Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Alpa Sheth
In theaftermathof theBhuj earthquakefor 2001, the scope of moderate to high hazard. The IS 13920 : 1993 differs from the
IS 13920 was extended to include all buildings in zone III, . IS 4326: 1976 in the following.
whereas, prior to that, it was applicable for high and very
(i) Material specifications have been introduced for the
high seismic hazard areas (zones IV and V) and for buildings lateral force-resisting elements
greater than five storeys in moderate seismic hazard area
(zone III). The IS 13920:1993 lays down the same conditions (ii) Geometric constraints have been introduced for the
for seismic detailing of frame members and shear walls lateral force-resisting elements as also detailing and
regardless of the level of seismic hazard (moderate to very location of splices, provisions of minimum and
maximum reinforcement
high). This needs to be rationalised. It may be possible to
simplify some of the ductile detailing in zone III and (iii) Requirements for the transverse reinforcement in
compensate for the reduced ductility and toughness by suitably beams and columns and their detailing have been
increasing the seismic force levels. This is already addressed expanded
in the ACI 318 and IBC codes. The paper makes a casefor a
(iv) Provisions for reinforced concrete shear walls are
simplified methodology of detailing for ordinary buildings included
in zones with moderate seismic hazard which will greatly
ease the application of earthquake engineering for buildings The IS 13920 : 1993 specifies the same level of ductility for
in zone III. As per IS 1893 : 2002, of the 79 important towns all buildings regardless of the level of seismic hazard the
in seismic zones III to V in India, 49 towns are in zone III. Some building is subjected to and makes no distinction between
of the ductility provisions of the IS 13920 are cumbersome zones of moderate, high and very high seismic hazard in the
and difficult to execute and as a result there is a resistance to energy dissipation requirements. Thus, seismic zones III to
its application. The author argues that the simplification of V require the same ductile detailing.
the ductile detailing in zone III would greatly encourage its
Need for varying toughness requirements
widespread implementation.
in moderate versus high seismic zones
The IS 13920 : 19931 covers the requirements for design and The level of ductile detailing in concrete structures directly
detailing of monolithic special reinforced concrete (RC) affects its energy dissipation capacity (toughness). It is fairly
moment resisting frames (SMRF) so as to give them adequate apparent that structures in higher seismic zones or those
toughness and ductility to resist severe earthquake shaking assigned to higher seismic performance or design categories
without collapse and moderate shaking with some non- should possess a higher degree of toughness. The degree of
structural damage and some non-structural damage. energy dissipation, and therefore the detailing, should
logically increase fqr structures progressing from ordinary
Prior to 1993, the IS 4326 : 19762 (Code of practicefor through intermediate to special categories, based on the
earthquakeresistant designand construction of buildings) laid seismic zone they are located in as well as the level of seismic
down requirements for ductile detailing in seismic areas of performance that is required of them. .
-~
-- -- -
The Bhuj earthquake of 2001 demonstrated that ordinary (reinforced concrete) moment resisting frames (IMRF) will
RC buildings (with well defined frames) in seismic zone III perform at a lower level of toughness with an appropriate
performed badly when they were marginally designed and compensating modification in the response reduction factor.
poorly detailed even for gravity loads or had a soft storey,
stiffness discontinuities, torsion, plan or vertical or mass The suggested relaxations in the various ductility
irregularities? Most buildings in zone III performed requirements of IS 13920 : 1993 for intermediate frames are
reasonably well as long as they did not possess any major discussed herein.
irregularities, even though many of them were not
specifically detailed as per with the ductility provisions of IS
Flexural members
13920. One of the reasons for this behaviour was the Longitudinal reinforcement
contribution of the infill panel walls to the stiffness and
strength of the building. The intensity of shaking in zone III It is necessary to provide flexural members with a threshold
towns and cities was also much lower. level of toughness. To achieve this, the IS 13920 requires that
minimum positive strength at a joint face should be equal to
Based on lessons learnt from past earthquakes, for at least half the negative strength at the joint face. It further
ordinary buildings (with importance factor = 1), a case may requires that minimum steel at any face should not be less
be made for a varying level of required energy dissipation than 25 percent of the maximum negative steel at any joint
capacity (toughness) the structure is called upon to face.
demonstrate, depending on the seismic zone it is located in
and which is assumed while computing the design seismic This ctiteria may be relaxed for intermediate frames such
loads. By reducing the response reduction factor and thus that the positive moment strength at the face of the joint is
designing for a higher seismic force, the detailing not less than one third the negative moment strength
requirements may be relaxed in zone III. provided at that face of the joint and the negative or the
positive moment strength at any section along the length of
Thus, a separate type of frame, say the intermediate moment the member is not less than one fifth the maximum moment
resistingjrame (IMRF) whose performance would be between strength provided at the face of either joint.
that of the ductile moment resisting frame (detailed as per IS
13920: 1993) and the ordinary moment resisting frame could Transverse reinforcement
be considered for application in moderate seismic zone. The
seismic detailing requirements of this type of frame would IS 13920 requires the web reinforcement in flexural members
be less stringent than that required as per IS 13920 : 1993 for to have a 135 degree hook and an additional 10 diameter
special RC moment resisting frames. To compensate for the length of the hoop reinforcement beyond the hook. The 135
reduction in the toughness due to a relaxation of the ductility degree hook is rather difficult to execute and in the case of a
criteria, the response reduction factor R may be less than the 200 rom wide flexural members with 50 rom clear cover, the
value of 5 for (ductile) special RC moment resisting frame 10 diameter additional length of the hoop bar beyond the
but may be more than 3.0 which is the value of R for ordinary hook practically touches the vertical leg of the hoop on the
RC moment resisting frame. The factor could be considered other side (for an 8 rom or higher diameter bar), Fig l(a).
to be between 3.5 to 4. Such a relaxation in energy dissipation This causes various construction difficulties such as difficulty
requirement is only for the ordinary, regular buildings in in the placement of these hoops, in the placing of concrete
zone III which do not fall in the category of irregular and in the vibration of the concrete. This requirement should
buildings. be eliminated for intermediate moment resisting frames
(IMRFs) in view of the reduced requirement of toughness
ACI 318-023 (Building Code Requirements for Structural and a 90 degree hook with a 8d extension instead may be
Concrete) also has a similar provision and allows for the use allowed, Fig l(b).
of "Intermediate moment frames" in regions of moderate
seismic hazard. For such intermediate frames, the detailing Design shear strength
requirements are greatly relaxed in ACI 318. The
requirement of toughness is reduced by reducing the response It is necessary in all seismic zones to avoid a shear failure in
modification coefficient R from 8 in special moment resisting frame members. Hence, the shear capacity of any frame
concrete frames to 5 in intermediate concrete moment frames member should be larger than the sum of actual shear on the
member due to vertical loads and that associated with the
in the International Building Code (!BC 2003)4,thus increasing
the seismic load by about 1.6 times. The International Building development of the full moment capacity of the member.
Code (2003), like the ACI 318, allows the use of intermediate
moment frames for buildings in seismic design category C. Presently, in IS 13920, the shear capacity required in
flexural members is given as:
The suggestions for revised requirements of ductile
detailing for zone III made herein are based on those of ACI M ~Urn + M ~Urn
318-02 for intermediate frames. Vu,a = VaD+L
- 1.4
( LAB
)
Requirements of intermediate moment
resisting frame v:u,b = VbD+L+ 1.4
MAS +MBh
u,Urn U,Urn
As distinct from the requirements of special RC moment LAB
( )
resisting frames spelt out in IS 13920, the intermediate
Note that the 1.4 factor for the moment capacity of the
0 0
'" '"
.... beams as given in IS 13920 is proposed to be eliminated in
....
The above clauses were formulated with the intent that Note that the 1.4 factor for design shear force for columns
as per IS 13920 is missing. The rationale for this change is the
the column would have the same axial strength after spalling' same as for beams mentioned earlier
of the cover concrete as before spalling.
6.2.4 Flexural members - Minimum steel at any face should not be less than Minimum steel at any face should not be less than 20 percent of
Longitudinal reinforcement 25 percent of the maximum negative steel at any joint face the maximum negative steel at any joint face
6.3.1 Web reinforcement - 135° hook + 10d extension of hoop bar 90° hook + 4d extension of hoop bar
6.3.3 Web reinforcement =shear required for design gravity loads + shear =shear required for design gravity loads + shear developed by sum
Shear capacity developed by 1.4 times sum of moment capacities of of moment capacities of both ends of member
both ends of member
7.2.1 Columns lap splices Maximum 50 percent of bars to be lapped at one location This requirement to be relaxed
M~im +M~im
( ) ( )
Transverse reinforcement M~1im +M:~Iim
7.3.4 V,= 1.4 v, =
Shear capacity in columns h" h,t
7.4.7 Area of special confining for circular hoops, This requirement to be eliminated
and steel in columns
f., -Ag-1.0
7.4.8 A'h=0.09SD,-'--
fy A, ( )
While for rectangular hoops steel,
f., -Ag-1.0
A,h=0.18ShD,-'--
fy A, ( )
9.4-9.5 Shear walls Boundary elements, coupling beams This requirement to be eliminated
??? Beamless slabs (flat slabs) Detailing clauses for flat slabs (for example, provisions of
integrity steel) required
past earthquakes and are not very desirable in high and very Table 1 summarises the suggested changes required in IS
high seismic zones, they may be used with caution in 13920 for IMRF for use in zone III or lower.
moderate seismic zones. However there are no requirements
for the placement, location and detailing of reinforcement in References
flat slabs in IS 13920. This needs to be rectified immediately 1. _Indian standard code of practicefor ductile detailing of reinforced concrete
and some minimum requirement of provision of integrity structures subjected to seismic forces, IS 13920 : 1993, Bureau of Indian
steel needs to be included on priority basis for seismic zone Standards, New Delhi.
m.
2. _Indian standard code of practice for earthquake resistant design and
construction of buildings, IS 4326: 1993,Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
Conclusion
3. _Building code requirementsfor structural concrete,AC1318-02, American
There appears to be a need to differentiate between the
Concrete Institute, USA.
ductility criteria in zones of moderate seismic hazard from
that in zones of high and very high seismic hazard as provided 4. _International building code,IBC2oo3, International Code Council, USA.
for in ACI 318-02. In zones II and III, buildings may be
designed with less stringent ductility detailing but with an 5. _Indian standard criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures,
Part 1 General provisions and buildings (fifth revision), IS 1893 (Part 1) :
increase in the design seismic force.
2002, Bureau of Indian Standards, New DeIhi.
Thus for zone III, there should be a choice of using either 6. _Indian standard code of practicefor plain and reinforced concrete (fourth
revision), IS 456: 2000, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
(i) SMRF as per the existing IS 13920with corresponding
7. JAIN,S K, LETIlS,W R, MURTY,
C V R, and BARDET,J.P. (editors), 2001 Bhuj, India
response reduction factor R value as 5.0 as spelt out
in IS 1893 : 2003s Earthquake Reconnaissance Report, Supplement A to Volume 18, Earthquake
Spectra, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, USA, July 2002.
or
Ms Alpa Sheth obtained her Master's from
(ii) IMRF zone III with a corresponding reduced R say 4
University of California, Berkeley. She is currently
Partner, Vakil Mehta Sheth Consulting Engineers,
Similarly, in zone II, an engineer may detail as per IS 456 Mumbai.
only (OMRF with R value of 3.0, as IMRF (with R value of
4.0), or as SMRF (with R value of 5.0t ...
I
1