Economic and Functional Feasibility of Concrete and Steel Composite Column Building Structure

Umair Ahmed; Assad Rashid; Zafar Baig

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ajce.20210905.11

| Peer-Reviewed

Economic and Functional Feasibility of Concrete and Steel Composite Column Building Structure

Umair Ahmed, Assad Rashid, Zafar Baig

Published in American Journal of Civil Engineering (Volume 9, Issue 5)

Received: 19 August 2021 Accepted: 3 September 2021 Published: 16 September 2021

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

Modern day construction is widely influenced using Steel-Concrete composite columns. The rapid growth in Steel-Concrete composite construction has significantly reduced the use of conventional Reinforced Cement Concrete (R.C.C) as well as other steel construction practices. Steel-Concrete composite construction gained an extensive receiving around the globe. Considering the fact that R.C.C construction is most suitable and economic for low-rise construction so it is used in framing system in most structures. However; increased dead load, span restriction, less stiffness and risky formwork makes R.C.C construction uneconomical and not suitable when it comes to intermediate to high-rise buildings. One Basement and 11 storeys existing building has been analyzed and comparison has been made between R.CC structure and concrete steel composite columns. Equivalent Static non -linear analysis was performed in X and Y direction by using Etabs 2017 software which results that encased composite columns construction cost is more than R.C.C columns but on the other hand encased composite columns has more floor area, the storey shear is more, story drift is less, storey displacement is less, in conventional R.C.C structures, storey shear is less in R.C.C conventional structure. Therefore; this research aims to analyze and to learn This research is an effort to learn cost effectiveness, increased or decreased stiffness and change on functionality of composite construction for intermediate to high-rise buildings in Pakistan. A Base + Ground +11 storey commercial building was selected for this study. Comparison is done between conventional R.C.C structure and Encased Composite column structure. Equivalent Static non-linear analysis was performed using ETABS 2017 software. Although for Base + Ground + 11 storey building the construction cost is 7.7% more than R.C.C structure but encased composite column building has 13.013% more floor area. This increased floor area will help to settle the cost difference between two structures.

Published in	American Journal of Civil Engineering (Volume 9, Issue 5)
DOI	10.11648/j.ajce.20210905.11
Page(s)	138-154
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Composite Structures, Concrete Steel Composite Column, Composite Structure Behavior, Modeling of Composite Columns

References

[1]	Campian, C., Nagy, Z., & Pop, M. (2015). Behavior of fully encased steel-concrete composite columns subjected to monotonic and cyclic loading. Procedia engineering, 117, 439-451.
[2]	Chen, C.-C., Li, J.-M., & Weng, C.-C. (2005). Experimental behaviour and strength of concrete-encased composite beam–columns with T-shaped steel section under cyclic loading. Journal of constructional steel research, 61 (7), 863-881.
[3]	Deierlein, G. G., & Noguchi, H. (2004). Overview of US–Japan research on the seismic design of composite reinforced concrete and steel moment frame structures. Journal of Structural engineering, 130 (2), 361-367.
[4]	Begum, M., SERAJUS, S. M., TAUHID, B. K. N., & Ahmed, W. (2013). Cost analysis of steel concrete composite structures in Bangladesh.
[5]	Kumawat, M. S., & Kalurkar, L. (2014). Cost Analysis of Steel-Concrete Composite Structure. International Journal of structural and Civil Engineering Research) ISSN, 158-167.
[6]	Uchida, N., & Tohki, H. (1997). Design of high-rise building using round tubular steel composite columns. Paper presented at the Composite construction-conventional and innovative. International conference.
[7]	Ellobody, E., & Young, B. (2011). Numerical simulation of concrete encased steel composite columns. Journal of constructional steel research, 67 (2), 211-222.
[8]	Johnson, R. P. (2018). Composite Structures of Steel and Concrete: beams, slabs, columns and frames for buildings: John Wiley & Sons.
[9]	Wagh, S. A., & Waghe, U. (2014). Comparative Study of RCC and Steel Concrete Composite Structures. Journal of Engineering Research and Applications, ISSN, 2248-9622.
[10]	Panchal, D., & Marathe, P. (2011). Comparative Study of RCC, steel and composite (G+ 30 storey) building. Nirma University, Ahmedabad, India.
[11]	Committee, A., & Standardization, I. O. f. (2008). Building code requirements for structural concrete (ACI 318-08) and commentary.
[12]	Committee, A. (2002). Building code requirements for structural concrete: (ACI 318-02) and commentary (ACI 318R-02).
[13]	Cusson, D., & Paultre, P. (1994). High-strength concrete columns confined by rectangular ties. Journal of Structural engineering, 120 (3), 783-804.
[14]	Collins, M. P., Mitchell, D., & MacGregor, J. G. (1993). Structural design considerations for high-strength concrete. Concrete international, 15 (5), 27-34.
[15]	Ahmad, S., & Shah, S. P. (1982). Stress-strain curves of concrete confined by spiral reinforcement. Paper presented at the Journal Proceedings.
[16]	Mirza, S. A., & Skrabek, B. (1992). Statistical analysis of slender composite beam-column strength. Journal of Structural engineering, 118 (5), 1312-1332.
[17]	Hajjar, J. F., & Gourley, B. C. (1996). Representation of concrete-filled steel tube cross-section strength. Journal of Structural engineering, 122 (11), 1327-1336.
[18]	El-Tawil, S., & Deierlein, G. G. (1999). Strength and ductility of concrete encased composite columns. Journal of Structural engineering, 125 (9), 1009-1019.
[19]	Agrawal, A., Sharma, A., & Pandey, M. Review Paper on Seismic Analysis of RCC and Steel Composite Building.
[20]	Liang, Q. Q. (2014). Analysis and design of steel and composite structures: CRC Press.
[21]	Ambe, V., & Maru, S. Life Cycle Cost Assessment of Multistory Steel Concrete Composite Building.
[22]	Shashikala, K., & Itti, S. (2013). Comparative Study of RCC and Composite Multi-storeyed Buildings. International Journal of Engineering and Innovative Technology (IJEIT) Vol, 3.
[23]	Tedia, A., & Maru, S. (2014). Cost, Analysis and Design of Steel-Concrete Composite Structure RCC Structure. IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering (IOSR-JMCE), 11 (1), 54-59.
[24]	Bridge, R. Q. (2011). Design of Composite Columns-Steel, Concrete, or Composite Approach? Composite Construction in Steel and Concrete VI (pp. 276-290).
[25]	CEN, E. (1994). 1-1;“Eurocode 4: Design of composite steel and concrete structures-Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings”. European standard.
[26]	Code, U. B. (1997). UBC-97. Paper presented at the Structural engineering design provisions. International conference of building officials, Whittier, California.
[27]	Code, U. B. (1997). UBC-97. Structural engineering design provisions. International conference of building officials, Whittier, California.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Umair Ahmed, Assad Rashid, Zafar Baig. (2021). Economic and Functional Feasibility of Concrete and Steel Composite Column Building Structure. American Journal of Civil Engineering, 9(5), 138-154. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajce.20210905.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Umair Ahmed; Assad Rashid; Zafar Baig. Economic and Functional Feasibility of Concrete and Steel Composite Column Building Structure. Am. J. Civ. Eng. 2021, 9(5), 138-154. doi: 10.11648/j.ajce.20210905.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Umair Ahmed, Assad Rashid, Zafar Baig. Economic and Functional Feasibility of Concrete and Steel Composite Column Building Structure. Am J Civ Eng. 2021;9(5):138-154. doi: 10.11648/j.ajce.20210905.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ajce.20210905.11,
  author = {Umair Ahmed and Assad Rashid and Zafar Baig},
  title = {Economic and Functional Feasibility of Concrete and Steel Composite Column Building Structure},
  journal = {American Journal of Civil Engineering},
  volume = {9},
  number = {5},
  pages = {138-154},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ajce.20210905.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajce.20210905.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajce.20210905.11},
  abstract = {Modern day construction is widely influenced using Steel-Concrete composite columns. The rapid growth in Steel-Concrete composite construction has significantly reduced the use of conventional Reinforced Cement Concrete (R.C.C) as well as other steel construction practices. Steel-Concrete composite construction gained an extensive receiving around the globe. Considering the fact that R.C.C construction is most suitable and economic for low-rise construction so it is used in framing system in most structures. However; increased dead load, span restriction, less stiffness and risky formwork makes R.C.C construction uneconomical and not suitable when it comes to intermediate to high-rise buildings. One Basement and 11 storeys existing building has been analyzed and comparison has been made between R.CC structure and concrete steel composite columns. Equivalent Static non -linear analysis was performed in X and Y direction by using Etabs 2017 software which results that encased composite columns construction cost is more than R.C.C columns but on the other hand encased composite columns has more floor area, the storey shear is more, story drift is less, storey displacement is less, in conventional R.C.C structures, storey shear is less in R.C.C conventional structure. Therefore; this research aims to analyze and to learn This research is an effort to learn cost effectiveness, increased or decreased stiffness and change on functionality of composite construction for intermediate to high-rise buildings in Pakistan. A Base + Ground +11 storey commercial building was selected for this study. Comparison is done between conventional R.C.C structure and Encased Composite column structure. Equivalent Static non-linear analysis was performed using ETABS 2017 software. Although for Base + Ground + 11 storey building the construction cost is 7.7% more than R.C.C structure but encased composite column building has 13.013% more floor area. This increased floor area will help to settle the cost difference between two structures.},
 year = {2021}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Economic and Functional Feasibility of Concrete and Steel Composite Column Building Structure
AU  - Umair Ahmed
AU  - Assad Rashid
AU  - Zafar Baig
Y1  - 2021/09/16
PY  - 2021
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajce.20210905.11
DO  - 10.11648/j.ajce.20210905.11
T2  - American Journal of Civil Engineering
JF  - American Journal of Civil Engineering
JO  - American Journal of Civil Engineering
SP  - 138
EP  - 154
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2330-8737
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajce.20210905.11
AB  - Modern day construction is widely influenced using Steel-Concrete composite columns. The rapid growth in Steel-Concrete composite construction has significantly reduced the use of conventional Reinforced Cement Concrete (R.C.C) as well as other steel construction practices. Steel-Concrete composite construction gained an extensive receiving around the globe. Considering the fact that R.C.C construction is most suitable and economic for low-rise construction so it is used in framing system in most structures. However; increased dead load, span restriction, less stiffness and risky formwork makes R.C.C construction uneconomical and not suitable when it comes to intermediate to high-rise buildings. One Basement and 11 storeys existing building has been analyzed and comparison has been made between R.CC structure and concrete steel composite columns. Equivalent Static non -linear analysis was performed in X and Y direction by using Etabs 2017 software which results that encased composite columns construction cost is more than R.C.C columns but on the other hand encased composite columns has more floor area, the storey shear is more, story drift is less, storey displacement is less, in conventional R.C.C structures, storey shear is less in R.C.C conventional structure. Therefore; this research aims to analyze and to learn This research is an effort to learn cost effectiveness, increased or decreased stiffness and change on functionality of composite construction for intermediate to high-rise buildings in Pakistan. A Base + Ground +11 storey commercial building was selected for this study. Comparison is done between conventional R.C.C structure and Encased Composite column structure. Equivalent Static non-linear analysis was performed using ETABS 2017 software. Although for Base + Ground + 11 storey building the construction cost is 7.7% more than R.C.C structure but encased composite column building has 13.013% more floor area. This increased floor area will help to settle the cost difference between two structures.
VL  - 9
IS  - 5
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Umair Ahmed

Department of Civil Engineering, Capital University of Science and Technology, Islamabad, Pakistan
Assad Rashid

Department of Civil Engineering, University of Management and Technology, Lahore, Pakistan
Zafar Baig

Department of Civil Engineering, University of Management and Technology, Lahore, Pakistan

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Umair Ahmed, Assad Rashid, Zafar Baig. (2021). Economic and Functional Feasibility of Concrete and Steel Composite Column Building Structure. American Journal of Civil Engineering, 9(5), 138-154. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajce.20210905.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Umair Ahmed; Assad Rashid; Zafar Baig. Economic and Functional Feasibility of Concrete and Steel Composite Column Building Structure. Am. J. Civ. Eng. 2021, 9(5), 138-154. doi: 10.11648/j.ajce.20210905.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Umair Ahmed, Assad Rashid, Zafar Baig. Economic and Functional Feasibility of Concrete and Steel Composite Column Building Structure. Am J Civ Eng. 2021;9(5):138-154. doi: 10.11648/j.ajce.20210905.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ajce.20210905.11,
  author = {Umair Ahmed and Assad Rashid and Zafar Baig},
  title = {Economic and Functional Feasibility of Concrete and Steel Composite Column Building Structure},
  journal = {American Journal of Civil Engineering},
  volume = {9},
  number = {5},
  pages = {138-154},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ajce.20210905.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajce.20210905.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajce.20210905.11},
  abstract = {Modern day construction is widely influenced using Steel-Concrete composite columns. The rapid growth in Steel-Concrete composite construction has significantly reduced the use of conventional Reinforced Cement Concrete (R.C.C) as well as other steel construction practices. Steel-Concrete composite construction gained an extensive receiving around the globe. Considering the fact that R.C.C construction is most suitable and economic for low-rise construction so it is used in framing system in most structures. However; increased dead load, span restriction, less stiffness and risky formwork makes R.C.C construction uneconomical and not suitable when it comes to intermediate to high-rise buildings. One Basement and 11 storeys existing building has been analyzed and comparison has been made between R.CC structure and concrete steel composite columns. Equivalent Static non -linear analysis was performed in X and Y direction by using Etabs 2017 software which results that encased composite columns construction cost is more than R.C.C columns but on the other hand encased composite columns has more floor area, the storey shear is more, story drift is less, storey displacement is less, in conventional R.C.C structures, storey shear is less in R.C.C conventional structure. Therefore; this research aims to analyze and to learn This research is an effort to learn cost effectiveness, increased or decreased stiffness and change on functionality of composite construction for intermediate to high-rise buildings in Pakistan. A Base + Ground +11 storey commercial building was selected for this study. Comparison is done between conventional R.C.C structure and Encased Composite column structure. Equivalent Static non-linear analysis was performed using ETABS 2017 software. Although for Base + Ground + 11 storey building the construction cost is 7.7% more than R.C.C structure but encased composite column building has 13.013% more floor area. This increased floor area will help to settle the cost difference between two structures.},
 year = {2021}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Economic and Functional Feasibility of Concrete and Steel Composite Column Building Structure
AU  - Umair Ahmed
AU  - Assad Rashid
AU  - Zafar Baig
Y1  - 2021/09/16
PY  - 2021
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajce.20210905.11
DO  - 10.11648/j.ajce.20210905.11
T2  - American Journal of Civil Engineering
JF  - American Journal of Civil Engineering
JO  - American Journal of Civil Engineering
SP  - 138
EP  - 154
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2330-8737
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajce.20210905.11
AB  - Modern day construction is widely influenced using Steel-Concrete composite columns. The rapid growth in Steel-Concrete composite construction has significantly reduced the use of conventional Reinforced Cement Concrete (R.C.C) as well as other steel construction practices. Steel-Concrete composite construction gained an extensive receiving around the globe. Considering the fact that R.C.C construction is most suitable and economic for low-rise construction so it is used in framing system in most structures. However; increased dead load, span restriction, less stiffness and risky formwork makes R.C.C construction uneconomical and not suitable when it comes to intermediate to high-rise buildings. One Basement and 11 storeys existing building has been analyzed and comparison has been made between R.CC structure and concrete steel composite columns. Equivalent Static non -linear analysis was performed in X and Y direction by using Etabs 2017 software which results that encased composite columns construction cost is more than R.C.C columns but on the other hand encased composite columns has more floor area, the storey shear is more, story drift is less, storey displacement is less, in conventional R.C.C structures, storey shear is less in R.C.C conventional structure. Therefore; this research aims to analyze and to learn This research is an effort to learn cost effectiveness, increased or decreased stiffness and change on functionality of composite construction for intermediate to high-rise buildings in Pakistan. A Base + Ground +11 storey commercial building was selected for this study. Comparison is done between conventional R.C.C structure and Encased Composite column structure. Equivalent Static non-linear analysis was performed using ETABS 2017 software. Although for Base + Ground + 11 storey building the construction cost is 7.7% more than R.C.C structure but encased composite column building has 13.013% more floor area. This increased floor area will help to settle the cost difference between two structures.
VL  - 9
IS  - 5
ER  -

Copy | Download