International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) – Volume 25 Number 3- July 2015
ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF STEEL CANOPY WITH HOT
WELDED PIPES
Yaswanth gorantla#1, Dr. B. Panduranga Rao#2, V.Ramesh #3
#1,2,3
Department of Civil Engineering
V R Siddhartha Engineering College
Vijayawada, India
Abstract— The objective of this work is to extend the arrival
and departure block at Vijayawada airport by suitably
matching the existing roof slopes. A suitable arrangement has
been finalized for roof trusses (12m span + 1.20m cantilever
truss on East side and 4.00m cantilever on West side) at a
spacing of 2.775m. As the requirement of column free area on
other side (perpendicular to span of truss) is 16.65m , it is
proposed with two piped beams of 16.65m span for
arrangement of 12m span trusses. These piped beams will
support seven number of 12m span trusses. Suitable
arrangement analysis and design of trusses, piped beams,
columns and foundation form the core of this thesis. .It has
been found from the literature survey1 arrangement with pipe
material is the best alternative and accordingly the work has
been carried out using STAAD Pro For better performance
STAAD Pro results of the truss are compared with ANSYS
results and it is found satisfactory.
of 3KN will be imposed on the truss. Since the airport is
located in Gannavaram i.e. adjacent to Vijayawada which is
near to coastal area, importance is given to the wind load in
view of the damage caused to the Visakapatnam international
airport due to recent disaster: hudhud cyclone. According to
Sagar D. Wankhade, Prof. P. S. Pajgade it is clear that Steel
Truss Building using pipe section and PEB is found to be
economical compared to Steel Truss Building using angle
section. As PEB cannot be preferred because the old slope of
the existing airport shed should match the new structure and
both should be joined together.
Structural arrangement:
Piped beams, on the 16.65m span, which support the
trusses (on 12m span at a spacing of 2.77m ) are supported by
piped columns resting on firm foundation. The structural
arrangement is shown in figure.1
Keywords— STAAD pro; Ansys ; piped truss.
I. INTRODUCTION
Trusses in general are simple, compound and complex.
Simple truss configurations start with basic triangle. Going on
adding a dyad (two members with a common joint) to the
existing joints an elaborate simple truss can be generated. Two
simple trusses can be joined together with a common joint and
a member or two simple trusses joined with three non-parallel,
non concurrent members a compound truss can be formed.
Complex is neither simple nor compound.
All the joints in a truss are welded or riveted but, still we
can assume the joints are pinned for analysis purpose. This
makes an underestimation in strength of material but still an
appropriate approach.
The proposed work is to increase the floor area of
Vijayawada airport terminal temporarily so that it meets the
required capacity of people at immigration, arrival and
departure lounge to handle the international air traffic. The
lounge is divided into five sections, with each section having a
column free area of 16.65m x 12.00m center to center with
cantilever projections for roof trusses 4m on west side and
1.28m on east side.
Fig1 (a) Plan Of The Canopy, Single Span structural Arrangement
II. ANALYSIS AND DESIGN
The analysis and design of the structure is Carried
out in four stages:
1. Analysis And Design Of Roof Trusses
2. Analysis And Design Of Piped Beam
3. Analysis And Design Of Piped Column
Hot welded pipes were considered to design the truss
elements. The sections considered are PIPE601.0L1 for top
4. Analysis And Design Of Foundation
and bottom chords; PIPE483.0M for vertical and diagonal
members. The pipe sections are jointed using electric arc
welding with sufficient thickness. The purlins used are box
type 50mmx50mmx4mm and galvanized thin sheet is used as
sheeting material to cover the roof truss. Approximately, a load
ISSN: 2231-5381
Fig 1 (b) Arrangement Of Truss
http://www.ijettjournal.org
Page 130
International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) – Volume 25 Number 3- July 2015
A. ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF ROOF TRUSSES:
Arrangement of piped beam:
Analysis and design of purlin is carried out
manually. The dead load i.e sheeting weight and the
load from the purlin is applied as a nodal load of
magnitude 3KN (figure2-a). Based on the location
and height of the structure, the wind pressure was
calculated from IS875 Part-3, and is found to be1.39KN/m 2. From the calculated wind pressure,
wind load acting at joints is obtained as 5.5KN and
it is applied on the truss at the nodes (figure2-b)
.The truss is analyzed for the load combinations
specified in IS 800.The pipe sections are provided to
the members based on the results of analysis and
design check carried out using STAAD.pro.
A rectangle with outer to outer dimensions of
600mm x 750 mm with spacer connections at
regular intervals is formed with pipes along with
diagonal to make the beam more rigid Figure4. A
12mm thick MS plate arranged over the beam for
seating arrangement of truss
Figure 4: (a) Arrangement of piped beam
Figure 2: (a) Dead load on trussFigure
Figure 4: (b) Loading on piped beam
Figure2: (b) Wind Load On Truss
Top chord and bottom chord- PIPE601.0L1
Vertical and diagonal members - PIPE483.0M
B. ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF PIPED BEAM:
From the results of the analysis of roof trusses,
obtained from STAAD.pro, the support reactions
from the trusses are taken as loads on the piped
beams. Shown in Figure3
Figure 4: (C) : Support Reactions from the piped beam.
C.ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF PIPED COLUMN:
The support reactions obtained from the piped
beam are taken and that load is applied on the piped
column.
Arrangement of piped column:
Figure 3: Support Reactions from the Truss
ISSN: 2231-5381
A square with outer to outer dimensions of
600mm x 600 mm with spacer connections at
regular intervals is formed with pipes along with
http://www.ijettjournal.org
Page 131
International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) – Volume 25 Number 3- July 2015
diagonal to make the column to transfer the load
coming from the column, effectively to foundation
FIGIRE 5. The axial load was obtained as
52.274KN and the lateral load was obtained as
229.150KN from support reactions of piped beam.
The piped column is safe for the axial load alone but
due to lateral load, the stresses in the bottom portion
of the pipes should take additional stress making the
column is unsafe. To counter this, the column is
encased with 12mm thick MS plate upto half of
height and 6mm thick ms plate for the remaining
column. The plate is welded along the four edges of
the column to make column more stiff and stable .At
the bottom the column is bolted to the foundation
pedestal.
Figure 6 (a) Foundations on east side
Figure 5: Column Arrangement And Loading On piped Column
Figure 6 (b) Foundations on west side
D.ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF FOUNDATION.
To effectively transfer the load from the column to
the soil, isolated footing with pedestal is designed
taking the support reactions from the column. The
safe baring capacity of the soil is found to be 8t/m2
from geotechnical investigation. Footings of size
2.7m x 2.7m x0.7m on East side, 3.0m x 3.0m x
0.9m on west side wear considered. The footing
dimension is more on west side because of the
additional load induced by the 4m cantilever truss
projection. The depth of the foundation is taken as
2m from the ground level. Levelling course of
150mm thick Plain cement concrete (P.C.C) of
proportion 1:4:8 is provided beneath the foundation.
1m x 1m pedestals are provided with M20 grade
concrete embedded with 8No.s- 25mm diameter
foundation bolts at a depth of 1m from the top of
the pedestal. The foundation bolts are anchored at
the end with 100 x100 x10mm anchor plate.
ISSN: 2231-5381
ANALYSIS OF TRUSS USING ANSYS:
The same truss which is analyzed and designed in
STAAD.pro was considered and modelled using
ANSYS software. In the analysis using STAAD pro
three load combinations are considered and the
design is carried out for the worst load combination.
In ANSYS, analysis is considered for two
combinations, the first combination is self weight of
the structure and the dead load due to purlin. The
second combination is dead load and wind load.
Wind load is resolved into X and Y component
because nodal load perpendicular o the member
axis cannot be defined in ANSYS. The minimum
and maximum stress for both combination of load is
shown in figures below.
http://www.ijettjournal.org
Page 132
International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) – Volume 25 Number 3- July 2015
In ANSYS, pipe188 element is considered for
analysis of pipe truss. Sectional properties are
defined using pipe sections.
Using key points and lines the truss is created then
each element in the truss is meshed with uniform
divisions. Support conditions and load conditions
are applied to the truss, analysis have been carried
out. Forces and stress in the members have been
obtained.
Figure 10: Stresses in members for Load Case:1
Stress(N/mm2)
Load case
(D.L + L.L) x 1.0
Maximum
38.338
MINIMUM
-38.207
(D.L + L.L+W.L)x1.5
56.433
-17.640
Table 1: Load Combinations
Figure 7: Truss model in ANSYS
Figure 8: Properties and Loading for Load Case : 1
Figure 9: Deformation of truss due to Load Case:1
ISSN: 2231-5381
Figure 11 : Properties and loading for Load Case :2
Figure 12: Member forces for Load Case:1
http://www.ijettjournal.org
Page 133
International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) – Volume 25 Number 3- July 2015
Figure 14: Stresses in members for load Case :2
Figure 13: Stresses in members for Load Case:2
III. CONCLUSIONS
The member forces in the truss members when
analysied in STAAD.Pro and ANSYS are nearly
equal.
2. Member forces in the piped columns at the
bottom panel are very high, dueto the application
of wind loads.To meet the requirment for high
stresses piped columns are encased with M.S
plates.
3. Analysis has been carried out in four different
stages separately for trusses, piped beams, piped
columns and foundations, without giving any
interruption to the interaction between pin-joints
and rigid joints.
4. Aproxiate structural steel consumption works
out to 4.1kg/sft.
1.
REFERENCES
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
Sagar D. Wankhade, Prof. P. S. Pajgade, ―Design & Comparison of
Various Types of Industrial Buildings,‖ International Refereed Journal
of Engineering and Science, Volume 3, Issue 6 (June 2014).
MananD.Maisuri, HiteshK.Dhameliya, Hiten L.Kheni, ― Review Of
Comparison Between Conventional Steel And Tubular Steel Section For
Multi Span Industrial Shed With Truss And Portal Frame ‖.Volume
1,Issue 12, December -2014.
Dr. K. Manjunath, Santhosh Kumar.C.N, ― Reliability based Analysis of
Steel Truss Member,‖ International Journal of Emerging Technology
and Advanced Engineering, Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2012
IS 875 (part 3) – 1987: Wind Loads.
IS 800-2007 Indian standard code of practice for general construction in
steel.
IS 456-200 Plain And Reinforced Concrete - Indian standard Code Of
Practice.
ISSN: 2231-5381
http://www.ijettjournal.org
Page 134