• M. Papadrakakis
  • M. Fragiadakis
  • N.D. Lagaros
Part of the NATO Security through Science Series book series


The objective of this paper is to present a performance based design procedure for steel structures in the framework of structural optimization. The structural performance is evaluated by means of the reliability demand and resistance methodology of FEMA-350 (Federal Emergency Management Agency) guidelines where the uncertainties and randomness in capacity and seismic demand are taken into account in a consistent manner. The structure has to be able to respond for different hazard levels with a desired confidence. Both Nonlinear Static and Nonlinear Dynamic analysis procedures are used in order to obtain the response for two hazard levels. The design procedure is performed in a structural optimization environment, where the Evolution Strategies algorithm is implemented for the solution of the optimization problem. In order to handle the excessive computational cost the inelastic time history analyses are performed in a parallel computing environment. The objective of the study is to obtain the design with the least material weight, and thus with less cost, that is capable to respond with the desired confidence for each performance level following the specifications of FEMA-350.


Seismic Design Pushover Analysis Federal Emergency Management Agency Hazard Level Nonlinear Dynamic Analysis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Argyris J, Tenek L, Mattssonn A. BEC: A 2-node fast converging shear-deformable isotropic and composite beam element based on 6 rigid-body and 6 straining modes. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics in Engineering 1998; 152:281–336.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bäck, T., and Schwefel, H.-P. “An Overview of Evolutionary Algorithms for Parameter Optimization”, Journal of Evolutionary Computation, 1(1):1–23, (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Balling RJ, Ciampi V, Pister KS, Polak E. Optimal design of seismic-resistant planar steel frames. Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley. Report No. UCB/EERC-81/20, 1981.Google Scholar
  4. Beck JL, Chan E, Irfanoglu A, Papadimitriou C. Multi-criteria optimal structural design under uncertainty. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1999; 28:741–761.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Benjamin J.R., and Cornell C.A. “Probability, Statistics and Decision for Civil Engineers”, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1970.Google Scholar
  6. Bhatti MA, Pister KS. A dual criteria approach for optimal design of earthquake resistant structural systems. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1981; 9:557–572.Google Scholar
  7. Chan C-M, Zou X-K. Elastic and inelastic drift performance optimization for reinforced concrete buildings under earthquake loads, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2004; 33:929–950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Charney FA. Needs in the Development of a comprehensive performance based optimization process. In Elgaaly M. (Ed.) ASCE Structures 2000 Conference Proceedings. May 8–10; 2000, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA; Paper No. 28.Google Scholar
  9. Cheng FY, Li D, Ger J. Multiobjective optimization of seismic structures. In Elgaaly M. (Ed.) ASCE Structures 2000 Conference Proceedings. May 8–10; 2000, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA; Paper No. 24.Google Scholar
  10. Esteva L, Dýaz-Lopez O, Garcýa-Perez J, Sierra G, Ismael E. Life-cycle optimization in the establishment of performance-acceptance parameters for seismic design. Structural Safety 2002; 24:187–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Eurocode 3, Design of steel structures. Part1.1: General rules for buildings. CEN-ENV, 1993.Google Scholar
  12. Eurocode 8, Design of structures for earthquake resistance, Part 1, European standard CEN 1998–1, Draft No. 6, European Committee for Standardization, Brussels, 2003.Google Scholar
  13. FEMA 350: Recommended Seismic Design Criteria for New Steel Moment-Frame Buildings. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington DC, 2000.Google Scholar
  14. FEMA 356: Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington DC, SAC Joint Venture, 2000.Google Scholar
  15. Fragiadakis, M., Lagaros, N.D. Papadrakakis, M. Performance-based optimum design of steel structures considering life cycle cost, Str. Mult. Opt., (to appear), 2006a.Google Scholar
  16. Fragiadakis, M., Lagaros, N.D. Papadrakakis, M. Performance based earthquake engineering using structural optimization tools, International Journal of Reliability and Safety, (to appear), 2006b.Google Scholar
  17. Ganzerli S, Pantelides CP, Reaveley LD. Performance-based design using structural optimization. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2000; 29:1677–1690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gong Y. Performance-based design of steel building frameworks under seismic loading. PhD Thesis, Dep. of Civil Eng. University of Waterloo, Canada, 2003.Google Scholar
  19. International Code Council (ICC). International Building Code (IBC), Falls Church, VA, 2000.Google Scholar
  20. Kocer FY, Arora JS. Optimal design of H-frame transmission poles for earthquake loading. ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering 1999; 125(11):1299–1308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kocer FY, Arora JS. Optimal design of latticed towers subjected to earthquake loading, ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering 2002; 128(2):197–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lagaros N.D., Fragiadakis M., Papadrakakis M. “Optimum design of shell s tructures with stiffening beams”, AIAA Journal, 42(1):175–184, (2004).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  23. Lagaros, N.D., Papadrakakis, M., Kokossalakis, G. “Advances in Structural Optimization with Evolutionary Algorithms”, Computer & Structures, 80(7–8):571–587, (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Liu M, Burns SA, Wen YK. Multiobjective optimization for performance-based seismic design of steel moment frame structures. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2005; 34:289–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Liu M, Burns SA, Wen YK. Optimal seismic design of steel frame buildings based on life cycle cost considerations. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2003; 32:1313–1332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Liu M, Wen YK, Burns SA. Life cycle cost oriented seismic design optimization of steel moment frame structures with risk-taking preference. Engineering Structures 2004; 26:1407–1421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Papadrakakis M, Lagaros ND, Thierauf G, Cai J., “Advanced solution methods in structural optimization based on Evolution Strategies”, Engineering Computations Journal, 15: 12–34, (1998).zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Papadrakakis M., Lagaros N.D., Fragakis Y. “Parallel computational strategies for structural optimization”, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 58(9):1347–1380, (2003).zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pezeshk S. Design of framed structures: an integrated non-linear analysis and optimal minimum weight design. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 1998; 41:459–471.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Polak E, Pister KS, Ray D. Optimal design of framed structures subjected to earthquakes. Engineering Optimization 1976; 2:65–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Somerville P, Smith N, Punyamurthula S, Sun J. Development of Ground Motion Time Histories for Phase 2 of the FEMA/SAC Steel Project. Report No. SAC/BD-97/04, SAC Joint Venture, Richmond CA, 1997.Google Scholar
  32. Yun S.-Y., Hamburger R.O., Cornell C.A., Foutch D.A. “Seismic Performance Evaluation for Steel Moment Frames”, J. Struct. Engrg. 128(4):534–545, (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Papadrakakis
    • 1
  • M. Fragiadakis
    • 1
  • N.D. Lagaros
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Structural Analysis & Seismic ResearchNational Technical University of AthensAthensGreece

Personalised recommendations