Comparative analysis of buildings with armed concrete structural systems: “Duales versus Diagrid”.

Descripción del Articulo

In order to investigate the seismic behavior of the concrete Diagrid structures, 03 models of 06-level buildings are proposed with a typical 30 m x 37.5 m plant located in an area of high seismicity in Peru. A comparative analysis has been made between two structural systems on the one hand the conv...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor: Núñez Herrera, José Luis
Formato: artículo
Fecha de Publicación:2019
Institución:Universidad Privada de Tacna
Repositorio:Revista UPT - Veritas et Scientia
Lenguaje:español
OAI Identifier:oai:ojs2.172.30.101.191:article/74
Enlace del recurso:http://revistas.upt.edu.pe/ojs/index.php/vestsc/article/view/74
Nivel de acceso:acceso abierto
id 2617-0639_10404cd14f6aa9c56927e58b7b740841
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs2.172.30.101.191:article/74
network_acronym_str 2617-0639
repository_id_str
network_name_str Revista UPT - Veritas et Scientia
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Comparative analysis of buildings with armed concrete structural systems: “Duales versus Diagrid”.
Análisis comparativo de edificios con sistemas estructurales de concreto armado: “Duales versus Diagrid”.
title Comparative analysis of buildings with armed concrete structural systems: “Duales versus Diagrid”.
spellingShingle Comparative analysis of buildings with armed concrete structural systems: “Duales versus Diagrid”.
Núñez Herrera, José Luis
title_short Comparative analysis of buildings with armed concrete structural systems: “Duales versus Diagrid”.
title_full Comparative analysis of buildings with armed concrete structural systems: “Duales versus Diagrid”.
title_fullStr Comparative analysis of buildings with armed concrete structural systems: “Duales versus Diagrid”.
title_full_unstemmed Comparative analysis of buildings with armed concrete structural systems: “Duales versus Diagrid”.
title_sort Comparative analysis of buildings with armed concrete structural systems: “Duales versus Diagrid”.
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Núñez Herrera, José Luis
author Núñez Herrera, José Luis
author_facet Núñez Herrera, José Luis
author_role author
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv In order to investigate the seismic behavior of the concrete Diagrid structures, 03 models of 06-level buildings are proposed with a typical 30 m x 37.5 m plant located in an area of high seismicity in Peru. A comparative analysis has been made between two structural systems on the one hand the conventional or orthogonal system and on the other the Diagrid system of reinforced concrete, for the latter two types or models that we will call type A and type B, whose modulation will be analyzed, will be analyzed. every 02 and 04 floors respectively. The three models will have the same characteristics; roofed area, dimensions in plan and elevation, construction materials and loading loads, geographical location, soil type, use and importance, Basic Coefficient of Reduction of the Seismic Force (Ro), these characteristics generate the factors that are regulated by E.030.2016 that defines the procedure for seismic analysis. In this research it has been shown that of the buildings studied (03 models) those with the structural Diagrid system of reinforced concrete (Diagrid type A and Diagrid type B) are more efficient than the conventional system (frames with structural walls), weight of the structure results in lower costs and lower demands of foundation structures of the three models, the lightest is the Diagrid type B system, both Diagrid systems are 30% lighter than the conventional system, the amount of steel needed to the diagonals of the Diagrid type A systems is 29% less than the longitudinal steel required for the structural walls of the conventional system, while Diagrid type B, requires 40% less than the conventional system.
Con la finalidad de investigar el comportamiento sísmico, de las estructuras Diagrid de concreto, se plantea 03 modelos de edificios de 06 niveles con una planta típica de 30 m x 37.5m ubicado en una zona de alta sismicidad en el Perú. Se ha realizado un análisis comparativo entre dos sistemas estructurales por un lado el Sistema Convencional u ortogonal y por el otro el sistema de Diagrid de Concreto armado, para este último se analizarán dos tipologías o modelos que denominaremos tipo A y tipo B, cuya modulación será cada 02 y 04 pisos respectivamente. Los tres modelos tendrán las mismas características; área techada, dimensiones en planta y elevación, materiales de construcción y solicitaciones de cargas, de ubicación geográfica, tipo de suelo, uso e importancia, Coeficiente Básico de Reducción de la Fuerza Sísmica (Ro), estas características generan los factores que están normados por la E.030.2016 que define el procedimiento para el análisis sísmico. En esta Investigación se ha demostrado que de los Edificios estudiado (03 modelos) los que son con el Sistema estructural Diagrid de concreto armado (Diagrid tipo A y Diagrid tipo B) son más eficientes que el Sistema convencional (pórticos con muros estructurales). El peso de la estructura redunda en menores costos y menores demandas de estructuras de cimentación de los tres modelos. El más liviano es el Sistema Diagrid tipo B. Ambos sistemas Diagrid son el 30% más livianos que el sistema convencional. La cantidad de acero necesaria para las diagonales de los sistemas Diagrid tipo A es 29% menos que el acero longitudinal necesarios para los muros estructurales del sistema convencional, mientras que Diagrid tipo B, requiere 40% menos que el sistema convencional.
description In order to investigate the seismic behavior of the concrete Diagrid structures, 03 models of 06-level buildings are proposed with a typical 30 m x 37.5 m plant located in an area of high seismicity in Peru. A comparative analysis has been made between two structural systems on the one hand the conventional or orthogonal system and on the other the Diagrid system of reinforced concrete, for the latter two types or models that we will call type A and type B, whose modulation will be analyzed, will be analyzed. every 02 and 04 floors respectively. The three models will have the same characteristics; roofed area, dimensions in plan and elevation, construction materials and loading loads, geographical location, soil type, use and importance, Basic Coefficient of Reduction of the Seismic Force (Ro), these characteristics generate the factors that are regulated by E.030.2016 that defines the procedure for seismic analysis. In this research it has been shown that of the buildings studied (03 models) those with the structural Diagrid system of reinforced concrete (Diagrid type A and Diagrid type B) are more efficient than the conventional system (frames with structural walls), weight of the structure results in lower costs and lower demands of foundation structures of the three models, the lightest is the Diagrid type B system, both Diagrid systems are 30% lighter than the conventional system, the amount of steel needed to the diagonals of the Diagrid type A systems is 29% less than the longitudinal steel required for the structural walls of the conventional system, while Diagrid type B, requires 40% less than the conventional system.
publishDate 2019
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2019-01-03
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://revistas.upt.edu.pe/ojs/index.php/vestsc/article/view/74
10.47796/ves.v7i2.74
url http://revistas.upt.edu.pe/ojs/index.php/vestsc/article/view/74
identifier_str_mv 10.47796/ves.v7i2.74
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv spa
language spa
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv http://revistas.upt.edu.pe/ojs/index.php/vestsc/article/view/74/67
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv Derechos de autor 2019 José Luis Núñez Herrera
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Derechos de autor 2019 José Luis Núñez Herrera
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidad Privada de Tacna
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidad Privada de Tacna
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv REVISTA VERITAS ET SCIENTIA - UPT; Vol. 7 Núm. 2 (2018): Veritas Et Scientia; pp. 970 - 979
JOURNAL VERITAS ET SCIENTIA - UPT; Vol 7 No 2 (2018): Veritas Et Scientia; pp. 970 - 979
2617-0639
2307-5139
10.47796/ves.v7i2
reponame:Revista UPT - Veritas et Scientia
instname:Universidad Privada de Tacna
instacron:UPT
reponame_str Revista UPT - Veritas et Scientia
collection Revista UPT - Veritas et Scientia
instname_str Universidad Privada de Tacna
instacron_str UPT
institution UPT
repository.name.fl_str_mv -
repository.mail.fl_str_mv mail@mail.com
_version_ 1701654247802667008
spelling Comparative analysis of buildings with armed concrete structural systems: “Duales versus Diagrid”.Análisis comparativo de edificios con sistemas estructurales de concreto armado: “Duales versus Diagrid”.Núñez Herrera, José LuisIn order to investigate the seismic behavior of the concrete Diagrid structures, 03 models of 06-level buildings are proposed with a typical 30 m x 37.5 m plant located in an area of high seismicity in Peru. A comparative analysis has been made between two structural systems on the one hand the conventional or orthogonal system and on the other the Diagrid system of reinforced concrete, for the latter two types or models that we will call type A and type B, whose modulation will be analyzed, will be analyzed. every 02 and 04 floors respectively. The three models will have the same characteristics; roofed area, dimensions in plan and elevation, construction materials and loading loads, geographical location, soil type, use and importance, Basic Coefficient of Reduction of the Seismic Force (Ro), these characteristics generate the factors that are regulated by E.030.2016 that defines the procedure for seismic analysis. In this research it has been shown that of the buildings studied (03 models) those with the structural Diagrid system of reinforced concrete (Diagrid type A and Diagrid type B) are more efficient than the conventional system (frames with structural walls), weight of the structure results in lower costs and lower demands of foundation structures of the three models, the lightest is the Diagrid type B system, both Diagrid systems are 30% lighter than the conventional system, the amount of steel needed to the diagonals of the Diagrid type A systems is 29% less than the longitudinal steel required for the structural walls of the conventional system, while Diagrid type B, requires 40% less than the conventional system.Con la finalidad de investigar el comportamiento sísmico, de las estructuras Diagrid de concreto, se plantea 03 modelos de edificios de 06 niveles con una planta típica de 30 m x 37.5m ubicado en una zona de alta sismicidad en el Perú. Se ha realizado un análisis comparativo entre dos sistemas estructurales por un lado el Sistema Convencional u ortogonal y por el otro el sistema de Diagrid de Concreto armado, para este último se analizarán dos tipologías o modelos que denominaremos tipo A y tipo B, cuya modulación será cada 02 y 04 pisos respectivamente. Los tres modelos tendrán las mismas características; área techada, dimensiones en planta y elevación, materiales de construcción y solicitaciones de cargas, de ubicación geográfica, tipo de suelo, uso e importancia, Coeficiente Básico de Reducción de la Fuerza Sísmica (Ro), estas características generan los factores que están normados por la E.030.2016 que define el procedimiento para el análisis sísmico. En esta Investigación se ha demostrado que de los Edificios estudiado (03 modelos) los que son con el Sistema estructural Diagrid de concreto armado (Diagrid tipo A y Diagrid tipo B) son más eficientes que el Sistema convencional (pórticos con muros estructurales). El peso de la estructura redunda en menores costos y menores demandas de estructuras de cimentación de los tres modelos. El más liviano es el Sistema Diagrid tipo B. Ambos sistemas Diagrid son el 30% más livianos que el sistema convencional. La cantidad de acero necesaria para las diagonales de los sistemas Diagrid tipo A es 29% menos que el acero longitudinal necesarios para los muros estructurales del sistema convencional, mientras que Diagrid tipo B, requiere 40% menos que el sistema convencional.Universidad Privada de Tacna2019-01-03info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttp://revistas.upt.edu.pe/ojs/index.php/vestsc/article/view/7410.47796/ves.v7i2.74REVISTA VERITAS ET SCIENTIA - UPT; Vol. 7 Núm. 2 (2018): Veritas Et Scientia; pp. 970 - 979JOURNAL VERITAS ET SCIENTIA - UPT; Vol 7 No 2 (2018): Veritas Et Scientia; pp. 970 - 9792617-06392307-513910.47796/ves.v7i2reponame:Revista UPT - Veritas et Scientiainstname:Universidad Privada de Tacnainstacron:UPTspahttp://revistas.upt.edu.pe/ojs/index.php/vestsc/article/view/74/67Derechos de autor 2019 José Luis Núñez Herrerahttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2021-06-04T16:25:13Zmail@mail.com -
score 13.910499
Nota importante:
La información contenida en este registro es de entera responsabilidad de la institución que gestiona el repositorio institucional donde esta contenido este documento o set de datos. El CONCYTEC no se hace responsable por los contenidos (publicaciones y/o datos) accesibles a través del Repositorio Nacional Digital de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación de Acceso Abierto (ALICIA).