Bibliographic citations
Parra, K., Morales, F. (2022). Influencia de la ubicación vertical de los amortiguadores de masa sintonizada en las respuestas dinámicas sísmicas de una edificación multifamiliar de 10 pisos, ubicado en el distrito de Cercado de Lima [Tesis, Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC)]. http://hdl.handle.net/10757/660449
Parra, K., Morales, F. Influencia de la ubicación vertical de los amortiguadores de masa sintonizada en las respuestas dinámicas sísmicas de una edificación multifamiliar de 10 pisos, ubicado en el distrito de Cercado de Lima [Tesis]. PE: Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC); 2022. http://hdl.handle.net/10757/660449
@misc{sunedu/3175302,
title = "Influencia de la ubicación vertical de los amortiguadores de masa sintonizada en las respuestas dinámicas sísmicas de una edificación multifamiliar de 10 pisos, ubicado en el distrito de Cercado de Lima",
author = "Morales Palomino, Francois Jordi",
publisher = "Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC)",
year = "2022"
}
In this investigation, a study of the influence of the location of the tuned mass dampers (AMS) on the dynamic seismic responses of a reinforced concrete building located in the Cercado de Lima district was carried out. For the investigation, a building of a multifamily dwelling with a 1 basement and 10 floors was modeled. It was determined that the building under study is regular in the X and Y directions; and that in the X-X direction the building presents a system of structural walls and in the Y-Y direction a dual system. The AMS was considered, with a weight of 1% with respect to the weight of the building and a damping factor of 20%. For the seismic analysis, seismic records were used, such as the 1996 Lima and Callao earthquake, the 2001 southern Peru earthquake and the 2007 Pisco earthquake. As part of the process, 11 models of the building were generated to perform the seismic analysis without AMS and the analysis in the 10 remaining models, in the latter the AMS was iterated from floor 1 to floor 10, in order to compare the results of each of them with the results of the model without AMS. Subsequently, a dynamic analysis of time history was applied in each of the models described above, to compare the dynamic responses of the mezzanine. The results show that by incorporating the AMS in the building, the lateral displacements in the X-X direction are efficiently reduced when the AMS is placed on the top floor, with a maximum value of 35% reduction; and in the Y-Y direction they are efficiently reduced when the AMS is placed on the different floors, with a greater percentage of reduction when the AMS is located on the 10th floor, with a maximum value of 49.4%. Comparing the results of the interstory drifts between the model without AMS and the models with AMS, reduction results are obtained when the AMS locates on the last floor, in the X-X direction with a maximum value of 40% and 49.7% in the X-X direction. Y-Y. Likewise, the acceleration reduction percentages when the AMS is located on the 10th floor, in the X-X direction with a maximum value of 19.3, in the Y-Y direction with a maximum value of 9.2%. The shear forces are efficiently reduced when the AMS is located on the 10th floor, in the direction with a maximum value of 37.7%, in the Y-Y direction with a maximum value of 40.4%. The location of the AMS on the 9th and 10th floors increases the stiffness in the X-X direction with maximum values of 22.7% and 22.4%, respectively; and in the Y-Y direction, the location of the AMS on the 9th and 10th floors increases with maximum values of 9.2% and 9.34%, respectively.
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License