ISSN (Print) : 0974-6846

Indian Journal of Science and Technology, Vol 8(32), DOI: 10.17485/ijst/2015/v8i32/89102, November 2015 ISSN (Online) : 0974-5645

Comparative Study of Pre Engineered and

Conventional Industrial Building
L. Maria Subashini and Shamini Valentina*
Department of Civil Engineering, Bharath University, Chennai - 600073, Tamil Nadu, India;
mariasubashini.civil@bharathuniv.ac.in, shamini.civil@bharathuniv.ac.in

Abstract
Longspan, Column free structures are the most essential in any type of industrial structures and Pre Engineered Buildings
(PEB) fulfill this requirement along with reduced time and cost as compared to conventional structures. This methodology is
versatile not only due to its quality pre-designing and prefabrication, but also due to its lightweight and economical construction.
The present work presents the comparative study and design of conventional steel frames with concrete columns and steel
columns and Pre Engineered Buildings (PEB). In this work, an industrial building of length 44m and width 20m with roofing
system as conventional steel truss and pre-engineered steel truss is analyzed and designed by using STAAD Pro V8i.

Keywords: Pre-Engineered Building, Staad.Pro, Tapered Section

1.  Introduction However India’s most progressive companies are seeing

India has the second fastest growing economy in the
world and a lot of it, is attributed to its construction indus-
try which figures just next to agriculture in its economic
contribution to the nation. In its steadfast development,
the construction industry has discovered, invented and
developed a number of technologies, systems and prod-
ucts, one of them being the concept of Pre-Engineered
Buildings (PEBs). As opposed to being on-site fabri-
cated, PEBs are delivered as a complete finished product
to the site from a single supplier with a basic structural
steel framework with attached factory finished clad-
ding and roofing components. The structure is erected
on the site by bolting the various building components
together as per specifications. PEBs are developed using
potential design software. The onset of technological
advancement enabling 3d modeling and detailing of the
proposed structure and coordination has revolutionized
Conventional building construction. Pre-Engineered
Buildings (PEB) is the future for India. Most of the Indian
business community is just started to realize the benefits
of PEB’s. Where you have been building with concrete for
as long as anyone can remember, it is difficult to change.
the benefits of PEB’s.
2.  Methodology
In the present study an Industrial steel structure with
Conventional steel structure with concrete columns,
Conventional steel structure with steel columns and 3.
Pre- Engineered structure are considered for the analysis,
design using Staad.ProV8i1. Conventional Steel Building
of length 20 m and span 44m. Baylengths are maintained
at an interval of 4m along length. The height of the truss is
taken as a minimum pitch that is 1/5th of span. So slope of
roof is taken as 21.8˚and covered with GI sheet. The spac-
ing of purlins is maintained as 1.35m. The eave height of the
building has been taken as 5.5m in which 3m from ground
level is used for brick work and remaining 2.5m is used for
cladding. Pre Engineered Steel Building of length 20m and
span 44m. Bay lengths are maintained at an interval of 4m
along length. For this structure from general practice slope
of the roof is taken as 5.71˚. The spacing of purlins is main-
tained as 1.26m. The eave height of the building has been
taken as 5.5m in which 3 m from ground level is used for
brick work and remaining 2.5 m is used as cladding2,3.

*Author for correspondence

 Comparative Study of Pre Engineered and Conventional Industrial Building
2.1  Pre Engineered Buildings
Pre-Engineered Building concept involves the steel build-
ing systems which are predesigned and prefabricated. As
the name indicates, this concept involves pre-engineering
of structural elements using a predetermined registry of
building materials and manufacturing techniques that can
be proficiently complied with a wide range of structural
and aesthetic design requirements4. The basis of the PEB
concept lies in providing the section at a location only
according to the requirement at that spot. The sections
can be varying throughout the length according to the
bending moment
. diagram. This leads to the utilization
of non-prismatic rigid frames with slender elements5.
Tapered I sections made with built-up thin plates are used
to achieve this configuration. Standard hot-rolled sec-
tions, cold-formed sections, profiled roofing sheets, etc.
is also used along with the tapered sections. The use of
optimal least section leads to effective saving of steel and
cost reduction. The typical PEB frame of the structure is
as shown in the Figure 1.
3.  Advantages of PEB
Following are some of the advantages Pre-Engineered
Building Structures
Figure 1.  Figure
Single1.Frame
SingleofFrame of a Pre Engineered
a Pre Engineered Building.Building.
3. Advantages of PEB
Following are some of the advantages Pre-Engineered Building Structures
3.1 Conventional Steel Buildings
Conventional Steel Buildings (CSB) are low rise steel structures with roofing systems of truss
with roof coverings7. Various types of roof trusses can be used for these structures depending
uponFigure
the pitch of the truss.
2. Single FrameForof large
a pitch, Fink type truss can be used; formed iumpitch, Prattty
Figure 2.  Single Frame of a Conventional Steel Building.
Conventional Steel Building.
2 Vol 8 (32) | November 2015 | www.indjst.org
3.1   Conventional Steel Buildings
Conventional Steel Buildings (CSB) are low rise steel
structures with roofing systems of truss with roof cov-
erings7. Various types of roof trusses can be used for
these structures depending upon the pitch of the truss.
For large pitch, Fink type truss can be used; formed
iumpitch, Prattty petruss can be used and for small pitch,
How etype truss can be used. Skylight can be provided for
daylighting and for more day lighting, quadrangular type
truss can be used. The selection criterion of roof trussal
so includes the slope of the roof, fabrication and trans-
portation methods, aesthetics, climatic conditions, etc.
Several compound and combination type of economical
roof trusses can also be selected depending upon the util-
ity. Standard hot-rolled sections are usually used for the
truss elements along with gusset plates8,9. The CSB frame
of the structure considered in the study is as shown in
Figure.
a) Buildings are generally constructed in just 6 to 8 weeks
after approval of drawings. PEB will thus reduce total
construction time of the project by atleast 30%. This
allows faster occupancy and earlier realization of rev-
enue10.
b) Because of systems approach, considerable saving is
achieved in design, manufacturing and erection cost.
c) Figure 2. Single
These can Frame expanded
be easily of a in length by adding
Conventional SteelAlso
additional bays. Building.
expansion in width and height is
possible by predesigning for future expansion.
d) Buildings can be supplied to around 90m clear spans.
This is one of the most important advantages of PEB
giving column free space.
e) Buildings are manufactured completely in the factory
under controlled conditions, and hence the quality can
be assured.
f) PEB Buildings have high quality paint systems for
cladding and steel to suit ambient conditions at the
site, which inturn gives long durability and low main-
tenance coats11.
g) Buildings are supplied with polyurethane insulated
panels or fibre glass blankets insulation to achieve
required “U” values (overall heat transfer coefficient).
h) Steel members are brought to site in CKD conditions,
there by avoiding cutting and welding at site. As PEB
sections are lighter in weight, the small members can
be very easily assembled, bolted and raised with the
help of cranes. This allows very fast construction and
reduces wastage and labour requirement.
Indian Journal of Science and Technology
 L. Maria Subashini and Shamini Valentina

Table 1.  Structure Parameters Dead Load on Conventional Steel Building:

Type of building Industrial building Weight of the G.I sheeting = 0.131kN/m2
Type of structure Single storey industrial
Weight of fixings = 0.025kN/m2
structure Weight of services = 0.1kN/m2
Location Visakhapatnam Total weight = 0.256kN/m2
Dead load = 0.256kN/m2
Area of building 880m2
Live load = 0.128kN/m2 (25% of reduction as per IS1893-
Eave height 5.5m
2002)
Spanwidth 20m
Total load = DL+LL = 0.384kN/m2
Number of bays 11No’s Bay width of the building is 4m
Single bay length 4m Therefore earthquake load on rafter = 0.384 × 4 = 1.538
Total bay length 44m kN/m.
Support condition (CSB) fixed
Earthquake Load on Pre-Engineered Building:
Support condition (PEB) pinned Dead load = 0.256kN/m2
PEB roof slope 5.710 Live load = 0.209kN/m2 (25% of reduction as per IS1893-
CSB roof slope 21.80 2002)
Total load = 0.465kN/m2
Dead Load Bay width of the building is 4m
Spacing of the purlin = 1.35m Therefore earthquake load on rafter = 0.444 × 4 =
Total weight on purlins = 0.256 × 1.35 = 0.345kN/m 1.86kN/m.
Dead Load on Pre-Engineered Building:
Weight of the G. I sheeting = 0.131kN/m2
4.2  Wind Load
Weight of fixings = 0.025kN/m2 Wind load is calculated as per IS: 875 (Part 3)-1987
Weight of services = 0.1kN/m2 Basic Wind speed Vb = 50m/sec
Total weight is = 0.256kN/m2 Risk Coefficient K1 = 1
Total weight on purlins = 0.256 × 1.26 = 0.322kN/m Terrain, Height and Structure size factor K2 = 1
Topography factor K3 =1
Live Load Design Wind Speed Vz = VbK1K2K3 = 50 m/sec = 1.5kN/m2
The Live load is calculated according to IS:875 (Part2)– Topography factor K3 =1
The Internal Coefficients are taken as +0.5 and –0.5. Wind
198716. Load onDesign Wind Speed Vz = VbK1K2K3 = 50 m/sec
individual members are then calculated by
Live Load on Conventional Steel Building: F = (Cpe–Cpi)xAxP
= 1.5kN/m 2

Live load on the sloping roof is = 750 – 20(α-10)N/m2 Where,

The Cpe–External
Internal CoefficientsCoefficient
are taken as +0.5Cpi–Internal Coefficient
and -0.5. Wind Load on individual members are then c
A–Surface Area in m 2
Where α = 21.8˚, Therefore live load = 0.514kN/m2 F = (Cpe–Cpi)xAxP
Live load on purlins = 0.514 × 1.35 = 0.9179kN/m P–Design Wind Pressure
Where, Cpe–External in Cpi–Internal
Coefficient kN/m2 Coefficient A–Surface Area in m2
P–Design Wind Pressure in kN/m2
Live Load on Pre-Engineered Building: 5.  Results
Live load on purlins = 0.836kN/m2 5. Results
Therefore live load on purlins at 1.26 spacing = 0.836 ×
1.26 = 1.05kN/m

4.  Load Calculations

4.1  Earthquake Load
Earthquake loads are calculated as per IS: 1893-200017.
Earthquake Load on Conventional Steel Building
Figure 3. Bending moments and Reactions at Supports Design Wind Pressure P = 0
Dead load is calculated According to IS: 875 (Part 1) - Figure 3.  Bending moments and Reactions at Supports
198715. Design Wind Pressure P = 0.06V2.

Vol 8 (32) | November 2015 | www.indjst.org Indian Journal of Science and Technology 3
 5. Results

Comparative Study of Pre Engineered and Conventional Industrial Building

Figure 7. Bending moments and Reactions at end of Rafters.
6.  Staad Pro Procedure
In the present study, Staad Pro software has been used
inorder to analyse and design Pre Engineered Structures
and Conventional Steel Structure12. It gives the Bending
moment, Shear Forces, Axial Forces, Torsion, Beam 120
Structures of a steel structure so that the design can be 100
Figure
done 3. Bending
using moments
Tapered andand
Sections Reactions at Supports
check for Design Wind Pressure P = 0.06V2.
safety in Pre 80
Engineered Buildings.
60
Figure 7.  Bending moments and Reactions at end 40
of
Figure 7. Bending moments and Reactions at end of Rafters.
6. Staad Pro Procedure Rafters. 20
0
In the present study, Staad Pro software has been used inorder to analyse and design Pre
Engineered Structures and Conventional Steel Structure12. It gives the Bending moment, Shear
Forces,
6. Axial
StaadForces, Torsion, Beam Structures of a steel structure so that the design can be done
Pro Procedure
using Tapered Sections and check for safety in Pre Engineered Buildings.
In the present study, Staad Pro software has been used inorder to analyse and design Pre 120
Engineered Structures and Conventional Steel Structure12. It gives the Bending moment, Shear 100
Forces, Axial Forces, Torsion, Beam Structures of a steel structure so that the design can be done Figure
using Tapered Sections and check for safety in Pre Engineered Buildings. 80
60
Figure
Figure4.4. 
Bending moments
Bending and
moments Reactions
and ReactionsininColumns.
Columns.
40
20
Figure
Figure
Figure 7. Bending moments and Reactions 8.Bending
8. of
at end Bendingmoments
Rafters. momentsand
andReactions
Reactionsat atRidge
0Ridge Portion.
Portion.

1202. Quantity of steel utilized for the structure

Table Figure 9. Q
100
Figure 5. Bending moments and Reactions in Rafters. 80
CSB with Concrete Columns 92.663Tonnes
60
CSB40
with Steel Columns 101.553Tonnes
Figure 5.  Bending moments and Reactions in Rafters.
Figure 5. Bending moments and Reactions in Rafters. 20
Figure 8. Bending
Pre-Engineered moments and Reactions
Building at Ridge Portion.
75.645Tonnes
0

Table 2. Quantity of steel utilized for the structure

Figure 9. Quantity tones.
Figure 9.  Quantity tones.

CSB with Concrete Columns

Table 2.  Quantity of steel utilized92.663Tonnes
for the structure
CSB
CSB with
with Concrete
Steel Columns Columns 92.663Tonnes
101.553Tonnes
Figure 8. Bending moments and Reactions atCSB
Ridge Portion.
with Steel Columns 101.553Tonnes
FigureFigure
6.  Bending moments
6. Bending and Reactions
moments at mid-span
and Reactions of
at mid-span of Rafters. Building
Pre-Engineered 75.645Tonnes
Rafters. Pre-Engineered Building 75.645Tonnes

Figure 6. Bending moments and Reactions at mid-span of Rafters.

4 Vol 8 (32) | November 2015 | www.indjst.org Indian Journal of Science and Technology
Table 2. Quantity of steel utilized for the structure

CSB with Concrete Columns 92.663Tonnes


7.  Discussion
• After Analyzing, at different load cases it is observed
that the Axial force at supports in PEB (43.487kN)
is less when compared to that in CSB with concrete
columns and steel columns (37.814kN & 64.054
kN). Shear force at supports in PEB (178.708 kN)
is less when compared to that in CSB with concrete
columns and steel columns (226.003 kN & 186.14
kN). The Bending Moments at supports in PEB
is negligible when compared to that in CSB with
concrete columns and steel columns (151.955kN &
171.955kN)13.
• In Columns, the Axial force in PEB (178.708kN is less
when compared to that in CSB with concrete columns
and steel columns (225.995 kN & 186.134 kN). Shear
force in PEB (44.832kN) is less when compared to
that in CSB with concrete columns and steel columns
(47.534 kN & 64.248 kN). The Bending Moments
in PEB (354.358kN) is more due to its lightweight
structure (Tapered Sections)when compared to that
in CSB with concrete columns and steel columns
(232.72kN&163.382kN)14.
• In Rafters, the Axial force in PEB (53.048kN) is less
when compared to that in CSB with concrete columns
and steel columns (135.625 kN & 128.426 kN). Shear
force in PEB (110.039 kN) is less when compared to
that in CSB with concrete columns and steel columns
(16.015 kN & 16.224 kN). The Bending Moments in
PEB (252.821kN) is more due To its lightweight struc-
ture (Purlins & Rafters) when compared to that in CSB
with concrete columns and steel columns (9.94kN &
14.544 kN).
• In Rafters at mid-span, the Axial force in PEB
• (46.794kN) is less when compared to that in CSB with
concrete columns and steel columns (135.335 kN &
178.16kN). Shear force in PEB (59.685kN) is more
when compared to that in CSB with concrete columns
and steel columns (1.426 kN & 1.61kN)20. The Bending
Moments in PEB (154.293 kN) is more due to its light-
weight structure (Tapered Sections) when compared to
that in CSB with concrete columns and steel columns
(1.447 kN & 1.959kN)15.
• In Rafters at Ends, the Axial force in PEB (34.226 kN)
is less when compared to that in CSB with concrete
columns and steel columns (121.66kN & 160.158kN).
Shear force in PEB (110.039kN) is less when compared
to that in CSB with concrete columns and steel col-
Vol 8 (32) | November 2015 | www.indjst.org
L. Maria Subashini and Shamini Valentina
umns (9.129kN & 10.306kN). The Bending Moments
in PEB (252.821 kN) is more when compared to that
in CSB with concrete columns and steel columns
(9.94kN & 13.456kN).
• In Rafters at Ridge portion, the Axial force in PEB
(52.435kN) is less when compared to that in CSB
with concrete columns and steel columns (102.817
kN & 135.352kN)21,22. Shear force in PEB (41.016kN)
is less when compared to that in CSB with concrete
columns and steel columns (12.567kN & 14.187 kN).
The Bending Moments in PEB (166.829 kN) is more
when compared to that in CSB with concrete columns
and steel columns (2.993 kN & 4.052kN)16.
8.  Conclusion
This paper effectively conveys that PEB structures can
be easily designed by simple design procedures in accor-
dance with country standards. Low weight flexible frames
of PEB offer higher resistance to earthquake loads18,19.
PEB roof structure is almost 26% lighter than onven-
tional Steel Building. In secondary members, lightweight
“Z” purlins are used for PEB structure, whereas heavier
hot-rolled sections are used for CSB. Support reactions
for PEB are lesser than CSB as per analysis. Lightweight
foundation can be adopted for PEB which leads to sim-
plicity in design and reduction in cost of construction of
foundation. Heavy foundation will be required for CSB
structure. PEB building cost is 30% lesser than the cost
of CSB structure17. PEB offers low cost, strength, dura-
bility, design flexibility, adaptability and recyclability. To
conclude “Pre-Engineered Building construction gives
end uers a much more economical and better solution
for long span structures where large column free areas are
needed.
9.  References
1. Zende AA, Kulkarni AV, Hutagia A. Comparative study of
analysis and design of pre-engineered-buildings and con-
ventional frames. IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil
Engineering. 2013 Jan-Feb; 5(1):32–43.
2. Bhavikatti SS. Design of steel structures by limit state
method as per IS 800-2007. New Delhi: I.K. International
Publishing House Pvt. Ltd.; 2010.
3. Saravanan T, Srinivasan V, Sandiya VP. A two stage DC-DC
converter with isolation for renewable energy applica-
tions. Indian Journal of Science and Technology. 2013;
6(S6):4824–30. ISSN: 0974-6846.
Indian Journal of Science and Technology 5
 Comparative Study of Pre Engineered and Conventional Industrial Building
  4. Zoad DP. Evaluation of Pre-Engineering Structure Design
by IS-800 as against Pre-Engineering Structure Design by
AISC. International Journal of Engineering Research and
Technology (IJERT). 2012 Jul; 1(5).
  5. Duggal SK. Limit State Design of steel Structural. New
Delhi: Tata McGraw Hill Education Private Limited;
2010.
  6. Thakar JD, Patel PG. Comparative Study of Pre-Engineered
Steel Structure by varying width of Structure. International
Journal of Advanced Engineering Technology. 2013 Sep;
4(3):56–62.
  7. Srinivasan V, Saravanan T. Reformation and market design
of power sector. Middle - East Journal of Scientific Research.
2013; 16(12):1763–7.
  8. Meera CM. Pre-Engineered Building Design of an Industrial
Warehouse. International journal of Engineering Sciences
and Emerging Technologies. 2013 Jun; 5(2):75–82.
  9. Thakker P. Conventional steel buildings v/s Pre-engineered
buildings.
10. Prabhakar J, Senthil kumar M, Priya MS, Mahalakshmi K,
Sehgal PK, Sukumaran VG. Evaluation of Antimicrobial
Efficacy of Herbal Alternatives (Triphala and Green Tea
Polyphenols), MTAD, and 5% Sodium Hypochlorite against
Enterococcus faecalis Biofilm Formed on Tooth Substrate:
An in vitro study. Journal of Endodontics. 2010; 36(1):83–6.
ISSN: 0099-2399.
11. Shiyekar MR. Limit State Design in Structural Steel. New
Delhi: PHI Learning Private Limited; 2011.
12. Subramanian N. Pre-Engineered buildings selection of
framing system, roofing and wall materials. The Master
builder. 2008 Jul; 48–2.
13. Subramanian N. Design of steel structures. Chennai: Oxford
Higher Education; 2008.
14. Ramkumar Prabhu M, Reji V, Sivabalan A. Improved
radiation and bandwidth of triangular and star patch
antenna. Research Journal of Applied Sciences,
Engineering and Technology. 2012; 4(12):1740–8. ISSN:
2040-7459.
6 Vol 8 (32) | November 2015 | www.indjst.org
15. Firoz S, et al. Design concept of Pre Engineered Building.
International Journal of Engineering Research and
Applications (IJERA). 2012 Apr; 2(2):267–72.
16. Bahadure V, Prasad RVRK. Comparison between Design
and Analysis of various Configuration of Industrial
Sheds. International Journal of Engineering Research and
Applications (IJERA). 2013 Jan-Feb; 3(1):1565–6.
17. Zamil steel. TechnicalManual. 1999 Jan.
18. Kumaravel A, Udhayakumara pandian D. Consruction
of meta classifiers for apple scab infections. International
Journal of Pharma and Bio Sciences. 2013; 4(4):B1207–13.
ISSN: 0975-6299.
19. IS800. General construct in steel–code of practice. New
Delhi: Bureau of Indian Standards; 2007.
20. IS875 (part 1). Code of practice for design loads (other than
earthquake) for building and structures. Dead loads, New
Delhi. 1987.
21. IS875 (part 2). Code of practice for design loads (other than
earthquake) for building and structures. Imposed loads,
New Delhi. 1987.
22. IS875 (part3). Code of practice for design loads (other than
earthquake) for building and structures. Wind loads, New
Delhi. 1988.
23. Kimio T, Natarajan G, Hideki A, Taichi K, Nanao K.
Higher involvement of subtelomere regions for chromo-
some rearrangements in leukemia and lymphoma and in
irradiated leukemic cell line. Indian Journal of Science and
Technology. 2012 Apr; 5(1):1801–11.
24. Cunningham CH. A laboratory guide in virology. 6th ed.
Minnesota: Burgess Publication Company; 1973.
25. Sathishkumar E, Varatharajan M. Microbiology of Indian
desert. In: Sen DN, editor. Ecology and vegetation of Indian
desert. India: Agro Botanical Publ.; 1990. p. 83–105.
26. Varatharajan M, Rao BS, Anjaria KB, Unny VKP,
Thyagarajan S. Radiotoxicity of sulfur-35. Proceedings of
10th NSRP, India. 1993; 257–8.
27. 01 Jan 2015. Available from: http://www.indjst.org/index.
php/vision
Indian Journal of Science and Technology