Structural Design Optimization of All-Steel Buckling-Restrained Braces Using Intelligent Optimizers

被引:0
作者
Seyed Mohamad Hoseini
Hossein Parastesh
Iman Hajirasouliha
Ahmad Ferdowsi
机构
[1] University of Science and Culture,Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering
[2] The University of Sheffield,Department of Civil and Structural Engineering
[3] Semnan University,Department of Water Engineering and Hydraulic Structures, Faculty of Civil Engineering
[4] University of Applied Science and Technology,undefined
来源
International Journal of Steel Structures | 2021年 / 21卷
关键词
Buckling-restrained braces (BRBs); Structural optimization; Artificial intelligence; Stiffness and strength criteria; Cost effective design; Global buckling requirement;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
This study aims to introduce a novel optimal structural design framework for buckling-restrained braces (BRBs) in multi-story buildings. Five artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms, including particle swarm optimization (PSO), shuffled frog-leaping algorithm (SFLA), interior search algorithm (ISA), hybrid of bat and particle swarm optimization (BAT-PSO), and political optimizer, which is recently proposed, are adopted for the optimum design of BRB systems. In the proposed optimization process, the BRB cross-sectional area is taken as the objective function considering the stiffness-strength criteria. As a result, by optimizing the BRB cross-sectional area, the weight of BRBs will reduce. Two mostly-used cross-sectional profiles for all-steel BRBs (circular and rectangular) are considered. In general, the optimized solutions using AI algorithms were more cost effective and exhibited considerably better structural performance in terms of global buckling requirements in comparison to other conventional BRB designs. The results showed that BAT-PSO worked the best in terms of objective function value and computational time. The design solutions obtained using BAT-PSO were lighter (35% for circular profiles and 20% for rectangular profiles), and had superior performance in terms of both stiffness and strength in comparison with the conventional BRB designs. It was also shown that using circular profile can reduce the weight of BRB elements by around 15% compared to rectangular profile. The results of this study should prove useful in more efficient design of BRB systems in common practice.
引用
收藏
页码:2055 / 2070
页数:15
相关论文
共 198 条
[31]  
Singh VP(2020)Optimal design parameters of stiffeners for improving seismic performance of links in EBFs International Journal of Steel Structures 20 415-680
[32]  
Ferdowsi A(2019)Numerical evaluation of the hysteretic behavior of concentrically braced frames and buckling restrained brace frame systems Journal of Building Engineering 22 1135-488
[33]  
Mousavi SF(2020)Plastic analysis of braced frames by application of metaheuristic optimization algorithms International Journal of Steel Structures 20 110437-1019
[34]  
Farzin S(2020)Optimal design of steel buckling-restrained braces considering stiffness and strength requirements Engineering Structures 211 4018169-239
[35]  
Karami H(2018)Design of pre-tensioned cable-stayed buckling-restrained braces considering interrelationship between bracing strength and stiffness requirements Journal of Structural Engineering 144 4017128-379
[36]  
Mohd NS(2017)Design of single-level guyed towers considering interrelationship between bracing strength and rigidity requirements Journal of Structural Engineering 143 965-748
[37]  
Afan HA(2015)GA-based multi-objective optimization for retrofit design on a multi-core PC cluster Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering 30 724-280
[38]  
Lai SH(2011)Optimization of cold-formed steel portal frame topography using real-coded genetic algorithm Procedia Engineering 14 36-undefined
[39]  
Kisi O(2015)Optimal design of cold-formed steel portal frames for stressed-skin action using genetic algorithm Engineering Structures 93 670-undefined
[40]  
Malek MA(2019)Multi-criteria shape optimization of open-spandrel concrete arch bridges: Pareto front development and decision-making World Journal of Engineering 16 476-undefined