Neighbour Matrix for Optimal Seismic Design of RC Frames for Minimum Total Life-Cycle Cost

Document Type : Structural Earthquake Engineering


University of Technology, Isfahan


Structures are subjected to different probable earthquake excitations in their lifetime, which have different destructive effects. Life-cycle cost analysis is an appropriate tool for assessing the structural performance to obtain the best economic scenario over its lifetime. Therefore, it is necessary to define a method for optimal seismic design with life-cycle cost objective. However, the nonlinear behaviour of structures under severe earthquakes and the need to synchronize the various constraints of the seismic code require use of innovative methods instead of optimal classical methods. In this paper, the total life-cycle cost of buildings is the optimization objective for the seismic design of reinforced concrete frames.Therefore, a simple novel optimization algorithm is introduced by defining "Neighbours Matrix". This algorithm reaches a path to minimize the objective throughout the steps, based on changing the objective function in "Neighbour RC frames". The results of optimum seismically design of RC frames including 5-, 8- and 12-story frames indicated that this algorithm reached optimum RC frame with acceptable performance and few numbers of analyses. Also the convergence rate was high because when total life-cycle cost was the objective function, after two steps with a small number of analyses, the TLCC was decreased about an average 25%. The robustness of the algorithm was confirmed by evaluation of the coefficient of variation of structures in the optimal path.


  1. FEMA-356 (2000) Prestandard & Commentary Table 8. Comparison between COV. of the RN in each step. for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC.
  2. Hajirasouliha, I., Asadi, P., and Pilakoutas, K. (2012) An efficient performance-based seismic design method for reinforced concrete frames. Earthquake Engineering and Structural
  3. Dynamics, 41(4), 663-679.
  4. Bengoa, C.C., Baldomir, A., Hernandez, S., and Romera, L. (2018) Multi-model reliability-based design optimization of structures considering the intact configuration and several partial collapses. Struct Multidisc Optim, 57(3), 977-994.
  5. Xu, L., Yan, X., and Li, Z. (2018) Development of BP-based seismic behaviour optimization of RC and steel frame structures. Engineering Structures, 164, 214-229.
  6. Mokarram, V. and Banan, M.R. (2018) A new PSO-based algorithm for multi-objective optimization with continuous and discrete design variables. Struct Multidisc Optim, 57(2), 509-533.
  7. Gencturk, B. and Elnashai, A.S. (2012) Structural Seismic Design Optimization and Earthquake Engineering: Formulations and Applications. Publisher: IGI Global, Editor: Vagelis Plevris,
  8. Chara Mitropoulou, Nikos D. Lagaros, ISBN:978-1-4666-1640-0.
  9. Gencturk, B. (2013) Life-cycle cost assessment of RC and ECC frames using structural optimization. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 42, 61-79.
  10. Park, H.S., Lee, D.C., Oh, B.K., Choi, S.W., and Kim, Y. (2014) Performance-based multiobjective optimal seismic retrofit method for a steel moment-resisting frame considering the life-cycle
  11. cost. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Article ID 305737, 14p.
  12. Moller, O., Foschi, R., Ascheri, J.P., Rubinstein, M., and Grossman, S. (2015) Optimization for performance-based design under seismic demands, including social costs. Earthquake Engineering & Engineering Vibration, 14(2), 315-328.
  13. Kim, S. and Frangopol, D.M. (2018) Multiobjective probabilistic optimum monitoring planning considering fatigue damage detection, maintenance, reliability, service life and cost. Struct Multidisc Optim, 57(1), 39-54.
  14. Burns, S.A. (2002) Recent Advances in Optimal Structural Design. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA.
  15. Sambridge, M. (1999) Geophysical inversion with a Neighborhood algorithm-I. Searching a parameter space. Geophysics Jouranl Int., 138, 479-494.
  16. Siddique, N. and Adeli, H. (2016) Simulated annealing, its variants and engineering applications. International Journal on Artificial Intelligence Tools, 25(6), 1630001-1-1630001-24.
  17. ASCE/SEI 7-16 (2016) Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA.
  18. ACI (2014) Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-14) and Commentar y, (ACI 318R-14) . American Concrete Institute: Farmington Hills, MI.
  19. Reinhorn, A.M., Roh, H., Sivaselvan, M., Kunnath, S.K., Valles, R., Madan, A., Li, C., Lobo, R.F., and Park, Y.J. (2009) IDARC2D Version 7.0: A Program for the Inelastic Damage
  20. Analysis of Structures , Technical Report MCEER-09-0006. State University of New York at Buffalo.
  21. Wen, Y.K. and Kang, Y.J. (2001) Minimum building life-cycle cost design criteria. I: Methodology. Journal of Structural Engineering, 127(3), 330-7.
  22. Elenas, A. and Meskouris, K. (2001) Correlation study between seismic acceleration parameters and damage indices of structures. Eng. Struct., 23, 698-704.
  23. FEMA 227 (1992) A Benefit-Cost Model for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings, Volume 1: A User's Manual. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.
  24. Fragiadakis, M. and Lagaros, N. (2011) An overview to structural seismic design optimization frameworks. Computers and Structures, 89, 1155-1165.
  25. Park, G., Lee, T., Lee, K., and Hwang, K. (2006) Robust design: an overview. AIAA Jouranl, 44(1), 181-91.