www.sefindia.org

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING FORUM OF INDIA [SEFI]

 Forum SubscriptionsSubscriptions DigestDigest Preferences   FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups  RegisterRegister FAQSecurity Tips FAQDonate
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log in to websiteLog in to websiteLog in to websiteLog in to forum 
Warning: Make sure you scan the downloaded attachment with updated antivirus tools  before opening them. They may contain viruses.
Use online scanners
here and here to upload downloaded attachment to check for safety.

Clarification concerning IS 13920 : 2016
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topicReply to topic Thank Post    www.sefindia.org Forum Index -> SEFI General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
hsrai
...
...


Joined: 26 Jan 2003
Posts: 151
Location: Ludhiana, Punjab, India

PostPosted: Sun Apr 23, 2017 9:50 am    Post subject: Clarification concerning IS 13920 : 2016 Reply with quote

Clause 6.2.6.3 on page 6 of IS 13920 : 2016 has:
Quote:
Welding of links, ties, inserts or other similar elements to vertical reinforcement bars required as per design is not permitted, in any seismic zone.
This is related to "Beams" i.e. it is under Section 6.
What I interpreted is that "links, ties, inserts" mentioned above are external elements and are not the reinforcement [main (positive and negative), stirrups]. All these are not permitted to be welded to "Vertical Reinforcement".

Now where is vertical reinforcement in "Beam"?

and if design require it, then what is the alternative?

Then there is mention of "any seismic zone". IS 13920 is not mandatory in Zone II. But Zone II is also a "Seismic Zone", so above clause is applicable to all India as such.

I am unable to get "point of action" for Structural Engineer. What is the objective of this clause and what is expected to be done by a designer?

_________________
H.S.Rai
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
hsrai
...
...


Joined: 26 Jan 2003
Posts: 151
Location: Ludhiana, Punjab, India

PostPosted: Tue Apr 25, 2017 8:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

On page 7, clause 7.1.2 states that columns having aspect ratio < .4, are required to be designed as per clause 9, however clause 9 is for Joints.

It is OK, or there is some mistake.

Then, what to do for sections having aspect ratio between .4 and .45, is not given.

_________________
H.S.Rai
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
B.V.Harsoda
Bronze Sponsor
Bronze Sponsor


Joined: 19 Jan 2009
Posts: 2294
Location: RAJKOT,GUJARAT, INDIA

PostPosted: Thu Apr 27, 2017 4:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dear Er. H.S.Rai

Refer Original Draft code by GSDMA at below link
http://www.iitk.ac.in/nicee/IITK-GSDMA/EQ11.pdf

In GSDMA  draft Cl. 9  is for shear walls. In BIS draft for comment aspect ratio < .4 but in final copy .45 may be  typographical mistake. In GSDMA draft cl. 7.1.3  it is .4

Best Wishes,

Er. B. V. Harsoda


hsrai wrote:
On page 7, clause 7.1.2 states that columns having aspect ratio < .4, are required to be designed as per clause 9, however clause 9 is for Joints.

It is OK, or there is some mistake.

Then, what to do for sections having aspect ratio between .4 and .45, is not given.


Last edited by B.V.Harsoda on Fri Apr 28, 2017 1:59 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hsrai
...
...


Joined: 26 Jan 2003
Posts: 151
Location: Ludhiana, Punjab, India

PostPosted: Thu Apr 27, 2017 5:14 pm    Post subject: Minimum 6 bars in Circular Column Reply with quote

Clause 7.3.1 of IS 13920 : 2016 states that "Circular columns shall have minimum of 6 bars".
This clause appears to be  redundant clause as same is there in Clause 26.5.3.1 (C) of IS 456 - 2000.
What is the intention to add this clause? Can any one throw light?

_________________
H.S.Rai
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
hsrai
...
...


Joined: 26 Jan 2003
Posts: 151
Location: Ludhiana, Punjab, India

PostPosted: Thu Apr 27, 2017 5:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

B.V.Harsoda wrote:
Refer Original Draft code by GSDMA at below link
http://www.iitk.ac.in/nicee/IITK-GSDMA/EQ11.pdf

In GSDMA  draft Cl. 9  is for shear walls. In BIS draft for comment aspect ratio < .4 but in final copy .45 may be  typographical mistake. In GSDMA draft cl. 7.1.3  it is .4

Might be, or BIS wanted to increase safety and changed factor from .40 to .45

_________________
H.S.Rai


Last edited by hsrai on Fri Apr 28, 2017 4:19 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
hsrai
...
...


Joined: 26 Jan 2003
Posts: 151
Location: Ludhiana, Punjab, India

PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 5:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

B.V.Harsoda wrote:
In GSDMA  draft Cl. 9  is for shear walls. In BIS draft for comment aspect ratio < .4 but in final copy .45 may be  typographical mistake. In GSDMA draft cl. 7.1.3  it is .4

To have typographical errors in such an important document is not good. Then to take long time to acknowledge that and delay in issuing corrections is very bad.

It has been observed that number of errors increased from the time when codes are started being typed on computers.

In a computer typed document, mistakes in "cross-referencing" (like referring clause 9 place of 10, to design columns as wall) is not possible, if software is used properly, as such facility is available since the era of Tex/LaTeX (in the year around 1985) and all Word Processor (Libre Office's Writer, MS Office's Word) has this feature. Unfortunately users of modern high end software are using such tools just as a type writer.

_________________
H.S.Rai
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
B.V.Harsoda
Bronze Sponsor
Bronze Sponsor


Joined: 19 Jan 2009
Posts: 2294
Location: RAJKOT,GUJARAT, INDIA

PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 1:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In draft of IS 13920  for comments :-

Cl. 7.1.1  The minimum dimension of a column shall not be less than
(a) 20 db  db=Largest dia. of beam bar
(b) 300 mm(see Fig.7)

in fig. 7 written as 15 db
I and other experts has been given comment to correct it at the  time of draft for comments but in final print of IS 13920 correction is not made by BIS.


Er. B. V. Harsoda
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
B.V.Harsoda
Bronze Sponsor
Bronze Sponsor


Joined: 19 Jan 2009
Posts: 2294
Location: RAJKOT,GUJARAT, INDIA

PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 2:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Please See also fig. 12 Column and joint Detailing of IS 13920

This fig. 12  is the copy  paste of GSDMA draft fig.  11 without change in relevant clause  Nos.
At time of draft for comment I have given my comment  to correct it but BIS has not made any correction in final print.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
B.V.Harsoda
Bronze Sponsor
Bronze Sponsor


Joined: 19 Jan 2009
Posts: 2294
Location: RAJKOT,GUJARAT, INDIA

PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 2:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In Figure 12 of IS 13920:2016  it is written that " Confined joint with beam framing into all four sides confining reinforcement as per 8.2"

Clause 8.2: When a column terminates in to a footing special confining reinforcement shall extend at least 300 mm in to footing(see fig 13)
Clause 8.2 in IS 13920:2016 has no any co-relation with fig. 12

In Fig.12 it is written that " Transverse reinforcement as per 7.2.3"
Cl. 7.2.3 is not found in IS 13920:2016  but in GSDMA draft cl. 7.2.3 is for lap splices.

All clause nos. shown in fig.12 has no any relation with relevant clauses of IS 13920:2016
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hemal
...
...


Joined: 01 Apr 2008
Posts: 129

PostPosted: Sat Apr 29, 2017 3:00 am    Post subject: Clarification concerning IS 13920 : 2016 Reply with quote

NBC 2016 now inclues latest versions of almost all codes IS 875, IS 456, IS 1343, IS 1893, IS 13920 etc. Many errors in IS 13920-2016 are corrected in NBC 2016. NBC 2016 was released much before IS 1893-2016 and IS 1893-2016 is already there in NBC 2016. However, there are many errors in IS 1893-2016 also (e.g. time period of shear walled building not properly copied from Eurocode and newzealand code, stiffness modifiers not given for shear wall and slab, also stiffness modifiers not given for SLS.). These will require ammendment in IS 1893 and NBC 2016 also.

Regards
Hemal Mistry
Surat

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

Posted via Email
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topicReply to topic Thank Post    www.sefindia.org Forum Index -> SEFI General Discussion All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


© 2003, 2008 SEFINDIA, Indian Domain Registration
Publishing or acceptance of an advertisement is neither a guarantee nor endorsement of the advertiser's product or service. advertisement policy