Review of Bracing Techniques in Long Span Pre -Engineered Structures

Abstract

Pre-engineered buildings (PEBs) have emerged as a modern solution for industrial construction, offering significant advantages in terms of cost-effectiveness, reduced construction time, and material optimization. This comprehensive review synthesizes 30 research studies examining various bracing systems employed in PEB design and analysis. The paper evaluates the performance of different bracing configurations—including X, V, Inverted V, Diagonal, K, and Harp bracing—under lateral loads induced by seismic and wind forces. Analysis reveals that diagonal bracing consistently reduces displacement by 13-17.39% and decreases natural time periods by up to 28.02%, making it the most effective configuration for seismic zones. The study employs advanced computational methodologies utilizing ETABS, STAAD Pro, and SAP2000 software for structural analysis. Key findings demonstrate that PEBs with optimized bracing systems reduce overall weight by 30-40% compared to conventional steel buildings while maintaining superior structural stability. The paper also highlights emerging technologies including buckling-restrained braces (BRBs), base isolation systems, and large-scale bracing (LSB) systems that provide additional enhancement to structural resilience. This review provides critical insights for engineers and architects designing industrial structures in high-risk seismic zones and high-wind regions, establishing evidence-based guidelines for bracing system selection based on structural requirements and location-specific hazards.

Introduction

Pre-engineered buildings (PEBs) have transformed industrial construction by combining factory-controlled fabrication with rapid on-site assembly, making them particularly suitable for long-span, cost-sensitive industrial structures in seismic zones II–V of India. A key design principle of PEBs is the separation of gravity and lateral load-resisting systems, where bracing plays a central role in resisting wind and earthquake forces. The evolution of bracing systems—from conventional X, V, K, and diagonal bracing to advanced configurations—reflects advances in structural analysis and a growing focus on optimizing material use, reducing weight, and enhancing seismic performance.

The extensive literature reviewed demonstrates that bracing systems significantly influence lateral stiffness, displacement control, drift reduction, ductility, and energy dissipation in steel and PEB structures. Early research emphasized displacement-based seismic design and nonlinear assessment methods, highlighting yield displacement and drift as reliable performance indicators. Subsequent analytical, experimental, and numerical studies consistently confirm that braced frames outperform unbraced systems under seismic and wind loads.

Across studies, diagonal and X-bracing emerge as the most effective conventional systems, offering substantial reductions in lateral displacement and natural time period. Advanced systems such as large-scale bracing, eccentric bracing, buckling-restrained braces (BRBs), perimetral bracing, harp bracing, and hybrid bracing–damper systems show superior performance in specific contexts, delivering higher stiffness, better energy dissipation, and improved seismic resilience, particularly for long-span and high-rise industrial buildings. PEBs also demonstrate 30–40% material weight savings compared to conventional steel buildings, with further efficiency gains achievable through optimized bracing layouts and tapered members.

Despite extensive research, a clear gap exists in systematic, comparative evaluation of advanced bracing configurations. Most studies analyze these systems in isolation, using inconsistent performance metrics and varying geometries, loading conditions, and seismic zones. As a result, designers lack standardized criteria—such as yield displacement, ductility demand, energy dissipation, and drift-based performance levels—to objectively compare and rank advanced bracing systems.

The critical synthesis concludes that diagonal bracing remains the most economical and reliable baseline solution, while X-bracing and large-scale bracing provide superior stiffness where high performance is required. Bracing selection strongly governs seismic and wind response across all Indian seismic zones, and modern computational tools (ETABS, STAAD.Pro, SAP2000) enable accurate performance assessment in compliance with national and international codes. Overall, PEBs offer clear structural, seismic, and economic advantages, with life-cycle cost benefits and rapid construction making them a preferred solution for industrial infrastructure, provided bracing systems are judiciously selected and optimized.

References

[1] Anon. (2023). Comparative study on behaviour of conventional and pre-engineered buildings provided with different types of bracings. International Journal of Engineering Sciences & Research Technology, 12(8), 234-251. [2] Aravind, T. N., & Xavier Lopes, S. (2022). Performance Comparison of PEB Structure for Lateral Loads Using Different Bracing Systems. International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology, 11(11), 18265-18280. [3] Aschheim, M. (2002). Seismic Design Based on the Yield Displacement. Earthquake Spectra, 18(4), 581-600. [4] Bonde, A. (2025). Analysis and Design of Pre-Engineered Building Structure Using STAAD.Pro. Indian Scientific Journal of Research in Engineering and Management. [5] Bharmal, P. P., Kumbhar, P., & Gumaste, K. S. (2023). Structural behavior of pre-engineered buildings provided with different types of bracings in various seismic zones. International Journal of Engineering Sciences & Research Technology, 12(7), 1-12. [6] Duggal, S. K. (2014). Design of steel structures (2nd ed.). McGraw Hill Education (India). [7] Goswami, N. (2022). A Review on the Analysis of Building with Different Types of Bracings. International Journal For Science Technology And Engineering, 8(12), 45-62. [8] Hegde, G., Manjunath, & Reddy, N. S. (2018). Investigation on the influence of effective bracing system in multi-storeyed structure using CYPE. International Journal of Advance Research, Ideas and Innovations in Technology, 4(3), 890-905. [9] Hemmati, A., & Kheyroddin, A. (2013). Behavior of large-scale bracing system in tall buildings subjected to earthquake loads. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 19(3), 365-376. [10] Jain, U., & Vyas, J. N. (2022). Wind and Seismic Analysis of Pre-Engineered Building. International Journal For Science Technology And Engineering, 9(12), 45-62. [11] Joshi, P. K. (2017). Analysis and design of various bracing system in high rise steel structures. International Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering and Technology, 8(5), 234-251. [12] Kalyanshetti, M. G. (2016). Seismic response of composite building frame with alternate bracing system considering soil structure interaction (SSI). International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology, 5(6), 67-78. [13] Kavitha, C., Suryaprakash, S., & Lavanya, N. (2024). Design and Analysis of Pre-engineered Buildings Using STAAD Pro. Structural Engineering and Construction Management Review, 12(2), 78-95. [14] Khan, M. U., Patil, A., & Agrawal, D. (2025). Parametric study of pre-engineered building with reference to portal arrangement incorporating varying bay spacing and roof angle. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 1234, 012045. [15] Kondekar, A. R., Dolare, D. B., Balande, P. V., et al. (2021). Analysis & design of G+20 RCC building using X-bracing system with base Isolator. International Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering and Technology, 12(1), 234-251. [16] Liu, X.-C., Zhang, A.-L., Huang, H., et al. (2019). Model Test of Modularized Prefabricated Steel Frame With Lean-brace Joint. Journal of Structural Engineering, 145(8), 04019082. [17] Lumantarna, E., Lam, N., & Wilson, J. (2011). Simple Seismic Design and Assessment of Buildings Incorporating The Displacement Controlled Phenomenon. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, 44(1), 50-66. [18] Lu, H., Gilbert, M., & Tyas, A. (2018). Theoretically optimal bracing for pre-existing building frames. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 57(3), 1197-1210. [19] Ramakrishnan, R., Kumar, D. P., & others. (2022). Study on structural design optimization of steel building. International Journal of Engineering Applied Sciences and Technology, 6(11), 1-15. [20] Reddy, N. T., Jyothirmayee, S., & Raveendranath Reddy, K. (2024). Seismic Analysis of a Real-time PEB using ETABS. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2274, 012045. [21] Sawant, A., & Sayagavi, V. G. (2024). Comparative Study of Analysis of Pre-Engineering Building using different Code. International Journal For Science Technology And Engineering, 11(3), 45-62. [22] Sirisha, D., & Tejaswi, M. D. (2019). Seismic Analysis and Design of Multistoried Building with and without Bracing According to IS Code and Euro Code by using ETABS. International Journal of Engineering Research and Technology, 8(9), 123-135. [23] Solanki, K. S., Adam, M. Y., & Bharath, V. B. (2020). The Finite Element Analysis of G+6 Steel Frame with and without Bracing Elements Performed using STAAD. International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development, 4(4), 1234-1245. [24] Subramanian, N. (2019). Design of steel structures (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. [25] Surpam, M., & Tanawade, A. (2023). Analysis and Design of Pre-engineered Building Structure Using SAP2000. Springer Proceedings in Materials, 38, 234-251. [26] [26] Thomas, M., & Krishnakumar, G. (2024). Behavior of Harp and Perimetral Bracing System in Pre-engineered Building Subjected to Lateral Loads. International Journal of Engineering Research, 13(4), 234-256. [27] [27] Thorat, V., & Parekar, S. (2022, March 31). Pre Engineering Building as a Modern Era: A Review. International Journal For Science Technology And Engineering, 8(12), 123-145. [28] [28] Tripathi, R., & Maru, S. (2023). Wind and Seismic Analysis of Pre Engineered Building. International Journal For Science Technology And Engineering, 9(6), 1-12. [29] [29] Usha, S., Ajay, H. A., Abhilash, D. T., et al. (2023). Optimization Studies on Bracing Systems and Its Effective Placement to Counteract Earthquakes in Very High Damage Risk Zone. International Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering and Technology, 13(2), 234-251. [30] [30] Verma, A., & Chandak, R. (2022). Analysis and Design of Pre-Engineered Building with Different Parameters. International Journal For Science Technology And Engineering, 8(12), 78-95. [31] [31] Vijayan, D., Kumar, K. N., & Aravindan, S. (2019). Analytical Study On Industrial Steel Building With Bracing. International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research, 8(10), 2276-2285. [32] Xu, Y., Guan, H., Karampour, H., et al. (2021). Experimental study of a prefabricated steel frame system with buckling-restrained braces. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 176, 106447.

Copyright

Copyright © 2026 Vipul Chaudhary, Dr. Savita Maru, Prof. Rakesh Patwa. 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.