See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/302928668

Comparative Study of Diagrid Structures with Conventional Frame Structures

Article in International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications · May 2016

CITATIONS READS

34 4,004

3 authors, including:

Snehal V. Mevada Vishalkumar Bhaskarbhai Patel

Birla Vishvakarma Mahavidyalaya Engineering College (An Autonomous Institution) Birla Vishvakarma Mahavidyalaya Engineering College
45 PUBLICATIONS 154 CITATIONS 80 PUBLICATIONS 134 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Vishalkumar Bhaskarbhai Patel on 30 June 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Manthan I. Shah et al. Int. Journal of Engineering Research and Applications www.ijera.com
ISSN: 2248-9622, Vol. 6, Issue 5, (Part - 2) May 2016, pp. 22-29

RESEARCH ARTICLE OPEN ACCESS

Comparative Study of Diagrid Structures with Conventional

Frame Structures
Manthan I. Shah*, Snehal V. Mevada**, Vishal B. Patel**
*(PG Student, Structural Engineering Department, Birla Vishvakarma Mahavidyalaya, Vallabh Vidyanagar-388120, Gujarat,
India Email: [email protected])
** (Assistant Professor, Structural Engineering Department, Birla Vishvakarma Mahavidyalaya, Vallabh Vidyanagar-
388120, Gujarat, India Email: [email protected] & [email protected])

ABSTRACT
In modern age, the decrease of available free land and increase of land prices along with the wide spread of
urban area has made architects and engineers to develop the cities vertically. For vertical growth, the only option
is to construct the buildings as high as possible. It is a task of a structural designer to make the desired building
stand and stable throughout its life. There are various structural systems for tall buildings, among them diagrid
system is selected for this work. Diagrid is an exterior structural system which resists the lateral forces by axial
actions of diagonals provided in periphery. Statistical analysis of tall buildings in India is carried out and
presented for buildings having height more than 150 m or 40 storeys. Parametric study and detailed comparison
of diagrid structural system with respect to conventional frame is carried out for symmetrical buildings. In this
study seven steel buildings of identical base area and loadings with different heights are designed for optimum
sections for both structural systems diagrid and conventional frame in ETABS. Various parameters like
fundamental time period, maximum top storey lateral displacement, maximum base shear, steel weight,
percentage differences in change of steel weight, maximum storey displacement and maximum storey drift are
considered in this study. A Diagrid structure performs well than conventional frame structures and increase in
steel weight with increase in height of building is considerably less in diagrid structures.

Keywords - Tall buildings, Diagrid system, Tall buildings in India, Conventional frame system, lateral loads,
Optimum design, Parametric Study, ETABS

I. INTRODUCTION Fazlur Khan proposed the concept of

“premium of height”; that as buildings became taller,
Early tall building systems started with steel/iron there is a “premium for height” due to lateral loads
frame structure which minimized the dimensions of and the demand on the structural system
the structural members at building perimeters. In this dramatically increased, and as a result, the total
system, large openings were filled with transparent structural material consumption increases drastically
glasses and steel/iron members were clad with solid (Mir and Moon 2007). If a rigid frame is used for a
materials. Later on, new cladding concept of curtain very tall building, the column sizes increases
walls was developed with the emergence of new progressively towards the base due to accumulation
structural systems. Most of tall buildings employed of gravity load at the base and material quantity
steel rigid frame with wind bracings as a structural required to resist lateral farces also increases
system, and were quite over-designed as the drastically with height.
advanced structural analysis techniques and
computer software were not available at that time. Khan also recognized that the stiffness
Innovative structural systems like composite based design concept controls the design rather than
structures, mega-frames, tubes, core-and-outrigger the strength based approach when the building
structures and artificially damped structures are height increases beyond 10 storeys. (Mir and Moon
some of the new developments since the 1960s. The 2007). Diagrid structures are emerging as a new
diagrid system, however used at few places in past aesthetic trend for tall buildings in the modern age of
but utilised for buildings with unique shapes and architecture as a most versatile structural system and
form, developed in the beginning of twenty-first it is a special form of the space truss. Diagrid system
century; so diagrid can be considered as one of the gives unique façade and it can be identified at a first
latest structural systems for tall buildings. glance. Diagrid structures, which represent the latest

www.ijera.com 22 | P a g e
Manthan I. Shah et al. Int. Journal of Engineering Research and Applications www.ijera.com
ISSN: 2248-9622, Vol. 6, Issue 5, (Part - 2) May 2016, pp. 22-29

mutation of tubular structures, play a major role due the ratio of approximately 50-50% in interior frame
to their inherent aesthetic quality, structural and peripheral diagrid and about 98% of lateral loads
efficiency and geometrical versatility (Elena, are taken by the peripheral diagrid system (Jani and
Toreno, et al. 2014). Diagrid structural system
Patel 2012, 2013). Diagrid structures are found to be
differs from conventional braced systems in a way
that, almost all the vertical columns are eliminated, safe against progressive collapse and progressive
as shown in the Figure 1. In diagrid, the diagrids are collapse potential decreases as the twisting angle
considered as pin jointed truss elements. Due to the increases (Kwon and Kim 2014).
triangular configuration of diagonals, diagrid can
carry gravity loads as well as the lateral loads Based on the literature review carried out herein, it is
efficiently. To transfer end moments, universal some researchers have worked on the effectiveness
connection can be used which are developed by K. of diagrid system. However, there is a need for
Moon as shown in Figures 2 and 3. detailed parametric study for diagrid system.

Fig. 1: Braced Tube and Fig. 3: Typical Universal

Diagrid Structure Fig. 2: Node details of universal connection (K.
Moon 2009) Connection
(Kyoung, Jerome and
John2007)
Following are the main objectives of the present
For exterior structural systems the study:
significance of diagrid system is identified for about
100 storey buildings where frames, tubes or braced  To review the tall buildings in India.
tubes are less efficient or uneconomical (Ali and  To compare the performance of the
building with diagrid structural system and
Kyoung 2007). Optimal angle range for diagrids is
conventional frame system.
found to be between 60° to 70°. Preliminary design
 To study the critical effects of lateral forces
procedure and formulae for area of diagonals are such as wind and earthquake forces on
derived according to the stiffness based design diagrid structural system.
Moon et al. (2007). Though the outrigger system is  To obtain the response in terms of
most commonly used structural system for tall parameters such as time period,
buildings, the diagrid system is the most efficient; displacement, drift, base shear and steel
because diagrid forms an exterior tube that can consumption.
maximise the moment arm to resist overturning. Kim
II. TALL BUILDINGS IN INDIA
(2008) Diagrid structures showed considerably less
lateral displacement than in tubular structure in non- In this section, the review of tall buildings in India
linear static and dynamic analysis. Shear leg in has been presented. Total data for 270 buildings was
diagrid building is considerably less compared to the obtained from Indian website of Council on Tall
framed tube (Kim et al. 2010). In case of twisted Buildings and Urban Habitat (CTBUH). From this
diagrid building, as the angle of twisting increases largely spread data, buildings with height greater
the top storey lateral displacement also increases. than 150 m or storeys greater than 40 were separated
Diagrid structural system is found to be one of the for further study. After separation, total 168 of
most appropriate structural solutions for free-form buildings were obtained. For detailed study these
towers (Moon 2011, 2013). Gravity load is shared in buildings were further classified based on

www.ijera.com 23 | P a g e
Manthan I. Shah et al. Int. Journal of Engineering Research and Applications www.ijera.com
ISSN: 2248-9622, Vol. 6, Issue 5, (Part - 2) May 2016, pp. 22-29

construction stage, building usage, location of with composite materials. But data of material use of
building and construction materials. The 4% buildings (7 Buildings) is not available. But,
classification based on construction stage, type of form this scenario it is seen that in India, no tall
building use, location of building and construction buildings are constructed with steel as only
material is presented in Figures 4 to 7. structural material.

Fig. 6: Classification Based on Location of Building

Fig. 4: Classification Based on Building Use

Fig. 7: Classification Based on Construction Material

Fig. 5: Classification Based on Construction Stage Type III. PARAMETRIC STUDY OF DIAGRID AND
It is observed that out of total 168 buildings CONVENTIONAL FRAME
selected, 38 (23%) tall buildings are constructed, 96 For the parametric comparison, a symmetrical
(57%) building are under construction at the time building is selected. Seven steel buildings for
and 24 (20%) buildings are in controversy. Out of different heights are modelled, analysed and
168 buildings, about 148 (88%) buildings are designed in ETABS for two structural systems;
residential, 11 (6.5%) buildings are office buildings diagrid and conventional frame. Analysis and design
and 9 (5.5%) buildings are hotels of multipurpose are carried out for dead load, live load, lateral
earthquake load and lateral wind load. For
buildings. It is observed that in India, the trend of
earthquake loads, both static and response spectrum
tall buildings is for residential buildings. It is analysis are done. To consider extreme conditions of
interesting to note that, 82% of the Indian tall lateral loads, the buildings are considered to be
buildings (138 Buildings) are located in Mumbai located in Zone V. The parameters selected for the
only. 6% of buildings are in Kolkata, 6% of comparison are fundamental time period, maximum
buildings in Bangalore and Hyderabad while 6% in top storey lateral displacement, maximum base
Gurgaon, Noida and Greater Noida. Further, shear, steel weight and percentage difference of
weight, maximum storey displacement and
remarkable obsession is that 93% of Indian tall
maximum storey drift. Further, governing lateral
buildings (156 Buildings) are made with concrete force is also determined.
only and 3% of buildings (5 Buildings) are made
www.ijera.com 24 | P a g e
Manthan I. Shah et al. Int. Journal of Engineering Research and Applications www.ijera.com
ISSN: 2248-9622, Vol. 6, Issue 5, (Part - 2) May 2016, pp. 22-29

A. Building Configuration
Seven buildings are designed with different number
of storeys such as 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 40 and 28 for both
diagrid and conventional frame systems. The
physical properties and data of the building
considered for the present study is as follows:

Plan Area : 18 m × 18 m
Location : Bhuj
Typical Storey Height : 3m
Steel Sections : Fe 250
Concrete (Slabs) : M 25
Dead Load : 3 kN/m2
Live Load : 2.5 kN/m2
Wall/Cladding Load : 4 kN/m
Slab Thickness : 120 mm
Earthquake Load: IS 1893 (Part 1) : 2002
Importance Factor: 1
Response Reduction
5
Factor :
Modal Damping : 2% 8 (a): Typical Floor and Beam Arrangement of 24-Storey Diagrid
Wind Load : IS: 875 (Part 3) - 1978 Building
Basic Wind Speed: 50 m/s
Steel Design Code: IS 800:2007
Limiting Top Storey Displacements : H/500;
Limiting Inter Storey Drifts : 0.004h
B. Diagrid Buildings
The structural elements like columns, beams and
diagrids are assigned structural steel properties while
the slabs are considered of RCC. All sections in
buildings are optimized for design sections. For that,
all buildings having storeys 12 and above are
divided into three parts along the height of the
buildings. For the design of diagrids and columns,
built-up box sections are used and for the design of
beams, Indian Standard I-Sections are used. The
typical plan, beam arrangements, elevation and 3D
views of a 24 storey diagrid building are shown in
Figure 8.

C. Conventional Frame Buildings 8 (b): Elevation of 24- 8(c): 3D View of 24-Storey Diagrid
Storey Diagrid Building
In case of conventional frame, as the height Building
increases, stiffness based design criteria becomes
predominant and even if the column sections suffice
Fig. 8: Typical Diagrid Building
the strength criteria, maximum lateral displacement
exceeds 1/500th of building height. To overcome
these excessive member sizes are required as height
increases.

For the design of columns, built-up box sections are

used and for the design of beams, Indian Standard I-
Sections are used. The typical plan, beam
arrangements, elevation and 3D views of a 24 storey
conventional frame building are shown in the Figure
9. Optimum design sections for 24 storey building
are shown in Table 1 with notations as shown in
Figures 8 and 9.

www.ijera.com 25 | P a g e
Manthan I. Shah et al. Int. Journal of Engineering Research and Applications www.ijera.com
ISSN: 2248-9622, Vol. 6, Issue 5, (Part - 2) May 2016, pp. 22-29

9 (b): Elevation of 24- 9(c): 3D View of 24-Storey

Storey Conventional Conventional Frame Building
Frame Building
9 (a): Typical Floor and Beam Arrangement of 24-Storey
Conventional Frame Building
Fig. 9: Typical Conventional Frame Building
Table 1: Design Sections for 24 Storey Building
Design Sections for 24 Storey Building
Building Type From To Diagrid Column Beam 1 Beam 2 Beam 3
0 8 B-200X17 B-400X45
Diagrid 9 16 B-150X10 B-400X30 ISMB 450 ISMB 450 ISMB 450
17 24 B-125X10 B-400X15
24 Storey
0 8 -- B-350X55
Simple Frame 9 16 -- B-350X45 ISMB 400 ISMB 350 ISMB 350
17 24 -- B-350X35

IV. RESULTS COMPARISON AND DISCUSSION

Table 2: Governing Loads
After analysing and designing all the structures, the
governing loads for each building for both diagrid Store Conventional
Diagrid
and conventional frame systems are tabulated in the y frame
Table 2. It is observed that in diagrid system 4 EQ STATIC EQ STATIC
earthquake forces are predominant upto 16 storeys
and in conventional frame upto 12 storeys. This 8 EQ DYNAMIC EQ DYNAMIC
means wind forces are predominant after 16 storeys 12 EQ STATIC EQ STATIC
in diagrid system and 12 storeys in conventional 16 EQ STATIC WL
frame system. It can be concluded that diagrid
system resists wind forces upto higher heights than 20 WL WL
conventional frame system. Further it is important to 24 WL WL
note that the section for conventional frame is not 28 WL --
possible from feasibility and practicability point of
view.

www.ijera.com 26 | P a g e
Manthan I. Shah et al. Int. Journal of Engineering Research and Applications www.ijera.com
ISSN: 2248-9622, Vol. 6, Issue 5, (Part - 2) May 2016, pp. 22-29

A. Time Period C. Maximum Base Shear

Figure 10 represents the comparison of the time The Figure 12 represents the comparison of the
period of both the systems. It is observed from the maximum base shear for both the systems:
figure that as the building height increases, the time
period of diagrid remains lower than that of the
conventional frame building. Thus it is observed that
the diagrid building is stiffer than the conventional
frame.

Fig. 12: Maximum Base Shear Comparison

As the building is symmetric, the base shear

will be the same in both the directions. As it is
known that the diagrid system is stiffer than the
conventional frame, it attracts more lateral force and
hence it has more base shear upto 12 storey
buildings. After 12 storeys, static wind loads takes
Fig. 10: Time Period Comparison
hold and becomes governing forces and the base
B. Maximum Top Storey Displacement shear is governed by static wind loads. Thus after 12
storeys the base shear for both the systems is
Figure 11 represent the comparison of the maximum observed to be similar.
top storey displacements for both the systems. The
trend of lateral displacements is observed to be D. Steel Weight
similar in both the directions because the building
selected in study is symmetrical. It is observed that The conventional frame buildings are designed with
the pattern of the plot is similar for both systems but excessive column sizes. And thus it has in turn
the overall displacement values are quite higher for increased the steel consumption or steel weight of
conventional frame even if they are designed for the buildings. The rate of increment also increases
excessive column sizes. Thus it proves the tremendously with the height of building as seen in
effectiveness of diagrid structures. Figure 13. This presents an example of the concept
of “Premium for Height” given by Fazlur Khan (Ali
and Kyoung 2007). Due to excessive member size
requirements, it is not possible to design 28 storey
conventional frame building. In the Figure 14, the
maximum steel weight is compared for both the
systems:

The overall increase in the steel weight of

the conventional frame system as compared to
diagrid system is very high. The percentage
differences in steel weight of conventional frame
with respect to the diagrid system are presented in
the Figure 14. It is observed that between 6 to 12
storeys, conventional frame is more economical that
diagrid system. After that, the concept of Premium
of Height becomes significant and makes the
conventional frame system uneconomical with
Fig. 11: Maximum Top Storey Displacement
respect to diagrid system.

www.ijera.com 27 | P a g e
Manthan I. Shah et al. Int. Journal of Engineering Research and Applications www.ijera.com
ISSN: 2248-9622, Vol. 6, Issue 5, (Part - 2) May 2016, pp. 22-29

Fig. 13: Steel Weight Comparison

Fig. 15: Maximum Storey Displ. for 20 Storey

Symmetrical Building

changed. As the building is symmetrical, results in

both directions are identical. The results showing
typical trend of drifts at each storey level for 20
storey building are presented in Figure 16. The
storey drifts are within permissible limits in both the
Fig. 14: Percentage Difference of Steel Weight Between cases.
Conventional and Diagrid Systems

E. Maximum Storey Displacements

Patterns of storey displacement curves are observed

to be uniform in both the cases. Storey displacement
patterns of conventional frame buildings are
observed more uniform while in case of the diagrid
buildings better results are observed. The trend of
plots for diagrids is found to be nearly linear while
that of conventional frame building is found to be
curvilinear. As the building is symmetrical, results in
both directions are identical. The results showing
typical trend of displacements at each storey level
for 20 storey building are presented in Figure 15.

F. Maximum Storey Drifts

Uniform storey drift curves are observed in both the

cases. But storey drift patterns of conventional frame
buildings are observed more uniform while in case
of the diagrid buildings highly conservative results
Fig. 16: Maximum Storey Drifts for 20 Storey
are observed. Maximum storey drift are observed at
Symmetrical Building
the lower portion of the conventional frame building,
while in diagrid buildings sudden variations are
observed at storeys where the diagrid sections are

www.ijera.com 28 | P a g e
 Manthan I. Shah et al. Int. Journal of Engineering Research and Applications www.ijera.com
ISSN: 2248-9622, Vol. 6, Issue 5, (Part - 2) May 2016, pp. 22-29

V. CONCLUSIONS International Journal of High-Rise

Buildings, 2014: 223-230.
Based on the numerical study carried out in the
[9] Kyoung, Soon Moon, J. Connor Jerome,
present research work, following major conclusions
and E. Fernandez John. “Diagrid Structural
can be drawn:
Systems for Tall Buildings: Characteristics
1) Diagrid structural system has emerged as a
and Methodology for Preliminary Design.”
better solution for lateral load resisting system
The Structural Design of Tall and Special
in terms of lateral displacements, steel weight
Buildings, 2007: 205-230.
and stiffness. It is stiff enough to resist wind
[10] Kyoung, Sun Moon. “Diagrid Structures for
forces upto higher heights.
Complex-Shaped Tall Buildings.” Procedia
2) The diagrid structure provides high efficiency in
Engineering, 2011: 1343-1350.
terms of steel weight along with the aesthetic
[11] Kyoung, Sun Moon. “Diagrid Structures for
appearance. For 24 storey building, weight of
Complex-Shaped Tall Buildings.”
conventional frame is 100% more than diagrid
Advanced Materials Research, 2012: 1489-
building.
1492.
3) Displacements on each storey and storey drifts
[12] Mir, Ali M., and Kyoung Sun Moon.
are observed to be less in diagrid systems as
“Structural Developments in Tall
compared to conventional frame.
Buildings:Current Trends and Future
REFERENCES Prospects.” Architectural Science Review,
[1] Ali, Mir M., and Sum Moon Kyoung. 2007: 205-223.
“Structural Developments in Tall [13] Moon, K. “Design and Construction of
Buildings: Current Trends and Future Steel Diagrid Structures.” NSCC, 2009.
Prospects.” Architectural Science Review, [14] Moon, Kyoung Sun. “Comparative
2007: 205-223. Evaluation of Structural Systems for Tilted
[2] Elena, Mele, Maurizio Toreno, Brandonisio Tall Buildings.” Intrenational Journal of
Giuseppe, and De Luca Antonello. “Diagrid High-Rise Buildings, 2014: 89-98.
structures for tall buildings: case studies [15] Moon, Kyoung Sun. “Diagrid Structures for
and design considerations.” The Structural Complex-Shaped Tall Buildings.” Procedia
Design Of Tall And Special Buildings, Engineering, 2011: 1343-1350.
2014: 124-145. [16] Moon, Kyoung Sun. “Optimal Grid
[3] Elena, Mele, Toreno Maurizio, Brandonisio Geometry of Diagrid Structures.”
Giuseppe, and De Luca Antonello. “Diagrid Architectural Science Review, 2008: 239-
Structures for Tall Buildings: Case Studies 251.
and Design Consideration.” The Structural [17] Moon, Kyoung Sun, Jerome J. Connor, and
Design of Tall and Special Buildings, 2014: John E. Fernandez. “Diagrid Structural
124-145. Systems For Tall Buildings: Characteristics
[4] Jani, Khushbu D., and Paresh V. Patel. And Methodology For Preliminary.” The
“Design of Diagrid Structural System for Structural Design Of Tall And Special
High Rise Steel Buildings as per Indian Buildings, 2007: 205-230.
Standards.” Structures Congress 2013 ©
ASCE 2013, 2013: 1070-1081. Indian Standard Codes
[5] Jani, Khushbu, and Paresh V. Patel.
“Analysis and Design of Diagrid Structural [1] “IS 1893 (Part 1) : 2002.” Criteria For Earthquake
Resistant Design Of Structures. Bureau of Indian
System for High Rise Steel Buildings.”
Standards.
Procedia Engineering, 2012: 92-100. [2] “IS 800:2007.” General Construction In Steel - Code
[6] Kim, J., Y. Jun, and Lee Ho. “Seismic Of Practice. Bureau of Indian Standards.
Performance Evaluation of Diagrid System [3] “IS: 875 - 1978.” Code Of Practice For Design
Buildings.” 2nd Speciality Conference on Loads (Other Than Earthquake) For Buildings And
Disaster Mitigation, 2010. Structures. Bureau of Indian Standards.
[7] Kim, Jong Soo, Young Sik Kim, and Seung
Hee Lho. “Structural Schematic Design of a Websites
Tall Building in Asan using the Diagrid
System.” CTBUH 2008 8th World [1] India Building
Congress. Dubai, 2008. www.skyscrapercenter.com/country/india (accessed
[8] Kwon, Kwangho, and Jinkoo Kim. August 7, 2015).
“Progressive Collapse and Seismic
erformance of Twisted Diagrid Buildings.”

www.ijera.com 29 | P a g e

View publication stats