COEP TECHNOLOGICAL
UNIVERSITY
Detailed Structural Design Report
(PEB Structure)
Academic Year – 2025-26
Design of Steel Structures
Name: Vaishnavi Chitnis
MIS: 612301020
Batch: A
1
Contents
1 Introduction and Project Scope
1.1 Project Overview..............................................................................................................3
1.2 Design Philosophy: Limit State Method................................................................3
1.3 Material Properties and Safety Factors.................................................................3
2 Load Analysis
2.1 Total Load Calculations.................................................................................................4
2.2 King Post Truss Analysis and Member
Forces……………………………………………………………………….5
3 Design of Tension Members (Ties and King Post)
3.1 Design Philosophy: Tension Member Failure (Cl. 6)........................................6
3.2 Step 1.1: Design for Tie Beam AE ............................................................................6
3.3 Step 1.2: Design for King Post CF ............................................................................6
4 Design of Compression Members (Struts and Rafters)
4.1 Theoretical Background: Slenderness and Design Stress (Cl. 7)..............7
4.1.1 Step 2.1: Design for Critical Strut BF ..........................................................7
4.1.2 Step 2.2: Check for Long Rafter AC..............................................................7
5 Design of Main Supporting Column
5.1 Step 3.1: Determine Column Effective Length (Leff)........................................8
5.2 Step 3.2: Select and Check Column Section........................................................8
6 Design of Slab Base Plate
6.1 Step 4.1: Sizing the Base Plate..................................................................................8
6.2 Step 4.2: Designing for Thickness (t).....................................................................8
7 Design of Welded Connection for Column Base
7.1 Theoretical Background: Fillet Weld Strength (Cl. 10.5.7)............................9
7.2 Step 5.1: Calculate Weld Strength per mm (Sweld)............................................9
7.3 Step 5.2: Calculate Required and Available Length (Lreq and Leff)............9
7.4 Step 5.3: Anchor Bolt Provision.............................................................................9
8. Conclusion
10
2
[Link] and Project Scope
1.1 Project Overview
This report provides a detailed structural analysis and design for key steel elements
within a small industrial shed structure, utilizing the Indian Standard Code of
Practice for General Con- struction in Steel, IS 800:2007 (Limit State Method).
The design is presented explicitly for a beginner, with every theoretical concept
and calculation step shown.
1.2 Design Philosophy: Limit State Method
The Limit State Method (LSM) is adopted. LSM ensures structural integrity against
collapse (Ultimate Limit State) and maintains fitness for use (Serviceability Limit
State). Safety is enforced through Partial Safety Factors (γm) applied to material
strengths.
1.3 Material Properties and Safety Factors
• Structural Steel (Fe 410 Grade):
1. Yield Stress: fy = 250 MPa
2. Ultimate Stress: fu = 410 MPa
• Concrete Grade: M20, with characteristic compressive strength fck = 20 MPa.
• Partial Safety Factors (IS 800:2007, Table 5):
γm0 = 1.10 (For material yielding or buckling)
γm1 = 1.25 (For material governed by ultimate stress/rupture)
γmw = 1.25 (For shop welding)
Figure 1: King Post Truss Roof
3
2. Load Analysis
2.1. Total Load Calculations
1. Dead Load Calculations :
Total Weight of GI Sheets
Weight (kg)=Length (m)×Width (m)×Thickness (m)×Density of steel (7850 kg/m³)
= 12 x 3.4 x 0.8 x10 ^3 x 7850
= 5.034 kN
Total roof purlin weight
Weight per purlin = 48 × 9.81 /1000 = 470.88 /1000 = 0.47088 kN
So each purlin weighs 0.47088 kN
Number of purlins: 1 apex + 2×2 slopes = 5
Total weight = 0.47088 × 5 = 2.3544 kN
Self- Weight of Members :
Member weights (assume 40 kg/m for simplicity)
Rafter: 3.35 × 40 × 2 = 3.35 × 80 = 268 kg
Bottom chord: 6 × 40 = 240 kg
King post: 1.50 × 40 = 60 kg
Diagonals: 3.3541 × 40 × 2 = 3.3541 × 80 ≈ 268.33 kg
Total truss mass = 268 + 240 + 60 + 268.33 ≈ 836.33 kg = 836.33 × 9.81 ≈ 8202.66
N
total self-weight of one king-post truss ≈ 8.20 kN
4
Therefore , Total dead load= 8.203+2.354+5.034= 15.591 kN
2. Wind Load Calculations
W purlin =qu × L(L = 12 m)
Ridge: 1.49 ×12=17.88 kN
Windward 1: 1.65 ×12=19.80 kN
Truss DL (kN) LL (kN) WL (kN) Total Load (kN)
T1 (end) 10.394 9.000 59.440 78.834
T2 (int) 20.788 18.000 118.880 157.668
T3 (int) 20.788 18.000 118.880 157.668
T4 (end) 10.394 9.000 59.440 78.834
Total 62.364 54.000 356.640 473.004
Windward 2: 1.65 ×12=19.80 kN
Leeward 1: 1.32 ×12=15.84 kN
Leeward 2: 1.32 ×12=15.84 kN
Total wind load =17.88+19.80+19.80+ 15.84+15.84
Total wind load on truss = 89.16 kN.
3. Live Load Calculations
[Link]-load selection:assume maintenance roof load 0.75kN/mm^2
[Link] to line load using tributary width ¿ 3 m:
w=0.75 × 3=2.25 kN/m.
[Link] live load on one truss (span = 6 m):
W =w × 6=2.25 × 6=13.5 kN.
So total live load per truss = 13.5 kN.
Total Final Load Calculations:
2.2 King Post Truss Analysis and Member Forces
The King Post Truss has a span of 6.0 m, a rise of 1.5 m, and θ = 26.56◦. The
forces are derived from the Method of Joints.
5
Table of Truss Member Forces
Table 1: Truss Member Forces and Classification
Memb Component Length Factored Force Nature
er Description (approx.) (Nu) [kN]
AE Tie Beam (Overall) 6.00 m 30.00 Tension
CF King Post (Vertical 1.50 m 20.00 Tension
Hanger)
BF, DF Inclined Struts 1.67 m 27.96 Compressi
(Internal) on
AC, CE Principal Rafters 3.35 m 16.78 Compressi
on
Figure 2: King Post Truss with member forces
[Link] of Tension Members (Ties and King Post)
Tension member design is governed by the minimum capacity from two modes:
yielding across the gross area and rupture across the net area (at bolt holes).
Tension Member Failure (Cl. 6)
The design tensile strength (Td) is calculated as:
Td = min(Ty,Rd, Tu,Rd)
Mode 1: Gross Section Yielding (Cl. 6.2): Prevents permanent deformation.
Ty,Rd = fγyAg
m0
Mode 2: Net Section Rupture (Cl. 6.3): Prevents brittle fracture at holes.
Tu,Rd = 0.γ9fuAn
m1
a. Step 1.1: Design for Tie Beam AE (Nu = 30.00 kN)
→ Trial Section: Flat 40 × 6 mm. Ag = 240 mm2.
→ Net Area (An): Based on existing analysis, use An ≈ 162 mm2.
6
→ Calculation 1: Yielding Capacity
250
N/mm2 × 240 mm2
Ty,Rd =
≈ 54.55 kN
1.10
→ Calculation 2: Rupture Capacity
Tu,Rd = 0.9 × 410 N/mm2 × 162 mm2
1.25 ≈ 47.82
kN
Conclusion: Td = min(54.55, 47.82) = 47.82 kN. Since 47.82 kN > 30.00 kN, the section is
→ Safe.
Provision for Tie AE: Flat 40 × 6 mm
b. Step 1.2: Design for King Post CF (Nu = 20.00 kN)
→ Trial Section: Flat 30 × 6 mm. Ag = 180 mm2.
→ Design Strength (Td): The minimum strength capacity is Td ≈ 30.11 kN.
→ Conclusion: 30.11 kN > 20.00 kN. Provision for King Post CF: Flat 30 × 6 mm.
7
4. Design of Compression Members (Struts and Rafters)
Compression member capacity (Pd) is determined by λ and fcd (Design Compressive Stress).
a. Theoretical Background: Slenderness and Design Stress (Cl. 7)
Pd = Ag × fcd
The value of fcd is obtained from IS 800:2007, Table 9 (based on fy and λ).
i. Step 2.1: Design for Critical Strut BF (Nu = 27.96 kN)
→ Trial Section: ISA 65 × 65 × 6 mm. Ag = 780 mm2, rmin ≈ 12 mm.
→ Effective Length (Leff): Assuming pinned joints (K = 1.0). L = 1677 mm.
Leff = 1677 mm
→ Slenderness Ratio (λ):
1677
mm = 139.75
λ=
12 mm
→ Design Compressive Stress (fcd): For λ = 139.75 (Buckling Class ’c’), fcd ≈ 91.86 N/mm2.
Capacity Check:
→ Pd = 780 mm 2× 91.86 N/mm2 ≈ 71.62 kN
→ Conclusion: 71.62 kN > 27.96 kN. Provision for Struts: ISA 65 × 65 × 6 mm.
ii. Step 2.2: Check for Long Rafter AC (Nu = 16.78 kN)
The rafter’s length (3354 mm) makes it critical for buckling.
→ Slenderness Ratio (λ): λ = 3354/12 = 279.5.
→ Design Stress (fcd): For high slenderness, fcd ≈ 22.97 N/mm2.
→ Capacity Check: Pd = 780 × 22.97 ≈ 17.91 kN.
→ Conclusion: 17.91 kN > 16.78 kN. The section is Safe.
Provision for Rafters: ISA 65 × 65 × 6 mm
[Link] of Main Supporting Column
The column must support Pu = 800 kN over a length of 6.0 m with defined end restraints.
8
a. Step 3.1: Determine Column Effective Length (Leff)
→ End Condition: Held in position at both ends; restrained against rotation at one end.
→ Effective Length Factor (K): As per IS 800:2007, Table 11, K = 0.8.
→ Calculation:
Leff = 0.8 × 6000 mm = 4800 mm
a. Step 3.2: Select and Check Column Section
→ Selected Section: ISHB 300 @ 577 N/m (A = 7485 mm2, ryy = 54.1 mm).
→ Slenderness Ratio (λ): λ = 4800/54.1 = 88.72.
→ Design Capacity (Pd): Buckling Class ’c’. fcd ≈ 119.08 N/mm2.
Pd = 7485 × 119.08 ≈ 891.25 kN
→ Conclusion: 891.25 kN > 800 kN. Column is Safe.
[Link] of Slab Base Plate
The slab base transfers the Pu = 800 kN load from the ISHB 300 column to the M20
concrete pedestal.
a. Step 4.1: Sizing the Base Plate
→ Permissible Bearing Stress (wdesign):
wdesign = 0.45fck = 0.45 × 20 MPa = 9.0 N/mm2
→ Required Area (Areq):
800 × 103
Areq = N 2
2
≈ 88, 889 mm
9.0 N/mm
→ Provided Size: Column properties: D = 300 mm, bf = 250 mm.
Provide 30 mm overhangs (a = b). L = 360 mm, B = 310 mm.
→ Actual Pressure (wactual):
800 × 10
3
2 2
wactual = ≈ 7.17 (< 9.0 N/mm , OK)
×
N/mm 360 310
b. Step 4.2: Designing for Thickness (t)
→ Thickness Formula (IS 800:2007, Cl. [Link]):
s
2.5wactualγm0
t= (a2 − 0.3b2) ≈ 7.05 mm
f
y
→ Code Check: t must be ≥ tf (flange thickness, 10.6 mm).
→ Final Provision: **Provide a slab base 360 × 310 × 12 mm**.
9
c. Step 5.2: Calculate Required and Available Length (Lreq and Leff)
→ Required Length (Lreq):
Pu 800 × 103 N
Lreq = = ≈ 1008.59 mm
Sweld 793.18 N/mm
→ Effective Length (Leff ): Available perimeter La ≈ 1539 mm. Deduction for 12 end
returns (12 × 2s = 144 mm).
Leff = 1539 mm − 144 mm = 1395 mm
→ Check: Leff (1395 mm) > Lreq(1008.59 mm). Safe.
Welded Connection Provision: 6 mm fillet weld all around the column perimeter.
1
0
[Link]
The structural design of the Pre-Engineered Building (PEB) was successfully
completed by performing a comprehensive analysis and design in accordance
with relevant Indian Standards, including IS 800:2007 (Limit State Design for
Steel Structures), IS 875 (Part 1–3) for load considerations and manual
calculations were carried out to verify the results for critical members.
All primary members such as rafters, columns, and bracings, along with
secondary members like purlins and girts, were designed to withstand factored
loads including dead, live, wind. The member sections were optimized to achieve
both structural efficiency and material economy. The design ensures that all
members and connections are within permissible limits of stress, deflection, and
stability as per the code provisions.
The study highlights the superiority of PEB systems over conventional steel
structures in terms of lightweight design, faster fabrication and erection,
reduced project cost, and architectural flexibility. The results validate that
the proposed PEB structure is structurally safe, economically viable, and
functionally efficient for the intended application.
Overall, the project demonstrates a systematic approach to structural design
using modern engineering tools and principles, contributing to sustainable and
efficient infrastructure development.
1
1
1
2