Bibliographic citations
Anccasi, R., (2020). Propuesta de un método para el diseño de edificios con disipadores pasivos de energía utilizando registros sísmicos peruanos [Tesis, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú]. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/15598
Anccasi, R., Propuesta de un método para el diseño de edificios con disipadores pasivos de energía utilizando registros sísmicos peruanos [Tesis]. PE: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú; 2020. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/15598
@mastersthesis{renati/527889,
title = "Propuesta de un método para el diseño de edificios con disipadores pasivos de energía utilizando registros sísmicos peruanos",
author = "Anccasi Huayra, Rubén",
publisher = "Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú",
year = "2020"
}
This research has been carried out following the guidelines proposed by the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The design method consists in performing a dynamic nonlinear time history analysis, for which the SAP2000 software was used, based on the philosophy of performance design proposed by the Structural Engineers Associations of California (SEAOC) across the Vision2000 Committee. In order to compare the structural performance and the construction costs, a building located in the city of Lima was chosen, its use is essential. The building has four levels and has a regular configuration in plan and elevation. The structural system consists of reinforced concrete frames and a slab of 20cm of thick. The building does not comply with the lateral displacements, but by strength according to the limits established in the Peruvian Code (RNE). As a solution, two alternatives were proposed, an unconventional solution that consisted of incorporating energy damping and a conventional solution that consisted in increasing the size of the columns and beams until the expected performance of both buildings is similar. Both buildings should have an Operational and Life Safety performance for an earthquake of 475 and 970 years of return period, respectively. It was verified that the difference in construction costs is $ 1.29 / m2, with the unconventional building being the most economical. Both solutions fulfill with the expected performance.
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License