NATIONAL WORKSHOP

ON
IS:456- 2000
16-17 August,2000

Organised by
National Council for Cement and Building Materials

New Delhi
Jointly with

Bureau of Indian Standards

New Delhi
 ACKNOW LEDG EMENT

Some of the articles in this volume are

reprints / reports or earlier publications. We
gratefully acknowledge the concerned
organisations / authors We specially thank
.

MIs L & T ECC Group and MIs Gammon

—

India Ltd., for the courtesy of photographs.

REVISION OF IS : 456 CODE OF PRACTICE
FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE
-OVERVIEW OF MODIFICATIONS

Centre for Human Resource and Continuing Education

NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR CEMENT AND BUILDING MATERIALS
 READING MATERIAL
on

IS:456-2000

02 - 03 ,tU(;UST, 2000

LIST OF CONTENTS

S No Topic Page
Nos
I Revision of IS:456 Code of Practice for Plain and 01-25
Reinforced concrete Overview of Modifications
—

2 Mix Proportioning and Quality Assurance 26-29

3 Acceptance Criteria 30-34

4 Durability Requirements 35-44

5 a) Shear capacity enhancement near supports 45-50

b) Slabs Spanning in Two Directions at Right AngIe 51-52

C) Control of Deflection 53-54

d) Lap Length of Reinforcing bars 55-56

e) Cover to reinforcements 57-63

flDesign of Slabs 64-67

6 General Design considerations and design of walls 69-83

REVISION OF IS 456 Code OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REiNFORCED
CONCRETE- OVERVIEW OF MODIFICATIONS

1. INTRODUCTION

Concrete is one of the most versatile among modern building materials. It is

most widely used, but unfortunately often most misused materials. Properly applied
technology for concrete starts with a good knowledge of the concrete materials and
the main operations of concreting i.e. selection of materials, its proportioning, mixing,
placing, compaction, curing and finishing. This has to be supported~oless measure
by efficient structural design, detailing, appropriate construction methods, quality
control, site management and level of maintenance.
In order to have uniform guidelines to be followed by all concerned in this most
important and basic area of construction, IS 456 was brought out in 1953 by the then
Indian Standard Institution. As the knowledge grew the Code was revised number of
times to make it competitive with similar Codes elsewhere in the world.

It is one of the most important basic standards widely used and accepted by
engineers, technical institutions, professional bodies and the construction industry. The
Code is expected to be used as one package for the design of concrete structures in
general building construction. It does not advocate the use of different provision from
different Codes in the design of concrete structures. However, for the design of special
structures, such as shell structures, folded plates, arches, bridges, chimneys, blast
resistant structures, hydraulic structures and liquid retaining structures specific
requirements as specified in the respective Codes shall be adopted in conjunction with
the provisions of the Code as far as they are applicable.

2. HISTORY OF IS 456

2.1 First published in 1953 under the title “Indian Standard Code of Practice for
Plain and Reinforced Concrete for General Building Construction”.

Highlights:
• covered design based on working stress method. Stresses were based
on British Standard Code.
• unit used was FPS.
Printed copies of 1 953 version sold out rapidly indicating the need for such
Code in the country.

In order to incorporate provision of additional materials and clarification on

some of the points raised while applying the Code to practical use, it was revised in
1957.
 Revision was limited to its scope. However, new sections on composite

column, concentrated toads and staircases were introduced.

2.2 The second revision was in 1964.

- Scope was enlarged to cover other types of structures. The title was also
modified as “Code of Practice for Plain and Reinforced Concrete”.
Other highlights of the revisions are:

• Inclusion of Ultimate Load (Load Factor) Theory of design to obviate the

short comings of Working Stress Method.
• Complete revision of section dealing with quality of concrete. Gradation
of concrete was done on the basis of its strength.
• Rationalisation of permissible stresses in concrete in metric system,
increase in permissible bond stress when deformed bars are used,
increase in permissible stresses in steel reinforcement and revision of the
periods for striking from Work were other major changes.

2.3 Third revision was done in 1978

Highlights of the revision:

• Introduction of Limit State Design

• Use of SI unit

• Symbols aligned with ISO 3989-1976. Bases for Design of Structures

Notation.
• Revision of sampling and acceptance criteria for concrete elaborating the
concept of statistical quality control and introduction of characteristic
strength of concrete.

• Inclusion of more types of cements, pozzolana, lightweight aggregate and

cold twisted deformed bars.

• Introduction of durability aspects covering minimum cement content and

maximum w/c ratio for different environment exposure conditions
including types of cement to be used for resisting sulphate attack.

• Other important changes included recommendation regarding substitutes

frame, minimum eccentricity for design of compression members,
recommendation regarding side face reinforcement in beam, detailing rule
for crack control, recommendation regarding design of deep beams,
guidance for the design of ribbed and voided slabs.
 Since the publication of 1978 version of the Code there has been rapid
development world over in the field of concrete technology, design and construction
practices. There is general :‘eeling that in the Code, though the design requirements
are adequately covered, provsions on materials, workmanship, durability requirements
inspection and testing are required to be dealt in more details. Further, increasing
number of failures of corcrete structures in recent past had drawn attention towards
the need to codify durability requirements for concrete and concrete structures.
The present fourth revision of the Code has given greater emphasis on the
above aspects besides bringing out other important necessary changes.

3. NEED FOR FOURTH REVISION

Users of the Code- designers, construction engineers and academicians from

educational institution have been sending suggestions for modification in Code. The
major concerns shown are:

• To unify Codes on Plain Concrete, RCC and prestressed concrete.

• Adequate emphasis to be given to durability aspects of the structures.

The approach suggested demanded modifications in the following areas.
- Exposure condition
- Selection of suitable constituent materials
- Selection of proper mix design including use of
admixtu res/additives
- Specifying proper cement content and w/c ratio for different
exposure conditions.
- Protection of reinforcement from corrosion by creating corrosion
inhibiting surrounding ie creating of dense cover concrete and
proper limiting of chloride and sulphate in concrete.
- Selection of appropriate structural form and detailing.
- Limiting crack formation and development
- Proper construction method

• Use of new materials like flyash, silica fume, rice husk ash, metakaoline,
blast furnace slag, super plasticisers etc. in concrete and the need for
increased durability demanded modifications in the material clause of the
Code.
• Simplifying the acceptance criteria of concrete which in the present Code,
is considered to be cumbersome

• Bringing service life approach in design.

• To bring quality assurance concept to give due emphasis on good

practices of construction.

3
 • Whether Working Stress Method should be given an independent identity.

• Provisicns for fire resistance structures

• Modifications regrading torsion and enhanced shear strength

• Estimation of loads on beams supporting slabs.

• Provision for design of walls, corb~Is.

4. DRAFT REVISION OF IS 456

While taking up the revision of the code, due considerations have been given
by the concerned committee to all the major issues pointed out by the users.

Whereas it is desirable to have a unified code covering all types of concrete

construction i.e. plain, reinforced and prestressed concrete as suggested by the users,
it was fell that revision of IS 456 in its present form was more important. Unification
could be done subsequently which would require more time.

4.1 Scope of Revision

Every revision of the code has distinct landmark; 1964 version introduced
ultimate load theory as a method of design, 1978 version introducè~ Limit State
Concept of design and the proposed revision has brought out, in addition to other
changes, durability aspect in concrete making and construction.

Changes in the analysis and design clauses are meant to improve the safety
and serviceability of the structures which may not bring substantial overall effect on
cost, but changes in concrete technology aspect like minimum cement content,
minimum grade of concrete, cover thickness etc. may affect cost of construction. The
impact of such changes, however, has to be considered taking into account the
resultant enhancement in durability and changes in the overall life cycle cost of the
structure.

Studies of distresses structure in recent past have clearly indicated that the
failures have been more due to lack of proper durability considerations during
construction stage of a structure, Durability of a structure is affected due to various
physical chemical and biological factors. These factors can be taken care of by proper
assessment of environment, selection of right material and mixes, adequate structural
design, good placement. provision of protective coating and preventive maintenance.
This calls for system approach in the design code. Accordingly, durability clause has
been enlarged to cover all the factors in details so as to bring in-built protection from
such factors keeping in view the overall life cycle cost of the structure.

4
5. IMPORTANT MODIFICATIONS

5.1 Materials

5.1.1 Cement

Cement is one of the main ingredient of concrete. Originally concrete was

made using a mixture of only three materials, cement, aggregate and water, almost
invariably, the cement was Portland cement. Later on in order to improve some of the
properties of concrete either in fresh or hardened state very small quantities of
chemical products as chemical admixture were added into the mix.

Later still other materials, inorganic in nature, were introduced mainly to bring
economy. Yet further encouragement for the use of some of the ‘supplementary;
material were provided by the ecological concerns. Materials such as blast furnace
slag, flyash, silica fume considered as waste materials were found to be very useful not
only in bringing economy but to help conservation of environment and getting some
properties helpful for durability of concrete.

Indian cement industry has also grown rapidly in recent past and at present
i~ranked4th in production next only to China, Japan and USA. Different varieties of
cements are covered by different Indian Standards, which are to be used depending
upon the intended use.

The revised standard accordingly states that:

“The cement used shall be any of the following and type selected be
appropriate for the intended use:

The list contains standards for three grades of OPC (i.e. 33 grade~ (IS 269),
43 grade(IS 8112))53 grade (IS 12269)) rapid hardening Portland cement (IS 8041),
Portland slag cement (IS 544), Portland pozzolana cement [IS 1489 (Part 1&2)},
hydrophobic cement(~S8043)10w heat Portland cement (IS 1260o), sulphate resisting
cement (IS 12330).

Usual cautionary note given for the use of low heat cement, high alumina
cement and supersulphate cement continues in the revised version.

It has now been established that use of proper quality of flyash, ground
granulated blast furnace slag and silica fume in certain proportion in concrete not only
saves energy and conserve resources, it brings technical benefits like influence on the
rate of development of heat, strength and on resistance to chemical attack.

In order to encourage use of flyash and ground granulated blast furnace slag
in concrete following have been added in the clause on cement

“Other combination of Portland cement with ground granulated blast furnace

slag and flyash of quality conforming to relevant Indian Standard may also be

5
 used in the manufacture of concrete provided there are satisfactory data on
their suitability, such as performance test on concrete containing them”.

The Code also gives a cautionary clause emphasising that consumers should
follow the performance characteristics given in the respective Indian Standard
specification for the cement. Any other claim by the manufacturers either on bags or
in advertisement are required to be dealt with caution to avoid any problem in concrete
making and construction.

5.1.2 Mineral Admixtures

Flyash, silica fume, rice husk ash and metakaoline, which have got pozzolanic
properties and ground granulated blast furnace slag are being used with advantages
for concrete making by concrete technologist. The revised Code has, therefore, given
provision for such materials.

Pozzolana is defined as siliceous or siliceous and aluminous materials which

in itself possesses little or no cementitious value but will, in finely divided form and in
the presence of moisture, ‘chemically react with calcium hydroxide at ordinary
temperatures to form compounds possessing cementitious properties. It is essential
that pozzolana be in a finely divided state as it is only then that silica can combine with
calcium hydroxide (produced by the hydrating Portland cement) in the presence of
water to form stable calcium silicates which have cementitious properties. Further silica
has to be amorphous, that is, glassy because crystalline silica has very low reactivity.

5.1.2.1 Flyash (Pulverised Fuel Ash)

Flyash is the ash precipitated electrostatically or mechanically from the

exhaust gases of coal- fired power station. Flyash conforming toGradel of IS 3812
has been permitted as part replacement of ordinary Portland cement provided uniform
blending with cement is ensured.

5.1.2.2 Silica Fume

Silica fume (very fine non crystalline silicon dioxide) is a by product of the
manufacture of silicon, ferrosilicon or the like, from quartz and carbon in electric arc..
furnaces. Silica in the form of glass (amorphous) is highly reactive, and the smallness
of the particles (0.03 - .3 micron) speeds up the reaction with calcium hydroxide
produced by the hydration of Portland cement. The very small particle of silica fume
can enters the space between the particles of cement and thus improve packing.

Although no Indian Standards specification is available on silica fume and it

is mostly imported it has been found to be very useful for achieving higher grade of
,

concrete. The Code therefore, has made adequate provision for use of silica fume.

6
5.1.2.3 Rice Husk Ash

Rice husks are a natural waste product have a very high silica content, and
when burnt at controlled temperature (500- 700°C)iesultsin an amorphous material
with porous structure. It is reported to contribute to the strength of concrete at 1 to 3
days.

However, to achieve adequate workability as well as high strength, the use of

superplasticisers may be necessary. It also affects water demand and drying
shrinkage. The revised Code has given provision to use this material with necessary
precaution.

5.1.2.4 Metakaoline

Metakaoline, obtained by calcination of pure or refined kaolinitic r~layat a

temperature of between ~0 and 850°C,followed by grinding to achieve a thiness of
700 - 900 m2/kg has been found to be exhibiting high pozzolanicity, the Code has given
provision for its use also.

5.1 .2.5 Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Stag

Ground granulated blast furnace slag has been used in the manufacture of
slag cement upto 65%. Tn recent years there has been increasing use of mixing the
Portland cement and ground granulated slag components direct in the concrete mixers.
Advantage is that the proportion can be varied as per the requirement.

Appropriate provision of ground granulated slag conforming to lS~*2089.

Specification for granulated slag for manufacture of Portland slag cement has oeen
given in the revised Code.

5.1.3 Water

Quality of all the ingredients of concrete are important. Water, being a thajor
ingredient must also be of proper quality. Requirements for quality of water has been
modified in the reused standard.

5.1.3.1 Sulphate

Sulphate has now been proposed as SO

3 in line with international practice with
a maximum limit reduced form 500 mg/i to 400 mg/I.

The amount of sulphate that can be tolerated in mixing water depeilds upon
the sulphate content of aggregate and cement, a limit of 4% of SO3 by mass of cement
has been proposed as total amount of SO3 in concrete.

7
5.1.3.2 Chloride

Limit of chloride content in water has been brought down from 1 000 mg/I to
500 mg/I for reinforced concrete work. This is in line with the prov!sion of British
Standard.

Chlorides are among the more abundant materials on earth and are present
in variable amounts in all of the ingredients of concrete. In order to keep the limit of
chloride below the threshold level which can initiate corrosion of reinforcement, limit of
500 mg/I in water has been recommended. Potable water has been found to be
generally suitable for concrete work.

5.1.4 Size of Aggregates

The existing Code has a suggestive clause which states that for reinforced
concrete work aggregates having nominal size of 20 mm are generally satisfactory. It
has been observed that for all practical purposes this provision takes precedence over
other provision regarding size of aggregates, though use of larger size wherever
possible are technically more appropriate and economically desirable. The revision,
therefore includes following additional sentence which can take care of this aspect.

“For most work 20 mm aggregate is suitable. Where there is no

restriction to the flow of concrete Into section, 40 mm or larger size may be
permitted. In concrete elements with thin section. closely spaced reinforcement
or small cover, consideration should be given to the use of 10 mm nominal
maximum size.

5.1.5 Admixtures

With the availability and successful use of superplasticisers in

improving the workability without increasing the w/c ratio, thus further gaining in strength
of concrete, it was felt that provision regarding admixtures required revision. IS 9103
which covers the requirements of admixture has been revised . It now covers the
requirements of superplasticisers in line with ASTM and British Standards~ Reference
of latest version of IS 9103 in IS 456 will pave the way for use of superplasticisers. In
addition, some guidelines for effective use of admixtures in field have also been made.
The most notable guidelines is the verification of suitability and effectiveness of
admixtures by trial mixes, using the same materials of concrete intended to be used
in the works.

5.2 Concrete

5.2.1 Grade of concrete

Grade of concrete denote its 28 days strength which is commonly considered

its most valuable properly, although in many practical cases, other chaacteristics. such
as durability and permeability, may infact be more important. Nevertheless strength

8
usually gives an overall picture of the quality of concrete since strength is directly

related to the structure of the hydrated cement paste.

5.2.1 .1 Minimum Grade of Concrete

There has been suggestions to upgrade both minimum and maximum grade
of concrete in the Code. There has been two schools of thought regarding the
minimum grade of concrete to be used for reinforced concrete. One section feels that
M 15 grade of concrete, keeping other factors affecting durability in control, is sufficient;
while other section feels that it should be increased for better durability. ln the
developed world, even for ordinary structures the minimum grade of concrete is the
equivalent of M25 or M30. It is now realised that these grades are easily realised in the
field by proper mix design, particularly with the availability of 43 and 53 grade of cement
in the country. Further, in case of nominal mix, the same proportion (1:2:4) used for
MiS grade now give M20 grade without any problem. In the revision of the Code, the
minimum grade of concrete has been related to exposure conditions.
For mild exposure condition, i.e. for concrete surfaces protected against
weather or aggressive conditions except those situated in coastal areas, the minimum
grade shall be M 20 for RCC structures.

5.2.1.2 Maximum Grade of Concrete

In so far as high strength concrete is concerned, the present Code gives

provision upto M 40. In the absence of provision of concrete more than M 40, it is felt
that even though higher grade concrete could be produced in the country with the
available resources and technology, it could not be used since provision does not exist
in the code.

Most national standards, rules and regulations for concrete structures are
applicable to concrete strength upto about 50 60 N/mm2. CEB-FIP Model Code
-
recommended 80 N/mm2 and Norwegian Standard NS 3473:89 recommends upt 105
N/mm2.

Realising the need, the revised Code has given provision upto 80 N/mm2. It
is, however, expected that users of high strength concrete will have sufficient data and
technology with them and will use high strength with proper care. Following note
emphasises this point.

For concrete of comprehensive strength greater than M55 design parameters

given in the Code may not be applicable and the values may be obtained from
specialist literatures and experimental results”.

Although minimum grade of concrete has been kept as M20, provision have
been given for use of concrete of lesser strength for plain concrete construction, lean
concrete, simple foundation, foundation for masonry walls or other simple or temporary
construction

9
 The table giving grades of concrete is as follows:

Grade Designation Specified Characteristic Compressive Strength

of 150 m cube at 28 days in N/mm2
M10 10
M15 15
M20 20
M25 25
M30 30
M35 35
M40 40
M45 45
M50 50
M55 55
M60 60
M65 65
M70 70
M75 75
M80 80

5.2.2 Modulus of Elasticity of Concrete

The modulus of elasticity of concrete (Ec is required for computation of deflection

of reinforced concrete flexural member. It has been observed that the value obtained
by the existing formula

Ec = 5700 ifck, where, fck is characteristic strength of concrete

is quite conservative compared to experimental values. Further, compared to

other international Codes i.e BS 8110 AOl 318, AS 3600 and DIN 1045, the values
obtained have been found to be more.Cbmparison of E~as given in IS 456:1978 and
other Codes is given below:

Ratio of Ec compared to value based on IS 456

Code fck (MPa)
20 30 40 50 60
IS 456 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
BS411O 0.94 0.83 0.78 0.74 0.72
ACI 318 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.75
BS 3600 0.92 0.88 0.88 0.87 0.85
DIN 1045 1.08 0.98 0.97 0.94 0.89

Considering the above the Equation has been changed as follows:

Ec = 5000~fck
l0
5.2.3 Age Factor of Concrete

Designers often express that the age factors given in the existing code is
theoretically alright, but in practice it does not help the designers. The gain of strength
depends upon the grade of concrete, type of cement, w/c ratio, curing regime etc.
These age factors may help to ascertain the actual behaviour of a distress structure but
should not be used for design. Accordingly the values of age factors have been
deleted

5.2.4 Workability

Existing code classifies various degrees of workability based on placing

conditions on the basis of vee-bee time, compacting factor and slump test in a Note.
Many users of the code felt that the values given in the note indicates certain
interconvertibitity of values are implied, in reality such a relationshipis however, not
easy to establish. It is, therefore, proposed to use in general the slump test for
measurement of workability. The provision of workability in the proposed revision is in
line with the provision of BS 5328. Guide to specifying concrete (in four parts).
However for very low workability, where strict control is necessary, measurement of
workability by determination of compacting factory with a value of 0.75 to 0.80 and for
very high workability, measurement of workability by determination of flow have been
suggested. The proposed table is given below:

Workability of Concrete
Placing Condition Degree of Workability Slum
(mm)
Blinding Concrete; Very low see Note
Shallow Section:
Pavement using Payers,
Mass concrete, lightly . 25 . 75
reinforced s~ctionin slabs
beams, walls, column; Floor Low
Hand Placed pavements
Canal lining
Strip footing
Heavily reinforced Medium 50- 100
Section in slabs
beams, wall, columns;
slip formwork: 75-100
Pumped Concrete
Trench fill: High 100- 150
In-situ piling
Tremie Concrete Very High see Note
Note: For most of the placing conditions, internal vibrators (needle vibrators) are suitable. the
diameter of the needle shall be determined based on the density and spacing of reinforcement
bars and thickness sections. For tremie concrete vibrators are not required to be used

II
 In the very low’ category of workability where strict control is necessary e.g.
pavement quality concrete, measurement of workability by determination of compacting
factor will be more appropriate than slump (see IS 1199:1959) and a value of 0.75 to
0.80 is suggested.

In the very low’ category of workability, measurement of workability by

determination of flow will be appropriate.

5.2.5 Durability

Durability of concrete is one that performa satisfactorily in the working

environment during its anticipated exposure conditions during service.
In the existing Code the durability clause is very brief and certain qualitative
values in the form of guidance are included in Appendix. There is a general feeling that
due importance to the durability requirement are lacking in the present provision of the
Standard.

To overcome these shortcomings it was decided to bring the durability

requirements covering all the factors in the main text. These changes are in line with
BS 81110 Structural ~1seof C’oncrete Part 1 Code of Practice for design and
-

construction.

The basic features in BS 8110, ACI 318 Building Code requirements for
reinforced concrete, AS 3600 concrete structures relating to durability design are:

I) a classification of exposure conditions:

ii) an emphasis on achieving low permeability, translated in practice into
detailed recommendations on the four Cs’ - Constituent of the mix,
cover, compaction and curing for each exposure condition.
iii) specific recommendations regarding certain forms of aggressive chemical
or physical action e.g. sulphate attack, chloride attack etc.

The approach taken in the revised Code is in similar line as above. It now
recognise following main factors influencing durability.

a) the environment
b) the cover
c) the type and quality of constituent material
d) the cement content and w/c ratio of the concrete
e) workmanship, to obtain full compaction and
f) the shape and size of member.

a) Classification of exposure condition

The existing standard covered three exposure conditions, i.e. Mild, Moderate and
Severe. In the proposed revision very severe and extreme have been added. The
classification proposed is given below.

12
 Exposure Conditions
Environment Exposure Condition

Mild Concrete surfaces protected against weather or aggressive conditions

except those situated in coastal area.

Moderate Concrete surfaces sheltered from severe rain or freezing whilst wet.
Concrete exposed to condensation and rain
Concrete continuously under water
Concrete in contact or buried under non-aggressive soil/ground water.

Severe Concrete surfaces exposed to severe rain, alternate wetting and drying
or occasional freezing whilst wet or severe condensation
Concrete completely immersed in sea water
Very Severe Concrete surfaces exposed to sea water spray, corrosive fumes or
sever freezing conditions whilst wet
Concrete exposed to aggressive subsoil ground water or coastal
environment.

Extreme Surface of members in tidal zone. Members in direct contact with

liquid/solid aggressive chemicals.

While defining the exposure condition, provisions, of other codes like AS 3600,
ACI 318, Pr ENV 206, CEB FIP Model Code were also discussed. It was discussed
whether location in relation to sea could be defined as in AS 3600. However, it was felt
that such details would be difficult to define. Provisions of Pr ENV 206 Concrete-
Performance, production, placing and compliance criteria, was also not found suiting
our requirements.

Abrasive environment has been kept separately since it requires different

treatment,

b) Exposure to aggressive chemicals

Deterioration of concrete by chemical attack may occur by contact with gases,

liquid and solids of aggressive chemicals.

Naturally occurring sulphates of sodium, potassium, calcium or magnesium are

sometimes found in soil or dissolved in ground water adjacent to concrete structures,
and they can attack concrete. When evaporation can take place from an exposed face,
the dissolved sulphates (salts) may accumulate at the face, thus increasing their
concentration and potential for deterioration.

There are apparently two chemical reactions involved in sulphate attack on

concrete.

13
 Combination of sulphate with free calcium hydroxide (hydrated lime)
liberated during the hydration of the cement, to form Calcium sulphate
(Gypsum)

ii) Combination of gypsum and hydrated calcium aluminate to form calcium

sulfoalum nate.

Both these reactions result in an increase in solid volume. Besides these

reaction, studies have also shown that a purely physical action (not involving the
cement), crystallisation of the sulphate salts in the pores of the concrete can amount
for considerable damage.

Protection against sulphate attack is obtained by using a dense, high quality

concrete with low w/c ratio, and a Portland cement having needed sulphate resistant
property. Air entrainment is of benefit in so far as it reduced the w/c ratio.

Considering the above facts the recommendations for the type of cement and
w/c ratio is now modified. (see Annex 1). These values are in the line with the
provisions given in BS 8110.

Presence of chloride in concrete increases the risk of corrosion of steel. The

higher the chloride content and the higher the curing temperature or subsequent
exposure to warm. moist conditions greater the risk of corrosion.

British Standard BS 8110 (Part 1) limits the total chloride content in reinforced
concrete cement to 0.40% by mass of cement. The same limit is prescribed in
European Standard ENV 206:1992. The approach in AOl 318:1989 is to consider water
soluble chlorides ion only. On that basis the chloride ion content is limited to 0.15% by
mass of cement. The two values are not substantially different from one another
because water soluble chlorides are only a part of the total chloride content, namely
the free chloride in pore water. The revision of IS 456 recommends as follows:

Type of use of Concrete Maximum total soluble

chloride content expressed
as kg/rn3 of concrete
Concrete containing metal and steam 0.4
cured at elevated temperature and pre-
stressed concrete

Reinforced concrete or plain concrete 0.6

containing material requiring embedded metal

Concrete not containing embedded metal 3.0

or any material requiring protection from
chloride

14
 Formulation of a standard on Method of test for determination of total chloride
content which may be based on ASTM C 1152-90 or BS 1881 : Part 124:1988 has
also been initiated.

c) Alkali- aggregates reaction

Aggregates containing particular varieties of silica may be susceptible to attack

by alkalis (as Na20 and K20) originating from the cement or other sources producing
an expansive reaction which can cause cracking and disruption of concrete. Revised
Code suggests necessary precaution to be taken in case of use of unfamiliar materials.

d) Concrete Mix Proportion

British Code BS 8110, American Code ACI 318, Australian Code 3600 and CEB
-FIP model code all identify permeability as being the key to durable concrete without
putting any limit on this; instead prescription are given for mix constituents and
proportions, cover and curing.

On mix constituent there is close agreement on limit of chloride-sulphate content

and on specification for aggregate cement, admixture and the like. Additionally w/c
ratio, cement content and concrete grades (in order of importance), are identified as
being key factors. Actual values may be differing for different exposure condition, but
the broad trends are virtually identical.

Keeping the provisions of,the above standards in mind, the provision in IS 456
is given in Annex II.

There is feeling in some section of the users of the code that with the availability
of cement of high strength, minimum cement content could be reduced further.

However, this is not true since the minimum cement is required first to ensure
sufficient alkalinity to provide a passive environment against corrosion of steel;
secondary minimum cement and w/c ratio are so chosen that should result in sufficient
volume of cement paste to overfill voids in the compacted aggregates.
3 unless special
Maximum cement content has been restricted to 475 kg/rn
consideration has been given in design to the increased risk of cracking due to drying
shrinkage in thin section or to early thermal cracking and to the increased risk to
damage due to alkali-silica reaction.

e) Design Mix

Preference has been given to design mix. For design mix constructor shall carry
out the mix design and the mix so designed (not the method of design) shall be
approved by the employer within the limitations of parameters and other stipulation laid
down by the Code.

15
f) Cover Requirements

Protection against penetration of salt to reinforcing steel and other embedded

items is affected considerably by the thickness of concrete cover over the steel. The
traditional code of practice approach is to specify nominal covers for different conditions
of exposure. A study of relevant code, ie BS 8110, ACI 318, CEB-FIP Model Code
reveals that there are very considerable differences in values for nominal covers for
notionally identical environment; this is because the four ‘Cs’ constituents of the mix,
cover, compaction and curing are integrated as a package in each codes (with the
effectiveness of the total package being the overriding concern).

In the existing IS Code cover requirement is not given on the basis of exposure
condition. However, in the revised Code, it is given on the basis of exposure conditions.
The provisions are reproduced below:

Exposure Nominal Cover in not less than

(mm)

Mild 20
Moderate 30
Severe 45
Very Severe 50
Extreme 75
Notes:
1) For main reinforcement upto 12 mm diameter bar for mild exposure the nominal
cover may be reduced by 5 mm.
2) Unless specified otherwise, actual cover shall not deviate from the required
nominal÷lOmor-O.

However, for a longitudinal reinforcing bar in a column nominal cover shall in any
case not be less than the diameter of such bar. In the case of column of minimum
dimensions of 200 mm or under whose reinforcing bars do not exceed 12 mm, a cover
of 25 mm may be used.

For footings minimum cover shall be 50 mm. ‘~

It is felt that improper cover has been one of the main causes of deterioration of
structures. Earlier provision in the code was for minimum clear cover. There is
tendency to attempt the minimum specified in construction which results in concrete
cover much below the requirements in actual practice. With the present provision of
nominal cover it has been attempted to achieve, in practice at least 20 mm cover to
reinforcement including links.

5.2.6 Compaction and Finishing

The basic objective of compaction is to produce a solid void free mass. Due
importance has been given, in the revision of the code, to this important aspect.

16
5.2.7 Curing

Curing is usually specified to i) moisture retention, ii) permit proper strength

development, iii) prevent steep temperature gradient and iv) maintain satisfactory
temperature regimes.

Adequate provision has been given in the Code and the concerned committee
has initiated a separate code of practice for curing of concrete covering all aspects
which could subsequently be referred in the Code.

5.3 Service Life of Structure

There has been proposal from some section of engineers that service life of
structures should be defined in our codes. It is, however, felt that at this stage it would
not be possible to define service life of structures.

5.4 Acceptance Criteria

There is a general feeling that the acceptance criteria of concrete given in the
existing code which was based on Australian Code AS 1480-1974, is quite
cumbersome. The acceptance criteria has now been modified keeping international
practice and Indian condition in mind. It lays down appropriate limits for flexural and
compressive strength of individual test sample and also group of four consecutive
samples. It is felt that this simplified acceptance criteria will be welcomed by all field
engineers.

5.5 Quality Assurance

Quality in construction, in its broadest sense, implies fulfilment of technical,

technological, financial and other social needs that the constructed facility is expected
to ~atisfy. The requirement of the quality is the satisfaction of both the ‘stated’ and
‘implied’ needs of the owner and the user. The construction should result in satisfactory
strength, serviceability and long term durability, so as to lower the overall life-cycle cost
of the structure.
It is increasingly being recognised that adequate quality assurance measures
should be taken in order that the properties of completed structures are consistent with
the requirements and the assumption made during the planning and design. To give
special emphasis to the quality assurance aspect, a new clause covering quality
assurance and quality aspect during the planning, design and execution of any
construction has been proposed.

5.6 Batching

With the emergence of Ready Mix concrete plants in the country, it was felt
necessary to encourage them to bring quality in concrete construction. It is, therefore,
mentioned that Readymix concrete supplied by RMC plant shall be preferred.

17
5.7 Inspection and Testing of Structures

The clause on inspection and testing of structures has been enlarged to give
general guidance on all aspects which should be considered for safety and
serviceability of a given structure.

Other important modifications in Section 2 are:

a) Proper limits have been introduced on the accuracy of measuring equipments

to ensure accurate batching of concrete.
b) Clause of trealment of construction joint has been modified.

c) Stripping time for formwork has been modified. Now for vertical formwork to
column, walls, large beams minimum stripping time is 16 hrs.

d) A new clause on placing of reinforcement has been introduced to emphasis that

rough handling, shock loading of reinforcement from a height should be avoided.
It also gives tolerances on placement and use of proper space chairs and other
supports so as to maintain proper cover.

5.8 Design Requirements

Some section of designers feet that during the last revision of the Code Working
Stress Method (WSM) was retained alongwith Limit State Method (LSM) considering
that it was a transition phase and slowly designers would change to limit state design
completely. After 21 years of publication of that revision, the need to continue with
working stress method. when code of other countñes have changed completely to Limit
State Design, required review. BS 8110:1985, CEB-FIP, Model Code 1990 have
completely changed over to the limit state method, retaining the use of service loads
(without load factor) only for carrying out serviceability limit state calculation of crack
Width, deflection and vibration. The American Code ACI 318:1989 allows the use of
working stress method as an alternate method to limit state method and is included as
a Appendix in that code. The German Code DIN 1045/1968 makes selective use of the
WSM for shear and Torsion, for ensuring that the structure behaves properly under
working loads.

The feedback received during the workshop arranged by the Institution of

Engineers (India) at Bombay few years ago indicated that either a majority of designers
use the LSM or that the use of the WSM does not pose any undue difficulties. In the
revised Code working stress method has been included in Annex.

5.8.1 Important Modification in Section 3 General Design Requirement

1) Fire resistance - Clause on fire resistance have now been enlarged based on BS
8110. This now includes apart from other requirements, minimum dimensional
requirement of wall, column, slab and beam with the minimum nominal cover for
different fire ratings.

18
ii) Effective length of Cantilever has been added. As per the new clause:
The effective length of a Cantilever shall 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 shall be taken”.

iii) For substitute frame, it has been recommended that rigorous analysis may be
required where side way consideration becomes critical.

iv) Based on Comments/suggestion, bending moment coefficient at middle of

interior span in Table 7 of existing code has been changed from 1/24 to 1/16.
It was felt that redistribution is assumed while giving these coefficient. Hence, a
higher moment value at mid span may occur than required for equilibrium
condition.

v) In addition to strength and stability requirements certain serviceability have to be

considered in designing for lateral load. These requirements are intended to
ensure the satisfactory performance of the structure under service condition.

The main drift deflection criteria for high rise building is lateral drift. This is the
relative magnitude of the lateral displacement at the top of a building with
respect to the height.

“Under prominent wind load, the laterals sway at the top should not exceed
H/500, where H is the total height of the building. For seismic loading, reference
should be made to IS 1893:1984”.

Fig 3 of the existing code for modification factor for tension reinforcement has
now been modified. The curves are now based on actual steel stress at service
loads as compared to the existing clauses which are based on allowable stress.
(See Annex Ill).

vi) Clause of 23.2 of the existing code has been modified as follows, in view of
better clarity so that the two way slabs may not be designed as continuous
beam.

“Slabs spanning in one direction and continuous over support shall be designed
according to the provision applicable to continuous beam”.

via) Considering that the support moments for adjacent panels calculated from Table
22 would vary significantly, redistribution of moment should be allowed. The
provision given in BS 8110 (Part 1) was considered more appropriate and a new
clause regarding adlustment of support moment in resultant slab have been
added.

viii) Recommendation regarding minimum eccentricity (Cl. 24.4 of IS 456:1978) has

been modified. It has been now addition that where biaxial bending is
considered, it is only necessary to ensure that eccentricity exceeds the minimum
about one axis at a time. (Based on BS 8110 Part 1)

19
5.7.2 Requirements Governing Reinforcement and Detailing (Existing clause 25)

There has been proposals to bring some details regarding reinforcement and
detailing of reinforcements from SP 24. It is felt that since details are available in SP 24
and SP 43:1981 Handbook on concrete reinforcement and detailing, one can always
refer to those publications, whenever needed.

However, provisions of other requirements in the code have been reviewed in the
light of comments received. Important Modification in this section are:

I) Considering the bars in flexural or direct tension both have the same bonding
characteristics with concrete. It was felt that there was no need to treat the two
cases separately. Accordingly the clause 25.2.5.1 has been modified. The
modified clause is in line with 3.12.8.13 of BS 8110 (Part 1) and cl.12.2.3 of ACI
318:89.

ii) Recommendation regarding strength of welds have been modified to bring it in

line with the provision of cI. 3.12.8.18 of BS 8110 (Part 1). With this
modification, for joint in tension, value of 100% will be taken if welding is strictly
supervised and if at any cross section of the member not more than 20% of the
tensile reinforcement is welded.

5,7.3 Special Design Requirements for Structural Members and System (Section
4, Clause 28 of IS 456:1978)

Important changes in this section are:

I) A new chapter on design of concrete corbel has been added.A detailed

chapter on walls based on Australian Code AS 3600 have been
incorporated.

ii) In addition to the requirements of minimum tensile reinforcement based

on depth of the section, provision of nominal reinforcement for Concrete
section of thickness greater than 1 m also been given as 360 mm2/meter
length in each direction on each face.

5.7.4 Structural Design (Limit State Method) (Section 5, Clause 34 of IS 456:1978)

Major change brought in are:

i) Considering that the values of Design shear strength?~fo’v 100 As/bd .~

0.15 are used frequently in design, these values have now been added
in Table 13 of Is 456. In addition values for 100 ,As/bd 13.00 has also
been added.

ii) A new clause has been added for calculation of enhanced shear strength
of sections close to supports (based on BS 8110).

20
 iii) Some modification in the torsion has also been made to make specific
mention for equilibrium torsion and need for design for it. This is based
on Cl. 40.1 of SF 24 and Cl.8.6 of AOl 318:1989.

5.7.5 WorKing Stress Method (Section 6, Clause 43 of Is 456:1978)

In this section modifications regarding torsion and enhanced shear strength, on

the same lines as in section 5 (Limit State Method), have been made.
Other modification brought in is the existing clause 46.3 on members subjected
to combined direct load an flexure.

As per the existing clause, Members subjected to combined direct load and
flexure and design by the methods based on elastic theory should be further checked
for their strength under ultimate load condition to ensure the desired margin of safety.

In the proposed modification it is recommended that members subjected to

combined direct load and flexure shall be designed by Limit State Method.

CONCLUSION

The revision brings durability criteria as a major criteria keeping in view the
changing scenario world over in the field of concrete. Though it is required to bring
changes in the code keeping in view the present trend and knowledge, at the same time
it is also required to ensure that the revision is easily adaptable in the country and it
does not prevent the technological advancement in the country. Some of the changes
in the revised Code reflect that trend. Standards are always open for review. Any
proposals for modification at any stage, can be referred to Bureau of Indian Standards
for the consideration of the concerned Committee.

Ref: Dr. J.K. Prasad, Former Deputy Director, Bureau of Indian Standards.

21
 Annex 1
CONCRETE EXPOSED TO SULPHATE ATTACK
(Clause 8.2.2.4)

Class Concentration of Suiphates Express Type of Cement Dense fully compacted

as SO3 concrete made with 20
mm nominal maximum
size aggregates
complying with IS 383
Free wlc
In soil SO3 in 2:1 In ground Cement Ratio not
Total water: soil water content not more than
SO3 extract less 3than
kg/rn
% gIL gIL

Traces Less than Less than Ordinary Portland 280 0.55

(<0.2) 1.0 3.0 cementor
Portland slag
cement or
Portland
Pozzolana
cement
2 0.2toO.5 1.0 to 1.9 0.3 to 1.2 Ordinary Portland 330 0.50
cement or
Portland slag
cement or
Portland
Pozzolana
cement
Supersulphate 310 0.50
cement or
sulphate resisting
Portland cement
3 0.Stol.O 1.9to3.1 1.2 to 2.5 Supersulphate 330 0,50
cement or
sulphate resisting
Portland cement
Portland
Pozzolana 350 0.45
cement of
Portland slag
cement
4 1.0 to 2,0 3.1 to 5.0 2.5 to 5.0 Supersulphate or 370 0.45
sulphate resisting
Portland cement

5 Over 2 Over 5.0 Over 5.0 Sulphate 400 0.40

resisting Portland
cement or
supersulphated
cement with
protective
coatings

22
Notes:

1) Cement content given in Table for ordinary Portland Cement is irrespective of

grades of cement.

2) Use of super-suiphated cement is generally restricted where the prevailing

temperature is below 40°C.

3) Supersulphated cement gives an acceptable life provided that the concrete is

dense and prepared with a water/cement ratio of 0.4 or less, in mineral acids,
down to pH 3.5.

4) The cement contents given in Class 2 are the minimum recommended. For SO.,
contents near the upper limit of Class 2, cement contents above these minimum
are advised.

5) For severe conditions such as thin sections under hydro-sta tic pressure on one
side only and sections partly immersed, considerations should be given to a
further reduction of water/cement ratio.

6) Portland slag cement conforming to 1S:455 with slag content more than 50
percent exhibits better sulphate resisting properties.

7) Where chloride is also encountered along with sulphate in soil or ground water,
ordinary Portland cement with CA content from 5 to 8 percent shall be desirable
to be used in concrete, instead of sulphate- resisting cement. Alternatively a
blend ofordinary Portland Cement and slag may also be used provided sufficient
in formation is available on performance of such blended cements in these
conditions.
 Annex 2

MINIMUM CEMENTITIOUS CONTENTS1MAXIMUM W/C RATIO AND MINIMUM

GRADE OF CONCRETE FOR DIFFERENT EXPOSURE WITH NORMAL WEIGHT
AGGREGATES OF 20 MM NOMINAL MAXIMUM SIZE

Exposure Plain Concrete Reinforced Concrete Minimum Grade of

Concrete
Minimum Maximum
Free Minimum
Cement Maximum
Free Plain
Concrete Reinforced
Concrete
Cement3 w/c kg/rn3 w/c
kg/rn
Mild 220 0.60 300 0.55 . M20
Moderate 250 0.60 300 0.50 M15 M25
Severe 260 0.50 350 0.45 M20 M30
Very 280 0.45 375 0.45 M20 M35
Severe
Extreme 300 0.40 375 0.40 M25 M40

Notes:
Cement content prescribed in the Table is irrespective of the grades of cement and it
is inclusive of addition mentioned in 5.2. The additions such as flyash or ground
granulated blast furnace slag may be taken into account in the concrete composition
with respect to the cement content and w/c ratio if the suitability is established and as
long as the maximum amounts taken into account do not exceed the limit of pozzolana
and slag specified in IS 1489 (Part 1) and IS 455 respectively.
2. Mirumum grade for Plain concrete under mild exposure condition not specified.

ADJUSTMENTS TO MINIMUM CEMENT CONTENTS FOR AGGREGATES OTHER

THAN 20 MM NOMINAL MAXIMUM SIZE

Nominal Maximum Adjustments to Minimum Cement Contents

Aggregates Size in above Table
kg/rn3

10 +40
20 0
40 -30

24
 Annex 3

c:~

D 4. 2 2.0 2.4 ~‘ 24 30
PERCENTAGE TENSION REINFORCEMENT

As required
ts = 0.58.fy.
As provided

MODIFIC ATION FACTOR FOR TENSION REINFORCEMENT

25
 MIX PROPORTIONING AND
QUALITY ASSURANCE

Centre for Human Resource and Continuing Education

NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR CEMENT AND BUILDING MATERIALS
 CONCRETE MIX PROPORTIONING
The modification in the revision is marginal. In specifying a particular
grade of concrete, the following additional informations are required.

Exposure conditions;
ii) Maximum temperature of concrete at the time of placing;
iii) Method of placing; and
iv) Degree of supervision.

Design Mix Concrete

The stipulations in the revision are as follows:

As the guarantor of quality of concrete used in the construction, the

constructor shall carry out the mix design and the mix so designed (not the
method of design) shall be approved by the employer within the limitations of
parameters and other stipulations laid down by the code.

The mix shall be designed to produce the grade of concrete having the
required workability and a characteristic strength.

Mix design done earlier not prior to one year may be considered adequate
for later work provided there is no change in source and the quality of the
materials.

Standard Deviation

The standard deviation for each grade of concrete shall be calculated,

separately.

Standard deviation based on test strength of samples

a) Number of test results of samples — The total number of test

strength of samples required to constitute an acceptable record for
calculation of standard deviation shall not be less than 30.
Attempts should be made to obtain the 30 samples, as early as
possible, when a mix is used for the first time.

b) When significant changes are made in the production of concrete

batches (for example changes in the materials used, mix design,
equipment or technical control), the standard deviation value shall
be separately calculated for such batches of concrete.

26
 c) Standard deviation to be brought up to date — The calculation of the
standard deviation shall be brought up to date after every change of
mix design.

Assumed Standard Deviation

Where sufficient test results for a particular grade of concrete are not
available, the value of standard deviation given in Table 1 may be assumed for
design of mix in the first instance. As soon as the results of samples are
available, actual calculated standard deviation shall be used and the mix
designed properly.

Table 1: Assumed Standard Deviation

Grade of Concrete Assumed Standard Deviation, N/mm2

M10
M15 3.5
M20
M25 4.0
M30
M35
M45 5.0
M45
M50 .

Note : The above values correspond to the site control having proper
storage of cement, weigh batching of all materials, controlled addition of
water, regular checking of all materials, aggregate gradings and moisture
content, periodical checking of workability and strength. Where there is
deviation from the above, the values given in the above Table shall be
increased by 1 N/mm2.

However, when adequate past records for a similar grade exist and justify
to the designer a value of standard deviation different from that shown in Table 1,
it shall be permissible to use that value.

Nominal Mix Concrete

Nominal mix concrete may be used for concrete of M20 or lower. The
proportions of materials for nominal mix concrete shall be in accordance with
Table 2.

27
 Table 2: Proportions for Nominal Mix Concrete

Grade of Total Quality of Dry Aggregates Proportion of Quantity of

Concrete by Mass per 50 kg of Cement, to Fine Aggregate Water per 50
be taken as the sum of the to Coarse kg of Cement,
Individual Masses of Fine & Aggregate (By Max.
~_________
Coarse Aggregates, Içg, Max. Mass) (I)
M5 800 Generally 1: 2 60
M7.5 625 but subject to 45
M10 480 an upper limit 34
of 1 :1 1/z and 32
MiS 330
M20 250 a lower limit of 30
1:21/2

Note : The proportion of the fine to coarse aggregates should be adjusted

from upper limit to lower limit progressively as the grading of fine
aggregates becomes fine and the maximum size of coarse aggregate
becomes longer. Graded coarse aggregate shall be used.

Example : For an average grading of fine aggregate (that is Zone II of

Table 4 of IS:383), the proportions shall be 1: 1 % 1: 2 and 1: 2 1/2 for
,

maximum size of aggregates 10mm, 20 mm and 40 mm respectively.

The cement content of the mix specified in Table 2 for any nominal mix
shall be proportionately increased if the quantity of water in a mix has to be
increased to overcome the difficulties of placement and compaction, so that the
water-cement ratio as specified is not exceeded.

Quality Assurance Measures

In order that the properties of the completed structure be consistent with

the requirements and the assumptions made during the planning and design,
adequate quality assurance measures shall be taken. The construction should
result in satisfactory strength, serviceability and long term durability so as to
lower the overall life-cycle cost. Quality assurance in construction activities
relates to proper design, use of adequate materials and components to be
supplied by the procedures, proper workmanship in the execution of works by the
contractor and ultimately proper care during the use of structure including timely
maintenance and repair by the owner.

28
 Quahty assurance measures are both technical and organizational. Some
common cases should be specified in a general Quality Assurance Plan which
shall identify the key elements necessary to provide fitness of the strUcture and
the means by which they are to be provided and measured with the overall
purpose to provide confidence that the realized project will work satisfactorily in
service fulfilling the intended needs. The job of quality assurance would involve
quality audit of both the inputs as well as the outputs; inputs in the form of
materials for concrete; workmanship in all stages of batching, mixing,
transportation, placing compaction and curing and the related plant, machinery
and equipments; resulting in the output in the form of concrete in place. To
ensure proper performance, it is necessary that each step in concreting which
will be covered by the next step, is inspected as the work proceeds.

Each party involved in the realization of a project should establish and

implement a quality assurance plan, for its participation in the project. Supplier’s
and subcontractor’s activities shall be covered. The individual Quality Assurance
Plan shall fit into the general Quality Assurance Plan. A quality Assurance Plan
shall define the tasks and responsibilities of all persons involved, adequate
control and checking procedures and the organization, and filling of an adequate
documentation of the building process and its results. Such documentation
should generally include:

test reports and manufacturer’s certificate for materials, concrete

mix design details;
ii) pour cards for site organization and clearance for concrete
placement;
iii) record of site inspection of workmanship, field tests;
iv) non-conformance reports, change orders;
v) control charts;
vi) Statistical analysis.

Note Quality control charts are recommended wherever the concrete is

in continuous production over considerable period.

1)r. S.(’. Maiti, (icucral Managcr NCI3.

29
 ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA

Centre for Human Resource and Continuing Education

NATiONAL COUNCIL FOR CEMENT AND BUILDING MATERIALS
 ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA

In L!ie semi—probabilistic approach in IS 456—1978,

loads arid strengths are treated as variable quantities and
the part:ial safety factors are meant to take into account
the variability, uncertainty and ignorance associated with
them, so as to result in an acceptable (low) probability of
attaining the limit states.

The random variation in the strength is assumed to

follow a normal distribution. The characteristics of the
normal distribution are such that in any set of
measurements, 68.27 per cent of results would lie within
one standard deviation from the mean, 94.45 per cent
results within two standard deviations and 99.74 per cent
results within three standard deviations from the mean.

Accordingly, the ‘characteristic strength’ is defined

as that, below which not more than 5 per cent of results
are expected to fall. This corresponds to a strength of
1.645 time the standard deviation (~) less than the mean
strength *

Characteristic strength = mean — 1.645 i~.

IS 456 stipulates that for acceptance testing, random

samples from fresh concrete shall be made, cured and tested
at 28 days in accordance with Is 516. A random sampling
procedure shall be adopted to ensure that each concrete
batch shall have a reasonable chance of being tested; that
is, the sampling should be spread over the entire period of
concreting and cover all mixing units.

In order to get relatively quicker idea of the quality

of concrete, e.g. to estimate the strength at the time of
removal of forrnwork, tests may be carried out at early ages
but the acceptance is always on the basis of 28 days
strength.

• For judging the conformity of concrete strength, the

quantity of concrete used for a structure, structural
components, etc. is to be subdivided into lots on which
conformity is judged. The total volume of concrete for one
lot shall be produced under conditions, which are deemed to
be uniform (same family) Concrete may be regarded as being
.

uniform (same family) if they are made with cement of the

30
same type and strength class and from a single s~urce and
aggregate of the same geological origin and type (crushed
or uncrushed) If admixtures or additions are used these
.

may form separate lots.

The size of a lot may be:

• The concrete produced (supplied) for each storey of a

building or group of beams/slabs or columns/walls of a
storey of a building.
• But in no case more than 60 m3 or more than the production
of one weeks casting, which ever is less.

Is 456 recommendations on the number of samples required

for conformity control relates to sampling plan for sites
using site mixed concrete. When concrete Is being purchased
from a continuous production unit such as a RMC unit, at
least one sample shall be taken from each shift. Frequency
of sampling may be agreed upon mutually by suppliers and
purchasers.

The test result of a sample shall be the average of the

test results of three specimens made from one sample.

The main statistical features of the Acceptance Criteria

are as under:
i. Any individual test result is allowed to fall below
the characteristic strength. Such low results, which
are inevitable to occur, are not regarded as
failures.
ii. An absolute minimum value is also specified which is
taken as fck 3 N/mm2 for MiS and f~k 4 N/mm2 for M20
— —

and above. For purpose of compliance each sample test

result is expected to equal or exceed this value.
iii. Because of the random nature of strength of concrete,
a sample may have strength lower than the
characteristic strength, but by the same logic there
should be. other samples whose strength should have
exceeded the characteristic strength. The mean of all
such samples should then be not less than f~k + k
~(k is a constant and z~ is established standard
deviation).
iv. IS 456 Draft recommendation is based on the mean
strength determined from any group of four non-
overlapping consecutive test results. The mean of the
group should equal or exceed the characteristic

31
 strengLh by 0.825 times established standard
deviation or 3N/rnm 2 (4N/mm2 for M20 and above)
whichever is greater.
v. The concrete is deemed to comply with strength
requirement when both the conditions are met.
(Acceptance criteria given in Is 456-1978 is appended for
the purpose of comparison).
The acceptance is thus on the basis of average of four
non-overlapping consecutive samples tested from one lot.

The quantity of concrete represented by a group of

four consecutive test results shall include the batches
from which the first and last samples were taken together
with all intervening batches.

For the individual test results requirements, only the

particular batch from which the sample was taken shall be
at risk.

If the results of tests on moulded specimens do not

fulfill the conformity requirements or not available or if
defects of workmanship give rise to doubt as to strength
and the safety of the structure, supplementary testing on
cores taken from the finished structure may be required or
a combination of tests on cores and non—destructive tests
on the finished structure.

32
 Lclausc 15 °JIJ!456-19781

15. ACCEPTANCE CRJTERT..A

15.1 The col1crctc shall be deemed to comply with the strength require.
ments if:
a) every sample has a test strength not less than the characteristic value;
or
b) the strength df one or more samples though less than the cbarac.-
terist.ic value, is in each case not less thao the greater of:
1) the characteristic strength minus 135 times the standard devia-
tion; and
2) 080 times the characteristic strength;
and the average streog-th ol all the samples is not less than the
characteristic strength plus

1165
L
1 65 ] times the standard deviation.
~/ number of samples j
15.2 Tbe concrete shall be deemed not to comply with the strength require-
m~”ts if:
~.) the strength olauy sample is lees than the greater~f:
I) the characteristic strength minus l~35tirne~the standard dcvia.
lion; and
2) 010 times the characteristic strength; or

b) the average strength ol all the samples is less than the cliaraclc~c~ic
strength plus • •~ •..

r 1~65— __________________ 1 times the standard devhilion.

L -.,~/ number of samples J

15.3 Concrete, which does not meet tbe strength requirements n~spcciIicd
in 15J.. but has a .ctrebgth greater than that required by t5.2 may, at the dis~
cretiori of the designer, be accepted as being structurally adu~quatc whhcuuj~
further testing. ..~1° - •~

15.4 If the concrete is deemed not to compiy persuant to 15.2, the structural
adequacy of the parts affected, sbaU be investigaI~d( cu~ 16 ) and an>’ ‘:once.
qucotial action as needed shall be taken.
15.5 Concrete of each grade shall bea~sessed separately.
15.6 Concrete shall be assessed daily for compliance.
15.7 Concrete is liable to be rejected if it is porous or boae~’-combea; ii’.
placing has been interrupted without providing a proper cocsthictioo joint;
the reinforcement has been displaced beyond the tolerances speciIicd; or
construction tolerances have not been met. However, the bardened concrctc
•

may be ‘accepted after carrying out suitable remedial measures o the s~’~k
faction of ibe engineer-in-charge.

33
 ACCEPAThNCE CRITERIA

The concrete shall deemed to comply with the strength requirements if:

IS 456 —1978 1S456 DRAFT

Any Individual Not less than Not less than
sample greater of: - 3 N/mm2 (M15)
i. f~— 1.35A
and f 2
0k - or
(M20 4 N/mm
more)
p ii.. 0.8 f~
Average strength f~k + 0.825 A Greater of
(4 samples) i. fa~ + 0.825 A

2 ii fo~ + 3 N/mm2
(M15)
-t ~ + 4 N/mm2
(M20 or more)
0
~1

z Notes:
For n number of samples
= f~ + 1. 65 A; favQ = fm,an — 1. 65 A;

for n=4; fav. ~ + 1.65 A - 1.65 A = f~ + 0.825 A

2
(A)

— 3A = f~, + 1. 65 A— 3A = f~ - 1.35 A
 DURABILITY REQUIREMENTS

Centre for Human Resource and Continuing Education

NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR CEMENT AND BUILDING MATERiALS
 DURABILITY OF CONCRETE

IS:456 1978 provides the following two paragraphs

— on
durabulit~~ of concrete.

The durability of concrete depends on its resistance to

deterioration and environment in which it is placed. The
reSiStaflCf? of concrete to weathering, chemical attack, abrasion,
frost and fire depends largely upon its quality and constituent
materials. Susceptibility to corrosion of the steel is governed
by the cover provided and the permeability of concrete. The cube
crushing strength alone is not a reliable guide to the quality
and durability of concrete; it must also have an adequate cement
content and low water—cement ratio.

One of the main characteristics influencing the

durability of any concrete is its permeability. With strong,
dense aggregates, a suitably low permeability is achieved by
having a sufficiently low w/c ratio, by ensuring as thorough
compaction of the concrete as possible and by ensuring sufficient
hydration of cement through proper curing methods. Therefore,
for given aggregates, the cement content should be sufficient to
provide adequate workability with low w/c ratio, so that concrete
can be completely compacted with the means available.
In the revised version of 19:4546, the above two
paragraphs have been replaced by the following

GENERAL

A durable concrete is one that performs satisfactorily

in the working environment during its anticipated exposure
conditions during service. The materials and mix proportions
specified and used should be such as to maintain its integrity
and, if applicable, to protect embedded metal from corrosion.

One of the main characteristics influencing the

durability of concrete is its permeability to the ingress of
water, oxygen, carbon dioxide, chloride, sulphate and other
potentially deleterious substances. Impermeability is governed
by the constituents and workmanship used in making the concrete.
With normal—weight aggregates a suitably low permeability is
achieved by having an adequate cement content, sufficiently low
free water/cement ratio, by ensuring complete compaction of the
concrete, and by adequate curing.

35
 The factors influencing durability include

a! the environment

b/ the cover to embedded steel

c/ the type and quality of constituent material

d/ the cement content and water/cement ratio of the

concrete

e/ workmanship, to obtain full compaction and

efficient curing

f/ the shape and size of the member

The degree of exposure anticipated for the concrete during its

service life together with other relevant factors relating to mix
composition, workmanship,design and detailing should be
considered. The concrete mix to provide adequate durability under
these conditions should be chosen taking account of the accuracy
of current testing regimes for control and compliance as
described in this code.

REQUIREMENTS FOR DURABILITY

ShaDe and Size of Member

The shape or design details of exposed structures

should be such as to promote good drainage of water and to avoid
standing pools and rundown of water. Care should also be taken
to minimize any cracks that may collect or transmit water.
Adequate curing is essential to avoid the harmful effects of
early loss of moisture. Member profiles and their intersections
with other members shall be designed and detailed in a way to
ensure easy flow of concrete and proper compaction during
concreting.

Concrete is more vulnerable to deterioration and due to

chemical or climatic attack when it is in thin sections, in
sections under hydrostatic pressure from one side only, in partly
immersed sections and at corners and edges of elements. The hf
of the structure can be lengthened by providing extra cover to
steel, by chamfering the corners or by using circular cross
sections or by using surface coatings which prevent or reduce the
ingress of water, carbon dioxide or aggressive chemicals.

36
Exposure Conditions

Appendix A of IS 456—1978 provides guidance regarding

mininiurn cement content and maximum W/C ratio required for plain
as well as reinforced concrete to ensure durability under three
exposure conditions, ie ‘mild’, ‘moderate’ and ‘severe’. Two
more exposure conditions i.e. ‘very severe’ and ‘extreme’ have
now been added. These have been detailed in Table 1.

‘Abrasive’ i5 an another exposure condition. Concrete

may sometimes be subjected to such condition e.g. action of metal
tyred vehicles or say, water carrying solids in hydraulic
structures. For the durability requirements of concrete
subjected to such ‘abrasive’ condition, specialist literature is
to be referred.

Minimum Concrete Quality

The quality of concrete required to give satisfactory

performance depends on the severity of exposure and other
factors, particularly the cover to steel reinforcements. The
quality of concrete, and specially that of cover concrete has to
be very good in order to resist the aggressive environments, if
any. The revised version of 18:456 includes ‘minimum grade of
concrete’ in addition to ‘minimum cement content’ and ‘maximum
w/c ratio’ for different exposures. Table 19 of IS:456—1978 has
thus been modified as given in Table 2.

Exposure to Sulphate Attack

Table 2~of IS:456—1978 gives requirements for concrete

exposed to sulphate attack. This table has now been expanded for
higher concentrations of sulphates in soil and ground water. The
table (Table 3) gives recommendations for the type of cement,
maximum free W/C ratio and minimum cement -content, which are
required at different sulphate concentrations in near—neutral
ground water of pH 6 to pH 9. For very high sulphate
concentrations in class 5 condition C 27. SO3 in soil), some form
of protection such as sheet polyethylene or polyehloroprene or
surface coating based on asphalt, chlorinated rubber, epoxy or
polyurethane materials should be used to prevent access by the
sulphate solution.

37
Chlorides and Sulphates in Concrete

Whenever there is chloride in concrete, there is an

increased risk o-f corrosion of reinforcements in R.C.C. ThE
higher the chloride content or if subsequently exposed to warrr
moist conditions, the greater is the risk of corrosion. Some of
the constituents of concrete may contain chlorides or concrete
may be contaminated by chlorides from the external environment.

IS:456-1978 stipulates that “to minimize the chances of

deterioration of concrete from harmful chemical salts, the levels
of such harmful salts in concrete coming from the concrete making
materials, that is cement, aggregates, water and admixtures, as
well as by diffusion from the environments should be limited.
Generally, the total amount of chlorides (as CI) and the total
amount of soluble sulphate’s (as 903) in the concrete at the time
of placing should be limited to 0.157. by weight of cement and 4•/.
by weight of cement respectively”.

Sulphate’s are present in most cements and in some

aggregates. Excessive amounts of water—soluble sulphate from
these or other mix constituents can cause expansion and
disruption of hardened concrete. In the revision of IS:456, the
above limit of 47. sulphate (by weight of cement) is not changed.
The 47. limit, however does not apply to concrete made with super
sulphated cement complying with IS 6909.

Regarding limit of chloride, a,.change has been made, by

expressing the chloride content as kg/m”~ of concrete, as shown in
Table 4.

Alkali—aggregate reaction

Some aggregates containing particular varieties of

silica may be susceptible to attack by alkalis (Na20 and K20)
originating from the cement or other sources, producing an
expansive reaction which can cause cracking and disruption of
concrete. Damage to concrete from this reaction will normally
only occur when all the following are present together:

a) a high moisture level, within the concrete;

b) a cement with high alkali content, or another source

of alkali;
c) aggregate containing an alkali reactive constituent.

38
Where the service records of particular cement/aggregate
combination are well established, and do not include any
instances of cracking due to alkali—aggregate reaction, no
further precautions should be necessary. When the materials are
unfamiliar, precautions should take one or more of the following
forms:

a) Use of non—reactive aggregate from alternate sources.

b) Use of low alkali ordinary Portland cement (OPC)

having total alkali content not more than 0.6
percent (as Na20 equivalent)

C) Use of flyash conforming to IS 3812:1981 or

granulated blast furnace slag conforming to IS 12089
as part replacement of ordinary Portland cement or
use of Portland Pozzoland Cement conforming to
IS 1489 (Part I’) or Portland slag cement conforming
to IS 455 provided pozzolana content is at least
20 percent and in case of slag at least 50 percent.

d) Measures to reduce the degree of saturation of the

concrete during service such as use of impermeable
membranes.

e) Limiting the cement content in the concrete mix and

thereby limiting, total alkali content in the
concrete mix. For more guidance specialist may be
referred.

39
 TABLE I EXPOSURE CONDITIONS
Environment Exposure Conditions

Mild Concrete surfaces protected against

weather of aggressive conditions
Moderate Concrete surfaces sheltered from
rain or freezing whilst wet
Concrete exposed to condensation and
rain
Concrete continuously under water

Concrete in contact or buried under non—

aggressive soil/ground water

Severe Concrete surfaces exposed to severe rain,

alternate wetting and drying or
occasional freezing whilst wet or severe
condensation.

Concrete completely immersed in sea

water

Very severe Concrete surfaces exposed to sea water

spray, corrosive fumes or severe
freezing conditions whilst wet.

Concrete in contact or buried under

aggressive subsoil/ground water

Concrete exposed to coastal environment

Extreme Surface of members in tidal zone, Mem-

bers in direct contact with liquid/solid
aggressive chemicals

4o
TABLE 2 MINIMUM CONTENTS OF CEMENTITIOUS MATERIALS, MAXIMUM
W/C RATIO AND MINIMUM GRADE OF CONCRETE FOR DIFFERENT
EXPOSURE WITH NORMAL WEIGHT AGGREGATES OF 2~ MM NOMINAL
MAXiMUM SIZE

Exposure Plain Reinforced Minimum Grade

Concrete concrete of concrete
Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum Plain Reinforced
Cements Free Cement Free concrete concrete
kg/m3 w/c kg/m3 w/c

Mild 220 0.60 300 0.55 M20

Moderate 250 0.60 300 0.50 MiS M25

Severe 260 0.50 350 0.4S M20 M30

Very Severe 280 0.45 375 0.45 M20 M35
Extreme 300 0.40 375 0.40 M25 M40

NOTES

1) Minimum cement content prescribed in the Table

is irrespective of grades of cement and it is
inclusive of mineral admixture’s such as flyash,
ground granulated blast furnace slag or silica
fume, The additions of flyash (conforming to
Grade I of IS 3812) or ground granulated blast
furnace slag may be taken into account in the
concrete composition with respect to the
cementjtjou’s materials content and water—
cementitous materials ratio, if the suitability
is established and as long as the maximum
amounts taken into account do not exceed the
limit of pozzolana and slag specified in
IS 1489(Part I) and 19 455 respectively.

2) Minimum grade for plain concrete under mild

exposure condition not specified.

41
 TABLE 3 CONCRETE EXPOSED TO SULPHATE ATTACK

Class Concentration of Sulphate’s Types of Cement Dense, fully

Expressed as 603 compacted
concrete made
In soil with 20 mm.
Total S03 603 In ground nominal maximum
in 2:1 water size aggregates
water: complying with
soil IS 383
extract
Cement Free
content water—
not less cement
than ratio
•1. not
g/L g/L kg/m3

1 Less than Less than Less than Ordinary Portland 280 0.55
0.2 1.0 0.3 cement or Portland
slag cement or
Portland Pozzolana
Cement

2 0.2 to 1.0 to 0.3 to Ordinary Portland 330 0.50

0/5 1.9 1.2 cement or Portland
slag cement or
Portland Pozzolana
Cement

Supersul pha ted 310 0.50

cement or sulphate
resisting Portland
Cemen t

3 0.5 to 1.9 to 1.2 to Supersuiphated 330 0.50

1.0 3.1 2.5 cement or Sulphate
resisting Portland
cement
Portland Pozzolana 350 0.45
cement or Portland
slag cement

4 1.Oto 3.1 to 2.5 to Supersuiphated or 370 0.45

2.0 5,0 5.0 or sulphate
resisting Portland
Cement
5 Over2 Over 5.0 Over 5.0 Sulphate resisting 400 0.40
Portland Cement or
supersulphated cement
with protective coatings

42
NOTES:

1 Cement content given in Table 3 for ordinary Portland

Cement is irrespective of grades of cement.

2) Use of super—sulphated cement is generally restricted where

the prevailing temperature is below 40°C.

3) Supersuiphated cement gives an acceptable life provided that

the concrete is dense and prepared with a water/cement
ratio of 0.4 or less, in mineral acids, down to pH 3.5.

4) The cement contents given in Class .2 are the minimum recommended

For SO3 contents near the upper limit of Class 2, cement
contents above these minimum are advised.

5) For severe conditions such as thin sections under

hydrostatic pressure on one side only and sectiDns partly
immersed, considerations should be given to a further
reduction o-f water/cement ratio.

6) Portland slag cement conforming to IS:455-19B9 with slag

content more than 50 percent exhibits better sulphate resisting
properties.

7) Where chloride is also encountered along with sulphate in soil

or ground water, ordinary Portland cement with 03A Content from
5 to 8 percent shall be desirable to be used in concrete,
instead of sulphate resisting cement. Alternatively, a blend
or ordinary Portland Cement and slag may be used provided
sufficientinformation is available on performance of
such blended cements in these conditions.

43
TABLE 4 LIMITS OF CHLORIDE CONTENT OF CONCRETE

Type or use of concrete Maximum Total acid soluble

chlorid~ Content Expressed
as kg/M of concrete

Concrete containing metal and 0.4

steam cured a elevcated
temperature and prestressed
concrete

Reinforced concrete or plain 0.6

concrete containing embedded
metal

Concrete not containing embedded 3.0

metal or any material requiring
protection from chloride

Ref: I)r. S.(.’. N1~uiti,GeiictaI Mana~cr, NCR.

44
 SHEAR CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT
NEAR SUPPORTS

Centre for Human Resource and Continuing Education

NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR CEMENT AND BUILDING MATERIALS
 SHEAR CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT NEAR SUPPORTS

Shear failure at sections of beams without shear

reinforcement will normally occur on plane inclined at an
angie 30 ° to the horizontal,. If the angle of failure plane
is forced to be inclined more steeply than this(because the
section considered ‘x-x’ in Fig.l is close to the support
or for other reasons) the shear force required to produce
failure is increased. The reason for this is that, for any
sections closer to the support than the critical section, a
substantial proportion of the load will be carried through
to the support directly by the strut and not by way of the
normal actions of shear and bending. The closer the load to
the support, the greater is the proportion of the load that
will be transmitted to the support in this way. The
enhancement of shear strength may be taken into account in
the design of sections in short members such as corbels or
in beams where the load is applied close to the support.
Any such enhancement should be ignored when checking the
shear resistance of the notional concrete compressive
struts.

A plot of test results illustrating the relationship

between a/d and v/va , for beams without stirrups is
reproduced in Fig. 2. The line shown on the graph is
straight for all values of a~/dgreater than 2,when v/va IS
1. The results shown in Fig. 2 derive from tests on short-
span, point-loaded beams but the results are applicable to
any short member where the failure plan~ is constrained to
form at an angle greater than tan1 (1/2) to the horizontal.
The enhancement in strength can therefore be applied for
any section closer to a support than 2d.
The enhancement of shear strength may be taken
into account in the design of sections near a support by
increasing the design concrete shear stress, vt.. to v~2d/a~
provided that v at the face of the support remains lesser
than the value given for maximum shear stress.

As outlined above, concentrated loads close to direct

supports lead to an enhancement of the design shear
resistance.

The strength of short beams depends to a great extent

upon the detailing of the reinforcement. Adequate anchorage
must be provided to the main tensile reinforcement.
Vertical stirrups are not very effective in beams in which

45
a~/d is less than 0.6. In such cases horizontal stirrups
parallel to the main tension reinforcement are recommended.

This enhancement is particularly useful for corbels or

pile caps or where concentrated loads are applied close to
the support of a beam.

Bottom loaded beams:

A further point to note is that this ~nhancement can
be applied only where the load is applied to the top face
of the beam and the support is at the bottom. Where load is
applied near the bottom of a section, sufficient vertical
reinforcement to carry the load should be provided in
addition to any reinforcement required to resist shear.

Shear reinforcement for sections close to supports:

If shear reinforcement is required, the total area of this
is given by:

EA5~ = a~ b {v—2dv~/a~ }/(0.87f~ )> 0.4 a~ b/0.87 f~

where
v nominal shear stress
=

= design shear strength of concrete

b = breadth of the member
d = effective depth
a~=shear span

The above equation considers that the effect of enhancement

is only on v~ and not on shear reinforcement.

Enhanced shear strength near supports (simplified approach):

At a distance ‘d’ from the support, Fig. 2 shows that
the capacity of the section is increasing very rapidly.So
much so that it is most unlikely that the shear force wil
be increasing more rapidly. The following rule will
normally give a safe way of gaining the advantage of the
strength enhancement for minimal effort.

For beams carrying generally uniform load or where the

principal load is located further than 2d from the face of
the support, the shear stress may be calculated at a
section at distance d from the face of support. The design
shear strength v~ ic calculated in accordance with the

46
Tablel9 and appropriate shear reinforcement assessed in
accordance with the Section 40.4. If this amount of shear
reinforcement is provided at sections closer ~o the support
no further check for shear at such sections is required.

Minimum shear reinforcement:

A~~/(s~b )> 0.4 /0.87 f~

S~ = stirrup spacing

Concrete corbels:

The essence of the design method recommended for a

corbel is the assumption that it behaves as a simple strut-
and —tie system, for loads appropriate to the ultimate
limit state. To make it function this way, it is necessary
to eliminate the possibility of a shear failure and Clause
28 suggests that the total depth of the corbel at the face
of the support be determined from shear considerations in
accordance with Clause 40.5.1, but using the modified
definition of a~ : (the distance between the line of the
reaction to the supported load and the root of the corbel.
The corbel width will be normally be determined from
practical considerations. The size of the bearing plate
transmitting the ultimate load to the corbel is calculated
using a bearing stress not greater than 0.8f~k(BS8110)
provided that it may be shown that the horizontal force at
the bearing is low (<0.1 Va).

The requirements of Cl 28.2 for the proportioning of

the corbel and the detailing of the reinforcement are
illustrated in Fig 3.
For higher a~ /d ratios, design will be controlled
principally by flexure at root section. Particular
attention has to be paid to the occurrence of horizontal
forces at the bearing, since these can considerably reduce
the corbel strength. (Ref: C&CA Tech report 472)

47
 x

~ H
at,

x
NOTE. The shear causing lailure is that acting on section X — X.

Figure t Shear failure near supports

~. .
•

I,..

8 •

tø , I Expenment
EC2 tne
S..

I.
.1
I

I
• : • S

~i1
Jig. .2. Experimental results Jor
I 2 3
shear strength near supports
aid

48
 main steel welded to a
transverse bar of
equal diameter

horizontal shear steel (A,,)

as stirrups Over upper
two-thirds of d
(a)

outside edge o~bearing

to be kept clear of bend in
main reinforcemeni (minimum
clearance = 1 bar diameter)

DETAILING RULES
(1) lit,~0.5/1
(2) 0.4~100 A,/bd’~1.3
(3) 0.6~100(A,
1±A,jlbd~20
(b) (4) Other details as per diagrams.

main reinforcement in the

torm of horizontal loops

bars provided to anchor

horizontal stirrups

Figure 3 Possi/,/e ,iiei!,ods of anchoring i;iaiii ~‘e~isioii ~ciiiforcciiieti( it, corb’fs.

49
 TAFft.E 19 DESEGN SHEAR STREP1CTII OF C0UCRETE~ ~N/u~2
(C1.9[J912 60.2.1, 60.2.2, 60.3, 614, 41.3.2, 6L3.3 and 41.6.3

100 - - Concrete Gr.a.de

bd
II 15 M 20 M 25 (1 30 M 35 It 40 and at

(1.) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)- (7)

IF’ o.~J
0.25
0.28
0.35
0.28

0.36
0.29

0.36 •
0.29

•0.37
0.29

0.37
0.30

0.33

0.50 0.4.13 0.48 0.49 0.50 0.60 0.51.

0.75 0.54 0.56 0.57 o.sr~o.sg o.~o

1.00 0.60 0.62 0.64 0.66 0.67 0.68

1.25 0.64 0.67 0.70 0.71 0.73 0.7~

1.50 0.68 0.72 0.74 0.76 0.78 Ct. 79

1.75 0.71 0.75 0.78 0.80 0.82 0.F34

2.00 0.71 0.79 0.82 0.84 0.86 0.88

2..2 0.71 0.31 0.35 0.38 0.~0 0.92

2.50 0.71 0.82 0.88 0,91 0.93 0.95

2.7,5 0,71 0.32 0.90 0..~A 0.~6 0.93

r~6~~\0. 7 1. 0.82 0.92 0.96 0.99 1.01.

and

Ihiole - Th~
.~ts i~ Ihe
~ re~ of 4- I ongi.n~
j 1,jrjtn?(
i~fficF.ivg
~erts Ion
Lep$h
reinforcement ~ihich inue~ ~ c te~
beyond the ~9C$~r,fl i~e~ng oon’~idered exr~ept~ ~‘.tpport ~~here
•~

the f’jl I
~re~ of ~ reirtforcg..~ni m~ be ~ proviriect
the rJe+~jNn~ cortform~ 1o 26.2.2 ~ 26.2.3

50
 SLABS SPANNING IN TWO
DIRECTIONS AT RIGHT ANGLE

Centre for Human Resource and Continuing Education

NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR CEMENT AND BUILDING MATERIALS
 SLABS SPANNING IN TWO DIRECTIONS
AT RIGHT ANGLE -

UNEQUAL EDGE CONDITIONS IN ADJACENT PANELS. In some

cases, the bending moments at a common support, obtained by considering the
two a(l~acentpanels in isolation, may differ significantly (say by 10%), because
of the differing edge conditions at the far supports or differing span lengths or
loading.
Consider panels I and 2 in Fig. - As the support on grid A for panel I
is discontinuous and the support on grid C for panel 2 is continuous, the moments
for panels I and 2 for the support on grid B could be significantly different. In
these circumstances, the slab can be reinforced throughout for the worst case span
and support moments. However, this may be uneconomic in some cases. In such
cases, the following distribution procedure can be used.

Two-way spanning
slab4: unequal edge condition
znadj -

~a:ei1M,2P3nei2

(a) Obtain the support moments for panels I and 2 Irom Table 3.6. Il M
and M are treated as fixed end moments, the moments may be
_.~

distributed in proportion to the stiffnesses of span l~in panels I and 2.

Thus a revised bending moment M ~ may be obtained for support over
B.
(b) The span moments in panels I and 2 should be recalculated as follows
- = (M~1 + M+~) — M8

M~2 = (M2 + M2 + A4~2)— M_~ — M_2

(Note that this assumes that the Iinal moment over C is M —2)
(c) For curtailment of reinforcement, the point olcontraflexure can be obtained
by assuming a parabolic distribution of moments in each panel.

51
DESIGNERS HANDBOOK TO EUROCODE 2

Table 3.6. Bond3ng moment coefficienls for rectangular panels supported on four sides with provision to
lorelon at cornors
Type ol panel and Short span coetticlenls ~ Long span
moments con~id~r~d coetticienls
l/1._____________ it.~(or nil
values of
- 1-0 11 12 1-3 1-4 1-5 1.75 2.0
y1
1

interior panels
Negative moment at
continuous edge 0-031 0-037 0042 0-046 0-050 0-053 0-059 0-063 0.032
Positive moment at
mid-span 0-024 0-028 0-032 0-035_- 0-037 0-040 0-044 0.048 0-024
One short edge -

discontinuous
Negative moment at
continuous edge 0-039 0044 0048 0-052 0055 0-058 0-063 0067 0-037
Poaflive moment at
mid-span 0-029 0-033 0-036 0-039 0-041 0-043 0.047 0-050 0-028

One long edge

discontinuous
Negative moment at
conlinuous edge 0-039 0049 0-056 0-062 0-068 0-073 0.082 0-089 0-037
Positive moment at
mid-span 0-030 0036 0-042 0-047 0-051 0-055 0~062 0.067 0-028
Two adjacent edges
discontinuous
Negative moment at
continuous edge 0-047 0-056 0-063 0-069 0-074 0-078 0087 0.093 0-045
Positive moment at
mid~span 0-036 0-042 0-047 0-051 0-055 0-059 0.065 0-070 0-034
Two short edges
discontinuous
Negative ~noment at
continuous edge 0-046 0-050 0-054 0-057 0-060 0-062 0-067 0-070 —
Positive moment at
mid-span 0-034 0-038 0-040 0-043 0-045 0-047 0-050 0-053 0-034
Two long edges
discontinuous
Negative moment at
0-045
continuous edge — — — — I
Positive moment at -

mid-span . - 0-034 0-046 0-056- 0-065- 0-072 0-078- 0.091 0~100 0034
Three edges
discontinuous (one
long edge continuous)
Negative moment at
continuous edge 0.057 0-065 0071 0-076 0-081 0-084 0.092 0098 —
Positive moment at
mid-span 0043 0-048 0-053 0-057 0-060 0-063 0-069 0-074 0-044
Three edges
discontinuous (one
short edge
continuous)
Negstive moment at
continuous edge — —

Positive moment at 0-058

mid-span 0042 0-054 0063 0-071 0078 0-084 0096 0-105 0-044
Four edges
discontinuous
Positive moment at
mid.span 0055 0065 0074 0-081 0087 0092 0103 0-111 J0-056

52
 CONTROL OF DEFLECTION

Centre for Human Resource and Continuing Education

RATIONAL COUNCIL FOR CEMENT AND BUILDING MATERIALS
 CONTROL OF DEFLECTION
(Extracts of relevant clause:~from IS:456- 1 978),

22.2 Control of Deflection The deflection of a structure or part tl~ereof

—

ala II not itdvcrscly tilect I he ll~ctra nec uv c Ulciency of tIc at ruetu ro or

finishes or partitions. The deflection shall generally be limited to the follow-
ing:
a) The final deflection due to all loads including the effects of tempera-
ture, creep and shrinkage and measured from the as-cast level of
the supports of floors, roofs and all other horizontal members,
- should not normally exceed span/250.
b) The deflection including the effects of temperature, creep and shrink-
age occurring after erection of partitions and the application of
finishes should not normally exceed span/350 or 20 mm whichever
is less.

22.2.1 For beams and slabs, the vertical de9ection~limitsmay generally be

assumed, to be satisfied provided that the span to depth ratios are not gi~eater
than the values obtained as below:
a) Basic values of span to effective depth ratio~for spans up to JO m:
- CantiLever 7
- Simply supponed
Continuous 26
b) For spans above 10 m, the values in (a) may be -multiplied by
10/span in metres, except for cantilever in which case deflection
calculations should be made.
c) Depending on the area and the type of, steel for tension reinforce-
ment, the values in(a) or (b) shall he modified as per Fig. 3.
d) Depending on the area of compression reinforcement, the value of
span to depth ratio be further modified as per Fig. 4.
e) For flanged beams, the values of (a) or (b) be modified as per Fig. 5
and the reinforcement percentage for use in Fig. 3 and 4 should be
based on area of section equal to b1 d.
Nors When deflection, are required to be calcidated, the method
— gvcn in
Appendix B may be used.

23. SOLID SLABS

23,1 General — The provisions of 22.2 for beams apply to slabs also.
Nom 1 — For slabs spanning in two directions, the shorter of the two spans should
be used for calculating the span to effective depth ratios.
Nort 2 — For two-way slabs of~span, ( up to 35 m) with mild steel reinforce-
ment, the span to overall depth ratios given below may generally be assumed to ~ati,1y
vertical deflection hinnfts for loading cla.ss up to 3 000 N/rn’ (300 kg/rn’ )~
Simply Supported slobs 35 -

Continuou3 slabs 40
For hi~bstrength deformed bars ofgrade F~415, the values gh’cn above should be
multiplied by 08.

(In IS:456 (Draft) the Figure relating to modification factor

for Tension Reinforcement has been revised)
53
 I-s

l.A

i-s
I
0
l-2

0 I-s
0
a

J-0~
0 0-50 00 lEO 5-00 2~0
It
0 peItctl~SAGE CQ,4PRESS,ON SF’WFORCE ME NI
F-
U
F,~,4 MoolFicAnoN FACTOR FOR CoMpReasloli R!LM,ORCIMENr

I.00
0
I—

U
U- 0.95
0
0
0
— 0-90
u
4
U.

X
0 0.~S
U
0
U 0.80

0.75
PERCENTAGE OF TENSION STEEL
0.70
0 02 O.E 0.8 0.0 1-0

Figure .~ -.~ Modification factors for tension reinforcement RAtIO OF WEB WIDtH
TO FtANGE WIDTH
Fiu. 5 l&suuw-uu FArruks FISH .RATIOI or Sa-~nTO
- DSPTH FOR F~NOeoBEAUS
 LAP LENGTH OF REINFORCING BARS

Centre for Human Resource and Continuing Education

I NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR CEM~NTAND BUILI~INGMATERIALS
 LAP LENGTH OF REINFORCING BARS
Laps of reinforcing bars lead to transverse tensile
stresses in the concrete around the lapped bars. Their
magnitude depends mainly on the tensile force, F, to be
transmitted and therefore on the bar diameter. In order to
avoid failure and to equilibrate the tensile stresses,
adequate cover to reinforcement, spacing of the lapped
bars, and distance from vertical surfaces of the cross
section should ~e provided. In addition, transverse
reinforcement may be necessary, in particular near the ends
of the bars where the transverse tensile stress
concentration develops in the concrete.

Laps should be detailed such that forces are transmitted

from one bar to the next without causing cracking or
spalling of the concrete.

Wherever possible, laps between bars should be staggered

and should not be located at sections of high stress. -

The lap length including anchorage value of hooks for

bars in flexural tension shall be ld(Development length) or
30 ~1 which ever is greater and for direct tension shall be
21d or 30 c~which ever is greater. The straight length of
the bar shall not be less than l5c~or 20 cm.

During drafting of 1S456, attention was drawn to the

revisions included in BS 8110 from the lap lengths given
in CP11O. The changes were made in the British code based
on the investigations reported in Europe and America, which
suggested that , in limiting circumstances, the lap
lengths given in CP11O could have factors of safety of less
than 1.0. Comparison with EUROCODE 2 ENV 1992 suggested
that, in some cases-, EUROCODE could require lap lengths of
up to twice the values given in 1S456-l978. However, the
committee was not aware of any cases where laps had failed
in practice.

The EUROCODE has considered the good and bad bond

conditions and the modes of lap failure. The factors that
contribute to such situations are:
1. The bond of bars cast near the top of members more than
300 mm deep or so is significantly reduced due to
settlement of the plastic concrete around the bar,
which leaves water filled lenses below the bar and

55
 sometimes cracks above the bar. The reduction is in the
region of 30 per cent(EUR000DE).
2. Closely spaced laps can lead to a plane of weakness
within a section, which can lead to reduction in
strength.
3. Corners are also a source of weakness; failure caused
by low lateral distance.
4. Bond increase with increasing ratio of cover to bar
diameter. Low cover values can cause failure. -

Multiplying factors for lap length.

Tension lap len9ths -

Bars in Corner Otherwise

top of bars not
sect ion as in top of
cast with section as
cover <~ cast with
cover <c~
Clear >75 mm and
distance > 6’~ 1.4 lb 1.4 lb 1.0 lb
between !
laps <75 mm or
6c1 2.0 lb 1.4 lb 1.4 lb

whichever
is greater
I
- basic anchorage length. ~t = diameter of bar

56
 COVER TO REINFORCEMENTS

Centre for Human Resource and Continuing Education

NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR CEMENT AND BUILDING MATERIALS
 COVER TO REINFORCEMENTS

Cover to reinforcement is the shortest distance between

the surface of a concrete member and the nearest surface
of the reinforcing steel, without including the plaster
or other decorative finishes. -

Despite being a simple detailing rule, failure to

achieve adequate cover in construction is the greatest
single factor influencing premature deterioration
observed in many reinforced and prestressesd structures.
The serious effect of a short fall in cover is
illustrated in Fig.l. Actual cover of half of what was
intended may lead to the on set of reinforcement
corrosion in a quarter of the expected time.

Concrete cover:
nominal value

- I
Fig. 1
Concrete cover: example
I
I-
a-
hat? nominal value of the
Penetration
w effect of
0
thickness
of cover

25 50 100
10 15
TIME — years

For protection of the reinforcing steel, having the

appropriate thickness of cover is not enough. The
concrete must be of appropriate quality. It is only the
quality of the cover that matters. The following Table
illustrates this point.

Water/ Cement Cover *Time in years for

rat io 10mm 45mm carbonation to reach
0. 7 5* 45 reinforcement in external
concrete sheltered from
0. 5 15 135
rain.

Variation of cover in practice:

There have been many investigations into the
variation of cover in actual construction.
A Canadian study investigated the actual cover in a
number of slabs; both cast on site and precast. Their
findings: Top reinforcement is more often affected th~n
bottom reinforcement. The mean deviation of cover from

57
the specified value was —20 mm for top reinforcement, and
-8 mm for the bottom reinforcement. In precast slabs,
with only bottom reinforcement, the cover was virtually
exactly as specified.

An Australian study combined the measurement of

actual cover with observation- of corrosion. There was a
good correlation. At 227 “fault locations” in 95
buildings, the average cover had a low value of 6mm. The
highest occurrence of problem areas in building facades
was in beam and slab end faces. This suggests that it is
the longitudinal displacement of reinforcement, or its
excessive length, in a horizontal member that leads to
inadequate cover. -

These studies show that the problem of improper

cover is not limited to just a few structures or to
particular types of structures or only to some countries.

A recent study in Britain, deals with

structures under construction on 25 sites. ( Clark,
L.A.,et al., “How can we get the cover we need?” The
Structural Engineer, V 75, No. 17, 1997, pp. 289-296.)
Quoting from this article:

“It is evident. That the required cover valves and

their allowable tolerances rnegative and positive] have
not been met, by wide margins, on most sites. Hence, it
is confirmed that lack of cover is an extensive problem
which is of a chronic rather than a sporadic nature.”

Some of the conclusions extracted from this study are:

• Specified cover was not achieved in a significant
number of structural elements on all sites
investigated; failure to achieve specified cover, is
thus an extensive and chronic, rather than sporadic,
problem. -

• Some defects occurred during construction as a result

of poor workmanship, while others occurred also during
construction but originated before construction
commenced. -

• Contractors’ quality assurance and checking systems

were found to be ineffective in controlling the
achievement of cover because they were capable of
detecting only the approximately 50 per cent of defects
which were shown by this study to result directly from
operatives’ performance.
• Contractors should have an early involvement at the
design stage.

58
• There is a need for a less confrontational culture
throughout the industry, which would encourage the good
communications, and coordination required achieving a
high quality of construction.

This study has also attempted a broad categorization of

the causes of the cover defects. The factors, which
impact on achieved quality, are described in terms of the
immediacy of impact referred to as ‘orders of causes’

First order of Immediate technical factors,

causes. readily observable at site: - use
Can be objectively of wrong size of spacers, not
determined buildable design details,
~ reinforcement not fixed properly.
Second order of Poor workmanship on the part of
causes (perceived), operatives. On the part of
Concerns management, lack of builadblity
occupational experience, inadequate checking in
responsibility the design office, poor
specifications, and time restraints
on professional site staff.
Third order of Related to omissions in necessary
causes (perceived), information. Poor communication ~nd
Concerns inadequate coordination between the
organisational parties concerned.
interaction -

Fourth order of Management decisions and heads

causes office
(perceived) . policies because of the
Concerns management competitive climate under which the
policy and external industry operates.
factors.

Purpose of cover to rein forcenien t:

• To transfer the strain in concrete in flexure
to the steel which then can develop a tensile
force.
• To protect the steel from corrosion process;
• To ensure a fire resistance over a certain
period.

59
 I~ 456 recommendations:

Concrete cover requirements as per Is 456-1978

Clause 25.4
Beam Column - c~ialls. Founda- Ends of —
Exposure - Slab&other tions main bars
condition members
Normal >25 mm >25 mm for >15 mm or 50 mm - > 25 mm or
or>4) main bars >4) 75min* 24)
4)<
12mm;
>40mm for
bars
4)> 12mm
Members As specified in Normal condition + 40 mm.
immersed in For grade M25 and above as specified in Normal
sea water# condition ÷20 mm.
Periodically As specified in Normal condition + 50 mm.
immersed in For grade M25 and above as specified in Normal
sea water# condition + 25 mm.
Other As specified in Normal condition + 15 mm to 50 mm.
chemical
envi ronment~I

# In all such cases the cover should not exceed 75 mm.

~Specified in SP:34
• Diameter of bar
Tolerance on Placing of Reinforcement: The cover
shall in no case be reduced by more than one-third of
specified cover~or 5mm whichever is less.

Draft IS 456 approach is to operate in terms of

Nominal cover, that is the design depth of concrete cover
to all steel reinforcements, including links. The value
of cover used in the design calculations and indicated on
the drawings. -

Nominal cover to meet durability requirements as per

draft IS:456 Table 16

Exposure condition Nominal

concrete cover
in not less
than
Mild 20
Moderate 30
Severe 45
Very severe 50
Extreme 75
Notes: For main reinforcement up to 12 mm diameter bar
and for mild exposure the nominal cover may be reduced by
5 mm.

60
 From the standpoint of durability, protection of
reinforcement is a function of the thickness of cover and
of the quality of concrete in it. The British code
provides a table of alternative combinations of thickness
of cover together with the quality of concrete to ensure
durability under given conditions. The Draft IS 456 does
not provide such combinations.

When concrete is to be exposed to conditions

generally called severe or very severe, the quality of
concrete must be high or very high. Minimum grades of
concrete and mix proportions suggested for different
exposure conditions (Table 5 of IS 456 Draft) are deemed
to meet this requirement.

To allow for the variability in the thickness of

cover in reality the code says: “Unless specified
-

otherwise, the actual cover should not deviate from the

required nominal cover by plus 10= or minus 0mm.” The
code gives both a negative and a positive tolerance i.e.
how much more than the specified is tolerated.

The ACI Building Code, section 7.5, specifies the

tolerance on minimum cover as minus 10mm for members up
to 200 mm deep, and minus 13mm for deeper members. The
ACI tolerance is linked to the depth of the members,
while IS 456(draft) tolerance is same in all cases.
However, there is a provision for specifying as per the
designer’s requirements, taking a more practical view of
what can be achieved. BS811O specifies negative tolerance
as minus 5mm. -

Workmanship:
Achieving the required cover is a question of
reliability and workmanship. It is essential thatproper
guidelines are available in the Code. Under the Section
Assembly of Reinforcement certain specifications are
given:
• Spacers, chairs and other supports detailed on
drawings, together with such other supports as may
be necessary, should be used to maintain the
specified nominal cover to the steel
reinforcement.
• Spacers and chairs should be placed at a maximum
spacing of 1 m and closer spacing may sometimes
may be necessary. -

• Spacers and cover blocks should be of concrete of

same strength or PVC.

61
 It is important to note that the material for
spacers should be durable, and it should neither lead to
corrosion of reinforcement nor cause spalling of concrete
cover. Also the mix used for spacer blocks should be
comparable in strength, durability, porosity and
appearance to the surrounding concrete.

The causes of improper cover are not limited to

placing of cover blocks, chairs and other supports. The
design and detailing of reinforcement sometimes
contributes to serious practical difficulty on site.
There is more steel than can actually be fitted into the
space available, especially when lapping is necessary. In
such situations concrete does not flow around the
reinforcement to provide adequate cover.

Another source of difficulties is incorrect handling

of bars or cutting them to length. Relatively small
errors can have serious consequences, given that the bar
lengths are handled in meters and, where cover is
measured in increments of 5mm.

Fire resistance: -

One more reason for the provision of adequate cover

to reinforcement is to give fire protection to steel.
Flame penetration and heat transmission impairs the
strength of steel. Assessment of fire endurance of
reinforced concrete elements is too complex, as well as
specialized and hence the details are not dealt with in
the draft code. However, the code specifies the minimum
cover for various types of structural elements (Beams,
Floors, Ribs and Columns) necessary to ensure a fire
resistance over a certain number of hours (0.5h to 4h).

Effect of increased cover th.ickness:

There is a concern that any increase in cover will
lead to shrinkage cracking of the concrete layer outside
the steel envelope. Unreinforced concrete if restrained
will allow concentrations of tensile strain to develop.
If this strain exceeds t-he strain capacity of the
concrete, shrinkage cracking will develop. To prevent the
development of such concentrations tensile strain, it is
necessary to provide reinforcement, spaced fairly
closely, and located sufficiently near the exposed drying
surface of the concrete members. Another aspect of
thicker cover is the possibility of an increase in the -

flexural crack widths in excess of code limits, and hence

increased durability problems. There is a difference of
opinion on this issue. Some engineers hold a view that
flexure crack widths at the surface are not the direct

62
factor in causing deterioration. (The Concrete society
Report CS44). Another concern expr~ssed is that
increasing the concrete cover may head to higher
transverse tension in faces under high compressive
stress. It is also to be noted that too large a cover
will result in the reduction of effective depth and
consequently reduction in the moment of resistance of the
beam or its ultimate strength. To quantify a limit on the
thickness of cover the maximum value suggested is 75 mm.

Suggestions to ensure specified cover: -

• For protection of the reinforcing steel, having the

appropriate thickness of cover is not enough. The
concrete must be of appropriate quality. It is only the
quality of the cover that matters.
• All embedded steel is subject to corrosion. The cover
requirements specified in the code apply to all
reinforcement including links and, indeed, to other
embedded steel.
• It is important to note that a combination of a very
large cover and very poor concrete is entirely
unsatisfactory.
• The chairs, spacers, and supports of the reinforcement
are an integral part of the finished structure. Their
quality should be assured.
• The required required cover should be clearly specified
both on the drawing and in the specification. -

• If the word “minimum” is used, it should be defined. It

could be an absolute minimum or a characteristic value.
• The tolerance should be defined, both positive and
negative, but they should not be unrealistically small.
• Exceeding the specified minimum cover shall increase
the weight of the structural members. It shall also
produce an unreinforced concrete section, with cracks
of considerable width.
• The need for cover to the ends of reinforcing bars
should not be ignored.
• In the design office much more attention to detailing
should be given.
• Codes of practice give advice on what is adequate but
under extreme conditions the designer should take a
conservative approach.
• Exacting supervision and frequent verification prior to
pouring concrete will he helpful.
• Modern cover meters are reliable and handy instruments
and can be used for compliance testing.

63
 DESIGN OF SLABS

Centre for Human Resource and Continuing Education

NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR CEMENT AND BUILDING MATERIALS
 DESIGN OF SLABS
A~ SOLID SLABS

In general there are not significant changes in the design and analysis ofsolid
slabs except forminor change in clause No. 24,4 and a new Clause No. 24.4.1

24.2 Slabs spanning in one direction and continuous over supports shall be designed
according to the provisions applicable to continuous beams. -

Comments: In this clause, the underlined phrase has been added.

24.43 Restrained slab with Unequal Condition at Adjacent Panels

In some cases the support moments calculated from Table 26 for adjacent panels
may differ significantly. The following procedure may be adopted to adjust them.

a) Calculate the sum of moments at midspan’ and supports (neglecting signs).

b) Treat the values from Table 26 as fixed end moments

c) According to the relative stiffness at adjacent spans, distributed the fixed end
moments across the supports, giving new support moments.
d) Adjust midspan , moments such that, when added to the support moments from
( c) (neglecting signs), the total should be equal to that from (a). -

If the resulting support moments are significantly greater than the value from
Table 26, the tension steel over the supports will need to be extended beyond the
provisions of 26.2 The procedure should be as follows:
.

e) Take the span moment as parabolic between supports: its maximum value is as
found from (d)

f) Determining the points of contraulexure of the new support moments (from (c))
with the span moment (from (e))

g) Extended half the support tension steel at each end to at least an effective depth or
12 bar diameters beyond the nearest point of contraflexure.

h) Extend the full area of the support tension steel at each end to half the distance
from (g).
64
Comments: This clause explains the method of distribution of unequal support
moments for adjacent panels.

B. SPECIFIC DESIGN REQUiREMENT FOR STRUCTURAL MEMBER

A1~DSYSTEM

Earlier in this section only the method of analysis and design of Flat Slab was
explained. Now in the revised version ofthe code, the method ofanalysis and
- design of Ribbed, Hollow Block or Voided Slab (Clause 30 ) has also been
introduced. -

There is no change in the method of design and analysis of Flat Slab.

30. RIBBED, HOLLOW BLOCK OR VOIDED SLAB

30.1 General

This covers the slabs constructed in one of the ways described below: -

a) As a series of concrete ribs with topping cast on forms which may be removed
after the concrete has set;
b) As a series of concrete ribs betweenprecast blocks which remain part ofthe
completed structure; the top of the ribs may be connected by a topping of concrete
ofthe same strength as that used in the ribs; and
c) With a continuous top and bottom face but containing voids of rectangular, oval
- or other shape. -

30.2 Analysis of Structure

The moment and forces due to design loads on continuous slabs may ~e obtained by the
methods given in Section 3 for solid slabs. Alternatively, the slabs may be designed as a
series of simply supported spans provided they are not exposed to weather or corrosive
conditions; wide cracks may develop at the supports and the engineer shall satisfy
himselfthat these will not impair finishes or lead to corrosion of the reinforcement.

30.3 Shear

Where hollow block are used, for the purpose of calculating shear stress, the rib width
may be increased to take account of the ~vall thickness of the block on one side of the
rib; with narrow precast units, the width ofthe jointing mortar or concrete may be
included.

65
30.4 Deflection

The Recommendations for deflection in respect of solid slabs may be applied to ribbed,
hollow block or voided construction. The span to effective depth ratios given in 23.2 for
a flanged beam are applicable but when calculating the final reduction factor for web
width, the rib width for hollow block slabs maybe assumed to include the walls ofthe
blocks on both sides of the rib. For voided slabs and slabs constructed of box or I-section
units, an effective rib width shall be calculated assuming all material be’low the upper
flange ofthe unit to be concentrated in a rectangular rib having the same cross-sectional
area and depth.

30$ Size and Poaition of Ribs

In-situ ribs shall be not less than 65mm wide. They shall be spaced at centres not greater
than I .5m apart and their depth, excluding any topping, shall be not more than fourtimes
their width.

Generally ribs shall be formed along each edge parallel to the span of one way slabs.
When the edge is built into a wall or rests on a beam, a rib atleast as wide as the bearing
shall be formed along the edge.

30.6 Hollow Blocks and Formers

Blocks and formers may be ofany suitable material. Hollow clay tiles for the filler types
shall conform to IS 3951 (Part 1). When required to contribute to the structural strength
of a slab they shall:

a) be made of concrete or burnt clay, and

b) have a crushing strength of at least 14 N/mm2 measured on the net section when
axially loaded in the direction ofcompressive stress in the slab.

30.7 Arrangemern of Reinforcement

The recommendations given in 26.3 regarding maximum distance between bars apply to
areas of solid concrete in this form of construction. The curtailment, anchorage and cover
to reinforcement shall be as described below:-

a) At least 50 percent ofthe total main reinforcement shall be carried though at the
bottom on to the bearing and anthored in accordance with 26.2.3.3.

b) Where a slab, which is continuous over supports, has been designed as simply
supported, reinforcement shall be provided over the support to control cracking.
This reinforcement shall have a cross-sectional area ofnot less than one-quarter

66
 that required in the middle ofthe adjoining spans and shall extend at least one-
tenth of the clear span into adjoining spans.

c) In slabs with permanent blocks, the side cover to the reinforcement shall not be
less than 10mm, In all other cases, cover shall be provided according to 26.4

30.8 The construction with precast joists and hollow concrete filler blocks shall
conform to IS 6061 (Part I) and precast joist and hollow clay filler blocks shall conform
to is 6061 (Part 2)

67
 GENERAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
AND DESIGN OF WALLS

Centre for Human Resource and Continuing Education

NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR CEMENT AND BUI~JDINGMATERIALS
 GENERAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
AND DESIGN OF WALLS

[NTRODUCTION:

IS:456-1978 (Third Revision), ‘Code of Practice for Plain and Reinforced Concrete’ was
adopted by BIS on 3~ October 1978. Practically two decades have passed since then which
have seen an increased use of concrete as a construction material allover the country.
However this period has also witnessed an unprecedented number of cases where concrete
has deteriorated badly, shaking the very confidence of the practitioners of this material.
Hitherto, in the code the attention was focussed on realising the required strength of concrete
at site, From there the focus has now shifted to durability. Hence the entire code has now
been revised with Durability as the central theme. Chapter 7 on Durability which had first 3
clauses has now been developed to include several important additional clauses.

As we all understand by now, durability of concrete has to be viewed as~anall uncompassing

requirement for which a holistic approach is warranted which will interalia include:
• Selection of site
• Structural designs and detailing
• Concrete technology
• System of construction
• Drainage, Cover, Water proofing
• Inspection. Maintenance & Repair

In session 5 & 6 we are looking into aspects of structural design and detailing to achieve
durability. Following are the main clauses, which have undergone revision.

69
 SECTION 3 GENERAL DESIGN CONSIDERATION

18. BASIS OF DESIGN

18.1 Aim of Design

The aim of design is the achievement of an acceptable probability that structures

being designed will perform satisfactorily during their intended life. With an
appropriate degree of safety, they should sustain all the loads and deformations of
normal construction and use and have adequate durability and have adequate
resistance to the effects of misuse and fire.

18.2 Methods of Design

18.2.1 Structure and structural elements shall normally be designed by Limit State Method.
Account should be taken of accepted theories, experiment and experience and the
need to design for durability. Calculations alone do not produce safe, serviceable and
durable structures. Suitable materials, quality control, adequate detailing and good
supervision are equally important.

18.2.2 Where the Limit State Method can not be conveniently adopted, Working Stress
Method may be used.

19.3 Imposed Loads and Wind Loads

Imposed loads and wind loads shall be assumed in accordance with IS 875 (Part 2)
and IS 875 (Part 3) respectively.

19.5.1 In ordinary buildings, such as low rise dwellings whose lateral dimension do not
exceed 45 m the effect due to temperature fluctuations and shrinkage and creep can be
ignored in design calculations.

20.5 Lateral Sway

Under transient wind load the lateral sway at the top should not exceed H/500, where
H is the total height of the building. For seismic loading, reference should be made to
IS 1893.

21 FIRE RESISTANCE

21 . I A structure or structural element required to have fire resistance should be designed to

possess an appropriate degree of resistance to flame penetration; heat transmission
and failure. The fire resistance of a structural element is expressed in terms of time in
hours in accordance with IS 1641. Fire resistance of concrete elements depends upon
details of member size, cover to steel reinforcement, reintorcement detailing and type
of aggregate (normal weight or light weight) used in concrete. General requirements
for fire protection are given in IS 1642.

7o
21.2 Minimum requirements of concrete cover and member dimensions for normal weight
aggregate concrete members so as to have the required fire resistance shall be in
accordance with 26.4.3 and Fig. 1

L~’H
Floor;

Co I u mm

• .1
~4jb

fio S Or~.I,~*zp’owd

Futly ci.poied

21.3 The reinforcement detailing should reflect the changing pattern of the structural
section and ensure that both individual elements and the structure as a whole contain
adequate support, ties, bonds and anchorage’s for the required fire resistance.

21 .3. 1 Additional measures such as application of fire resisthnt finishes, provision of fire
resistant false ceilings and sacrificial steel in tensile zone, should be adopted in case
the nominal cover required exceeds 40 mm for beams and 35 mm for slabs to give
protection against spalling.

21.4 Specialist literature may be referred to for determining stress distribution in structure
exposed to specified fire period.

22 2 Effective Span

(c) The effective length of a cantilever shall 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 shall be taken.

71
22.4.2.lWhere side sway consideration becomes critical due to unsymmetry geometry or
loading, rigorous analysis may be required.

22.6 2 1 Note : The above clauses are applicable for beams generally carrying uniformly
distributed load or where the principal load is located farther than 2d from the face of
the support. Fig. 2 modified to steel stress levels.

(U)

I’;) (ci)

4
jJ~u
14
vu
I

Fig.: ~
ing factored shear force V

MoD.~ATvOr1 FA.CTO~
a

ii JiiiL~LL~::
~T
~__ —

-~
— —~— * —
~7~

ii i±~i
:~
ii ZI~
,~ t 72
ZI ii
~‘1 .
La
~ .

-I
— — — —
m ~.•,;
I
~,

~ . — — —
r’l i__I ~1
;z:j
m

,
72
25.4 Minimum Eccentricity

All columns shall be designed for minimum eccentricity, equal to the unsuppported
length of column/500 plus lateral dimensios/30, subject to a minimum of 20 mm.
Where Bi-axial bending is considered, it is only necessary to ensure that eccentricity
exceeds the minimum about one axis at a time.

26.1,1 Bars may be arranged singly, or in pairs in contact, or in groups of three or four bars
bundled in contact. Bundled bars shall be enclosed within stirrups or ties. Bundled
bars shall be tied together to ensure. the bars remaining together. Bars larger than 32
mm diameter shall not be bundled, except in columns.
26. 1 .2 The recommendations for detailing for earthquake resistant construction given in IS
13920 should be taken into consideration, where applicable.

26.2.2.2Anchoring bars in compression

The anchorage length of straight bar in compression shall be equal to the development
length of bars in compression as specified in 26.2.1. The projected length of hooks,
bends and straight lengths beyond bends if provided for a bar in compression, shall
only be considred for development length.

26.2.5.lLap splices

c) Lap length including anchorage value of hooks for bars in flexural tension shall be Ld
(see 26.2.1.) and for direct tension shall be 2Ld or 30 x dia whichever is greater. The
straight length of the lap shall not be less than 15 x dia or 20 cm. The following
provisions also apply:

Where lap occurs for a tension bar located at:

i) top of a section as cast and the minimum cover is less than twice the diameter of the
lapped bar, the lap length shall be increased by a factor of 1.4.

ii) Corner of a section and the minimum cover to eithbr face is less than twice the
diameter of the lapped bar or where the clear distance between adjacent laps is less
than 75 mm or 6 times the diameter of lapped bar, whichever is greater, the lap length
should be increased by a factor of 1 .4.

Where both condition (i) and (ii) apply, the lap length should be increased by a factor
of 2.0.

26.2.5 1 Strength ofwelds

The following values may be used where the strength of the weld has been proved by
tests to be at least as great as that of the parent bar.

a) \Velded splices and Mechanical Connection — 100 percent of the design strength of
joined bars.

b) Joints in tension
73
 i) 80 percent of the design strength of welded bars (100 percent if welding is
strictly supervised and if at any cross section of the member not more than 20
percent of the tensile reinforcement is welded).

ii) 100 percent ofdesign strength of mechanical connection.

26 4 Nominal Cover to Reinforcement

26.4.1. Nominal Cover

Nominal cover is the design depth of concrete cover to all steel reinforcements,
including links. It is the dimension used in design and indicated in the drawings.

26.4.2 Nominal Cover to Meet Durability Requirement

Minimum values for the nominal cover of normal — weight aggregate concrete which
should be provided to all reinforcement, including links depending on the condition of
exposure described in 8.2.3. shall be as given in Table 16.

26.4.2.1 However for a longitudinal reinforcing bar in a column nomina1~cover shall in

any case not be less than 40 mm, or less than the diameter of such bar. in the case of
columns of minimum dimension of 200 mm or under, whose reinforcing bars do not
exceed 12 mn~i,a nominal cover of 25 mm may be used.

26.4.2.2 For footings minimum cover shall be 50 mm.

26.4.3 Nominal Cover to Meet Specified Period of Fire Resistance

Minimum values of nominal cover of normal weight aggregate concrete to be

provided to all reinforcement including links to meet specified period of fire
resistance shall be given in Table 16.

Table 16
(Clause 26.4)
Nominal Cover to meet Durability Requirements

Exposure Nominal Concrete Cover in mm

Not less than

Mild 20
Moderate . 30
Severe , 45
Very severe 50
Extreme 75

Notes

I) For main reinforcement up to 12 mm diameter bar for mild exposure the nominal
cover may be reduced by 5 mm
74
ii) Unless specified otherwise, actual concrete cover should not deviate from the required
nominal cover by ±10mm or 0mm.

Nominal cover to all reinforcement to meet specified periods of fire resistance (see Notes 1
and 2)

Fire Nominal cover ,

resist- Beams Floors Ribs Column

tance Simply Continuous Simply ‘ continuous Simply Continuous
supported ‘ supported supported
his.
0.5 20 20 20 20 20 20 40
1 20 20 20 20 20 20 40
1.5 20 20 25 20 35 20 40
2 40 30 35 25 45 35 40
3 60 40 45 35 55 45 40
4 70 50 55 45 65 55 40

Notes

1. The nominal covers given relate specifically to the minimum member dimensions
given in Figure 1A.

2. Cases that lie below the bold line require attention to the additional measures
necessary to reduce the risks of spalling (See CI.2l.3. 1)

26.5. 1.5 Maximum spacing of shear reinforcement

The maximum spacing of shear reinforcement measured along the axis of the
member shall not exceed 0.75 d for vertical stirrups and d for inclined stirrups at 45
degree, where d is the affective depth of the section under consideration. In no case
shall the spacing exceed 300 mm.

26.5.4 Minimum reinforcement and spacing shall be as per the requirements of solid slab.

27. E>~?ANSIONJOrNTS

27. 1 Structures which marked changes in plan dimensions take place abruptly shal be
provided with expansion on joints at the section where. such changs occur.
Expansion joints shall be so provided that the necessary movement occurs with a
minimum resistance at the joint. The structures adjacent to the joint should preferably
be supported on separate columns or walls but not necessarily on separate
foundations. Reinforcement shall not extend across an expansion joint and the break
between the sections shall be complete.

28 CONCRETE CORBELS
75
28. 1 General

A corbel is a short cantilever projection which supports a load bearing member and
where:

a) the distance a between the line of the reaction to the supported load and the root of the
corbel is less than d (the effective depth ofthe root of the corbel); and
b) the depth at the outer edge of the contact area of the supported load is not less than
one-half of the depth at the root of the corbel.

The depth of the corbel at the face of the support is determined from shear
consideration in accordnance with 40.5.2 but using the modified defmition of av given
in(a).

28.2 Design

28.2. 1 Simplifying assumptions

The concrete and reinforcement may be assumed to act as elements of a simple struct-
and-tie system, with the following guidelines.

a) The magnitude of the resistance provided to horizontal force should be not less than
one-half of the design vertical load on the corbel (see also 28.2.4).

b) Compatibility of strains between the struct-and-tie at the corbel root should be

ensured.
It should be noted that the horizontal link requirement described in 28.2.3 will ensure
satisfactory serviceability performance.

28.2.2 Reinforcement Anchorage

At. the front face ofthe corbel, the reinforcement should be anchored either by:

a) Welding to a transverse bar of equal strength; in this case the bearing area of the load
should stop short of the face of the support by a distance equal to the cover of the tie
reinforcement; or

b) by bending back the bars to form a loop; in this case the bearing area of the load
should not project beyond the straight portion of the bars forming the main tension
reinforcement.

28.2.3 Shear Reinforcement

Shear reinforcement should be provided in the form of horizbntal links distributed in

the upper two-third of the effective depth of root of the corbel; this reinforcement
should .be not less than one-half of the area of the main tension reinforcement and
should be adequately anchored.

28.2.4 Resistance to applied horizontal force 76

 Additional reinforcement connected to the supported member in accordance with 5.3
should be provided to transmit this force in its entirety.

32. WALLS

32. 1 General

Reinforced concrete walls subject to direct compres~ionor combined flexure and

direct compression should be designed in accordance with Section 5 or 6 provided the
vertical reinforcement is provided in each face. Braced walls subject to only vertical
compression may be designed as per the empirical procedure given in 32.2. The
Minimum thickness of walls shall be 100 mm.

32.1 1 Guidelines for design of walls subjected to horizontal and vertical loads are given in
32.3.

32.2 Empirical Design Method for walls subject to inpiane vertical Loads

32.2.1 Braced Walls

Walls shall be assumed to be braced if they are laterally supported by a structure in

which all the following apply

a) Walls or vertical braced elements are arranged in two directions so as to

provide lateral stability to the structure as a whole.

b) Lateral forces are resisted by shear in the planes of these walls or by braced
elements.

c) Floor and roof systems are designed to transfer lateral forces.

d) Connections between the wall and the lateral supports are designed to resist a
horizontal force not less than—

i) the simple static reactions to the total applied horizontal forces at the level of
lateral support; and
ii) 2.5 percent of the total vertical load that the wall is designed to carry at the
level of lateral support.

32.2.2 Eccentricity of vertical load

The design of a wall shall take account of the actual eccentricity of the vertical force
subject to a minimum value of0.05 t.

The vertical load transmitted to a wall by a discontinuous cdncrete floor or roof shall
be assumed to act at one-third the depth of the bearing area measured from the span
face of the wall. Where there is an in-Situ concrete floor continuous over the wall, the
load shall be assumed to act at the center of the wall,

The resultant eccentricity of the total vertical load~on a braced wall at any level
between horizontal lateral supports, shall be calculated on the assumption that the
resultant eccentricity of all the vertical loads above the upper support is zero.

77
32.2.3 Max. effective height to thickness ratio

The ratio ofeffective height to thickness, Hwe/t shall not exceed 30.

32.2.4 Effective height

The effective height of braced wall shall be taken as follows:

a) Where restrained against rotation at both ends by —,

i) floors 0.75 H~or

ii) intersecting walls or similar members 0.75 L1

Whichever is the lesser.

b) Where not restrained against rotation at both ends by-

i) floors l.0H~or
iii) intersecting walls or similar members I .0L1

Whichever is the lesser.

Where

Hw = the unsupported height of the wall.

= the horizontal distance between centers of lateral restraint.

3 2.2.5 Design axial strength of wall

The design axial strength Puw per unit length of a braced wall in compression may be
calculated from the following equation

Puw = 0.3 (t — 1.2 e— 2 ea ) f~k

Where

= ‘ thickness of the wall

e eccentricity of load measured at right angles to angles to the plane of

the wall determined in accordance with 32.2.2.
= additional eccentricity due to slenderness effect taken as H~eI2500t

32.3 Walls subject to Combined Horizontal and Vertical Forces

32.3. 1 When horizontal forces are in the plane of the wall, it may be designed for vertical
forces in accordance with 32.2 and for horizontal shear in accordance with 32.3.
Inplane bending may be neglected in case a horizontal cross-section of the wall is
always under compression due to combined effect of horizontal and vertical loads.
78
32.3 2 Walls subjected to horizontal forces perpendicular to the wall and for which the
design axial load does not exceed 0.04 fck Ag, shall be designed as slabs in
accordance with the appropriate provisions under 24.

32.4 Design for Horizontal Shear

32.4. 1 Critical section for shear

The critical section for maximum shear shall be taken at a distance from the base of
0.5 L~or 0.5 Hw whichever is less.

~24 2 Nominal shear stress

The nominal shear stress ~ in walls shall be obtained from the following equation:

Tvw = Vu/t.d
Where Vu = shear force due to design loads
t = wall thickness
d = 0.8 xLw where Lw is the length ofthe wall.

1
~2.4.2. Under no circumstances shall the nominal shear stress Tvw
inwalls exceed 0.17 fck in limit state method and 0.12 fck in working stress method.

32.4.3 Design shear strength of concrete

The design shear strength of concrete in walls, L~without shear reinforcement shall
be taken as below

a) For HW/LW < 1

Tcw = (0.3 — H~/L.)fck.K1

Where K1 is 0.2 in limit state methods and 0.13 in working stress method.

b) For HJL> 1

Lesser of the values calculated from (a) above and from

Tcw K2 fck (H~/L~.+1)

(H~/L~-l)

Where K2 is 0.04 in limit state method and 0.03 in working stress method.

but not less than K3 fck in any case.

Where K3 is 0. 15 in limit state method and 0. 10 in working stress method.

32.4 4 Design of shear reinforcement

Shear reinforcement shall be provided to carry a shear equal to Vu — T~w.t.(O.8Lw).

In case of working stress method Vu is replaced by V. The strength of shear
reinforcement shall be calculated as per clause 40.0 or 49.4 with Aa% defined as below:

~ (0.8 L~.~)t . 79
 Where P~.is determined as follows:

a) For walls where HW/LW ~ 1, P~.shall be the lesser of ~heratios of either the
vertical reinforcement area or the horizontal reinforcement area to the cross
sectional area of wall in the respective direction.

b) For walls where ~ < 1, P~shall be ratio of the horizontal reinforcement

area to the cross-sectional area of wall per vertical metre.

32.5 Minimum Requirements for Reinforcement in Walls

The reinforcement for walls shall be provided as below

a) the minimum ratio of vertical reinforcement to gross concrete area shall be:

1) 0.0012 for deformed bars not larger than 16 mm in diameter and with a
characteristic strength of 415 N/mm2 or greater.
2) 0.0015 for other types of bars.

3) 0.00 12 for welded wire fabric not larger than 16 mm in diameter.

b) Vertical reinforcement shall be spaced not farther apart than three times the
wall thickness nor 450 mm.

c) The minimum ratio of horizontal reinforcement to gross concrete area shall be:

1) 0.0020 for deformed bars not larger than 16 mm in diameter and with a
characteristic strength of 415 N/mm2 or greater.

2) 0.0025 for other types ofbars:

3) 0.0020 for welded wire fabric not larger than 16 mm in diameter

d) Horizontal reinforcement shall be spaced not farther apart than three times the
wall thickness nor 450 mm.

NOTE — The minimum reinforcement may not always be sufficient to provide

adequate resistance to the effects of shrinkage and temperature.

32.5.1 For walls greater than 200 mm thick, the vertical and horizontal reinforcement shall
be provided in two grids, one near each face of the wall.

32.5.2 Vertical reinforcement need not be enclosed by transverse reinforcement as given in

26.5.3.2 for column, if the vertical reinforcement is not greater than 0.01 times the
gross sectional area or where the vertical reinforcement is not required for
compression.

Enchanced Shear Strength of Sections Close to Supports

40.5.1 General 80
 Shear failure at sections of beams and cantilevers witl!out shear reinforcement will
normally occur on plane inclined at an angle 30 degree to the horizontal. If the angle
of failure plane is forced to be inclined more steeply than this (because the section
considered (x-x) in Fig. 24 is close to a support or for other reasons the shear force
required to produced failure is increased.

The enhancement of shear strength may be taken into account in the design of
sections near a support to increasing design shear strength of ~concreteto 2d c/av
provided that design shear stress at the face of the support remains less than the values
given in Table 20. Account may be taken of enhancement in anysituation where the
section considered is closer to the face of a support or concentrated load than twice
the effective depth, d. To be effective, tension reinforcement should extend on each
side of the point where it is intersected by a possible failure plane for a distance at
least equal to the effective depth, or be provided with an equivalent anchorage.

it

NOTE. Thi i~ c~vr~f.~lur~s ~ x x.

—

F ~ 2~ . ~

40,5.2. Shear Reinforcement for Sections Close to Supports

If shear reinforcement is required, the total area of this is given by:

As avb (t\ — 2d t.~/av)/0.87fv? 0.4bav/0.87f~i

81
 This reinforcement should be provided within the middle three quarters of av. Where
av is less than d, horizontal shear reinforcement will be effective than vertical.

40.5.3 Enhanced Shear Strength Near Supports (Simplified approach)

The procedure given in 40.5.1 and 40.5.2 may be used for all beams. However for
beams carrying generally uniform load or where the principal load is located further
than 2 d from the face of support, the shear stress may be calculated at a section a
distance d from the face of support. The value of t~is calculated in accordance with
Table 19 and appropriate shear reinforcement is provided at sections closer to the
support, no further check for shear at such sections is required.

41. LIMIT STATE OF COLLAPSE: TORSION

41. 1 General

In structures, where torsion is required to maintain equilibrium, members shall be

designed for torsion in accordance with clauses 41.2, 41.3 and 41.4. However, for
such indeterminate structures where torsion can be eliminated by releasing redundant
‘restraints, no specific design for torsion is necessary, provided torsional stiffness is
neglected in the calculation of internal forces. Adequate control of any torsional
cracking is provided by the shear reinforcement as per clause 40.

43. 1 Flexural Members

In general, compliance with the spacing requirements of reinforcement given in 26.3.2

should be sufficient to control flexural cracking. If greater spacing are required, the
expected crack width should be checked by formula given in Annex G.

B-5.5 Enhanced Shear Strength of Sections Close to Supports

B-5.5.1 General

Shear failure at sections of beams and cantilevers without shear reinforcement will
normally occur on plane inclined at an angle 30 degree to th~horizontal. If the angle
of failure plane is forced to be inclined more steeply than this because the section
considered (x-x) in Fig. 29 is close to a support or for other reasons) the shear force
required to produce failure is increased.

The enhancement of shear strength may be taken into account in the design of
sections near a support by increasing design shear strength of concrete. t~to 2d t~/av
provided that the design shear stress at the face of support remains less~than the values
given in Table 23. Account may be taken of the enhancement in any situation where
the section considered is closer to the face of a support of concentrated load than
twice the affective depth, d. To be effective, tension reinforcement should extend on
each side of the point where it is intersected by a possible failure plane for a distance
at least equal to the affective depth, or be provided with an equivalent anchorage.

5.5.2 Shear Reinforcement for Sections Close to Supports

Ifshear reinforcement is required, the total area ofthis is given by:

82
EAs = avb (t~_ 2d t~lay) /0.87fy > 0.4bav/0.87fy

This reinforcement should be provided within the middle three quarters of av. Where
av is less than d, horizontal shear reinforcement will be more effective than vertical.

B-5.5.3 Enhanced Shear Strength Near Supports (Simplified Approach)

The procedure given in B-5.5.1 and B-5.5.2 may be used for all beams. However for
beams carrying generally uniform load or where the principal load is located further
than 2 d from the face of support, the shear stress may be calculated at a section a
distance d from the face of support. The value of t is calculated in accordance with
Table 23 and appropriate shear reinforcement is provided at sections closer to the
support, no further check for such section is required.

B-6 TORSION

B-6.l General

In structures where torsion is required to maintain equilibrium, members shall be

designed for torsion in accordance with clauses B-6.2, B-6.3 and B-6.4. However, for
such indeterminate structures where torsion can be eliminated by releasing redundant
restraints, no specific design for torsion is necessary provided torsional stiffness is
neglected in the calculation of internal forces. Adequate control of any torsional
cracking is provided by the shear reinforcement as. per clause B-5.

Ref: Shri .Jose Kurian, Superintending Engineer, C P W D - New Delhi.

83