Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.12989/cac.2018.21.4.441

Application of meta-model based parameter identification of a seismically retrofitted reinforced concrete building  

Yu, Eunjong (Department of Architectural Engineering, Hanyang University)
Publication Information
Computers and Concrete / v.21, no.4, 2018 , pp. 441-449 More about this Journal
Abstract
FE models for complex or large-scaled structures that need detailed modeling of structural components are usually constructed using commercial analysis softwares. Updating of such FE model by conventional sensitivity-based methods is difficult since repeated computation for perturbed parameters and manual calculations are needed to obtain sensitivity matrix in each iteration. In this study, an FE model updating procedure avoiding such difficulties by using response surface (RS) method and a Pareto-based multiobjective optimization (MOO) was formulated and applied to FE models constructed with a commercial analysis package. The test building is a low-rise reinforced concrete building that has been seismically retrofitted. Dynamic properties of the building were extracted from vibration tests performed before and after the seismic retrofits, respectively. The elastic modulus of concrete and masonry, and spring constants for the expansion joint were updated. Two RS functions representing the errors in the natural frequencies and mode shape, respectively, were obtained and used as the objective functions for MOO. Among the Pareto solutions, the best compromise solution was determined using the TOPSIS (Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution) procedure. A similar task was performed for retrofitted building by taking the updating parameters as the stiffness of modified or added members. Obtained parameters of the existing building were reasonably comparable with the current code provisions. However, the stiffness of added concrete shear walls and steel section jacketed members were considerably lower than expectation. Such low values are seemingly because the bond between new and existing concrete was not as good as the monolithically casted members, even though they were connected by the anchoring bars.
Keywords
model updating; response surface method; multi-objective optimization; seismic retrofit; TOPSIS;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 ACI (2011), Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete, 318-11.
2 Architectural Institute of Korea (2016), Korea Building Code, Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs.
3 ASCE/SEI (2007), Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, ASCE/SEI 41-06, Reston.
4 Behzadian, M., Otaghsara, S.K., Yazdani, M. and Ignatius, J. (2012), "A state-of the-art survey of TOPSIS applications", Exp. Syst. Appl., 39(17), 13051-13069.   DOI
5 Deb, K., Pratap, A., Agarwal, S. and Meyarivan, T.A.M.T. (2002), "A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II", IEEE Tran. Evol. Comput., 6(2), 182-197.   DOI
6 Deng, L. and Cai, C.S. (2009), "Bridge model updating using response surface method and genetic algorithm", J. Bridge Eng., 15(5), 553-564.   DOI
7 Fang, S.E. and Perera, R. (2009), "A response surface methodology based damage identification technique", Smart Mater. Struct., 18(6), 065009.   DOI
8 Fang, S.E. and Perera, R. (2011), "Damage identification by response surface based model updating using D-optimal design", Mech. Syst. Signal Pr., 25(2), 717-733.   DOI
9 Fang, S.E., Perera, R. and De Roeck, G. (2008), "Damage identification of a reinforced concrete frame by finite element model updating using damage parameterization", J. Sound Vib., 313(3), 544-559.   DOI
10 Friswell, M. and Mottershead, J.E. (1995), Finite Element Model Updating in Structural Dynamics, Springer Science.
11 Huang, J.J. and Yoon, K. (2011), Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications, Chapman and Hall.
12 Myers, R.H. and Montgomery, D.C. (2002), Response Surface Methodology: Process and Product Optimization Using Designed Experiments, 2nd Edition, Wiley
13 Jaishi, B. and Ren, W.X. (2006), "Damage detection by finite element model updating using modal flexibility residual", J. Sound Vib., 290(1), 369-387.   DOI
14 MIDAS IT (2004), MIDAS/GEN Version 6.3. 2 User's Manual.
15 Montgomery, D.C. (2008), Design and Analysis of Experiments, John Wiley & Sons.
16 Van Overschee, P. and De Moor, B. (1993), "N4SID: numerical algorithms for state space subspace system identification", Proceedings of the World Congress of the International Federation of Automatic Control.
17 Ren, W.X. and Chen, H.B. (2010), "Finite element model updating in structural dynamics by using the response surface method", Eng. Struct., 32(8), 2455-2465.   DOI
18 Shahidi, S.G. and Pakzad, S.N. (2013), "Generalized response surface model updating using time domain data", J. Struct. Eng., 140(8), A4014001.
19 Teughels, A., Maeck, J. and De Roeck, G. (2002), "Damage assessment by FE model updating using damage functions", Comput. Struct., 80(25), 1869-1879.   DOI
20 Yu, E. and Chung, L. (2012), "Seismic damage detection of a reinforced concrete structure by finite element model updating", Smart Struct. Syst., 9(3), 253-271.   DOI
21 Zitzler, E. and Thiele, L. (1999), "Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: a comparative case study and the strength Pareto approach", IEEE Tran. Evol. Comput., 3(4), 257-271.   DOI
22 Yu, E., Taciroglu, E. and Wallace, J.W. (2007), "Parameter identification of framed structures using an improved finite element model-updating method-Part I: formulation and verification", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 36(5), 619-639.   DOI