Skip to main content

Finite element model updating of an 18-story structure using branch-and-bound algorithm with epsilon-constraint


This paper studies the finite element (FE) model updating of an 18-story experimental structure. FE model updating requires solving optimization problems that are generally non-convex and have unknown number of local optima. For such problems, neither randomized local optimization algorithms nor stochastic search algorithms can guarantee global optimality. To obtain the global optimum and improve the accuracy of FE model updating, this paper proposes the branch-and-bound (B&B) algorithm for solving non-convex optimization problems in FE model updating. The paper focuses on the modal property difference formulation that minimizes the difference between experimental and simulated eigenvalues and eigenvectors. We propose a reformulation of the modal property difference approach using epsilon-constraint, to enable the application of the B&B algorithm in FE model updating. The proposed approach is first investigated in simulation and compared with the interior-point method and the genetic algorithm. The model updating results using the B&B algorithm are next validated by the shaking table test data of an 18-story steel frame structure.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

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

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Code availability

Part of the code that supports the findings of this study is available at .


  1. 1.

    Friswell MI, Mottershead JE (1995) Finite element model updating in structural dynamics. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Moller PW, Friberg O (1998) Updating large finite element models in structural dynamics. AIAA J 36:1861–1868

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Christodoulou K, Papadimitriou C (2007) Structural identification based on optimally weighted modal residuals. Mech Syst Signal Process 21:4–23

    Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Salawu OS (1997) Detection of structural damage through changes in frequency: a review. Eng Struct 19:718–723

    Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Kurata M, Kim J-H, Lynch JP, Law KH, Salvino LW (2010) A probabilistic model updating algorithm for fatigue damage detection in aluminum hull structures. In: Smart materials, adaptive structures and intelligent systems, pp 741–750

  6. 6.

    Yuen KV (2012) Updating large models for mechanical systems using incomplete modal measurement. Mech Syst Signal Process 28:297–308

    Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Dong X, Wang Y (2018) Modal property difference formulations and optimization algorithm comparison towards FE model updating. In: Proceedings of SPIE 2018, smart structures and materials + nondestructive evaluation and health monitoring, Denver, CO, USA

  8. 8.

    Jaishi B, Ren WX (2006) Damage detection by finite element model updating using modal flexibility residual. J Sound Vib 290:369–387

    Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Zhu D, Dong X, Wang Y (2016) Substructure stiffness and mass updating through minimization of modal dynamic residuals. ASCE J Eng Mech 142:04016013

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Farhat C, Hemez FM (1993) Updating finite element dynamic models using an element-by-element sensitivity methodology. AIAA J 31:1702–1711

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Kosmatka JB, Ricles JM (1999) Damage detection in structures by modal vibration characterization. ASCE J Struct Eng 125:1384–1392

    Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Reuland Y, Lestuzzi P, Smith IFC (2017) Data-interpretation methodologies for non-linear earthquake response predictions of damaged structures. Front Built Environ 3:43

    Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Yuen K-V, Kuok S-C (2011) Bayesian methods for updating dynamic models. Appl Mech Rev 64

  14. 14.

    Astroza R, Alessandri A, Conte JP (2019) A dual adaptive filtering approach for nonlinear finite element model updating accounting for modeling uncertainty. Mech Syst Signal Process 115:782–800

    Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Behmanesh I, Moaveni B (2016) Accounting for environmental variability, modeling errors, and parameter estimation uncertainties in structural identification. J Sound Vib 374:92–110

    Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Wang Y, Dong X, Li D (2019) A non-convexity study in finite element model updating. In: Proceedings of the 9th international conference on structural health monitoring of intelligent infrastructure (SHMII-9), St. Louis, MO, USA

  17. 17.

    Jang J, Smyth AW (2017) Model updating of a full-scale FE model with nonlinear constraint equations and sensitivity-based cluster analysis for updating parameters. Mech Syst Signal Process 83:337–355

    Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Teughels A, De Roeck G, Suykens JA (2003) Global optimization by coupled local minimizers and its application to FE model updating. Comput Struct 81:2337–2351

    Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Bakir PG, Reynders E, De Roeck G (2008) An improved finite element model updating method by the global optimization technique ‘Coupled Local Minimizers.’ Comput Struct 86:1339–1352

    Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Levin R, Lieven N (1998) Dynamic finite element model updating using simulated annealing and genetic algorithms. Mech Syst Signal Process 12:91–120

    Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Alkayem NF, Cao M, Zhang Y, Bayat M, Su Z (2017) Structural damage detection using finite element model updating with evolutionary algorithms: a survey. Neural Comput Appl, pp 1–23

  22. 22.

    Kang F, Li J, Xu Q (2009) Structural inverse analysis by hybrid simplex artificial bee colony algorithms. Comput Struct 87:861–870

    Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Li D, Dong X, Wang Y (2018) Model updating using sum of squares (SOS) optimization to minimize modal dynamic residuals. Struct Control Health Monit 25:e2263

    Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Li D, Wang Y (2019) Sparse sum-of-squares optimization for model updating through minimization of modal dynamic residuals. J Nondestruct Eval Diagn Progn Eng Syst, 2

  25. 25.

    Li D, Wang Y (2020) Modal dynamic residual-based model updating through regularized semidefinite programming with facial reduction. Mech Syst Signal Process 143:106792

    Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Falk JE, Soland RM (1969) An algorithm for separable nonconvex programming problems. Manage Sci 15:550–569

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Tawarmalani M, Sahinidis NV, Sahinidis N (2002) Convexification and global optimization in continuous and mixed-integer nonlinear programming: theory, algorithms, software, and applications, vol 65. Springer Science & Business Media, Berlin

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Lawler EL, Wood DE (1966) Branch-and-bound methods: a survey. Oper Res 14:699–719

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Ryoo HS, Sahinidis NV (1995) Global optimization of nonconvex NLPs and MINLPs with applications in process design. Comput Chem Eng 19:551–566

    Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Binney J, Sukhatme GS (2012) Branch and bound for informative path planning. In: 2012 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, pp 2147–2154

  31. 31.

    Chmielewski DJ, Palmer T, Manousiouthakis V (2002) On the theory of optimal sensor placement. AIChE J 48:1001–1012

    Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Balakrishnan V, Boyd S, Balemi S (1991) Branch and bound algorithm for computing the minimum stability degree of parameter-dependent linear systems. Int J Robust Nonlinear Control 1:295–317

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Thanedar P, Vanderplaats G (1995) Survey of discrete variable optimization for structural design. J Struct Eng 121:301–306

    Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Dey SS, Santana A, Wang Y (2019) New SOCP relaxation and branching rule for bipartite bilinear programs. Optim Eng 20:307–336

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Janter T, Sas P (1990) Uniqueness aspects of model-updating procedures. AIAA J 28:538–543

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Marler RT, Arora JS (2004) Survey of multi-objective optimization methods for engineering. Struct Multidiscip Optim 26:369–395

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Ryoo HS, Sahinidis NV (1996) A branch-and-reduce approach to global optimization. J Glob Optim 8:107–138

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    McCormick GP (1976) Computability of global solutions to factorable nonconvex programs: part I—Convex underestimating problems. Math Program 10:147–175

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Suita K, Suzuki Y, Takahashi M (2015) Collapse behavior of an 18-story steel moment frame during a shaking table test. Int J High-Rise Build 4:171–180

    Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Sahinidis NV (1996) BARON: a general purpose global optimization software package. J Glob Optim 8:201–205

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Tawarmalani M, Sahinidis NV (2005) A polyhedral branch-and-cut approach to global optimization. Math Program 103:225–249

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  42. 42.

    Wang Y, Dong X, Li D, Otsuki Y, SMU: MATLAB Package for Structural Model Updating, version 1.1, Accessed Jan 2019.

  43. 43.

    MathWorks Inc. (2019) Optimization Toolbox™ user’s guide, Version 8.2. MathWorks Inc, Natick

    Google Scholar 

  44. 44.

    Karmarkar N (1984) A new polynomial-time algorithm for linear programming. Combinatorica 4:373–395

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  45. 45.

    MathWorks Inc. (2019) Global optimization Toolbox™ user’s guide, Version 4.2. MathWorks Inc., Natick

    Google Scholar 

  46. 46.

    Whitley D (1994) A genetic algorithm tutorial. Stat Comput 4:65–85

    Google Scholar 

  47. 47.

    Van Overschee P, De Moor B (1994) N4SID: subspace algorithms for the identification of combined deterministic-stochastic systems. Automatica 30:75–93

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  48. 48.

    Goh K-C, Safonov MG, Papavassilopoulos GP (1995) Global optimization for the biaffine matrix inequality problem. J Glob Optim 7:365–380

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  49. 49.

    Boyd SP, Vandenberghe L (2004) Convex optimization. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  50. 50.

    Gupte A, Ahmed S, Cheon MS, Dey S (2013) Solving mixed integer bilinear problems using MILP formulations. SIAM J Optim 23:721–744

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references


This research was partially funded by the National Science Foundation (CMMI-1634483). The first author received scholarship support from the Nakajima Foundation. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the view of the sponsors.


This research was partially funded by the National Science Foundation (CMMI-1634483). The first author received scholarship support from the Nakajima Foundation.

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yang Wang.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the view of the sponsors.

Additional information

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

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Otsuki, Y., Li, D., Dey, S.S. et al. Finite element model updating of an 18-story structure using branch-and-bound algorithm with epsilon-constraint. J Civil Struct Health Monit 11, 575–592 (2021).

Download citation


  • Finite element model updating
  • Branch-and-bound algorithm
  • Non-convex optimization
  • Global optimization
  • Epsilon-constraint method
  • Shaking table test