Fast Procedure for Practical Member Sizing Optimization of Steel Moment Frames
Publication: Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction
Volume 20, Issue 4
Abstract
A conceptually intuitive, computationally efficient iterative procedure is formulated to optimize the member sizes of regular steel moment frames under both lateral forces and gravity loads. This procedure aims to maximize the interstory drifts of a steel frame while satisfying code requirements on both individual member strength and story lateral stiffness. A key premise of the present optimization method is that the process of pushing the interstory drift profile of a steel frame toward the code-specified interstory drift limit (i.e., attaining a fully drifted state) is inherently accompanied by a reduction in the total steel weight of the frame. To attain the desired fully drifted state, an iterative scheme for the story-by-story updating of the column and beam sizes is provided. At each iteration, a steel member is resized according to the worst of its strength demand-to-capacity ratio and the interstory drift demand-to-limit ratio. The iterative process continues until the total steel weight of the frame has been reduced to a satisfactory level, and both member strength and interstory drift have met the code requirements. Member sizing optimization of three example steel moment frames with varied complexities is carried out using the present iterative procedure. Numerical results show that an improved frame design can be generated within a few iterations, and that this design compares favorably with the baseline frame design that results from weight minimization by either an exhaustive enumeration or a genetic algorithm. Therefore, the present iterative procedure is an appealing tool for practical design optimization of steel frames.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
Ahrari, A., and Atai, A. A. (2013). “Fully stressed design evolution strategy for shape and size optimization of truss structures.” Comput. Struct., 123(Jul), 58–67.
AISC. (2005). Steel construction manual, 13th Ed., Chicago.
AISC. (2010). AISC seismic provisions for structural steel buildings. Chicago.
American Concrete Institute (ACI). (2008). “Building code requirements for structural concrete.” ACI 318-08 and Commentary, Farmington Hills, MI.
Arora, J. S. (2007). Optimization of structural and mechanical systems, World Scientific, Hackensack, NJ.
ASCE. (2010). “Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures.” ASCE 7, Reston, VA.
Burns, S. A., ed. (2002). Recent advances in optimal structural designs, ASCE, Reston, VA.
Deb, K. (2001). Multi-objective optimization using evolutionary algorithms, Wiley, London.
FEMA. (2000a). “Recommended seismic design criteria for new steel moment-frame buildings.” FEMA 350, Washington, DC.
FEMA. (2000b). “State of the art report on systems performance of steel moment frames subject to earthquake ground shaking.” FEMA 355-C, Washington, DC.
Gustafson, M. (2010). “Consideration of practical design issues in formulating structural optimization for design automation.” Proc., Structures Congress 2010: 19th Analysis and Computation Specialty Conf., S. Senapathi, K. Casey, and M. Hoit, eds., ASCE, Reston, VA, 467–479.
Hajirasouliha, I., Asadi, P., and Pilakoutas, K. (2012). “An efficient performance-based seismic design method for reinforced concrete frames.” Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dynam., 41(4), 663–679.
Kirsch, U. (1993). Structural optimization: Fundamentals and applications, Springer, New York.
Liu, M., and Burns, S. A. (2003). “Multiple fully stressed designs of steel frame structures with semi-rigid connections.” Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., 58(6), 821–838.
Liu, M., Burns, S. A., and Wen, Y. K. (2006). “Genetic algorithm based construction-conscious minimum weight design of seismic steel moment-resisting frames.” J. Struct. Eng., 50–58.
MATLAB 7.6.0 R2008a [Computer software]. Natick, MA, MathWorks.
Mueller, K. M., Liu, M., and Burns, S. A. (2002). “Fully stressed design of frame structures and multiple load paths.” J. Struct. Eng., 806–814.
Patnaik, S. N., Gendy, A. S., Berke, L., and Hopkins, D. A. (1998). “Modified fully utilized design (MFUD) method for stress and displacement constraints.” Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., 41(7), 1171–1194.
Razani, R. (1965). “Behavior of fully stressed design of structures and its relationship to minimum-weight design.” AIAA J., 3(12), 2262–2268.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction
Volume 20 • Issue 4 • November 2015
Copyright
© 2014 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Jan 17, 2014
Accepted: Jun 26, 2014
Published online: Aug 7, 2014
Published in print: Nov 1, 2015
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.