Review on Comparative Study on Design and Analysis of Industrial Shed with Steel and Aluminium Members

Abstract

Industrial sheds are crucial in various sectors like manufacturing, logistics, and infrastructure where structural efficiency, economy, durability, and sustainability are among the main design considerations. Steel has been the main construction material for industrial sheds because of its high strength, easy availability, and reliable design codes. But, the demand for lightweight structures, corrosion resistance, quicker construction, and reduced environmental footprint has led to a growing interest in aluminum as a potential structural material. This review paper offers a detailed comparison of the structural systems of steel and aluminum in industrial shed applications. The authors thoroughly evaluate the latest work done on structural performance, load-bearing behavior, wind and seismic response, durability, cost-effectiveness, constructability, and life-cycle environmental impacts of both materials. Results from finite element analyses, experimental studies, and design-oriented investigations suggest that while steel has the upper hand in terms of stiffness and initial cost, aluminum still delivers superb benefits in the form of weight reduction, corrosion resistance, modular construction, and carbon emission reduction. Among others, the review discusses the current problems, research needs, and limitations in design pertaining to the use of aluminum as a material and advocates for the development of refined design practices and codes. Thus, the paper helps in the material selection process for industrial shed design which is optimized.

Introduction

Industrial sheds are essential for industrial infrastructure such as warehouses, manufacturing units, and logistics centers, and their design must ensure safety, durability, and cost efficiency under environmental loads like wind, seismic forces, and corrosion. Steel is the most widely used material due to its high strength, stiffness, and established design standards, especially in pre-engineered buildings (PEBs), but it suffers from corrosion, high maintenance needs, and significant environmental impact due to carbon emissions.

In contrast, aluminum is emerging as a sustainable alternative because of its lightweight nature, corrosion resistance, and recyclability. Although it has a lower stiffness and higher initial cost, research shows that with proper design optimization and advanced analysis methods, aluminum structures can achieve performance comparable to steel in certain applications. Life-cycle studies also suggest that aluminum may offer environmental advantages over time due to reduced maintenance and higher recyclability.

The literature highlights that steel industrial sheds are well-researched and widely standardized, while aluminum-based systems still lack comprehensive design codes and widespread adoption. Existing studies often focus on individual factors such as strength, cost, or durability, rather than a full comparative evaluation under identical conditions. This creates a research gap in holistic assessment considering structural performance, environmental impact, and life-cycle cost together.

Conclusion

The review article suggests that the decision on which structural material to use for industrial sheds should consider performance needs, environmental exposure, economic factors, and long-term sustainability instead of just the initial cost. Steel is still the material of choice for large and heavy industrial sheds because of its high strength, stiffness, and extensive codal provisions, which guarantee reliable load-bearing capacity and structural stability. Nevertheless, its vulnerability to corrosion and higher maintenance requirements lead to increased lifecycle costs, especially in harsh environments. On the other hand, aluminum is considered having lower stiffness and higher upfront material cost but it provides the most important advantages including lighter weight, corrosion resistance, fabricating ease, and recyclability which consequently results in lower foundation loads and maintenance requirement. The studies reviewed all point out aluminum’s ability of use in coastal, seismic, modular, and lightweight industrial applications. Moreover, hybrid steel–aluminum systems are seen as a feasible solution, bringing together the structural efficiency of steel with the durability and sustainability of aluminum. In conclusion, this review makes it clear that the decision regarding material choice for industrial shed designs must be made on a lifecycle basis considering the particular context to arrive at optimized- resilient- and sustainable designs.

References

[1] K. Šáran, P. Eswaramoorthi, and P. Nandhakumar, “Literature study on comparative analysis of long-span PEB industrial shed,” International Journal for Research in Applied Science and Engineering Technology (IJRASET), vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 1–6, 2023. [2] S. G. Hirekhan, P. D. Wadaskar, and A. G. Hirekhan, “Comparative study of design wind pressures for steel industrial sheds (IS875 variations & MBMA),” NVEO Journal, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 45–52, 2023. [3] P. Mehta and A. Gupta, “Structural analysis of aluminum and steel in industrial sheds: A comparative study,” Materials Today: Proceedings, vol. 47, pp. 3120–3126, 2021. [4] Y. Yan and J. Shan, “Cost-effectiveness and durability of aluminum vs. steel in industrial structures,” International Journal of Steel Structures, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 1185–1195, 2019. [5] Y. Sun, “Material selection for industrial structures: Analyzing steel and aluminum,” Materials Science & Engineering, vol. 789, pp. 1–10, 2020. [6] J. Peko, N. Tori?, and I. Boko, “Comparative analysis of steel and aluminum structures,” in Proceedings of the ACAE, University of Split, Croatia, pp. 55–62, 2017. [7] E. Georgantzia, M. Gkantou, and G. S. Kamaris, “Aluminium alloys as structural material: A review of research,” Institutional Repository, Open Access, pp. 1–20, 2021. [8] N. Habib, A. Vafadar, and F. Guzzomi, “Comparative study of aluminium properties manufactured using additive manufacturing techniques,” Journal of Additive Manufacturing, vol. 52, pp. 1–14, 2025. [9] D. Skeji?, A. Val?i?, I. ?udina, I. Garaši?, and T. Dokšanovi?, “A roadmap for the reliable design of aluminium structures fit for purpose,” Buildings, MDPI, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 1–25, 2024. [10] A. Cascino, E. Meli, and A. Rindi, “Evaluation of load-bearing performance and cost efficiency in steel-welded and modular aluminum rack structures,” Machines, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 1–18, 2025. [11] A. Thoresen, “Aluminium versus steel in low-volume production of structural applications,” NTNU Technical Report, Trondheim, Norway, 2024. [12] R. Feng, T. Yang, Z. Chen, K. Roy, B. Chen, and J. B. P. Lim, “Finite-element analysis and design of aluminum alloy RHSs/SHSs with openings in bending,” Structural Engineering, pp. 1–15, 2023. [13] Y. Yan and J. Shan, “Comparative study on carbon emission of steel and aluminum alloy structures,” in SPIE Conference Proceedings, vol. 12845, pp. 1–8, 2024. [14] L. Sharma, N. Taak, and P. K. Mishra, “A comparative analysis of conventional steel building and pre-engineered building systems,” E3S Web of Conferences, vol. 455, pp. 1–7, 2024. [15] O. O. Tokede, K. K. Weththasinghe, S. K. Shill, M. Wijayasundara, and M. Subhani, “Comparative evaluation of different material options for moment-resisting frames,” Journal of Structural Engineering, pp. 1–16, 2025. [16] A. Saai, V. Delhaye, T. Lange, T. Furu, K. Aamot, and J. Lein, “Comparative study of the effects of galvanic corrosion on bimetallic joints,” Construction and Building Materials, vol. 368, pp. 1–12, 2023. [17] M. R. Seyedabadi, M. Karrabi, M. Shariati, S. Karimi, M. Maghrebi, and U. Eicker, “Global building life cycle assessment: Comparative study of steel and concrete framed buildings,” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 389, pp. 1–14, 2023. [18] S. Yan and K. J. R. Rasmussen, “Generalised component method-based finite element analysis of beam-to-column joints,” Composite Structures, vol. 345, pp. 1–15, 2025.

Copyright

Copyright © 2026 Aanchal Walde, Prof. Raju Bondre. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.