## 6 Conclusions  
This study presents a comprehensive seismic performance assessment of the historic Church of Santo Tomas de Aquino in Rondocan, Peru, using advanced numerical modeling  
Figure 17: Acceleration–displacement response spectra for the LS limit state (return period of 475 years) and capacity curves of the (**a**) south lateral wall, (**b**) north lateral wall, (**c**) main facade, and (**d**) rear facade. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline  & **Units** & **South Lateral Wall** & **North Lateral Wall** & **Main Fagade** & **Rear Facade** \\ \hline \(a_{0}\) & - & 0.12 & 0.10 & 0.26 & 0.12 \\ \(M^{\ast}\) & kg & 771,469 & 1,097,670 & 688,954 & 517,206 \\ \(e^{\ast}\) & - & 0.96 & 0.96 & 1.00 & 1.00 \\ \(a_{0}^{\ast}\) & g & **0.12** & **0.10** & **0.26** & **0.12** \\ \hline \(a_{S}\)(for DL) & g & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**0.174**} \\  & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Not verified**} & **Not verified** & **Verified** & **Not verified** \\ \hline \(a_{S}/g\)(for LS) & g & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**0.15**} \\  & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Not verified**} & **Not verified** & **Verified** & **Not verified** \\ \hline \(\theta\) & \(\circ\) & 7.41 & 6.49 & 14.66 & 6.71 \\ \(d_{0}\) & m & 0.94 & 0.98 & 3.15 & 1.39 \\ \(d_{S}^{\ast}\) & m & 0.62 & 0.61 & 1.40 & 0.58 \\ \(d_{S}^{\ast}\) & m & **0.25** & **0.24** & **0.56** & **0.23** \\ \(d_{S}^{\ast}\) & g & 0.07 & 0.06 & 0.16 & 0.07 \\ \(T_{IS}^{\ast}\) & s & 3.08 & 3.38 & 3.17 & 3.05 \\ \(\Delta_{A}(T_{IS})\) & m & **0.22** & **0.22** & **0.22** & **0.22** \\  & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Verified**} & **Verified** & **Verified** & **Verified** \\ Safety index & - & 1.11 & 1.08 & 2.50 & 1.03 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Parameters used in the seismic safety assessment of the four out-of-plane mechanisms. techniques. Despite conservation efforts undertaken between 1996 and 1997, the structure exhibits significant vulnerabilities, notably at the intersections of lateral walls and facades. A finite-element model employing a macro-modeling approach was developed and calibrated using in situ sonic and ambient vibration tests. The results confirmed that the timber tie beams contribute to the global structural behavior under low-intensity seismic excitation. Their effectiveness in resisting moderate to strong seismic forces is largely determined by the condition and integrity of their mechanical connections. Notably, all nonlinear analyses were performed assuming that existing cracks in the rear facade had been repaired and that effective connections exist at wall-to-wall and wall-to-buttress interfaces. These assumptions must be verified or achieved in future conservation actions to ensure the validity of the numerical predictions. The accuracy and relevance of numerical simulations in heritage structures heavily rely on their calibration using field data. In this context, in situ inspections and experimental campaigns are indispensable. They provide critical information about material properties, boundary conditions, existing damage, and the effectiveness of previous interventions. This information is essential not only for model validation but also for reducing uncertainties in the assessment of seismic performance. When dealing with historically and culturally significant structures, the availability of experimental data becomes even more vital, as it informs appropriate intervention strategies that balance safety and preservation. The model effectively replicated observed damage patterns, particularly at the wall corners, highlighting the vulnerability of different structural elements. The nonlinear pushover analyses showed that seismic loading along the transverse axis (X direction) produced widespread damage, while longitudinal loading (Y direction) concentrated the damage within either the main or rear facade, depending on the loading direction. The rear (east) facade was identified as the element most vulnerable to out-of-plane collapse, with a maximum load factor of 0.17 g, even under idealized conditions (assuming repaired cracks).