www.ijcrt.

org © 2023 IJCRT | Volume 11, Issue 6 June 2023 | ISSN: 2320-2882

STUDY & ANALYSIS OF PRE-ENGINEERED

BUILDING [PEB] WITH RESPECT TO
CONVENTIONAL STEEL BUILDING
Mr. Chetan Tagade1, Prof .A.D.Shende2, Dr.B.S.Ruprai3, Mr. Jigar Shah4
1
Post Graduate (PG) Student, KDK College of Engineering,
Nagpur-09, MH, India.
2
Assistant Professor of KDK College of Engineering,
Nagpur-09, MH, India. Civil Engineering Dept.
3
Assistant Professor of KDK College of Engineering,
Nagpur-09, MH, India. Civil Engineering Dept.
4
Structural Consultant and Architects ISO 9001: 2015,
Certified Company Nagpur-09, MH, India.

Abstract: This work is primarily concerned with the concepts of PEB and CSB. In steel construction, pre-engineered building (PEB)
systems are state-of-the-art for creating cost-effective, ecologically friendly, and long-lasting buildings. The Prefabricated Building
(PEB) concept is a new one-story industrial building concept. Because of its lightweight and cost-effective design, this technology
can be employed in a variety of ways. For buildings with roof trusses, this idea has several advantages over the traditional steel
structure (CSB) concept. The work is a 60 m long, 15 m wide & 60m long, 20m wide industrial building with an assumed roof truss
slope of 5.71 degrees and Bay spacing is 6m. The eave height is 6m. These structures were STAAD pro v8i is used for analysis and
design to compare PEB and conventional steel trusses. PEB design is based on US code AISC 360:10 and CSB design is based on
Indian code IS800:2007. According to IS800:2007 and AISC, the loads considered in the analysis are dead loads, traffic loads, and
wind loads, as well as various combinations. Dead weight per IS: 875 (Part 1)-1987. Payload is obtained based on IS: 875(Part-2)-
1987. Wind loads per IS: 875 (Part 3)-2015.

Keywords: Structure analysis and design, wind load, tapered sections, Pre-engineered Buildings (PEB), Conventional Steel
Buildings (CSB), and STAAD PRO V8i.

I. INTRODUCTION
India is the world's second fastest expanding economy, owing largely to the construction industry, which ranks second only to
agriculture in terms of economic contribution to the country. The construction business has constantly discovered, invented, and
produced new technologies, techniques, and products. One of these is the pre-engineered building (PEB) concept. In contrast to on-
site manufacture, PEB is supplied to your location as a fully finished product from a single provider. It is made up of a basic steel
structural frame with factory finished cladding and roof. The structure was built on site by bolting several buildings together
according to specifications. This approach is not only suitable for pre-planning and prefabrication, but also for its speed and low
weight. The Pre-Engineered Building concept includes technology to provide the best section possible according to optimal
requirements. This approach provides a number of advantages over traditional steel structures (CSB). In this research, Staad Pro's
analysis and design of prefabricated mainframes with widths 12 meters, 14 meters, 16 meters, 18 meters, and 20 meters and an eave
height of 6 m were done to comprehend the behavior of PEB. The design is based on "Indian Standard Recommended Practice for
Weight of Structures and Structures," IS 875:1987 (the parts 1, 2 and 3) and IS 800:2007, "Code of Practice for General Construction
in Steel Structures." Dead, live, and wind loads in various combinations as described in IS are among the load scenarios taken into
account in the modelling. PEB construction is popular these days due to its superiority over traditional concrete and steel
construction. Concrete structures are bulkier and flex less with increased but steel has a seismic weight structures increase structural
flex as well as ductility helps resist seismic forces. The outstanding qualities of concrete and steel are combined in PEB construction,
low cost, rapid construction, high quality control, long-term viability, and so on. As a result, the purpose of this study is to contrast
the G+ two-story Frame RCC with the PEB- frame. Both frames are intended to support identical load combinations. Steel or RCC
sections are used. Used for the beams and column sections. Analyze and design using STAAD PRO software, then compare the
outcomes. Material costs for both building frames are used to calculate the economics. The steel take-off and standard a steel
structure and a pre-engineered structure will be compared as project objectives. To compare pre-engineered structures to typical
steel buildings and to analyses buildings that contain critical design components. To compare the benefits of constructed buildings
compared to conventional steel structures.
IJCRT2306026 International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT) www.ijcrt.org a221
www.ijcrt.org © 2023 IJCRT | Volume 11, Issue 6 June 2023 | ISSN: 2320-2882

1.1 [CSB] CONVENTIONAL STEEL STRUCTURES

The modern steel, world offers beauty, artistry, as well as practicality in numerous ways, contributing to create fresh approaches
to the construction of impressive structures that were previously unimaginable. Give a solid framework. Steel is utilized extensively
in the building sector because of its valuable qualities, including ductility and elasticity. Instead of being crushed or crumbling, it
bends under heavy loads. Its power, low speed, stability, flexibility, and recyclability are all advantages. Make this suitable for use
in structural steel. We can also see that steel has a certain reserve power. The traditional steel structure is stable. These buildings
typically use hot-rolled parts. Components are made in factories close by after that delivered to construction site. Over assembly,
modifications welding and cutting procedures can be used to complete the task. Trusses are commonly used in this design

Fig - 1: PEB vs CSB

1.2 PRE-ENGINEERED BUILDING [PEB]

The Pre-engineering building Links are manufactured here according to customer requirements. Components are manufactured
in a fully transportable condition. This is followed by delivered to construction place, when the assembly procedure begins.
Manufacturing procedure is not carried out on-site. Prefabricated structures are typically used for offices, retail, and warehouses.
Prefabricated buildings are primarily low-rise constructions suitable for use as offices, flats, showrooms, shops, and other similar
applications. Applying the principle of prefabricated construction to low-rise structures is particularly important cost-effective with
time-efficient. Buildings can be built in a fraction the majority of the time that is ordinarily necessary. PEB systems are used
commonly global in commercial and non-residential buildings.

1.3 COMPONENTS OF PEB

 Main Element - The primary load-bearing component of a PEB, which typically consists of a rigid main frame, is its
major component. Columns refer to vertical members, and rafters to horizontal members. These composite parts are
frequently constructed from hot rolled plate.
 Secondary Elements - Purlins, wall flanges, eaves braces, and other cold formed pieces are secondary elements During
the PEB procedure. These are referred to as cold formed. Elements since they do not require any cutting, welding, or
polishing operations. Cold formed elements are made with presses, and MS steel coils are machine pressed into the
desired shape.
 Bracing In order to stabilize a structure against wind, seismic, or other stresses as well as longitudinal cross bracing is
used to provide lateral support. The brace's function is to transfer the frame's horizontal load to the base. Types of
bracing: 01. Cross brace. 02. Brace Angle.
03. Pipe brace. 04. Portal Brace.
Rod bracing is often utilized for buildings with minimal axial loads, and as the building's intricacy grows with cranes
otherwise mezzanines, angular brace and tubes are used.

Fig - 2: Component of PEB

IJCRT2306026 International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT) www.ijcrt.org a222

www.ijcrt.org © 2023 IJCRT | Volume 11, Issue 6 June 2023 | ISSN: 2320-2882

II. METHODOLOGY

 The Structure with 10 bays, walls bay spacing of 6 meters, and a building height of 6 meters, the framework is clear-span
framed and is 60 meters long by 15 meters wide and 20 meters wide by 60 meters long. The design and analysis carried
out in this study work on the 3D PEB structure with a 15-meter and 20-meter widths is done utilizing the Limit State
Method (LSM), which adopts The most important load for a building is wind load.
 In addition, the CSB structure 3D frame with the same dimensions is an analysis and design using an affordable roof truss
and Indian standard code. All three of the structures mentioned above are designs that are then compared to assess
economic production. The hot-rolled section used in CSB and the cold-formed purlins used in PEB are also compared. The
designs are created utilizing Indian and American standards, as well as STADD-Pro.

1) [CSB] Conventional Steel Building

2) [PEB] Pre-Engineered Building

III. BUILDING PARAMETER

 The STADD-pro programmer was used to compare Pre-Engineered Structures (PEB) with Conventional Steel Buildings.
 Analyze and design the structure using I.S 800:2007 (LSM) is a standard code in India. Reduce consumption of steel
and compare the outcomes for different creation procedures.
 Determine the more effective design process.

1 Type of structure Clear-Span industrial structure PEB & CSB

2 Location Nagpur Nagpur
3 Area 960 m2 1200 M2
4 Length 60 m o/o 60 M C/C
5 Width 15 m o/o 15 M C/C
7 Height 6 m o/o 6 M O/O
8 Bay Spacing 10 @ 6.0 m c/c [email protected] M C/C
9 Slope of the PEB Roof 5.71 degrees on the roof 5.71 degree
10 Slope of the CSB Roof 5.71 degrees on the roof 5.71 degree
11 Column Support Fixed Fixed
12 Wind Pressure 44 m/s 44 M/SEC
13 Seismic Zone II II

Table - 1: Building Parameter

Fig -3: Industrial Warehouse Ground Floor Plan

IJCRT2306026 International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT) www.ijcrt.org a223

www.ijcrt.org © 2023 IJCRT | Volume 11, Issue 6 June 2023 | ISSN: 2320-2882

Fig -4: Section of Pre-Engineered Building

Fig -5: Section of Conventional steel Building

IV. LOAD CALCULATION

 The load acting over the course of a structure's full life is crucial in the design of any structure. It must make certain that
the frame is properly undersigned; otherwise, the structure would failed. 875-1987, according to IS, the load exerted on a
structure can be computed. The wind load is recognized as a storage facility structure's frame requires a critical load.

1) DEAD LOAD

 The deceased is identified utilizing the While functioning under the Indian Act (IS 875-1987 Parts 1) a 2D and 3D frame
of the PEB. Self-weight and structural elements, such as insulation, bracing, sag rods, and G.I. roof sheets, among others,
act as Roofs with dead loads. If a dead load operates on a roof, 1.5 kn/m of self-weight is found ignored, is required. In
PEB, the weight is distributed uniformly along each meter of rafter length. Additionally, Indian code IS 800:2007 (LSM)
is used to construct both 3D and 2D PEB frames. In the case of, a dead load is transmitted to the truss a 3D CSB frame.as
and 1.5 KN equivalent point load at a middle panel location and 0.75 KN at an end panel position.

2) LIVE LOAD

 The live load applied to the inaccessible the term roof originates in the Indian standard rule IS 875 (in Part 2) - 1987. It is
anticipated 0.75 KN/m2 for the structure, with a 0.02 KN/m2 drop for each degree rise in rooftop slope above 10 degrees.
A rafter's total equally dispersed load per running meter on the PEB 3D framework is 4.5 KN/m., according to Indian code.
The live load is considered 7.57 KN in middle panel locations, with half of that 4.5 KN on ends equalling 4.5 KN/m on a
CSB 3D structure.

Sr.No. Load PEB Structure CSB Structure

Load on Rafter Load on Rafter
As per IS 875:1987 As per IS 875:1987
1 Dead Load 0.9 kN/m 0.75 kN/m

2 Live Load 4.5 kN/m 3.75 kN/m

Table - 2: Load calculation

IJCRT2306026 International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT) www.ijcrt.org a224

www.ijcrt.org © 2023 IJCRT | Volume 11, Issue 6 June 2023 | ISSN: 2320-2882

3) WIND LOAD

 Wind load is estimated in accordance with IS: 875 (Part3) -2015. The building is in Nagpur, as well as the baseline this
location's wind velocity is 44 m/s., according to the regulation. Wind load is applied to a PEB rafter and sidewall as U.D.L.
Each point is subjected to the point load. Case of CSB, but it is applied as U.D.L. to the sidewall. Tables 3 and 4 show six
different wind combinations affecting the rafter and sidewall.

Column (kN/m) PEB Roof panel (kN/m)

Sr.
Case Wind-ward Lee-ward
No. Left Right
Intermediate Intermediate
1 WL1 1.87 -1.68 -4.11 -2.21
2 WL2 -1.68 1.87 -2.44 -4.11
3 WL3 3.37 -0.19 -2.62 -0.75
4 WL4 -0.19 3.37 -0.75 -2.62
5 WL5 -2.99 -2.62 -3.74 -2.24
6 WL6 -2.62 -2.99 -2.24 -3.74
7 WL7 -1.5 -1.12 -2.24 -0.75
8 WL8 -1.12 -1.5 -0.75 -2.24
Table - 3: Wind calculation for PEB

Column (kN/m) PEB Roof panel (kN/m)

Sr.No. Case Wind-ward Lee-ward
Left Right
Intermediate Intermediate
1 WL1 1.56 -1.4 -3.43 -1.87
2 WL2 -1.4 1.56 -1.87 -3.43
3 WL3 2.8 -0.16 -2.18 -0.62
4 WL4 -0.16 2.8 -0.62 -2.18
5 WL5 -2.49 2.18 -3.12 -1.87
6 WL6 -2.18 -2.49 -1.87 -3.12
7 WL7 -1.25 -0.93 -1.87 -0.62
8 WL8 -0.93 -1.25 -0.62 -1.87
Table - 4: Wind calculation for CSB

V. LOAD COMBINATION

 Load combinations are permitted in accordance with IS: 800-2007 (LSM). The thirteen combinations of loads are taken
into consideration for both system assessments.

VI. STAAD PRO PROCEDURE

 STADD Pro software is used for structure design, analysis, and modelling. This programmer supports a variety of national
standards, including Indian norms. This software is used to model the structure, characteristics, specifications for loads
and loading combinations, applied analysis, and design. The STADD Pro study's utilization percentage shows that the
component's code is adequate. The component is overstressed if the value exceeds one; if it is less than one, it is under
stressed. It is under stress and is suitable for design.

IJCRT2306026 International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT) www.ijcrt.org a225

www.ijcrt.org © 2023 IJCRT | Volume 11, Issue 6 June 2023 | ISSN: 2320-2882

VII. RESULT

Sr.No Particular (IS 800:2007) CSB (IS 800:2007) PEB

1 Length (M) 15 20 15 20
2 Displacement Maximum mm 55.011 94.568 121.2 212.2
3 Axial Force KN/m 126.107 409.657 21.8 32.702
4 Shear Force (sy) KN/m 1.256 1.356 3.556 5.448
5 Bending Moment (Mz) KN/m 9.223 13.009 150.049 211.759
6 Steel Quantity KN 9.436 21.422 4.506 8.207

Table - 5: Calculation for Rafter

450
400 25
350
300 20

Maximum Weight
250
200
150 15
100
Maximum Moment

50 10
0
Length M

Maximum mm

Shear Force (sy)

Bending Moment
Axial Force KN/m
Description

Displacement

5
(Mz) KN.M
KN/m

0
1 2
CSB 9.436
21.422
Sr.No 1 2 3 4 5
PEB 4.506
Discription
8.207

Graph - 1: Rafter Graph - 2: Rafter Weight

Sr.No Particular (IS 800:2007) CSB (IS 800:2007) PEB

1 Length (M) 15 20 15 20
2 Displacement Maximum mm 55.011 94.568 40.42 58.158
3 Axial Force KN/m 21.823 74.137 48.374 59.86
4 Shear Force (sy) KN/m 1.232 2.365 1.225 1.356
5 Bending Moment (Mz) KN/m 43.918 52.174 150.049 211.75
6 Steel Quantity KN 2.548 2.578 2.489 3.088

Table - 6: Column calculation

250
200
150 3.5
100 3
Maximum Moment

50 2.5
0 2
Moment (Mz)
Length M

Maximum mm

Axial Force

Shear Force (sy)

Description

Displacement

1.5
Maximum Moment

KN/m

Bending

KN.M

1
KN/m

0.5
0
1 2
CSB 2.572
Sr.No 1 2 3 4 5
2.578
Discription
PEB 2.495
3.088

Graph - 3: Column Graph - 4: Column Weight

IJCRT2306026 International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT) www.ijcrt.org a226

www.ijcrt.org © 2023 IJCRT | Volume 11, Issue 6 June 2023 | ISSN: 2320-2882

30
25 0.5
20 0.45
15 0.4
10 0.35

Axis Title
0.3
Maximum Moment
5
0.25
0 0.2

Length M

Maximum mm

Bending Moment
Shear Force (sy)
Section size
Description 0.15

Displacement
0.1

(Mz) KN.M
0.05

KN
0
1 2
CSB 0.469
0.469
Sr.No 1 2 3 4 5
PEB 0.372
Discription 0.372

Graph - 5: Purlin Graph - 6: Purlin Weight

Sr.No Particular (IS 800:2007) CSB (IS 800:2007) PEB

1 Length (M) 15 20 15 20
2 Steel Quantity KN 228.94 384.14 179.416 241.324
Table - 7: Total Weight of Steel Building

400
350
Maximum Moment

300
250
200
150
100
50
0
1 2
CSB 228.94
384.14
PEB 179.416
241.324

Graph - 6: Total Weight of Steel Building

VIII. DISCUSSION

The findings of structure software analysis and literature investigations indicate showing The PEB construction is less
expensive and more advantageous compared to the CSB structure.

Sr.No Particular (IS 800:2007) CSB (IS 800:2007) PEB

1 Section Size ISMC100 ISMC100 Z200X60X2.0 Z200X60X2.0
Displacement
2 6 6 6 6
Maximum mm
3 Axial Force KN/m 4.125 4.125 4.256 4.256
Shear Force (sy)
4 16.25 16.25 12.635 12.635
KN/m
Bending Moment
5 25.625 25.625 17.648 17.648
(Mz) KN/m
6 Steel Quantity KN 0.469 0.469 0.372 0.372

IJCRT2306026 International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT) www.ijcrt.org a227

www.ijcrt.org © 2023 IJCRT | Volume 11, Issue 6 June 2023 | ISSN: 2320-2882

IX. CONCLUSION

The displacement of the PEB structure model produced by IS 800:2007 is greater than that of the CSB structure.
Because the structure is lighter than a CSB structure, the support reaction is reduced. PEB has a 15% lower maximal
support reaction than CSB. When compared to a CSB structure, it has reduced axial, shear force, and bending moment.
PEB has a lower maximum axial force than CSB. The building is lighter than a CSB building. Compared to CSB
constructions, PEB structures are 26% lighter. Wind resistance is higher than in a CSB construction. Cold-formed purlin
is 26% lighter than hot-rolled purlin. Steel can be used to design pre-engineered steel structure buildings since it is a low-
cost material that also offers strength, durability, design flexibility, adaptability, and recyclability.

X. REFERENCE

[1] S. S. Mane and Mitaali Jayant Gilbile [September-2020] "A Review of a Comparative Study regarding the Structure
Analysis and Construction of Pre-Engineered Buildings [PEB] and Conventional Steel Buildings [CSB]"” Vol. 9 Issue 09.
[2] Shalu Assis [May 2019] “PEB structure evaluation and contrast to traditional steel buildings of varied specifications"
Volume: 06, Number: 05.
[3] S.B. Bhagate [April 2017] Issue 5, Issue 4, ISSN 2349-4476, "Comparative Study of Traditional Steel Structure and Pre-
Engineered Building."
[4] Abhinav Dewangan, Abhyuday Titiksh and Akshay Sharma [November 2015 ]“ A Comparison of Conventional Steel
Buildings with Pre-Engineered Buildings for Use as Industrial Sheds”,pp.25-28 Volume 7, Issue 5.
[5] Dr. Kuldeep R. Dabhekar, Humanaaz Arif Qureshi and Dr. Isha P. Khedikar [May 2020] "A Comparison of Pre Designed
and Conventional Steel Buildings"” Volume 7, Issue 5.
[6] Sai Lakshmi , M. K. M. V. Ratnam and B.Meena [April -2021] “A Comparison between Pre Engineered Steel Buildings
and Conventional Steel Buildings” Volume 4, Issue 5.
[7] Pornima Naik, Dr.S.H. Mahure [May 2021] “A Comparison of Pre Engineered and Conventional Steel Buildings” Volume
8, Issue3.
[8] M.K. Krishna Chaitanya and M.K. Ratnam [April -2025] “A Comparison between Pre-Engineered and Conventional Steel
Buildings” Volume 8, Issue 8.
[9] L.Maria Subashiniand Shamini Valentina [November 2015] “A Comparison of Pre Engineered vs. Conventional Industrial
Buildings” Volume 8, Issue4.
[10] K. Srinivasa Vengala Rao and G.V. Rama Rao [July 2022] “Evaluation and Development of Pre-Engineered Building and
Common Frames in Comparison” Volume 2, Issue 1.
[11] Aijaz Zende and Aslam Hutagi 1 (Jan. - Feb. 2013) “Analytical and Design Comparison of Pre-Engineered Structures and
Conventional FramesFrames” Volume 5, Issue5.
[12] V. Sanjay Gokul and G. Amar, [2016] " IJEDR's Analysis and Design of Common and Pre-Engineered Buildings (RCC
and Steel), Volume 4, Issue 2.
[13] Hemant Sharma [March 2017] “"A Comparative Study of PEB and CSB Analysis and Design" IJIRST -International
Journal of Innovative Study in Science and Technology Volume 5, Issue 2.
[14] Pradeep V. [March 2014] “Comparative investigation into pre-engineered and ordinary industrial buildings".: an
International Journal of Engineer Trends and Technologies (IJETT) -Volume-9 Number-1.
[15] Manoj kumar, Dr. Pankaj Singh [2018] “A comparison of warehouse structures in pre-engineered and conventional steel
buildings”. (IRJET) Volume-7 | Issue-3.

IJCRT2306026 International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT) www.ijcrt.org a228