Doc. No.

:_CED 39(7941)_ BIS Letter Ref: _CED 39/T-8_ Dated: 28 March 2014_
Title: Ductile Detailing of Reinforced Concrete Structures Subjected to Seismic Forces
- Code of Practice (First Revision of IS 13920)
Name of the Commentator/ Organization: N.PRABHAKAR, Chartered Structural
Engineer, Vasai (E), Pin 401 208, Thane Dist., Maharashtra
Sl
No.
1

Clause/ Subclause/ Para/

Table/ Figure No.
Commented
7.1.1 (a), Fig. 7
and 9.1.3

Comments/ Suggestions/ Modified

Wordings
(Technical Comments)
The present wordings are
The minimum dimension of a column
shall not be less than 20db.. This
requirement is very arbitrary and will
not satisfy the requirement of Clause
26.2.2.5 of IS 456 : 2000 related to
bearing stresses at bends of tensile
bars. The present clause is to be
modified to suit the requirement of the
above referred clause of IS 456 :
2000 as applicable for standard
radius of bend equal to 4 x db for 90O
bend. The revised wordings to be as
follows:
The minimum dimension of a column
depth in the direction of the framing
beam, hc, shall not be less than Kc x db
or 300mm, whichever is less, where
db is the diameter of the largest
diameter of the longitudinal
reinforcement bar in the beam
passing through or anchoring into the
column at the joint, and Kc is the
coefficient given below for different
grades of concrete in column and
reinforcement steel
Concrete Grade
In Column, fck
M20
M25
M30
M35
M40
M45
M50

Kc
fy values
415
500
550
42.75
35.31
31.25
26.44
22.66
21.00
19.32

52.38
43.54
38.97
33.26
28.75
27.07
25.41

58.02
48.38
43.47
37.25
32.32
30.65
29.00

Justification of
Proposed Change
The present clause will
lead to anchorage
failure of tension bars,
particularly in large
diameter L-shaped 90O
bend bars with a
standard radius of
bend equal to 4db as
per IS: 2502, in small
depth columns due to
high bearing stress in
concrete at bends of
bars. This failure can
be avoided by
providing larger radius
of bend greater than
4db, as per clause
26.2.2.5 of IS 456:
2000 for tension bars.
This is not practical as
it involves showing
larger radius of bend
on the reinforcement
drawing and in the bar
bending schedule,
besides strict
supervision and
execution of it which
may not be there at all
sites. Hence, the only
practical solution as
many international
codes recommend, is
to increase the column
depth in the direction of
the framing beam. I
have expressed my
point of view on this
topic in the Indian
Concrete Journal of
April 2001 on the
subject of Earthquake
resistance structures.
Also, in my Letter to

the Editor of the Indian

Concrete Journal,
September 2004 issue,
commenting on the
topic related to Fig 5
(a) in EarhquakeTip 20
: Beam-column joints,
issued by IITK-bmTpc.
In reply to my
comment, Dr. Sudhir K.
Jain, author of the
Earthquake Tip 20
agrees with my
comment on the
subject and promises
to modify it
satisfactorily in future.
But, this has not been
modified in the draft
code.
I am attaching herewith
a copy of both of my
articles published in
the Indian Concrete
Journal mentioned
above, for your
information.
The proposed
modification I have
suggested can be
verified by calculations
in the attached Excel
Worksheet I have
developed , which is
as per the requirement
of Clause 26.2.2.5 of
IS 456: 2000 in regard
to bearing stresses at
bends of tensile bars.
The proposed values
of Kc in the table given
in my comments, are
worked out considering
32mm dia. bars, but
these values will be
slightly less for smaller
diameter bars, but
these are safe.
As comparison, for
commonly used M25
grade concrete and
415 grade steel, the
value of hc as per my

table is 35.31db, which

is nearly same as the
New Zealand practice
of 36 db for concrete of
20 MPa cylinder
strength (equivalent
cube strength is 25
MPa) and grade 430
steel, and 32 db as per
ACI 352.
2.

Clause 7.3.2.1(c)
and (ii)

The wordings in (c) is to be revised as

under:
Lap splices shall be provided not
(i)
within a joint or
(ii)
within a distance of 1d
from
face of the beam

The present clause

means, in most cases,
each column bar will
be two storeys high in
order to stagger the
laps by 50%, i.e. as
much as 6m to 8m high
bars, which poses the
problem of keeping the
bars in position during
construction.