Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
1 of 8
http://www.sefindia.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12187
www.sefindia.org
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING FORUM OF INDIA [SEFI]
Search
Share
Subscriptions
Follow @sefindia
66k
Digest Preferences
FAQ
Profile
Search
Memberlist
2,495 followers
Usergroups
Register
Security Tips
Donate
Log in
Warning: Make sure you scan the downloaded attachment with updated antivirus tools before opening them. They may contain viruses.
Use online scanners here and here to upload downloaded attachment to check for safety.
Message
Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 6:34 pm
IS-LSMD
HI SEFIANS
Joined: 17 Jan 2009
Posts: 26
4. ON WHAT BASIS THEY ARE PREFERRING AISC THAN 'IS CODE' , MOST OF THE PEB
STRUCTURES ARE ANLYSED AND DESIGNED WITH AISC. ?
COULD ANY ONE PLZ EXPLAIN WHAT IS THE MAIN ASSUMPTIONS , AND CONEPT BEHIND IT.
THANK YOU
TBSPL_6
Back to top
N. Prabhakar
Post subject:
...
Dear Sefians,
In my opinion, the answers to the queries raised in this posting are the
following:
Joined: 25 Apr 2009
Posts: 206
22-01-2015 16:26
http://www.sefindia.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12187
Post subject:
General Sponsor
Dear All,
I agree with most of the observations of Er Prabhakar.
But I want to comment on his observation "As per Indian code, the classes of section considered
for design are Plastic, Compact and Semi-compact. Class of Slender cross-section, particularly
with thin webs, are not considered for design as the elements buckle locally even before reaching
yield stress. It is well known that many PEB manufacturers use sections with very thin webs in
order to reduce the weight of the section and be economical/competitive in their commercial
offers, and these thin webs do not satisfy the codal provisions of IS 800 : 2007."
IS 800:2007 has not considered slender sections which are often encountered in cold formed thin
sections, because there is another code IS 801 for this (see page 19 of IS 800 where a note about
this is made). Hence people using cold formed sections can not use IS 800.
IS 801 is still under WSM and currently under revision. God only knows when it will be published
by BIS. Draft code may be ready-Prof Arul Jayachandran of IITM may throw some light on this
as he is heading the committee, I think. May me that is the reason people are using AISC code for
cold formed structures.
Er Prabhakar's comment "the main reason to use the AISC code for PEB structures is due the
fact that it leads to an economical structural solution as compared to the Indian Code" kindled
nostalgic memories. We used to design structures using cold formed sections for TI Metal
sections. My friend Er Vijayaraghavan was there at that time, who is very knowledgeable on RC
as well as Steel design and we used to discuss for hours about the design methods. I used to have
fruitful discussions with a young engineer of their company by name Er Elangovan (I believe he
is with Tiger Steel, another company engaged in PEB, but lost touch with him for 15 to 20 years).
We used to optimize the members sizes by using a IS 801 provision, which will not be normally
2 of 8
22-01-2015 16:26
3 of 8
http://www.sefindia.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12187
considered by other designers-I do not have the code here, but I think it is the extra strength
available at the bends of the sections, due to strain hardening effects. My Ph.D. guide Prof.
Ganapathy of IITM, wrote a beautiful explanatory handbook on IS 801, which is still available
through BIS.
Best wishes
Subramanian
N. Prabhakar wrote:
Dear Sefians,
In my opinion, the answers to the queries raised in this posting
are the following:
Last edited by Dr. N. Subramanian on Wed May 23, 2012 1:39 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
Dr. N. Subramanian
Post subject:
General Sponsor
Dear All,
in continuation to my posting, I want to discuss one more thing. In India, BIS is making small
codes for different items and making money. We need to integrate the codes. For example in ACI
318, they have integrated Prestressed concrete and EQ provisions. Whereas we have separate
codes for these things. When will we have unified codes? I request those in IS committees to
take up the issue with BIS.
Best wishes
NS
22-01-2015 16:26
4 of 8
http://www.sefindia.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12187
Back to top
TBSPL_6
SEFI Regulars
VALUABLE CLARIFICATION
General Sponsor
Dear Er TBSPL,
In most of the international codes a partial load factor of 1.6 is adopted for LL and a factor of 1.4
for DL. it is because DL can be calculated precisely than LL. For simplicity IS 875 uses a factor of
1.5 for Both LL and DL.
The LL specified in IS 875 (Part 2) is higher than than those found in earlier load surveys (See
more on this in my book on Design of steel structures, pp. 142)
Best wishes
NS
TBSPL_6 wrote:
DEAR PRABHAKAR SIR/ DN SUBRAMANYAM SIR
THANK YOU ALOT FOR YOUR
VALUABLE CLARIFICATION
Post subject:
General Sponsor
Back to top
Dr. N. Subramanian
Post subject:
General Sponsor
22-01-2015 16:26
5 of 8
http://www.sefindia.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12187
Dear Er Sandeep,
Are not Examples 6.15 to 6.26 moment connections?
Best wishes
NS
sandeep_chauhan wrote:
It is a very good question asked by Tata Bluescope Engineer.
I am agree with Prabhakar sir, that we are still using AISC code to analyse PEB Buildings.
Joined: 21 Feb 2008
Posts: 4848
Location: Gaithersburg, MD,
U.S.A.
I am also working for a Pre-Engineered Building (PEB) & i have Designed more than 100 PEBs
in INDIA.
If i see the codes used for the buildings design by me are:
almost 85 buildings are as per AISC/MBMA/AISI
almost 15 buildings are as per IS-800:1984/IS-875/IS-801
and only one building is as per IS-800:2007/IS-875/IS-801
According to me, the problem in using IS-800:2007 is :
1. It is not a good practice to analyse primary member(portal frame) as per Limit State
method and Secondary member(Purlin, girts,cladding etc) as per Working stress method,in
same building.
2. I feel that the Deflection Criteria is not given clearly in IS-800:2007. the load combinations
given in Table-4 for Serviceability are not match with the load combinations given for
deflection check as given in Table-6 of IS:800-2007.
3. Design & Detailing for Earthquake loads as per Chapter-12 is given in Brief. There should be
a Explanatory by BIS for Chapter-12.
Even the book on "Design of steel structures" available in india, does not cover the
Chapter-12.
Also i am requesting to Subramanian Sir that please put a Example in our favourite
book(DESIGN OF STEEL STRUCTURES-N.SUBRAMANIAN) for Regid Moment Connection
Design, according to Chapter-12
Regards
Sandeep Chauhan
Back to top
N. Prabhakar
Post subject:
...
Dear Sefians,
In continuation of my earlier posting on the subject, I would like to add
the following:
Joined: 25 Apr 2009
Posts: 206
The PEB structures what we are discussing are not the structures of light
weight type, low-rise or short span buildings where cold-worked steel
sections can be used. Because these sections are very thin compared to
their widths, buckling at low stress values will result under compression,
shear, bending and bearing. The critical buckling is generally of a local
nature followed by an overall buckling of the member. Because of this
deficiency, the usage of cold-worked steel section for a heavily loaded
compression member is very limited. At best, it can be used as a bending
member of small spans. In industrial type structures, the most popular usage
of cold-worked steel as a structural member is in Z and C shaped sections
for roof purlins and side sheeting rails which are no doubt economical as
compared to hot rolled angle and channel sections. The usage of these Z and
C sections for purlins and sheeting rails is invariably based on the actual
full-scale load tests conducted by the manufacturer of these sections, and
BS 5950 has given empirical equations to check on the size of the members
supplied by the manufacturer.
The PEB structures supplied in India are mainly industrial type, large span
warehouses, factory buildings, etc. For these type of structures
which carry heavy loads and sometime with crane installation, hot-rolled
sections are normally used to avoid buckling failures of the type that occur
in structures with thin cold-worked steel. For PEB structures,
manufacturers prefer to use built-up sections instead of the hot-rolled
sections to arrive at an economical solution. In one industrial structure
with crane, I have come across, the PEB manufacturer has used an I shaped
built-up section made of 496mm deep x 4mm thick web and 220mm wide x 10mm
thick flanges for a column section subjected to axial load and bending
moment. With d/tw ratio of 124 which is more than the limiting value of 42,
it is classified as a slender member as per Table 2 of IS 800 : 2007, and
22-01-2015 16:26
6 of 8
http://www.sefindia.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12187
also by other international codes viz. BS 5950,the EuroCode EC3, and AISC
code. This slender section can cause local buckling even before reaching
yield stress which may result overall failure of the structure. While
designing this column section, a well known software is used by the PEB
designers which considers only the overall member strength by satisfying
only the stress requirements, ignoring the aspect of local buckling of the
thin web.
No stiffeners are provided to the web as a remedial measure.
This deficiency is mainly because of the designers aim in economizing the
size of the fabricated built-up section, ignoring the codal provisions on
the section classification. The above aspect is a very serious matter as
far as the safety and stability of the structure is concerned.
The PEB designers are also accused of mixing too many codes to satisfy the
economic requirement. They calculate the loads as per IS 875, but do the
design as per AISC or AISI ,MBMA, and use welds as per AWS. If they feel
that the steel section is lighter as per one code, they will adopt that
clause of the code and select another clause of another code of another
country for the design of some other part of the same building. Some PEB
designers select some clauses of previous versions of the code and other
clauses of the latest versions. It seems, PEB design teams are on constant
research in the selection of codal provisions of various countries and are
on trials with different clauses. This way of mixing too many codes is
not valid by any means. If the loads and codes are not specified by the
buyer, it is binding on the PEB manufacturer to use the local codes of
practice. The consultants who are proof-checking the design of PEB
structures should do a thorough job, and do not be carried away by the name
of well known software used or to the reference of a foreign code.
With best wishes,
N. Prabhakar
Chartered Structural Engineer
Vasai (E)
Back to top
Dr. N. Subramanian
Post subject:
General Sponsor
Dear Er Prabhakar,
Thank you very much for explaining the situation in detail. I was not aware of that. It is a bad
practice indeed!
Regards,
Subramanian
N. Prabhakar wrote:
Dear Sefians,
Joined: 21 Feb 2008
Posts: 4848
Location: Gaithersburg, MD,
U.S.A.
22-01-2015 16:26
7 of 8
http://www.sefindia.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12187
Oldest First
Go
Page 1 of 2
Jump to: SEFI Web Site Problems/ Login/Registration Issues
Translation: Translate topic
Go
Go
You cannot post new topics
You cannot reply to topics
You cannot edit your posts
You cannot delete your posts
You cannot vote in polls
You cannot attach files
You cannot download files
in
in
in
in
in
in
in
this
this
this
this
this
this
this
forum
forum
forum
forum
forum
forum
forum
22-01-2015 16:26
8 of 8
http://www.sefindia.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12187
Structural Engineering Forum of India shared Phoenix Webtech Private Limited's album.
5 hrs
tsunami
earthquake
powered by
powered by
22-01-2015 16:26