International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056 Volume: 06 Issue: 07 | July 2019 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072 © 2019, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.211 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 2876 Comparative Study of Steel, RCC and Composite frame Building Samadhan Jagadale 1 , M.R. Shiyekar 2 , Y.M. Ghugal 3 1 M.Tech Student of Structural Engineering, Applied Mechanics Department, Government College of Engineering Karad, Maharastra 2 Adjunct Professor Applied Mechanics Department, Government College of Engineering Karad, Maharastra 3 Head, Applied Mechanics Department, Government College of Engineering Karad, Maharastra, India. ----------------------------------------------------------------------***--------------------------------------------------------------------- Abstract – Steel-concrete composite construction is a relatively a new concept for the construction industries. R.C.C is no longer economical because of their increased dead load and hazardous formwork; also Steel is not economical for high rise building frames due to less stiffness and more ductility, so steel concrete composite construction has got wide acceptance due to combine positive properties of both Steel and Concrete. This paper reviews that the composite frames are best suited for high rise buildings compared to that of steel and R.C.C. frame buildings. The paper includes comparative study of seismic performance of a Steel, R.C.C. and Composite (G+7) Storey frames. RCC, Steel and Composite Building frame situated in earthquake zone V. Equivalent Dynamic method is used for seismic analysis. ETAB 2015 software is used and results are compared. Key Words: Comparative Study, Steel frame, RCC frame Composite frame, Seismic analysis, Comparison Aspects, ETABS2015. 1.0 INTRODUCTION As compared to other developing countries the use of steel for construction purpose is very less in India. Steel structural members are prone to local and lateral buckling. Concrete structural members are generally thick and less likely to buckle but they are subjected to creep and shrinkage with time. Steel is more ductile material and so it can absorb more shocks and impact loadings. Thus, Composite structure is made to take the benefit of both steel and concrete materials. It is shown that the performance of building during an earthquake depends upon several factors like stiffness, ductility, lateral strength and simple and regular configuration. Earthquake has enforced the structural engineers to look for the alternate method of construction. Use of composite material is of particular interest, due to its significant prospective in improving the overall performance through rather modest alterations in manufacturing and constructional technologies. The study includes comparative study of R.C.C. and Steel with Composite (G+7) multi-storey frames using dynamic method of analysis by ETABS2015 software. Comparative study includes deflections, bending moments in x & y direction, axial force & shear force in columns & beams in composite with respect to R.C.C. and Steel sections, Also the comparison of masses of R.C.C., Steel and composite frames is carried out. 2. ELEMENTS OF COMPOSITE STRUCTURE 2.1. Shear Connectors Shear connections are crucial for steel concrete construction as they integrate the compression capacity of supported concrete slab with supporting steel beams to improve the load carrying capacity as well as overall rigidity. Fig. 2.1.a Types of Shear Connectors 2.2. Composite deck slab Composite steel deck floors consist of a profiled steel deck with a concrete topping. Included in the concrete is some light welded mesh reinforcement which acts to control cracking, to resist longitudinal shear and, in the case of fire, to act as tensile reinforcement. Indentations in the profiled deck allow the concrete and steel to bond and share load. Composite action between the supporting beams and the concrete is created by welding shear studs through the deck onto the top flange of the beam. Composite slabs with profiled decking are unsuitable when there is heavy concentrated loading or dynamic loading in structures such as bridges. Fig. 2.2.a Composite Deck Slab