Anda di halaman 1dari 5


CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE 3 3.1 Revisions in Section 3 : General design considerations Bases for design (Cl. 18)

New clauses on aim of design; durability, workmanship and materials;

and design process have been added to include considerations for adequate durability and resistance to the effect of fire.

The new code has encouraged the use of Limit State Method design
by shifting Working Stress Method from the body of the code (Section 6 in 1978 edition) to Annex B. It has also stated that structure and structural elements should normally be designed by Limit State Method. Where the Limit State Method can not be conveniently adopted, Working Stress Method may be used. 3.2 Loads and forces (Cl. 19)

Live load is now termed as imposed load and consideration of snow

load in accordance with IS 875 (Part 4) has been added.

The code has simplified that in ordinary buildings, such as low rise
dwellings whose lateral dimension do no exceed 45m, the effects due to temperature fluctuations, shrinkage and creep can be ignored in design calculations. 3.3 Stability of structures (Cl. 20) In addition to other stability criteria like overturning, sliding, etc., lateral drift criteria is also important in high rise buildings. This aspect has been recognized by the new code and the lateral sway at top has been restricted to H/500, where H is the height of the building. 3.4 Fire resistance (Cl. 21)

A new clause on fire resistance has been incorporated on the basis of

BS 8110. To meet specified period of fire resistance, the code has now stipulated requirements of minimum dimensions for structural elements (fig. 1) and nominal covers for different structural configurations (Table 16A).

When the required nominal cover exceeds 40 mm for beams and 35

mm for slabs, additional measures such as application of fire resistance finishes, provision of fire resistance false ceiling and


CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE sacrificial reinforcement in tensile zone have been recommended to protect against spalling. 3.5 Analysis (Cl. 22)

3.5.1 Effective span (Cl. 22.2) The effective length of cantilever, which was missing in the earlier code, has been introduced and is to be taken as its length to the face of the support plus half the effective depth except where it forms the end of a continuous beam where the length to the centre of support is to be taken. 3.5.2 Structural frames (Cl. 22.4) Simplified assumptions like substitute frame has been continued except where side sway consideration becomes critical due to unsymmetry in geometry or loading, in which cases rigorous analysis is recommended. 3.5.3 Moment and shear coefficients for continuous beams (Cl. 22.5) It is interesting to note that the bending moment coefficient at middle of intermediate span has been changed from 1/24 to 1/16. The reason is not very clear unless the moment coefficient given in the earlier code was based on redistribution done inadvertently. 3.5.4 Critical section for shear (Cl. 22.6.2) The shear failure at sections without shear reinforcement will normally occur on plane inclined at an angle of 30 0 to the horizontal. Thus, if the depth of the beam is d, the critical section for shear will be at a distance of d/tan300 from the face of support. The new code has clarified that the above will be applicable for beams generally carrying uniformly distributed load and where the principal load is located further than twice the distance of critical section from the face of support. Furthermore, it is worth pointing out that the above is applicable only when load is from top and support is at bottom as has been in fig. 2(a) and 2(b). In case of fig. 2(c), whole concept is changed since the support is from top and critical section for shear is at face of support only. 3.6 Control of deflection for beams (Cl. 23.2) The span to depth ratio given in clause 23.2.1 (a) and (b) is required to be modified for tension reinforcement as per fig. 4. Earlier, the modification factor was based on area and type of steel; but this has now been rightly based on the area and actual stress of steel for tensile reinforcement. The


CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE minimum depth of beam now required for deflection control will be comparatively less. However, it may be relevant here to mention that the span to depth ratio given in the code is only a simplified approach when rigorous deflection calculations are not made. 3.7 Slabs continuous over supports (Cl. 24.2) The relevant earlier clause stated that slabs continuous over supports should be designed according to provisions applicable to continuous beams. This has now been corrected and states that slabs spanning in one direction and continuous over supports should be designed according to provisions applicable to continuous beams as a separate provision is there for slabs spanning in two directions and continuous over supports. 3.8 Restrained slab spanning in two directions at right angles with unequal conditions at adjacent panels (Cl. 24.4.1) This is a new provision for slabs spanning in two directions at right angles to each other having different span lengths or different boundary conditions at far ends. Under such cases there is significant variance in bending moment at the common support. The extant practice is to design for the greater moment, resulting in uneconomical design. The present code has made provision for distribution of the moments according to relative stiffness of adjacent spans and also curtailment of reinforcement on the basis of point of contra-flexure assuming parabolic moment diagram. 3.9 Minimum eccentricity for compression members (Cl. 25.4) It has been clarified that in case of compression members subjected to biaxial bending, it would be sufficient to ensure that minimum eccentricity is exceeded about one axis at a time. This would simplify the design as eccentricity need not be considered in resultant direction. 3.10 Requirements governing reinforcement and detailing (Cl. 26)

Bundling of bars larger than 32 mm diameter has not been permitted. For detailing of earthquake resistant construction, reference to IS
13920 has been added. 3.10.1 Lap splices (Cl. Provisions have been added for increase in lap length where lap for a tension bar located at top and corner of a section and where minimum cover of twice the diameter of lapped bar is not available.


CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE 3.10.2 Strength of welds (Cl. The following conditions in regard to strength of welds have been added:

The strength of weld should be at least as great as that of the

parent bar. For splices in tension, 100 percent of design strength may be assumed if welding is strictly supervised and not more than 20% of the tensile reinforcement is welded in the section. 3.10.3 Maximum spacing of reinforcement bars in tension (Cl. 26.3.3) Maximum spacing of main reinforcement bars in slab has been reduced from 450 mm to 300 mm. 3.10.4 Nominal cover to reinforcement (Cl. 26.4) The effective protection of steel in concrete against corrosion depends upon adequate thickness of good quality concrete. A large-scale modification has been made in the new code while recommending requirements of concrete cover, which are as under:

The term nominal cover has been introduced and it is defined as

the design depth of concrete cover to all steel reinforcement including links. It is the dimension used in the design and included in the drawing that has to be strictly followed at site.

The required nominal cover has been specified on considerations

of both durability and fire resistance.

The requirement of nominal cover on durability considerations is for

various exposure conditions and not related to the type of structural members.

The nominal cover for longitudinal reinforcement bar in column

should in no case be less than 40 mm nor the diameter of such bar. This value may be reduced to 25 mm in case of columns of minimum dimension of 200 mm or under, whose reinforcement bars do not exceed 12 mm.

For footings, the minimum cover should be 50 mm.

3.10.5 Maximum spacing of shear reinforcement in beams (Cl.


CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE Maximum spacing of shear reinforcement in beams is reduced from 450 mm to 300 mm. 3.10.6 Minimum shear reinforcement in beams (Cl. In the formula for minimum cross-sectional shear of stirrup legs of shear reinforcement for beams, the term f y (characteristic strength of shear reinforcement in N/mm2) has been replaced by 0.87f y. 3.10.7 Pitch and diameter of lateral ties in columns (Cl.

The minimum distance between lateral ties in columns has been

modified from forty-eight times the diameter of lateral ties to 300 mm. The minimum diameter of lateral ties has been increased from 5 mm to 6 mm. 3.11 Expansion Joints (Cl. 27) For design consideration of expansion joints, reference to IS 3414 has been included.