Project Final Report

A Project Report on
“COMPARATIVE STUDY OF COMPOSITE & RCC

STRUCTURE AGAINST LATERAL LOADS”
By
Name Enroll. No.
MOHIT JAIN 150760106064
PATEL NIRAV D. 150760106091
RAGHVANI DHRUV 150760106104
SHALWALA AKASH 150760106110
SOHAMKUMAR CHAUHAN 150760106113
Under the guidance by

Prof. Mehul J. Bhavsar
Assistant Professor
Civil Engineering Department
S.S.A.S.I.T
Surat
A report Submitted to
Gujarat Technological University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for
the Degree of Civil Engineering
Civil Engineering Department

SHREE SWAMI ATMANAND SARASWATI INSTITUE OF TECHNOLOGY
Surat-395006
2018-19
Comparison Of Composite and RCC Structure 2018-19
Certificate
This is to certify that Research work embodied in this report entitled “Comparative Study
of Composite & RCC Structure against lateral loads” was carried at Shree Swami
Atmanand Saraswati Institute of Technology, Surat for partial fulfilment for the
award of Bachelor Degree in Civil Engineering by Gujarat Technological University. This
research work has been carried out under our guidance & supervision and is up to our
satisfaction.
Date: _____/_____/_____
Place: ___________________
Prepared by
Name Enroll. No.

MOHT JAIN 150760106064
PATEL NIRAV D. 150760106091
RAGHVANI DHRUV 150760106104
SHALWALA AKASH 150760106110
SOHAMKUMAR CHAUHAN 150760106113
Signature of Guide Signature of HOD
Signature of Internal Examiner Signature of External Examiner
1
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
Acknowledgement
With great pleasure & deep sense of gratitude I would like to extent out sincere thanks to
almighty God for his peace and blessings for granting me the chance and the ability to
successfully complete this study.
We express sincere thanks to Dr. Kishore N. Mistry Principal, S.S.A.S.I.T, Surat and
Prof.Avinash P. Satasiya HOD, Civil Engineering Department, S.S.A.S.I.T, Surat for
granting to undertake the studies under this topic and for guiding and motivating.
We would like to give special thanks to our guide Prof. Mehul J. Bhavsar Assistant
Professor, Civil Engineering Department, S.S.A.S.I.T, Surat whose timely and persistent
guidance has played a key role in making work success.
We thank to my family for their everlasting love and financial support throughout my
numerous academic years.
We would also like to thank my classmates who have directly or indirectly provided
their unerring support throughout the course of this project work.
We would like to thanks all teaching and non-teaching staff member of Civil
Engineering department who directly or indirectly helped us for completion of report of
the project.
MOHIT JAIN
PATEL NIRAV D.
RAGHVANI DHRUV
SHALWALA AKASH
SOHAMKUMAR CHAUHAN
2
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Sr. no. Title Page No.
A. List of Figures 4
B. Abstract 5
1. Chapter 1: Introduction 6
1.1: General 6
1.2: Introduction of composite structure 7
1.3: Composite Multi-Story Building 7
1.3.1: Composite Deck Slab 8
1.3.2: Composite Beam 8
1.3.2.1: Composite Actions in Beam 8
1.3.3: Composite Column 9
1.3.4: Shear Connectors 9
1.4: Comparative Study of Composite and RCC Structure 10
1.5: Aim of Project 10
1.6: Objectives 10
2. Chapter 2: Review of Literature 11
2.1: Analysis and Design of RCC Structure 11
2.2: Introduction, Analysis, and Design of Composite Structure 13
2.3: Comparison of RCC and Composite Structure 19
3. Chapter 3: Methodology 21
3.1: Seismic Coefficient Method 21
3.2: Analysis/Design of RCC Column 22
3.2.1: Axially Loaded Column 22
3.2.2: Uniaxially Loaded Column 24
3.2.3: Biaxially Loaded Column 25
3.3: Analysis and Design of Composite Structure 26
3.3.1: Axially Loaded Column 26
3.3.2: Uniaxially Loaded Column 31
3.3.3: Biaxially Loaded Column 35
4. Chapter 4: Problem Definition 41
5. References 42
3
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Composite Beam and Slab .................................................................................. 07

Figure 2 Composite Beam ................................................................................................. 08
Figure 3 Composite Column .............................................................................................. 09
Figure 4 Installation of Shear Studs ................................................................................... 09
4
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
Abstract:
Presently the human civilization has entered into the fourth generation of innovation
from discovery of machines in first phase, discovery of electricity in the second phase and
discovery of internet in the third phase. In the present phase some innovations called
disruptive innovations, have abolished the prevalent technologies and have changed the
human life style radically. In construction sector such disruptive innovations might not
have taken place but some advanced technology already popular abroad could be well
suited for application to the Indian scenario. Recently, Government of India has targeted to
build 20 million urban and 40 million rural houses within just 3/4 years to come, which is
achievable only by adopting fast track technology. One of them is Steel-Concrete
Composite Design and Construction methodology where the beneficial properties of both
Steel and Concrete are optimally used to act together and thereby reduce the material cost
and save valuable construction time. India houses about 125 Crores of population, which
is sparsely located over a vast area. Mostly the metros with better living opportunities are
densely populated because people from less privileged areas throng en mass to these
metros. So, it is an arduous task to accommodate such a large volume of migrating people
considering all the constraints of expansion possibility of the metros, which necessitates
construction of tall buildings. For high-rise buildings Steel-Concrete composite
construction is cost-effective. Further, cost is a concept, which varies according to its
purpose and Direct Construction Cost is an investment only. The durability, resistance to
wind / earthquake tremors, Life Expectancy, better functionality are considered in assessing
the Net Construction Cost and Life Cycle Cost of the structures
Keywords: composite construction, direct construction cost, life-cycle-cost, shear

connectors
5
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 General:
For constructions in India there are generally two options available for design of
building, masonary and concrete structures and the use of steel in construction industry
is very low in India compared to many developing countries. There is a great potential
for increasing the volume of steel in construction, especially in the current
development and not using steel as an alternative construction material and not using
it where it is economical is a heavy loss for the country.
1.2 Introduction of composite structure:

Composite structures are becoming popular and preferred choice of structural
Engineers as disadvantages of using purely steel or purely concrete structures can be
minimized. Steel and concrete have almost the same thermal expansion, concrete is
efficient in taking compression loads and steel is subjected to tensile loads. concrete
also gives corrosion protection and thermal insulation to the steel at elevated
temperatures and additionally can restrain slender steel sections from local or lateral-
torsional buckling. Concrete structural members are generally thick and less likely to
buckle but they are subjected to creep and shrinkage with time. Steel is more ductile
material and so it can absorb more shocks and impact loadings. Thus, composite
structure is made to take the benefit of both of the materials.
6
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
1.3 Composite Multi-Storey Building

1.3.1 Composite Deck Slab: Composite floor system consists of steel beams, metal
decking and concrete. They are combined in a very efficient way so that the best
properties of each material can be used to optimize construction techniques. The
most common arrangement found in composite floor systems is a rolled or built-up
steel beam connected to a formed steel deck and concrete slab. The concrete forms
the compression flange – the steel provides the tension component and shear
connectors ensure that the section behaves compositely. Composite slabs are
usually designed as simply supported members in the normal condition, with no
account taken of the continuity offered by any reinforcement at the supports. A
composite slab in which steel sheets are connected to the composite beam with the
help of shear connectors, steel sheets act as bottom reinforcement for steel deck slab
and later it is combined with hardened concrete.
Fig 1: Composite Beam and Slab
7
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
1.3.2 Composite Beam: A composite beam is a steel beam or partially encased beam
which is mainly subjected to bending and it supports the composite deck slab. In
conventional composite construction, concrete slabs rest over steel beams and are
supported by them. Under load these two components act independently and a relative slip
occurs at the interface if there is no connection between them. With the help of a deliberate
and appropriate connection provided between them, slip can be eliminated. Generally, in
steel concrete composite beams, steel beams are integrally connected to prefabricated or
cast in situ reinforced concrete slabs.
Fig 2: Composite Beam

1.3.2.1 Composite Action in Beams: Composite beams, subjected mainly to bending,
consist of section action composite with flange of reinforced concrete. To act together,
mechanical shear connectors are provided to transmit the horizontal shear between the
steel beam and concrete slab, ignoring the effect of any bond between the two
materials. These also resist uplift forces acting at the steel concrete interface.
If there is no connection between steel beam and concrete slab interface, a relative slip
occurs between them when the beam is loaded. Thus, each component will act
independently. If slip at the interface is eliminated or drastically reduced, the slab and
steel member will act together as a composite unit. Slip is zero at mid-span and
maximum at the support of the simply supported beam subjected to uniformly
distributed load. Hence, shear is less in connectors located near the centre and
maximum in connectors located near the support. Composite beams are often designed
under the assumption that the steel beam supports the weight of the structural steel or
wet concrete plus construction loads. This approach results in considerably lesser
number of connectors than they are required to enable the maximum bending
resistance of the composite beam to be reached.
8
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
1.3.3. Composite Column: A steel concrete composite column is a compression

member, comprising either of a concrete encased hot rolled steel section or a concrete
filled hollow section of hot rolled steel. It is generally used as a load bearing member
in a composite framed structure. Composite members are mainly subjected to
compression and bending. At present there is no Indian standard code covering the
design of composite column.
Fig 3: Composite Column

1.3.4. Shear Connector: The total shear force at the interface between concrete slab
and steel beam is approximately eight times the total load carried by the beam.
Therefore, mechanical shear connectors are required at the steel-concrete interface.
These connectors are designed to (a) transmit longitudinal shear along the interface,
and (b) Prevent separation of steel beam and concrete slab at the interface. Commonly
used types of shear connectors as per IS: 11384-1985. There are three main types of
shear connectors; rigid shear connectors, flexible shear connectors and anchorage
shear connectors.
Fig 4: Installation of Shear Studs
9
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
1.4 Comparative Study of RCC and Composite Structure:

Comparative study includes deflection, axial force and shear force, bending moment
in column and beam, cost. Efficient properties of composite structure compare to
R.C.C. & Steel are due to lighter weight of members, smaller section required & good
load carrying capacity following the design concept of Strong Column & Weak Beam
theory. Thus, Composite structure provides the effective solution in designing
structures for earthquake resistance compare to R.C.C structures. As steel frame is
economically not viable but composite frame can be economical as well as faster in
construction compare to R.C.C.
1.5 Aim of Project:

Analytical study of composite and RCC structure against seismic forces.
1.6 Objectives:
 Analysis of RCC and composite structures.
 Understanding fire and temperature behaviour of RCC and composite structures.
 Understanding seismic behaviours of RCC and composite structures.
10
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
For above mentioned topic, we have reviewed literature papers regarding it. Further
we have divided it into three phases:
i. Analysis and design of RCC structure.
ii. Introduction, analysis and design of composite structure.
iii. Comparative study of composite and RCC structure.
2.1 Analysis and Design of RCC Structure
2.1.1 “Analysis and Design Of G+5 Residential Building”

By V. Varalakshmi, G. Shiva Kumar, R. Sunil Sarma (2014) [9]
In this paper, G+5 building at Kukatpally, Hyderabad, India layout was prepared using
Auto CAD software. Depending upon the suitability, plan layout of beams and positions of
columns is fixed. The loads were taken according to IS 456:2000 and IS 1786:1985. Safe
bearing capacity of soil was taken as 350 KN/m².
Designing of slabs depends upon whether it is one-way or two-way. From the slabs, the
loads were transferred to beam. Thereafter, the loads, mainly shear from the beams are
taken by the columns and then to the foundation and finally distributed to the soil. In this
paper, two types of slabs namely roof-slabs and floor-slabs were designed. Main steel bars
are used for distributing the load and distribution bars are used to resist temperature and
shrinkage stresses.
Generally, doubly reinforced beams are used. The beam is analysed first in order to
calculate internal actions such as bending moment and shear force. A simplified substitute
frame analysis can be used for determining the bending moments and shear forces at any
floor level due to gravity loads. The designing of beam mainly consists of fixing breadth
and depth of the beam and arriving at area of steel ad diameter of bars to be used. The
breadth of the beam is generally kept equal to thickness of wall to avoid offset. The depth
of beam is taken as L/10 to L/6.The shear is transferred to the column.
Column may be designed as axially loaded, uniaxially loaded or biaxially loaded.
Generally, columns are designed as uniaxially or biaxially as the loads aren’t concentric in
actual. Interaction curves are used for determining percentage of steel.
11
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
Foundation design involves soil study to establish the most appropriate type of foundation
and to determine footing dimensions and reinforcement. Generally, slope foundation is
used in case of lesser loads, as slopes result into decrease the concrete volume in
constructions which results in economy. The footing is designed for flexure, punching (one-
way shear/two-way shear). The allowable soil bearing pressure determines the size of
footing and punching shear governs the depth of footing. Hence finally, load is transferred
to the soil safely.
2.1.2 “Effect of High Temperature on Concrete/RCC”

By Chirag R. Ajmera, Dr. Ashok R. Mundhada (2018) [8]
Fire and fire incidents can damage to such an extent that it can collapse. However, there
are no structures which are totally immune to fire and hence it becomes a big safety criteria.
For this, spacing of stirrups plays a serious role in design of structure. It was intended to
study if the closely spacing of stirrups heated the inner core.
For experimental purpose, 108 beams were casted where 3 groups of 36 beams were made
of different grades (M30, M25, M20). The specimens were exposed to fire flames of
temperature ranging from (25-800) °C. The mechanical properties of steel were not affected
until 400°C. The effect was observed between 600-800°C. There was decrease in residual
tensile yield strength and residual ultimate stress.
There were two types of cracks developed. There were thermal cracks (appeared in honey
comb pattern all over the surface) and flexural cracks (appears at mid-span due to bending).
Modulus of elasticity is mostly affected by fire flame temperature rather than its
compressive strength. Concrete cubes heated beyond 800°C for more than 4 hours started
to crumble after 2-3 days. High-strength concrete showed 90% drop in its strength once
exposed to 1000°C or more irrespective of binder material used.
For specimens exposed to 200-400°C, there was an average reduction in compressive
strength about 20% to 25%. Majority of fire damaged RCC structures were repairable. But
the observation of effect of elevated temperature at 800°C on the reinforced concrete beams
showed that there was a significant reduction in flexural strength. For 600°C temperature,
immediate repairing was prescribed to help regain strength. For 800°C of the fire effect,
member replacement was suggested.
12
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
2.2 Introduction, Analysis and Design of Composite Structure
2.2.1. “Analysis and Design of Composite Structure & Its Comparison

with RCC Structure”
By Rajendra R. Bhoir, Prof. Mahesh Bagade (2016) [6]
Composite structure is a structure made with steel and concrete where hot rolled steel
sections are used as structural member. Use of steel in construction is very low in India.
There is a great potential for increasing volume of steel in construction and not using it
where it is not economical is a heavy loss for the country like India.
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 have forced the structural engineers to look for
the alternative method of construction. Use of composite is of particular interest, due to its
significant potential in improving the overall performance of a structure.
Primary elements used in composite structures are:
1. Composite deck slab
2. Composite beam
3. Composite column
4. Shear connector
Composite deck slab is generally rolled or built-up steel beam connected to formed steel
deck and concrete slab. Composite slabs thickness is usually between 100 to 250 mm for
shallow decking and 280 to 320 mm for deep decking. When the steel beam and deck slab
are appropriately connected using a suitable connection they start to act as Composite Beam
and they acts similar to monolithic Tee Beam. Encased steel beam sections have better fire
resistance and corrosion. It allows easy repair and modifications and is able to resist
repeated earthquake loads which requires high amount of resistance and ductility.
13
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
A Composite Column either comprises of concrete filled hollow section of hot rolled steel
or concrete encases hot rolled steel section. Currently, there are no Indian standard code
covering composite column, so European code EC4 is largely preferred for design of
composite columns. Encased columns provide corrosion protection. Composite columns
provide higher stiffness, strength, and fire resistance. For concrete filled tubular sections,
formwork is not required.
Shear force at the interface of concrete slab and steel beam is almost 8 times the total load
carried by beam. Therefore, mechanical shear connectors are required at the steel-concrete
interface. There are three types of shear connectors:
1. Rigid type: They derive their resistance from bearing pressure on the concrete,
and fails due to crushing of concrete.
2. Flexible type: They derive their stress resistance through bending and undergo
large deformation before failure.
3. Bond/Anchorage type: These connectors derived from the resistance through
bond and anchorage action.
2.2.2. “Seismic Analysis of Composite Structures and its comparison

with RCC structures”
By K.Mukeshkumar, H.Sudarsana Rao (2014)[7]
Due to growing population and lesser availability of area, there is a need of medium to high
rise building. For such high-rise structures, it was found that steel concrete composite
structures could be more beneficial more beneficial than traditional RCC structures.
A composite member is constructed by combining concrete member and steel member so
that they act as a single unit. Hence, Compressive strength of concrete and tensile strength
of steel is used, which result into effective section. Good properties of both steel and
concrete member are used in it and results into better overall performance.
The structural elements which are comprised in a composite construction are:
1. Composite deck slab
2. Composite beam
3. Composite column
4. Shear connector
14
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
Composite floor system comprises of steel beam, metal deck and slab. A concrete slab rests
on the beam’s steel section. The metal deck also serves as operational stand for concrete
work and hence no additional formwork is required in slab, which results into economy.
The metal deck rests between two steel section.
Commonly I section is used as steel beam. If no connection is provided between steel beam
and the concrete deck slab, there may be relative slip between them and they may not act
as a single unit. So appropriate connection must be provided between slab and beam to
prevent the relative slippage.
Generally, shear connectors are used for connection between slab and beam. Shear
connector prevents/avoids partition of concrete slab and beam. Shear connector is the main
component responsible for composite action between slab and beam by shear transfer.
Shear connector transfers the shear from slab to the beam. Composite column consists of
both steel section and concrete element.
There are two types of composite column:
1. Concrete section with embedded steel section
2. Hollow steel section with concrete infill
Steel and concrete acts as a single unit due to friction and bond between them. Construction
of composite column consists of erecting steel section and then filling it with concrete.
Steel section have problem of buckling. Thus, lateral deflection and buckling of the steel
section are prevented by concrete. Steel section is more ductile in nature. Therefore, this
quality helps in resisting lateral loads.
The modelling, analysis and design is done with the ETABS software. The building layout
consists of 4X4 bays of 5m length. Comparison has been made for RCC and composite
structure of 5 storey, 10 storey, 15 storeys. And the storey height is 3 m and is kept uniform.
2.2.3. “Comparative Study on Behavior of RCC And Steel - Concrete

Composite Multi-storey Building”
By V.Preetha, M.C.Arun Prasad (2017) [4]
This paper deals with introduction of steel-concrete composite multi-storey building. Steel-
Concrete composite structure is a new concept for the construction industry. Steel-Concrete
composite structures are formed to act as a single unit and it is achieved by connecting the
steel beam to the composite profile deck sheet with the help of shear connectors. If Steel-
Concrete composite system properly configured, then it can provide economical structural
system with great durability, speedy erection and superior seismic performance.
The structural elements which are comprised in a composite construction are:
1. Shear connector
2. Profiled deck
3. Composite beam
4. Composite column
15
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
Composite floor consists of Profiled deck sheet, steel beam and shear connectors; and
formed as to act as a single unit. In composite floor system, steel sheet act as tension
reinforcement and structural behaviour is to act as RC slab. The metal deck serves as
operational stand for concrete work and hence no additional formwork is required in slab,
which results in speedy construction compared to RCC structure. A Steel-Concrete
composite beam comprises of a steel beam, over which RC slab is cast with shear
connector. The beam depth is reduced by the composite action.
Shear connectors are used for connection between slab and beam. Shear connector prevents
partition of concrete slab and beam; and relative slip between them. The composite action
between slab and beam is achieved by shear transfer with the help of shear connectors.
Usually, a Steel-Concrete composite beam is a compression member, which consists of
both steel section and concrete element.
16
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
There are mainly two types of composite columns used in practice which are:
1. Concrete encased steel (CES)
2. Concrete filled steel tube (CFST)
There are various types of combination of composite columns: concrete encased steel
(CES) (a), concrete filled steel tube -(CFST) (b), combination of CES and CFST (c), hollow
CFST sections (d), double skin sections (e). In Steel-Concrete composite column, steel and
concrete acts as a single unit due to bond and friction between them. Steel sections are more
ductile which helps in resisting lateral loads. Concrete helps in preventing buckling of the
steel section and lateral deflection. The modelling, analysis and design is done with the
ETABS software.

This paper consists of analysis and design of steel concrete composite structure. G+15
storey composite structure was taken for the analysis and design in ETABS software with
two different storey heights 3m and 4m.
The building considered here was a commercial building. The plan dimension was 63.2m
x 29.5m. Height of parapet was considered as 1m.
Sizes of beam used in composite structure varied from ISMB 200 to ISMB 500. Sizes of
column used in composite structure were 350mmx450mm and 350mmx550mm and fully
encased steel sections used were ISHB 350 and ISHB 450.
Grade of concrete was taken as M45. Grade of reinforcing steel was taken as Fe500.
Seismic zone was taken as zone III and Wind speed was taken as 39 m/s.
Floor finish was taken as 1.5 KN/m2 and Live load was taken as 3.0 KN/m2.
Firstly, Modelling was done with the help of ETABS software. The building models were
analyzed using Equivalent static method and then
17
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
by ETABS software.
Different parameters such as shear force and bending moment were studied for the models.
Seismic codes are unique to a particular region of country. In Indian standard criteria for
earthquake resistant design of structures IS 1893 (Part-1):2002 was the main code that
provides outline for calculating seismic design force. Wind forces were calculated using
code IS 875 (Part-3).
Axial forces and bending moment were calculated by analyzing the structure, the results
obtained were quite lesser than the regular structure and hence smaller sections were
obtained which resulted into economy. Due to steel members, the concrete volume was
reduced. Due to steel section, the composite columns were flexible and performance was
better.

By K.Mukeshkumar, H.Sudarsana Rao (2016) [3]
This paper consists of analysis and design of steel concrete composite structure. The layout
of plan having 4x4 bays of equal length of 5m. The storey height is 3 m and is kept uniform.
Zone IV is considered for analysis and design. IS 11384 is used for the composite design.
The building model was analysed and designed using ETABS software.
The different parameters such as displacements storey drifts, column axial forces, column
bending moments and shear forces beam shear forces and bending moments, time period
of the structure and dead weight of the structure were calculated for composite structure.
The displacements were more due to the ductile and flexible nature of steel, but the values
were within permissible limits. Column shear forces and bending moment were very less
and which resulted into smaller section of column.
Due to smaller section, dead weight of the structure was reduced considerably and resulted
into lesser load on foundation and thus, the size of the foundation was small was resulted
into economy.
18
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
2.3 Comparision of Composite and RCC Structure
2.3.1. “Comparative Study on Behavior of RCC And Steel - Concrete

Composite Multi-storey Building”
By V.Preetha, M.C.Arun Prasad (2016) [4]
This paper deals with a comparison of RCC and Steel-Concrete composite multi-storey
building.
The parameters considered for comparison are joint displacement, storey drifts and storey
shear.
The building considered here is a G+9 commercial building. The building layout consists
of 20m x 20m plan dimension. The study is carried out on same building plan for R.C.C.,
Steel-Concrete composite building with Encased Column and with Filled Tubes. The basic
loading on all types of structure kept same.
Composite structure better than RCC structure earthquake conditions due to inherent
ductility which results in smaller section and economical than RCC structure. Story drifts
of composite structures were comparatively more than RC structures but within permissible
limits.
Lateral deflection of composite structure was also more than RC structure but within
permissible limits. Story shear of composite structure was lower than RC structure.
Composite structure is more economical than the conventional method for medium to high-
rise building. Composite structure deals with indirect cost such as fast completion of work
will turns to fast return on investment and no formwork is needed in case of CFST structure.
After comparison between RCC and composite structure, it was observed that composite
structures are better than RCC structures as the number of storeys increases. In general,
Composite structures were economical than that of RCC structures.

This paper deals with a comparison of RCC and Steel-Concrete composite multi-storey
building.
Two residential G+15 storied buildings made of composite and RCC were analysed and
designed and compared in ETAB software and they had different story heights.
Literature says that if properly analysed, this may provide extremely economical, high
durability, rapid construction and great seismic performance characteristics.
Results were that depth of beams in composite structure was found to be lesser than that in
RCC structure which further resulted in lesser size of column and foundation. It was found
that if floor height was increased then it didn’t make any big changes to axial and bending
moments even with the same size of columns and beams.
The cost of composite structure was found to be lesser than that of RCC in every case. Due
to steel sections, composite structures performed much better in earthquake resistance
19
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
compared to RCC structures. The construction time of composite structure was much lesser
due to quick erection of steel frame and ease of formwork for concrete.

By K.Mukeshkumar, H.Sudarsana Rao (2016) [3]
Due to growing population and lesser availability of area, there is a need of medium to high
rise building. For such high-rise structures, it was found that steel concrete composite
structures are more beneficial than traditional RCC structures. In case of low-rise structures
RCC construction is preferred due to less dead load. But in medium and high-rise structures
where there are more dead loads and increased spans, composite structures are required.
The parameters considered for comparisons are displacements, story drifts, and column
axial forces, column bending moments and shear forces, beam shear forces and bending
moments, time period of the structure and dead weight of the structure.
After modelling, analysis, design and comparison between RCC and composite structure,
it was observed that composite structures are better than RCC structures as the number of
storeys increases.
The time period for composite structure is more than RCC structure as in case of composite
structure, steel is used which is flexible which means it can oscillate back and forth when
lateral force act on the building. Thus, ductility is the factor for more time period and this
is the property which results into more lateral deflection. As RCC structures are stiff, it
results in reduction in time period than composite structure.
The column axial forces and shear forces are very less as compared to RCC structures,
which results into smaller section, which further reduces the dead weight of the structure
and causes smaller size of the foundation which ultimately results into economy.
The beam shear forces and beam bending moments are also less as compared to RCC
structures, which results into smaller section, which further reduces the dead weight of the
structure and results into economical structure.
As due to lesser dead weight, Composite column section reduces and results into more floor
area than the RCC column. The most important thing in case of composite structure is that
due to light weight of the structure, the composite structures are less susceptible against the
seismic forces acting on the structure.
The analyses of composite structure showed that axial forces, shear forces, bending
moments are less as compared to RCC structure for the same loading, which result into
reduction in dimensions of steel and column and it leads to conclusion that Composite
structures are more efficient and economical than the conventional RCC structures.
20
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
3.1 Seismic Coefficient Method:
Seismic analysis of most structures is still carried out on the basis of lateral force assumed
equivalent to the actual loading. The base shear which is the total horizontal force action
on the structure is calculated on the basis of structure mass, fundamental period of vibration
and corresponding mode shape. It is the simplest method of analysis.
In this method, the design base shear is calculated for the whole building, and it is then
distributed along the height of the building, as explained below:
Design lateral force: (IS 1893(Part 1): 2016- Cl.7.2.1 – P.17)
Building shall be designed for the design lateral force VB given by:
VB = AhW
Where,
Ah= the design horizontal seismic coefficient
W= Seismic weight of the building
Seismic Weight: (IS 189 (part 1): 2016 Cl.7.4-P.21)
The seismic weight of the building is sum of seismic weight of all floors. While computing
the seismic weight of each floor, the weight of columns and walls in any storey shall be
appropriately apportioned to the floors above and below the storey.
Seismic weight of floor system = dead weight of slab + weight of beams + half of the weight
of columns above and below the floor + half of the weight of walls above and below the
floor.
21
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
3.2 Analysis/Design of RCC Column

3.2.1. Axially Loaded Column
INPUT DATA
Grade
Grade of Diameter
Length of Load on of Clear Percentage
Type of Concrete of Main
Sr. No. Column Column Steel Cover of Steel
column (fck) Steel
(m) (KN) (fy) (mm) (%)
(Mpa) (mm)
(Mpa)
1 Square 3 2400.00 30 415 32 40 4.00

2 Rectangle 3 2400.00 30 415 28 40 3.00
3 Square 3 3600.00 30 415 36 40 3.00
4 Rectangle 3 3600.00 30 415 36 40 3.00
Analysis and Design
Factored Gross Area Pitch for

Tie Spaci Max
Load on Area B D of asp circular
No. of Bars Diameter ng Dc (mm) Min ρs Pitch
Column (Ag) (mm) (mm) Main (mm2) column
(mm) (mm) (mm)
(KN) (mm2) Steel (mm)
3600.00 158996 400 400 6400 8 8 300 320 50.27 0.024 26.00 26.00
3600.00 180166 400 475 5700 10 7 300 395 38.48 0.019 21.00 25.00
5400.00 270249 525 525 8268 10 9 300 445 63.62 0.017 34.00 34.00
5400.00 270249 500 575 8625 10 9 300 495 63.62 0.015 35.00 35.00
22
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
Eccentricity Check:
Maximum
Eccentricity Eccentricty Maximum
Eccentircity
along Width of along Depth Eccentircity
along Width Eccentricity<Maximum Eccentricity
Column (ey) of Column along depth of
of Column
(mm) (ex) (mm) Column (mm)
(mm)
19.33 19.33 20.00 20.00 OK

19.33 21.83 20.00 20.00 OK
23.50 23.50 20.00 20.00 Design as Eccentric loaded Column
22.67 25.17 20.00 20.00 Design as Eccentric loaded Column
OUTPUT DATA
Depth of
Column/
Main Tie
Width of (Diamter
No. of Steel Diamter Spacing
Column of Design Check
Bars Diameter (M.S) (mm)
(mm) Circular
(mm) (mm)
Column)
(mm)
400 400 8 32 8 300 OK OK

400 475 10 28 8 300 OK OK
NOT Design as Eccentric
525 525 10 36 10 300
OK loaded Column
NOT Design as Eccentric
500 575 10 36 10 300
OK loaded Column
23
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
Input Data
Factored
Diameter Factored
Width Depth Clear Axial
of bar fck fy Moment Pu / Mu /
(B) (D) cover load d' / D P / fck
(ф) (Mpa) (Mpa) (Mu) (fckbD) (fckbD2)
(mm) (mm) (mm) (PU)
(mm) (KN)
(KN)
700 700 40 25 30 415 7500 270 0.510 0.026 0.075 0.04
750 750 40 20 30 415 7500 270 0.444 0.021 0.067 0.0125
750 750 40 25 30 415 7500 270 0.444 0.021 0.070 0.0125
Analysis
As provided Tie ф Tie spacing

d' (mm) Pt (%) As (mm2) n
(mm2) (mm) (mm)
53 1.200 5880 12 5891 8 300

50 0.375 2109 8 2513 6 300
53 0.375 2109 6 2945 8 300
3.2.2 Uniaxially Loaded Column
Output Data
Area of steel (As) No. of Bars Diameter of Bar Diameter of Tie Spacing of
(mm2) (n) (mm) (mm) Tie (mm)
5891 12 25 8 300
2513 8 20 6 300
2945 6 25 8 300
24
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
Input Data
Factored Pu - Mu Interaction curve
Diameter Axial
Width Depth Clear Moment Moment
of bar fck fy load Pu / Mux /
(B) (D) cover (Mux) (Muy) d' / D P / fck
(ф) (MPa) (MPa) (PU) (fckbD) (fckbD2)
(mm) (mm) (mm) (KNm) (KNm)
(mm) (KN)
600 900 50 32 30 415 7500 330 270 0.463 0.041 0.073 0.0375
600 900 50 28 30 415 7500 330 270 0.463 0.041 0.071 0.037
800 800 50 32 30 415 7500 330 270 0.391 0.039 0.083 0.02
3.2.3 Biaxially Loaded Column
Input Data
For Check Purpose
Pu / (fckbD) d' / D P / fck d' / B P/Pz Mux1 / Muy1 / αn

(fckbD2) (fckb2D)
0.463 0.073 0.040 0.11 0.815 0.045 0.04 2
0.463 0.071 0.038 0.11 0.822 0.045 0.04 2
0.391 0.083 0.021 0.083 0.762 0.04 0.04 1.94
Analysis
As provided Tie ф Tie spacing

d' (mm) Pt (%) As (mm2) n Pt (%)
(mm2) (mm) (mm)
66 1.125 6075 8 6434 1.191 8 300

64 1.110 5994 10 6158 1.140 8 300
66 0.600 3840 5 4021 0.628 8 300
25
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
Analysis
Along X: Along Y:
Mux1 Muy1 Ac (mm2) Puz (KN) αn (Mux / Mux1)αn + Check
(KNm) (KNm) (Muy / Muy1)αn
656 389 533566 9205 2 0.735 OK
656 389 533842 9123 2 0.735 OK
614 kNm 614 kNm 635979 mm2 9837.33 kN 1.94 0.502 OK
Output Data
Bar
Area of steel (As) No. of bars Diameter of Spacing of
Diameter Check
(mm2) (n) Tie (mm) Tie (mm)
(mm)
6434 8 32 8 300 OK
6158 10 28 8 300 OK
4021 6 32 8 300 OK
26
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
3.3 Analysis/Design of Composite Structure:

3.3.1. Axially Loaded Column:
DETAILS OF THE SECTION
Column dimension: 400 X 400

Concrete Grade: M30
Steel Section ISHB: 300
Reinforcement steel area: Fe 415
0.5% of gross concrete area.
Cover from the flanges: 50 mm
Height of the column: 3000 mm
LIST MATERIAL PROPERTIES
(1) Structural steel

Steel section: ISHB 300
Nominal yield strength fy = 250 N/mm2
Modulus of elasticity Ea = 200 kN/mm2
27
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
(2) Concrete
Concrete grade M30
Characteristic strength (cube), (fck)cu =30 N/mm2
Characteristic strength (cylinder), (fck)cy =25 N/mm2
Secant modulus of elasticity for short term loading, Ecm =31220 N/mm2
(3) Reinforcing steel

Steel grade: Fe 415
Characteristic strength fsk = 415 N/mm2
Modulus of elasticity Es = 200 kN/mm2
(4) Partial safety factors
γ a =1.15
γ c = 1.5
γ s = 1.15
LIST SECTION PROPERTIES OF THE GIVEN SECTION
(1) Steel section

Aa = 8025 mm2
h= 300 mm
tw = 9.4 mm
Iax = 129.5 * 106 mm4
Iay = 22.46 * 106 mm4
(2) Reinforcing stee

Area reinforcement = 0.5% of gross concrete area = 0.5/100 * (400*4008025)
= 760 mm2
Provide 4 bars of 16 mm dia., As = 805 mm2
(3) Concrete
Ac = Agross – Aa-As
= 400 * 400 – 8025 –805
=151170 mm2
DESIGN CHECKS
(1)Plastic resistance of the section
Pp = Aa fy / γ a +αc Ac (fck)cy / γ c + As fsk / γ s

Pp = Aa fy / γ a +αc Ac (0.80 * (fck)cu) / γ c + As fsk / γ s
= [8025 * 250 /1.15 + 0.85* 151170 * 25 /1.5 + 805 * 415/1.15]/1000
=4090.98 kN
(2) Calculation of Effective elastic flexural stiffness of the section
28
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
About the major axis:
(EI)ex =EaIax + 0.8 EcdIcx + EsIsx
Iax = 129.5 * 106 mm4

Isx = Ah2
= 805 * [ 400/2-25-8]2
= 22.45 * 106 mm4
Icx =( 400)4/12 – [ 129.5 + 22.45] *106
=1981.38 * 106 mm4
(EI)ex = 2.0 * 105 * 129.5* 106 + 0.8 * 23125 * 1981.38 * 106 + 2.0 *105 * 22.45* 106
= 67.04 * 1012 Nmm2
About minor axis:
(EI)ey = 47.62* 1012 N mm2
(3) Non dimensonal slenderness
λ = (Ppu/P cr) ½
Value of Ppu (γ a = γ c = γ s = 1.0)

Ppu = Aafy + αcAc(fck)cy + Asfsk
Ppu = Aafy + αcAc* 0.80 *(fck)cu + Asfsk
= 8025 * 250 + 0.85* 115170 * 25 + 415 * 805
= 5425 kN
Ecd= Ecm / γ *c
=31220 /1.35
=23125 N/mm2
π2 (EI)ex
( Pcr)x = l2
= 73518 kN
(Pcr)y = 52221 kN
λx = 0.272
λy = 0.322
29
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
(4) Resistance of the composite column under axial compression
Buckling resistance of the section should satisfy the following condition
Pb < X Pp
Where
Pb = buckling load
X = reduction factor for column buckling
Pp = plastic resistance of the section
= 3366 kN
X values :
About major axis:
αx = 0.34
1
Xx = {∅ 2 2 1/2
𝑥 +(∅𝑥 −𝜆𝑥 )
Øx = 0.5[ 1 + αx*(λx - 0.2) + λx2]

= 0.5[ 1 + 0.34*(0.272 – 0.2) + 0.2722]
= 0.55
Xx = 0.97
About minor axis:
αy = 0.49
Øy = 0.58
Xy = 0.94
(Pb)x = Xx * Pp
= 0.97 * 4090.98
= 3968 kN
(Pb)y = Xy * Pp
= 0.94 * 4090.98
= 3845 kN
30
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
3.3.2. Uniaxially Loaded Column:

Concrete Grade: M30
Steel Section: ISHB 350
Steel Reinforcement: 4 Nos. of 12 mm dia. bar, Fe415 grade
Design Axial Load: 5000 kN
Design bending moment about x-x axis: 180 kNm
Design bending moment about y-y axis: 0 kNm

(2) Concrete
Concrete grade M30

Steel grade: Fe 415
31
SSASIT, SURAT GTU

γ a =1.15
γ c = 1.5
γ s = 1.15

(1) Steel section
Aa = 9221 mm2
tf = 11.6 mm
h= 350 mm
tw = 10.1 mm
Iax = 198.02 * 106 mm4
Iay = 25.10 * 106 mm4
Zpax = 1.131 * 106 mm3
Zpay = 1.99 * 106 mm3
4 bars of 12 mm dia., As = 452 mm2
(3) Concrete
Ac = Agross – Aa - As
= 500 * 500 – 8025 –452
= 240734 mm2
DESIGN CHECKS
Pp = Aa fy / γa +αc Ac (fck)cy / γc + As fsk / γs

Pp = Aa fy / γa +αc Ac ( 0.80*(fck)cu ) / γc + As fsk / γs
= [9221 * 250 /1.15 + 0.85* 240734 * 25 /1.5 + 452 * 415/1.15]/1000
=5441 kN
Iax = 198.02 * 106 mm4
32
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
Isx = Ah2
= 452 * [ 500/2-25-6]2
= 21.68 * 106 mm4
Icx =( 500)4/12 – [ 198.02 + 21.68] *106
=4988.64 * 106 mm4
(EI)ex = 2.0 * 105 * 198.02* 106 + 0.8 * 23125 * 4988.64 * 106 + 2.0 *105 * 21.68 *106
= 136.23 * 1012 Nmm2
About minor axis:

(EI)ey = 104.84 * 1012 Nmm2
λ = (Ppu/Pcr) ½
Value of Ppu (γ a = γ c = γ s = 1.0):

Ppu = Aafy + αcAc*0.80*(fck)cu + Asfsk
= 9221 * 250 + 0.85* 240734 * 25 + 415 * 452
= 7403.8 kN
Ecd= Ecm / γc*

=31220 /1.35
=23125 N/mm2
π2 (EI)ex
(Pcr)x = l2
= 149393 kN
(Pcr)y = 114970 kN
λx = 0.22
λy = 0.25
(4) Resistance of the composite column under axial compression and uni-axial bending
Compressive resistance of concrete, Pc = Ac Pck

=3274 kN
Plastic section modulus of the reinforcement:

Zps = 4(π / 4 * 144 ) * (500/2-25-6)
= 99.07 * 103 mm3
33
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
Plastic section modulus of the steel section:

Zpa = 1131.6 * 103 mm3
Plastic section modulus of the concrete:

Zpc = bchc2/ 4 - Zps - Zpa
= (500)3/4 – 99.07 * 103 –1131.6 * 103
= 9931 * 103 mm3

Check that the position of neutral axis is in the web
Ac Pck −A′s (2Psk −Pck )

hn =
2bc Pck +2tw (2Py −Pck )
= 148 mm < (h/2 - tf)= 163.4 mm
The neutral axis is in the web.
Section modulus about neutral axis:
Zpsn =0 (As there is no reinforcement with in the region of 2hn from the middleline of the
cross section)
Zpan = tw hn2
= 10.1 * (148)2
= 221230.4 mm3
Zpcn = bchn2 - Zpsn - Zpan

= 500 (148)2-221230.4
= 10730.7* 103 mm3
Plastic moment resistance of section:

Mp = Py ( Zpa-Zpan) + 0.5 Pck (Zpc-Zpcn ) + Psk ( Zps- Zpsn)
= 217 (1131.6*1000 -221.23*1000) + 0.5 * 0.85 *25/1.5 (30019*1000 –
10730.7*1000)
+ 361 (99.07 * 1000)
= 365 kNm
(5) Check of column resistance against combined compression and uni-axialbending

The design against combined compression and uni-axial bending is adequateif following
condition is satisfied:
M <= 0.9 µ MP
M = 180 kNm
Mp =365 kNm
34
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
µ = moment resistance ratio

= 1- {(1 - X) Xd}/{(1 - Xc) X}
= 1- {(1 –0.99) 0.91}/{(1 – 0.60) 0.99}
= 0.5949
.: M < 0.9 µ Mp
< 0.9 (0.5949) * (365)
<195 kNm
Hence the composite column is acceptable and the check is satisfied.

3.3.3. Biaxially Loaded Column:
Concrete Grade: M30
Steel Section: ISHB 450
Steel Reinforcement: 4 Nos. of 12 mm dia. bar, Fe415 grade
Design Axial Load: 5000 kN
Design bending moment about x-x axis: 220 kNm
Design bending moment about y-y axis: 180 kNm

(2) Concrete
Concrete grade M30

Steel grade: Fe 415
35
SSASIT, SURAT GTU

γ a =1.15
γ c = 1.5
γ s = 1.15
(1) Steel section
Aa = 11789 mm2
tf = 13.7 mm
h= 450 mm
tw = 11.3 mm
Iax = 403.49 * 106 mm4
Iay = 30.45 * 106 mm4
Zpx = 1793.3 * 103 mm3
Zpy = 242.1 * 103 mm3
4 bars of 12 mm dia., As = 452 mm2
(3) Concrete
Ac = Agross – Aa - As
= 600 * 600 – 11789 –452
= 347759 mm2
DESIGN CHECKS
Pp = Aa fy / γa +αc Ac (fck)cy / γc + As fsk / γs

Pp = Aa fy / γa +αc Ac ( 0.80*(fck)cu ) / γc + As fsk / γs
= [11789 * 250 /1.15 + 0.85* 347759 * 25 /1.5 + 452 * 415/1.15]/1000
=7455 kN
Iax = 403.49 * 106 mm4

Isx = Ah2
= 452 * [ 600/2-25-6]2
= 32.71 * 106 mm4
Icx = (600)4/12 – [ 403.49 + 32.71] *106
= 10363.8 * 106 mm4
36
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
(EI)ex = 2.0 * 105 * 403.49* 106 + 0.8 * 23125 * 10363.8 * 106 + 2.0 *105 * 32.71 * 106
= 279 * 1012 Nmm2
About minor axis:

(EI)ey = 211.26 * 1012 Nmm2
λ = (Ppu/Pcr) ½
Value of Ppu (γ a = γ c = γ s = 1.0):

Ppu = Aafy + αcAc*0.80*(fck)cu + Asfsk
= 11789 * 250 + 0.85* 347759 * 25 + 415 * 452
= 10230 kN
Ecd= Ecm / γc*

=31220 /1.35
=23125 N/mm2
π2 (EI)ex
(Pcr)x = l2
= 305958 kN
(Pcr)y = 231673 kN
λx = 0.1828
λy = 0.210
(4) Resistance of the composite column under axial compression and uni-axial
bending
Compressive resistance of concrete, Pc = Ac Pck

=4730 kN
About major axis:

Zps = 4(π / 4 * 144 ) * (600/2-25-6)
= 121.7 * 103 mm3

Zpa = 1793.3 * 103 mm3

= (600)3/4 – 121.7 * 103 –1793.3 * 103
37
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
= 52085 * 103 mm3
A P −A′ (2Psk −Pck )

hn = 2bc Pck +2ts
c ck w (2Py −Pck )
= 183 mm < (h/2 - tf) = 211.3 mm
Zpsn =0 (As there is no reinforcement with in the region of 2hn from the middle line of the
cross section)
Zpan = tw hn2
= 11.3 * (183)2
= 378.42* 103 mm3
Zpcn = bchn2 - Zpsn - Zpan

= 600 (183)2 - 378.42* 103
= 19715* 103 mm3
Mpx = Py ( Zpa-Zpan) + 0.5 Pck (Zpc-Zpcn ) + Psk ( Zps- Zpsn)

= 217 (1793.3*1000 -378.42*1000) + 0.5 * 0.85 *25/1.5 (52085*1000 – 19715*1000)
+ 361 (121.7 * 1000)
= 571.07 kNm
About minor axis:

Zps = 4(π / 4 * 144 ) * (600/2-25-6)
= 121.7 * 103 mm3

Zpa = 242.1 * 103 mm3

= (600)3/4 – 121.7 * 103 –242.1 * 103
= 53636 * 103 mm3
Ac Pck −A′s (2Psk −Pck )+tw (2tf −h)(2Py −Pck )

hn = 2hc Pck +4tw (2Py −Pck )
38
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
= 69.14 mm = (tw/2 < hn < b/2) = (5.5 < hn < 125) mm
Zpsn =0 (As there is no reinforcement with in the region of 2hn from the middle line of the
cross section)
Zpan = 2tf hn2 + (h – 2tf)/4*tw2

= (2 * 13.7 * 69.142) * (450 – 2*13.7)/4 * 11.32
= 144.5* 103 mm3
Zpcn = hchn2 - Zpsn - Zpan

= 600 (69.14)2 – 144.5* 103
= 2723.7* 103 mm3
Mpy = Py ( Zpa-Zpan) + 0.5 Pck (Zpc-Zpcn ) + Psk ( Zps- Zpsn)

= 217 (242.1*1000 – 144.5*1000) + 0.5 * 0.85 *25/1.5 (53636*1000 – 2723.7*1000)
+ 361 (121.7 * 1000)
= 411.31 kNm
(5) Check of column resistance against combined compression and uni-axial bending
The design against combined compression and uni-axial bending is adequate if

following condition is satisfied:
1.
About major axis:
M <= 0.9 µ MP
Mx = 220 kNm
Mpx =571.07 kNm

= 1- {(1 – Xx) Xd}/{(1 - Xc) Xx}
= 1- {(1 –1.005) 0.67}/{(1 – 0.63) 01.005}
=1
.: M < 0.9 µ Mp
< 0.9 *(1) * (571.07)
<514 kNm
About minor axis:
M <= 0.9 µ MP
39
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
My = 180 kNm
Mpy =411.31 kNm

= 1- {(1 – Xy) Xd}/{(1 - Xc) Xy}
= 1- {(1 –0.99) 0.67}/{(1 – 0.63) 0.99}
= 0.98
.: M < 0.9 µ Mp
< 0.9 *(0.98) * (411.31)
<363.4 kNm
2.
𝑀𝑥 𝑀𝑦
+ ≤ 1.0
µ𝑥 𝑀𝑝𝑥 µ𝑦 𝑀𝑝𝑦
0.8318 ≤ 1.0
Hence the composite column is acceptable and the check is satisfied.
40
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
CHAPTER 4
PROBLEM DEFINATION
 Two models will be prepared: G+15 storey building and G+20 storey building.
 Grade of concrete: M30
 Grade of steel: Fe500
 Number of Bays: 6x8
 Storey height: 3m
 Building is situated in earthquake zone III
 Bay spacing: 4m
Composite Column:
41
SSASIT, SURAT GTU
 REFERENCES:
1. Dr. D. R. Panchal (2014) ‘New Techniques of Analysis and design of composite
steel-concrete structure’.
2. Rajendra R. Bhoir, Prof. Mahesh Bagade (2006) ‘Analysis and Design of
composite structure & Its Comparision with R.C.C structure’.
3. K. Mukesh kumar, H. Sudarsana Rao (2016) ‘Seismic Analysis of composite
structure and its comparision with RCC Structure’.
4. D. R. Panchal, P. M. Marathe (2011) ‘Comparative study of RCC, Steel and
Composite (G+30 storey) building’.
5. Dr. P. Nanjundaswamy (2015) ‘Steel-Concrete composite structures design data
handbook’.
6. V. Varalakshmi, G. Shiva Kumar, R. Sunil Sarma (2014) “Analysis and Design
Of G+5 Residential Building”
7. K.Mukeshkumar, H.Sudarsana Rao (2014) “Seismic Analysis of Composite
Structures and its comparison with RCC structures”
8. Chirag R. Ajmera, Dr. Ashok R. Mundhada (2018) “Effect of High Temperature
on Concrete/RCC structure”
9. “Analysis and Design Of G+5 Residential Building” V. Varalakshmi, G. Shiva
Kumar, R. Sunil Sarma (2014)
42
SSASIT, SURAT GTU

Project Final Report

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Project Final Report

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

A Project Report on

“COMPARATIVE STUDY OF COMPOSITE & RCC

Under the guidance by

Civil Engineering Department

Name Enroll. No.

Signature of Guide Signature of HOD

Signature of Internal Examiner Signature of External Examiner

Figure 1 Composite Beam and Slab .................................................................................. 07

Keywords: composite construction, direct construction cost, life-cycle-cost, shear

1.2 Introduction of composite structure:

1.3 Composite Multi-Storey Building

Fig 1: Composite Beam and Slab

Fig 2: Composite Beam

1.3.3. Composite Column: A steel concrete composite column is a compression

Fig 3: Composite Column

Fig 4: Installation of Shear Studs

1.4 Comparative Study of RCC and Composite Structure:

1.5 Aim of Project:

2.1 Analysis and Design of RCC Structure

2.1.1 “Analysis and Design Of G+5 Residential Building”

2.1.2 “Effect of High Temperature on Concrete/RCC”

2.2 Introduction, Analysis and Design of Composite Structure

2.2.1. “Analysis and Design of Composite Structure & Its Comparison

2.2.2. “Seismic Analysis of Composite Structures and its comparison

2.2.3. “Comparative Study on Behavior of RCC And Steel - Concrete

2.2.4. “Analysis and Design of Composite Structure & Its Comparison

2.2.5. “Seismic Analysis of Composite Structures and its comparison

2.3 Comparision of Composite and RCC Structure

2.3.1. “Comparative Study on Behavior of RCC And Steel - Concrete

2.3.2. “Analysis and Design of Composite Structure & Its Comparison

2.3.3. “Seismic Analysis of Composite Structures and its comparison

3.1 Seismic Coefficient Method:

3.2 Analysis/Design of RCC Column

1 Square 3 2400.00 30 415 32 40 4.00

Analysis and Design

Factored Gross Area Pitch for

19.33 19.33 20.00 20.00 OK

400 400 8 32 8 300 OK OK

As provided Tie ф Tie spacing

53 1.200 5880 12 5891 8 300

3.2.2 Uniaxially Loaded Column

3.2.3 Biaxially Loaded Column

Pu / (fckbD) d' / D P / fck d' / B P/Pz Mux1 / Muy1 / αn

As provided Tie ф Tie spacing

66 1.125 6075 8 6434 1.191 8 300

3.3 Analysis/Design of Composite Structure:

DETAILS OF THE SECTION

Column dimension: 400 X 400

LIST MATERIAL PROPERTIES

(1) Structural steel

(3) Reinforcing steel

LIST SECTION PROPERTIES OF THE GIVEN SECTION

(1) Steel section

(2) Reinforcing stee

(1)Plastic resistance of the section

Pp = Aa fy / γ a +αc Ac (fck)cy / γ c + As fsk / γ s

(2) Calculation of Effective elastic flexural stiffness of the section

About the major axis:

(EI)ex =EaIax + 0.8 EcdIcx + EsIsx

Iax = 129.5 * 106 mm4

About minor axis:

(EI)ey = 47.62* 1012 N mm2

(3) Non dimensonal slenderness