International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET)
e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 11 Issue: 11 | Nov 2024
p-ISSN: 2395-0072
www.irjet.net
COMPARATIVE STUDY OF RCC AND STEEL STRUCTURES USING STAAD PRO SOFTWARE Mrs. Yashaswi H. V 1, Vivek R2, Shivaprasad B. S3, Nithin K. N4, Sachin5 1 Asst Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Dr. AIT, Bengaluru
2,3,4,5 UG Students, Department of Civil Engineering, Dr. AIT, Bengaluru
---------------------------------------------------------------------***---------------------------------------------------------------------
Abstract - This project work focuses on comparison of RCC
using AutoCAD and STAAD.Pro. AutoCAD is used to draft the plan and modelling is done using STAAD.Pro, which was employed for detailed structural analysis. STAAD.Pro is particularly useful for simulating real-world conditions, ensuring that the design meets international standards, and allowing engineers to perform structural analysis for various loads.
and Steel structures of (G+2) commercial building using STAAD Pro software. The dead load & live loads are applied for beams, columns, slabs in STAAD Pro. The live load is considered for the commercial building specified in IS 875 part 2. Plan of the project is done in AutoCAD and converted it into nodes in STAAD Pro. The loads are applied on the model and analysis is done. The results obtained are as mentioned, the maximum bending moment and the shear force acting on RCC structure is higher compared to steel structures. The strength of the steel structures is more than RCC structure. Due to lower weight of steel structure the shear force and the bending moment acting on the structure is also less. The maximum axial force acting on RCC structure is higher compared to steel structures. The member size ratio required for steel structures decreases when the span of column is increased when compared to that of RCC structures.
RCC and steel structures are compared in terms of loadcarrying capacity. RCC structures offer durability, fire resistance, and good compressive strength, but require skilled labor and continuous checking. Steel structures, known for their high strength-to-weight ratio and elasticity, are quicker to construct but need regular maintenance due to corrosion risks. Ultimately, steel structures are preferred for tall buildings and industrial projects, while RCC remains a reliable option for everyday construction.
2. METHODOLOGY
Key Words: RCC & Steel structure, Auto Cad & STAAD Pro software, Loads, Maximum bending moment, Maximum shear force
2.1 FLOW CHART REPRESENTING METHODOLOGY Literature review
1. INTRODUCTION In order to compete in the ever-growing competent market, it is very important for a structural engineer to save time. As a sequel to this, an attempt is made to analyze a multi-storied building using a software package STAAD.Pro. For analyzing a multi storied building one has to consider all the possible loadings and see that the structure is safe against all possible loading conditions. There are several methods for analysis of different frames like Kani‘s method, cantilever method, portal method, Matrix method and also there are three design philosophies: Working Stress Method (WSM), Ultimate Load Method (ULM), and Limit State Method (LSM) for designing. WSM focuses on keeping materials within their elastic limits, ensuring safety through allowable stress, but it can lead to over-conservative designs. ULM, on the other hand, takes into account the ultimate strength of materials, reducing section sizes but lacking serviceability considerations. LSM offers a balanced approach by considering both safety and serviceability through partial safety factors for steel and concrete.
Preparation of plan
Draft using AUTO CAD software
Load calculation and assigning loads
Generating model using STAAD.Pro software
Analysis of building using STAAD.Pro software
Comparision of results between RCC and Steel Structure
This project involves analysis of main structural elements slab, beam, and column—of a G+2 multi-storied building
© 2024, IRJET
|
Impact Factor value: 8.315
Conclusion
|
ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal
|
Page 1