COMPARATIVE STUDY ON ANALYSIS OF STEEL-CONCRETE COMPOSITE STRUCTURE WITH DIFFERENT SHEAR WALL POSITIONS

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 10 Issue: 09 | Sep 2023 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072
© 2023, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 8.226 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 243
COMPARATIVE STUDY ON ANALYSIS OF STEEL-CONCRETE COMPOSITE
STRUCTURE WITH DIFFERENT SHEAR WALL POSITIONS
Fahad Baig1, Wahab Sayyed2, Dr. Sadath Ali Khan Zai3
1 M-Tech Student in Structural Engineering, 2 M-Tech Student in Earthquake Engineering
3Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering,
U.V.C.E, Bangalore University, Bengaluru-560056
---------------------------------------------------------------------***---------------------------------------------------------------------
Abstract - Steel- Concrete composite systems have become
quite popular in recent times because of their advantages
against reduction in self-weight. Composite construction
combines the better properties of the both i.e. concrete and
steel and results in speedy construction. In this study we have
analyzed the G+8 storey steel-concrete composite building
without shear wall and with shear wall at different positions.
The overall dimension of the building is 25m X 25m The 3D
analysis has been carried out using structural analysis
software ETABS and the results are compared; and it is found
that composite structure with shear walls at corners has
minimum displacement, storey drift and time period.
Key Words: Composite column, Composite beam, Shear
connector, Displacement,Storeydrift,Timeperiod, Base
shear.
1.INTRODUCTION
Structures in which composite sections made up of two
different types of materials such as steel and concrete are
used for beams, and columns is called as composite
structures. Steel- Concrete composite systems have become
quite popular in recent times because of their advantages
against reduction in self-weight. In this paper we have
compared the G+8 storey steel-concrete composite building
without shear wall with shear wall at different positions,
which is situated in seismic zone V as per IS 1893-2016. For
analysis we have used equivalent static and response
spectrum method. The parameters considered are lateral
displacements, storey drift, time period and base shear. The
analysis involves the load calculation, analysing it by 3D
modelling using software ETABS. Analysis hasbeendone for
various load combinations as per the Indian Standard Code
of Practice. The results such as maximum values of
displacements, storey drift, time period and base shear are
found out by analysis.
2 LITERATURE REVIEW
This [11] study evaluates four various multi-storeyed
commercial buildings i.e. G+12, G+16, G+20, G+24 are
analysed by using ETABS 2013 software. It was concluded
that the Composite structure is nearly double than that of
R.C.C structure but within permissible limit. The Shear force
and Axial force in R.C.C structure is on higher side than that
of composite structure. [12] This paper analyze steel
concrete composite, steel and R.C.C. options are considered
for comparative study of G+30 storey commercial building
which is situated in earthquake zone IV. Equivalent Static
Method of Analysis is used. For modelling ofComposite,Steel
and R.C.C. structures. The reduction in the dead weight ofthe
Steel framed structure is 32 % with respect to R.C.C. frame
Structure and Composite framed structure is 30 % with
respect to R.C.C. framed structure.
3 OBJECTIVES
The salient objectives of the present study have been
identified as follows:
 To study the behaviour of composite structure
against dead load, live load, seismic load and their
various combinations.
 To perform the static and response spectrum
analysis on compositestructurewithdifferentshear
wall positions.
 To analyse and compare the lateral displacement,
storey drift, base shear and time period of different
models.
4 COMPOSITE CONSTRUCTION
4.1 Definition
In structural engineering, composite construction
exists when two different materials are bound together
so strongly that they act together as a single unit from a
structural point of view.
Composite members are constructed such that the
structural steel shape and the concrete act together to
resist axial compression and bending.
4.2 Components of Composite Construction
The Composite construction consist of following
elements:
1. Composite deck slab

2. Composite beam
3. Composite column
4. Shear connector
Figure 1: Steel-concrete composite frame
4.3 Composite Deck Slab
Steel beams, metal decking, and concrete make up the
composite floor system. They are blended in such a
manner that the greatest qualities of each material may
be exploited to improve construction methods. In
composite floor systems, the most common structure is
a rolled or built-up steel beam linked to a formed steel
deck and concrete slab. The metal deck usually extends
between steel elements unsupported, providing a
working platform for concrete operations. By creatinga
robust horizontal diaphragm and dispersing wind and
seismic shears to the lateral load-resisting systems, the
composite floor system ensures overall building system
stability.
Figure 2: Composite deck slab components
4.4 Composite Beam
When a concrete slab is put over an I-section or steel
beam under in-situ circumstances, a composite beam is
created. Both of these aspects tend to operate
independently under the effect of loading, and there is a
relative slippage between them. An I-section steel beam
with a concrete slab will act like a monolithic beam if
they are properly connected and there is no relativeslip
between them.
Figure 3: Composite beam components
4.5 Composite Column
A compression member is made out of a concrete-
encased hot rolled steel section or a concrete-filled
hollow hot rolled steel section with a steel concrete
composite column. It is typically employed as a load
bearing element in composite framed structures.
Compression and bending are the most common
stresses on composite elements. There is currently no
Indian standard code that covers composite column
design. Friction and bonding are used to interact
between the concrete and the steel. In a building that is
made up of many columns. As a result, they areresistant
to external loading. The principal constructionloadsare
often carried and supported by bare steel columns in
composite construction.
Figure 4: Composite column components
4.6 Shear Connectors
Shear connections are critical in steel-concrete
construction because they combine the compression

capacity of the supported concrete slab with the load
bearing capacity and overall stiffness of the supporting
steel beams / girders. Despite the fact that the steel-to-
concrete connection may aid shear transmission
between the two to some level, it is ignored by thecodes
due to its ambiguity. As a result, all codes require
positive couplings at the steel-concrete contact. All
codes therefore, specify positive connectors at the
interface of steel and concrete. Theshearconnectorsare
designed to transmit longitudinal shear along the
interface and horizontal shear between steel beam and
concrete slab, ignoring the effect of any bond between
the two. Shear connectors prevent separation of steel
beam and concrete slab at the interface and also resist
uplift force at the steel concrete interface.
Figure 4: Shear connectors
5 BUILDING DETAILS
The Building assumed as residential building. The plan
dimension of building is 25m x 25m.
Table 1: Structural data
Plan dimensions 25m x 25m
Total height of building 27m
Height of each storey 3m
Height of parapet wall 1m
Type of beam Size of beam
Main beam ISMB 500
Secondary beam ISMB 300
Column size 300x600mm with ISMB
500 encased
Thickness of slab 150mm
Thickness of wall 200mm
Seismic zone V
Zone factor 0.36
Importance factor 1.2
Soil condition Medium soil
Floor finish 1.5 KN/m2
Grade of concrete for slab M25
Grade of concrete for
columns
M30
Grade of steel Fe 550
6 MODELLING
The modelling is done using ETABS 2016 software:
1. Model 1 (without shear wall)
Figure 5: Plan of model 1
Figure 6: 3D view of model 1

2. Model 2 (with shear wall at center)
3. Model 3 (with shear wall in X-direc)
4. Model 4 (with shear wall in Y-direc)

5. Model 5 (with shear wall at corners)
7 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
From the analysis the parameters such as displacement,
storey drift, time period and base shear is considered and
their variation plotted in the form of graph as shown below.
7.1 Displacement
Table 2: Displacement for static analysis in x-y direc
Models X-direc (mm) Y-direc (mm)
Model 1 53.525 40.917
Model 2 21.37 19.372
Model 3 21.307 46.189
Model 4 58.273 18.717
Model 5 20.009 17.942
Graph 1: Displacement for static analysis in x-y direc
Table 3: Displacement for dynamic analysis in x-y direc
Models X-direc (mm) Y-direc (mm)
Model 1 46.277 35.467
Model 2 18.944 17.157
Model 3 19.043 39.89
Model 4 50.269 16.702
Model 5 17.796 15.964
Graph 2: Displacement for dynamic analysisinx-ydirec
From table 2&3 and graph 1&2 it is observedthatModel
5 shows less displacement along x & y direction.

7.2 Storey Drift
Table 4: Storey drift for static analysis in x-y direc
Models X-direc Y-direc
Model 1 0.002527 0.001933
Model 2 0.000933 0.000841
Model 3 0.000939 0.002186
Model 4 0.002754 0.000822
Model 5 0.000884 0.00079
Graph 3: Storey Drift for static analysis in x-y direc
Table 5: Storey drift for dynamic analysis in x-y direc
Models X-direc Y-direc
Model 1 0.002365 0.001806
Model 2 0.000817 0.000736
Model 3 0.000833 0.002064
Model 4 0.002619 0.000726
Model 5 0.000778 0.000696
Graph 4: Storey Drift for dynamic analysis in x-y direc
From table 4&5 and graph 3&4 it is observedthatModel
5 shows less storey drift along x & y direction.
7.3 Time Period
Table 6: Time period
Models Time period (sec)
Model 1 1.051
Model 2 0.605
Model 3 0.979
Model 4 1.1
Model 5 0.581
Graph 4: Time period of all models
From table 6 and graph 4 it is observed that Model 5
shows less time period value.
7.4 Base Shear
Table 7: Base Shear for static and dynamic analysis in
x-y direc
Models X-direc (KN) Y-direc (KN)
Model 1 3492.5125 3492.5125
Model 2 3480.3446 3480.3446
Model 3 3612.9358 3612.9358
Model 4 3691.6954 3691.6954
Model 5 3737.8342 3737.8342

Graph 5: Base Shear for static and dynamic analysis in
x-y direc
8 CONCLUSIONS
From the analysis done on G+8 structure in zone V the
following conclusions are made:
1. From the results of displacement,itisnotedthatthe
maximum lateral displacement is seen in Model 4
for static analysis along X-direction, Model 3 for
static analysis along Y-direction.
2. From the results of displacement,itisnotedthatthe
maximum lateral displacement is seen in Model 4
for response spectrum analysis along X-direction
and Model 3 for response spectrum analysis along
Y-direction.
3. From the results of displacement,itisnotedthat the
minimum lateral displacement is seen in Model 5
for static and response spectrum analysis along X
and Y direction.
4. The reduction of lateral displacement along X
direction for static and response spectrum analysis
is 34.33% and 35.40%. The reduction of lateral
displacement along Y direction for static and
response spectrum analysis is 38.84% and 40.02%.
5. From the results of storey drift, it is noted that the
maximum lateral storey drift is seen in Model 4 for
static analysis along X-direction, Model 3 for static
analysis along Y-direction.
maximum lateral storey drift is seen in Model 4 for
response spectrum analysis along X-direction and
Model 3 for response spectrum analysis along Y-
direction.
minimum storey drift is seen in Model 5 for static
and response spectrum analysis along X and Y
direction.
8. The reduction of storey drift for static and response
spectrum analysis along X-direction is 32.09% and
29.70%. The reduction of storey drift for static and
response spectrum analysis along Y-direction is
36.13% and 33.72%.
9. From the graphs and tables of time period in the
results section it is clearly observed that the Model
4 has maximum time period and Model 5 has
minimum time period.
10. The reduction in time period is 52.81% when
compared between maximum and minimumvalues
of time period.
11. From the graphs and tables of base shear in the
results section it is clearly observed that the
maximum base shear is seen in Model 5 for static
and response spectrum analysis along X and Y
direction.
12. From the graphs and tables of base shear in the
results section it is clearly observed that the
minimum base shear is seen in Model 2andModel 8
for static and response spectrum analysis along X
and Y direction. The reduction in base shear is
9.17% when compared between maximum and
minimum values of base shear.
REFERENCES
[1] Sayyed Faizuddin Hashmi, Hemant.B.Dahake(2021),
“Comparative Study of R.C.C, Composite and Steel
Structure Under Dynamic Condition”, ISSN: 2455-2631.
[2] Er. Tushar Loya, Er. Ravindra Bansode, Dr. M.R.
Shiyekar(2020), “Comparative Study on Analysis and
Design of Steel Building and Conventional RC Building”,
ISSN 2321 3361 © 2020 IJESC.
[3] Mr. Anil S. Savadi, Dr. Vinod Hosur.(2019),“comparative
study of rcc, steel and composite structures for
industrial building”,Vol-5Issue-42019IJARIIE-ISSN(O)-
2395-4396.
[4] Parag P. Limbare, Prof. P. A. Dode(2018), “Comparative
study of Reinforced Concrete frame structure & Steel-
Concrete composite structuresubjected to static and
dynamic loading”, International Journal of Engineering
and Applied Sciences (IJEAS) ISSN: 2394-3661, Vol-5.
[5] Mohd Sameer(2017), “Comparative Study of
Conventional R.C.C &
[6] Composite Structure”, International Journal of
Innovative Science and Research Technology ISSN No: -
2456 – 2165.

[7] Dr. S. S. Jamkar, Nileshkumar V. Ganwani(2016),
“Comparative Study of RCC and Steel-Concrete
Composite Building based on Seismic Analysis”,
International Journal of Engineering Research &
Technology (IJERT) ISSN: 2278-0181 Published by,
www.ijert.orgIC-QUEST - 2016ConferenceProceedings.
[8] Renavikar Aniket V, Suryawanshi Yogesh(2015), “
Comparative Study on Analysis and Cost of R.C.C. and
Steel-Composite Structure”, International Journal of
Science and Research (IJSR) ISSN (Online): 2319-7064.
[9] Syed Fahad Ali, S. A. Bhalchandra(2015), “Study on
Seismic Analysis of RCC and Steel-Concrete Composite
Structure and Cost Comparison with Different Support
Conditions”, IJSRD - International Journal for Scientific
Research & Development| Vol. 3, Issue 09, 2015 | ISSN
(online): 2321-0613.
[10] Prof. S. S. Charantimath, Prof. Swapnil B.Cholekar,
Manjunath M. Birje(2014), “Comparative Study on
Structural Parameter of R.C.C and Composite Building”,
Civil and Environmental Research ISSN 2224-5790
(Paper) ISSN 2225-0514 (Online)Vol.6, No.6, 2014.
[11] Shweta A. Wagh, Dr. U. P. Waghe(2014), “
Comparative Study of R.C.C and Steel Concrete
Composite Structures”, ISSN :2248-9622,Vol.4,Issue4(
Version 1), April 2014, pp.369-376.
[12] D. R. Panchal and P. M. Marathe(2011),
“Comparative Study of R.C.C, Steel andComposite(G+30
Storey) Building”,INSTITUTEOF TECHNOLOGY,NIRMA
UNIVERSITY, AHMEDABAD – 382 481, 08-10.
[13] IS: 456, Code of practice for plain and reinforced
concrete code of practice, Bureau of Indian Standards,
New Delhi, 2000.
[14] IS: 1893-2016, Criteria for earthquake resistant
design of structures - general provisions for buildings,
Part 1, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, 2002.
[15] IS: 875, “code of practice for design load(otherthan
earthquake) for buildings and structures” Bureau of
Indian Standards, New Delhi, 2002.
[16] IS: 800, Code of practice for general construction in
steel, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, 2007.
[17] IS: 11384, "Code of practice for composite
construction in structural steel and concrete",Bureauof
Indian Standards, New Delhi, 1985.
[18] IS 13920: 1993. “Indian Standard Code of the
practice for the detailing of Reinforced Concrete
Structures Subjected to Seismic Forces” Bureau of
Indian Standards, New Delhi.

COMPARATIVE STUDY ON ANALYSIS OF STEEL-CONCRETE COMPOSITE STRUCTURE WITH DIFFERENT SHEAR WALL POSITIONS

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to COMPARATIVE STUDY ON ANALYSIS OF STEEL-CONCRETE COMPOSITE STRUCTURE WITH DIFFERENT SHEAR WALL POSITIONS

Similar to COMPARATIVE STUDY ON ANALYSIS OF STEEL-CONCRETE COMPOSITE STRUCTURE WITH DIFFERENT SHEAR WALL POSITIONS (20)

More from IRJET Journal

More from IRJET Journal (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

COMPARATIVE STUDY ON ANALYSIS OF STEEL-CONCRETE COMPOSITE STRUCTURE WITH DIFFERENT SHEAR WALL POSITIONS