Comment Description Recommended Practice

1.Importance factor for cyclonic region ( ASCE/MBMA)

In ASCE-7 basic wind speeds are defined four types of wind maps asper Generally we follow risk categoery -2 where risk to human life is medium.And
•Importance factor for cyclonic region is not specified separately in ASCE07/ MBMA, as
risk categoery .And one need to refer separate wind speeds for occupancy categoery as applicable. In ASCE-7-05 only one wind map used and specified different importance factors for various risk
wind speed map in ASCE07 in itself factored for cyclonic force in cyclone prone areas
1 hurricane region. categories.

•As Indian region wind speed is not covered in ASCE, we have to follow IS:875 for wind
speed. But cyclonic factor is also mandatorily to be considered along with Indian wind
Where as ASCE-7-10 onwards 4 types wind maps specified for different risk categories.and with
speed.
2 different Mean recurrence interval(MRI)
IN ASCE-7 no additional cyclonic factor applicable since wind speed is In India cyclonic factors are applicable for coastal region upto 60km from
•Major compe tors are not considering cyclonic factor for ASCE07/ MBMA wind itself is different for hurricane region.and internal presuure coefficents coast. Since we have only one basic wind map.We can check k4 = 1.15 or 1 For warehouse like structure where risk to human life is less one may can use 1.0 by mutual
3 calculations. This is resulting in under designing of structure, affecting stability. also differ for % openings. based structure i.e industrial or other structure. agremeent.
4 •Also it leads to major tonnage difference.
2. Mixing of Codes
1 PIS input shall clearly mention the Code to be used in design
2 As per NBC India, designs shall be as per applicable local codes only.

3 The codes to be used, shall be latest edition & superseded old codes must not be used
4 It’s observed that PIS asks for loading as per IS & Design as per American AISC-10.
Eventhough in both IS & ASCE wind speeds are measured based on 3- If one need to use LRFD/ASD load combinations asper ASCE-7 for indian wind
sec guest wind the return period are different.In India we are loads we need to modify load combinations based on MRI.for example risk
formulating for 50 years return period. Whereas in ASCE -7 MRI ( mean cate gorey-2 and MRI-700 years we need to multiply wind combination factor
5 Wind load per IS:875 ≠ AISC 2010 (ASCE load combination shall not be used). recurrance interval different for different risk categories). So to by 1.26^2 ~ 1.6 so in load combination factor 0.6*1.6 ~1.0 need to apply.
As per ASCE 07-10/MBMA -12, Wind Load comb is de-rated by 0.6 since wind load is normalise the same we need to adopt correction in load combinations.
6 ultimate load. For that we need to multiply wind load factors in LRFD/ASD. refer ASCE-
7 Thus leading to under design to the extent of 55%, leading to failure of structure. 7 chapter 26.5 for conversion factor.
8 Whereas, IS:875 = ASCE 07-05 but this code is superseded.
Similarly, IS:1893 ≠ AISC 2005/AISC 2010 (ASCE7-05/10, at limit state level) & leads to In most of the PEB structures wind load only governs and very rarely
9 under designing. seismic governs. It is better practice to follow seismic loads asper Indian standards.
3.Other Major Factors
3a. MaxSeam Truss bracings:
Lateral Braces must be provided for the stability of the roof structure as per codal
1 provisions. Lateral bracing requirement depends on performance of roof sheeting
2 Competitors are not providing the same. product.
3 This has an impact on tonnage.
3b. Purlin Spacing based on Sheet Panel capacity:
1 Purlin Spacing depends on Sheet Panel capacity
Whereas, competitors provide default range 1500 mm to 1700 mm c/c, which is Purlin spacing depends on roof sheeting panel capacity based on that
2 unstable. we can determine spacing at eaves-interior & ridge locations.
3 This has a greater impact on CF tonnage.
3c. Purlin design considering local wind coefficient:
Purlins shall be designed using local wind coefficients. Since Local coefficients are Asper IS 875 -part-3(2015) Cla 7.3 local coefficent only used for roof
1 higher than overallwind pressure coefficients. sheeting,wall sheeting and their fixtures only not to purlin. Roof
Competitors are considering overall all wind pressure coefficients for purlin design, sheeting panel capacity needs to check for these local pressure Only sheeting panel capacity and coressponding fixtures needs sustain these
2 which is not safe. coefficents and sheeting screws needs transfer that loads efficently. local pressure loadings.
3 This has a greater impact on CF tonnage.
3d. Flange Brace Adequacy:
1 Flange Braces must be checked for the loads as per relevant codes.
Flange braces to be designed for 2.5% ofaxial force of supporting
beam/rafter compression flange capacity.And also it needs to match
with staad input and drawing out put.If Moment magnitude more
where cold form or HR members are not sufficent we need to design
2 Any inadequacy will lead to failure of the frame. seperate eura /yura bracings for the same.
3 Competitors are providing nominal size without any design checks
4 This has a greater impact on CF, HR & BU tonnage
4. Connections
3D Design -To simulate actual structural behavior (for overall stability of structure), 3D
design for complex buildings are carried out by ZS Engg. Where as competitors are
1
simply designing in 2D STAAD as per customer specifications. 2D designs are unsafe in For Simple Box building it may not effect. We only need 3D analysis
such cases. when complex plans are involved.
If Building fulfill the requiremnts of IS800-2007 Cla 3.10 we can omitt
2 Temperature Load- For wider buildings, ZS Engg is considering temperature load as per temperature loading on structures. Otherwise one need to incorporate
codal requirements, whereas competitors are not following the same. the same in design.

Crane beam design- ZS Engg is designing crane beam considering fatigue check as per
3
codal requirements. ZS Engg is having special crane beam design tool ( ASFAD) Crane beams should design for fatigue check based on usage level that
whereas competitors are designing crane beam in STAAD Pro which is not considering is number of cycles. And also designed for combined effect of major & Need to follow the recommendations provided in Candian design code for
fatigue stresses. minor axis bending simulataneousely. crane beam especially to considere T- beam while designing for lateral thurst.

4 Crane design data- In absence of customer provided crane data, various competitors In the abscenec of data it is always better to go with Electromech(
are referring different crane data, which is resulting variation in tonnage. Which is heaviest) than demac ( lowest) crane data.

5 Wall frame opening design- ZS Engg is designing wall frame opening section for actual If opening size is significant we need to considere these effect for
wind load and considering wind lock impact from Roll up doors. Whereas Competitors normal rolling shutter this effect is not substantial. Rolling shutter may
are using by default standard CFS sections without designing. or maynot in open condition all the time.