Large Span Lattice Frame Industrial Roof Structure

IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering (IOSR-JMCE)
e-ISSN: 2278-1684,p-ISSN: 2320-334X, Volume 12, Issue 1 Ver. IV (Jan- Feb. 2015), PP 01-07
www.iosrjournals.org
Large Span Lattice Frame Industrial Roof Structure

1
Milan Masani, 2Dr. Y. D. Patil
Chartered Civil Engineer & Structural Consultant M.Tech-R (Structure) Student

Department of Applied Mechanics Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of Technology Surat-395007, India
2Professor, Phd, M.Tech-(Structure), Department of Applied Mechanics Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute
of Technology Surat-395007, India
Abstract: Recent growth in India for construction of large span roof steel structure using shop fabricated steel
sheet built-up members are facing challages in trasportation and erection from shop to site. Lattice frame
construction using rolled section for larger span can be batter solution if feasible to construct on site with
restrcited dimensions and lighter weight. Using systematic analysis of various altenatives of large span roof a
solution to adopt most economical profile is presentrd in this paper work using software based analysis results.
Keywords: Pre Engineering Building( PEB), Lattice Portal frame(LPF),Wind Load(WL), Dead Load(DL),
Live Load(LL),Reinforced Cement Concrete(RCC), Beuraw of Indian Standard(BIS)
I.
Introduction
Construction industries in India, in terms of usages of construction equipments, technology and

materials are on growing phase. It has increases the perception of achieving quick completion targets schedule.
Increased cost of resources has put the structural engineer on sharp edges of safety requirements. Engineers are
inevitably be innovative though economical for building structures.
Single storey Large Floor Area Sheds are now part of almost every industry. These buildings are
typically used for storage , engineering workshops, and distribution warehouses. Referred to colloquially as
sheds, span vary from small workshops of just a few meters up to 100 meters for warehouses and industrial
sheds.
Most single-storey buildings are relatively simpler in design with sloped roof structure supported on
columns. In recent years, construction of such buildings has led to huge improvements in terms of quality, cost
and delivery performance. These improvements have been achieved by design-and-build steelwork contractors,
improved project planning, and active supply chain management. As steel can be recycled any number of times
without loss of quality or strength, it is gaining popularity in Indian market. Steel building components are
fabricated under factory-controlled conditions with minimal waste. As the site activity is mainly assembly, there
is rarely any waste on site. Also steel structures are relatively simple structures in single storey buildings, can be
easily assembled or dissembled.
Sophisticated computer software is widely available to design portal frames to the optimum efficiency.
These programs use plastic or elasto-plastic design techniques, and can handle multi-span frames with varying
geometries and multiple load cases. Design is still normally carried out to BS 5950-1, with loads taken from BS
6399, as plastic design of portal frames is not included in the Euro codes. However, Interim guidance in the
form of SCI P400 is available and full guidance is due to be published in mid-2014.
The main alternative to portal frames is lattice construction. Lattice trusses supported on steel or RCC
columns are generally more expensive than Steel portal frames for smaller spans. However, they will offer the
best framing solution for very large spans (greater than 30m), for service facilities needing space / machineries
suspended from the roof area, or where deflection criteria are particularly critical (in case of using corrugated
cement roofing sheet)
Lattice Portal is a fusion of both types of structures. Trusses are being replaced by Lattice Rafter
having members usually either rolled or structural hollow sections. The internal members can be angles, beams
or hollow sections, depending on the design loads, configuration and fabrication costs. Two basic configurations
are used in single storey buildings pitched roof shed.
DOI: 10.9790/1684-12140107
1 | Page

II.
The Case Study
Figure: 1 Lattice Frame Assembly for Large Span

A design of a coal Storage Shed of an industrial building at coastal Zone of Gujarat, in India has been
done by author in year 2012 using above concept. The shed has 60 mtr span and 100 mtr length. Fig.1 presents
the general outline with three dimensional view of basic concept of Lattice Portal fame Roof.
Analysis and Design of a large span structural system using software STAAD-PRO has been done and
worked out different alternatives. A comparative study of various systems analysed is made and the most
economical system is concluded.
III.
A.
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)
The Design Data
Basic data for Member Force Calculations:Building size 100 mtr x 60 mtr
Span of building - 60 mtr
Height of column at eaves to decide,
Slope of roof- to decide by designer
Location of building coastal zone of Gujarat
Use of shed to store coal
Roof covering non asbestos cement sheets
Cladding same as roof
Spacing of truss to decide by designer
Seismic zone zone IV
B. Wind load calculation for Zone-IV

Design wind speed V2= (Vb)K1K2K3
Where,
K1= risk coefficient = 1.0
K2=Terrain coefficient = category-3 class-C, 0.82 H=10mtr
K3 = topography coefficient Flat terrain, K3=1
Design Manuel = 1.0x0.82x1.0x44
= 36.08 m/sec
= 130Kmph
Pressure P2
= 0.6 V2
= 0.6x (36)
= 781.06 N/m
= 0.781 KN/m
For Design purpose we have consider Pz= 1 KN/m. Assume Normal permeability, since slope is less than 10,
Live load= 75 Kg/m= 750 N/m & External wind base side pressure= (-) 0.7p. Internal wind pressure for
DOI: 10.9790/1684-12140107
2 | Page

normal permeability = 0.2p. Wind Load calculations are as below. WL1 & WL2 = Wind Normal to ridge with
internal suction & Wl3= wind parallel to ridge with internal pressure.
C. Design Loads and Load Combination for Zone-IV
Dead load
Nodal Point Load
= Load due end reaction of
= Load due to sheet +
Sheeting Load = 21Kg/mx Truss spacing X
= 25 X 6 X 1.2
= 180 Kg / mtr
Weight Of Purlin = Self Wt X Length of purlin
= 25.0 kg/ m X6mtr
= 150 Kg / Node
Self Weight Of truss
=Self Wt of Truss/mtr
= 100 Kg / mtr x 1.20 mtr
= 120 Kg / Node
Total Nodal Load
= 180 Kg + 150 Kg + 120 Kg
= 450 Kg
= 4500N or 4.5 KN
Live load
Live Load
= 750 N/mx6mtr spacing
Nodal Point Load
= Load due end reaction of
= 750 N/mx Truss spacing X
= 5400N/ Node
or 5.4 KN
Total Nodal Load
= DL+LL
= 4500+5400
= 9900 N
Say 10 KN
Purlin
purlin + self Weight
purlin Spacing.
supported by truss.
x Node Spacing
Purlin
purlin Spacing.
Load Combinations
Load Combination for STAAD Analysis ( Nodal point load is considered for analysis with appropriate value
and direction for load combination)
D.L.+L.L.
--------------------------------Load Combination (1)
D.L.
Imposed Load
=4.5 KN.
=5.50 KN.
D.L.+L.L.
=10.0 KN.
D.L.+W.L.1
D.L.1
W.L.1
W.L.L.1
= 4.5 KN - 0.3 KN
= 4.1 KN. On Rafter
= 0.7P
= 0.7 X 1.2
= 0.84 KN.
On Wind ward.
= 0.3P
= 0.3 X 1.2
= 0.36 KN.
On Lee Ward.
D.L.+W.L.2
D.L.2
= 4.5 KN - 0.84 KN
DOI: 10.9790/1684-12140107
= 3.66 KN On Rafter.
3 | Page

W.L.2
W.L.L.2
= 0.3P
On Wind ward.
= 0.7P
On Lee ward.
= 0.36 KN
= 0.84 KN
D.L.+W.L.3
-------------------------------Load Combination (4)
D.L.3
W.L.3
W.L.L.3
= 4.5 KN.-0.96 KN
= 0.2P
On Wind ward.
= 0.2P
On Lee ward.
= 3.4 KN On Rafter
= 0.24 KN
= 0.24 KN
Governing Load Combination is DL + LL =10 KN

This is accurate to consider as a preliminary design of member forces and worked out Initial members sizes.
Goemetry of portal frame can also be optimised with preliminary design using unit loading method. A basic
calculation sheet, prpepared on the basis of polynomial equations for different geometry can be worked out as a
guide to select geometry of the frame.
For different span, portal rise at centre is worked out as below

RISE IN DEGREE/ SPAN IN MTR
60
70
80
90
10 0
30mtr
1.576
1.842
2.108
2.376
2.645
IV.
40mtr
2.102
2.455
2.811
3.168
3.527
50mtr
2.628
3.07
3.514
3.96
4.408
60mtr
3.153
3.684
4.216
4.751
5.29
Results
Using spread sheets prepared on the basis of polynomial equations, member forces are worked out for
unit loading on rafter for different geometry of slopes and eaves height for Three Different Span is as below.
DOI: 10.9790/1684-12140107
4 | Page

Span
UDL
=
=
40 mtr
1kN
Rise
In Deg.
60
70
80
90
10 0
Column Height=5mtr
Moment-KnMtr
Base
96.67
95.89
94.41
92.41
90.07
Eaves
95.15
80.85
84.33
80.16
76.33
Rise
In Deg.
60
70
80
90
10 0
Column Height=6mtr
Moment-KnMtr
Base
90.54
91.09
90.73
89.88
86.63
Eaves
100.12
94.76
90.79
87.04
83.49
Rise
In Deg.
60
70
80
90
10 0
Column Height=7mtr
Moment-KnMtr
Base
Eaves
85.42
103.26
86.62
98.72
86.91
95.29
86.75
91.98
86.23
88.79
Rise
In Deg.
60
70
80
90
10 0
Column Height=8mtr
Moment-KnMtr
Base
Eaves
81.21
105.24
82.71
101.38
83.36
98.41
83.62
95.51
83.57
92.68
Centre
48.14
42.12
37.71
33.54
29.6
Shear in Kn
Reaction
20
20
20
20
20
Rise
In Deg.
60
70
80
90
10 0
Column Height=9mtr
Moment-KnMtr
Base
77.74
79.36
80.2
80.72
80.96
Centre
52.62
47.08
42.97
39.05
35.31
Shear in Kn
Reaction
20
20
20
20
20
=
=
Rise
In Deg.
60
70
80
90
10 0
Column Height=5mtr
Moment-KnMtr
Base
160.56
157.01
151.11
144.52
139.07
Rise
In Deg.
60
70
80
90
10 0
Column Height=6mtr
Moment-KnMtr
Base
152.93
151.64
148.59
144.56
140.9
Rise
Column Height=7mtr
Moment-KnMtr
Shear in Kn
Reaction
20
20
20
20
20
Centre
28.11
20.43
15.17
10.47
6.28
Fix Base
Eaves
133.74
126.36
117.6
109.95
104.54
Eaves
144.24
137.69
129.49
122.1
116.72
1.4
2.01
2.45
2.74
Thrust
-0.61
-0.01
0.47
0.85
Shear in Kn
Reaction
20
20
20
20
20
Centre
42.81
36.26
31.53
27.12
23.01
50 mtr
1kN/mtr
Thrust
Shear in Kn
Reaction
20
20
20
20
20
Centre
36.31
29.19
24.15
19.53
15.31
Eaves
106.44
103.13
100.56
98.02
95.52
Span
UDL
DOI: 10.9790/1684-12140107
Base
(D.L. + L.L)
Thrust
-1.72
-1.19
-0.74
-0.36
Thrust
-2.33
-1.88
-1.48
-1.13
Thrust
-2.64
-2.26
-1.92
-1.61
Base
Fix Base
(D.L. + L.L)
Centre
24.24
16.11
6.79
-1.04
6.42
Shear in Kn
Reaction
25
25
25
25
25
Thrust
5.36
6.12
6.7
6.91
6.9
Centre
37.99
30.17
20.78
12.61
6.84
Shear in Kn
Reaction
25
25
25
25
25
Thrust
1.44
2.32
3.18
3.74
4.03
Shear in Kn
5 | Page

In Deg.
60
70
80
90
10 0
Base
145.36
145.4
144.22
142.01
139.72
Eaves
151.36
145.85
138.46
131.59
126.49
Centre
49.24
41.81
32.69
24.55
18.67
Rise
In Deg.
60
70
80
90
10 0
Column Height=8mtr
Moment-KnMtr
Base
Eaves
138.56
156.86
139.36
151.77
139.37
145.17
138.41
138.91
137.12
134.18
Centre
58.71
51.54
42.84
34.91
29.09
Rise
In Deg.
60
70
80
90
10 0
Column Height=9mtr
Moment-KnMtr
Base
Eaves
132.64
160.51
133.88
156.04
134.63
150.18
134.52
144.53
133.93
140.2
Centre
66.32
59.8
51.55
43.93
38.26
Span
UDL
=
=
Rise
In Deg.
60
70
80
90
10 0
Column Height=5mtr
Moment-KnMtr
Base
Eaves
238.05
175.08
226.66
161.68
214.46
150.27
203.32
141.36
191.42
132.9
Rise
In Deg.
60
70
80
Column Height=6mtr
Moment-KnMtr
Base
Eaves
232.55
196.36
224.78
170.74
220.58
173.36
DOI: 10.9790/1684-12140107
60 mtr
1kN/mtr
Reaction
25
25
25
25
25
Shear in Kn
Reaction
25
Thrust
-0.89
-0.06
0.82
1.48
1.89
25
25
25
Thrust
-2.28
-1.55
-0.72
-0.06
0.36
Shear in Kn
Reaction
25
25
25
25
25
Thrust
-3.09
-2.46
-1.72
-1.11
-0.69
Base
Fix Base
Centre
14.64
0.93
-10.31
-18.83
-26.69
Shear in Kn
Reaction
30
30
30
30
30
Thrust
12.59
12.99
12.83
12.39
11.7
Centre
39.16
20.79
14
Shear in Kn
Reaction
30
30
30
Thrust
6.3
7.5
7.87
(D.L. + L.L)
6 | Page
Member
different
out as above for unit
uniform results at
trusses and column
pattern.
For
results ratio of Izz for
Truss is considered to
assumption
gives
column but at the same
considerable moment
eaves. Since truss
column length, overall
achieved.
Base is
gives less load in truss
V.
Conclusion
90
10 0
208.93
204.86
Rise
In Deg.
60
70
80
90
10 0
Column Height=7mtr
Moment-KnMtr
Base
Eaves
222.52 209.07
219.1
193.8
216.69 187.78
209.07 174.04
206.19 169.87
Rise
In Deg.
60
70
80
90
10 0
Rise
In Deg.
60
70
80
90
10 0
159.19
154.98
Column Height=8mtr
Moment-KnMtr
Base
Eaves
212.68 218.4
212.1
204.62
210.93 199.06
206.34 186.14
204.41 182.13
Column Height=9mtr
Moment-KnMtr
Base
Eaves
203.73 225.28
204.95 212.91
204.64 207.85
202.24 195.88
201.03 192.11
-0.63
-4.85
30
30
8.29
8.31
Centre
55.95
37.94
31.09
15.97
11.5
Shear in Kn
Reaction
30
30
30
30
30
Thrust
1.92
3.61
4.13
5
5.18
Centre
69.92
52.64
45.92
30.81
26.27
Shear in Kn
Reaction
30
30
30
30
30
Thrust
-0.71
0.93
1.48
2.52
2.78
Centre
81.71
65.29
58.81
43.99
39.47
Shear in Kn
Reaction
30
30
30
30
30
Thrust
-2.39
-0.88
-0.35
0.7
0.99
forces
results
of
configuration, worked
loading, shows that
eaves junction
in
follows one particular
calculation of above
column and Izz for
be
unity.
This
heavier design for
time
will
reduce
in truss members near
length is more than
economy
can
be
considered as rigid,
members.
Observing
above results and its
uniformity pattern, It
is possible to narrate
that forces becomes uniform in one particular patter which has following approximate relation between span and
eaves height,
H= m X ( /) X L,
H= Eaves Height
= Pitch of Roof
L = Span of Rafter
m= co-efficient varies between 3.00 to 4.00, depending upon the pitch.
In many cases height of column is to be decided by an architect as client has having limitation on
minimum height in storage type of sheds. This relation is helpful in finalising Geometry of the portal to be
design for uniform member forces at critical locations, which in turn gives balance design, giving overall
economy in weight.
Hand calculations are advised to proceed further for deciding preliminary member sizes based on SP
47: 2003. A STAAD model is than prepared and run for detail analysis.
WHERE
References
[1].
[2].
[3].
[4].
[5].
[6].
[7].
[8].
[9].
[10].
[11].
[12].
[13].
[14].
Is 800:2007:, Design of steel structures

Is 875-part-III :, Wind load on roof
SP38: 1978:, Design of roof trusses
SP 40 : 1987 :, Design of steel portal frames
SP 47 : 1987 (reaffirmed on 2003):, Design of steel lattice portal frames
INS/PUB/010, Steel Work Design Guide to BS 5950 Vol-4
INS/PUB/013, Introduction to steelwork design to BS 5950
INS/PUB/024, Design of Structural Steel Work C-Southcombe
INS/PUB/045, Connection Design and Detailing
INS/PUB/046:, Structural Design to BS 5950-5:1998 Section Properties and Load Tables
Bungale S Tarnath, Wind and Earthquake resisting Buildings
Subramaian.N, Design of Steel Structure
K. Suresh Kumar , C. Cinib, Valerie Sifton:, Assessment of design wind speeds for metro cities of India
K. Suresh Kumar :,Wind Engineering for Design of Structures -Fundamentals
DOI: 10.9790/1684-12140107
7 | Page

Large Span Lattice Frame Industrial Roof Structure

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Large Span Lattice Frame Industrial Roof Structure

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering (IOSR-JMCE)