See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: [Link]

net/publication/348298158

STUDY ON DIAGRID STRUCTURE OF MULTISTOREY BUILDING

Research · April 2017

CITATION READS

1 3,164

2 authors, including:

Pradeep Pandey
RK University
6 PUBLICATIONS 1 CITATION

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Pradeep Pandey on 07 January 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 e-ISSN (O): 2348-4470
Scientific Journal of Impact Factor (SJIF): 4.72
p-ISSN (P): 2348-6406

International Journal of Advance Engineering and Research

Development
Volume 4, Issue 4, April -2017

STUDY ON DIAGRID STRUCTURE OF MULTISTOREY BUILDING

Ravi Sorathiya1,Asst. Prof. Pradeep Pandey2
1
Post Graduate Student, Department Of Civil Engineering, School Of Engineering RK University, Gujarat, India
2
Aassistant Professor, Department Of Civil Engineering, School Of Engineering RK University, Gujarat India,

Abstract—Construction of multi‐storey building is rapidly increasing throughout the world. . Recently the diagrid
structural system has been widely used for tall buildings due to the structural efficiency and aesthetic potential provided
by the unique geometric configuration of the [Link] days the latest trend of technology in diagrid structures is
evolving. The diagrid structures are buildings with diagonal grids in the periphery at a particular angle and in modules
across the height of the building. Diagrid structure uses triangulated grids which are in place of vertical columns in the
periphery. Thus, systems that are more efficient in achieving stiffness against lateral loads are considered better options
in designing tall buildings.
This paper presents a stiffness-based design methodology for determining preliminary member sizes of r.c.c diagrid
structures for tall buildings. A G+24, G+36,G+48,G+60 storey RCC building with plan size 18 m × 18 m located in
surat wind and seismic is considered for analysis. [Link] software is used for modelling and analysis of structural
members. All structural members are designed as per IS 456:2000 and load combinations of seismic forces are
considered as per IS 1893(Part 1): 2002. Comparison of analysis results in terms of beam displacement, Storey Drift,
Bending Moment. This cause economical design of diagrid structure compared to conventional structure.

Keywords-Diagrid building, Diagrid Angel, [Link], Displacement, Storey Drift, Bending Moment

I. INTRODUCTION

The development and growth of tall buildings around the world in populated cities is increasing day by day. It is due to
continuous urban sprawl, availability of more rental areas with less environmental damage, constructional cost efficiency
and the need to preserve the agricultural land. Diagrid – Diagonalised grid structures is one of the emerging innovative
concepts to design tall buildings. Diagrid not only gives more stiffness but also resist the lateral forces (Due to wind and
seismic) and gravity load by axial action. It is a particular form of space truss consisting of perimeter grid made up of
triangular structural system. Diagrid- a word formed by combination of “diagonal” and “grid” designated Diagrid as a
totally new trend.
Diagrid is a particular form of space truss consisting of perimeter grid made up of series of triangular module. This
module can also be of diamond shaped. The important point for a diagrid structure system is selection of material for the
structure.
The materials available for the construction of diagrid are:-
1. Steel
2. Concrete
3. Timber

1.1 Diagrid System

A diagrid structure is a type of structural system consisting of diagonal grids connected through horizontal rings which
create an elegant and redundant structure that is especially efficient for high-rise buildings. A diagrid structure is
different from braced frame systems, since diagonals as main structural elements participate in carrying gravity load in
addition to carrying lateral load due to their triangulated configuration, which eliminates the need for vertical columns.
The column free structure of a diagrid system offers several advantages such as high architectural flexibility and
elegancy, and enormous day lighting due to its large free surface.

1.2 Diagrid Angel

The structural design of diagrid structure is greatly influenced by the angle of diagonals. With the deviation of angle of
diagonals from optimum condition, not only the required amount of steel increases significantly but also storey drift of
structure, storey shear and top storey displacement changes. Therefore, it is very necessary for an Engineer to obtain the
optimum angle of diagonals in diagrid structure in order to obtain a safe structural design of diagrid.
0 0
For maximum bending rigidity, the angle made by column should be 90 and for maximum shear rigidity, it is 35 . It is
expected that optimum angle of diagrid falls in this range. bending beams whereas short buildings with low aspect ratio
behave like shear beams. Thus, it is expected that, increase in building height increases the optimal angle of diagonals.

@IJAERD-2017, All rights Reserved 512

 International Journal of Advance Engineering and Research Development (IJAERD)
Volume 4, Issue 4, April -2017, e-ISSN: 2348 - 4470, print-ISSN: 2348-6406

Figure 1 Show in Diagrid Structure

1.3 Objective Of Study

 The Main objective of this study is to understand the concept of diagrid structural system.
 The objective of this study is to understand the analysis and design methodology of diagrid structure using
[Link] v8i ss5 software.
 To determine the various optimum angle and various storey for diagrid system.
 Analysis of building wind analysis.
 Analysis of building frames considering seismic analysis.
 Comparison between conventional building and diagrid building.

II METHODOLOGY AND DATA COLLECTION

The design methodology is applied to a set of diagrid structures G+24, G+36, G+48 and G+60 stories tall, The diagrid
structure of each storey height is designed with diagonals of various uniform angles as well as diagonals of gradually
changing angles over the building height in order to determine the optimal grid geometry of the structure within a certain
height range. The building’s typical plan dimensions are 18x 18 meters with typical storey heights of 3 meters. The
structures are assumed to be in Surat.

2.1 Geometry And Structural Data

(1) Plan dimension-18x18 m
(2) Storey height-3 m
(3) Diagrid angel-57º,63º,69º,73º
(4) No. of storey- G+24, G+36, G+48 and G+60
(5) Diagrid storey module-2,3,4 and 6 storey
(6) The dead load taken -8.75 KN/m
Floor finish-2 KN/m²
(7) Live load-floor finish-2.5 KN/m²
(8) Slab thickness-200 mm
(9) Support- Pinned support
(10) Characteristic strength of concrete: 30 N/mm2
(11) Characteristic strength of steel: 415 N/mm2

@IJAERD-2017, All rights Reserved 513

 International Journal of Advance Engineering and Research Development (IJAERD)
Volume 4, Issue 4, April -2017, e-ISSN: 2348 - 4470, print-ISSN: 2348-6406

2.2 Load Combination Of Wind And Seismic Load

(1) 1.5(DL+LL)
(2) 1.5(DL+WLX+VE) and 1.5(DL+ELX+VE)
(3) 1.5(DL-WLZ-VE) and 1.5(DL-ELZ-VE)
(4) 1.5(DL+LL+WLX+VE) and 1.5(DL+LL+ELX+VE)
(5) 1.5(DL+LL-WLZ-VE) and 1.5(DL+LL-ELZ-VE)
(6) 1.2(DL+LL-WLX-VE) and 1.2(DL+LL-ELX-VE)
(7) 1.2(DL+LL+WLZ+VE) and 1.2(DL+LL+ELZ+VE)
(8) 0.9(DL+LL+WLX+VE) and0.9(DL+LL+ELX+VE)
(9) 0.9(DL+LL-WLZ-VE)and 0.9(DL+LL-ELZ-VE)

2.3 Wind Design

Vz = vb kl k2 k3
Vz = design wind speed at any height z in m/s;
k1 = probability factor (risk coefficient )
k2 = terrain, height and structure size factor and
k3 = topography factor

2.4 Seismic Design

Ah= Z I Sa/2 R g

Z=zone factor
I= importance factor depending upon the functional use of the structures, characterized by hazardous consequences of
its failure, post-earthquake functional needs, historical value, or economic importance
R= Response reduction factor, depending on the perceived seismic damage performance of the structure, characterised by
ductile or brittle deformations. However, the ratio (I/R)shall not be greater than 1.0
Sa/g= Average response acceleration coefficient

Table 1 Seismic Parameters

NO SEISMIC PARAMETERS
1 Zone factor(zone-3) 0.16
2 Type of soil Medium
3 Importance factor 1
4 Response reduction factor 5(SMRF)

2.5 Models Generation

There are four different story of building analyzed

(1) G+24 Storey

(2) G+36 Storey
(3) G+48 Storey
(4) G+60 Storey

And in each storey there are five types model generation

(1) 57° diagrid angel

(2) 63° diagrid angel
(3) 69° diagrid angel
(4) 73° diagrid angel
(5) Conventional building

And all these models are analyzed for wind analysis IS code 875(PART 3):1987 and seismic analysis IS
1893(part1):2002

@IJAERD-2017, All rights Reserved 514

 International Journal of Advance Engineering and Research Development (IJAERD)
Volume 4, Issue 4, April -2017, e-ISSN: 2348 - 4470, print-ISSN: 2348-6406

Table 2 Storey module of diagrid angel

Storey module Diagrid Angel Storey

2 Storey 57° \
3 Storey 63° G+24 G+36 G+48 G+60
4 Storey 69°
6 storey 73°

Table 3 Preliminary sizes in mm for member G+24 Storey

Storey Element size in mm

Beams Column Diagrid
G+24 Storey 450 X 800 750 X 750 650 X 650
450 X 600 650 X 650 -
300 X 600 600 X 600 -

Table 4 Preliminary sizes in mm for member G+36 Storey

Storey Element size in mm

Beam Column Diagrid
450 X 450 800 X 800 650 X 650
G+36 Storey 450 X 600 750 X 750 -
300 X 600 700 X 700 -
300 X 450 650 X 650 -
300 X 400 600 X 600 -

Table 5 Preliminary sizes in mm for member G+48 Storey

Storey Elements in mm
G+48 Storey Beam Column Diagrid
450 X 800 900 X 900 650 X 650
450 X 600 850 X 850 -
300 X 600 800 X 800 -
300 X 450 750 X 750 -
300 X 400 700 X 700 -
300 X 350 650 X 650 -

Table 6 Preliminary sizes in mm for member G+60 Storey

Storey Elements in mm
Beam Column Diagrid
450 X 800 950 X 950 650 X 650
450 X 600 900 X 900 -
G+60 Storey 350 X 600 850 X 850 -
300 X 600 800 X 800 -
300 X 450 750 X 750 -
300 X 400 700 X 700 -
300 X 350 650 X 650 -

III RESULTS

3.1 Storey Displacement

There are G+24,G+36,G+48,G+60 storey wind and seismic analysis max. displacement various diagrid angel and
conventional buildingl. As per IS 456-2000 in clauses 23.2 page no. 37 permissible displacement should not exceed
span/250.

A G+24 Storey

@IJAERD-2017, All rights Reserved 515

 International Journal of Advance Engineering and Research Development (IJAERD)
Volume 4, Issue 4, April -2017, e-ISSN: 2348 - 4470, print-ISSN: 2348-6406

45
40
35
Displacement in mm

30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Conventional
57° Angel 63° Angel 69° Angel 73° Angel
building
WIND 33.835 29.953 29.199 30.891 33.43
SEISMIC 35.129 33.001 32.329 36.186 39.023

B G+36 Storey

80

70

60
Displacement in mm

50

40

30

20

10

0
Conventional
57° Angel 63° Angel 69° Angel 73° Angel
building
WIND 69.507 55.037 53.829 55.334 67.061
SEISMIC 67.759 62.659 60.917 63.892 74.619

C G+48 Storey

@IJAERD-2017, All rights Reserved 516

 International Journal of Advance Engineering and Research Development (IJAERD)
Volume 4, Issue 4, April -2017, e-ISSN: 2348 - 4470, print-ISSN: 2348-6406

140

120

100
displacement in mm

80

60

40

20

0
Conventional
57° Angel 63° Angel 69° Angel 73° Angel
Building
WIND 128.153 89.004 87.815 90.864 120.141
SEISMIC 112.866 104.031 100.943 103.324 125.179

D G+60 Storey

250

200
displacement in mm

150

100

50

0
Conventional
57° Angel 63° Angel 69° Angel 73° Angel
Building
WIND 234.131 145.679 144.683 149.405 204.839
SEISMIC 183.278 231.849 163.357 163.464 195.731

3.2 Storey Drift

There are G+24,G+36,G+48,G+60 storey wind and seismic analysis max. displacement various diagrid angel and
conventional buildingl. As per IS 1893(Part 1)-2002 in clauses 7.11.1 page no. 27 permissible Storey Drift should not
exceeds 0.004 times the total height of the building.

A G+24 Storey Wind Analysis

@IJAERD-2017, All rights Reserved 517

 International Journal of Advance Engineering and Research Development (IJAERD)
Volume 4, Issue 4, April -2017, e-ISSN: 2348 - 4470, print-ISSN: 2348-6406

Wind Analysis
1.6
1.4
1.2
Storey Drift in cm

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
4 Storey 8 Storey 12 Storey 16 Storey 20 Storey 24 Storey
57° 0.3278 0.5026 0.7045 0.9115 1.1134 1.3011
63° 0.1765 0.2663 0.3682 0.4698 0.5662 0.6508
69° 0.1966 0.2987 0.4112 0.5194 0.6197 0.7063
73° 0.2349 0.3552 0.4915 0.6213 0.7372 0.8182
Conventional 0.3509 0.5799 0.8618 1.1162 1.3496 1.5173

B G+24 Storey Seismic Analysis

Seismic Analysis
3

2.5
Storey Drift in cm

1.5

0.5

0
4 Storey 8 Storey 12 Storey 16 Storey 20 Storey 24 Storey
57° 0.2921 0.4925 0.7462 1.0234 1.3045 1.5676
63° 0.2976 0.4948 0.7434 1.0074 1.2722 1.5071
69° 0.3125 0.5214 0.7783 1.0466 1.309 1.5382
73° 0.3518 0.5858 0.8789 1.1841 1.4779 1.6948
Conventional 0.4154 0.7519 1.2231 1.6942 2.1616 2.5033

@IJAERD-2017, All rights Reserved 518

 International Journal of Advance Engineering and Research Development (IJAERD)
Volume 4, Issue 4, April -2017, e-ISSN: 2348 - 4470, print-ISSN: 2348-6406

C G+36 Storey Wind Analysis

Wind Analysis
4.5
4
3.5
Storey Drift in cm

3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36
Storey Storey Storey Storey Storey Storey storey Storey Storey
57° 0.4238 0.7363 1.1341 1.5835 2.0701 2.5733 3.0819 3.5814 4.0657
63° 0.2278 0.3878 0.59 0.8122 1.0489 1.2887 1.5309 1.7641 1.9856
69° 0.3004 0.5578 0.8994 1.2924 1.7284 2.1829 2.6461 3.0922 3.5088
73° 0.3025 0.5101 0.7726 1.0464 1.3344 1.6061 1.8854 2.1366 2.35
Conventional 0.4407 0.8041 1.2946 1.8027 2.3508 2.8791 3.4202 3.885 4.2689

D G+36 Storey Seismic Analysis

Seismic Analysis
6

5
Storey Drift in cm

0
12 16 20 24 28 32 36
4 Storey 8 Storey
Storey Storey storey Storey Storey Storey Storey
57° 0.2812 0.5343 0.8791 1.29 1.7542 2.2496 2.7622 3.2703 3.7619
63° 0.2863 0.533 0.8684 1.2579 1.6943 2.153 2.6266 3.0885 3.5261
69° 0.3004 0.5578 0.8994 1.2924 1.7284 2.1829 2.6461 3.0922 3.5088
73° 0.3324 0.6088 0.9911 1.4121 1.887 2.3627 2.8579 3.3173 3.7065
Conventional 0.3806 0.7513 1.2937 1.9032 2.6068 3.3257 4.1037 4.7881 5.3467

@IJAERD-2017, All rights Reserved 519

 International Journal of Advance Engineering and Research Development (IJAERD)
Volume 4, Issue 4, April -2017, e-ISSN: 2348 - 4470, print-ISSN: 2348-6406

E G+48 Storey Wind Analysis

Wind Analysis
12

10
Storey Drift in cm

0
4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48
57° 0.150 0.957 1.554 2.256 3.052 3.913 4.828 5.771 6.727 7.681 8.623 9.547
63° 0.274 0.504 0.809 1.159 1.551 1.969 2.413 2.864 3.318 3.770 4.212 4.641
69° 0.308 0.563 0.895 1.271 1.688 2.129 2.592 3.060 3.528 3.986 4.433 4.864
73° 0.364 0.654 1.044 1.470 1.944 2.428 2.946 3.453 3.945 4.434 4.897 5.317
Conventional 0.521 0.997 1.671 2.411 3.253 4.128 5.111 6.064 6.994 7.851 8.635 9.312

F G+48 Storey Seismic Analysis

Seismic Analysis
12

10
Storey Drift in cm

0
4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48
57° 0.285 0.582 1.001 1.516 2.122 2.798 3.537 4.314 5.114 5.920 6.719 7.500
63° 0.291 0.581 0.988 1.48 2.053 2.687 3.377 4.095 4.832 5.570 6.297 6.999
69° 0.305 0.605 1.018 1.513 2.085 2.713 3.394 4.099 4.817 5.528 6.223 6.888
73° 0.337 0.653 1.107 1.628 2.240 2.896 3.615 4.343 5.074 5.797 6.493 7.116
Conventional 0.378 0.776 1.376 2.078 2.921 3.841 4.924 6.016 7.120 8.157 9.114 9.92

@IJAERD-2017, All rights Reserved 520

 International Journal of Advance Engineering and Research Development (IJAERD)
Volume 4, Issue 4, April -2017, e-ISSN: 2348 - 4470, print-ISSN: 2348-6406

G G+60 Storey Wind Analysis

Wind Analysis
25

20
Storey Drift in cm

15

10

0
4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60
Stor Stor Stor Stor Stor stor Stor Stor Stor Stor Stor Stor Stor Stor Stor
ey ey ey ey ey ey ey ey ey ey ey ey ey ey ey
57° 0.6 1.2 2.0 3.1 4.2 5.5 6.9 8.4 10 11. 13. 14. 16. 18. 19.
63° 0.3 0.6 1.0 1.5 2.1 2.8 3.4 4.2 4.9 5.7 6.4 7.2 8.0 8.8 9.5
69° 0.3 0.7 1.1 1.7 2.3 3.0 3.7 4.4 5.2 6.0 6.8 7.6 8.3 9.1 9.9
73° 0.4 0.8 1.3 1.9 2.6 3.3 4.1 4.9 5.7 6.6 7.4 8.2 9.0 9.8 10.
Conventional 0.6 1.2 2.1 3.1 4.2 5.4 6.7 8.0 9.3 10. 12. 13. 14. 16. 17.

H G+60 Storey Seismic Analysis

Seismic Analysis
25

20
Storey Drift in cm

15

10

0
4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60
Stor Stor Stor Stor Stor Stor Stor Stor Stor Stor Stor Stor Stor Stor Stor
ey ey ey ey ey ey ey ey ey ey ey ey ey ey ey
57° 0.3 0.6 1.1 1.8 2.5 3.4 4.3 5.4 6.5 7.6 8.8 10. 11. 12. 13.
63° 0.4 0.9 1.6 2.5 3.6 4.8 6.1 7.6 9.1 10. 12. 14. 15. 17. 19.
69° 0.3 0.6 1.1 1.8 2.5 3.3 4.1 5.1 6.1 7.1 8.2 9.2 10. 11. 12.
73° 0.3 0.7 1.2 1.9 2.6 3.4 4.3 5.3 6.3 7.3 8.4 9.4 10. 11. 12.
Conventional 0.4 0.8 1.5 2.3 3.3 4.3 5.5 6.7 8.0 9.4 10. 12. 13. 15 16.

@IJAERD-2017, All rights Reserved 521

 International Journal of Advance Engineering and Research Development (IJAERD)
Volume 4, Issue 4, April -2017, e-ISSN: 2348 - 4470, print-ISSN: 2348-6406

3.3 Bending Moment

A G+24 Storey

180

160

140
Bending Moment in KNm

120

100

80

60

40

20

0
Conventional
57° Angel 63° Angel 69° Angel 73°Angel
Building
WIND 135.485 118.703 110.415 125.11 144.934
SEISMIC 136.265 120.52 110.521 125.014 160.611

B G+36 Storey

200
180
160
Bending Moment in KNm

140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Conventional
57° Angel 63° Angel 69° Angel 73° Angel
Building
WIND 151.951 124.498 108.95 120.568 178.574
SEISMIC 151.263 128.649 109.081 121.002 165.118

@IJAERD-2017, All rights Reserved 522

 International Journal of Advance Engineering and Research Development (IJAERD)
Volume 4, Issue 4, April -2017, e-ISSN: 2348 - 4470, print-ISSN: 2348-6406

C G+48 Storey

250

200
Bending Moment in KNm

150

100

50

0
Conventional
57° Angel 63° Angel 69° Angel 73° Angel
Building
WIND 163.129 131.262 107.262 117.676 216.308
SEISMIC 159.821 133.067 108.468 117.934 171.705

D G+60 Storey

300

250
Bending Moment in KNm

200

150

100

50

0
Conventional
57° Angel 63° Angel 69° Angel 73° Angel
Building
WIND 180.873 138.76 112.604 117.54 256.254
SEISMIC 174.935 147.138 113.297 117.67 178.893

@IJAERD-2017, All rights Reserved 523

 International Journal of Advance Engineering and Research Development (IJAERD)
Volume 4, Issue 4, April -2017, e-ISSN: 2348 - 4470, print-ISSN: 2348-6406

CONCLUSIONS

The current study is carried out by considering the different angles of diagrid and also different storey module of the
varying building height. The proposed plan of 18m x 18m is considered with four different types of angles of diagrid that
is 57°, 63°, 69°,and 73° for 2 storey, 3 storey, 4 storey, 6 storey diagrid module for G+24, G+36, G+48 and G+60 storey
building. also comparative study diagrid and conventional building is carried out.
We conclude from the study that
 For all the 40 models consider for the study storey displacement and storey drift values are within the
permissible limit.
 Wind and seismic analysis are all storey diagrid angel 63° and 69° provides more stiffeness to the diagrid
structural system which reflect the less storey displacement, less storey drift and less bending moment
 And comparison of diagrid building and conventional building they are shows that diagrid building are less
displacement,less story drift and less bending moment in wind and seismic analysis.
 Diagrid structure comparison to conventional building provide more aesthetic look it becomes important for
high rise structure
 So from result comparison with conventional building, one can adopt diagrid structure for better lateral and
gravitational load resistance.

FUTURE SCOPE OF WORK

 Higher storey buildings can be studied in R.C.C symmetrical building for diagrid structure.
 Asymmetrical building with different angel study for diagrid structure.
 Study With and without outer column for diagrid structure.
 Steel building can also studies diagrid structures.
 Comparative study braced tube system and diagrid structures.

REFERENCES

[1] Sree Harsha and K Raghu “Analysis Of Tall Building For Desired Angel Of Diagrids IJRET Volume:04 Issue: 04
Apr-2015
[2] Khushbu Jani, Paresh V. Patel,”Analysis And Design Of Diagrid Structural System For High Rise Steel Building”,
Procedia Engineering 51 ( 2013 ) 92 – 100
[3] Naga Subramanian and Augustine Maniraj Pandian “Evaluation of structural efficiency of steel diagrid system for
multi-story buildings” ICEIS-2016
[4] Raghunath Deshpandey and Sadanand Patil “Analysis and Comparison Of Diagrid And Conventional Structural
System” Volume: 02, Issue: 03, June-2015
[5] Sahana and Aswathy s Kumar “Comparative study of diagrid structures with and without corner columns” IJSR
Volume 5, Issue 7, July-2016
[6] Harshita Tripathi and Dr. Sarita Singla “Diagrid structural system for R.C. framed multistoried building”
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research Volume7, Issue 6, June-2016
[7] Kiran Kamath and Sachin Hirannaiah “An Analytical study on performance of a diagrid structure using nonlinear
static pushover analysis” ScienceDirect April-2016
[8] Ravish Khan and Sangeeta Shinde “Analysis of diagrids using symmetric and asymmetric plan geometry”
ISSN:2347-2812 Volume-4, Issue-3, 2016
[9] Nikesh Ganesh Rathod and [Link] “Diagrid an innovative technique for high rise structure” ISSN:2349-8404 Volume
2, Issue 5, June-2015
[10] Amol Gorle and S.D. Gowardhan “Optimum performance of diagrid structure” IJER Volume 05,Issue 03 Feb-2016
[11] K Moon “Design and construction of steel diagrid structures” NSCC2009
[12] Pallavi Bhale and P.J. Salunke “Analytical study and design of diagrid building and comparison with conventional
frame building” IJATES Volume 04, Issue 01, January 2016
[13] Saket Yadav and Vivek Garg “Advantage of steel diagrid building over conventional building” IJCSER Volume 03,
Issue 01 Sep-2015
[14] Ravi Revankar and R.G. Talasadar “Pushover Analysis Of Diagrid Structure” IJEIT Volume 4 Issue 3 Sep-2014
[15] Raghunath Deshpande and Sadanand Patil “Analysis and comparison of diagrid and conventional structural system”
IRJET Volume 02, Issue 03, June-2015
[16] IS456:2000 plain and reinforced concrete-code of practice
[17] IS 875(PART 3):1987 code for practice for design loads(other than earthquake) for buildings and structures
[18] IS 1893(part:1):2000 Proposed Draft Provisions and Commentary on Indian Seismic Code

@IJAERD-2017, All rights Reserved 524

View publication stats