A sequential decision process for the system-level design of structural frames

The building design community is currently experiencing a shift towards generating more resilient and sustainable designs that are also safe and economic. Integrating these broad, often conflicting, factors into design causes the design process to become more complex, the decisions more difficult, and a need for higher fidelity (and more expensive) modeling efforts to gain insight to resolve these tradeoffs. Set-based design is a promising alternative to traditional point-based design for such complex design problems because many design concepts are generated, refined and carefully eliminated throughout the process thereby maintaining significant freedom in the early stages of design. There is an emerging concept of closely coupling set-based design with model-based simulation to systematically contract the design space through a sequence of modeling efforts in which bounding models are constructed to guarantee the antecedent model only eliminates design alternatives that are dominated when analyzed using a subsequent higher fidelity model. In this paper, the concept of the sequential decision process is explored for the system-level design of seismic-resisting structural frames using nonlinear static analysis. Bounding models are derived for this design problem that are sufficiently general for various types of structural frames. The merit of the novel approach lies in giving designers the ability to search the tradespace exhaustively, arriving at the global minimum with a reduced cost by comparison to a full evaluation using the highest fidelity model while also providing the freedom to retain dominated and non-dominated solutions.

[1]  M. Abramowitz,et al.  Handbook of Mathematical Functions With Formulas, Graphs and Mathematical Tables (National Bureau of Standards Applied Mathematics Series No. 55) , 1965 .

[2]  R. Bellman Dynamic programming. , 1957, Science.

[3]  Richard J. Balling,et al.  Optimal Steel Frame Design by Simulated Annealing , 1991 .

[4]  Allan D. Shocker,et al.  Consideration set influences on consumer decision-making and choice: Issues, models, and suggestions , 1991 .

[5]  John W. Payne,et al.  The adaptive decision maker: Name index , 1993 .

[6]  J. Townsend,et al.  Decision field theory: a dynamic-cognitive approach to decision making in an uncertain environment. , 1993, Psychological review.

[7]  Eric J. Johnson,et al.  The adaptive decision maker , 1993 .

[8]  H. Fawcett Manual of Political Economy , 1995 .

[9]  Durward K. Sobek A set-based model of design , 1996 .

[10]  Durward K. Sobek,et al.  Another look at how Toyota integrates product development , 1998 .

[11]  Durward K. Sobek,et al.  Toyota's Principles of Set-Based Concurrent Engineering , 1999 .

[12]  R. Goel,et al.  Capacity-Demand-Diagram Methods Based on Inelastic Design Spectrum , 1999 .

[13]  Shahram Pezeshk,et al.  Design of Nonlinear Framed Structures Using Genetic Optimization , 2000 .

[14]  M. S. Hayalioglu Optimum load and resistance factor design of steel space frames using genetic algorithm , 2001 .

[15]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II , 2002, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[16]  Gary B. Lamont,et al.  Evolutionary Algorithms for Solving Multi-Objective Problems , 2002, Genetic Algorithms and Evolutionary Computation.

[17]  Douglas A. Foutch,et al.  Modeling of steel moment frames for seismic loads , 2002 .

[18]  Jiachuan Wang,et al.  Interactive evolutionary solution synthesis in fuzzy set-based preliminary engineering design , 2003, J. Intell. Manuf..

[19]  Dan M. Frangopol,et al.  Probabilistic models for life‐cycle performance of deteriorating structures: review and future directions , 2004 .

[20]  Raphael T. Haftka,et al.  Structural optimization complexity: what has Moore’s law done for us? , 2004 .

[21]  Daniel E. Hastings,et al.  11.4.3 The Tradespace Exploration Paradigm , 2005 .

[22]  Adam M. Ross,et al.  The Tradespace Exploration Paradigm , 2005 .

[23]  Manolis Papadrakakis,et al.  Performance-based multiobjective optimum design of steel structures considering life-cycle cost , 2006 .

[24]  K. Marchand,et al.  UFC 4-023-03: Design of Buildings to Resist Progressive Collapse , 2006 .

[25]  Shalva Marjanishvili,et al.  COMPARISON OF VARIOUS PROCEDURES FOR PROGRESSIVE COLLAPSE ANALYSIS , 2006 .

[26]  Manolis Papadrakakis,et al.  Robust seismic design optimization of steel structures , 2007 .

[27]  M. Stolpe,et al.  Truss topology optimization with discrete design variables—Guaranteed global optimality and benchmark examples , 2007 .

[28]  Timothy W. Simpson,et al.  Visual Steering Commands and Test Problems to Support Research in Trade Space Exploration , 2008 .

[29]  Gary F. Dargush,et al.  A Unified Framework for Evolutionary Optimization with Application to Structural Engineering , 2008 .

[30]  Timothy W. Simpson,et al.  Visual Steering Commands for Trade Space Exploration: User-Guided Sampling With Example , 2009, J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng..

[31]  D. Singer,et al.  What Is Set-Based Design? , 2009 .

[32]  Daniel D. Frey,et al.  The Pugh Controlled Convergence method: model-based evaluation and implications for design theory , 2009 .

[33]  N. Chater,et al.  Preference reversal in multiattribute choice. , 2010, Psychological review.

[34]  Gregory G. Deierlein,et al.  NEHRP Seismic Design Technical Brief No. 4 - Nonlinear Structural Analysis for Seismic Design: A Guide for Practicing Engineers | NIST , 2010 .

[35]  Timothy W. Simpson,et al.  Trade Space Exploration: Assessing the Benefits of Putting Designers ''Back-in-the-Loop'' during Engineering Optimization , 2011 .

[36]  M. Bendsøe,et al.  Topology Optimization: "Theory, Methods, And Applications" , 2011 .

[37]  Glaucio H. Paulino,et al.  Application of layout and topology optimization using pattern gradation for the conceptual design of buildings , 2011 .

[38]  Anna-Maria Rivas McGowan,et al.  The Design of Large-Scale Complex Engineered Systems: Present Challenges and Future Promise , 2012 .

[39]  Robert Tremblay,et al.  Seismic Performance of Low-to-Moderate Height Eccentrically Braced Steel Frames Designed for North American Seismic Conditions , 2012 .

[40]  Gang Li,et al.  Modified-modal-pushover-based seismic optimum design for steel structures considering life-cycle cost , 2012 .

[41]  Young Sang Cho,et al.  Efficiency analysis of Set-based Design with structural building information modeling (S-BIM) on high-rise building structures , 2012 .

[42]  Mark Sarkisian,et al.  Optimization Tools for the Design of Structures , 2012 .

[43]  Timothy W. Simpson,et al.  Preference Construction, Sequential Decision Making, and Trade Space Exploration , 2013, DAC 2013.

[44]  Timothy W. Simpson,et al.  Metamodeling in Multidisciplinary Design Optimization: How Far Have We Really Come? , 2014 .

[45]  Mark Sarkisian,et al.  Embodied Carbon in Structures and Cities , 2014 .

[46]  Timothy W. Simpson,et al.  DESIGN AS A SEQUENTIAL DECISION PROCESS: A METHOD FOR REDUCING DESIGN SET SPACE USING MODELS TO BOUND OBJECTIVES , 2015, DAC 2015.

[47]  Mathias Stolpe,et al.  Truss topology optimization with discrete design variables by outer approximation , 2015, J. Glob. Optim..

[48]  L. Valdevit,et al.  Incorporating fabrication cost into topology optimization of discrete structures and lattices , 2015 .

[49]  K. Saitou,et al.  Multi-material topology optimization using ordered SIMP interpolation , 2016, Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization.

[50]  Aisc Steel Construction Manual , 2017 .