Parametric Assessment of Prefabricated Buildings and Conventional Steel Bearings

Open Access

Year : 2022 | Volume : | Issue : 1 | Page : 26-33

    Rushabh S. Thole

  1. A.B. Vawhale

  1. Student, Department of Civil Engineering, Shreeyash College of Engineering and Technology, Maharashtra, India
  2. Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Shreeyash College of Engineering and Technology, Maharashtra, India


Prefabricated buildings are primarily prepared through the process of pre-planning and prefabrication. The advancement of the prefabricated building construction approach implies time constraints, cost efficiencies, improved structural performance, and expanded architectural insights. Prefabricated buildings become an effective replacement for traditional steel buildings in every respect further result when comparing costs, construction time, quality parameters and architectural perspective. The main objective of the current study is to compare prefabricated steel structures and conventional steel structures in all respects. A prefabricated building was designed and then a comparative analysis was carried out in relation to a conventional building with the same configuration. The main software used for the whole design and analysis part was Bentley STAAD.Pro and it was found that the prefabricated building gave more sustainable results compared to traditional steel buildings. The budget is consumed in all aspects, so the use of prefabricated buildings should be implemented, because the construction and maintenance costs of prefabricated buildings are much lower than traditional steel buildings. In this project work we compare the parametric evaluation of 120 m long and 60 m wide pre-engineered buildings (PEB) and conventional industrial halls under the influence of moving crane loads for fixed and articulated storage with STAAD.Pro.

Keywords: : Max. displacement, time period, base shear, STAAD.Pro.

[This article belongs to International Journal of Structural Engineering and Analysis(ijsea)]

How to cite this article: Rushabh S. Thole, A.B. Vawhale Parametric Assessment of Prefabricated Buildings and Conventional Steel Bearings ijsea 2022; 8:26-33
How to cite this URL: Rushabh S. Thole, A.B. Vawhale Parametric Assessment of Prefabricated Buildings and Conventional Steel Bearings ijsea 2022 {cited 2022 May 30};8:26-33. Available from:

Full Text PDF Download

Browse Figures


1. Firoz S, Kumar SC, Rao SK. Design concept of pre-engineered Building. Int J Eng Res Appl (IJERA). 2012;2(2):267–72.
2. Thorat AR, Patil SK. A. Study of performance of pre-engineered building of an industrial warehouse for dynamic Load. Int Res J Eng Technol. 2017;4(6):2240–6.
3. Lande PS, Kucheriya VV. Comparative study of an industrial pre-engineered Buildingwith conventional steel Building. J Civ Eng Environ Technol. 2015;2(10):77–82.
4. Dubey A, Sahare A. Main frame design of pre-engineered Building. Int Journal of Innov Eng Res Technol. 2016;3(11):12–8.
5. Meera CM. Pre-engineered building design of an industrial Warehouse. Int J Eng Sci Emerg Technol. 2013;5(2):75–82.
6. Patil SS. Analysis and design of pre-engineered building of an industrial Warehouse. Int J Curr Eng Sci Res. 2017;4(12):39–43.
7. Katkar DD, Phadtare NP. Comparative study of an industrial pre-engineered building with conventional steel Building.IntResJEngTechnol.2018;5(10):127-33.doi:10.1016/S1361-9209(98)00024-8.
8. Kiran GS, Rao AK, Kumar RP. Comparison of Design Procedures for Pre-Engineered Buildings (PEB): A Case Study. International Journal of Civil. Architectural Press, And Structural and Construction Engineering 8 (4) 2014: 480–4.
9. Kolate N, Kewate S. Economizing steel building using pre-engineered steel Sections. Int J Sci Eng Res. 2015;6(12):69–74.
10. Patra SI, D’Mello M. Analysis of pre-engineered building and conventional building using Primavera. Software. Int J Adv Res Eng Manag 3 (7). 2017:97–101.
11. Mythili TD. An overview of pre-engineered building Systems. Int J Sci Eng Res. 2017;8(4):557–63.
12. Dharmalingam G, Silambarasan G. Design and analysis of pre-engineered building with subjected to seismic loads using E-Tabs. Int J Sci Res Dev. 2017;5(4):1628–38.
13. Thorat AR, Patil SK. A study of performance of pre-engineered Building of an industrial warehouse for dynamic Load. Int Res J Eng Technol. 2017;4(6):2240–6.
14. Goswami A, Shende T. Pre-engineered building design of an industrial warehouse. Int Res J Eng Technol. 2018;5(6):1484–8.
15. Mehendale AP, Gupta AK. Assessment & maintenance of pre-engineered. Building. 2016;1(4):31–4.
16. Saleem M, Qureshi H. Design solutions for sustainable construction of pre-engineered steel buildings. Sustainability. May 28, 2018;10(6):1761. doi: 10.3390/su10061761.
17. Abrahamse W, Steg L, Vlek C, Rothengatter T. A review of intervention studies aimed at household energy conservation. J Environ Psychol. 2005;25(3):273–91. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2005.08.002.
18. Allison PD. Missing data techniques for structural equation modeling. J Abnorm Psychol. 2003;112(4):545–57. doi: 10.1037/0021–843X.112.4.545.
19. Bamberg S, Möser G. Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: a new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour. J Environ Psychol. 2007;27(1):14–25. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2006.12.002.
20. Berenguer J, Corraliza JA, Martín R. Rural-urban differences in environmental concern, attitudes, and actions. Eur J Psychol Assess. 2005;21(2):128–38. doi: 10.1027/1015–5759.21.2.128.
21. Boeije H. A purposeful approach to the constant comparative method in the analysis of qualitative interviews. Qual Quant. 2002;36(4):391–409. doi: 10.1023/A:1020909529486.
22. Brehm JM, Eisenhauer BW, Stedman RC. Environmental concern: examining the role of place meaning and place attachment. Soc Nat Resour. 2013;26(5):522–38. doi: 10.1080/08941920.2012.715726.
23. Buta N, Holland SM, Kaplanidou K. Local communities and protected areas: the mediating role of place attachment for pro-environmental civic behavior. J Outdoor Recreat Tourism, 5e6. 2014:1.e10.
24. Carrozzino-Lyon AL, McMullin SL, Parkhurst JA. Mail and web-based survey administration: a case study with recreational users of Virginia’s wildlife management areas. Hum Dimen Wildl. 2013;18(3):219–33. doi: 10.1080/10871209.2013.761298.
25. Chao Y, Lam S. Measuring Responsible Environmental Behavior: Self-Reported and Other-Reported Measures and Their Differences in Testing a Behavioral Model. Environ Behav. 2011;43(1):53–71. doi: 10.1177/0013916509350849.
26. Cooper C, Larson L, Dayer A, Stedman R, Decker D. Are wildlife recreationists conservationists? Linking hunting, birdwatching, and pro-environmental behavior. J Wildl Manag. 2015;79(3):446.e457.
27. De Young R. Changing behavior and making it stick: the conceptualization and management of conservation behavior. Environ Behav. 1993;25(3):485–505. doi: 10.1177/0013916593253003.
28. De Young R. New ways to promote pro-environmental behavior: expanding and evaluating motives for environmentally responsible behavior. J Soc Issues. 2000;56(3):509–26. doi: 10.1111/0022–4537.00181.
29. Dono J, Webb J, Richardson B. The relationship between environmental activism, pro-environmental behaviour and social identity. J Environ Psychol. 2010;30(2):178–86. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.11.006.
30. Ebreo A, Vining J. How similar are recycling and waste reduction? Future orientation and reasons for reducing waste as predictors of self-reported behavior. Environ Behav. 2001;33(3):424–48. doi: 10.1177/00139160121973061.

Regular Issue Open Access Article
Volume 8
Issue 1
Received May 12, 2022
Accepted May 25, 2022
Published May 30, 2022