International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics

Volume 119 No. 12 2018, 9169-9181

ISSN: 1314-3395 (on-line version)
url: http://www.ijpam.eu
Special Issue
ijpam.eu

LIMIT STATE METHOD OF DESIGN FOR STEEL

STRUCTURES

Dr. S. J. Mohan1, R. Chitra2, S. Thendral3

Professor ,Assistant Professor2,3 ,Department of Civil Engineering 1,2,3
1

BIST, BIHER, Bharath University

[email protected]
.

consider a structural component (say, a

1.0 INTRODUCTION beam) designed to carry a given nominal
load. Bending moments (B.M.) produced
A Civil Engineering Designer has to by characteristic loads are first
ensure that the structures and facilities computed. These are to be compared
he designs are (i) fit for their purpose (ii) with the characteristic resistance or
safe and (iii) economical and durable. strength (R.M.) of the beam. But the
Thus safety is one of the paramount characteristic resistance (R.M.) itself is
responsibilities of the designer. not a fixed quantity, due to variations in
However, it is difficult to assess at the material strengths that might occur
design stage how safe a proposed design between nominally same elements. The
will actually be – consistent with actual resistance of these elements can
economy. There is, in fact, a great deal be expected to vary as a consequence.
of uncertainty about the many factors, The statistical distribution of these
which influence both safety and member strengths (or resistances) will be
economy. Firstly, there is a natural as sketched in (a).
variability in the material strengths and
secondly it is impossible to predict the Similarly, the variation in the maximum
loading, which a structure (e.g. a loads and therefore load effects (such as
building) may be subjected to on a future bending moment) which different
occasion. Thus uncertainties affecting structural elements (all nominally the
the safety of a structure are due to same) might encounter in their service
 uncertainty about loading life would have a distribution shown in
 uncertainty about material strength (b). The uncertainty here is both due to
and variability of the loads applied to the
 uncertainty about structural structure, and also due to the variability
dimensions and behaviour. of the load distribution through the
structure. Thus if a particularly weak
These uncertainties together make it structural component is subjected to a
impossible for a designer to guarantee heavy load which exceeds the strength of
that a structure will be absolutely safe. the structural component, clearly failure
All that the designer could ensure is that could occur.
the risk of failure is extremely small,
despite the uncertainties[1-7]. Unfortunately it is not practicable to
define the probability distributions of
An illustration of the statistical meaning loads and strengths, as it will involve
of safety is given in Fig. 1. Let us hundreds of tests on samples of

9169
International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics Special Issue

components. Normal design

calculations are made using a single
value for each load and for each material
property and making appropriate safety Characteristic resistance of a material
factor into the design calculations. The (such as Concrete or Steel) is defined as
value used is termed as “Characteristic that value of resistance below which not
Strength or Resistance” or “ more than a prescribed percentage of
Characteristic Load”. test results may be expected to fall. (For
example the characteristic yield stress of
steel is usually defined as that value of
yield stress below which not more than
5% of the test values may be expected to
Variation of fall). In other words, this strength is
expected to be exceeded by 95% of the
maximum life time
cases[8-12].
load effects (B.M.)
Similarly, the characteristic load is that
Variation of value of the load, which has an
resistance accepted probability of not being
Cu
(R.M.) exceeded during the life span of the
rv
Frequency

Cu between structure. Characteristic load is

e
rv nominally therefore that load which will not be
(a)
e identical exceeded 95% of the time.
(b) materials
2.0 STANDARDISATION
Ri
sk Most structural designs are based on
of experience. Standardisation of all
fa designs is unlikely within the
il foreseeable future hence design rules,
ur based on experience, become useful. If
e a similar design has been built
successfully elsewhere, there is no
reasons why a designer may not consider
it prudent to follow aspects of design
Load that have proved successful, and adopt
effects standardised design rules. As the
Stren
divided by consequences of bad design can be
Load gth
Resistance catastrophic, the society expects
used in (or
moment designers to explain their design
calcul resist
ation ance) decisions[13-16]. It is therefore
used advantageous to use methods of design
in that have proved safe in the past.
calcu Standardised design methods can help in
Fig. 1 Statistical
lation comparing alternative designs while
Meaning sof Safety

9170
International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics Special Issue

minimising the risk of the cheapest In general, each member in a structure is

design being less safe than the others. checked for a number of different
combinations of loading. The value of
Most Governments attempt to ensure factor of safety in most cases is taken to
structural safety through regulations and be around 1.67. Many loads vary with
laws. Designers then attempt to achieve time and these should be allowed for. It
maximum economy within the range of is unnecessarily severe to consider the
designs that the regulations allow. effects of all loads acting simultaneously
Frequently the professions are allowed with their full design value, while
to regulate themselves; in these a cases maintaining the same factor of safety or
the Regulations or Codes of Practices safety factor. Using the same factor of
are evolved by consultation and safety or safety factor when loads act in
consensus within the profession[17-23]. combination would result in uneconomic
designs.
3.0 ALLOWABLE STRESS
DESIGN (ASD) A typical example of a set of load
With the development of linear elastic combinations is given below, which
theories in the 19th century the stress- accounts for the fact that the dead load,
strain behaviour of new materials like live load and wind load are all unlikely
wrought iron & mild steel could be to act on the structure simultaneously at
accurately represented. These theories their maximum values:
enabled indeterminate structures to be
analysed and the distribution of bending (Stress due to dead load + live load)
and shear stresses to be computed < allowable stress
correctly. The first attainment of yield (Stress due to dead load + wind load)
stress of steel was generally taken to be < allowable stress
the onset of failure. The limitations due (Stress due to dead load + live load +
to non-linearity and buckling were wind) < 1.33 times allowable stress.
neglected.
In practice there are severe limitations to
The basic form of calculations took the this approach. These are the
form of verifying that the stresses caused consequences of material non-linearity,
by the characteristic loads must be less non-linear behaviour of elements in the
than an “allowable stress”, which was a post-buckled state and the ability of the
fraction of the yield stress. Thus the steel components to tolerate high
allowable stress may be defined in terms theoretical elastic stresses by yielding
locally and redistributing the loads.
Yield stress
Allowable stress  Moreover the elastic theory does not
Factor of safety readily allow for redistribution of loads
of a “factor of safety" which represented from one member to another in a
a margin for overload and other statically indeterminate structures[24-35]
unknown factors which could be .
tolerated by the structure. The allowable
stress is thus directly related to yield 4.0 LIMIT STATE DESIGN
stress by the following expression: An improved design philosophy to make
allowances for the shortcomings in the

9171
International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics Special Issue

“Allowable Stress Design” was “Limit State of Strength” are: loss of

developed in the late 1970‟s and has equilibrium of the structure and loss of
been extensively incorporated in design stability of the structure. “Serviceability
standards and codes formulated in all the Limit State" refers to the limits on
developed countries. Although there are acceptable performance of the structure.
many variations between practices
adopted in different countries the basic Not all these limits can be covered by
concept is broadly similar. The structural calculations. For example,
probability of operating conditions not corrosion is covered by specifying forms
reaching failure conditions forms the of protection (like painting) and brittle
basis of “Limit States Design” adopted fracture is covered by material
in all countries. specifications, which ensure that steel is
sufficiently ductile[36-41].
“Limit States" are the various conditions
in which a structure would be considered 5.0 PARTIAL SAFETY FACTOR
to have failed to fulfil the purpose for
which it was built. In general two limit The major innovation in the new codes
states are considered at the design stage is the introduction of the partial safety
and these are listed in Table 1. factor format. A typical format is
described below:
Table 1: Limit States
In general calculations take the form of
Limit State of Serviceability Limit verifying that
Strength State S*  R*

where S* is the calculated factored load

Strength Deflection effect on the element (like bending
(yield, Vibration moment, shear force etc) and R* is the
calculated factored resistance of the
buckling) Fatigue checks element being checked, and is a function
Stability (including reparable of the nominal value of the material
yield strength.
against damage due to
overturning fatigue) S* is a function of the combined effects
of factored dead, live and wind loads.
and sway Corrosion (Other
Fracture due to Fire loads – if applicable, are also
considered)
fatigue
Plastic In accordance with the above concepts,
the safety format used in Limit State
collapse Codes is based on probable maximum
Brittle Fracture load and probable minimum strengths,
so that a consistent level of safety is

9172
International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics Special Issue

achieved. Thus, the design requirements when loads act alone or in

are expressed as follows: combination.
 Serviceability Limit State is related
Sd  Rd to the criteria governing normal use.
Unfactored loads are used to check
where Sd = Design value of internal the adequacy of the structure.
forces and moments caused by the  Fatigue Limit State is important
design Loads, Fd where distress to the structure by
Fd = f * Characteristic Loads. repeated loading is a possibility.
f = a load factor which is The above limit states are provided in
determined on probabilistic basis terms of partial factors reflects the
severity of the risks.
Rd = Characteristic Value of An illustration of partial safety factors
Resistance for applied load and materials as
m suggested in the revised IS: 800 for
Limit States of Strength and Limit States
where m = a material factor, which is of Serviceability are given in Table 2
also determined on a „probabilistic and 3 respectively.
basis‟
Table 2: Partial safety factors
Limit state of
It should be noted that f makes
Limit State of Strength
Serviceability
LL’ LL’
allowance for possible deviation of loads Combin Ac
W
and the reduced possibility of all loads ation
DL Lead
Acco WL/
AL DL
Lea co
L/
acting together. On the other hand m
mpan EL din mp
ing EL
ying g any
allows for uncertainties of element ing
behaviour and possible strength DL+LL+
1.5 1.5 1.05   1.0 1.0 1.0 
CL
reduction due to manufacturing
DL+LL+ 1.2 1.2 1.05 0.6
tolerances and imperfections in the CL+  1.0 0.8 0.8 0.8
1.2 1.2 0.53 1.2
material[42-47]. WL/EL
1.5
DL+WL/
(0.9)   1.5  1.0   1.0
Collapse is not the only possible failure EL *

mode. Excessive deflection, excessive 1.2

vibration, fracture etc. also contribute to DL+ER 1.2       
(0.9)
Limit States. Fatigue is an important
DL+LL+
design criterion for bridges, crane 1.0 0.35 0.35  1.0    
AL
girders etc. (These are generally assessed *
This value is to be considered when the dead load contributes to
under serviceability Limit States) stability against overturning is critical or the dead load causes reduction
in stress due to other loads.
„
Thus the following limit states may be When action of different live loads is simultaneously considered, the
leading live load is whichever one causes the higher load effects in the
identified for design purposes: member/section.
Abbreviations: DL= Dead Load, LL= Imposed Load (Live Loads), WL=
 Ultimate Limit State is related to the Wind Load,
CL= Crane Load (Vertical/horizontal), AL=Accidental Load,
maximum design load capacity under
ER= Erection Load, EL= Earthquake Load.
extreme conditions. The partial load
factors are chosen to reflect the
probability of extreme conditions,

9173
International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics Special Issue

Table 3: Partial safety factors The buildings should be effectively tied

Sl. together at each principal floor and roof
Partial Safety level, in both directions. The
No Definition
Factor recommended minimum tie strengths are
.
75 kN at floor level, 40 kN at roof level.
1 Resistance, 1.10 Each section between expansion joints
governed by should be treated as a separate building.
yielding m0 These requirements are aimed at
2 Resistance of 1.10 ensuring that the collapse of one element
member to of a structure does not trigger the failure
buckling m0 of the structure as a whole. By tying the
structure together, it is possible to ensure
3 Resistance, 1.25 that there is an alternative load path that
governed by would help to enhance safety.
ultimate stress
m1 Suggested requirements for integrity of
4 Resistance of Shop Field buildings of five storeys or more are
connection Fabrica Fabricati given below:
m1 tions ons
 For sway resistance, no portion of
structures should be dependent on
(i) Bolts- only one bracing system.
Friction Type,  The minimum tie strengths to be
mf 1.25 1.25
provided are 0.5 Wf St La internally
and 0.25 Wf St La externally.
(ii) Bolts- 1.25 1.25 Wf - total factored load / unit area
Bearing Type, St - tie spacing
mb 1.25 1.25
La - distance between columns in
(iii) Rivets, 1.25 1.50 the direction
mr  At the edge of the structure, columns
should be restrained by horizontal
(iv) Welds, ties resisting 1% of column load.
mw  Columns should be continuous
vertically through the floors, as far as
possible.
Requirements for all Buildings to  Collapse must not be
maintain Structural integrity are given disproportionate and the role of key
below: elements should be identified.
Structures should remain as complete
 Precast floors must be anchored at
integral units even when (due to an
both ends[8-12].
accident such as explosion) one of the
members fail or become inoperative.
6.0 FACTORS GOVERNING THE
This requirement provides a significant
ULTIMATE STRENGTH
measure of safety for the occupants and
is termed “Structural integrity
Stability is generally ensured for the
requirement”.
structure as a whole and for each of its

9174
International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics Special Issue

elements. This includes overall frame d) Fire Resistance

stability against overturning and sway,
as given below. The structure as a whole Load factor, f, of value equal to unity
or any part of it are designed to prevent are used for all loads leading to
instability due to overturning, uplift or Serviceability Limit States to check the
sliding under factored load as given adequacy of the structure under
below: serviceability limit states, unless
specified otherwise.
a) The actions are divided into
components aiding instability and The deflection under serviceability loads
components resisting instability. of a building or a building component
b) The permanent and variable should be such that, they do not impair
actions and their effects causing the strength of the structure or
instability are combined using components or cause damage to
appropriate load factors as per the finishing. Deflections are to be checked
Limit States requirements to obtain for the most adverse but realistic
maximum destabilizing effect. combination of service loads and their
c) The permanent actions (loads) and arrangement, by elastic analysis, using a
effects contributing to resistance load factors as per Table 3. Table 4
shall be multiplied with a partial gives recommended limits of deflections
safety factor 0.9 and added for certain structural members and
together with design resistance systems.
(after multiplying with appropriate
partial safety factor). Variable As per IS: 800, suitable provisions in the
actions and their effects design are required to be made for the
contributing to resistance are dynamic effects of live loads, impact
disregarded loads and vibration due to machinery
operating loads. In severe cases
d) The resistance effect shall be possibility of resonance, fatigue or
greater than or equal to the unacceptable vibrations shall be
destabilizing effect. Combination investigated. Unusually flexible
of imposed and dead loads should structures (generally the height to
be such as to cause most severe effective width of lateral load resistance
effect on overall stability[21-28]. system exceeding 5:1) need to be
investigated for lateral vibration under
7.0 LIMIT STATE OF dynamic wind loads. Structures
SERVICEABILITY subjected to large number of cycles of
loading shall be designed against fatigue
As stated in IS: 800, Serviceability Limit
failure.
State is related to the criteria, governing
normal use. Serviceability limit state is Durability or Corrosion resistance of a
limit state beyond which service criteria, structure is generally, under conditions
specified below, are no longer met: relevant to their intended life as are
listed below:
a) Deflection Limit
b) Vibration Limit a) The environment
c) Durability Consideration b) The degree of exposure

9175
 International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics Special Issue

c) The shape of the member and the Crane

structural detail load
d) The protective measure (Electric Span /
operatio Gantry Crane
750
e) Ease of maintenance n
up to 50
t)
Fire resistance of a steel member is a
Crane
function of its mass, its geometry, the load
actions to which it is subjected, its (Electric Span /
structural support condition, fire operatio Gantry Crane
n
1000
protection measures adopted and the fire over 50
to which it is exposed. Design t)

provisions to resist fire are briefly No Column Elastic Height

covered. cranes cladding / 150
No Masonry/B Height
Column rittle
cranes / 240
cladding
Crane Gantry Crane(abso Span /
+ (lateral) lute) 400
Lateral
Table 4: Partial safety factors wind Relative
[According to IS: 800 (2007)] displaceme 10 mm
nt between
Type De Maxim Column/f Gantry
rails Height
Desig
of fle Supportin um Crane rame (Elastic / 200
n Member
uildi cti g Deflect + cladding;
Load
ng on ion wind Column/f Gantry
pendent Height
Live Purlins Elastic Span / rame (Brittle
operated) / 400
load/ and Girts cladding 150 cladding;
Elements
Live Floor & Span /
Wind Purlins Brittle Span / cab
not
load Roof 300
load and Girts cladding 180 operated)
susceptible
Live Simple Elastic Span / Live Floor & Elements Span /
to cracking
susceptible
load span cladding 240 load Roof 360
Vertical

to cracking
Elements
Live Simple Brittle Span /
Other Buildings

load span cladding 300 Live not Span /

Industrial building

Live Cantileve Elastic Span / load Cantileve susceptible 150

load r span cladding 120 r to cracking
Vertical

Live Cantileve Brittle Span / Live Elements Span /

load r span cladding 150 load susceptible 180
Live Profiled to cracking
Elastic Height
Span /
load Rafter Metal cladding / 300
180 Wind Building
Lateral

or supportin Sheeting Brittle

Wind g Plastered Span / cladding Height
load Sheeting 240 Inter Storey
/ 500
Wind ---
Crane storey height /
load Span / drift 300
(Manual Gantry Crane
500
operatio
n)
8.0 CONCLUDING REMARKS

This papaer reviews the provisions of

safety, consequent on uncertainties in

9176
International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics Special Issue

loading and material properties. The and Applied Mathematics, V-116, I-

partial load factors employed in design 16 Special Issue, PP-43-44, 2017
to take into account these variations are 9. Ramya, N., Muthukumar, M., On
discussed and illustrated. coloring of 4-regular graphs,
International Journal of Pure and
9.0 REFERENCES Applied Mathematics, V-116, I-16
Special Issue, PP-491-494, 2017
1. Owens G.W., Knowles P.R : "Steel
10. Ramya, N., Muthukumar, M., On
Designers Manual", The Steel
Construction Institute, Ascot, star and acyclic coloring of graphs,
England, 1994 International Journal of Pure and
2. British Standards Institution : "BS Applied Mathematics, V-116, I-16
5950, Part-1 Structural use of Special Issue, PP-467-469, 2017
steelwork in building", British 11. Ramya, N., Pavi, J., Coloring of
Standards Institution, London, 1985 book and gear graphs, International
3. IS: 800 (2007), General Construction Journal of Pure and Applied
in Steel – Code of Practice, Bureau Mathematics, V-116, I-17 Special
of Indian Standards, New Delhi, Issue, PP-401-402, 2017
2007. 12. Ramya, P., Hameed Hussain, J.,
4. Ramamoorthy, R., Kanagasabai, V., Alteration framework for integrating
Kausalya, R., Impact of celebrities' quality of service in internet real-
image on brand, International time network, International Journal
Journal of Pure and Applied of Pure and Applied Mathematics,
Mathematics, V-116, I-18 Special V-116, I-8 Special Issue, PP-57-61,
Issue, PP-251-253, 2017 2017
5. Ramamoorthy, R., Kanagasabai, V., 13. Ramya, P., Sriram, M., Tweet
Vignesh, M., Quality assurance in sarcasm: Peep, International Journal
operation theatre withreference to of Pure and Applied Mathematics,
fortis malar hospital, International V-116, I-10 Special Issue, PP-231-
Journal of Pure and Applied 235, 2017
Mathematics, V-116, I-14 Special 14. Sabarish, R., Meenakshi, C.M.,
Issue, PP-87-93, 2017 Comparision of beryllium and CI
6. Ramya, N., Arthy, J., Honey comb connecting rod using ansys,
graphs and its energy, International International Journal of Pure and
Journal of Pure and Applied Applied Mathematics, V-116, I-17
Mathematics, V-116, I-18 Special Special Issue, PP-127-132, 2017
Issue, PP-83-86, 2017 15. Sabarish, R., Rakesh, N.L., Outcome
7. Ramya, N., Jagadeeswari, P., Proper of inserts for enhancing the heat
coloring of regular graphs, exchangers, International Journal of
International Journal of Pure and Pure and Applied Mathematics, V-
Applied Mathematics, V-116, I-16 116, I-17 Special Issue, PP-419-422,
Special Issue, PP-531-533, 2017 2017
8. Ramya, N., Karunagaran, K., Proper, 16. Sangeetha, M., Gokul, N., Aruls, S.,
star and acyclic coloring of some Estimator for control logic in high
graphs, International Journal of Pure

9177
International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics Special Issue

level synthesis, International Journal Pure and Applied Mathematics, V-

of Pure and Applied Mathematics, 116, I-20 Special Issue, PP-393-396,
V-116, I-20 Special Issue, PP-425- 2017
428, 2017 24. Saritha, B., Chockalingam, M.P.,
17. Sangeetha, M., Gokul, N., Aruls, S., Adsorptive removal of heavy metal
Image steganography using a chromium from aqueous medium
curvelet transformation, International using modified natural adsorbent,
Journal of Pure and Applied International Journal of Civil
Mathematics, V-116, I-20 Special Engineering and Technology, V-8, I-
Issue, PP-417-422, 2017 8, PP-1382-1387, 2017
18. Saraswathi, P., Srinivasan, V., Peter, 25. Saritha, B., Chockalingam, M.P.,
M., Research on financial supply Adsorptive removal of brilliant green
chain from view of stability, dye by modified coconut shell
International Journal of Pure and adsorbent, International Journal of
Applied Mathematics, V-116, I-17 Pure and Applied Mathematics, V-
Special Issue, PP-211-213, 2017 116, I-13 Special Issue, PP-211-215,
19. Saravana Kumar, A., Hameed 2017
Hussain, J., Expanding the pass 26. Saritha, B., Chockalingam, M.P.,
percentage in semester examination, Photodegradation of eriochrome
International Journal of Pure and black-T dye from aqueous medium
Applied Mathematics, V-116, I-15 by photocatalysis, International
Special Issue, PP-45-48, 2017 Journal of Pure and Applied
20. Saravana, S., Arulselvi, S., AdaBoost Mathematics, V-116, I-13 Special
SVM based brain tumour image Issue, PP-183-187, 2017
segmentation and classification, 27. Saritha, B., Chockalingam, M.P.,
International Journal of Pure and Photodradation of malachite green
Applied Mathematics, V-116, I-20 DYE using
Special Issue, PP-399-403, 2017 TIO<inf>2</inf>/activated carbon
21. Saravana, S., Arulselvi, S., Dynamic composite, International Journal of
power management monitoring and Civil Engineering and Technology,
controlling system using wireless V-8, I-8, PP-156-163, 2017
sensor network, International Journal 28. Saritha, B., Chockalingam, M.P.,
of Pure and Applied Mathematics, Synthesis of photocatalytic
V-116, I-20 Special Issue, PP-405- composite Fe-C/TiO2 for
408, 2017 degradation of malachite green dye
22. Saravana, S., Arulselvi, S., Clustered from aqueous medium, International
morphic algorithm based medical Journal of Pure and Applied
image analysis, International Journal Mathematics, V-116, I-13 Special
of Pure and Applied Mathematics, Issue, PP-177-181, 2017
V-116, I-20 Special Issue, PP-411- 29. Saritha, B., Chockalingam, M.P.,
415, 2017 Removal of heavy X`X`l from
23. Saravana, S., Arulselvi, S., aqueous medium using modified
Networks, International Journal of natural adsorbent, International

9178
International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics Special Issue

Journal of Pure and Applied Journal of Pharmacy and

Mathematics, V-116, I-13 Special Technology, V-8, I-3, PP-17182-
Issue, PP-205-210, 2017 17187, 2016
30. Saritha, B., Chockalingam, M.P., 37. Shanthi, E., Nalini, C., Rama, A.,
Degradation of malachite green dye Autonomous epistemologies for
using a semiconductor composite, 802.11 mesh networks, International
International Journal of Pure and Journal of Pharmacy and
Applied Mathematics, V-116, I-13 Technology, V-8, I-3, PP-17087-
Special Issue, PP-195-199, 2017 17093, 2016
31. Sartiha, B., Chockalingam, M.P., 38. Sharavanan, R., Golden Renjith,
Photocatalytic R.J., Design and analysis of fuel
decolourisationoftextileindustrywast flow in bend pipes, International
ewaterby TiO2, International Journal Journal of Pure and Applied
of Pure and Applied Mathematics, Mathematics, V-116, I-15 Special
V-116, I-18 Special Issue, PP-221- Issue, PP-59-64, 2017
224, 2017 39. Sharavanan, R., Jose Ananth Vino,
32. Sartiha, B., Chockalingam, M.P., V., Emission analysis of C.I engine
Study on photocatalytic degradation run by diesel,sunflower oil,2 ethyl
of Crystal Violet dye using a hexyl nitrate blends, International
semiconductor, International Journal Journal of Pure and Applied
of Pure and Applied Mathematics, Mathematics, V-116, I-14 Special
V-116, I-18 Special Issue, PP-209- Issue, PP-403-408, 2017
212, 2017 40. Sharavanan, R., Sabarish, R., Design
33. Shanthi, E., Nalini, C., Rama, A., of built-in hydraulic jack for light
The effect of highly-available motor vehicles, International Journal
epistemologies on hardware and of Pure and Applied Mathematics,
architecture, International Journal of V-116, I-17 Special Issue, PP-457-
Pharmacy and Technology, V-8, I-3, 460, 2017
PP-17082-17086, 2016 41. Sharavanan, R., Sabarish, R., Design
34. Shanthi, E., Nalini, C., Rama, A., and fabrication of aqua silencer
Drith: Autonomous,random using charcoal and lime stone,
communication, International International Journal of Pure and
Journal of Pharmacy and Applied Mathematics, V-116, I-14
Technology, V-8, I-3, PP-17002- Special Issue, PP-513-516, 2017
17006, 2016 42. Sharmila, G., Thooyamani, K.P.,
35. Shanthi, E., Nalini, C., Rama, A., A Kausalya, R., A schoolwork on
case for replication, International customer relationship management
Journal of Pharmacy and with special reference to domain 2
Technology, V-8, I-3, PP-17234- host, International Journal of Pure
17238, 2016 and Applied Mathematics, V-116, I-
36. Shanthi, E., Nalini, C., Rama, A., 20 Special Issue, PP-199-203, 2017
Elve: A methodology for the 43. Sharmila, S., Jeyanthi Rebecca, L.,
emulation of robots, International Anbuselvi, S., Kowsalya, E.,

9179
International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics Special Issue

Kripanand, N.R., Tanty, D.S.,

Choudhary, P., SwathyPriya, L., GC-
MS analysis of biofuel extracted
from marine algae, Der Pharmacia
Lettre, V-8, I-3, PP-204-214, 2016
44. Sidharth Raj, R.S., Sangeetha, M.,
Data embedding method using
adaptive pixel pair matching method,
International Journal of Pure and
Applied Mathematics, V-116, I-15
Special Issue, PP-417-421, 2017
45. Sidharth Raj, R.S., Sangeetha, M.,
Android based industrial fault
monitoring, International Journal of
Pure and Applied Mathematics, V-
116, I-15 Special Issue, PP-423-427,
2017
46. Sidharth Raj, R.S., Sangeetha, M.,
Mobile robot system control through
an brain computer interface,
International Journal of Pure and
Applied Mathematics, V-116, I-15
Special Issue, PP-413-415, 2017
47. Sivaraman, K., Sundarraj, B.,
Decisive lesion detection in digital
fundus image, International Journal
of Pure and Applied Mathematics,
V-116, I-10 Special Issue, PP-161-
164, 2017
48. Sridhar, J., Sriram, M., Cloud
privacy preserving for dynamic
groups, International Journal of Pure
and Applied Mathematics, V-116, I-
8 Special Issue, PP-117-120, 2017

9180
9181
9182