You are on page 1of 8

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER)

2016
American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER)
e-ISSN: 2320-0847 p-ISSN : 2320-0936
Volume-5, Issue-10, pp-121-128
www.ajer.org
Research Paper
Open Access

A Study of Affordable Roofing System with Rectangular


Pyramidal Panels
Ravindra R1, Subramanya K.G2, Tejus V3
1AssociateProfessor,Dept.of CivilEngineering,R.V. College of Engineering, VTU,India
2AssistantProfessor,Dept.of CivilEngineering,GSKSJTI, VTU,India.
3Post Gradute student,Dept.of CivilEngineering,GSKSJTI, VTU,India.

ABSTRACT:affordablehousingisatermusedtodescribedwellingunitswhosecostsaredeemedaffordabletoagrou
pofpeoplewithinaspecifiedincomerange.Structuralfloors/roofsaccountforsubstantialcostofbuildinginnormalsituat
ion.ThereforeanysavingsachievedintheroofingSystemsconsiderablyreducethecostofthebuildingunit.Afocusedinve
stigationistobemadetocheckwhethertheprefabricatedroofingwouldreplacethenormalroofingprocess. In the study
undertaken,Pre-cast RCC roof infill elements are supported on precast RCCj oist System.The rectangular
pyramidal
panels
consideredhavealeastsizeof0.5mand0.75mwiththeaspectratiovaryingfrom1.25to2withariseof60mmatthecenter.Th
eanalysisoftheroofSystemismadebyusingSTAADPROsoftwareandlaterdesignedusingM20gradeconcreteandsteelc
orrespondingto415N/mm2.Thecostanalysismadeforthe
affordable
roofingSystemproposedindicatesacostreductionbetween0.4%to34.7%whencomparedtotheconventionalRCCslab
of same size.The panels weighless errand can easily be handled by three to five masons. It proves to bea strong
alternative to the conventional RCC roofing System.
Keywords Affordable Roofing, Precast Concrete, CostEconomics of Roofing System, Aspect Ratio.
Affordable housing

I. INTRODUCTION
Housingaffordabilityhasalwaysbeenaworldwideconcern.Roofsarethecomponentsinstalledatthetopofthebuildingsto
protecttheoccupantsagainstadverseweatherconditionssuchastemperaturechanges,solarradiation,rain,snow,andwin
d.So,anykindsofsavingattainedintheconstructionofroofingSystemsubstantiallyreducesthecostofthebuildingunit.
Asotheressentialpartsofbuildings,roofscorrespondtoabout811%ofthetotalprojectcost[1].InIndiaaccordingtotheWorldBankestimatesof2013,around23.6%oftheresidentsareres
idingunderthelowerpovertylineandtheshortageintheurbandwellingunitswasassessedas17millionunits.
Inviewofsearchofalternateroofingtechnology,thepresentworkundertakenhasprecast
RCCroofinfillelementswhicharesupportedonagridworkofprecastRCCjoistSystemandwithanoverlayofinsituconcrete.The components of roofing Systema r e
(i).Roofinfillelementofrectangularpanelswithpyramidal
shapeofsmaller
thicknesstohavemembraneactionaswellasarchingaction.
(ii).PrimaryandsecondaryRCCprecastbeamslikegridSystem.
Thenecessityinthereductionofthecostinconstructionledtothedevelopmentofalternativeroofingtechnologies.Fillersla
bisonesuchtechnology,whichisbasedontheprinciplethatconcretecantakeupcompressionbutisweakintension.Thusint
heconventionalRCCslab,bottomportionofthe concreteissubstitutedwith acheaperandlighterfillermaterialforcosteffectiveadvantageoverRCCslab[2].PrecastRCCplanksandjoistSystemisanotheralternativeroofingtechnology.Her
e,precastplanksaresupportedabovethepartiallyprecastjoistSystemacrossandarethenlinkedtogetherbyinsituconcretepouredoverfullroofingareaandreinforcedhooksprojectoutfromthejoistSystemstohavemonolithicaction[
3].
B.V.VenkataramanaReddy,JagadishKSet.al[4]havehighlighted
someissuesrelatingtotheenvironment,energyeffectsofalternativebuilding
techniquesintheresearchwork.Alternatebuildingtechniquesdevelopedwereenergyefficientandtheembodiedenergyo
fthehousingunitsconstructedusingtheseskillsarefoundtoconsumelessenergythanhalfoftheenergyutilizedbyconventi

www.ajer.org

Page 121

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER)

2016

onalhousingunits.HiraBNandNegiSK[5]havefoundoutanumberofaspectsofprefabricatedbuildingpracticesforlowc
osthousingbyhighlightingthevariousprefabricationtechniques,andtheeconomicbenefitsattainedbyitsadoption.Adla
khaPKandPuriHC[6]havesuggestedtheuseofthePrecastRCPlanks
and
joists,
PrecastRC
Channel
Roofing,PrecastConcretePanels,PrefabricatedBrickPanels,Precast RBCurvedPanels, andPrecast HollowSlabs
etc.asroofelements.ResearchworkscarriedbyAdlakhaPK[8],VivianW.Y
[9],TiwariP
[10],and
IanHolton[11]givesthecosteffectiveconstructionandsustainableenergy,anditisfoundthatthereisaneedof
environment-friendlyand
innovativehousingtechniquesforthedevelopmentofhousesandstructureswithsubstantialreductioninthecost.
WilliamG.Davids[12],hasgivenastudywhichmainlyemphasizesonthein-planeloaddeflectionsaswellasbucklingresponseofthepressurizedprefabricatedarchesof
continuouscircularcrosssection.ImmanuelGandKharthiK[13],havefoundoutbehaviourofvarioustypesofshelleleme
ntsinroofslabsorinanyotherstructure.Researchworkswerecarriedoutontheoptimizationmethodsforroofslabsforthele
astpossiblecost.RichardJ.BallingandXiaopingYao.,BoozWet.al[14],havementionedofoptimizationmethodforthree
-dimensionalreinforcedconcreteframedstructuresandotherfloor/roofstructures.
ItisnotedthatconventionalroofinginahousingSystemisoneofthemostcostlycomponentsandalsocontributeshugelytot
heembodiedenergyofthebuildingsasawhole.Hence,itisnecessarytofindasuitablecosteffectivealternativeroofingtech
nologybyusingprecastingtechniques.Byusingthistechnology,formworkcost,Labourcharges,castinsituworktobecarr
iedoutetc.canbeavoided.Thisprojectaimsatdevelopinga
costeffectiveroofingtechnologywhichiseconomical,lesstimeconsumingforconstructionandaestheticallypleasing
roofingSystem.ItalsoaimsatdevelopingatechnologyofprovidingroofingSystemwithprecastpanelssupportedonpreca
stbeams.

II. SCOPE AND OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY


Themainobjectiveofthisanalyticalinvestigationundertakenistoexaminethebehaviourandperformance ofthe precast
joistsandpanel
roofingSystem.ItalsoaimsatdevelopingatechnologyofprovidingroofingSystemwithprecastpanelssupportedonprec
astbeams.Rectangularprecastpanelshavingshortersideoflength0.5mand0.75mareconsideredinthestudy.Theaspectr
atioofthepanelisvariedfrom1.25to2withariseof60mm
atthecentre.Table1showsthedetailsoftheproposedslabSystemundertakenforstudy.AtypicallayoutoftheroofingSyste
misshowninFig1.
ARS refers to affordable roofing system
Table 1 Parameters Undertaken For the Present Study
SL
NO
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Rectangular panel
Dimension in (m)
0.5 X 0.625
0.5 X 0.75
0.5 X 0.875
0.5 X 1.0
0.75 X 0.9375
0.75 X 1.125
0.75 X 1.3125
0.75 X 1.5

Aspect
Ratio
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00

No. of Panels
Along
shorter
span
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4

Along
span
4
4
4
3
4
3
3
3

longer

Total Size of the


ARS Slab
2.50 X 2.50
2.5 X 3.0
2.5 X 3.5
2.0 X 3.0
3.0 X 3.75
3.0 X 3.375
3.0 X 3.94
3.0 X 4.5

Fig1.Typical Layout of the Roofing System

III. LOADS CONSIDERED

Aliveload (LL)of 1.5KN/m2isconsidered,inaccordancetoIS875:1987 (Part2).


Dead load is considered to be the self-weight of beams and panels. The Density is taken as

www.ajer.org

Page 122

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER)

2016

25KN/m3.InaccordancetoIS875:1987 (Part 1).

Screed
Concrete
isassumedasfloorfinishing.Densityofscreed
concreteisassumedas20KN/m3,
thethicknessofscreed concreteiscalculated based on rise. Fig2showsthecrosssectionaldetails.
Water proofing coat: The Density of WPC is taken as 20.40KN/m3 inaccordancetoIS875:1987 (Part 1)and
the Thickness of WPC is taken as 50mm fig 2 gives the details of panel thickness and WPC thickness.
Theanalysisiscarriedfora loadcombinationof1.5(DL+LL)asperIS456:2000

Fig 2 Panel Thickness and Floor Finishes Considered For Slab

IV. ANALYSIS AND DESIGN


RectangularPanels
ThesizingofthemainbeamandthesecondarybeamismadebypreliminaryanalysisoftheroofingSystemproposed.Thesi
zeofthebeamof150mmwidthand150mmdepthwassufficientforallthetypesoftheslabsconsidered.Thedetailed
analysisoftheroofingSystemismadeusingSTAADPROsoftware.Therectangularpanelsarediscretisedintothreenod
edandfournodedelements.Atypicaldiscretised
modelofarectangularpanelisshowninFig3(a)
and
3(b).T heslabthicknessoftherectangularpanelsareassumedtobe 75mm in the initial phase of analysis which was
later revised based on analysis results.Thesecondarybeamsaresupportedonthebracketprovidedon themain beam
asshown
inFig4.The
analysisof
the
roofing
System
using
thesoftwareyieldedthecriticalvaluesofbendingmoment(MxandMy),shearstress(SqxandSqy),andinplanestresses(SxandSy).ThenotationsforthecriticalvaluesforbendingmomentshearstressandinplanestressesarethesameasusedintheSTAADPROsoftware.
Thetypicalstresscontoursofarectangularpanelmeasuring
0.5mx
0.625misshown
inFig5(a),5( b),and
5(c).TherectangularpanelsaredesignedbylimitstatemethodinaccordancetoIS456:2000.Therectangularpanelsared
esignedforBendingMoment,Shearandalsoforthecombinedactionofbendingmomentandinplanestresses.Atypicalreinforcementdetails
in
2
therectangularpanelisshowninFig6.M20gradeofconcreteandreinforcementhavingyieldstrengthof415N/mm isass
umedinthedesign.

Fig 3(a) Top view of Discretised Slab panel

www.ajer.org

Page 123

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER)

2016

Fig 3(b) Front view of Discretised Slab panel

Fig 4 ConnectionbetweenBracketandSecondaryBeam

Fig 5(a) MxLocalStresses (for0.5mx0.625mPanel)

e
Fig 5(b) SxLocalStresses(for0.5mx0.625mPanel)

www.ajer.org

Page 124

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER)

2016

Fig 5(c) SqxLocalStresses(for0.5mx0.625mPanel)

Fig6ReinforcementLayout(forPanelofSize0.5mX0.625m)

Fig7 SlabofSize2.5mx2.5m(For0.5mx0.625mPanel)
PrimaryandSecondaryBeam
Theanalyticalmodeldevelopedforaroofofsize2.5mx2.5mis
showninFig7.Theprimarybeamandthesecondarybeamofsize150mmx150mmaredesignedbylimitstate

www.ajer.org

Page 125

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER)

2016

methodusingM20gradeconcreteandsteelhavingyieldstrength415N/mm2.Thesecondarybeamsareassumedtobesi
mplysupportedattheends.Theassumeddimensionofthebeamsof150mmx150mmisfoundtobeadequateforthecritic
al values ofbendingmoment andshearobtainedfromthedetailedanalysisusingthesoftware.
Brackets
ThearrangementofabracketSystemisshowninFig4.Thebracketsizeismadeconsideringthemaximumshearingforcetr
ansmittedbythesecondarybeam.Basedonthisconditionthewidthofthebracketiskeptsameasthewidthofthebeams,wh
ileabearinglengthof80mm
wassufficientto
ensurethebearingstresseswithinthepermissiblelimits
(0.45fck).Depthofthebracketof
50mmissufficienttotakecareofthebendingmomentgeneratedduetotheeccentricityofthereactionsofthesecondarybe
am.Limit
state
adoptedforthedesignofthebrackets
[18].Thecentralbeamisaprimarybeamwhichsupportstwosecondarybeamsoneitherside.Secondarybeamtransfersar
eactionontheprimarybeamwhichinturninducesamomentcausingtheupperfaceofthebrackettoactasatensionregiona
ndthebottomregionasa compression. Thebracketisdesigned asper the guidelines ofIS456:2000.Fig8
showsaprimarybeamwithbracketconnectiononboththesideofitandsecondarybeamsrestingoverit.Atypicalreinforce
mentofsecondarybeamrestingoverthebracketsoftheprimarybeamisshowninFig8.Slotisprovidedinthebracketandth
esecondarybeamforplacinga10mmbarandgroutedwiththecementmortarforadepthof25mm.The slot is grouted
with cement slurry for better connectivity.

Fig8 TypicalReinforcementofSecondaryBeamRestingovertheBracketsofthePrimaryBeam

V. COST ANANLYSIS
Economy in the construction industry is one of the prime factors apart from safety and durability. Cost
analysis is made for proposed affordable roofing System and conventional RCC slab. For a conventional RCC
slab System concreting, shuttering and bar bending is done in-situ, where as in case of the proposed Affordable
roofing System it is done in the casting yard. Hence same rate cannot be considered for both Conventional RCC
slab and Affordable roofing System (ARS) slab, Rate analysis is done for the above said items and the
respective rates are considered for cost analysis.
Cost ratio is the ratio of cost of ARS slab to cost of conventional RCC slab per Sqm in Rupees (Rs)
Table 2 Cost Comparison of ARS and Conventional RCC Roof (Rise 60mm)
SL
NO

SizeofSlab in m

1
2
3

2.5
2.5
2.5

X
X
X

2.5
3.0
3.5

www.ajer.org

Rise
mm
60
60
60

in

Conventional slab

ARS slab

Total Cost
in Rs
14460.12
17093.63
21428.18

Total Cost in
Rs
13193.54
15493.87
20628.69

Cost Per Sqm in Rs


2313.62
2279.15
2448.94

Cost Per Sqm in Rs

Cost
Ratio

2110.97
2065.85
2357.56

0.912
0.906
0.963

Page 126

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER)


4
5
6
7
8

2.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.8

X
X
X
X
X

3.0
3.75
3.38
3.94
4.5

60
60
60
60
60

13979.66
25996.53
23591.83
27463.86
43033.79

2329.94
2310.80
2330.06
2324.98
2550.15

13923.87
19623.45
18934.42
21966.41
28109.10

2016
2320.65
1744.31
1870.07
1859.59
1665.72

0.996
0.755
0.803
0.800
0.653

Table3 WeightsofPanel,PrimaryBeamandSecondaryBeam

VI. CONCLUSION
Based on all the analytical investigations carried out in the project the following conclusions may be drawn.
The precast beam and panel roofing System designed in the work proves to be a strong alternative to the
conventional RCC roofing System.
There is 0.4%-34.7% of cost reduction in the precast roofing Systems when compared to the RCC roofing
System, which advocates the adoption of this technology in low cost housing projects.
The alternative roofing System proposed has a pleasing aesthetic appearance in the soffit of the pyramid
portion. It requires no plastering work and false roofing work can be avoided which reduces the cost of the
roofing unit.
The roofing Systems proposed in the current project is designed to take the factored load of 1.5 times the
dead load and live load.
The important factor during the construction is the total time consumed for construction. The kind of
roofing System adopted in the project would reduce the time of construction as the panels and joists are
readily available precast and can be just placed avoiding the cast in-situ construction.
The panel weighs lesser and can easily be handled by three to five masons. Thus reduces the cost in using
Labour for construction and can be erected in a very short period of time.

REFERENCE
[1].
[2].
[3].
[4].
[5].
[6].
[7].
[8].
[9].
[10].
[11].
[12].
[13].
[14].
[15].

SerdarUlubeylia,AynurKazazb,BayramErb,M.TalatBirgonulc,ComparisonofDifferentRoofTypesinHousingProjectsinTurkey:Cost
Analysis,ProcediaSocialandBehaviouralSciences119(2014)2029pp.221-228.
KSJagadish,KSNanjundaRao,KRGaneshAndBVVenkataramanaReddy,
NationalSeminaronAlternativeBuildingMethods,ProceedingsAlternativeBuildingMethods,2002,pp.24-32.
RinkuTaurandVidyaDeviT,LowcosthousingACSGEBITSPilani,October25-272009.
B.V.VenkataramanaReddy,Sustainablebuildingtechnologies,currentscience,vol.87,no.7,10October2004.
Jagadish,K.S.andVenkataramanaReddy,B.V.,Experimentsinbuildingtechnologiesforruralareas
andAlternativebuildingsintheUngraregion,Alternativebuildings,ASTRA,IndianInstituteofScience,Bangalore,1981.
HiraB.N.&NegiS.K.,UpgradationofHousing&AmenitiesinRuralAreasJournalofIndianBuildingCongress,Vol.11,No.2,2004;
;
SeminaronAppropriateBuildingTechniquesforRuralHousing.BMTPCatBhubaneswar,December,22nd-23rd2004.
PKAdlakhaandShriHCPuri,PrefabricationBuildingMethodologiesforLowCostHousing,IE(I)Journal.AR,June302003.
PKAdlakha,CostReductioninRoofingthroughSmall
PanelPrefabricationNationalSeminaronNewBuildingMaterialsandTechnology,Delhi,May19-21,1989.
VivianW.Y.Tam,CostEffectivenessofusingLowCostHousingTechnologiesinConstruction,TheTwelfthEastAsiaPacificConferenceonStructuralEngineeringandConstruction,WesternSydney,2011pp.156-160.
Tiwari P, Parikh K and Parikh J, Structural design considerations in house builder construction model: a multi objective
optimization technique, Journal of Infrastructure System. 5(3), 1999. Pp.75-90.
Ian Holton a, b, Jacqui Glass, Andrew D.F. Price, Managing for sustainability: findings from four company case studies in the UK
precast concrete industry Journal of Cleaner Production 18, 2010 152160.
William G. Davids, In-Plane Load-Deflection Behaviour and Buckling of Pressurized Fabric Arches, Journal of Structural
Engineering, Vol. 135, No. 11, November 1, 2009, pp.1320-1329.
G. Immanuel and K. Kharthi, Jorgen Juncher Structures for Sports Centre, Indian Journal of Science and Technology, Vol 7(S5),
10-15 June 2014.
Richard J. Balling, and Xiaoping Yao, Optimization of Reinforced Concrete Frames, Journal of Structu1al Engineering, Vol.
123, No.2, February 1997, pp.193-202.

www.ajer.org

Page 127

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER)


[16].
[17].
[18].
[19].
[20].

2016

Booz W., Legewie, G., and Thierauf, G. Optimization of reinforced concrete structures according to German design
regulations.Int. Conf. on Computer.-Aided Analysis. And Design. Of Concrete Structures, 1984.
IS 456-2000 Indian Standard Code of Practice for Plain and reinforced concrete, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
Reinforced Concrete design, By S Unnikkrishna Pillai and Devdas menon, Tata McGraw Hill Education Private limited New
Delhi, Third Edition,ISBN NO:978-0-07-014110-0
Limit State design of Reinforced concrete Second edition by P.CVarghese, PHI learning private limited, New Delhi,ISBN:97881-203-2039-0
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography.

www.ajer.org

Page 128