International Journal of Engineering Research ISSN:2319-6890)(online),2347-5013(print) Volume No.4, Issue No.10, pp : 539-541 01 Oct. 2015 IJER@2015 Page 539 Comparison between Conventional (Angular) Steel Section and Tubular Steel Section Rakesh R. Nora 1 *, Umarfarukh D. Masud 1 , Maske Ravi G. 2 1 * Department of Civil Engineering, N.K.Orchid College of Engg, Solapur, India, 2 N.K. Orchid College of Engineering and Technology, Solapur, India. Corresponding Email: 1 rakeshnora123@gmail.com 3 ravimaske339@gmail.com Abstract: The main purpose of this study is to regarding the economy, load carrying capacity of structural member. This study involving comparison between sectioned structural members for given requirement of superstructure part of an industrial building. Study reveals that, upto30% to 40% saving in cost is achieved by using tubular sections. Keywords - IS:800-2007, IS:806-1968, IS 875-1987 For tubular section, STAAD Pro 8Vi. I. Introduction This study is about designing components of roof truss by conventional angle section and tubular section. Tubular sections are an economical, efficient and strong alternative to conventional angle sections in steel structure. Advantages of Tubular Section: i. For tubular sections, higher strength to weight ratio could result in up to 30% to 40% saving in steel. ii. Due to the high torsional rigidity and compressive strength tubular section behaves more efficiently than conventional steel section. iii. For dynamic loads tubes have higher frequency of vibration than any other rolled section. iv. Ease of maintenance. v. Free from sharp edges. vi. Ease of fabrication and erection. Objective and scope of present work To determine the effectiveness of tubular sections an industrial shed is considered analysis and design is carried out using conventional steel and tubular steel structure and also cost comparison is made for above sections. II Model Formulation Data for an Industrial Shed: Type of truss:- Fink type of truss. Location:-Aurangabad, Maharashtra, India. Geometry of truss:- span=18m, θ=18.43˚. No. of panel points:- 9. Spacing of purlins=1.17m. Sloping length=7m. Spacing of truss=7m. No of trusses=7 Fig. Geometry of Truss Span = 18 m and Rise = 3 m Fink Type Truss with member numbers Truss Analysis: The steel trusses have been analysed as simply supported on columns. The support at both ends is assumed to be hinged for the purpose of analysis. The truss has been analysed for dead load, live load and wind load according to IS: 875(Part 3)-1987. APPROACH: i) Dead load analysis is done according to IS 875 (Part1) with the help of STAAD-PRO 8Vi ii) Live load analysis is done according to IS 875 (Part2) with the help of STAAD-PRO 8Vi Designing is done according to IS 800, IS806 and STAAD PRO 8Vi. III. LOADING CALCULATION i) DEAD LOAD CALCULATION: (As per IS: 875 Part –I) 1) Self-weight of truss =(L/3+5)*10=0.110KN/m2 2) Self-weight of CGI sheet=0.1127KN/m2 3) Self-weight of fixtures=0.05KN/m2 4) Self-weight of bracing=0.012KN/m2 5) Self-weight of purlin=0.1873KN/m2 Total Dead Load: 1) On intermediate purlin=3.553 KN 2) On end purlin=1.776 KN