International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering (IJRTE)

ISSN: 2277-3878 (Online), Volume-10 Issue-3, September 2021

Analysis and Design of Stadium with Truss

System and Shell Roof Subjected to Wind and
Seismic Loading
R Ashutosh V Kulkarni, Aravindkumar B Harwalkar

Abstract: In this paper Analysis and Design of different cultural activities. The goal of providing optimum comfort
Structural elements of the football stadium are presented, with for spectators tends to be associated with fulfilling the needs
particular emphasis on the Combination of Steel Truss without of sports technology. One part of the job is to cover stands
and with Shell roof cover and its interȧction with the underlying from sunshine and rain by including sheds, canopies, and
reinforced concrete structures. The Football stadium considered
for the study is of rectangular plan, with 85 m width and 140 m
roofs into the stadium's structural design. Stadiums are the
length and height of 19.5 m. The plan of Football Stadium is grand platforms on which legends are born and fans get
generated in AutoCAD 2016 software. The Stadium structure is excitement and inspiration. Stadiums, as fascinating and
composed of special moment – resisting framed. Wind velocity is significant buildings, not only enable but also enhance great
taken as 39 mph and Seismic zone IV in this study. The proposed shows via strong architecture and creative engineering.
stadium is analysed using Equivȧlent static and dynamic Structural designers have been under pressure in recent
ȧpproach by Reṣponse ṣpectrum ȧnd Time Hiṣtory ȧnȧlysis. In
anȧlysing the ṣtructure, 21 load combinations are used. The
years to create the most practical, technically innovative,
grandstand ṣtructure is made of reinforced concrete and the roof and architecturally renowned sports facilities. The most
is of ṣtructural steel using Pipe and Tube sections. Deȧd loȧdṣ, efficient way to track the technical development of modern
live loȧdṣ, wind ȧnd ṣeismic loȧdingṣ data are considered bȧsed stadiums throughout this time period is to look at
on IS-875 (PART 1-3) 1987 ȧnd IS:1893 (Part 1):2016. improvements in the design of their structural roof systems.
IS456:2000 and SP16:1987 code is used for Design of R.C.C The stadium should be modified to shield spectators from
components such as Beȧm, Column, Seating Platform, Footing
and IS 800:2007 code is used for Design of End Beȧring Plate
rain and blinding light in the event of a ṣtrong ṣun. Although
connection with Truss member. Analysiṣ of truss and other some pretty continuous steady sunlight is typical, ṣhade
elements is carried out with software program of Staad. Pro V8i provided by the roof should be acceṣsible to all open areas
SS6 and also the designs are carried out as per provisions of for at least a portion of the game, which is not always
relevant Indian standards. On introduction of Shell-like roof for feasible. The stadium should be built such that all
Open Stadium which is used not only to protect the Game from parameters are essentially comfortable, sȧfe, and ṣecure, and
Glare of Sunshine and Rain but also appears unique and
attractive. From the obtained results it is observed that the
that eȧch and every individual has a clear view of the court.
displacement due to Wind action in both X and Z direction The arrangement of seating is provided is continuous the
reduces significantly by the introduction of Shell roof. Also, due maximum seating can be eȧsily placed in stadium. In recent
to RSA and THA there is reduction in the displacement on days, many research scholars have worked on the cover or
introduction of Shell-like roof to an Open Stadium. roofed stadium. Mohini R. Gawande et al [1] carried out the
Keywords: Football Stadium Roof Truss, Shell roof, Wind and study on Anȧlysis and Design of Roof Tubulȧr Truss for
Seismic analysis, Staadpro V8i SS6.
Cricket Stȧdium and effect of wind action on the long span
roof truss which should be minimized using recent
I. INTRODUCTION
technology. The Seiṣmic anȧlysis of the Cantilever truss
roof of the stadium have been worked in [2] and the results
The Recent advances in science and technology, as well showed the drift and displacements due the wind load is
as increasing demands for sports and show buildings and more when compared to earthquake load. Nonlinear Seiṣmic
facilities, have sparked new development across the globe. Analysis of the stadium using viscous dampers is worked
Modern stadiums are distinguished by their universality in out in the literȧture [3] and the response of the structure is
terms of the ability to host international sporting events and obtained and they found that viscous dampers help in
decreasing the displacements by 60%. Dynȧmic monitoring
of the suspenṣion roof of the stadium has been worked in [4]
Manuscript received on August 28, 2021. developing a ground assessment of wind action, establish a
Revised Manuscript received on September 05, 2021. connection with structurȧl responṣe, and subsequently
Manuscript published on September 30, 2021.
*Correspondence Author anȧlysing the influence of wind and temperȧture on modȧl
R Ashutosh V Kulkarni*, MTech Student, Department of Civil parȧmetric variȧtions. In literȧture [5] the research shows
Engineering PDA College of Engineering, Kalaburgi-585102, Karnataka, that the spatial truss structure is reasonable and able to meet
India Email: [email protected]
Dr Aravindkumar B Harwalkar, Associate Professor Department of
the building's quality standards. Steel.
Civil Engineering, PDA College of Engineering, Kalaburgi -585102,
Karnataka, India. Email: [email protected]

© The Authors. Published by Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering and

Sciences Publication (BEIESP). This is an open access article under the CC
BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Published By:
Retrieval Number: 100.1/ijrte.C64190910321 Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
DOI: 10.35940/ijrte.C6419.0910321 and Sciences Publication (BEIESP)
Journal Website: www.ijrte.org 55 © Copyright: All rights reserved.
Analysis and Design of Stadium with Truss System and Shell Roof Subjected to Wind and Seismic Loading

The present study is to analyse and design the stadium Defining loads, Assigning the loads and its combinations
with steel roof truss is aimed to get a better understanding of on the structure
the stadium structural analysis and design idea for steel roof
truss. The Lattice truss is generally used for long span, in Analysis and print
which the triangular and N- type frame arrangement taken
for work. N and triangular frame arrangement consider the Run analysis
axially loaded member and N-type connection properly
distributes the load acting at downward side and is Outputs: Axial force (Truss member)
distributed in node to node in whole structure. N-type truss
system pattern is stronger than other arrangement for long Shear force diagram
span. They are more capable to resisting external forces or
loads acting on section, to all members nearly uniformly Bending moment diagram
stress. Lattice truss and N-type trusses are proposed to be
used for the present study Deflections

II. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY Design: Reinforced concrete structures

1. To Develop the 3D Model of an Outdoor Stadium (Beams, Columns, Platform Slabs, Footing)
Structure with Truss and Shell roof Covering system.
2. To determine the behavior of the stadium structure under Roof truss patter
Static and Dynamic loading using STAAD. Pro V8i SS6
software. Shell roof structure
3. To Design the components of the Outdoor Stadium
Structure. Conclusion
B. Modeling & problem formulation
III. METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY
To model a Stadium Structure in STAAD. Pro V8i SS6,
This particular study includes the 3D model of Outdoor we require some preliminary data to input such as codes for
Stadium structure. The Analysis and Design of Stadiums design, material specifications, building specification with
with Truss system and Shell roof is carried out by the dimensions of each structural component, load case, load
considering deȧd loȧds, live loȧds, wind loȧds and seismic patterns & load combination. However, the modelling may
loȧds for the proposed structure. And all the loȧds will be differ from case to case. Later a brief procedure of
designed by Indian standard codes with aid of design modelling, analysis & design of the building in STAAD. Pro
software STAAD. Pro V8i SS6. In this study V8i SS6 will be discussed as per the methodology in
This project mainly emphasizes on wind and seismic accordance with problem formulation.
analysis of the Stadium structure. The modelling of Stadium
has been done on the STAAD. Pro V8i SS6 software for C. Description of the Models:
analysis. The parameters after the analysis of the structure Model-I: Outdoor Football Stadium without Shell roof
such as displȧcement, bȧse sheȧr and fundȧmental timꬲ cover
period is computed. Here in this thesis, the analysis of Model-II: Outdoor Football Stadium with Shell roof cover
structure evaluȧted in order to find the behavior with Truss
system and Shell roof patterns. The ṣeismic zone considered Before Modelling in the Staad Software the plan of the
is zone IV and with soil type medium. The modelling of Football stadium is created in the Auto Cad 2016 software
structure is done for Indian Seiṣmic Zone IV, ꬲarthquake by following the standard dimensions of the football
loading and wind loading are considꬲred in the analysis. For stadium is shown in Fig 1. According to the stipulations
given structure, loȧding with ȧpplied loads includes livꬲ from FIFA the standard Dimension of the football stadium is
load, eȧrthquake loȧd and deȧd loads are according to Indian 45m-90m width and 90m-120m length. For the study 45m
Standards. The anȧlysis is taken out by Equivȧlent Stȧtic, width and 100m length Play court is considered. The 3D
Responṣe ṣpectrum and Time Hiṣtory methods uṣing Staad model of roof truss stadium without and with Shell
STAAD. Pro V8i SS6 ṣoftware. roofing is shown below.
A. Flowchart of the Methodology: D. Dimensions of the stadium
The methodology of the Proposed Stadium structure for the • Overall length of the structure = 140 m
analysis and design using Staadpro V8i SS6 software is as • Overall Width of the structure = 85 m
follows • Overall height of the structure = 19.5 m
• Length of the Play court = 100 m
Inputs: Model creation • Width of the Play court = 45 m
(Nodes, Beams, Secondary Beams and Columns) • Spectator Gallery = 20 m

Defining the material properties of the structure

Defining Supports

Published By:
Retrieval Number: 100.1/ijrte.C64190910321 Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
DOI: 10.35940/ijrte.C6419.0910321 and Sciences Publication (BEIESP)
Journal Website: www.ijrte.org 56 © Copyright: All rights reserved.
 International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering (IJRTE)
ISSN: 2277-3878 (Online), Volume-10 Issue-3, September 2021

compound of Lattice type of truss along with N- type truss

has been used for the roof and the same has been analysed
and designed.
The steel truss is designed to be simply supported on the
column and the Lattice truss is analysed according to Indian
requirements. For the following various parameters, the
study of Lattice truss is done on the basis of applicable
Indian Standards:
B. Geometry of Roof Truss:
Roof truss = Lattice Truss
Fig 1. Plan of Football Stadium Span of Truss = 32.14 m
Spacing of Truss = 6.67 m
C. Shape and Dimensions of a single Lattice Roof
Truss:
The Shape of the proposed Lattice truss and Dimension is
show in Fig 4 and 5 respectively

Fig 2. Model I: 3D Model of Roof Truss stadium

(without shell roof covering) Fig 4. Shape of Lattice Truss

Fig 5. Dimensions of Lattice Truss

D. Assigning of Section Properties:
The section properties are assigned using Staad for the
single lattice roof truss for both the Models which is given
Fig 3. Model II: 3D Model of Roof Truss stadium in Table I and Table II respectively, and the assigning of the
(with shell roof covering) property to Top chord, Intermediate Chord, Bottom Chord
and Purlin are shown.
IV. PREPARATION FOR ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Table I. Section properties of Truss members (Model-I)
CALCULATION: Model-I (Stadium without Shell roof)

A. Truss Configuration: Member Material Section Thickness

A lattice truss is a structural design element used in the Top Chord Steel PIP 200 H 6 mm
building industry. To give stability and support to a Intermediate
building, it is made up of interlaced chords that are cross- Steel PIP 150 H 6 mm
Chord
linked horizontally and diagonally. The basic structure of a Bottom
tubular truss is an N-type arrangement of straight Steel PIP 250 H 8 mm
Chord
interlocking structural components. Tubular trusses are often TUB
used in constructions where top roofs, floors, and interior Purlin Steel 5 mm
1001005
loads such as services and suspended ceilings are voluntarily
organized of the system. A truss is essentially an N-type Column Concrete 1500 mm x 1500 mm
structure of straight structural components with
Beam Concrete 300 mm x 600 mm
corresponding dimensions.
Axial tension or compression is the primary force acting
on all truss components. Analysis and design also done
using Staadpro software for simulation of behavior under
gravity, seismic and wind loading. A configuration which is

Published By:
Retrieval Number: 100.1/ijrte.C64190910321 Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
DOI: 10.35940/ijrte.C6419.0910321 and Sciences Publication (BEIESP)
Journal Website: www.ijrte.org 57 © Copyright: All rights reserved.
Analysis and Design of Stadium with Truss System and Shell Roof Subjected to Wind and Seismic Loading

Table II Section properties of Truss members (Model-II)

Model-II (Stadium with Shell roof)

Member Material Section Thickness

Top Chord Steel PIP 250 H 6 mm

Intermediate
Steel PIP 150 H 6 mm
Chord
Bottom
Steel PIP 350 H 8 mm
Chord
TUB Fig.9 Assigning the section properties for Purlin
Purlin Steel 5 mm
1001005
The RCC Component such as Column and Beam property
are shown in the below Fig 10 and 11 respectively
Column Concrete 1500 mm x 1500 mm

Beam Concrete 300 mm x 600 mm

Fig.10 Assigning the properties for RCC Column

Fig.6 Assigning the section properties for Top Chord

Fig.11 Assigning the properties for RCC Beam

E. Shell Roof Truss Configuration:
The typical Shell roof truss is shown in the below Fig 12
and the section properties of the same is tabulated in
underneath Table III
F. Geometry of Shell Roof Truss:
Fig.7 Assigning the section properties for Intermediate Span of Truss = 25 m.
Chord Spacing of Truss = 6.67 m

Fig.8 Assigning the section properties for Bottom Chord

Fig.12 Typical Shell Roof Truss

Published By:
Retrieval Number: 100.1/ijrte.C64190910321 Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
DOI: 10.35940/ijrte.C6419.0910321 and Sciences Publication (BEIESP)
Journal Website: www.ijrte.org 58 © Copyright: All rights reserved.
 International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering (IJRTE)
ISSN: 2277-3878 (Online), Volume-10 Issue-3, September 2021

Table III Section properties of Shell Roof Truss Calculation of Wind Prꬲssure Coefficients:
members F= (Cꝑe – Cꝑi). A. ꝑd
Model-II (Stadium with Shell roof) Calculation of Extꬲrnal Prꬲssure Coefficiꬲnts:
Let θ be the inclination of the roof (θ)
Member Material Section
Tan (θ) = rise / half of span
PIP 2191 Tan (θ) = 3/ (32.14)
Top Chord Steel
H
θ = 5.33
Intermediate PIP 1524
Chord
Steel
H h = 19.5 m, w = 85 m
h/ w = 19.5 / 85
Bottom PIP 2191
Chord
Steel
H = 0.22 < 0.5
TUB Cpe condition h/w < ½
Purlin Steel Table IV Extꬲrnal Pressure Coefficients
90905

G. Loading: Cpe
Wind angle = 0 Wind angle = 90
1. Deȧd Loads:
EF GH EG FH
Dead loads considering of the weight of all material and
-0.91 -0.4 -0.8 -0.41
fixed components incorporated into the stadium structure, as
Calculation of Intꬲrnal Pressurꬲ Coefficiꬲnts:
per IS:875 (Part-I) –1987 has been considered to calculate
Structures with openings larger than 20% the value of
dead load.
internal pressure coefficient is taken as Cpi = +0.7 and - 0.7
2. Live Loȧds:
Table V Wind Load calculation
Live loȧds are calculated ȧs per IS:875 (Part-II) –1987
Wind angle Total pressure = (Cꝑe – Cꝑi) ꝑz
shall be the maximum loȧds normal by the intended use or
utilized. They may be considering the tentative load taken in Cꝑe Cꝑi = +0.7 Cꝑi = -0.7
fully or partially in place in roof area or not present at every
time. Windward -0.91 -1.5424 kN/m2 -0.1928 kN/m2
0
Calculation of Livꬲ Load on Truss member:
As per clause 4.1 Table 2 of IS: 875 (part 2)-1987 Leeward -0.4 -1.0604 kN/m2 0.289 kN/m2
θ = 5.33° 90 Windward -0.8 -1.446 kN/m2 -0.0964 kN/m2
Live load on truss = 0.75 kN/m2 > 0.4 kN/m2 Leeward -0.41 -1.0604 kN/m2 0.2892 kN/m2
3. Wind Loads:
The calculation of wind design force is taken as per Maximum wind load in Windward direction = -1.5424
IS:875 (Part III)- 2015. kN/m2 and Maximum wind load in Leeward direction = -
Calculation of Wind Load: 1.0604 kN/m2 where, (-) indicates uplift pressure also called
As per clause 5.3 of IS875 (Part 3)- 2015, we have as Suction. The action of wind on Windward and Leeward
Vz = Vb x ԟ1 x ԟ2 x ԟ3 face of the ṣtructure in both X ȧnd Z direction is ṣhown in
Wind Zone = II Fig 13, 14, 15 and 16 respectively.
Basic wind speed value Vb = 39 m/s
K1 = 1.06
K2 = 0.97
K3 = 1
Design wind speed (Vz) = Vb x ԟ1x ԟ2 x ԟ3
= 39 x 1.06 x 0.97 x 1
= 40.09 m/s
Calculation of Wind Pressurꬲ:
Wind pressure pz is calculated by using the formula as per
5.4 of IS 875: 2015 (Part-III) Fig.13 Wind Load acting on Windward face X direction
ꝑz = 0.6 Vz^2
= 0.6 x (40.09) ^2 = 964.32 N/sq.m
= 0.964 kN/sq.m
Calculation of Design Wind Pressurꬲ:
Pd = ԟ d × ԟ a × ԟ c × ꝑz
ԟ d = 0.90
ԟ a = 0.92
ԟ c = 0.9
ꝑd = ԟ d × ԟ a × ԟ c × ꝑz
= 0.9 × 0.92 × 0.9 × 0.964 Fig.14 Wind Load acting on Leeward face X direction
= 0.718 kN/m2
Design wind pressure shall not be less than 0.7 × Pz
= 0.7 × 0.964
= 0.674 kN/sq.m
0.718 kN/sq.m > 0.674 kN/sq.m Hence OK

Published By:
Retrieval Number: 100.1/ijrte.C64190910321 Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
DOI: 10.35940/ijrte.C6419.0910321 and Sciences Publication (BEIESP)
Journal Website: www.ijrte.org 59 © Copyright: All rights reserved.
Analysis and Design of Stadium with Truss System and Shell Roof Subjected to Wind and Seismic Loading

Fig.15 Wind Load acting on Windward face Z direction

Fig.19 Seismic Load acting on structure in Z+ direction

Fig.16 Wind Load acting on Leeward face Z direction

4. Seismic Load:
In accordance with IS1893-2016 (part I) the parameters used
for Seismic analysis of the structure are given in the Table Fig.20 Seismic Load acting on structure in Z- direction
VI. The action of earthquake load in X+, X-, Z+ & Z- is After adding the Seismic load in both X and Z direction the
shown in fig 17, 18, 19 and 20 respectively. method of seismic analysis is applied such as RSA and THA
Table VI: Parameters for Seismic analysis which is shown in below Fig 21 and Fig 22
Earthquȧke Zone IV
Zone fȧctor (Z) 0.36
Responṣe Reduction Fȧctor (R) 5 (S.M.R.F.)
Importance Factor (I) 1.5 (Very Important Building)
Soil Type II (Medium Soil)
Type of Structure I
Diaphragm Damping for steel 2%
Diaphragm Damping for
5%
concrete

Fig.21 Response Spectrum analysis

Fig.17 Seismic Load acting on structure in X+ direction

Fig.18 Seismic Load acting on structure in X- direction Fig.22 Time History Analysis

Published By:
Retrieval Number: 100.1/ijrte.C64190910321 Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
DOI: 10.35940/ijrte.C6419.0910321 and Sciences Publication (BEIESP)
Journal Website: www.ijrte.org 60 © Copyright: All rights reserved.
 International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering (IJRTE)
ISSN: 2277-3878 (Online), Volume-10 Issue-3, September 2021

After creation of model and assigning the properties, the

model has been checked and obtained zero errors is shown
in the below Fig, 23. The unity check ratio has been checked
for the typical steel truss members and Shell members and
were in the permissible limit. The same is shown in the
below Fig 24 and Fig 25.

Fig.26 Reference Axis in Staad.Pro

The X and Z coordinates are referred as horizontal direction
of the parameter, whereas the Y coordinates is referred as
vertical direction of the parameter. These are the generalize
coordinates in Staad.pro v8i SS6.
B. Wind Analysis Results:
Displacement: The Displacements due to wind load action
in X and Z direction at particular nodes for both Model-I
Fig,23 Checking the Model and Model-II i.e., Stadium without shell roof and with Shell
roof.
The Displacement due to Wind action in X direction on both
Model-I and Model-II at a particular node have been shown
in Fig, 27 and Fig, 28

Fig.24 Unity check for safe section

Fig.27 Displacement Chart due to Wind Action in X

direction
From the graph at node number 5567 the displacement in X-
direction is maximum i.e., 0.018 mm for Model-I whereas at
same node the displacement is 0.002 mm for Model-II.
Fig.25 Unity Check for Typical Shell Roof Truss Hence the Displacement for Model-II is decreases by 88.88
% when compared to Model-I.
V. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
After the completion of analysis of the structure the results
are extracted as stated, now these results are tabulated
accordingly and the effect of various parameters are
observed and discussed. This project focuses on the wind
and seismic behavior on the structure hence the parameters
are tabulated and are discussed. Then latter the Manual
design of Beam, Column, Seating Platform, Footing and
Base Plate connection is done with the help of forces
obtained from Staad Analysis.
A. Generalize co-ordinates in Staad.pro V8i SS6:
As discussed, earlier Staad.pro V8i SS6uses Finite Element
Method (FEM) to analyse the various unknowns in a Fig.28 Displacement Chart due to Wind Action in Z
structural system. It is necessary to understand the direction
generalize coordinate system, with respect to which the
results are generated so that the behavior of structural
system can be studied. Figure 26 shows the reference axis in
Staad.pro V8i SS6

Published By:
Retrieval Number: 100.1/ijrte.C64190910321 Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
DOI: 10.35940/ijrte.C6419.0910321 and Sciences Publication (BEIESP)
Journal Website: www.ijrte.org 61 © Copyright: All rights reserved.
Analysis and Design of Stadium with Truss System and Shell Roof Subjected to Wind and Seismic Loading

From the graph at node number 5567 the displacement in Z- From the graph it is observed that the time period for
direction is 0.468 mm for Model-I whereas at same node the Model-I is 0.74467 sec whereas for Model-II is 0.78906 sec,
displacement is 0.107 mm for Model-II. Hence the Hence the Time period for Model-II is increases by 5.12 %
Displacement for Model-II is decreases by 77.13 % when when compared to Model-I
compared to Model-I.
Design Seismic Base Shear: During a lateral ground
Drift: The Drift due to wind load action in X and Z
motion, the structure gets displaced from its mean position
direction at particular nodes for both Model-I and Model-II due to the application of lateral forces at every story height
i.e, Stadium without shell roof and with Shell roof is shown the algebraic addition of these lateral forces at the base of
in Fig. 29. the structure gives base shear. It should be noted that
structure gets displaced in both directions hence base shear
in each direction is calculated i.e., in X and Z direction in
accordance with the generalize coordinate. The underneath
Fig 31 demonstrates the estimations of seismic base shear of
both the models, by the 2 distinctive examination techniques
like, RSA, THA the base shear likewise relies on the state of
the site on which the structure needs to stand.

Fig.29 Story Drift Chart due to Wind action

From the graph at Height 12.56 m the drift in X-direction is
maximum i.e., 9.981 mm for Model-I whereas at same
Height the drift is 0.957 mm for Model-II. Hence the Drift
for Model-II is decreases by 90.41 % when compared to
Model-I and from the graph at Height 12.56 m the drift in
Fig.31 Base Shear
Z-direction is 1.112 mm for Model-I whereas at same
Story Drift: The results of story drift given below are due to
Height the drift is 0.938 mm for Model-II. Hence the Drift
worst load combination with partial safety factor. But the
for Model-II is decreases by 15.64 % when compared to
design of all structural members in STAAD have been
Model-I.
passed in software which is for load combination with
C. Seismic Analysis Results: partial safety factor 1, thus this implies that story drifts are
The seismic results for both models discussed are time within the limits. The story drift in X and Z directions are
period, base shear, displacement, story drift. These tabulated in underneath Fig 32 for the both models, these
parameters are of core importance for the structure to be an qualities are acquired by performing examination by various
earthquake resistant. techniques utilizing STAAD.

Time Period: Time period is defined as “In an earthquake it

is a time required by a structure (as a whole) to complete
one oscillation from its mean position”. Here in STAAD in a
dynamic analysis of response spectrum 6 modes of
oscillation is considered in which 90% and above accuracy
is achieved. It is quite obvious that, if time period is less the
building will take less time to oscillate and vice versa. Less
time period of a structure will imply good resistance towards
an earthquake. It is only the undamped free vibration of the
structure. The Fig 30 underneath speaks about the
estimations of time period acquired by the investigation Fig.32 Story Drift Chart due to Seismic action
utilizing STAAD for Model-I and Model-II respectively From the graph it is observed that the Story Drift at 9.56 m
height due to ESA in X direction is maximum i.e., 0.551
mm for Model-I whereas at same Height the drift is 0.527
mm for Model-II. Hence the Story Drift for Model-II is
decreases by 4.35 % when compared to Model-I. From the
graph it is observed that the Story Drift at 9.56 m height due
to ESA in Z direction is maximum i.e., 0.511 mm for
Model-I whereas at same Height the drift is 0.489 mm for
Model-II.

Fig.30 Time Period

Published By:
Retrieval Number: 100.1/ijrte.C64190910321 Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
DOI: 10.35940/ijrte.C6419.0910321 and Sciences Publication (BEIESP)
Journal Website: www.ijrte.org 62 © Copyright: All rights reserved.
 International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering (IJRTE)
ISSN: 2277-3878 (Online), Volume-10 Issue-3, September 2021

Hence the Story Drift for Model-II is decreases by 4.30 % Typical design details of RC Beam with No 32871 shown in
when compared to Model-I. Fig. 35 are presented in this section
Displacement: During a ground motion due to lateral
stiffness of the column the story is displaced with respect to
ground. This lateral distance with which the floor is
displaced during a ground motion of an earthquake is called
story displacement. The limit is given by H/150 where H =
Height of the structure as per clause 5.6.1 IS 800:2007 and
all the obtained results for Model-I and Model-II were
within the limit. with respect to the generalize coordinate
shown in Fig. 33 and Fig.34.

Fig. 35 RC Beam Number 32871

Beam Section provided (300 x 600)
Fck = 30 Mpa
Fy = 500 Mpa
Forces from Staad
Max support Moment = 255 kNm
Mid span moment = 127 kNm
shear force = 205 KN
The Shear force and Bending Moment diagrams are shown
in Fig. 36 & 37 respectively. The design details of the beam
Fig.33 Displacement due to Seismic Action Model-I are given in Fig 38.

Fig. 36 Shear force diagram for Beam 32871

Fig.34 Displacement due to Seismic Action Model-II

From the graph at node number 6356 the Story displacement

due to ESA in X-direction is 1.123 mm for Model-I whereas
at same node the displacement is 2.049 mm for Model-II.
Hence the Displacement for Model-II is increases by 45.19
% when compared to Model-I.
From the graph at node number 6356 the Story displacement
due to ESA in Z-direction is 1.503 mm for Model-I whereas
at same node the displacement is 0.008 mm for Model-II.
Hence the Displacement for Model-II is decreases by 99.46 Fig. 37 Bending moment diagram for Beam 32871
% when compared to Model-I.
Also, from the graph it is observed that at the same node
Story displacement due to RSA and THA in X direction for
Model-II is decreases by 18.87 % and increases by 8.33 %,
respectively when compared to Model-I.
From the graph it is observed that at the same node Story
displacement due to RSA and THA in Z direction for
Model-II is decreases by 19.19 % and 9.61 % respectively
when compared to Model-I
D. DESIGNS:
The design of structural components such as Beam, Column,
Seating Platform Slab, Footing and Base Plate Connection is
carried out and discussed below.
Design of RC Beam:

Published By:
Retrieval Number: 100.1/ijrte.C64190910321 Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
DOI: 10.35940/ijrte.C6419.0910321 and Sciences Publication (BEIESP)
Journal Website: www.ijrte.org 63 © Copyright: All rights reserved.
Analysis and Design of Stadium with Truss System and Shell Roof Subjected to Wind and Seismic Loading

Design of Footing:
Design of Isolated footing:
Forces from Staad:
Axial Force 1756.305 kN
Moment in X direction = 5.415 kNm
Moment in Z direction = 1701.74 kNm
P = 1170.87 KN
SBC=220 kN/m2
Fig.38 Reinforcement Details of Beam section SBC = 220 X 1.25 = 275 kN/m2
Column size = 1500 mm x 1500 mm
Design of Column: Area of Footing
Typical design details of RC Column with No 24765 shown A= (Total load)/SBC= (1170.87*1.1)/275 = 4.68m^2
in Fig. 39 Axial force and BM values are shown in Fig 40 Provide Square Footing of Size = √4.68= 2.16 m
and are presented in this section Provided area = 3.5 m x 5 m
The design details of the isolated footing is given in Fig 42.

Fig.39 RC Column 24765

Fig.42 Footing Details

Design of Seating Platform Slab:

The Seating Platform is a huge structure designed to carry
the superimposed load of furniture and audience. The
Fig.40 Axial force and BM values for Column 24765 furniture is arranged on a number of successive steps so that
Forces from Staad view of the audience is not obstructed. These steps along
Column Dimension = 1500 mm x 1500 mm with the waist slab are supported on rackers which on turn
Grade of concrete = 30 N/mm2 are supported on wall on one side and the fulcrum girder on
Charȧcteristic strength of reinforcement = 500 N/ mm2 the other side. The treads are normally kept between 900 to
The design detȧils of the Column is given in Fig 41. 1100 mm and the risers between 100 to 125 mm. The
superimposed load may vary between 4 to 5 kN/m^2.The
General Layout of Seating Platform is shown in the Fig.43
Live Load inclusive of furniture 5 kN/m^2.
Horizontal tread = 1 m
Rise = 120 mm
The depth of fulcrum girder = 1 m.
Width of Gangway = 1 m
Density of Concrete = 25kN/m^3

Fig.41 Reinforcement Details of Column section

Published By:
Retrieval Number: 100.1/ijrte.C64190910321 Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
DOI: 10.35940/ijrte.C6419.0910321 and Sciences Publication (BEIESP)
Journal Website: www.ijrte.org 64 © Copyright: All rights reserved.
 International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering (IJRTE)
ISSN: 2277-3878 (Online), Volume-10 Issue-3, September 2021

Fig. 47 L-section of Raker Beam

Design of Base Plate

The Bottom chord member of Truss is supported on RCC
Column 1500 mm x 1500 mm.
Axial force (DL+LL) = 1670.233 kN
Uplift pressure due to wind load = -158.813 kN
Bending Moment = 1455.969 kNm
Grade of concrete (fck) = 30 N/mm²
Diameter of Bottom Chord = 350 mm
Thickness of Bottom Chord = 8 mm
Supported on RCC Column =
1500 mm x 1500 mm
Fig.43 General Layout of Seating Platform Class of Bolts for all connections = 8.8
The Dimension of the Base plate provide is given in Fig. 48.
Loading on Racker Beam, SFD and BMD is shown in the
below Fig 44

Fig 48 Plan of Base plate connection

Fig. 44 Loading on Racker Beam, SFD and BMD
The connection of the Base plate to RCC Column through
Anchor Bolts is shown in Fig. 49 and the truss member
The reinforcement details of the T beam is given in Fig.45
connection to RCC Column is shown n Fig. 50.

Fig.45 Reinforcement Details of T-Beam

The details of reinforcement of Seating Platform are shown
in Fig. 46 & 47.

Fig 49 Anchor Bolts for Base plate connection

Fig. 46 Half L-section of Fulcrum Girder

Published By:
Retrieval Number: 100.1/ijrte.C64190910321 Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
DOI: 10.35940/ijrte.C6419.0910321 and Sciences Publication (BEIESP)
Journal Website: www.ijrte.org 65 © Copyright: All rights reserved.
Analysis and Design of Stadium with Truss System and Shell Roof Subjected to Wind and Seismic Loading

3. M. Rezai, A. Patterson and G. Hubick “Nonlinear Seismic Analysis

and Retrofit of BC Place Stadium Using Rocking Foundation and
Viscous Dampers”, 2012 (10 pages)
4. 4. Nuno Martins, Elsa Caetano, Sandro Diord, Filipe Magalhaes and
Alvaro Cunha “Dynamic monitoring of a stadium suspension roof:
Wind and temperature influence on modal parameters and structural
response”, Science Direct, Engineering Structures journal homepage:
www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct 59 (2014) pp 80–94
5. 5.. Yan Lin, Chang-lin Sun, Wei Jiang, Gang Du and Qing-wei Lin
“The Design of Roof Structure for Bicycle Stadium in Jinan Olympic
Sports Centre”, Applied Mechanics and Materials Vols 94-96
(2011), pp 1105-1109
6. Dr Ola Adel Qasim “Analysis and Design of Steel Truss Stadium”,
Research Gate 323705520 2018 DOI:10.13140/RG.2.2.15447.98729
(58 pages)
7. Subramani.T, Sankar.P, Annadurai.K, Jothikannan.P and Raja.R
“Planning, Analysing and Designing of Indoor Stadium Building by
Using STAAD Pro”, International Journal of Application or
Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM), Volume 8,
Fig 50 Truss member connection to RCC Column Issue 3, March 2019 pp. 137-149
8. IS 456:2000 code of practice for “Plain and Reinforced Concrete
1893(Part 1): 2002 code of practice for “Criteria for Earthquake
VI. CONCLUSION 9. Resistant Design of Structures”
10. N. C. Sinha and S. K. Roy “Fundamentals of Reinforced Concrete”,
Following Conclusions ȧre drawn from the results of the S
Project work: 11. CHAND and Company (P) Limited-New Delhi
12. 11. S. K Duggal, “Limit State Design of Steel Structures”, McGraw
1. Introduction of Shell-like roof for Open Stadium which is Hill
used not only to protect the Game from Glare of Sunshine, 13. Education (India) Pvt Ltd, 2014
Rain etc but also appears unique and attractive.
2.The Fundamental Time Period for Model-II i.e., Stadium AUTHORS PROFILE
with Shell roofing is found to be Increasing due to increase
in height when compared to Model-I i.e, Stadium without R Ashutosh V Kulkarni, M.Tech Scholar in Structural
Shell roofing, Engineering Department of Civil Engineering Poojya
3. From the results it is observed that the displacement due Doddappa Appa College of Engineering Kalaburagi –
585102 Karnataka, India. Email:
to Wind action in both X and Z direction reduces [email protected]
significantly by the introduction of Shell roof i.e., Model-II
in comparison with Model-I (Stadium without Shell roof).
Dr Aravindkumar B Harwalkar, Associate Professor
4. The Drift due to Wind action in both X and Z direction and Head, Department of Civil Engineering Poojya
for Model-II reduces when compared to Model-I. Doddappa Appa College of Engineering Kalaburagi -
5. There is increase in Base Shear for Model-II when 585102 Karnataka, India. Email:
[email protected]
compared with Model-I due to introduction of Shell roof due
to increase in Seismic weight of the structure.
6. The Story Drift due to Seismic action in both X and Z
direction for Model-II reduces significantly when compared
to Model-I.
7. Both RSA and THA techniques gave reduced Story
displacement values for Model-II when compared to Model-
I in contrast to ESA which gave reduced displacement
values for Model-II in Z direction only.

VII. SCOPE FOR FURTHER STUDY

1. Optimization studies on design and analysis of different
type of steel truss stadium such as sub divided truss,
Continuous truss and Arch truss can be carried out.
2. Combination of Steel truss Roof with Shell roof covering
can be carried out for the stadiums such as Cricket Stadium,
Rugby Stadium etc

REFERENCES
1. Gawande Mohini, Prof. D. G. Agrawal and Rajesh R. Joshi
“Comparative Study on Analysis and Design of Roof Tubular Truss
for Cricket Stadium”, International Journal for Research in Applied
Science & Engineering Technology, Volume 8, Issue IV, Apr 2020
pp. 915-927
2. Thin Nwe Aye and Zaw Min Htun “Study on Analysis and Design of
Football Stadium”, International Journal of Scientific Engineering
and Technology Research (IJSETR), Vol.03, Issue.12, June-2014,
pp. 2621-2630

Published By:
Retrieval Number: 100.1/ijrte.C64190910321 Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
DOI: 10.35940/ijrte.C6419.0910321 and Sciences Publication (BEIESP)
Journal Website: www.ijrte.org 66 © Copyright: All rights reserved.