Saltar al contenido
República del Perú · Observatorio de la producción científica universitaria
OApol.org Observatorio de Inteligencia Científica Universitaria del Perú
OApol.org
Inicio Universidades Publicaciones Investigadores
Repositorios
Tesis y trabajos académicosRevistas
Indicadores
Ranking trimestralRanking por carreraObjetivos de Desarrollo SostenibleReporte OCDERed neuronal 3D
Acerca
MetodologíaPrivacidad

Comparative Analysis of the Structural Performance of Lightweight Arch-Type Roofs with Mixed and Self-Supporting Systems under Peruvian Standard E.030 for a 15 m Clear Span

Del Aguila J.E.A.; Escobar S.R.; De La Cruz Vega S.A. · Civil Engineering and Architecture (2026) · DOI: 10.13189/cea.2026.141332

Resumen

The objective was to conduct a comparative analysis of the structural performance of lightweight arch-type roofs with mixed and self-supporting systems under Peruvian Standard E.030 for a 15 m clear span. This study employed an applied research methodology with a descriptive design and a quantitative approach. The data collection technique used was observation, and the instrument employed was an observation sheet for the systematic recording and analysis of structural data. Initial data were collected based on the environmental and structural conditions in the city of Lima. The study concluded that the Self-Supporting System proved to be the most advantageous option in critical aspects such as seismic safety and material economy, showing a reduction of approximately 40% in critical lateral displacements and a 33.45% decrease in the total structural weight compared to the mixed truss system. This enhances stiffness, increases the safety margin during earthquakes, and reduces the load on the foundation. The mixed (trussed) system performed better at handling and spreading internal stresses, with much lower bending moments and shear forces in its elements. This makes sizing the structure easier and gives it more strength under strong wind loads. So, self-supporting systems are a good choice for seismic zones because they’re stiff and lightweight, while mixed systems work well for projects with longer spans or where the profiles don’t need to be as strong.

Instituciones: Universidad César Vallejo