Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Optimizing earthquake design of reinforced concrete bridge infrastructures based on evolutionary computation techniques

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper presents a methodology for the earthquake design of reinforced concrete (RC) bridge infrastructures based on the application of multi-objective evolutionary techniques. The purpose of the methodology is to allow better decision-making for the earthquake design of bridges by proposing optimized solutions which offer trade-offs between material quantities, performance/robustness, and cost. For this, two multi-objective problems (MOPs) were defined with two sets of objectives: the first objective set optimizes the amount of material used in the piers; the second set of objectives comprises a cost function and a performance metric. The NSGA-II algorithm was adapted and applied with real coded variables and multiple non-linear dynamic analyses performed in each fitness evaluation. The results of the runs show different Pareto fronts strongly associated with solution schema of pier-deck connections and steel distribution between piers. The results also allow to perceive the influence of ductility through the impact that certain variables in certain piers have on the performance of solutions. The importance of support conditions/connections between infrastructure and deck and of confinement of piers is clear. The results of the two MOPs show that sub-optimal solutions in terms of volume of materials used may be interesting in terms of reliability gain. In the end, the results of applying the methodology present solutions which offer trade-offs and information gain valuable for bridge design.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20
Fig. 21
Fig. 22
Fig. 23
Fig. 24

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alam MI, Kanagarajan B, Jana P (2019) Optimal design of thin-walled open cross-section column for maximum buckling load. Thin-Walled Struct

  • Antoniou S, Pinho R (2004) Development and verification of a displacement-based adaptive pushover procedure. J Earthq Eng 8(5):643–661. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460409350504

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arellano H, Tolentino D, Gómez R (2018) Optimum criss crossing cables in multi-span cable-stayed bridges using genetic algorithms. KSCE J Civ Eng. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-018-5736-2

  • Azizi M, Ejlali RG, Ghasemi SA, Talatahari S (2019) Upgraded whale optimization algorithm for fuzzy logic based vibration control of nonlinear steel structure. Eng Struct 192:53–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beume N, Fonseca CM, Lopez-Ibanez M, Paquete L, Vahrenhold J (2009) On the complexity of computing the hypervolume indicator. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 13(5):1075–1082. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2009.2015575

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bybordiani M, Kazemzadeh Azad S (2019) Optimum design of steel braced frames considering dynamic soil-structure interaction. Struct Multidiscip Optim. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-019-02260-4

  • Casarotti C, Pinho R (2007) An adaptive capacity spectrum method for assessment of bridges subjected to earthquake action. Bull Earthq Eng 5(3):377–390

  • Chikahiro Y, Ario I, Pawlowski P, Graczykowski C (2019) Optimization of reinforcement layout of scissor-type bridge using differential evolution algorithm. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering

  • Chow CK, Yuen SY (2012) A multiobjective evolutionary algorithm that diversifies population by its density. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 16(2):149–172

  • Curadelli O, Amani M (2014) Integrated structure-passive control design of linear structures under seismic excitations. Eng Struct 81:256–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deb K (2001) Multi-objective optimization using evolutionary algorithms. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Deb K, Pratap A, Agarwal S, Meyarivan T (2002) A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 6(2):182–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EN 1998-2 (2005) Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance - part 2: bridges. CEN - European Committee for Standardisation

  • EN1998-1 (2005) Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance - part 1: general rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings. CEN - European Committee for Standardisation

  • Esfandiari MJ, Urgessa GS, Sheikholarefin S, Manshadi SH (2018) Optimization of reinforced concrete frames subjected to historical time-history loadings using DMPSO algorithm. Struct Multidiscip Optim 58(5):2119–2134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-018-2027-y

  • Fonseca CM, Fleming PJ (1996) On the performance assessment and comparison of stochastic multiobjective optimizers. 4th International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, PPSN IV. Springer-Verlag, London, pp 584–593

  • Fonseca CM, Guerreiro AP, López-Ibáñez M, Paquete L (2011) On the computation of the empirical attainment function. In: Takahashi RHC, Deb K, Wanner EF, Greco S (eds) Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimization. EMO 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6576. Springer, Berlin, pp 106–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-19893-9_8

  • Fragiadakis M, Papadrakakis M (2008) Performance-based optimum seismic design of reinforced concrete structures. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 37(6):825–844. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.786

  • Geem ZW, Lee KS (2004) A new structural optimization method based on the harmony search algorithm. Comput Struct 82(9–10):781–798

  • Geem ZW, Kim JH, Loganathan GV (2001) A new heuristic optimization algorithm: harmony search. Simulation 76(2):60–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/003754970107600201

  • Goldberg DE (1989) Genetic algorithms in search, optimization and machine learning. Boston: Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc.

  • Ha M-H, Vu Q-A, Truong V-H (2018) Optimum design of stay cables of steel cable-stayed bridges using nonlinear inelastic analysis and genetic algorithm. Structures

  • Kappos AJ, Saiidi MS, Aydinoglu MN, Isakovic T (2012) Seismic design and assessment of bridges, Inelastic Methods of Analysis and Case Studies (Geotechnical, Geological and Earthquake Engineering), vol 21. Springer, New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-3943-7

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lagaros ND, Papadrakakis M (2007) Robust seismic design optimization of steel structures. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization 33(6):457–469. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-006-0047-5

  • Lagaros ND, Tsompanakis Y (2007) Intelligent computational paradigms in earthquake engineering. Idea Group Inc, Hershey

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lee J (2019) Multi-objective optimization case study with active and passive design in building engineering. Struct Multidiscip Optim 59(2):507–519. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-018-2080-6

  • Liu M, Burns SA, Wen YK (2003) Optimal seismic design of steel frame buildings based on life cycle cost considerations. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 32(9):1313–1332

  • Martínez CA, Curadelli O, Compagnoni ME (2014) Optimal placement of nonlinear hysteretic dampers on planar structures under seismic excitation. Engineering Structures

  • McKenna F, Fenves G (1999) OpenSEES-open system for earthquake engineering simulation. The Regents of the University of California, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  • Mergos PE (2018) Efficient optimum seismic design of reinforced concrete frames with nonlinear structural analysis procedures. Struct Multidiscip Optim 58(6):2565–2581. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-018-2036-x

  • Papadrakakis M, Lagaros ND (2002) Reliability-based structural optimization using neural networks and Monte Carlo simulation. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 191(32):3491–3507

  • Parreiras R, Vasconcelos J (2009) Decision making in multiobjective optimization aided by the multicriteria tournament decision method. Nonlinear Anal Theory Methods Appl 71(12):191–198

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Pedro R, Demarche J, Miguel L, Lopez R (2017) An efficient approach for the optimization of simply supported steel-concrete composite I-girder bridges. Adv Eng Softw 112:31–45

  • Plevris V, Mitropoulou CC, Lagaros ND (2012) Structural seismic design optimization and earthquake engineering: formulations and applications. Hershey: IGI Global

  • Priestley MN (2003) Myths and fallacies in earthquake engineering, revisited. IUSS Press, Pavia

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao SS, Sundararaju K, Prakash BG, Balakrishna C (1992) Fuzzy goal programming approach for structural optimization. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

  • Rojas HA, Foley C, Pezeshk S (2011) Risk-based seismic design for optimal structural and nonstructural system performance. Earthquake Spectra 27(3):857–880

  • Sarma KC, Adeli H (2000) Fuzzy genetic algorithm for optimization of steel structures. J Struct Eng 126(5):596–604

  • SeismoSoft (2016) SeismoSpect v2016. Retrieved from http://www.seismosoft.com

  • Soh CK, Yang J (1996) Fuzzy controlled genetic algorithm search for shape optimization. J Comput Civ Eng 10(2):143–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsompanakis Y, Papadrakakis M (2004) Large-scale reliability-based structural optimization. Struct Multidiscip Optim 26(6):429–440. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-003-0369-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tugilimana A, Coelho R, Thrall A (2019) An integrated design methodology for modular trusses including dynamic grouping, module spatial orientation, and topology optimization. Struct Multidiscip Optim. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-019-02230-w

  • Wang J-Q, Li S, Dezfuli FH, Alam MS (2019) Sensitivity analysis and multi-criteria optimization of SMA cable restrainers for longitudinal seismic protection of isolated simply supported highway bridges. Eng Struct 189:509–522

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zavala GR, Nebro AJ, Luna F, Coello Coello CA (2013) A survey of multi-objective metaheuristics applied to structural optimization. Struct Multidiscip Optim 49(4):537–558. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-013-0996-4

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang Q, Li H (2007) MOEA/D: a multiobjective evolutionary algorithm based on decomposition. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 11(6):712–731. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2007.892759

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang Q, Chen JC, Chong PP (2004) Decision consolidation: criteria weight determination using multiple preference formats. Decis Support Syst 38(2):247–258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zitzler E, Thiele L (1998) Multiobjective optimization using evolutionary algorithms-a comparative case study, 5th International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, PPSN V. Springer-Verlag, London, UK, pp 292–304

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge CERIS/DECivil from IST for all the support.

Funding

Vítor T. Camacho has a grant (grant number PD/BD/127802/2016) from Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia (FCT).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CERIS, Department of Civil Engineering, Instituto Superior Técnico, Av. Rovisco Pais no. 1, Instituto Superior Técnico (IST) – DECivil, 1049-001, Lisbon, Portugal

    Vítor T. Camacho, Mário Lopes & Carlos S. Oliveira

  2. Instituto de Telecomunicações, Instituto Superior Técnico, Lisbon, Portugal

    Nuno Horta

Authors
  1. Vítor T. Camacho
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nuno Horta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mário Lopes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Carlos S. Oliveira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vítor T. Camacho.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Responsible Editor: Mehmet Polat Saka

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(TCL 24 kb)

ESM 2

(TCL 66 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Camacho, V.T., Horta, N., Lopes, M. et al. Optimizing earthquake design of reinforced concrete bridge infrastructures based on evolutionary computation techniques. Struct Multidisc Optim 61, 1087–1105 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-019-02407-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-019-02407-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation