INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, NIRMA UNIVERSITY, AHMEDABAD 382 481, 08-10 DECEMBER, 2011

Comparative Study of R.C.C, Steel and Composite (G+30 Storey) Building

D. R. Panchal and P. M. Marathe

Abstract - Steel-concrete composite systems for buildings are formed by connecting the steel beam to the concrete slab or profiled deck slab with the help of mechanical shear connectors so that they act as a single unit. In the present work, steelconcrete composite, steel and R.C.C. options are considered for comparative study of G+30 storey commercial building which is situated in earthquake zone IV. Equivalent Static Method of Analysis is used. For modeling of Composite, Steel and R.C.C. structures, ETABS software is used and the results are compared; and it is found that composite structure is found to be more economical. Index Term--Composite beam, Composite column, Shear connector, ETAB software.
I.

A need to study the composite design of the multi-story buildings keeping in view of the rapid development in this field. In India, it is comparatively new and no updated design codes are available for the same. [1]

INTRODUCTION & OBJECTIVE

teel-concrete composite systems have become quite popular in recent times because of their advantages against conventional construction. Composite construction combines the better properties of the both i.e. concrete and steel and results in speedy construction. In the present work included Comparative study of R.C.C., STEEL and COMPOSITE (G+30 STORY) building. In the comparative study includes deflections of the members, size and material consumption of members in composite with respect to R.C.C. and Steel sections, seismic forces and behavior of the building under seismic condition in composite with respect to R.C.C. and Steel, foundation requirements and type of foundation can be selected for Composite structure with respect to R.C.C. and Steel and total cost of the building. II. COMPOSITE CONSTRUCTION In the past, for the design of a building, the choice was normally between a concrete structure and a masonry structure. But the failure of many multi-storied and low-rise R.C.C. and masonry buildings due to earthquake has forced the structural engineers to look for the alternative method of construction. Use of composite or hybrid material is of particular interest, due to its significant potential in improving the overall performance through rather modest changes in manufacturing and constructional technologies. In India, many consulting engineers are reluctant to accept the use of composite steel-concrete structure because of its unfamiliarity and complexity in its analysis and design. But literature says that if properly configured, then composite steel-concrete system can provide extremely economical structural systems with high durability, rapid erection and superior seismic performance characteristics.

Fig.1. Typical composite beam-slab details.

Formally the multi-story buildings in India were constructed with R.C.C framed structure or Steel framed structure but recently the trend of going towards composite structure has started and growing. In composite construction the two different materials are tied together by the use of shear studs at their interface having lesser depth which saves the material cost considerably. Thermal expansion (coefficient of thermal expansion) of both, concrete and steel being nearly the same. Therefore, there is no induction of different thermal stresses in the section under variation of temperature. 1) Composite beam definition A steel concrete composite beam consists of a steel beam, over which a reinforced concrete slab is cast with shear connectors. The composite action reduces the beam depth. Rolled steel sections themselves are found adequate frequently for buildings and built up girders are generally unnecessary. The composite beam can also be constructed with profiled sheeting with concrete topping or with cast in place or precast reinforced concrete slab. 2) Composite Column definition A steel concrete composite column is conventionally a compression member in which the steel element is a structural steel section. There are three types of composite columns used in practice which are Concrete Encased, Concrete filled, Battered Section.

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CURRENT TRENDS IN TECHNOLOGY, NUiCONE 2011

III. EARTHQUAKE ANALYSIS AND DESIGN PROCEDURE

The traditional codes gives us procedure attempts to satisfy implicitly all three objectives. [3] A. Negligible damage in once in a lifetime earthquake shaking demands having a return period of about 50 years. This can be achieved by elastic structural response and limiting the storey drifts to minimize damage to non-structural components such as cladding and internal walls. B. Collapse prevention under the largest earthquake demanded that may occur at the site. Such earthquake occurs with a return period of approximately 2500 years. The inelastic deformation demands are smaller than their deformation capacities taking approximate account of gravity loads, second order effects and deterioration of stiffness and strength due to cyclic loading. Also the story deformations are sufficiently small so as to prevent catastrophic damage to non structural elements. Deformations are the key parameter for performance based earthquake design rather than force or strength. Deformation can be classified in to three categories. a. Overall building movements. b. Story drifts & other internal deformations. c. Inelastic deformations for structural components and elements. These movements occur due to rigid body displacement and shear deformations. IV. CRITICAL ISSUES High base overturning moment and foundation design. High shear capacity requirement at base. High gravity stresses reducing the usable floor area and more sectional area of components. Development of ductility at base elements under high compressive gravity stresses. Controlling lateral acceleration and story drifts. Controlling damage so as to permit repairs. Ensuring ductile energy dissipation mechanism and preventing brittle failures.

Fig.2. Plan view of building. TABLE 1 PROJECT DETAILS

2) Beam grid and column positions.

For all the above issues regarding the performance of the building under seismic forces the three types of model has been studied and comparison of all the parameters are made which can give us better idea about the behavior of the building with different materials. V.
PROJECT DETAILS

1) Architectural details To study the behavior of high rise building under high seismic forces as here taken Zone IV as per IS 1893 : 2002 where building is situated, a typical office building plan is selected with area covering 24 m x 42 m.
Fig.3. Typical beam grid for all floors.

INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, NIRMA UNIVERSITY, AHMEDABAD 382 481, 08-10 DECEMBER, 2011

3) Modeling with ETABS 3-D model is being prepared for the frame static analysis of the building in ETABS version 9.7.1.[2] The basic parameters considered for the design Slab depth : 125 mm thick Live load in office area : 4 kN/sq m Live load in passage area : 4 kN/sq m Live load in urinals : 2 kN/sq m Floor finish load : 1.5 kN/ sq m Wall thickness : 150 mm thick wall Stair case loading : 4 kN/sq m Lift shaft : 300 mm thick shear wall Earthquake parameters considered Zone : IV Soil type : Hard soil Importance factor : 1 Time period : Program Calculated Seismic zone factor : 0.24 for zone IV Earthquake load in X and Z direction. Rigid frame diaphragm Codes used for analysis R.C.C. design: IS 456: 2000 [5] Steel design: IS 800: 1984 [8] Composite design: AISC LRFD 99 [9] R.C.C., Steel and Composite model has been made and different column sizes were selected along with different beam sizes.

Fig. 6. Open GL view from Etabs.

VI. SIZING OF THE MEMBERS The sizes of the members in different model have been taken as per strength as well as displacement requirements. For all the models the sizes are curtailed at every 10 story to achieve economy and reduce dead weight of the structure. Here is the summary of the final sizes achieved and designed.
TABLE 1 COLUMN SECTIONS

Fig. 4. Screenshot of Etabs.

Fig. 5. Typical Beam grid in Etabs.

4
TABLE 2 BEAM SECTIONS

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CURRENT TRENDS IN TECHNOLOGY, NUiCONE 2011

Column Axial force

TABLE 5 COLUMN AXIAL FORCES IN KN

Column bending Moments in X direction

TABLE 6 BENDING MOMENT IN X DIRECTION IN KN-M

VII. COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT MODELS. 1. Comparison Factors The model has been compared with different parameters. Max Story Displacement in X and Y direction Total Weight of Structure Max Story Displacement in X and Y direction
TABLE 3 DISPLACEMENTS IN X AND Y DIRECTION IN M

2.

Column bending Moments in Y direction

TABLE 7 BENDING MOMENT IN Y DIRECTION IN KN-M

3.

Total weight of Structure

TABLE 4 TOTAL DEAD WEIGHT OF STRUCTURE IN KN

INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, NIRMA UNIVERSITY, AHMEDABAD 382 481, 08-10 DECEMBER, 2011

Secondary beam shear forces

TABLE 8 SHEAR FORCES IN SECONDARY BEAM IN KN

11 Main beam bending moments

TABLE 11 BENDING MOMENTS IN MAIN BEAM IN KN M

Secondary beam bending moments

TABLE 9 BENDING MOMENTS IN SECONDARY BEAM IN KN M

12 Quantities for different models.

TABLE 12 QUANTITIES

VIII. CONCLUSION 1. 10 Main beam shear forces

TABLE 10 SHEAR FORCES IN MAIN BEAM IN KN

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

As the results show the Steel option is better than R.C.C. But the Composite option for high rise building is best suited among all three options. The reduction in the dead weight of the Steel framed structure is 32 % with respect to R.C.C. frame Structure and Composite framed structure is 30 % with respect to R.C.C. framed structure. As the sizes of the steel members from steel option to the composite option reduces about 25 % in main beams and about 60 % in secondary beams. Shear forces in secondary beams are increased by average 83.3% in steel structure and reduced by average 10 % in composite structure as compared to R.C.C. framed structure while in main beams shear forces are increased by average 131% in steel structure and reduced by average 100 % in composite structure as compared to R.C.C. framed structure. Bending moments in secondary beams are increased by average 83.3% in steel structure and reduced by average 48 % in composite structure as compared to R.C.C. framed structure while in main beams bending moments are increased 131% in steel structure and increased by average 117 % in composite structure as compared to R.C.C. framed structure. Axial forces in column have been reduced by average 46% in steel structure and reduced by average 7% in Composite framed structure as compared to R.C.C. framed structure.

6 7.

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CURRENT TRENDS IN TECHNOLOGY, NUiCONE 2011

Bending forces in X direction in column have been reduced by average 34% in steel structure and increased by average 5% in Composite framed structure as compared to R.C.C. framed structure while bending moments in Y direction in column have been reduced by average 25% in steel structure and reduced by average 26% in composite framed structure as compared to R.C.C. framed structure. 8. In all the options the values of story displacements are within the permissible limits as per code limits. 9. Steel and composite structure gives more ductility to the structure as compared to the R.C.C. which is best suited under the effect of lateral forces. 10. Total saving in the composite option as compared to the R.C.C. results in 10 % so as with Steel it will be 6-7%. IX. REFERENCES.
[1] Institute for steel development & Growth, "B+G+40 Storied Residential Building With Steel-Concrete Composite Option India Dec 2007. [2] M. Nageh, How To Model and Design High Rise Building Using ETABs Program Cairo 2007. [3] M. Willford, A. Whittaker and R. Klemencic, Recommendations for Seismic Design of High-Rise Buildings Council of Tall building and Urban habitat Feb 2008. [4] J. Zils and J. Viis, An Introduction To High Rise Design Structure Magazine Nov 2003. [5] IS: 456, Code of practice for plain and reinforced concrete code of practice, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, 2000. [6] IS: 1893, Criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures - general provisions for buildings, Part 1, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, 2002. [7] IS: 875, code of practice for design load (other than earthquake) for buildings and structures Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, 2002. [8] IS: 800, Code of practice for general construction in steel, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, 2007. [9] AISC 360-05, Specification of structural steel building, An American national stanadard, American Institute Of Steel Construction, Inc., 2005 [10] IS: 11384, Code of practice for composite construction in structural steel and concrete, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, 1985.