For BIS Use Only

MANAK BHAVAN, 9 BAHADUR SHAH ZAFAR MARG, NEW DELHI 110002

MINUTES
Our Ref: CED 39/A-2.21 13 October 2014
Subject: Minutes of the Twenty-first Meeting of
Earthquake Engineering Sectional Committee, CED 39

ALL MEMBERS OF CED 39

Dear Sirs,

Please find enclosed a copy of the Minutes of the Twenty-first Meeting of the
Earthquake Engineering Sectional Committee, CED 39 held on 04 August 2014 in
New Delhi. The Minutes have been duly approved by Dr D.K. Paul, Chairman of the
Committee.

Comments, if any, confined to the accuracy of recording may please be sent

to the undersigned at the earliest, preferably within two weeks time. If no reply is
received within the above period, we may be permitted to presume your approval of
the Minutes as recorded.

Thanking you and with regards,

Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(S. Arun Kumar)
Scientist ‘C’, Civil Engg
sak@bis.org.in
Ph: 011–2323 0131 extn 4402
Fax: 011–2323 5529

Encl: As above

As a part of Green Initiative by BIS only Soft Copy of these MINUTES are being sent.

1
For BIS Use Only CED 39 21st meeting’s Minutes

BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS

MINUTES
Earthquake Engineering Sectional : Twenty-first Meeting
Committee, CED 39

Monday, 04 August 2014 : 1030 h – 1700 h

Dr Lal C Verman Conference Hall, Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhawan,

9, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi 110 002.

*******************

CHAIRMAN : Dr D.K. Paul

MEMBER SECRETARY : Shri S. Arun Kumar

MEMBERS PRESENT e-mail

Shri Sandeep Shirkhedkar, Association of Consulting Civil Engineers shirkhedkar@yahoo.com
(India), Beangaluru
Shri A.D. Roshan, Atomic Energy Regulatory Board, Mumbai adroshan@aerb.gov.in
Shri Rajesh Khare, Central Public Works Department, New Delhi rjkhr@rediffmail.com

Dr Manish Gupta, Central Soils and Materials Research Station, nipendra@nic.in

mansihgupta@nic.in
New Delhi
Shri Aman Deep Garg, Creative Design Consultants (P) Ltd, aman@ccepl.co.in
Ghaziabad
Dr Navjeev Saxena, CSIR-Central Building Research Institute, navjeevsaxena@gmail.com
Roorkee
Dr K.G. Bhatia, D-CAD Technologies, New Delhi kgbhatia@hotmail.com

Shri Sadanand Ojha, DDF Consultants Pvt Ltd, New Delhi sadanand_ojha@yahoo.com

Shri Sanjib Konar, Gammon India Limited, Mumbai Sanjib.konar@gammonindia.com

Dr V. Thiruvengadam, In personal capacity, New Delhi thiruspa@rediffmail.com

Dr A. K. Mittal, In personal capacity, Ghaziabad dr.akmittal@gmail.com

Prof A.S. Arya, In personal capacity, Ghaziabad asarun3155@gmail.com,

Dr Ravi Sinha, IIT Bombay, Mumbai rsinha@civil.iitb.ac.in

Dr Durgesh C. Rai, IIT Kanpur, Kanpur dcrai@iitk.ac.in

Prof Rupen Goswami, IIT Madras, Chennai rg@iitm.ac.in

Dr Heman B. Kaushik, IIT Guwahati hemantbk@iitg.ac.in

Shri Dal Singh, India Metrological Department, New Delhi Dal.singh538@gmail.com

Prof M.L. Sharma, Indian Society of Earthquake Technology, sharmamukat@gmail.com

Roorkee
Prof R.Pradeep Kumar, International Institute of Information ramancharla@iiit.ac.in
Technology, Hyderabad
Lt Col Gaurav Kaushik, Military Engineer Services, E-in-C’s Branch, Gaurav_k72@yahoo.com
New Delhi

1
For BIS Use Only CED 39 21st meeting’s Minutes

Shri Brijesh Singh, National Council for Cement and Building brijeshsehwagiitr96@gmail.com
Materials, Ballabhgarh
Dr Ravinder Singh, National Disaster Management Authority, ravinder.geo@gmail.com
sangliak@gmail.com
New Delhi
Dr Praveen Khandelwal, National Thermal Power Corporation, Noida pkhandelwal@ntpc.co.in
Shri A. Raghupati Roy, Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited, rroy@npcil.co.in
Mumbai
Shri Ashok Kumar Mathur, RITES, Gurgaon akmathur@rites.co.in
kumar.rajeshiit@gmail.com
Shri Rajesh Kumar, RITES, Gurgaon
Shri Sushil Gupta, RMSI, Noida Sushil.Gupta@rmsi.com
Dr Mahesh Tandon, Tandon Consultants Pvt Ltd, New Delhi tcpl_123@yahoo.com
vinayash88@gmail.com
Shri Vinay K. Gupta
Shri K.V. Subramanian, Tata Consulting Engineers, Mumbai kvsubra@tce.co.in
Ms Alpa R. Sheth, Vakil-Meta-Sheth Consulting Engineers, Mumbai alpa-sheth@vakilmehtasheth.com
Dr Vikram Gupta, Wadia Institute of Himalaya Geology, Dehradun vgupta@wihg.res.in

*******************

ITEM 0 OPENING REMARKS BY THE CHAIRMAN

0.1 The Chairman, Dr D K Paul, extended a warm welcome to the members

present for this important national Committee of BIS and greeted the members for
this quick successive meeting. He highlighted the recent activities of this Committee
namely revision of the important standard IS 13920 and preliminary draft revision of
IS 1893 (Part 1) and other new areas. He sought for continued participation of all the
members in a big way including responding to the draft standards by way of
commenting on the same. This he said would generate more interest and energy for
the Committee to standardize on areas of need. He mentioned that the Agenda of
the meeting is quite elaborate and therefore sought for cooperation of all the
members. With these, he suggested to take up the Agenda item wise.

0.2 Shri B. K. Sinha, Head (Civil Engg) of BIS welcomed the members and
emphasized the importance of this Committee and lauded for the frequent meetings
enabling formulation of various related national standards. He also mentioned that
the National Building Code of India is being revised and the inputs of CED 39 (in
terms of the standards formulated and revised by CED 39) would enable the part 6
structural design to be updated suitably. Shri Sinha also highlighted the provisions
of XII Plan Funds available for National and International participation of members
and for R&D based formulation/revision of Indian Standards.

ITEM 1 CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE LAST MEETING

1.1 There being no comments on the Minutes of the 20th meeting held on
28 April 2014 and circulated vide BIS letter No. CED 39/A-2.20 dated 05 June 2014,
the Committee confirmed the same with, the inclusion of three names under
"member presents" as mentioned in the Agenda.

2
For BIS Use Only CED 39 21st meeting’s Minutes

ITEM 2 REVIEW OF COMPOSITION OF SECTIONAL COMMITTEE,

SUBCOMMITTEES AND PANEL

2.1 The Sectional Committee noted its composition as given at Annex 1 of the
Agenda and the extract of the guidelines for participation in the technical Committee
work of BIS is given at Annex 2 of the Agenda decided/noted as follows:

a) IIT Guwahati to be represented by their Dr Hemant Kaushik.

b) MES to be represented by their Lt Col Gaurav Kaushik.
c) Write to Geological Survey of India, Lucknow to send their revised
nominations in view of retirement Shri Harsh Gupta. (CSMRS representatives
kindly agreed to obtain the revised nomination.)
d) Indian Concrete Institute was requested to provide an alternate member in
addition to their principal nomine Dr A R Santhakumar.
e) The Committee requested all the organizations with 0/3 and 0/2
participation to actively take part in the work of the Committee not only
in the physical meetings but also contribute through comments on the
draft standards and make suggestions on existing standards/subjects
under consideration.

2.2 The Committee reviewed the composition of its Sub-Committees and Panels.

a) Write to Geological Survey of India, Lucknow to send their revised

nominations for CED 39:4 in view of retirement Shri Harsh Gupta. (CSMRS
representatives kindly agreed to obtain the revised nomination)
b) CWPRS to provide their revised nominee of principal member for CED 39:4.

ITEM 3 DRAFT STANDARDS FOR FINALIZATION

3.1 Draft Indian Standard Code of Practice for Ductile Detailing of Reinforced
Concrete Structures Subjected to Seismic Forces (First Revision of IS 13920):
CED 39 (7941)WC

3.1.1 The Committee considered the above draft revision of the Indian Standard
which was issued in wide circulation vide BISDG letter No. CED 39/T-8 dated 28
March 2014 along with all the Comments received on the same as given under the
item of the Agenda.
Considering the elaborate nature of the comments received, it was decided to
highlight the important deliberations based on the comments and then prepare the
final version of the standard. The highlights indicating the key decisions of CED 39
based on the day long intensive discussions and deliberations are included at Annex
1 (P-13).

As agreed by the Committee at the end of the day and as decided then, the following
Group was constituted to consider the remaining comments:

1. Dr D K Paul, IITR
2. Dr C V R Murty, IITJ
3. Ms Alpa Sheth, VMS Consultants

3
For BIS Use Only CED 39 21st meeting’s Minutes

4. Shri Raghupathi Roy, NPCIL

5. Shri Rupen Goswami, IITM
6. Shri Ravi Sinha, IITB
7. Shri K V Subramanian, TCE
8. Shri D C Rai, IITK

A meeting of the above Group was held on 12 September 2014 and based on the
decisions of the same, the highlights of the discussions are also included at Annex 1
(P-13).

The above Group was also authorized by the Committee to prepare the F-draft
based on the decisions decided.

With these, the Committee recommended the draft standard as FINALIZED and
requested BIS to take care of the necessary formalities regarding ADOPTION and
PRINTING.

Considering the importance of the standard and the comments received, it was
suggested to prepare a commentary to IS 13920. Members of CED 39 including
those involved in drafting the revision of IS 13920 were requested to also consider
taking up this task under the R&D mode so that an explanatory hand book could be
brought out at the earliest.

ITEM 4 STANDARDS UNDER REVISION / SUBJECTS UNDER

CONSIDERATION

4.1 The Committee noted the details relating to the draft standards (new and
revisions) under development and decided as follows:

Sl. Standard / Work Item Decision / Remarks of CED 39

No.
1 IS 1893 (Part 1):2002
‘Criteria for earthquake resistant
design of structures :
Part 1 General provisions and
Buildings’.
Formerly, Doc No. CED 39(7233)
Draft revision of the standard was circulated to
all the members of CED 39 vide BIS e-mail
dated 30 July 2014 based on the inputs
received from Dr CVR Murty. It was decided to
circulate the same as a formal preliminary draft
with new document number.

2 IS 1893 (Part 4) : 2005 The Committee noted that the draft

‘Criteria for earthquake resistant standard is currently under print. Dr M. L.
design of structures : Sharma kindly agreed to provide the
Part 4 Industrial structures including design spectra for time upto 6 seconds.
stack like structures'. (inputs since received)
3 IS 1893 (Part 5) The Committee noted that the CED 39:10 sub-
‘Criteria for earthquake resistant Committee under the Convenership of Dr M.
design of structures : Srikhande is engaged in the formulation of the
Part 5 Dams and Embankments: two sections of the proposed standard namely:
Sec 1: Earth embankments and small
to intermediate size earth and rock fill Section 1 on Earth Embankments and
dams.’ Section 2 on Concrete Dams.

4
For BIS Use Only CED 39 21st meeting’s Minutes

Formerly, Doc No. CED 39(7430) The Sub-Committee was requested to

propose the preliminary drafts standard at the
earliest as all the other four parts of IS 1893
have since been published/are under print.

4 IS 4991:1968 The Committee noted that the working group

Criteria for blast resistant design of under the Convenership of Dr Alok Goyal is
structures for explosions above engaged in the formulation of the standard.
ground The Working Group was requested to propose
the preliminary draft standard at the earliest.

5 IS 4967:1968 The Committee noted that the working group

Recommendations for seismic under Convenership of Dr Ashok Kumar, IITR
instrumentation for river valley is engaged in the formulation of the standard.
projects The Working Group was requested to propose
the preliminary draft standard at the earliest.

6 Draft Indian Standard on Guidelines The Panel CED 39/P1 and its Convener, Shri
for risk reduction for structure against Arvind Shrivastava were requested to meet
tsunami at the earliest on priority and consider the
document CED 39(7545) along with the
Doc No. CED 39 (7545) comments received and the additional
pictures/maps received from AERB and
additional comments received from members.
The Panel was requested to suggest their
recommendations for finalization by
CED 39.

7 Probabilistic seismic hazard map The R&D project proposal regarding

(PSHM) of India preparation of PSHMs for incorporation in
IS 1893 was awaited from IIT Madras and they
were request to submit at the earliest.

8 Proposed standard on Seismic The Working Group under the Convenership

Assessment and Retrofit of Dr Arun Menon, IITM was requested to submit
Structures − Masonry Buildings – the preliminary draft (developed so far) on
Code of Practice priority so that CED 39 can decide on the
(based on NDMA's proposal) same.

9 Proposed standard on Seismic The Committee noted that Dr Rupen Goswami,

Design and Ductile Detailing of Steel IITM, Convener of the concerned Working
Buildings – Code of Practice Group had proposed the formulation of the
(based on NDMA's proposal) standard under the R&D scheme as per the
preliminary details as below:

The minimum proposal would be as follows:

Project officer (manpower) for 9 months @
Rs. 20,000 = Rs. 1,80,000
Books, codes, etc. = Rs. 50,000
Travel (to attend BIS meetings only) = Rs.
50,000
Subtotal = Rs. 2,80,000
Institute (IIT Madras) Overhead @ 20% = Rs.

5
For BIS Use Only CED 39 21st meeting’s Minutes

Rs. 70,000
Total = Rs. 3,50,000/-

The Committee agreed in principle to the

above proposal and authorized BIS to
initiate the necessary formalities regarding
funding the projects. Dr Goswami was
requested to submit the formal proposal
based on the guidelines circulated earlier
by BIS. (See the separate Pdf attached with
these minutes for details.)

10 Proposed standard on Post- The Committee noted that Dr Durgesh C. Rai,

Earthquake Damage Assessment of
SEs − Bridges (RC, Masonry and
Steel)
(based on NDMA's proposal)
IIT Kanpur and Dr O.R. Jaiswal, VNIT,
Nagpur were requested in the earlier meetings
to prepare the provisions of the draft standard.
It was suggested to them to include
prestressed concrete bridges also. They were
suggested to co-opt relevant experts on the
WG. Further, they kindly agreed to propose
the draft standard in 3 month's time so as to
enable CED 39 consider in its next meeting.

11 Proposed standard on Post- The Committee was apprised of the 39 paged

Earthquake Damage Assessment of
SEs − Water Tanks (Elevated and
Ground Supported)
(based on NDMA's proposal)
document received from Dr O.R. Jaiswal and
Shri L K Jain. They were requested to
finalize the same and propose the preliminary
draft standard at the earliest so as to consider
in the next meeting of CED 39.

12 Proposed standard on Seismic The Working Group under the Convenership

Design of Buried Pipelines - CODE Dr S. R. Dash, IIT Bhubaneswar was
OF PRACTICE requested to submit the preliminary draft
(developed so far) on priority so that CED 39
(based on NDMA's proposal) can decide further.

13 Proposed standard on Seismic It was decided to write to the Earthquake

Design and Damage Assessment of Engineering Research Lab of Central Power
SEs − Communication Towers Research Institute for taking up the subject
(based on NDMA's proposal) and provide a draft standard (as decided in the
last meeting) at the earliest so that the same
can be considered in the next meeting of
CED 39.

14 Proposed standard on Seismic The Committee noted that inputs were

Design and Damage Assessment of received earlier from Dr CVR Murthy in the
SEs − Non-Structural Elements form of Annex B to IS 1893 (Part 4) shall be
(based on NDMA's proposal) suitably considered and decided after the
printing of the revision of IS 1893 (Part 4).

15 Proposed standard on Seismic The Working Group under the Convenership

Design and Damage Assessment of Dr B. K. Maheshwari, IITR was requested to
SEs Coastal Structures submit the draft standard (developed so far) on
(based on NDMA's proposal) priority so that CED 39 can decide further.

6
For BIS Use Only CED 39 21st meeting’s Minutes

4.2 The Committee noted the observations of BHEL as given below on IS 1893
(Part 4) (currently under print):

Clause 7.1 & 7.2 of IS 1893 draft standard under discussion.

In draft standard version upto October 2013, it was clear that Clause 7.1 is for Category 1 structures
to use site specific spectrum mandatorily. Cl. 7.2 is meant for Category 2, 3, 4 structures and
spectrum as per IS:1893 can be used.

In Draft standard Final after meeting 14Feb 2013, it is mentioned under Clause 7.1 that “For all-
important projects, and all industries dealing with highly hazardous / toxic chemicals, evaluation of
site-specific spectra for DBE and MCE is recommended. Such DBE site-specific spectra shall be
considered as Design Spectra.”

Though this clause intends for Category 1 structures but under “important structures” even Category 2
& 3 structures may also come depending upon interpretation.

Already some people has started propagating use of site specific spectrum as the only method for all
power plant structures being important structures.

The clause 7.1 may please be amended as “For all Category -1 structures and all industries dealing
with highly hazardous / toxic chemicals, evaluation of site-specific spectra for DBE and MCE is
recommended. Such DBE site-specific spectra shall be considered as Design Spectra.”

The Committee observed that there is no ambiguity with respect to the provisions
based on the above. It was suggested to include a suitable note to the referred
clause stating that 'the spectra so derived (site specific) may be used (if it gives
higher value than that recommended in the standard) as design spectra' so that the
maximum value specified in the standard are taken care during the design. It was
further decided to refer the above to Dr K. G. Bhatia for his views.

4.3 The Committee noted the Inputs / Suggestions were received from the Special
Structures Sectional Committee, CED 38 while finalizing the revision of IS 4998
(Concrete Chimney Code) and decided/recommended as below:

Add following text: Section 17.2 of IS: 1893 (Part 4) The Committee observed that the
appears to requiring vertical component of earthquake
For chimney of circular cross combination of three component should not be ignored considering
section, the horizontal motion. For circular chimney, the orthogonal effect. For circular
earthquake loads shall be only one component is relevant
sections subjected to EQ Loads for
assumed to act alone in one in horizontal direction and
direction. The vertical vertical loads may be neglected
both directions the value of force
component of earthquake may as chimney as a structure is would be the same and their
be ignored. very rigid in vertical direction. components may be considered.

Add following text:
Chimney shall be designed
with reduction factor R= 2.0
provided rebar is detailed as
per requirement of IS 4326
and IS:13920, specifically near
duct openings. Alternatively,
Chimney may be designed for
Ongoing research as pointed out
by R.4.3.2 of ACI 307-2008
(quoting Wilson, 2002) indicates
that R=3.0 may not be
appropriate and a lower value
shall be used. ACI 307
recommends use of R = 1.5
without seismic detailing
provisions, pending result of
The Committee noted that hollow
sections are deformation dependent
and the value of "R" of 1.4 should
be sufficient. The Committee also
noted that although ACI give
special detailing requirements, the
values in Indian Standards may
seem to be stringent but such
provisions have been working safe.

7
 For BIS Use Only
R=1.0 without special seismic
detailing of reinforcing bars.
Partial safety factor for loads
have been adopted as per
section 5.3.1 of ACI 307
except for load combination c).
ACI 307 adopts a load factor of
1.0 for seismic loading where
as in the present table this
load factor is reported as 1.4.
When load effects of
earthquake is based on
service-level seismic forces
then load factor of 1.4 shall be
used else this factor shall be
1.0.
4.4 The Committee noted that in the last meeting, the following areas were
considered for taking up for standardization under the scope of the Committee. The
Committee reviewed the composition as below and requested the Working Groups
to initiate the draft provisions for standardization on the respective subject.
They were also authorized to co-opt suitable experts if any.
Subjects identified for
standardization under
CED 39
Performance Based Design
(w.r.t retrofitting)
&
Retrofitting
[In one publication]
Response spectra
(for 6 seconds and more) &
Soil classification
CED 39 21st meeting’s Minutes
ongoing work by ACI code
Committee. Based on work by J
L Wilson (code
recommendations for the
aseismic design of tall reinf.
Conc. Chimneys, IWCEE 2000),
it may be more appropriate that
chimneys be designed for R =
2.0 with seismic detailing or
R=1.0 with no seismic detailing.
A similar design approach is
adopted by CICIND.
Use of R=1.0 may not be
economical for high stacks,
nevertheless, it is an option
available to design engineer.
This gives an option to simplify
design of smaller stacks.
Cl. 2.3.2 of ASCE 7-10 and The Committee decided for no
Cl. 9.2.1 of ACI 318-08 may be change.
referred.
Composition of the Working Group Email id
constituted during the meeting.
Dr Yogendra Singh (Convener) yogenfeq@iitr.ac.in,
yogenfeq@iitr.ernet.in
Dr A K Mittal dr.akmittal@gmail.com,
Dr C V R Murty director@iitj.ac.in , cvrm@iitm.ac.in;
Shri Ajai S. Pisharady
Shri Somnath Jha aspisharady@aerb.gov.in,
Representative of NPCIL/BARC somnath@aerb.gov.in,
Dr C V R Murty (Convener) director@iitj.ac.in , cvrm@iitm.ac.in;
Dr Alok Goyal & Dr Ravi Sinha, IITB rsinha@civil.iitb.ac.in,
agoyal@iitb.ac.in,
Dr Yogendra Singh & Dr DK Paul, IITR yogenfeq@iitr.ac.in,
8
 For BIS Use Only
Seismic Microzonation
Seismic Base Isolation &
Energy Absorption Devices
Liquefaction potential of soils
during earthquakes
(Including mitigation
measures; incorporation for
design purposes)
Seismic Qualification of
Equipments
Post Earthquake Damage
Assessment of Buildings
CED 39 21st meeting’s Minutes
Dr Debashish Roy, IITKGP
Prof Sitaram, IISc
Dr Ramanna, IITD
Dr R K Chadha, NGRI (CSIR)
Prof Ashok Mathur
Dr Mukut Lal Sharma (Convener)
Dr Alok Goyal, IITB
Dr H R Wason
Geological Survey of India
Representative of NIDM, New Delhi
Prof. Ambrish Kumar Mahajan
India Metrological Department
Dr A K Shukla, In Personal Capacity
Wadia Institute of Himalayan Geology
Dr Durgesh C Rai (Convener)
EIL Representative
Other members to be co-opted by
Dr D C Rai
Convener (to be appointed later)
Shri Nripendra Kumar, CSMRS
Dr B K Maheswari, IITR
DST-Dehradun Facility
Prof Ashutosh Trivedi, DTU
Dr G R Reddy, BARC (Convener)
BHEL Representative
EIL Representative
CSIR-SERC Representative
CPRI Representative
Dr Manish Shrikande, IITR
Prof Basu of IITR (In Personal
Capacity)
Dr Ravi Sinha (Convener)
Dr C V R Murty
Dr D C Rai
Dr Pratima Bose
Dr A Meher Prasad
9
yogenfeq@iitr.ernet.in,
dpaulfeq@gmail.com,
debasis@civil.iitkgp.ernet.in,
sitharam@civil.iisc.ernet.in,
proftgs@gmail.com
ramana@civil.iitd.ac.in,
chadha@ngri.res.in,
akmeqfeq@iitr.ernet.in,
mukutfeq@iitr.ernet.in,
sharmamukat@gmail.com,
agoyal@iitb.ac.in,
wasonfeq@iitr.ernet.in;
wason2009@gmail.com,
akmahajan@rediffmail.com,
dal.singh538@gmail.com,
atindra_kumar_shukla@hotmail.com ,
wihg@sancharnet.in,
dcrai@iitk.ac.in;
nipendra@nic.in,
bkmahfeq@iitr.ac.in,
bkmahfeq@iitr.ernet.in,
wihg@sancharnet.in,
atrivedi@dce.ac.in,
m.shrikhande@gmail.com ,
mshrifeq@iitr.ernet.in,
sbasufeq@iitr.ac.in,
sbasufeq@iitr.ernet.in,
rsinha@civil.iitb.ac.in,
director@iitj.ac.in ,
cvrm@iitm.ac.in;
dcrai@iitk.ac.in;
prbose@gmail.com,
prasadam@iitm.ac.in;
For BIS Use Only CED 39 21st meeting’s Minutes

Dr A K Mittal dr.akmittal@gmail.com,
Dr Sushil Gupta sushilgupta74@yahoo.com,
sushil.gupta@rmsi.com,
Dr Amita Sinvhal amitafeq@iitr.ac.in,
amitafeq@iitr.ernet.in,
Dr Purnachandra Rao, NGRI (CSIR) raonpc@ngri.res.in,

ITEM 5 PROGRESS OF WORK OF THE COMMITTEE

5.1 The Committee noted the Programme of work of the Sectional Committee giving
status regarding the published standards and those under revision and formulation of
the new standards as given in Annex 7 of the Agenda.

Item 6 INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES

6.1 The Committee noted that India is an ‘O’ (Observer) member on ISO Technical
Committee, ISO/TC 98 and ‘P’ (Participating) member on ISO Technical Committee,
ISO/TC 71 as below:

DESIGNATION MEMBERSHIP NAME

ISO/TC 98 O Bases for design of structures
ISO/TC 98/SC 1 P Terminology and symbols
ISO/TC 98/SC 2 P Reliability of structures
ISO/TC 98/SC 3 P Loads, forces and other actions
ISO/TC 71/SC 5 P Simplified design standard for concrete
structures
ISO/TC 71/SC7 P Maintenance and repair of concrete structures

The Committee constituted a Panel for ISO work with the following
composition:

1) Dr D K Paul (Convener)
2) Representative of IIT Bombay
3) Representative of IIT Kanpur
4) Representative of IIT Roorkee
5) Representative of IIIT Hyderabad

An updated version of the Guidelines for International Participation of BIS Committee members is
sent separately with these Minutes for ready information.

6.2 The Committee also noted the updated list of ISO standards and those drafts
under development under the above ISO Technical Committees as given at Annex 8
of the Agenda and decided to utilize appropriately, the international standards/draft
standards in harmonizing with Indian Standards and formulate new/revise the
existing standards under the Committee. ISO 13822 and ISO 13824 were also noted
for consideration by CED 39 in view of the subjects being related to them.

Item 7 RAJIV GANDHI NATIONAL QUALITY AWARD (RGNQA)

7.1 The Committee noted the information on the item as given in the Agenda.

10
For BIS Use Only CED 39 21st meeting’s Minutes

Item 8 NATIONAL SYSTEM OF STANDARDIZATION

8.1 The Committee noted the following information on National System of

Standardization and requested that all members of the Committee should effectively
utilize the system:

A) Central Govt. of India had approved a Central Sector Plan Scheme for
'Establishment of a National System of Standardization' during 11 th Five Year
Plan with following objectives:

1) To increase participation of various stakeholders in international and

national standardization process by funding their travel expenses.
2) To provide funds for R & D activities to various technical/R & D
organizations for upgrading existing standards as well as
development of new standards in view of latest technological
advancements .
3) To pool in information from various organizations developing
standards so as to provide a consolidated common database at a
single point and to make WTO- TBT Enquiry Point web enabled so as
to disseminate information from a single point

B) Under the 12th Plan (2012-2017) the following components have been included
under two schemes of the 'National System of Standardization':

i) Strengthening Standardization at National Level

a) R&D projects for establishment / revision of Indian Standards
b) Intensifying participation of BIS Technical Committee
Members in BIS Technical Committee Meetings
c) Workshops for Technical Committee members
d) Training programmes for Standards Formulation Departments
(SDOs)
e) Seminar /workshops for other stakeholders.
ii) Strengthening Standardization at International level
a) Intensifying participation of BIS officials, Technical Committee
Members, other officials and experts in international
standardization by participation in International / Regional/
Bilateral meetings/ trainings.
b) Organizing ISO/IEC and other international/ regional/SAARC/
multilateral/ bilateral Meetings/workshops/ trainings in India

A copy each of the Supplementary Guidelines for Funding R&D Projects for Establishment/Revision of
Indian Standards under Plan Funds and GUIDELINES FOR PAYMENT TO Members of BIS Technical
Committees and BIS officials for attending meetings of BIS Technical Committees under Plan Funds are sent
separately with these Minutes for ready information.

11
For BIS Use Only CED 39 21st meeting’s Minutes

Item 9 E-SALE OF INDIAN STANDARDS

The Committee noted the information on the item as given in the Agenda.

Item 10 WORLD STANDARDS DAY

The Committee noted the information on the item as given in the Agenda and was
informed of the theme for WSD 2014 namely, "Standards level the playing field"
details of which are available at http://www.iso.org/iso/home/world-standards-day2014.htm.

Item 11 ANY OTHER BUSINESS

The members expressed sincere thanks to Dr D K Paul for ably Chairing the meeting
leading to finalization of revision of IS 13920 in particular. BIS Secretariat thanked
all the members for their kind participation and successful co-operation in the
meeting.

12
For BIS Use Only CED 39 21st meeting’s Minutes

Annex 1

HIGHLIGHTS INDICATING THE KEY DECISIONS BASED ON THE DISCUSSIONS AND

DELIBERATIONS HELD REGARDING REVISION OF IS 13920

1) in clause 1.1, mention explicitly that for flat slabs, same level of performance shall be provided
2) Highlight the clause 1.1.1 that they have to be designed for drift compatibility (7.11.2)
3) as mentioned in 1.1.2, precast / prestressed concrete structures are not covered under this standard for
which separate standard may be referred/developed.
4) in cl 3.5, the provision of 6 times diameter (tested in US) shall be checked w.r.t IS 456 and if
necessary change the figure to ensure proper implementation of this important 135° hook.
5) Invite suggestions from other members of CED 39, if we can include a new clause 3.8.3 on
INTERMEDIATE MOMENT RESISTING FRAME and decide if majority of them would agree to the
same.
6) in 3.10, use the term 'shear wall' and include "also known as 'structural wall' "within brackets
7) in 5.3.1, continue the provision to use Fe 250 (mild steel) as ductility is still available in those bars.
(also refer the comment to dr alok goyal's panel and to IS 456 Committee )
8) refer the comment on 5.3.2 to CED 54 Committee and in 5.3.3 change the value of ratio of ultimate to
yield strength to 1.15 (as minimum).
9) Include a "clarification note" under clause 5.4
10) Ms Alpa Sheth to take care of the comment on clause 6.1
11) no change w.r.t comment on 6.2.5
12) no change w.r.t comment on 6.3.4 as when the concrete is crakced, only steel shall take up the load in
that cracked portion
13) Dr D C Rai agreed to write a clause on 'in fill members' used in frames particularly based on the
availability of various new materials such as AAC blocks which are highly porous.
14) In clause 7.1, to confirm if the value in the ACI standard is 0.35 or 0.50 fck
15) to clarify in the foreword that 'all the frame elements in a structure need not be designed to take up
lateral loads and that the designer can choose based on the architecture of the building and
position the lateral load resisting elements and design those members for full lateral load.' To
also clarify about seismic frames and non-seismic frames.
16) to address suitably 'bare frame' and 'in fill frame'; where 'bare frame' may not have in- fills and if in-
fills are provided their stiffness shall be <30% of the frames and 'the term shear panel' shall preferably
be used. Also to detail the in-fills if their stiffness is > 30%.
17) To also mention about gravity columns and seismic columns, and ways to distinguish them.
18) To clarify in the Foreword (or so) T shape columns or other shapes shall be designed only as gravity
frames and not as lateral load resisting member.
19) For seismic design of flat slabs, 'ignore the drop' but use steel studs. This aspect needs to be clarified in
the draft. Also IS 1893 (Part 1) to cover flat slabs in a separate chapter/section.
20) In case of PT slabs, mention that the structure shall not act similar to a framed structure. IS 1893 (Part
1) to address the design force to be carried by such slabs.
21) Cross tiles shall be spaced 150 mm (max) horizontally and 100 mm (max) vertically.
22) IS 1893 (Part 1) to cover in detail the material part particularly concrete and steel.
23) To refer to CED 54 for specifying in IS 1786, the requirement of UTS/YS ratio. It was suggested that
the value shall be 1.25 for Fe 415 steel and 1.15 for Fe 500 steel.
24) To refer in clause 5.4 about the provisions of IS 4326 for providing mullions in the masonry over
lintels to ensure no out of plane failure takes place to that portion of masonry. This will also to take
care of the effect if short column failure and openings near columns.
25) To decide suitably (in a Note-for guidance) specifying 16 mm bars for buildings and 25 mm bars for
bridges.
26) To check from clause 21.1.8 of ACI 318 for type 1 and type 2 couplers; and adopt type 2 couplers
based on IS 16172:2014 ' Reinforcement Couplers for Mechanical Splices of Bars in Concrete -
Specification ' for structures on all seismic zones.

13
For BIS Use Only CED 39 21st meeting’s Minutes

27) To include an informative Annex giving an example of the ductile detailing.

28) Clause 7.1.1 to be used only for 'shear frames' and not for all the frames. (this aspect to be mentioned in
the draft, say in a note).
29) To also match the value of minimum dimension of a column in 7.1.1 (a) and that in Fig. 7
30) In 7.1.2, use the value 0.45 instead of 0.4. (To also check from other sources if the value 0.45 is
practical).
31) In the figure 8 under clause 7.2, it was decided to adopt the value of 1.4 instead of 1.7.
32) To clarify in 7.2 that the provisions are not applicable for flat slabs.
33) No change w.r.t comments on clause 7.2.1.3
34) In clause 7.3.2.1(a), spacing of stirrup shall not exceed 100 mm (instead of 150mm). It was also
decided to include that, "lap splices shall not be used for bars larger than 32 mm and only mechanical
splicing to be adopted."
35) To also clarify in the draft that IS 13920 is optional for seismic zone II of the country.
36) No change w.r.t comments on clause 7.3.2.2
37) No change w.r.t comments on clause 7.3.3 as, so far there are no published research data for columns
other than rectangular in section.
38) In 8.1 (b), include the following after "(iii) 100 mm" in place of the existing:
"however, the value should not be less than 100 mm".
39) No change in 8.1(c) as the same is as per ACI/NZ standards.
40) To modify the figure under 8.2 to include the top layer of reinforcement too.
41) No change w.r.t comments on clause 8.3 as the provision can be easily met with.
42) It was agreed to correct/elaborate in clause 8.5, w.r.t the comment on "relatively small lateral forces".
43) To modify the figure 14 under clause 8.5 providing uniform stirrup spacing and continue the wall
through the footing.
44) To use the term links (instead of stirrups).
45) To mention under 9, that a section to be classified as wall, b:d shall be 1:4 (or more).
46) To bring in more clarity in the provisions of clause 10 by suitably rewording the provisions of the same
and also elaborating 10.1 thereby addressing the comments.
47) In 10.1.2 (a), modify as (a) 150 mm, however the thickness may increase for higher fire safety
requirements.
48) To include a note under clause 10.1.9.
49) No change w.r.t comments on clause 10.2.3 as the as the values are stricter than 0.17 fck as mentioned
in Table 20 of IS 456.
50) To suitably address the comment on 10.3.1 in the proposed handbook to IS 13920.
51) To clarify suitably in a note, 'about the boundary element (portion of element outside the 0.15 fck region
from neutral axis and up to the edge of the element, which can be defined after the bending moment
diagram and stress diagrams are available)'.
52) To clarify the fig. 15 under 10.5.3 based on the comments (on pg. 57) from M/s Jacobs.
53) To the comment on 10.6 of L&T it was decided that in case the elements were modelled with openings
in the FEM analysis, another review as per the clause is not mandatory.
54) Add at the end of (d) in 10.8.3.1, "………. section in the boundary element".
55) To modify line 2 of clause 11 as "……… subjected to R times……"
56) To include a figure (such as in the ACI publication) for detailing of coupled walls.
57) On the comment for new detailed section on IMRF, it was decided to include in the next revision.
However, as mentioned above, the option shall be given to the users to exercise.
58) The definition 3.5-Crosstie to be replaced as Transverse Reinforcement [and to list both Stirrups (used
in columns) and Cross-Ties (used in beams)].
59) A suggestion to CED 46 for mentioning in the NBC, a requirement for the developers (like in MS flats)
to submit all the structural drawings to the flat owners when they purchase flats/apartments. Also, to
mention the importance of re-analysis of structures particularly when there is a change in the
occupancy type.

********

14