | Nov 2022 www.irjet.net p-ISSN:2395-0072

Bending Moment in Column

Figure 4.3 Bending Moment Variation along the Column in Model -1 Axial Force in Column

Figure 4.4 Axial Force Variations along the Column in Model-1

4.2 Deflection in PEB Shed Bare Frame

ThemaximumdeflectionofthePEBshedwithbareframeistabulatedfromtheenveloploadcombination.Theenvelopload combinationisfoundtobe1.5(DL+LL)andthemaximumdeflectionis72.42mmandallowabledeflectionaccordingtotheISis 96mmforthepresentstudy.Hence,PEBshedissafeunderdeflectioncriteria.Fromfigure4.5,highlightedpointgivesthe positionofmaximumdeflection.

Figure 4.5 Deflections in Model-1

4.3 Utilization Ratio in PEB Shed Bare Frame

ThePEBshedwasdesignedaccordingtotheIS-800codestandardsandtheutilizationratiowasfoundtobelessthan1 whichmeansallthemembersoftheshedarepassingandsamecanbeseeninfigure4.6.

2022, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.529 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN:2395-0056

Volume: 09 Issue: 11 | Nov 2022 www.irjet.net p-ISSN:2395-0072

Figure 4.6 Utilization Ratio of Model-1

4.4 Comparison of Bending Moments in Rafter

Figure 4.7 Comparison of Bending Moment in Rafter

Figure4.7isagraphplottedtoshowvariationofbendingmomentinraftersamongallthreemodels.Itisevidentfromthe graphthatthebendingmomentislessforPEBwithperimeterbracingandmaximumforPEBwithbareframe.Thebending momentforPEBshedbareframeandPEBwithharpbracingdoesn’thavenoticeabledifference.

PEBshedwithperimeterbracingisfoundtobeefficientoutofallthreemodelswhenparameterlikebendingmomentinrafter isconsidered.

4.5 Comparison of Shear Force in Rafter

Figure4.8isagraphplottedtoshowvariationofshearforceinraftersamongallthreemodels.Wecanconcurfromthegraph thattheshearforceislessforPEBwithperimeterbracingandmaximumforPEBwithbareframe.TheshearforceforPEBshed bareframeandPEBwithharpbracingdoesn’thavenoticeabledifferenceandshearforceattheridgeishigherforthePEBshed withperimeterbracing.PEBshedwithperimeterbracingisfoundtobeefficientoutofallthreemodelswhenparameterlike shearforceinrafterisconsidered.

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN:2395-0056

Volume: 09 Issue: 11 | Nov 2022 www.irjet.net p-ISSN:2395-0072

Figure 4.8 Comparison of Shear Force in Rafter

4.6 Comparison of Bending Moments in Column

Figure4.9isagraphplottedtoshowvariationofbendingmomentincolumnamongallthreemodels.Itisevidentfromthe graphthatthebendingmomentislessforPEBwithperimeterbracingandmaximumforPEBwithbareframe.Thebending momentforPEBshedbareframeandPEBwithharpbracingdoesn’thavenoticeabledifference.

PEBshedwithperimeterbracingisfoundtobeefficientoutofallthreemodelswhenparameterlikebendingmomentin columnisconsidered.

Figure 4.9 Comparison of Bending Moment in Column

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN:2395-0056

Volume: 09 Issue: 11 | Nov 2022 www.irjet.net p-ISSN:2395-0072

4.7 Comparison of Axial Force in Column

Figure 4.10 Comparison of Axial Force in Column

Figure4.10isagraphplottedtoshowvariationofaxialforceincolumnamongallthreemodels.Wecanconcurfromthegraph thattheaxialforceislessforPEBwithperimeterbracingandmaximumforPEBwithbareframe.Theaxialforcevaluesof columnforPEBshedbareframeandPEBwithharpbracingarealmostsimilar.

PEBshedwithperimeterbracingisfoundtobeefficientoutofallthreemodelswhenparameterlikeaxialforceincolumnis considered.

4.8 Comparison of Deflection

Deflectionoftheshediscomparedwithallthe3modelspresentinourthesis.Figure4.11isagraphplottedtoshowtotal deflectionoftheshedamongallthreemodelsandthepermissibledeflectionallowedaccordingtotheIndianstandards.

Figure 4.11 Comparison of Deflection

5. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE SCOPE

5.1 Conclusion

Onthebasisofdesignandanalysisofpre-engineeredstructurewithharpandperimetralbracingsubjectedtowindloading, manyinferencescanbeseen.

2022, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.529 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN:2395-0056

Conclusionsoftheresearchworkare:

Hence,aspertheabove-mentionedconclusionondifferentaspectsclearlyindicatingthattheperimeterbracinggiveseffective andsatisfactoryresultsandthiscanbeutilizedinfieldapplicationsofPEB.Further,nosignificantresultsareobtainedonPEB byusingharpbracingsoitisadvisedtoavoidsuchbracinginfieldapplication.

5.2 Future Scope

InthepresentstudyPEBshedwithPerimeterandharpbracingaremodeledandanalyzed.Variouspropertieslikeaxialforce, bendingmoment,shearforceoncolumnandrafterofallshedsarecompared.Basedonresultsvariousimportantconclusions aredrawnwhicharedescribedabove.However,fewissuesorparameterscanbeconsideredinfutureforresearchwhichis detailedasfollows:

•AspresentstudysuggeststhatPerimeterbracingismoreeffectiveascomparetoharpandbareframeincaseofwindloading, hencefurtheroptimizationoncostisstillneedresearch.

• Adetailedconnectionsdesignofshedisalsoconsideredforfurtherstudy.

•Further,theeffectivenessofPerimeterbracingcanalsobevalidatingincaseoftime-historyanalysis.

6. REFERENCES

6.1 Journal Papers

1.GM,Renuka.,SH,S.,Patange,R.,SP,M.,&CK,D.(2020).“TheDesignandAnalysisofIndustrialwarehouseusingSTAAD Pro”.InternationalJournalofFuturesResearchandDevelopment,1(1),99-113.

2.MitaaliJayantGilbile,S.S.Mane,(2020),“AReviewonComparativeStudyontheStructuralAnalysisandDesignofPreEngineered Building [PEB] with Conventional Steel Building [CSB]”, International Journal of Engineering Research and Technology(IJERT)Volume09,Issue09(September2020)

3.HarshilPatel,DhruvUpadhyay ,DivyangPatel.DesignOptimizationofBoxGirderinGantryCraneusingFiniteElement AnalysisSoftware.InternationalResearchJournalofEngineeringandTechnology(IRJET).2020.

4.ZhiqiangZhang,HaibinJin,XingLiandJinjinTianRigidDynamicLoadoftheCraneLiftingMechanismWhentheSeries ResistanceStarts.JournalofPhysics:ConferenceSeries.2020.

5.Sitthipong,S.,Meengam, C.,Chainarong,S.,& Towatana,P.(2018).DesignAnalysisofOverheadCraneforMaintenance Workshop.

6.ShivaniMeher,RuchitaNar,SadichhaJagadale,GautamiKalal,VirenChandanshive,2018,“DesignofIndustrialWarehouse” International Journal of Engineering Research and Technology (IJERT) Volume 07, Issue 02 (February 2018),http://dx.doi.org/10.17577/IJERTV7IS020170

7.HabiburRahaman,FaiyazAzam,MirzaAamirBaigSeismicriskassessmentofanindustrialsteelbuilding.International JournalofAdvanceResearch,IdeasandInnovationsinTechnology,2018.

8.Patil,Subodh&Jadhav,Raviraj&Mali,Pritam.A.&Bhanuse,Maheshkumar.(2017).“AnalysisandDesignOfPre-Engineed BuildingOfAnIndustrialWarehouse”.10.13140/RG.2.2.23069.77282.

9.Venkatesh,A.,Vignesh,S.,Iyappan,S.,VigneshKumar,P.,Tamilvanan,G.andVijayaSarathy,R.DESIGNOFANOVERHEAD PLATEGANTRYGIRDER.InternationalJournalofDevelopmentResearch,2016.

10.KavitaR.Kapadni,Prof.S.G.Ganiger.AReviewPaperonDesignandStructuralAnalysisofSimplySupportedGantryCrane BeamforEccentricLoading.InternationalResearchJournalofEngineeringandTechnology(IRJET)e-IS.2015

Volume: 09 Issue: 11 | Nov 2022 www.irjet.net p-ISSN:2395-0072 © 2022, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.529 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page231

11.NavyaP,Dr.Y.MManjunat.StructuralBehaviorofIndustrialStructureSubjectedtoLateralLoads.InternationalJournalof EngineeringResearch&Technology(IJERT).2015.

12.Kapadni,K.R.,&Ganiger,P.S.(2015).AReviewPaperonDesignandStructuralAnalysisofSimplySupportedGantryCrane BeamforEccentricLoading

13. Sagar gajanan kashid, prof. mr. pandit rangrao sawant, 2014, design and development of material handling crane, internationaljournalofengineeringresearch&technology(ijert)volume03,issue10(october2014),.

14. Mohamed H. Mabrouk, Sherif M. M. Abdelkhalek, 2014, Design and Implementation of a Light Duty Gantry Crane, INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFENGINEERINGRESEARCH&TECHNOLOGY(IJERT)Volume03,Issue12(December2014),

15.C.OktayAzeloglu,AyseEdincliler,AhmetSagirli,"InvestigationofSeismicBehaviorofContainerCraneStructuresbyShake Table Tests and Mathematical Modeling", Shock and Vibration, vol. 2014, Article ID 682647, 9 pages, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/682647

16. Andrea GODOY, Frédéric BARBIER , Charisis CHATZIGOGOS, Nicolas BESSON, Alfred THIBON and Martin RAY. COMPARATIVE SEISMIC ANALYSIS OF OVERHEAD CRANE ON STEEL FRAME CARRYING STRUCTURE: EVALUATION OF ADEQUATEEQUIPMENT-STRUCTUREINTERACTIONMODELING.SecondEuropeonConferenceonEarthquakeEngineering. 2014.

17.SubhrakantMohakul,Dr.ShaikhYajdani,AbhayDhurde,August2014“Designofindustrialstorageshedandanalysisof stressesproducedonfailureofajoint”.InternationalJournalofCivilEngineeringandTechnology

18.Saleem,MuhammadUmair,etal.“MinimumWeightDesignofPreEngineeredSteelStructuresUsingBuilt-upSectionsand ColdFormedSections.”AdvancedMaterialsResearch,vol.684,TransTechPublications,Ltd.,Apr.2013,pp.125–129.Crossref, doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/amr.684.125.

19.SyedFiroz,SarathChandraKumarB,S.KanakambaraRao,”DesignConceptofPreEngineeredBuilding”,IJERAVol.2,Issue 2,Mar-Apr2012,pp.267-272

20.C.M.Meera,June2013“Pre-EngineeredBuildingDesignofanIndustrialwarehouse”.InternationalJournalofEngineering SciencesandEmergingTechnologies.

6.2 IS-Codes

1.IndianStandard:1893(Part1);2002.CriteriaforEarthquakeResistantDesignStructures:NewDelhi:BIS;2002.

2.IS875:Part1to5CodeOfPracticeForDesignLoads(OtherThanEarthquake)ForBuildingsandStructures,1stRevision, NewDelhi:BIS.

3.IndianStandard:801–1975;CodeOfPracticeForUseOfCold-FormedLightGaugeSteelStructuralMember‘sInGeneral BuildingConstruction,1stRevision,NewDelhi:BIS.

4IndianStandard:800–2007;GeneralConstructioninSteel CodeofPractice;3rdSRevision,NewDelhi:BIS.

6.3 Books/ Manuals

1.MBMA:MetalBuildingManufacturersAssociation-2006,MetalBuildingSystemsManual.

2.Dr.N.Subramanian,‗Designofsteelstructures‘.

3.Dr.N.Subramanian(2008),―Pre-engineeredBuildingsSelectionofFramingSystem,RoofingandWallMaterials‖.

4.TechnicalManual,ZamilSteel,SaudiArabia,Pre-EngineeredBuildingsDivision.

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN:2395-0056 Volume: 09 Issue: 11 | Nov 2022 www.irjet.net p-ISSN:2395-0072 © 2022, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.529 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page232