Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Topology optimization of multiple-rocking concentrically braced frames subjected to earthquakes

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

Abstract

This paper presents a topology optimization approach for the seismic design of multiple-rocking self-centering concentrically braced frames (SC-CBFs). SC-CBFs have been recently developed as damage-free seismic lateral load-resisting systems. In these systems, rocking sections are potentially designed in several locations over the height due to several modes. The design of multiple-rocking SC-CBFs is a demanding task due to their highly non-linear behavior. The vertical irregularity, caused by the non-continuous stiffness over the height of these systems, makes the prediction of their behavior a challenging task, especially when subjected to dynamic ground accelerations. In this paper, an efficient and general design approach for these systems is developed utilizing gradient-based topology optimization. An optimization problem is formulated such that the construction cost of the SC-CBF is minimized while simultaneously considering the topology of the frame, cables, energy dissipation (ED) material, and the location of the rocking sections. The performance of the building is limited to acceptable limits by formulating the constraints of the optimization problem based on the results obtained from non-linear time history analysis (NLTHA). An efficient numerical integration scheme based on the mixed lagrangian formalism (MLF) was adopted to conduct the NLTHA. The proposed method was used for the design of 5- and 10-story buildings. The results show that efficient designs could be achieved with a reasonable number of iterations using a personal computer. This makes the proposed approach desirable for the design of multiple-rocking SC-CBFs by researchers and engineers.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akehashi H, Takewaki I (2020) Simultaneous optimization of elastic-plastic building structures and viscous dampers under critical double impulse. Front Built Environ 6:211. [Online]. Available: https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fbuil.2020.6238321

  • ASCE (2021) Asce/sei 7-22. minimum design loads and associated criteria for buildings and other structures. ASCE, Reston

  • Aslani H (2005) Probabilistic earthquake loss estimation and loss disaggregation in buildings. Stanford University, Stanford

    Google Scholar 

  • Belleri A, Schoettler MJ, Restrepo JI, Fleischman RB (2014) Dynamic behavior of rocking and hybrid cantilever walls in a precast concrete building. ACI Struct J 111(3):661–671

    Google Scholar 

  • Bendsøe MP (1989) Optimal shape design as a material distribution problem. Struct Optim 1(4):193–202

    Google Scholar 

  • Bendsøe MP, Ben-Tal A, Zowe J (1994) Optimization methods for truss geometry and topology design. Struct Optim 7(3):141–159

    Google Scholar 

  • Charney FA (2008) Unintended consequences of modeling damping in structures. J Struct Eng 134(4):581–592

    Google Scholar 

  • Chintanapakdee C, Chopra AK (2004) Seismic response of vertically irregular frames: response history and modal pushover analyses. J Struct Eng 130(8):1177–1185

    Google Scholar 

  • Christopoulos C, Pampanin S, Nigel Priestley M (2003) Performance-based seismic response of frame structures including residual deformations part i: single-degree of freedom systems. J Earthq Eng 7(01):97–118

    Google Scholar 

  • Christopoulos C, Tremblay R, Kim H-J, Lacerte M (2008) Self-centering energy dissipative bracing system for the seismic resistance of structures: development and validation. J Struct Eng 134(1):96–107

    Google Scholar 

  • Das S, Nau JM (2003) Seismic design aspects of vertically irregular reinforced concrete buildings. Earthq Spectra 19(3):455–477

    Google Scholar 

  • Dehcheshmeh EM, Broujerdian V (2021) Determination of optimal behavior of self-centering multiple-rocking walls subjected to far-field and near-field ground motions. J Build Eng. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.103509

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eatherton MR (2010) Large-scale cyclic and hybrid simulation testing and development of a controlled-rocking steel building system with replaceable fuses. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

  • Eatherton MR, Ma X, Krawinkler H, Mar D, Billington S, Hajjar JF, Deierlein GG (2014a) Design concepts for controlled rocking of self-centering steel-braced frames. J Struct Eng 140(11):04014082

    Google Scholar 

  • Eatherton MR, Ma X, Krawinkler H, Deierlein GG, Hajjar JF (2014b) Quasi-static cyclic behavior of controlled rocking steel frames. J Struct Eng 140(11):04014083

    Google Scholar 

  • Eberhart R, Kennedy J (1995) A new optimizer using particle swarm theory. In: MHS’95. In: Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on Micro Machine and Human Science. IEEE, pp 39–43

  • Elzinga J, Moore TG (1975) A central cutting plane algorithm for the convex programming problem. Math Program 8(1):134–145

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Fajfar P, Krawinkler H (2004) Performance-based Seismic Design: Concepts and Implementation. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop, Bled, Slovenia, 28 June–1 July 2004. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center

  • Filiatrault A, Tremblay R, Kar R (2000) Performance evaluation of friction spring seismic damper. J Struct Eng 126(4):491–499

    Google Scholar 

  • Garlock MM, Sause R, Ricles JM (2007) Behavior and design of posttensioned steel frame systems. J Struct Eng 133(3):389–399

    Google Scholar 

  • Gomez F, Spencer BF (2019) Topology optimization framework for structures subjected to stationary stochastic dynamic loads. Struct Multidisc Optim 59(3):813–833

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Gomez F, Spencer BF Jr, Carrion J (2021a) Simultaneous optimization of topology and supplemental damping distribution for buildings subjected to stochastic excitation. Struct Control Health Monit 28(7):e2737

    Google Scholar 

  • Gomez F, Spencer BF Jr, Carrion J (2021a) Topology optimization of buildings subjected to stochastic wind loads. Probab Eng Mech 64:103127

    Google Scholar 

  • Haftka RT, Gürdal Z (2012) Elements of structural optimization, vol 11. Springer, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Holland JH (1973) Genetic algorithms and the optimal allocation of trials. SIAM J Comput 2(2):88–105

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Hormozabad SJ, Soto MG (2021) Performance-based control co-design of building structures with controlled rocking steel braced frames via neural dynamic model. Struct Multidisc Optim. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-021-02902-6

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Huang D, Pei S, Busch A (2021) Optimizing displacement-based seismic design of mass timber rocking walls using genetic algorithm. Eng Struct 229:111603

    Google Scholar 

  • Idels O, Lavan O (2020) Performance based formal optimized seismic design of steel moment resisting frames. Comput Struct 235:106269

    Google Scholar 

  • Jorge N, Stephen JW (1999) Numerical optimization. Springer, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kalliontzis D, Schultz AE, Sritharan S (2020) Generalized dynamic analysis of structural single rocking walls (SRWS). Earthq Eng Struct Dynam 49(7):633–656

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelley JE Jr (1960) The cutting-plane method for solving convex programs. J Soc Ind Appl Math 8(4):703–712

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kirsch U (1989) Optimal topologies of truss structures. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 72(1):15–28

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kristiansen H, Poulios K, Aage N (2021) Topology optimization of structures in transient impacts with coulomb friction. Int J Numer Methods Eng. https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.6756

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kurama YC (2000) Seismic design of unbonded post-tensioned precast concrete walls with supplemental viscous damping. Struct J 97(4):648–658

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurama Y, Sause R, Pessiki S, Lu L-W (1999) Lateral load behavior and seismic design of unbonded post-tensioned precast concrete walls. Struct J 96(4):622–632

    Google Scholar 

  • Lavan O (2010) Dynamic analysis of gap closing and contact in the mixed lagrangian framework: toward progressive collapse prediction. J Eng Mech 136(8):979–986

    Google Scholar 

  • Lavan O (2020) Adjoint sensitivity analysis and optimization of transient problems using the mixed lagrangian formalism as a time integration scheme. Struct Multidisc Optim 61(2):619–634. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-019-02383-8

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Lavan O, Levy R (2006) Optimal design of supplemental viscous dampers for linear framed structures. Earthq Eng Struct Dynam 35(3):337–356

    Google Scholar 

  • Lavan O, Sivaselvan M, Reinhorn A, Dargush G (2009) Progressive collapse analysis through strength degradation and fracture in the mixed lagrangian formulation. Earthq Eng Struct Dynam 38(13):1483–1504

    Google Scholar 

  • Li T, Berman JW, Wiebe R (2017) Parametric study of seismic performance of structures with multiple rocking joints. Eng Struct 146:75–92

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu Y, Zhou W (2021) Experimental investigation of self-centering hybrid concrete shear walls subjected to horizontal cyclic loading. Earthq Eng Struct Dynam. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001673

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madah H, Amir O (2017) Truss optimization with buckling considerations using geometrically nonlinear beam modeling. Comput Struct 192:233–247

    Google Scholar 

  • Ma X, Eatherton M, Hajjar J, Krawinkler H, Deierlein G (2010) Seismic design and behavior of steel frames with controlled rocking–part ii: Large scale shake table testing and system collapse analysis. In: Proceedings of the ASCE structures congress, Orlando, FL, USA, pp 12–15

  • Ma X, Krawinkler H, Deierlein G (2011) Seismic design and behavior of self-centering braced frame with controlled rocking and energy dissipating fuses. Rep. No. 174, The John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Stanford Univ., Stanford, CA., Tech. Rep

  • Marriott D, Pampanin S, Bull D, Palermo A (2008) Dynamic testing of precast, post-tensioned rocking wall systems with alternative dissipating solutions. In: 2008 NZSEE Conference. Canterbury, New Zealand

  • Martin A, Deierlein GG (2020) Structural topology optimization of tall buildings for dynamic seismic excitation using modal decomposition. Eng Struct 216:110717

    Google Scholar 

  • Marzok A, Lavan O (2021a) Mixed lagrangian formalism for dynamic analysis of self-centering systems. Earthq Engi Struct Dynam 50(4):998–1019. [Online]. Available: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/eqe.3357

  • Marzok A, Lavan O (2021b) Seismic design of multiple-rocking systems: a gradient-based optimization approach. Earthq Eng Struct Dynam. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.3518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matlab V (2010) 7.10.0 (r2010a). The MathWorks Inc., Natick

    Google Scholar 

  • Nakashima M, Lavan O, Kurata M, Luo Y (2014) Earthquake engineering research needs in light of lessons learned from the 2011 tohoku earthquake. Earthq Eng Eng Vib 13(1):141–149

    Google Scholar 

  • NISEE, Earthquake engineering online archive nisee e-library. https://nisee.berkeley.edu/elibrary/files/documents/data/strong_motion/sacsteel/ground_motions.html. Accessed 14 Oct 2021

  • Nocedal J, Wright S (2006) Numerical optimization. Springer, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Pennucci D, Calvi GM, Sullivan TJ (2009) Displacement-based design of precast walls with additional dampers. J Earthquake Eng 13(S1):40–65

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollino M (2015) Seismic design for enhanced building performance using rocking steel braced frames. Eng Struct 83:129–139

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollino M, Bruneau M (2007) Seismic retrofit of bridge steel truss piers using a controlled rocking approach. J Bridg Eng 12(5):600–610

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollini N, Lavan O, Amir O (2016) Towards realistic minimum-cost optimization of viscous fluid dampers for seismic retrofitting. Bull Earthq Eng 14(3):971–998

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollini N, Lavan O, Amir O (2017) Minimum-cost optimization of nonlinear fluid viscous dampers and their supporting members for seismic retrofitting. Earthq Eng Struct Dynam 46(12):1941–1961

    Google Scholar 

  • Priestley MN (1993) Myths and fallacies in earthquake engineering. Bull N Z Soc Earthq Eng 26(3):329–341

    Google Scholar 

  • Qureshi IM, Warnitchai P (2016) Computer modeling of dynamic behavior of rocking wall structures including the impact-related effects. Adv Struct Eng 19(8):1245–1261

    Google Scholar 

  • Rahman, Amar Mahmood, Restrepo , José I (2000) Earthquake resistant precast concrete buildings: Seismic performance of cantilever walls prestressed using unbonded tendons. research report, issn 0110-3326, 2000-5 ed. Christchurch, New Zealand: University of Canterbury

  • Ramirez CM, Miranda E (2012) Significance of residual drifts in building earthquake loss estimation. Earthq Eng Struct Dynam 41(11):1477–1493

    Google Scholar 

  • Rutenberg A (1981) A direct p-delta analysis using standard plane frame computer programs. Comput Struct 14(1–2):97–102

    Google Scholar 

  • Rutenberg A (2013) Seismic shear forces on rc walls: review and bibliography. Bull Earthq Eng 11(5):1727–1751

    Google Scholar 

  • Sause R, Ricles J, Roke D, Chancellor N, Gonner N (2010) Seismic performance of a self-centering rocking concentrically-braced frame. In: Proceeding of the 9th US National and 10th Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering, pp 25–29

  • Sideris P, Aref AJ, Filiatrault A (2015) Experimental seismic performance of a hybrid sliding-rocking bridge for various specimen configurations and seismic loading conditions. J Bridg Eng 20(11):04015009

    Google Scholar 

  • Sigmund O (2011) On the usefulness of non-gradient approaches in topology optimization. Struct Multidisc Optim 43(5):589–596

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Sivaselvan MV, Reinhorn AM (2004) Nonlinear structural analysis towards collapse simulation: a dynamical systems approach. technical report, issn 1520-295x, mceer-04-0005 ed. University of Buffalo, New York (2004)

  • Sivaselvan MV, Reinhorn AM (2006) Lagrangian approach to structural collapse simulation. J Eng Mech 132(8):795–805

    Google Scholar 

  • Somerville P, Smith N, Punyamurthula S, Sun J (1997) Development of ground motion time histories for phase 2 of the FEMA/SAC steel project. Report No. SAC/DB-97/04. SAC Joint Venture

  • Standard NZ (2006) Concrete structures standard. Wellington, New Zealand

    Google Scholar 

  • Steele TC, Wiebe LD (2016) Dynamic and equivalent static procedures for capacity design of controlled rocking steel braced frames. Earthq Eng Struct Dynam 45(14):2349–2369

    Google Scholar 

  • Steele TC, Wiebe LD (2017) Collapse risk of controlled rocking steel braced frames with different post-tensioning and energy dissipation designs. Earthq Eng Struct Dynam 46(13):2063–2082

    Google Scholar 

  • Steele TC, Wiebe LD (2021) Collapse risk of controlled rocking steel braced frames considering buckling and yielding of capacity-protected frame members. Eng Struct 237:111999

    Google Scholar 

  • Stolpe M (2016) Truss optimization with discrete design variables: a critical review. Struct Multidisc Optim 53(2):349–374

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Svanberg K (1987) The method of moving asymptotes—a new method for structural optimization. Int J Numer Meth Eng 24(2):359–373

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Tortorelli DA, Michaleris P (1994) Design sensitivity analysis: overview and review. Inverse Probl Eng 1(1):71–105

    Google Scholar 

  • Tremblay R, Poirier L, Bouaanani N, Leclerc M, Rene V, Fronteddu L, Rivest S (2008) Innovative viscously damped rocking braced steel frames. In: Proceedings of the 14th world conference on earthquake engineering, Beijing, China, pp 12–17

  • Verbart A, Langelaar M, Van Keulen F (2017) A unified aggregation and relaxation approach for stress-constrained topology optimization. Struct Multidisc Optim 55(2):663–679

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Wiebe L, Christopoulos C (2009) Mitigation of higher mode effects in base-rocking systems by using multiple rocking sections. J Earthq Eng 13(S1):83–108

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiebe L, Christopoulos C (2015a) Performance-based seismic design of controlled rocking steel braced frames. i: Methodological framework and design of base rocking joint. J Struct Eng 141(9):04014226

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiebe L, Christopoulos C (2015b) Performance-based seismic design of controlled rocking steel braced frames. ii: Design of capacity-protected elements. J Struct Eng 141(9):04014227

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiebe L, Christopoulos C, Tremblay R, Leclerc M (2013a) Mechanisms to limit higher mode effects in a controlled rocking steel frame. 1: Concept, modelling, and low-amplitude shake table testing. Earthq Eng Struct Dynam 42(7):1053–1068

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiebe L, Christopoulos C, Tremblay R, Leclerc M (2013b) Mechanisms to limit higher mode effects in a controlled rocking steel frame. 2: Large-amplitude shake table testing. Earthq Eng Struct Dynam 42(7):1069–1086

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolski M, Ricles JM, Sause R (2009) Experimental study of a self-centering beam-column connection with bottom flange friction device. J Struct Eng 135(5):479–488

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was partially funded by SolarEdge Technologies Ltd., as part of the Guy Sela Memorial Project at the Technion. The authors gratefully acknowledge the Council for Higher Education (VATAT), Israel, for granting doctoral scholarship.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, 3200003, Haifa, Israel

    Ameer Marzok & Oren Lavan

Authors
  1. Ameer Marzok
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Oren Lavan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Oren Lavan.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Replication of results

The paper includes pseudocodes to assist interested readers with the implementation of the proposed approach. In addition, all input data required to execute the examples are available in the text. The corresponding author may be contacted if there are additional queries for implementations.

Additional information

Responsible Editor: Emilio Carlos Nelli Silva

Publisher's Note

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Marzok, A., Lavan, O. Topology optimization of multiple-rocking concentrically braced frames subjected to earthquakes. Struct Multidisc Optim 65, 104 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-022-03192-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-022-03192-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation