Full Paper

Proc. of Int. Conf. on Advances in Civil Engineering 2012

Effectiveness of Dome Structures in Reduction of

Stresses under Transverse Loadings
Ashim Kanti Dey1, Chinmoy Deka2
1

Department of Civil Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Silchar, Assam -10, India
Email: ashim_kanti@yahoo.co.in
2
Department of Civil Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Silchar, Assam -10, India
Email: cdekanits@gmail.com
Abstract In the present study effectiveness of dome shaped
roofing in reduction of deformations under lateral loading is
discussed. A comparison was made between a flat roof structure
and a dome roof structure on deformations imposed under
lateral loading. STAAD Pro software was used to evaluate
deformations, bending moments and shear forces under
different combinations of loads. For the same column and
beam sizes it was observed that deformation in dome roof
structure is 30% less than that in flat roof structure. Similar
reduction in bending moments and shear forces were also
observed. On the other hand, for the same deformation, the
sizes of columns were needed to be increased by 40% in the
flat roof structure. The present study concludes that a
considerable amount of material and money can be saved in
choosing a dome shaped roof with a marginal loss in floor
area and a total loss of the utility of a flat roof.

transverse loadings in comparison to a conventional flat roof

structure.
The same seismic load combinations were applied to both
the flat roof and dome shaped roof frames using STAAD Pro
software [3]. The values of deformation, maximum bending
moment and maximum shear force in columns were compared.
It was observed that the structure with dome shaped roof
was more effective against transverse loads.
II. METHODOLOGY
A. Dome Shaped Structure Concept
Dome shaped structures have been used in ancient times
such as the Mughal era with the purpose of lending symmetry
and enhancing the beauty of buildings. Research has been
carried out on the effect of wind load on dome shaped
structures. In a study on the buckling effect of wind load on
cylindrical tanks with dome shaped roof, it was seen that
there is a low imperfection sensitivity of the tanks for buckling
loads associated with wind speeds 45% higher than those
specified by the ASCE 7-02 standard [4]. The design and
construction method used for a dome subjected to wind loads
has been also studied [5]. It was concluded that the pressure
coefficients obtained using Fourier series formulation are in
close agreement with those obtained by experimental work.
However very limited research works have been reported on
the possibility of use of dome shape roof to resist transverse
loads.
The idea behind the present study originated from the
fact that a structure may not collapse by virtue of its shape.
In this respect a dome shaped structure is more stable than a
rectangular frame. During shaking the position of centre of
gravity (C.G) of a rectangular structure is shifted whereas
there is little shift of C.G of a dome. The outer shell of a dome
is under compression in ordinary loading. With a transverse
load little or no tension is developed in the shell, whereas,
tension is developed in the outer column of the frame
structure. Reversal of stresses due to load reversal causes
damage and spalling of concrete. Thus a dome shaped roof
is supposed to withstand higher loads than a flat roof.
With this concept in mind it is proposed to try a structure
with dome shaped roof under transverse load. Since the entire
structure cant be made dome shaped because of limitation
of space and utility, it is proposed to make at least two/three
top floors dome shaped. The present analysis has made a

Index TermsDome Shape; Rectangular; Flat Roof;

Deformation; Bending Moment; Shear Force; Lateral Load;
Transverse Load.

I. INTRODUCTION
Most earthquake-related deaths are caused not directly
by an earthquake but due to collapse of structures. A structure
collapses because of faulty construction, improper design
calculation or impractical loading concept. Failure is also due
to extent of response of a structure under a seismic loading.
It is now observed that a building of moderate height
collapses whereas a high rise building does not show any
distress although both the buildings are located in the same
place. This is because of resonance of frequencies of soil
column layer and the building. Since long people are trying
to make their buildings earthquake resistant. As a result,
various earthquake resistant practices are being followed in
different regions of the world. Methods like base isolation
[1] and friction damped bracing systems [2] have been
studied.
Traditionally, the focus of the seismic resistant design of
buildings has been collapse prevention with the ultimate aim
of saving the invaluable human lives. However, these
buildings take enough damage that makes them unfit for
further use after an earthquake. The new goal is to build
structures that not only avoid collapse, but take no damage
when an earthquake strikes and are ready for immediate
occupancy with little or no economic loss. Following this
philosophy, the present study aimed to find out whether a
structure with dome shaped roof would be more resistant to
2012 ACEE
DOI: 02.AETACE.2012.3. 12

136

Full Paper
Proc. of Int. Conf. on Advances in Civil Engineering 2012
comparison of stresses developed in a conventional five
storied frame structure with those developed in a structure of
same dimension but the top two floors being dome shaped.
The dome was created using curved members of radius half of
the smaller dimension of the frame. Fig.1 shows the layout of
the two structures.

Figure 2. Columns selected for comparison (dimensions:

.23 x .23 m)

deformations shown in Table I.

TABLE I. COMPARISON O F D EFORMATION I N SELECTED COLUMNS

(a)

(b)

Figure 1. (a) Flat Roof Structure (b) Dome shaped Roof Structure

The floor height was taken as 3m in each frame. The

dimension of the floors in the conventional rectangular
portions of the structures was taken to be 10.5 x 7 m. The
dimension of the 4th floor of the dome shaped roof structure
was kept 9.5 x 7 m. The dimension of the small flat portion at
its top i.e. on the roof was kept 1.5 x 3.5 m.
B. Loading Considerations
A part of the loadings were calculated manually while the
rest were generated using load generator in STAAD Pro. The
various loading cases considered were self-weight, dead load,
live load and seismic load.
i. Self weight (SW) from slabs was calculated to be 4.5
KN/m2 by assuming slabs of thickness 180 mm.
ii. Uniform dead load (DL) exerted by walls was calculated
as 8 KN/m (floor walls) 3.6 KN/m (parapet wall) by assuming
thickness of 125 mm.
iii. The live load (LL) considered in each floor was 3 KN/
m2 and for the terrace level it was considered to be 0.75 KN/
m2.The seismic load (SL) values were calculated as per IS
1893-2002. The parameters considered were: Zone factor Z
= 0.36, Response Reduction factor RF = 5, Importance factor
I = 1, Rock and soil site factor SS = 1, Damping Ratio DM
= 3, Period in X direction PX = 0.6 seconds, Foundation
Depth = 3 m and RC Framed Structure. STAAD Pro has a
seismic load generator in accordance with the IS code
mentioned
iv. The structure was analyzed for load combinations
considering all the previous loads in proper ratio. Seismic
load combination = 1.2 (SW + DL + LL) +SL.

The graphs shown in Fig. 3 compared the deformations

along the height of the selected columns. It was observed
that a reduction of around 30% in the values of deformation
occurred in columns of dome shaped roof.

III. RESULT COMPARISON

Analysis was carried out on both the structures. For
comparison vertical columns as shown in Fig. 2 were chosen.
Some of the findings are discussed below.
A. Deformation
The selected columns as mentioned above undergo
2012 ACEE
DOI: 02.AETACE.2012.3.12

137

Full Paper
Proc. of Int. Conf. on Advances in Civil Engineering 2012

Figure 3. Comparison of Deformation in selected columns

B. Bending Moment
Table II shows a comparison of maximum bending
moments imposed in columns of both the structures under
the load combination mentioned above.

Figure 4. Comparison of Bending Moment in selected columns

TABLE II. C OMPARISON OF MAXIMUM B ENDING MOMENT I N SELECTED COLUMNS

Figure 5. Comparison of Bending Moment in selected columns

TABLE III. COMPARISON O F MAXIMUM SHEAR FORCE IN SELECTED COLUMNS

The graphs shown in Fig. 4 and Fig. 5 compared the bending moments along the height of the selected columns. It was
observed that around 35% reduction in value of maximum
bending moment occurred in columns of dome shaped roof.

The graphs shown in Fig. 6 compared the shear forces

along the height of the selected columns. It was observed
that around 35% reduction in value of maximum shear force
occurred in columns of dome shaped roof.
IV. PARAMETRIC STUDIES
B. Shear Force

It is known that thicker columns undergo less deformation when subjected to loadings. The same principle was
applied to the analysis and the columns of the rectangular
structure were made larger. An attempt was made to achieve

Table III shows a comparison of maximum shear forces

imposed in columns of both the structures under the load
combination mentioned above.
2012 ACEE
DOI: 02.AETACE.2012.3.12

138

Full Paper
Proc. of Int. Conf. on Advances in Civil Engineering 2012
TABLE IV. C OMPARISON OF MAXIMUM D EFORMATION I N SELECTED COLUMNS
(AFTER INCREASE)

Figure 7. Comparison of deformation in selected columns (after

increase)

1. The shape of the dome encloses the maximum amount

of space with the least surface area. And because a domes
surface area requires a much smaller quantity of expensive
building materials, the cost savings and efficiencies are
substantial.
2. The construction of steel reinforced concrete domes is
quick, regardless of weather conditions. The process takes
place within an air-inflated form that covers equipment and
stockpiled materials, allowing construction to continue regardless of weather conditions.
3. Domes are ideally suited for structures where open
spaces are required: They are open span and therefore no
columns intrude on or interrupt valuable available space. Steel
reinforced concrete domes provide unprecedented flexibility,
especially in buildings requiring a large amount of open space.
The designer has total flexibility in the layout of rooms.
Virtually any size and number of rooms are possible.

Figure 6. Comparison of Shear Force in selected columns

the same deformation after increasing the column size. Accordingly, the section was increased from 230 x 230 mm to 270
x 270 mm (around 40 mm increase). Table IV shows a comparison of maximum deformation imposed in selected columns
between flat roof structure with larger column section and
dome roof structure.
Fig. 7 shows comparison of deformation along the height
of the selected columns after larger column section was
considered in conventional flat roof structure.
V. CONSTRUCTION AND ADVANTAGES
New age dome construction applies a patented process
known as airforming [6]. The advantages of such construction
are :
2012 ACEE
DOI: 02.AETACE.2012.3.12

139

Full Paper
Proc. of Int. Conf. on Advances in Civil Engineering 2012
CONCLUSIONS

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

A comparison study was carried out between a conventional flat roof structure and a dome shaped roof structure on
the deformation, maximum bending moment and maximum
shear force. These were followed by some parametric study
whereby the column section of the flat roof structure was
increased to obtain the same deformation. The following conclusions were drawn from the present study:
There was a significant reduction in terms of deformation, maximum bending moment and maximum shear force
when the top two floors of the rectangular framed structure
[G+4] were given a dome shape. The average percentage reduction was nearly 30%, 34.5% and 35% in deformation, maximum bending moment and maximum shear force respectively.
i. The column section of the flat roof structure was needed
to be increased by 40 mm to get the same deformation value
as obtained in the dome roof structure for a G + 4 storied
frame.
ii. There was a loss of approximately 1.2 % floor area in
the dome roof structure in comparison to that of the
rectangular framed structure.

The authors wish to thank National Institute of

Technology, Silchar. This was carried out as a project under
its Summer Research Fellowship12 program.

2012 ACEE
DOI: 02.AETACE.2012.3.12

REFERENCES
[1] Kelly, James. M. 1997. Earthquake-Resistant Design with
Rubber. 2nd ed. Berlin and New York: Springer-Verlag.
[2] Ciampi, V., De Angelis, M., Paolacci, F.1995. Design of yielding
or friction-based dissipative bracings for seismic protection
of buildings. Engineering Structures Volume 17, Issue 5, June
1995, Pages 381391.
[3] STAAD Pro, Getting Started and Tutorials STAAD Pro
Manual, Research Engineers International, 2005.
[4] Portela, G., Godoy, L.A. 2005. Wind pressures and buckling of
cylindrical steel tanks with a dome roof. Journal of
Constructional Steel Research Volume 61, Issue 6, June 2005,
Pages 808824.
[5] Montes, P., Fernandez, A. 2001.Behaviour of a hemispherical
dome subjected to wind loading. Journal of Wind Engineering
and Industrial Aerodynamics Volume 89, Issue 10, August
2001, Pages 911924.
[6] Maximilliaan J. Dykmans. 1992. Multi-purpose dome structure
and the construction thereof, Patent: US5094044.

140