AN OVERVIEW OF REVISIONS IN IS 456 : 2000

‘CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE’

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Concrete is one of the most versatile materials for construction industries.
Making quality concrete requires proper technical knowledge of concrete
materials, its selection, proportioning, mixing, placing, compaction and curing.
This has to be supplemented by efficient design, detailing, appropriate
construction method, quality control, site supervision and maintenance during
service. IS 456 has been introduced in order to have an uniform standard to be
maintained by all the users.

1.2 Indian Standard for Plain and Reinforced Concrete – Code of Practice
(IS 456) is one of the most important and widely used code dealing with concrete
materials, workmanship, inspection, testing and the design requirements for
concrete structures. This standard was first published in 1953 under the title
‘code of practice for plain and reinforced concrete structures for general building
construction’ and was subsequently revised in 1957. The second revision of the
code was published in 1964 under title ‘code of practice for plain and reinforced
concrete’; thus enlarging the scope of use to structures other than general
building construction also. The ultimate load method of design was also
introduced in this revision. The third revision published in 1978 introduced Limit
State approach to design.

1.3 The 2000 edition is the fourth revision of the standard. This revision has
brought out a number of important changes with a view to keeping abreast with
the rapid developments in concrete technology, to enlarge the provisions on
durability consideration and also for improvements in the light of experience
gained while using the earlier version of the standard.

1.4 This report is prepared to highlight all the important changes/modifications

brought out in the 2000 edition of IS 456 with a brief commentary
thereupon.
 AN OVERVIEW OF REVISIONS IN IS 456 : 2000
‘CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE’

2. Revisions in Section 2 : Materials, Workmanship, Inspection and

Testing

2.1 Materials

2.1.1 Cement (Cl. 5.1) :

All three grades of OPC viz. 33, 43 & 53, Low Heat Portland cement and
Sulphate resisting Portland cement have been included under various
types of cement. In the manufacturing of concrete, the code also permits
other combination of Portland cement with mineral admixtures of quality
listed in Cl. 5.2.

2.1.2 Mineral Admixtures (Cl. 5.2) :

The mineral admixtures, which may be used as part replacement of

cement, listed in the code are Pozzolanas (such as fly ash, silica fume,
rice husk ash and metakaoline) and Ground Granulated Blast Furnace
Slag.

2.1.3 Aggregates (Cl. 5.3) :

(i) Preference has been given to the use of natural aggregates as far
as possible. Most of the zonal railway specifications permit use of
only crushed aggregate for RCC structures. It is considered that
this should be reviewed to generate greater use of natural
aggregates.
(ii) The limit of sulphate content in other types of aggregates such as
slag etc. has been reduced from 1% to 0.5%.
(iii) According to the revised code, 40 mm or larger size aggregates
may be permitted where there is no restriction to the flow of
concrete in the section.
(iv) The code recommends considering use of 10 mm nominal
maximum size aggregate for thin section, closely spaced
reinforcement and smaller cover.

2.1.4 Water (Cl. 5.4)

(i) From durability considerations, permissible limits of solids in water

have been reduced as under:

• Sulphate - from 500 mg/l to 400 mg/l

• Chloride - from 1000 mg/l to 500 mg/l for RCC works
 AN OVERVIEW OF REVISIONS IN IS 456 : 2000
‘CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE’

(ii) The 1978 edition of the code allowed use of seawater under
unavoidable circumstances in such RCC structures, which are
permanently under seawater. But the present revision prohibits this.

2.1.5 Admixtures (Cl. 5.5)

The 1978 edition contained a single sentence permitting use of admixture

conforming to IS-9103. Considering increase in the usage of several types
of admixtures available in the market, the new revision has given following
detailed guidelines on their use under sub clause 5.5.1 to 5.5.6.

• Admixtures should not impair durability of concrete.

• Workability, compressive strength and slump of concrete should be
checked for both with and without admixtures in trial mix.
• Relative density of liquid admixtures to be checked.
• Chloride content to be independently tested.
• If two or more admixtures are used simultaneously, data should be
obtained to assess their interaction to ensure their compatibility.

2.1.6 Reinforcement (Cl. 5.6)

i) Use of hot rolled deformed bars conforming to IS 1139 has been

withdrawn.
ii) Use of structural steel conforming to Grade A of IS 2062 has been
introduced in place of IS 226 as the latter code is superceded by
the former.
iii) Cleaning of reinforcement by sand blasting or other treatment has
been recommended.
iv) Reference to specialist literature has been recommended for
special precautions like coating of reinforcement in exceptional
cases.

2.2 Concrete (Cl. 6)

2.2.1 Grade of Concrete (Cl. 6.1)

i) Higher grade of concrete up to M 80 has been permitted (earlier

revision was permitting maximum grade M 40). This is a
progressive provision in line with recent trend for using high
strength concrete in India and abroad. However, the code has
cautioned that for high strength concrete (compressive strength
greater than M 55), the design parameters given in this standard
 AN OVERVIEW OF REVISIONS IN IS 456 : 2000
‘CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE’

may not be applicable and the values may be obtained from

specialist literatures and experimental results.

ii) The grades of concrete have been classified in following three

groups:

a) Ordinary Grade M 10 to M 20
b) Standard concrete M 25 to M 55
c) High strength concrete M 60 to M 80

iii) The minimum grade of concrete for plain and reinforced concrete in
various exposures conditions have been revised as under:-
Exposure condition Minimum grade of concrete
Plain Cement Reinforced Cement
Concrete Concrete
Mild - M 20
Moderate M 15 M 25
Severe M 20 M 30
Very Severe M 20 M 35
Extreme M 25 M 40

2.2.2 Properties of concrete (Cl. 6.2)

(i) IS 456 : 1978 allowed increase in compressive strength of concrete

up to 20% depending upon the age of concrete where it could be
shown that a member would not receive its full design load/stress
within a period of 28 days. The new revision though acknowledges
the increase in compressive strength with age but recommends
design based on 28 days strength only unless there is evidence to
justify higher strength for concrete of a particular structure. This is
because the increase in strength depends upon the grade and type
of cement, curing, environment conditions, etc. For concrete of
Grade M 30 and above, the rate of increase of compressive
strength with age should be based on actual investigation.
(ii) The value of Modulus of elasticity has been reduced from 5700√fck
to 5000√fck, which means that the deformation of the structure will
be more.

2.3 Workability of concrete (Cl. 7)

IS 456 : 1978 specified workability in terms of compacting factor, vee-bee

time and slump. But the new revision specifies workability only in terms of slump;
except in case of “very low” and “very high” degree of workability, where
compaction factor and flow determination method respectively have been
 AN OVERVIEW OF REVISIONS IN IS 456 : 2000
‘CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE’

specified. This is probably because of the absence any correlation between the
three test methods.

2.4 Durability of concrete (Cl. 8)

Major thrust/emphasis has been given on durability aspects. The durability

clause has been enlarged to a great extent to include guidance on concerning
factors. Detailed clause covering various requirements for durability of concrete
structures has been incorporated.

2.4.1 Shape and size of member (Cl. 8.2.1)

For the first time, importance has been given to shape and design
detailing to enhance durability of exposed concrete structures. Specific
mention has been made regarding good drainage arrangement, adequate
curing, cover to steel, chamfering of corners, surface coating, member
profiling and design detailing of member intersections to ensure easy flow
of concrete.

2.4.2 Exposure conditions (Cl. 8.2.2)

2.4.2.1 General Environment (Cl. 8.2.2.1)
Table 3 on environmental exposure conditions has been modified to
include “very severe” and “extreme” exposure conditions. Five environmental
exposure conditions (viz. Mild, moderate, severe, very severe and extreme) have
been defined in this table.
2.4.2.2 Abrasive action (Cl. 8.2.2.2)

Reference to specialist literature has been recommended for durability

requirements of concrete surface exposed to abrasive action.
2.4.2.3 Freezing and thawing (Cl. 8.2.2.3)

Use of suitable air entraining admixtures has been suggested for

obtaining enhanced durability in case of freezing and thawing actions under wet
conditions. For concrete lower than grade M 50, the mean total air content has
been specified for such cases. Since air entrainment reduces the strength of
concrete, suitable adjustment in the mix design may be required.
2.4.2.4 Exposure to sulphate attack (Cl. 8.2.2.4)

Table 4 (on requirements for concrete exposed to sulphate attack) has

been modified to include two more classes of sulphate attack viz. Class 4 and 5.
For very high sulphate concentration in class 5, use of lining with polyethylene or
polychloroprene sheet or suitable surface coating has been recommended.

2.4.3 The cover to embedded steel (Cl. 8.2.3)

 AN OVERVIEW OF REVISIONS IN IS 456 : 2000
‘CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE’

The nominal cover to embedded steel required from durability

consideration has been related with exposure conditions vide Table 16.
Tolerances for concrete cover have also been specified. In addition, minimum
cover is also specified to meet different specified period of fire resistance from
0.5 hour to 4 hours.

Nominal cover has been defined as the depth of concrete cover to all
steel reinforcement, including links.

2.4.4 Concrete mix proportions (Cl. 8.2.4)

From durability considerations appropriate values for minimum cement

content and the maximum free water-cement ratio applicable to 20 mm
nominal maximum size aggregate have been specified in Table 5 for
different exposure conditions. Adjustment for minimum cement content
for other aggregate size has been given in Table 6.

2.4.5 Maximum cement content (Cl. 8.2.4.2)

A new clause 8.2.4.2 has been added specifying that cement content
not including fly ash and ground granulate blast furnace slag in excess
of 450 kg/m3 should not be used unless special consideration has
been given to the increased risk of cracking due to drying shrinkage in
thin sections or to early thermal cracking and to increased risk of
damage due to alkali silica reactions.

This provision may lead to increased use of mineral admixtures as a

part replacement of cement particularly for higher grade of concrete
leading to likely enhancement of durability.

2.4.6 The type and quality of mix constituents (Cl. 8.2.5)

For concrete to be durable, careful selection of the mix and materials is

necessary so that the presence of deleterious constituents do not
exceed the prescribed limits.

2.4.6.1 Chloride in concrete (Cl. 8.2.5.2)

Chloride in concrete is harmful and there is an increased risk of

embedded steel being corroded. To minimize the chances of
deterioration, the maximum total acid soluble Chloride content in the
concrete at the time of placing for different type/use of concrete has
been limited vide Table 7. As per the new code, the maximum Chloride
content is 0.6 kg/m3 for RCC works; while the earlier edition limited the
chloride content to 0.15% by mass of cement. Thus the new provision
 AN OVERVIEW OF REVISIONS IN IS 456 : 2000
‘CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE’

is more lenient in this respect for concrete having cement content up to

400 kg/m3.

2.4.6.2 Sulphate in concrete (Cl. 8.2.5.3)

Sulphates are present in most cement and in some aggregates.

Excessive amount of water-soluble sulphate can cause expansion and
disruption of concrete. To prevent this, the total water-soluble sulphate
content of the concrete mix expressed as SO 3 has been limited to 4%
by mass of cement; which is same as was provided in IS 456 : 1978.

2.4.6.3 Alkali-aggregate reaction (Cl. 8.2.5.4)

Some aggregates containing particular varieties of silica may be

susceptible to attack by alkalies (Na 2O and K2O) originating from
cement or other sources and may produce an expansive reaction
which can cause cracking and disruption of concrete. The new code
has suggested taking one or more of the following precautionary
measures when the service records of the particular cement/aggregate
combination is not well established:

• Use of non-reactive aggregate from alternative sources.

• Use of low alkali OPC having total alkali content not more than
0.6% as Na2O equivalent.
• Measures to reduce the degree of saturation of concrete during
service such as use of impermeable membranes.
• Limiting the cement content in the mix and thereby limiting the total
alkali content.

2.4.7 Concrete in aggressive soils and water (Cl. 8.2.6)

The code has suggested that at sites where the alkali concentration
are high or may become very high, the ground water should be lowered by
drainage so that it does not come into direct contact with the concrete. It has also
suggested additional protection like the use of chemically resistant stone facing
or a layer of plaster of Paris covered with suitable fabric, such as jute thoroughly
impregnated with bituminous material.

2.4.8 Concrete in Sea-water (Cl. 8.2.8)

From durability considerations, the minimum grade of concrete in sea-

water or exposed directly along sea-coast has been increased from M 15 to M 20
in the case of PCC and from M 20 to M 30 in the case of RCC works.

2.5 Concrete mix proportioning (Cl. 9)

 AN OVERVIEW OF REVISIONS IN IS 456 : 2000
‘CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE’

Salient revised provisions under this clause are highlighted hereunder:

i) In the list of information required in specifying a particular grade of

concrete, the following new items have been added:

• Exposure conditions as per Table 4 and 5 of the standard.

• Maximum temperature of concrete at the time of placing.
• Method of placing.
• Degree of supervision.

ii) 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 in this standard.

This provision is very important as the responsibility of

quality assurance and carrying out the mix design has been rightly
entrusted to the constructor. Also what is more important is that the
results of mix rather than the method of its design has been insisted
upon as the basis for finalising the mix proportion. In this context it
is worth mentioning that the earlier version of this code mentioned
that the procedure given in IS : 10262-1982, Recommended
Guidelines for Concrete Mix Design (which was under preparation
at that time), may be followed. But the new IS : 456 does not refer
to the above standard either in the body of the code or in the list of
referred Indian Standards appearing in Annex A.

iii) The target mean strength of the concrete mix should be equal to
the characteristic strength plus 1.65 times the standard deviation.

iv) The provision regarding necessity for revision of concrete mix has
been modified. The mix design done earlier not prior to one year
has been considered adequate for later works provided there is no
change in source and the quality of the materials.

v) When sufficient test results for a particular grade of concrete are

not available, the value of standard deviation given in Table 8 is to
be taken for design of mix in the first instance. The values of
assumed standard deviation given in the above table 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 grading and moisture content; and periodical
checking of workability and strength. Where there is deviation from
 AN OVERVIEW OF REVISIONS IN IS 456 : 2000
‘CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE’

the above, the values given in the table shall be increased by

1N/mm2. The revised code further stipulates that as soon as the
results of samples are available, actual calculated standard
deviation shall be used and the mix be designed properly.

2.6 Production of concrete (Cl. 10)

2.6.1 Quality Assurance Measures (Cl. 10.1)

Some important aspects on quality assurance measures have been

added. These include:

• Quality assurance to proper design, use of adequate materials and

components to be supplied by producers, proper workmanship in
the execution and timely maintenance and repair during service.
• Development and implementation of a general Quality Assurance
Plan (QAP) to identify the key elements necessary to provide
fitness of the structure and the means by which they are to be
provided and measured. The quality assurance would involve
quality audit of inputs such as materials of concrete; workmanship
in all stages of batching, mixing, transportation, placing, compaction
and curing; and related plant, machinery and equipment.

• The QAP shall define the task and responsibility of all persons
involved, adequate control and checking procedure and
maintenance of adequate documentation, which should generally
include:

* Test reports and manufacturer’s certificate for materials,

concrete mix design details;

* Pour cards for site organization and clearance for concrete

placement;

* Record of site inspection of workmanship, field tests;

* Non-conformance reports, change orders;

* Quality control charts; and

* Statistical analysis

2.6.2 Batching (Cl. 10.2)

The following important additions have been made:

 AN OVERVIEW OF REVISIONS IN IS 456 : 2000
‘CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE’

• To avoid confusion and error in batching, consideration should be

given to using the smallest practical number of different concrete
mixes on any site or in any one plant.

• Ready-mixed concrete supplied by ready-mixed concrete plant has

been given preference. For large and medium project sites, the
concrete should be sourced from ready-mixed concrete plants or
from on site or off site batching and mixing plants.

• The accuracy of measuring equipment should be within ± 2% of the

quantity of cement being measured and within ± 3% of the quantity
of aggregate, admixtures and water being measured.

• Volume batching may be allowed only when weigh batching is not

practical and provided accurate bulk densities of materials to be
actually used in concrete have earlier been established. The mass
volume relationship should be checked as frequently as necessary.

2.6.3 Mixing (Cl. 10.3)

• The mixers are required to be fitted with water measuring

(metering) devices.

• Dosages of retarders, plasticisers and superplasticisers have been

restricted to 0.5, 1.0 and 2.0 percent respectively by weight of
cementitious materials.

2.7 Formwork (Cl. 11)

The minimum period before striking vertical formwork to columns,

walls, beams, etc. has been reduced to 16-24 hours from 24-48 hours.

2.8 Assembly of reinforcement (Cl. 12)

• Re-bending or straightening of high strength deformed bars without

prior approval has been prohibited.

• Bar bending schedule is required to be prepared for all

reinforcement work.

• As per IS 456 : 1978, the reduction in concrete cover was permitted

up to one-third of specified cover or 5 mm whichever is less. But
the new code specifies tolerance of cover as +10 mm and –0 mm.
 AN OVERVIEW OF REVISIONS IN IS 456 : 2000
‘CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE’

Thus, no reduction in actual cover from the specified cover has

been permitted.

• Types of cover-blocks acceptable (concrete of same strength or

PVC) have been mentioned. This may pave the way for use of PVC
cover blocks.

2.8.1 Welded Joints or mechanical connections (Cl. 12.4)

• Only up to 12 mm for high strength deformed steel bars and up to

16 mm for mild steel bars are permitted to bend aside at
construction joints which can afterwards be bent back to original
position.

• Reinforcement should be placed and tied in such a way that

concrete placement be possible without segregation and allow
compaction by immersion vibrator.

• Within concrete mass, different types of metal in contact should be

avoided to ensure that bimetal corrosion does not take place.

2.9 Transportation, placing, compaction and curing (Cl. 13)

• Maximum permissible free fall of concrete has been stipulated as

1.5m.
• Construction joints should comply with IS 11817.
• The earlier practice of introducing a cement slurry/mortar layer
between old and new concrete has been discontinued. It has now
been recommended to roughen the surface of the previously
poured concrete to expose the aggregate and the prepared surface
should be in a clean surface dry condition when the fresh concrete
is placed against it. Fresh concrete should be thoroughly vibrated
near construction joint so that mortar from fresh concrete flows
between large aggregates and develops proper bond with old
concrete. Provision of shear keys has been recommended where
high shear resistance is required at construction joints.
• The earlier code made a general statement that the curing period
should not be less than 7 days from the date of placing concrete.
But the new code has specified different period of curing for
concrete where mineral admixtures or blended cements are used
and also for concrete exposed to dry and hot weather conditions.
As per the new code, the minimum curing period of concrete made
with OPC is 7 days for normal conditions and 10 days for dry and
 AN OVERVIEW OF REVISIONS IN IS 456 : 2000
‘CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE’

hot weather conditions. The same for concrete where mineral

admixtures or blended cements are used, are 10 days for normal
conditions and 14 days for dry and hot weather conditions.
• Impermeable membrane such as polyethylene sheeting to provide
effective barrier against evaporation may be used as an alternative
to moist curing.

2.10 Concreting under special conditions (Cl. 14)

2.10.1 Under-Water Concreting (Cl. 14.2)

• Some fundamental conceptual changes have been made in

provisions on under-water concreting. The 1978 edition stated that
under-water concrete should in no case be considered as ‘Design
mix concrete’ and recommended to provide at least 10% extra
cement than that required for the same mix placed in dry. The new
edition envisages that design mix concrete alone will be used for
under-water concreting and the requirement of 10% extra cement
has been deleted. However, the code has further specified that the
minimum cement content shall be 350 kg/m 3, which would take
care of possible loss of cement during under-water concreting.

• Direct placement with pump has been added as one of the methods
to be used for depositing concrete under water.

2.11 Sampling and strength of designed concrete mix (Cl. 15)

• The heading of this clause should have been ‘Sampling and

strength test of concrete’ as per the earlier code since the details of
sampling and testing is related to work site concrete and not to
‘design mix concrete’.

• IS : 456 – 1978 exempted strength tests at the discretion of

engineer-in-charge for concrete of quantity less than 15 m 3 in
unimportant building and works.

• Both 1978 and 2000 editions have specifically mentioned that in all
cases, the 28 days compressive strength shall alone be the criteria
for acceptance or rejection of concrete. But the 1978 edition
permitted relaxation in the frequency in 28 days compressive
strength provided a satisfactory relation between 28 days
compressive strength and the modulus of rupture at 72 ±2 hrs or 7
days or compressive strength at 7 days is established for a
 AN OVERVIEW OF REVISIONS IN IS 456 : 2000
‘CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE’

reasonably long period. This relaxation has been deleted from the
2000 edition.

• The 1978 edition had given values of the modulus of rupture at

72±2 hrs and 7 days as well as compressive strength at 7 days for
various grades of concrete in order to get a relatively quicker idea
of the quality of concrete and possible compressive strength at 28
days. The new edition has not given these values and has rightly
stated that these values should be arrived at based on actual
testing because several factors may affect it.

• The new revised standard recognizes the use of ready-mixed

concrete and states that the frequency of sampling for such
concrete may be decided mutually by supplier and purchaser.

2.11.1 Test results of sample (Cl. 15.4)

Both 1978 and 2000 editions state that test result of no individual
specimen should vary more than ±15% of the average strength of the
sample. The 2000 edition further clarifies that the test results of such
sample will be invalid.

2.12 Acceptance criteria (Cl. 16)

• The acceptance criteria has been fully modified and made simpler
for implementation. As per the new code the concrete shall be
deemed to comply with strength requirements when both the
following conditions are met:

a) The mean strength determined from any group of four non-

overlapping consecutive test results gives concrete strength
greater than or equal to:

(i) fck + 0.825 x established standard deviation (rounded off to

nearest 0.5 N/mm2)

or

(ii) fck + 3 N/mm2 (for M15) or fck + 4 N/mm2 (for M20 and
above) as the case may be

Whichever of (i) and (ii) is greater.

 AN OVERVIEW OF REVISIONS IN IS 456 : 2000
‘CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE’

b) Any individual test result should be greater than equal to f ck - 3

N/mm2 (for M15) or fck - 4 N/mm2 (for M20 and above) as the
case may be.

Thus, as long as standard deviation is less than about 5 N/mm 2

(which can be achieved with good quality control), the criteria is
satisfied when a margin of 4 N/mm 2 for the mean strength over the
characteristic strength is maintained. Or in other words for concrete
of grade M 20 to M 50, about 85 to 93 percent of target mean
strength of design mix is to be achieved at site.

• A new clause 16.2 has been added on the requirements of flexural

strength.

• Vide new additional clause 16.3, the quantity of concrete

represented by strength test results has been clarified.

2.13 Inspection and testing of structures (Cl. 17)

The thrust is now more for a quality of inspection system than the
inspection of final product. The following important additions have been
made:

• An inspection procedure should be set up covering materials,

records and workmanship to ensure that the construction complies
with the design.

• Tests should be made on reinforcement and the constituent

materials of concrete in accordance with relevant standard.

• A suitable quality assurance plan should be made to see that:

* Design and detail are capable of being executed to a suitable
standard, with due allowance for dimensional tolerance;

* There are clear instructions on inspection standards;

* There are clear instructions on permissible deviations;

* Elements critical to workmanship, structural performance,

durability and appearance are identified; and

* There is a system to verify that the quality is satisfactory in

individual parts of the structure, specially the critical ones.
 AN OVERVIEW OF REVISIONS IN IS 456 : 2000
‘CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE’

2.13.1 Load tests for flexural members (Cl. 17.6)

The heading of this clause has been rightly changed from “Load tests
on parts of structure” (as per cl. 16.5 of IS : 456 – 1978) to “Load tests
for flexural members” as it describes detailed requirements of load
tests for flexural members.

2.13.2 Members other than flexural members (Cl. 17.7)

This is a new provision, which states that members other than flexural
members should be preferably investigated by analysis.

2.13.3 Non destructive tests (Cl. 17.8)

The earlier provision regarding non-destructive tests has been

extended and non-destructive test methods like Ultrasonic Pulse
Velocity and Rebound Hammer, Probe Penetration, Pullout and
Maturity has been recognized to obtain estimation of the properties of
concrete in the structure. Any of these methods may be adopted, in
which case the acceptance criteria may be agreed upon prior to
testing.

However, an important provision that the non-destructive tests should

be done under expert guidance contained in the earlier code has not
been mentioned here.
 AN OVERVIEW OF REVISIONS IN IS 456 : 2000
‘CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE’

3 Revisions in Section 3 : General design considerations

3.1 Bases for design (Cl. 18)

• New clauses on aim of design; durability, workmanship and materials;

and design process have been added to include considerations for
adequate durability and resistance to the effect of fire.

• The new code has encouraged the use of Limit State Method design
by shifting Working Stress Method from the body of the code (Section
6 in 1978 edition) to Annex B. It has also stated that structure and
structural elements should normally be designed by Limit State
Method. Where the Limit State Method can not be conveniently
adopted, Working Stress Method may be used.

3.2 Loads and forces (Cl. 19)

• Live load is now termed as imposed load and consideration of snow

load in accordance with IS 875 (Part 4) has been added.

• The code has simplified that in ordinary buildings, such as low rise
dwellings whose lateral dimension do no exceed 45m, the effects due
to temperature fluctuations, shrinkage and creep can be ignored in
design calculations.

3.3 Stability of structures (Cl. 20)

In addition to other stability criteria like overturning, sliding, etc., lateral

drift criteria is also important in high rise buildings. This aspect has been
recognized by the new code and the lateral sway at top has been
restricted to H/500, where H is the height of the building.

3.4 Fire resistance (Cl. 21)

• A new clause on fire resistance has been incorporated on the basis of

BS 8110. To meet specified period of fire resistance, the code has now
stipulated requirements of minimum dimensions for structural elements
(fig. 1) and nominal covers for different structural configurations (Table
16A).

• When the required nominal cover exceeds 40 mm for beams and 35

mm for slabs, additional measures such as application of fire
resistance finishes, provision of fire resistance false ceiling and
 AN OVERVIEW OF REVISIONS IN IS 456 : 2000
‘CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE’

sacrificial reinforcement in tensile zone have been recommended to

protect against spalling.

3.5 Analysis (Cl. 22)

3.5.1 Effective span (Cl. 22.2)

The effective length of cantilever, which was missing in the earlier code,
has been introduced and is to 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 is to be taken.

3.5.2 Structural frames (Cl. 22.4)

Simplified assumptions like substitute frame has been continued except

where side sway consideration becomes critical due to unsymmetry in
geometry or loading, in which cases rigorous analysis is recommended.

3.5.3 Moment and shear coefficients for continuous beams (Cl. 22.5)

It is interesting to note that the bending moment coefficient at middle of

intermediate span has been changed from 1/24 to 1/16. The reason is not
very clear unless the moment coefficient given in the earlier code was
based on redistribution done inadvertently.

3.5.4 Critical section for shear (Cl. 22.6.2)

The shear failure at sections without shear reinforcement will normally

occur on plane inclined at an angle of 30 0 to the horizontal. Thus, if the
depth of the beam is ‘d’, the critical section for shear will be at a distance
of d/tan300 from the face of support. The new code has clarified that the
above will be applicable for beams generally carrying uniformly distributed
load and where the principal load is located further than twice the distance
of critical section from the face of support. Furthermore, it is worth pointing
out that the above is applicable only when load is from top and support is
at bottom as has been in fig. 2(a) and 2(b). In case of fig. 2(c), whole
concept is changed since the support is from top and critical section for
shear is at face of support only.

3.6 Control of deflection for beams (Cl. 23.2)

The span to depth ratio given in clause 23.2.1 (a) and (b) is required to be
modified for tension reinforcement as per fig. 4. Earlier, the modification
factor was based on area and type of steel; but this has now been rightly
based on the area and actual stress of steel for tensile reinforcement. The
 AN OVERVIEW OF REVISIONS IN IS 456 : 2000
‘CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE’

minimum depth of beam now required for deflection control will be

comparatively less. However, it may be relevant here to mention that the
span to depth ratio given in the code is only a simplified approach when
rigorous deflection calculations are not made.

3.7 Slabs continuous over supports (Cl. 24.2)

The relevant earlier clause stated that slabs continuous over supports
should be designed according to provisions applicable to continuous
beams. This has now been corrected and states that slabs spanning in
one direction and continuous over supports should be designed according
to provisions applicable to continuous beams as a separate provision is
there for slabs spanning in two directions and continuous over supports.

3.8 Restrained slab spanning in two directions at right angles with

unequal conditions at adjacent panels (Cl. 24.4.1)

This is a new provision for slabs spanning in two directions at right angles
to each other having different span lengths or different boundary
conditions at far ends. Under such cases there is significant variance in
bending moment at the common support. The extant practice is to design
for the greater moment, resulting in uneconomical design. The present
code has made provision for distribution of the moments according to
relative stiffness of adjacent spans and also curtailment of reinforcement
on the basis of point of contra-flexure assuming parabolic moment
diagram.

3.9 Minimum eccentricity for compression members (Cl. 25.4)

It has been clarified that in case of compression members subjected to bi-

axial bending, it would be sufficient to ensure that minimum eccentricity is
exceeded about one axis at a time. This would simplify the design as
eccentricity need not be considered in resultant direction.

3.10 Requirements governing reinforcement and detailing (Cl. 26)

• Bundling of bars larger than 32 mm diameter has not been permitted.

• For detailing of earthquake resistant construction, reference to IS
13920 has been added.

3.10.1 Lap splices (Cl. 26.2.5.1)

Provisions have been added for increase in lap length where lap for a
tension bar located at top and corner of a section and where minimum
cover of twice the diameter of lapped bar is not available.
 AN OVERVIEW OF REVISIONS IN IS 456 : 2000
‘CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE’

3.10.2 Strength of welds (Cl. 26.2.5.2)

The following conditions in regard to strength of welds have been

added:

• The strength of weld should be at least as great as that of the

parent bar.
• For splices in tension, 100 percent of design strength may be
assumed if welding is strictly supervised and not more than 20% of
the tensile reinforcement is welded in the section.

3.10.3 Maximum spacing of reinforcement bars in tension (Cl. 26.3.3)

Maximum spacing of main reinforcement bars in slab has been

reduced from 450 mm to 300 mm.

3.10.4 Nominal cover to reinforcement (Cl. 26.4)

The effective protection of steel in concrete against corrosion depends

upon adequate thickness of good quality concrete. A large-scale
modification has been made in the new code while recommending
requirements of concrete cover, which are as under:

• The term ‘nominal cover’ has been introduced and it is defined as

the design depth of concrete cover to all steel reinforcement
including links. It is the dimension used in the design and included
in the drawing that has to be strictly followed at site.
• The required nominal cover has been specified on considerations
of both durability and fire resistance.
• The requirement of nominal cover on durability considerations is for
various exposure conditions and not related to the type of structural
members.
• The nominal cover for longitudinal reinforcement bar in column
should in no case be less than 40 mm nor the diameter of such bar.
This value may be reduced to 25 mm in case of columns of
minimum dimension of 200 mm or under, whose reinforcement bars
do not exceed 12 mm.

• For footings, the minimum cover should be 50 mm.

3.10.5 Maximum spacing of shear reinforcement in beams (Cl. 26.5.1.5)
 AN OVERVIEW OF REVISIONS IN IS 456 : 2000
‘CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE’

Maximum spacing of shear reinforcement in beams is reduced from

450 mm to 300 mm.

3.10.6 Minimum shear reinforcement in beams (Cl. 26.5.1.6)

In the formula for minimum cross-sectional shear of stirrup legs of

shear reinforcement for beams, the term f y (characteristic strength of
shear reinforcement in N/mm2) has been replaced by 0.87f y.

3.10.7 Pitch and diameter of lateral ties in columns (Cl. 26.5.3.2c)

• The minimum distance between lateral ties in columns has been

modified from forty-eight times the diameter of lateral ties to 300
mm.
• The minimum diameter of lateral ties has been increased from 5
mm to 6 mm.

3.11 Expansion Joints (Cl. 27)

For design consideration of expansion joints, reference to IS 3414 has

been included.
 AN OVERVIEW OF REVISIONS IN IS 456 : 2000
‘CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE’

4 Revisions in Section 4 : Special design requirements for structural

members and system

4.1 Concrete corbels (Cl. 28)

A new clause on design of concrete corbels on the basis of simplified

assumptions of strut-and-tie system and its reinforcement detailing has
been introduced.

4.2 Minimum length of reinforcement for flat slabs (Cl. 31.7.3)

A new provision has been introduced that the length of reinforcement for
slabs in frames not braced against sideways and for slabs resisting lateral
loads should be determined by analysis but should not be less than those
given in Fig. 16.

4.3 Walls (Cl. 32)

A new clause on design of concrete walls and its reinforcement detailing

has been introduced.

4.4 Nominal reinforcement for footings (Cl. 34.5)

A new clause stipulating minimum reinforcement and its spacing for

footings has been introduced.

5. Revisions in Section 5 : Structural design (Limit State Method)

5.1 Limit State of Serviceability : Cracking (Cl. 35.3.2 and 43)

Where specific attention is required to limit the design crack width, the
new code has included the formulae for calculation of crack width in
Annex F. The permissible crack widths has been kept same as earlier
code and varies from 0.30 mm to 0.1 mm depending upon type of
structure and environment.

It may be noted from the formula for crack width calculation that for a
given section, the crack width is a function of strain in steel, depth of
concrete cover and spacing of reinforcement steel. Again, permissible
crack width is less when required nominal cover is more from exposure
condition. Thus, if crack width is to be limited to 0.1 mm only for a given
strain and higher concrete cover, the reinforcement spacing would be too
congested to cause problems in concreting. On the other hand reduction
in strain would result uneconomic design. However, the code has clearly
stated in clause 43.1 that compliance with the minimum spacing of
reinforcement bars given in clause 26.3.2 should be sufficient to control
 AN OVERVIEW OF REVISIONS IN IS 456 : 2000
‘CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE’

flexural cracking and crack width given in Annex F need be calculated only
when greater spacing are required.

5.2 Slender compression member (Cl. 39.7)

Note 1 under clause 39.7.1 has been added clarifying the conditions under
which a column may be considered braced in a given plane.

5.3 Design shear strength of concrete (Cl. 40.2)

In both Limit State and Working Stress Methods (Table 19 and 23), the
percentage area of longitudinal tension reinforcement has been added
below 0.15 and above 3.0 for design shear strength calculations. This
would help the designer as often the percentage areas go beyond the
limits given in the table. In both these tables the value of design shear
strength for M 40 for different percentage area of tensile reinforcement as
given in earlier code has been retained for M 40 and above in the new
code.

5.4 Maximum shear stress in concrete with shear reinforcement (Cl.

40.2.3)

In Table 20 specifying Maximum shear stress in concrete even with shear

reinforcement, the value for M 40 given in earlier code has been retained
for M 40 and above in the new code.

5.5 Enhanced shear strength of sections close to supports (Cl. 40.5)

For any section closer to support, substantial portion of the shear will be
directly transferred to the support by strut action. Thus, the shear strength
for all sections from critical section for shear (refer para 3.5.4 above) to
the face of support get enhanced. This aspect has been recognized for the
first time in the revised edition and a new clause in this regard has been
introduced both in Limit State and Working Stress Methods. Accordingly,
permissible shear stress at supports has been increased.

However, it is worth mentioning that the above enhancement is applicable

only when the load is on top of beam and support is at bottom. If the load
acts at bottom, i.e. something is hung from bottom fiber of beam, the
whole concept changes and enhancement of shear at support is no more
applicable.

5.6 Limit State of Collapse : Torsion (Cl. 41)

As per earlier code, the members were required to be designed for

torsion, only where the torsional resistance or stiffness of member was
 AN OVERVIEW OF REVISIONS IN IS 456 : 2000
‘CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE’

taken into account in the analysis of the structure. This has been modified
in the new code and it states that the members are to be designed for
torsion if torsion is required to maintain equilibrium of the structure. It
further clarifies that no specific calculations for torsion is required in
intermediate structures when the redundant restrains are released,
provided torsional stiffness is neglected in calculation of internal forces.
 AN OVERVIEW OF REVISIONS IN IS 456 : 2000
‘CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE’

6. Revisions in Annex B : Structural design (Working Stress Method)

• It is interesting to note that the value of the Modulus of Elasticity of

concrete has been reduced by about 12%. But there is no
corresponding increase in the value of modular ratio ‘m’ which has
been kept same (280/3 σcbc) as earlier code. The reason is not very
clear.
• Due to introduction of higher grade of concrete, values of tensile
stresses for concrete of grade M 45 and M 50 have been added.
Similarly, values of permissible compressive stresses and bond
stresses for concrete of grade M 45 and M 50 have been added in
Table 21.
• In terms of Clause B-4.3 of the new code, it is now mandatory that
members subjected to combine direct load and bending be designed
by Limit State Method only.

• It has already been mentioned vide para 5.3 above that in Table 23,
the percentage area of longitudinal tension reinforcement has been
added below 0.15 and above 3.0 for design shear strength
calculations. The value of design shear strength for M 40 for different
percentage area of tensile reinforcement as given in earlier code has
been retained for M 40 and above in the new code.

• In Table 24 specifying Maximum shear stress in concrete even with

shear reinforcement, the value for M 40 given in earlier code has been
retained for M 40 and above in the new code.

• Provision for enhanced shear strength of sections close to supports

has been added for Working Stress Method also in a similar manner as
already explained vide para 5.5 above for Limit State Method.

• Modification in design for torsion as explained vide para 5.6 above has
been included in Working Stress Method also.

7. Revisions in Annex E : Effective length of columns

• A method to determine whether a column is a no sway or a sway

column by computing stability index has been added vide clause E-2.

• Reference to Fig. 26 as given in line 5 of clause E-1 should be read as

Fig. 27. This is typographical mistake.

8. CONCLUSIONS

• Every revision of IS 456 has a special milestone. 1964 revision brought

out Ultimate Load Method of design, 1978 is known for introduction of
 AN OVERVIEW OF REVISIONS IN IS 456 : 2000
‘CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE’

Limit State concept and in the new code i.e. 2000 revision major thrust
has been on Durability aspects.

• Enhancement in durability of concrete structures depends on

numerous factors to be taken care of during planning; design and
detailing; construction and service. Some of these are mentioned
below:

∗ Proper assessment of environment

∗ Selection of right material and mixes
∗ Efficient design and detailing including concrete cover
∗ Proper production, placement, compaction and curing of concrete
∗ Enforcement of acceptance criteria
∗ Development of Quality Assurance Plan and inspection and testing
of constituent materials and structures.
∗ Preventive maintenance

The new revision of the code has modified and enlarged the clauses
comprehensively to cover all factors governing durability of concrete
structures.

• The new code has taken bold steps in introducing high

strength/performance concrete up to grade M 80.
• Encouragement in the use of new materials like fly ash, silica fume,
Ground Granulated Blast Furnace slag, various types of cements
presently being manufactured, admixtures, PVC cover blocks, etc. is
considered to be a progressive approach.
• Some aspects of concrete technology though very common but are not
in practice to real sense like alkali aggregate reaction, preference to
natural aggregates, under water concreting, etc. have been
modified/elaborated.
• Introduction of certain clauses like minimum grade of concrete,
increased nominal cover, etc. from durability considerations though will
involve increase in initial cost but would ultimately result in reduction of
overall life cycle cost of the structure due to enhanced durability.
• The new code has encouraged the use of Limit State Method design
by shifting Working Stress Method from the body of the code to
Annexure.
• More scientific approaches like crack width calculations, enhanced
shear strength of sections near supports, maximum cement content,
etc. has been introduced.
 AN OVERVIEW OF REVISIONS IN IS 456 : 2000
‘CODE OF PRACTICE FOR PLAIN AND REINFORCED CONCRETE’

• The code has not mentioned about permeability test of concrete, which
is an important check for ensuring durability. No mention has also been
made about Thermo-mechanically Treated (TMT) reinforcement bars
and various types of protective coating of concrete and reinforcement
bars.

In this report an attempt has been made only to highlight the important
changes/modification brought out in IS 456 : 2000. Many of these changes
have already appeared in Railways’ Concrete Bridge Code, which was
revised in 1997; earlier to revision of IS 456. But still there remain certain
important changes, which are worth considering for inclusion in IRS
Concrete Bridge Code.