Intro: As India races to build faster and cheaper with Pre-Engineered Buildings, is structural integrity being traded for savings? SSMB dives deeper on this issue whilst interacting with various industry stakeholders across the PEB business domain.
Pre-Engineered Buildings (PEBs) have rapidly gained popularity across India, particularly in industrial, warehousing, and commercial sectors. Their appeal lies in fast-track construction timelines, economical designs, and lightweight structural systems. As real estate and logistics boom across the country, more developers are looking to PEBs as a go-to solution for quick, cost-effective infrastructure. But as the pace quickens, it’s critical to ask: Are these structures being built to last, or just to save?
The popularity of PEBs stems from their convenience, economy, quality production, and speed of construction. The typical components of a PEB envelope include cladding sheets, secondary framing of purlins, and a primary rigid gable frame. Design economy is achieved by configuring the frame to follow the bending moment, often utilizing tapered columns and rafter factory-welded I-sections. These sections, designed for easy transportation, are assembled on-site with bolted joints and then erected. The rapid demand for factories, warehouses, data centers, and other similar facilities has led to a significant increase in the number of fabrication vendors.
While structural engineers often rely on software for designing these structures, the ultimate safety and stability depend on strict compliance with national code provisions. Unfortunately, aspects of ignoring code provisions, either totally or partially, occur frequently in pursuit of perceived economy, a practice to which clients are often inclined. Experienced structural engineers who conscientiously follow national codes are aware of their legal standing and possess the expertise to provide code-based, safe, and economical PEB structures.
Cracks in the Framework: The Compliance Problem
One of the most pressing challenges facing the Indian PEB industry today is the growing disregard for national building codes, driven by intense competition and a lack of client awareness. A disturbing trend has emerged: some vendors openly advertise that their PEB designs are based solely on international references such as the MBMA manual, often defaulting to American codes unless explicitly instructed otherwise.
This practice is flawed on multiple levels. The Metal Building Manufacturers Association (MBMA) manual, while comprehensive, is not a legally binding building code, even in the United States. It is a trade document tailored to the American regulatory environment and cannot replace the statutory codes that govern construction in India. “Designers must adhere to the imposed loads, load factors, and serviceability limits stipulated by the regulating authority of the country in which the structure is located,” says Prof. LS Jayagopal, Managing Director, Mithran Structures.
In India, that authority is the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS), with the National Building Code (NBC) laying down the overarching framework. The NBC even cautions that structures erected in violation of statutory provisions are liable for demolition. “Despite this, several PEB builders exploit the client’s lack of technical knowledge and deliver designs that are non-compliant,” Prof. Jayagopal warns. According to Sriprakash Shastry, Partner at Aswathnarayan & Eswaran LLP, the most common and dangerous non-compliance involves misapplication of foreign codes: “We’ve seen instances where structures in India are designed using foreign wind or seismic standards, or worse, Indian seismic/wind data is used with foreign load combinations. These hybrids are structurally unsound and potentially fatal. Yet clients remain unaware and focus solely on cost.”
Even within academic circles, there are misconceptions about the design intent of PEBs. Some journal articles, for instance, compare Indian codes unfavourably to foreign standards, suggesting that Indian provisions are more conservative. But such observations often stem from a fragmented understanding of both the holistic PEB design process and the legal obligations of practicing engineers in India. “It is vital to understand that Indian standards like IS 800 and IS 875 mandate Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD),” clarifies Prof. Jayagopal. “There is no scope for Allowable Stress Design (WSD), and load combinations from different codes cannot be arbitrarily mixed.”
Ultimately, the misuse or outright neglect of BIS codes is not just a technical lapse, but a compliance failure with potentially catastrophic consequences. For the Indian PEB sector to mature responsibly, strict adherence to national codes must be non-negotiable, and client education must be part of the process, not an afterthought.
| Common Deviations from Code Provisions
Several common deviations from code provisions are observed in PEB construction:
|
The Consultant’s Dilemma: Navigating Authority, Assumptions, and Accuracy
Structural consultants in India often find themselves marginalised in the project lifecycle, brought in only after critical design decisions have been made. In turnkey contracts, their role is further diluted, their authority curtailed, and their cautionary inputs sometimes dismissed in favour of cost-driven alternatives. Shastry recalls several instances where red flags raised by consultants were overridden, resulting in long-term compromises to structural integrity.
PEB designers, meanwhile, face a distinct set of challenges in delivering structures that are both optimal and code-compliant. A crucial aspect, they note, lies in client education particularly in dispelling the misconception that PEBs are universally cost-effective. “PEB systems may not be economical for small built-up areas, irregular layouts, or complex roof geometries,” cautions Prof. Jayagopal. He adds that experienced engineers typically recommend pinned base columns which do not transmit building moments to the foundations over fixed-base connections, especially for industrial-scale builds. “This fundamental assumption should be explicitly stated in the specification document,” he advises, noting that failure to do so often leads to mismatched expectations or design inefficiencies.
Another recurring challenge is the miscommunication or omission of collateral loads, the loads that are not part of the primary structure but still need to be supported by it. These include mechanical pipes, electrical conduits, ducts, and false ceilings. “Clearly specifying the nature, position, magnitude, and arrangement of these loads is critical for achieving an economical and efficient structural design,” says Prof. Jayagopal. He illustrates this with a simple but powerful example: “If the location and load of heavy electrical conduits are known in advance, there’s no need to overdesign all roof purlins. Only the specific line carrying the load needs to be designed accordingly.” This level of clarity in design assumptions and load communication, he stresses, is what separates an overbuilt structure from an optimised one and ensures safety without inflating cost.
Code vs Cost: The Tug of War
In many PEB contracts, minimising steel tonnage becomes the defining metric of success, often at the cost of structural integrity. Shastry highlights that while the tonnage difference among technically sound bids should ideally fall within 4–5 per cent, tenders often see discrepancies as high as 30 per cent, which indicates over-optimisation that undermines the original design intent. “STAAD is not a magic wand. The engineer’s mind is,” Shastry asserts, emphasising that sound engineering judgment must prevail over software-driven shortcuts.
Shastry further outlines the responsibility shared by all stakeholders:
- Consultants, he says, must be fully conversant with code provisions and should guide PEB vendors to quote accurately.
- PEB vendors should act ethically, optimising designs within the spirit and stipulations of the tender rather than simply chasing minimal tonnage.
- And most importantly, clients must remember that buildings outlast procurement cycles.
“Procurement people keep changing, but the building is eternal,” Shastry notes. “Once all vendors are on a level playing field, the commercial decision can be taken, but never at the expense of safety or durability.”
For Mahendra Waghule, Head of Projects & Development at Horizon Industrial Parks, technical competence takes precedence over mere cost metrics. “The experience of the design team and the value they add during early-stage discussions is a key differentiator,” he says.
Beyond design expertise, Horizon evaluates vendors on several other fronts:
- Material quality and sourcing, which directly impact the durability and long-term performance of the building.
- Manufacturing capabilities, including production capacity, proximity to site, adoption of advanced machinery, and strict QA/QC adherence.
- Installation efficiency, which includes the deployment of skilled manpower and appropriate machinery for smooth execution.
“We independently vet the structural design submittals from vendors through our own team of experts,” Waghule confirms, reinforcing the importance of an independent layer of technical due diligence.
While PEB systems offer clear advantages in terms of economy, speed, and scalability, their success ultimately hinges on one non-negotiable factor: compliance with national codes and standards. “Non-compliance, whether due to cost-cutting or misinterpretation of design fundamentals, poses serious structural risks,” warns Prof. Jayagopal. He adds that these risks are often invisible during construction but may become catastrophically evident over time.
Pullout:
The message is clear: in the tug of war between code and cost, it’s engineering ethics, not economics, that must hold the line.
Striking Right Balance: Optimising Costs Without Compromising Codes
While the Indian PEB industry faces increasing scrutiny for allegedly prioritising cost over compliance, a growing number of companies are setting a different benchmark, one where cost-efficiency coexists with structural integrity. These firms are not only adhering to IS codes and design standards, but are also innovating within those boundaries to deliver optimised yet compliant solutions.
For Waghule, the key lies in collaborating with vendors who understand that affordability must not come at the cost of safety. “We work with suppliers who can provide cost-effective solutions while strictly adhering to design codes, quality benchmarks, and material specifications,” he explains. “To ensure clarity and compliance, we provide well-defined specifications upfront.” Waghule’s team also engages Third-Party Inspection (TPI) agencies to conduct rigorous quality checks, both during fabrication and site installation. “Our approach is rooted in delivering the right design, quality, and safety at the right price,” he affirms.
Kirby Building Systems, one of India’s pioneering PEB manufacturers, has engineered a process where cost-efficiency and code compliance are not mutually exclusive. “We achieve this balance by using tapered built-up sections tailored to bending moment profiles, ensuring steel is used only where structurally necessary,” explains PV Mohan, CEO of Kirby Building Systems & Structures India Pvt Ltd. Leveraging tools such as BIM, STAAD Pro, Tekla, and in-house proprietary software, Kirby fine-tunes layouts to reduce material without sacrificing performance. “Standardised modular designs, precision-driven prefabrication, and adherence to IS codes allow us to deliver safe, durable, and cost-effective solutions,” he adds.
Similarly, Everest Industries has institutionalised a design philosophy that integrates economy with safety. “At Everest, our engineers apply robust design principles, advanced manufacturing practices, and efficient erection methodologies to optimise steel usage without compromising on integrity,” says Dr. P Ravindra Murthy, GM and Head of Engineering.
Everest also places strong emphasis on continuous learning, hosting internal workshops and adopting a “train-the-trainer” approach to deepen code literacy across its engineering teams.
From a sales and solutions standpoint, Apex Buildsys emphasises the inherent flexibility PEBs offer in tailoring members to suit load and span requirements. “PEBs allow us to vary depth and thickness of structural elements for optimal efficiency,” notes Rakesh Chopra, National Head (Sales), Apex Buildsys. “This adaptability helps us balance cost with strict adherence to safety and code compliance.”
For Interarch Buildings, the order of priorities is non-negotiable. “Code compliance is our foremost priority. Only after fully adhering to relevant standards do we explore cost optimisation,” asserts Navaz Malikakkal, COO, Interarch Buildings. Interarch’s methodology includes rationalising bay spacing, selecting efficient sections, and analysing structural behavior – all within a well-defined compliance framework.
Amit Agarwal, Director at Ashtech Prefab (India) Pvt Ltd, echoes a similar philosophy. “We use value engineering and advanced software to optimise cost, but never at the expense of code adherence,” he states. “Our teams ensure every material and section selection is done with reference to IS 800 and IS 875, delivering structures that are safe, functional, and economical.”
Ensuring Code Compliance: Robust Internal Checks in Structural Design
Adherence to the Indian Standards, particularly IS 800 (General Construction in Steel) and IS 875 (Loads), is critical to the safety, durability, and reliability of steel structures. Experts across the industry emphasize that a disciplined approach to code compliance must underpin every phase of design and execution. So, what internal mechanisms do leading firms implement to ensure these standards are met rigorously?
A Multi-Layered Review Framework:
At Kirby Building Systems, Mohan explains, “We custom-design each project using the latest domestic and international codes, including IS 800, IS 875, and others such as MBMA, AISC, and AWS. Our in-house engineering team manages every project with strict adherence to these codes. Utilising advanced design tools like MBS and ETABS, we model and analyse structures early in the design stage to identify any potential compliance issues.” He further describes a comprehensive internal review system: “Every design undergoes multiple peer reviews and cross-checks by senior engineers and managers. Beyond design validation, all inspections, tests, and compliance documentation are meticulously tracked through our SAP-based ERP system. This ensures full traceability and accountability throughout the project lifecycle.”
Quality Assurance and Continuous Training:
Agarwal highlights the importance of a systematic quality assurance process. “Our approach involves a multi-tier system where senior structural engineers conduct detailed peer reviews. We rely on internal design checklists aligned with IS 800, IS 875 (Parts I to V), and project-specific codes like the National Building Code (NBC) and IS 1893 for seismic zones. Continuous training and periodic audits enable us to detect any deviations early, maintaining a high level of code compliance.” Interestingly, Malikakkal echoes this view, underscoring the role of both knowledge and process: “We ensure that all our engineers are thoroughly familiar with the relevant provisions of IS 800, IS 875, and other codes. Each design is peer-reviewed by team leads or senior engineers, creating a robust multi-tier review process. We also conduct regular internal training sessions to keep our engineers updated on any new codes or amendments.”
Leveraging Technology and Expertise:
Chopra explains that strict adherence to Indian Standards extends to every design document. “Our internal checks include peer reviews, design audits, and continuous training to stay current on code revisions. We use validated software tools aligned with IS codes to cross-verify compliance throughout the design process.” However, Dr. Murthy adds that the discipline of layered scrutiny is fundamental to maintaining quality and precision. “We follow a stringent multi-tiered review process where every design, drawing, and technical document is carefully examined by senior engineers and team leads during quality checks. This layered validation ensures consistent compliance at every stage.”
| Safety Through Systematic Compliance
The collective insight from these industry leaders makes it clear that strict code adherence is far from incidental; it requires intentional, methodical internal controls, continuous learning, and use of advanced engineering tools. This disciplined framework not only ensures compliance with IS 800 and IS 875 but also safeguards the structural integrity and longevity of steel buildings, ultimately protecting client investments and public safety. |
Client Awareness: Progress Made, Yet More to Do
A key question confronting the steel construction industry is whether clients truly understand the critical importance of structural code compliance. The consensus among industry leaders is clear: while awareness has improved, it remains uneven and incomplete.
Mohan shares a balanced perspective: “Client awareness about code compliance has definitely improved over time, but it’s not yet universal. Many clients juggle numerous responsibilities beyond the PEB component, so their understanding of the vital role played by compliance in safety, durability, and regulatory approval varies. Regardless, we never compromise on standards or code requirements. Kirby positions itself as a partner by proactively advising and educating clients throughout the project lifecycle. Our technical teams don’t just deliver compliant structures, they engage clients with clear communication, adapt designs to local codes, and provide ongoing supervision to ensure safety and quality. We continue investing in seminars and advisory services to close any remaining knowledge gaps.”
Malikakkal highlights an important divide: “Institutional clients and experienced consultants typically grasp the importance of compliance. However, awareness is often lacking in private developers or smaller players, where cost and speed frequently take precedence over structural integrity. The situation is worsened by the absence of rigorous structural audits in our approval processes – a common safeguard in many other countries. As engineers, we see educating clients as part of our role. We emphasise the long-term risks of non-compliance and how adherence to codes benefits safety, durability, and legal accountability.”
Chopra echoes this nuanced view: “Awareness around structural compliance has been growing, but there is still ambiguity in many projects. Some clients prioritise cost and timelines over technical rigor, which can result in gaps in understanding the full significance of compliant design.” Dr. Murthy adds an optimistic note on evolving industry attitudes: “Many clients today do recognise the importance of code compliance. However, the broader ecosystem including developers, contractors, and even end-users still needs better education about the long-term advantages of adhering to structural standards. Enhanced awareness will elevate the overall quality and safety of PEB structures across India.”
Agarwal also stresses the role of industry professionals in client education: “Large corporate clients and EPC contractors are usually well-informed. But many private sector or SME clients often focus more on cost and timelines than on technical due diligence. Educating clients on why compliance is non-negotiable for structural stability, safety, durability, and legal reasons is a vital responsibility for us as engineers.”
| A Collective Responsibility
The recurring theme across these perspectives is clear. Client education and proactive communication must go hand-in-hand with strict internal compliance. As the industry advances, closing awareness gaps through seminars, advisory services, and transparent dialogue remains crucial to fostering safer, code-compliant structures nationwide. |
Balancing Act: The Challenges of Cost, Compliance, and Structural Integrity
Ensuring that designs are both cost-effective and rigorously code-compliant is a complex balancing act faced by every player in the PEB industry. The insights from seasoned experts reveal a multi-faceted challenge shaped by technical, economic, and regulatory realities. Mohan underscores the multifarious nature of these challenges: “As a leading PEB manufacturer, we constantly strive to optimise material use and control costs without compromising code compliance or structural soundness. Steel prices, which account for 65 to 70 per cent of total PEB costs, fluctuate unpredictably, impacting both procurement and pricing strategies. We mitigate this by maintaining strong partnerships with major steel mills to ensure quality and competitive pricing.”
Mohan further adds, “A unique challenge in India is the absence of dedicated national standards specifically for PEBs, unlike in the US or Europe. This requires careful interpretation and selection of applicable codes such as AISC, MBMA, and IS standards tailored to each project’s needs. Moreover, every sector and client demands customised, flexible solutions, adding complexity to design compliance. Supply chain disruptions, logistics, and quality control also impact consistency, alongside limited availability of skilled manpower for design and site execution. Finally, tight project timelines add pressure on teams to deliver compliant, cost-effective, and structurally robust solutions quickly.”
Agarwal highlights practical difficulties in stakeholder alignment and data reliability: “Managing client expectations remains a challenge, especially when they push to reduce steel tonnage or accelerate delivery. Soil reports and local site data can be inconsistent, complicating code-based design. Moreover, achieving consensus among architects, consultants, and contractors on code interpretation can sometimes delay progress.”
Malikakkal points out regulatory and ethical hurdles: “Certain IS code provisions are ambiguous, leading to industry-wide inconsistencies. We actively engage with the Bureau of Indian Standards to clarify these areas or suggest modifications. The lack of a regulatory body to routinely vet private industrial designs means enforcement is uneven, creating challenges in uniform compliance. While automation helps, human oversight is still essential, so our internal review mechanisms are critical to maintaining integrity. Additionally, client pressure for cheaper solutions sometimes threatens to compromise design parameters. However, engineering ethics and robust internal processes guide us to prioritise safety above all else.”
Chopra draws attention to competitive and logistical constraints stating, “Maintaining price competitiveness during bidding while ensuring full code compliance is a perennial challenge. At times, availability of non-standard material sizes creates design and logistical constraints that we must carefully navigate to maintain structural integrity.” Dr. Murthy reframes compliance as a responsibility, not a challenge, asserting “For us, code compliance is fundamental, not an obstacle. We emphasise continuous training and collaboration with institutions to stay current on evolving standards. That said, the industry would greatly benefit from a collective regulatory framework defining best practices in design, manufacturing, and erection for PEBs.”
| Collaboration and Commitment as Keys to Success
From fluctuating raw material prices to ambiguous codes and stakeholder coordination, the path to achieving cost-effective yet code-compliant PEB designs is laden with challenges. What emerges is a clear need for collaboration between manufacturers, clients, regulators, and engineers and a steadfast commitment to engineering ethics and rigorous internal processes to ensure safety and structural soundness are never compromised. |
Code, Commitment & Credibility – Where Does the Industry Stand?
The PEB segment in India stands at a pivotal juncture where engineering ambition must consistently align with regulatory discipline. This story has uncovered a revealing distinction between two ends of the spectrum: at one end, the top-tier PEB manufacturers who uphold code compliance as non-negotiable; at the other, a segment of low-cost operators who often trade off technical rigor for quick deliveries and reduced costs.
From the perspective of leading consultants, the message is clear: the indiscriminate adoption of foreign codes, misinterpretation of IS standards, and lack of structural audits present risks that go beyond commercial setbacks – they threaten life and property. The resolute consultants observed that while institutional clients and experienced stakeholders understand the value of compliance, smaller developers and uninformed end-users often fall prey to price-first pitches, overlooking the long-term implications of non-adherence.
On the other hand, established players have demonstrated that it is possible to deliver high-quality, cost-effective, and timely solutions without ever compromising on IS 800, IS 875, NBC, or seismic codes. Their success lies in robust internal checks, multi-layered peer reviews, continual staff training, and the use of advanced design and validation software, all underpinned by a culture of engineering ethics and accountability. These firms have built their reputation not just on speed and scale, but on trust and technical integrity.
Yet, the perception of PEBs is sometimes unfairly coloured by the actions of less compliant players. This not only affects market confidence, but also places undue burden on responsible vendors to constantly differentiate themselves.
As the sector matures, the challenge is no longer one of knowledge or capability, but of consistent industry-wide enforcement and education.
So, the question we leave you with is this: Can India’s PEB industry rise uniformly to the standards set by its best, or will the gap between compliance and compromise continue to define its narrative?
| Have Your Say:
What’s your view on structural code compliance in the PEB sector? Share your perspective and contribute to the ongoing conversation. Scan the QR Code here to join the dialogue. |
QuoteShoot:
“We partner with vendors who deliver cost-effective solutions without compromising on design codes, quality standards, and material specifications. Clear, upfront specifications help ensure transparency and compliance throughout the process.”
- Mahendra Waghule, Head of Projects & Development, Horizon Industrial Parks
“Introducing dedicated and exclusive guidelines for the PEB industry within the IS codes is essential to bring uniformity and discipline among suppliers. It will prevent misinterpretation, curb dilution of standards, and support the sector’s long-term growth.”
- PV Mohan, CEO, Kirby Building Systems & Structures India Pvt Ltd
“There are several instances where structural or design compromises due to cost optimisation are made, but in our projects, we review designs very closely and ensure full code compliance.”
- Sriprakash Shastry, Partner, Aswathnarayan & Eswaran LLP
“Addressing the current design and compliance challenges while embracing the future trends will be key to the continued success and responsible growth of the PEB industry in India.”
- Prof. L.S. Jayagopal, Managing Director, Mithran Structures
“A formally recognised industry body comprising key stakeholders is crucial for PEB sector. By driving standardised best practices aligned with national and international codes, such a body would ensure structural integrity while enabling sustainable industry growth”
- Dr. P. Ravindra Murthy, GM (Head of Engineering), Everest Industries
“Third-party structural reviews play a vital role in reinforcing integrity, promoting accountability, and preventing commercial pressures from driving non-compliance. They also offer clients and end-users an added layer of safety and assurance.”
- Navaz Malikakkal, COO, Interarch Buildings
“Awareness of structural code compliance has grown, but ambiguity still persists across many projects. When cost and timelines are prioritized over technical rigor, the long-term value of code-compliant design is often overlooked.”
- Rakesh Chopra, National Head (Sales), Apex Buildsys
“Third-party vetting fosters accountability and transparency, while driving design optimization within the bounds of compliance. It builds trust with clients and regulators alike, and plays a key role in elevating industry standards.”
- Amit Agarwal, Director, Ashtech Prefab (India) Pvt Ltd
For images use the link below from various folders:
https://drive.google.com/drive/u/5/folders/1i_PACcomw5ogHYuAcrS6MkF4JM0O9ao8
In the Box:
What Clients Should Know?
Code Compliance Is Non-Negotiable
Insist that your project complies with all relevant IS Codes (e.g., IS 800, IS 875, IS 456). Non-compliance isn’t just risky, it’s illegal.
Ask for a Compliance Declaration
Ensure your structural engineer or design consultant provides a written statement confirming adherence to applicable IS Codes.
Verify Your Project’s Approval Path
All building designs must go through approval from local development authorities, based on compliance with the National Building Code and relevant IS Codes.
Request Third-Party Peer Review
For critical infrastructure, always ask for an independent design review by a licensed third-party structural consultant.
Demand a Geotechnical Report
Before design even begins, confirm that your site has undergone a certified soil investigation. Many structural failures begin below ground.
Know the Risks of Non-Compliance
- Legal penalties & delays
- Structural failures & financial losses
- Insurance claim rejections
- Reputational damage
Ensure Fire & Seismic Safety Provisions
Ask: Have IS 875 (wind load), IS 1893 (earthquake load), and fire norms under NBC 2016 been factored into the design?
Request BIM or 3D Modelling for Visibility
Demand transparency. Today’s advanced tools can show you how your building performs under code-specified conditions, don’t settle for 2D drawings.
Insist on Site Supervision
Ask: Is there a qualified engineer verifying that what’s being built matches the code-approved drawings?
Don’t Cut Corners, Cut Risks
Choosing cost over code compliance is never worth it. Insist on quality materials, certified welders/fabricators, and code-trained professionals.
Sidebar:
IS Codes: Facts & Myths
- Myth: IS Codes Are Merely Guidelines, Not Mandatory
Fact: IS Codes are not optional. In India, adherence to IS Codes is legally mandated under the National Building Code (NBC). Non-compliance can lead to severe penalties, including fines and imprisonment. For instance, failure to submit Form B or maintain functional fire safety equipment can result in penalties, including fines and imprisonment ranging from six months to three years.
- Fact: Non-Compliance Leads to Structural Failures
Insight: A significant number of building failures in India stem from non-compliance with IS Codes. Factors such as lack of professional integrity, use of substandard materials, and inadequate inspections contribute to these failures.
- Fact: Fire Safety Violations Are Rampant
Insight: Between November 2021 and April 2022, the Mumbai fire brigade inspected 329 buildings and issued notices to 151 for fire safety, included non-functional firefighting systems.
- Myth: Pre-Engineered Buildings (PEBs) Lack Durability
Fact: Modern PEBs, when constructed adhering to IS Codes, can be highly durable. They utilise high-quality materials and are designed to withstand natural forces like earthquakes and heavy winds.
- Fact: IS Codes Cover a Wide Spectrum
Insight: There are over 20,000 IS Codes in India, covering various aspects of civil engineering. Key codes include IS 456 for reinforced concrete structures, IS 800 for steel structures, and IS 875 for design loads.
- Myth: Structural Failures Are Solely Due to Design Flaws
Fact: Many structural failures result from inadequate geotechnical investigations and foundation issues, not just design flaws. Proper soil analysis is crucial for structural integrity.
- Fact: Regular Updates Enhance Safety
Insight: The National Building Code has incorporated updated structural design provisions for wind and seismic loads, helipad loads, and blast loads to ensure disaster-resilient buildings.
