Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Cost optimization of rectangular RC footing using GA and UPSO

  • Foundations
  • Published:
Soft Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The paper presents an estimation of the optimum cost of an isolated foundation following the safety and serviceability guidelines of Indian Standard (IS) 456:2000. Two adaptable optimization algorithms are developed for the first time to optimize the cost of any type of isolated footing design. Two optimization methods, i.e., constrained binary-coded genetic algorithm, with static penalty function approach and unified particle swarm optimization are developed in MATLAB compliant for optimal design of any isolated foundations. The objective function formulated is based on the total cost of footing. This includes the cost of concrete, the cost of steel and cost of formwork. The design variables which influence the total cost of footing are plan area and depth of footing and area of flexural reinforcement at moment critical sections. The footing design algorithm is developed according to the biaxial-isolated rectangular footing as per IS codes. The constraints, e.g., dimension of footing, restriction on bending, shear stresses and displacements, are considered in the footing design algorithm which acted as a subroutine to the developed optimization programs. Four different numerical examples have been solved to evaluate the versatility of the developed method. A comparison study has been done to observe the efficacy of both the optimization methods.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

astbal :

The upper bound value of ast

a, b :

The length and width of column

Ag:

Optimized area of concrete provided in m2

Agp:

Provided area of footing, i.e., gross area of concrete provided

As:

Optimized area of steel provided

AF:

Optimized area of formwork provided

Agr:

Minimum gross area of concrete required

Asp:

Area of steel provided

Asr:

Area of steel required

AFp:

Area of formwork provided

AFr:

Area of formwork required

Ast:

Area of tension reinforcement

B and L :

The width and depth of footing cross section provided

Cc:

Cost of 1 m3 of ready mix reinforced concrete

Cs:

Cost of 1 Ton of steel

Cf:

Cost of 1 m3 timber

NR:

Neighborhood radius for UPSO

c 1 and c 2 :

Cognitive and social parameter, respectively

χ :

The constrictive factor

μ :

Unification factor which increases exponentially from 0 to 1

d :

Effective depth of footing required

D :

Overall depth of footing required

d bal :

Upper bound value of d

dia:

Diameter of steel reinforcement

\( \epsilon \) :

The precision level

Fopt(X):

The objective function

f j(X):

The total cost of footing for jth string in subset X

Faprov :

Footing area provided

Fck:

Characteristic compressive strength of concrete

fy:

Characteristic strength of footing reinforcement

\( \gamma s \) :

Steel density = 7.843 Ton/m3

i :

The number of iterations for GA

L dt :

Development length in tension

L dc :

Development length in compression

l :

The length of the sub-string for GA

l s :

The length of steel reinforcements in footing where s is the number of reinforcement

m:

Per meter length unit

m2 :

Square meter unit

m3 :

Cubic meter unit

M :

The design moment applied to footing

N :

The size of strings for GA, j = 1, 2, …, N and size of particles in an S-dimensional search space for UPSO

P :

Imposed design load applied to footing

\( P_{i} = C\sum \varphi_{ik} \left( X \right)^{2} \) :

The static penalty function for constraint optimization

C :

The user-defined penalty coefficient

\( \varphi ik \left( X \right)^{2} \) :

The penalty term for kth constraint corresponding to ith objective function

qu:

The factored contact pressure of the soil

q uone :

The factored contact pressure at the distance of effective depth of footing from the face of the column for one-way shear calculation as per IS 456:2000

qmax and qmin:

Maximum and minimum pressure of soil

Q :

Net allowable bearing capacity of soil = net safe bearing capacity of soil

Qfavg :

Average factored contact pressure

R j :

The rank of jth string in subset X

r 1, r 2, r 3, and r 4 :

Random numbers independent of each other between [0, 1]

T c :

The one-way shear

V cu :

Permissible shear stress as per IS 456:2000

V max :

An upper limit − Vmax is lower limit of particle velocity

v j(n):

The velocity of the jth particle in the swarm of N-particles for n number of iterations

\( x_{j} \left( n \right) = x_{1} , x_{2} ,x_{3} \in X \) :

The three sub-strings for GA and three dimensions of swarm for UPSO w.r.t. three design variables

\( x_{1}^{ \hbox{max} } \) and \( x_{1}^{ \hbox{min} } \) :

The maximum and minimum values of one design variable or sub-string

x max and x min :

The maximum and minimum values of all the design variables

x 1 :

The real value of one sub-string

D :

Decoded value of the binary sub-string

x umax :

Depth of neutral axis of the cross section of footing

References

  • Al-Ansari M (2013) Structural cost of optimized reinforced concrete isolated footing. World Acad Sci Eng Technol 7(4):193–200

    Google Scholar 

  • Balaguru PN (1980) Cost optimum design of doubly reinforced concrete beams. Build Environ 15(4):219–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basudhar PK, Das A, Dey A, Deb K, De S (2006) Optimal cost design of rigid raft foundation. In: Tenth east Asia–Pacific conference on structural engineering and construction: (EASEC—10), Bangkok, Thailand

  • Bekas GK, Stavroulakis GE (2017) Machine learning and optimality in multi storey reinforced concrete frames. Infrastructures 2(2):6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Camp CV, Pezeshk S, Hansson H (2003) Flexural design of reinforced concrete frames using a genetic algorithm. J Struct Eng 129(1):105–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chakrabarty BK (1992) Models for optimal design of reinforced concrete beams. Comput Struct 42(3):447–451

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coello CC, Hernández FS, Farrera FA (1997) Optimal design of reinforced concrete beams using genetic algorithms. Expert Syst Appl 12(1):101–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colin MZ, MacRae AJ (1984) Optimization of structural concrete beams. J Struct Eng 110(7):1573–1588

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dole R, Ronghe GN, Gupta LM (2000) Optimum design of reinforced concrete beams using polynomial optimization technique. Adv Struct Eng 3(1):67–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferreira CC, Barros MHFM, Barros AFM (2003) Optimal design of reinforced concrete T-sections in bending. Eng Struct 25(7):951–964

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gharehbaghi S, Khatibinia M (2015) Optimal seismic design of reinforced concrete structures under time-history earthquake loads using an intelligent hybrid algorithm. Earthq Eng Eng Vib 14(1):97–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • He Y, Hui C-W (2010) A binary coding genetic algorithm for multi-purpose process scheduling: a case study. Chem Eng Sci 65(16):4816–4828

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Homaifar A, Qi CX, Lai SH (1994) Constrained optimization via genetic algorithms. Simulation 62(4):242–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IS 456 (2000) Practice for plain and reinforced concrete or general building construction. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy J, Eberhart R (1995) Particle swarm optimization. In: Proceedings of ICNN’95—international conference on neural networks, IEEE, pp 1942–1948

  • Kwok NM, Ha QP, Samali B (2007) MR damper optimal placement for semi-active control of buildings using an efficient multi-objective binary genetic algorithm

  • Laníková I, Štěpánek P, Simůnek P (2014) Optimized design of concrete structures considering environmental aspects. Adv Struct Eng 17(4):495–511

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee C, Ahn J (2003) Flexural design of reinforced concrete frames by genetic algorithm. J Struct Eng 129(6):762–774

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lepš M, Šejnoha M (2003) New approach to optimization of reinforced concrete beams. Comput Struct 81(18–19):1957–1966

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madanmohan R, Basudhar PK, Dey A, Deb K, De S (2006) Settlement controlled optimum design of shallow footings. In: 2nd international conference on computational mechanics and simulation (ICCMS-06), IIT Guwahati, India

  • Mayengbam SS, Choudhury S (2012) Column size for R.C. frames with high drift. IJCEE 6(8):604–610

    Google Scholar 

  • Milajić A, Pejicic G, Beljakovic D (2013) Optimal structural design of reinforced concrete structures—review of existing solutions. Arch Tech Sci 9(1):53–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Nigdeli SM, Bekdaş G (2017) Optimum design of RC continuous beams considering unfavourable live-load distributions. KSCE J Civ Eng 21(4):1410–1416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park E, Min KW, Lee SK, Lee SH, Lee HJ, Moon SJ, Jung HJ (2010) Real-time hybrid test on a semi-actively controlled building structure equipped with full-scale MR dampers. J Intell Mater Syst Struct 21(18):1831–1850

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parsopoulos KE, Vrahatis MN (2007) Parameter selection and adaptation in unified particle swarm optimization. Math Comput Model 46(1–2):198–213

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Parsopoulos KE, Vrahatis MN (2010) Particle swarm optimization and intelligence: advances and applications. Information Science Reference-Imprint of: IGI Publishing, Hershey

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pant M, Thangaraj R, Abraham A (2009) Particle swarm optimization: performance tuning and empirical analysis. Foundations 3:101–128

    Google Scholar 

  • Prakash A, Agarwala SK, Singh KK (1988) Optimum design of reinforced concrete sections. Comput Struct 30(4):1009–1011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pratihar DK (2013) Soft computing: fundamentals and applications. Narosa Publishing House, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  • Preethi G, Arulraj PG (2016) Optimal design of axially loaded RC columns. Bonfring Int J Ind Eng Manag Sci 6(3):78–81

    Google Scholar 

  • Rahmanian I, Lucet Y, Tesfamariam S (2014) Optimal design of reinforced concrete beams: a review. Comput Concr 13:457–482

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rajeev S, Krishnamoorthy CS (1998) Genetic algorithm-based methodology for design optimization of reinforced concrete frames. Comput Aided Civ Infrastruct Eng 13(1):63–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renzi E, Serino G (2004) Testing and modelling a semi-actively controlled steel frame structure equipped with MR dampers. Struct Control Health Monit 11:189–221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rizwan M, Alam B, Rehman FU, Masud N, Shazada K, Masud T (2012) Cost optimization of combined footings using modified complex method of box. Int J Adv Struct Geotech Eng 1(1):24–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarma KC, Adeli H (1998) Cost optimization of concrete structures. J Struct Eng 124(5):570–578

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seyedpoor SM (2016) Structural damage detection using a multi-stage particle swarm optimization. Adv Struct Eng 14(3):533–549

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spetz A, Dahlblom O, Lindh P (2014) Optimum design of shallow foundation using finite element analysis. In: 11th World congress on computational mechanics (WCCM XI), Bercelona, Spain

  • Tapao A, Cheerarot R (2017) Optimal parameters and performance of artificial bee colony algorithm for minimum cost design of reinforced concrete frames. Eng Struct 151:802–820

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torregosa RF, Kanok-Nukulchai W (2002) Weight optimization of steel frames using genetic algorithm. Adv Struct Eng 5(2):99–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang HZ, Liu X, Yi WJ (2014) Reinforcement layout optimisation of RC D-regions. Adv Struct Eng 17(7):979–992

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Ms. Payel Chaudhuri declares that there has been no funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Payel Chaudhuri.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Ms. Payel Chaudhuri declares that she has no conflict of interest. Dr. Damodar Maity declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the author.

Additional information

Communicated by A. Di Nola.

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

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chaudhuri, P., Maity, D. Cost optimization of rectangular RC footing using GA and UPSO. Soft Comput 24, 709–721 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-019-04437-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-019-04437-x

Keywords

Navigation