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.

Moderators' Response to some queries about IS 16700:2017

 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Thank Post    www.sefindia.org Forum Index -> E-conference on IS 16700 13th March to 18th March 2018
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Econf_Moderator
E-Conference Moderator


Joined: 26 Feb 2012
Posts: 23

PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2018 5:30 pm    Post subject: Moderators' Response to some queries about IS 16700:2017 Reply with quote

Dear All:

Here are responses to some of your queries. These are by no means exhaustive and some queries will need more time form our end. So do bear with us.


Comment

In IS codes 1893/2016, 13920/2016 and IS 875 part 3 /2015 and the new code 16700/2017, most of the provisions are inter connected. Some of the clauses in 16700 is confusing with the provisions of the other codes mentioned above.


Generally speaking ,therefore, in my opinion, an explanatory addition to 16700/2017 , in the form of a Special publication, is necessary , interpreting the various clause to understand this new code fully ,and adapt for practical application.


Response

Your comment is noted and many SEFIans have shared the same thought.
We too hope that the Bureau of Indian Standards ​will consider coming out with a commentary on this code.


Comment

Another important requirement in Tall Buildings is DAMPERS.
This aspect has not been mentioned or highlighted in this code. In almost all tall builngs, already constructed ,different types of dampers have been used to reduce drift ,lateral deflection and vibrations due to dynamic wind loads. There are positive Visco Elastic dampers, Tuned Mass dampers, Sloshing Warer Dampers, Tuned Liquid Dampers and Simple Pedulum dampers. Most of the Tall & super tall bldgs. already constructed have used one or other types of dampers. This aspect needs inclusion in the new code.


Response

The present code covers only buildings that can be covered in a prescriptive code. As mentioned in the foreword, structures with dampers fall within "code-exceeding buildings". This is also in line with the fact that the current IS 1893 part 1 does not cover dampers nor does the wind code. There is a code in preparation for use of such special systems. Once that is released, other codes can refer to it.


Comment:

Annexure A talks about code exceeding buildings and procedure for its approval. Question is who is going to implement it and there is no administrative mechanism to follow the guide lines ? It is not clear whether state Govt will provide the directions to form the expert review panel or local corporations do it on their own? Every one knows how Govt. departments function. We have very good laws but we lack in implementation. I feel Chairman of BIS should write to all State Governments / Urban Development Departments to form ERP for the respective states / corporation levels to implement the code guidelines. Otherwise it will remain on paper only.

Response

The need for the setting up of the ERP committee cannot be stressed enough. The issue is about mandate and jurisdiction. BIS has no authority to direct states or municipal authorities to do anything but perhaps it can engage the UDD at the centre who can then action it via directives to the States who will then direct the municipal bodies. It's a process but it should be started ASAP.


Comment

Questions are asked by many whether codes are only for guidance or they are legally binding? My personal view is that code are for guidance only but when the code reference is mentioned in the contract document / tender document it becomes legally binding for that contract.

Response

As per our understanding, a code on its own has not legal status. It needs to be mandated by the municipal body vide its development control regulations for it to be binding. Almost all municipal bodies require NBC to be followed which in turn means all BIS codes need to be followed.


best regards,


Ranjith Chandunni and Alpa Sheth
Econference Moderators.

Posted via Email
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
keyulmehta
SEFI Member
SEFI Member


Joined: 01 Jun 2017
Posts: 1

PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2018 11:00 pm    Post subject: Response to some queries Reply with quote

Respected sir/madam In design of tall building governing load combination is most probably include dynamic wind load.
In order to analyze any passive dampers in software we have to input spectra of force which contains ( Force vs. Time )
IS 875- part 3 does not explain or mention this spectra, it gives the procedure to use gust factor for the calculation so ultimately it convert dynamic wind load into equivalent static force.
In any software one can not analyze working of passive dampers for dynamic wind loading.


On 17-Mar-2018 9:55 PM, "Econf_Moderator" <forum@sefindia.org (forum@sefindia.org)> wrote:
Quote:
           Dear All:

Here are responses to some of your queries. These are by no means
exhaustive and some queries will need more time form our end. So do bear
with us.



Comment: In IS codes 1893/2016, 13920/2016 and IS 875 part 3 /2015 and
the new code 16700/2017, most of the provisions are inter connected.
Some of the clauses in 16700 is confusing with the provisions of the
other codes mentioned above.
Generally speaking ,therefore, in my opinion, an explanatory addition
to 16700/2017 , in the form of a Special publication, is necessary ,
interpreting the various clause to understand this new code fully ,and
adapt for practical application.

Response: Your comment is noted and many SEFIans have shared the same
thought.
​We too hope that the Bureau of Indian Standards ​will consider coming
out with a commentary on this code.


Comment: Another important requirement in Tall Buildings is DAMPERS.
This aspect has not been mentioned or highlighted in this code. In
almost all tall builngs, already constructed ,different types of dampers
have been used to reduce drift ,lateral deflection and vibrations due to
dynamic wind loads. There are positive Visco Elastic dampers, Tuned Mass
dampers, Sloshing Warer Dampers, Tuned Liquid Dampers and Simple Pedulum
dampers. Most of the Tall & super tall bldgs. already constructed have
used one or other types of dampers. This aspect needs inclusion in the
new code.


Response: The present code covers only buildings that can be covered in
a prescriptive code. As mentioned in the foreword, structures with
dampers fall within "code-exceeding buildings". ​ This is also in line
with the fact that the current IS 1893 part 1 does not cover dampers nor
does the wind code. There is a code in preparation for use of such
special systems. Once that is released, other codes can refer to it.


Comment: Annexure A talks about code exceeding buildings and procedure
for its approval. Question is who is going to implement it and there is
no administrative mechanism to follow the guide lines ? It is not clear
whether state Govt will provide the directions to form the expert review
panel or local corporations do it on their own? Every one knows how
Govt. departments function. We have very good laws but we lack in
implementation. I feel Chairman of BIS should write to all State
Governments / Urban Development Departments to form ERP for the
respective states / corporation levels to implement the code guidelines.
Otherwise it will remain on paper only.

Response:
​The need for the setting up of the ERP committee cannot be stressed
enough. The issue is about mandate and jurisdiction. BIS has no
authority to direct states or municipal authorities to do anything but
perhaps it can engage the UDD at the centre who can then action it via
directives to the States who will then direct the municipal bodies. It's
a process but it should be started ASAP.


Comment: Questions are asked by many whether codes are only for
guidance or they are legally binding? My personal view is that code are
for guidance only but when the code reference is mentioned in the
contract document / tender document it becomes legally binding for that
contract.

​Response: As per our understanding, a code on its own has not legal
status. It needs to be mandated by the municipal body vide its
development control regulations for it to be binding. ​ ​Almost all
municipal bodies require NBC to be followed which in turn means all BIS
codes need to be followed. ​
​​
best regards,

Ranjith Chandunni and Alpa Sheth
Econference Moderators.
     



     



Posted via Email
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Econf_Moderator
E-Conference Moderator


Joined: 26 Feb 2012
Posts: 23

PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2018 5:35 pm    Post subject: Moderators' Response to some queries about IS 16700:2017 Reply with quote

Here are the response for some of the queries received recently. The queries related to the section on foundation have been referred to the Geotechnical expert and would be responded shortly.

Comment: Clause 7.3.11 does not allow contribution of flat slab (slab-column frame) and clause 8.6.1 column strip of flat slab in resisting lateral load. I think rather than using two different terms (though having same meaning) a single term shall be used.
Anyway, my query is that, if i am neglecting stiffness of flat slab (Ieff=0) to exclude it from lateral load resisting system, how sensitivity analysis for backstay can be carried out as per cl. 8? if i have flat slab (with shear wall and perimeter frame) building (or buildings) with large podium. Do i need to modify only area of backstay diaphragm (flat slab) with upper and lower bound?


Response: The comment regarding flat slab stiffness is noted however, the two clauses are in different context.
Only the out of plane stiffness of flat slab which contributes to the lateral stiffness of the building should be neglected and not the in plane stiffness which should be considered at lower and upper bound for sensitivity analysis.

Comment: More clarification on Cl7.3.10 on how to calculate inter storey drift stability coefficient is required which is not clear. If someone explains with some numbers it will be helpful.

Comment: Cl. 7.3.10 The flexibility of the building shall be such that the flexibility of inter storey drift stability coefficient -[theta (Pu Delta/H)] exceeds 0.2 ,where Theta is not defined. This may be clarified or defined. whether Pu refers to the particular floor for which inter storey drift is calculated or not. Pu is defined in cl.4 symbols.

Response: The comments are noted; there is typo error in the stability index formula which will be clarified in the errata to be issued.
We too hope that the Bureau of Indian Standards will consider coming out with a commentary on this code.

Comment: Cl. 7.3.14 multiple towers connected by a single podium shall be modelled separately and integrally. DOES THIS MEAN THAT EACH TOWERS SHALL BE MODELLED SEPARATELY WITH THE PODIUM OR WITHOUT THE PODIUM AND ANOTHER MODEL WITH TWO TOWERS TOGETHER WITH THE PODIUM. IS THIS THE SAME CASE WHEN THERE IS EXPANSION JOINT WITH PODIUM AND TWO TOWERS.

Response: While modelling multiple towers, each tower to be modelled separately as well as integrally. When separate towers are modelled, if the part of podium attached to the tower is with more than two spans, and the lateral resistance system outside the footprint of the tower is sufficiently stiff to cater for the lateral resistance of the podium outside the footprint of the tower, at least two spans to be modelled with the tower if not the entire podium is modelled. Further guidance is available under section 8.1.3. Multiple tall building connected a common podium.


Best regards,
EConference Moderators

Posted via Email
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hemalmistry
...
...


Joined: 01 Jul 2009
Posts: 59

PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2018 12:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In response to query regarding "integral and separate tower" modeling for backstay effect, moderator have mentioned about modeling of 2 podium panels adjoining to tower for "separate tower" modeling. This requirement is there in Clause 5.1.14 of JGJ-3_2010 and in clause 7.3.15 in draft IS:16700-2017 but removed in final IS:16700_2017. Is it removed intentionally?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Thank Post    www.sefindia.org Forum Index -> E-conference on IS 16700 13th March to 18th March 2018 All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 

 
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 cannot 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