International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology (IJEAT)
ISSN: 2249 – 8958, Volume-5, Issue-4, April 2016
Optimised Cost Design of Reinforced Concrete
Frame
Renitha T V, Raghunandan Kumar
Abstract: Cost optimization of Reinforced Concrete (RC) frames
carried out in the present study. A three bay, three storey RC
frame is optimised for minimum cost using global optimization
toolbox in MATLAB software. The design variables taken for this
study are effective depth and area of reinforcement of beams and
columns. The design constraints included are geometric, strength
and reinforcement areas confirming to IS 456:2000 code. The
concept of grouping is incorporated for the simplicity of the
design. The material properties are considered as constants. A
MATLAB program is developed which expects to input constant
parameters like grade of concrete and steel, cost of materials, live
load etc. The program output is design variables and the cost of
frame for optimized design. Reliable results have been obtained
and are validated with manual design by Limit State Method.
Comparison of optimised result with ETABS design result is
made.
Keywords: ETABS, Genetic Algorithm, MATLAB,
Optimization, RC Frame
I. INTRODUCTION
Reinforced Concrete Frame optimization is performed to
design an economical structure which is safe too. This is
achieved by implementing structural constraintsinaccordance
with IS 456:2000 code. The cost of RC Frame is affected by
three components namely cost of concrete, cost of steel and
cost of labour and formwork. In comparison to steel
optimization RC optimization is complex problem owing to
the large number of variables involve, the nature of those
variables and the various reinforcement details available for a
single design.
In Reinforced Concrete(RC) frames, beams are rigidly
connected to columns, so that the whole frame acts asa single
unit. When designing a reinforced concrete frame,
consideration of the interaction between beams and columns
is vital in developing safe and cost-efficient structures.
Beams are the structural elements which transmits the load
from slabs and wall to columns. They are flexural members
subjected to both bending moment(BM) andshear forces(SF).
Columns are structural elements which support the frame
system by transferring the load to thefoundation.They are
subjected to compressive axial loads, and bending moments.
Considering the economical aspect of construction andever
increasing cost of materials and labour, the optimized design
of reinforced structural members is essential. Sincelarge
number of member variables are involved in theoptimisation
of RC Frames, calculus based methods arefound to be
infeasible. In most of the RC design there isa common trend
to select higher sections than designedone,
Revised Version Manuscript Received on April 25, 2016.
Renitha T V, P G Student, Department of Civil Engineering, Christ
University Faculty of Engineering, Bangalore, KA, India.
Raghunandan Kumar R, Associate Professor, Department of Civil
Engineering, Christ University Faculty of Engineering, Bangalore, KA,
India.
194
Which is economically not advisable. Since different
designs may be available for any RC design, optimization
can help to choose economical design. In practical design,
sections of beams and columns are taken as multiples ofone
inch (25mm), the section variables can be chosen as
discrete variable. The reinforcement bar available in
themarket also has specific sizes and hence the diameters of
reinforcing bars are taken as discrete variables.In the
present study, the objective is to perform cost optimization
of three storey framed structure under bothdead load and
live load confirming to the specifications in IS 456:2000
code. Heuristic technique is used as it involves discrete and
integer variables.
A. Genetic Algorithm
Genetic algorithm(GA) is one of the Heuristic
Optimizationalgorithms, which is based on the
evolutiontheory of Darwin. They were proposed by
Holland,1975[17]. The main principle of GA is the survival
of robustones and the elimination of the others in a
population.GA has exceptional capabilities which can solve
discrete,non-continuous, non-differentiable, non-smooth
cost functions,to attain the global optimum.In the
implementation of GA, randompopulation of chromosomes
is chosen initially. It is thenevaluated to obtain better
solution for the target problemby utilizing these
chromosomes [18]. Generation of newpopulation involves
three operations such as reproduction,crossover and
mutation. This newly created population isused to generate
subsequent populations and so on, whichgive rise to a
solution that is closer to the optimum solution.Decoding of
the strings is done to determine thevalues of the objective
function of the individuals of thenew population. These
values express the fitness of the solutionsof the new
generations. This completes one cycleof genetic algorithm
called a generation. This improvedsolution is stored as best
solution for next generation. Thisprocess is continued till
convergence is achieved. A numberof feasible solutionsare
provided by GA for a particularproblem depending in
population size, generation size etc.
II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
The application of Genetic Algorithm in structural
optimizationwas studied initially by Rajeev et al [16].
Costoptimization of three bay four storey plane frame was
presentedin his study. Constraint equations were
formulatedbased on the specifications in IS 456:2000,
omitting shearreinforcement consideration. Camp et al. [9],
studied optimizationRC frames using Genetic Algorithm.
The formulation was based on specifications of the ACI
Code consideringit as discrete cost optimization problem.
Aga, A etal. [1] investigated the cost optimization of
reinforced concrete(RC) frames based on specification in
Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
& Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
 Optimised Cost Design of Reinforced Concrete Frame

ACI code. ArtificialNeural Network (ANN) was the f -Objective Function,

optimization techniqueused and modelling was done by the Cc- Cost of concrete per Cubic Metre
NeuroShell-2 software program. T. S. Ketkukaet al. [2] Cs- Cost of steel in Metric Tonne
presenteddesign optimization of a two bay single storey RC Cf- Cost of formwork per Sq. Meter.
planeframe. Direct stiffness method was used for the Vc- Volume of Concrete
analysis.Constraint equations based on specifications of Vs- Volume of Steel
Eurocode2were formulated. Bat Algorithm (BA) was usedby γs-Unit Weight of steel
S. Gholizadehet al. [4] to study the optimum design Af- Surface area of Formwork
ofreinforced concrete (RC) plane moment frames. The
C. Formulation of Design Constraints
optimizationprocess based on ACI 318-08 code. The
frameswere analysed for gravity loads as well as seismic Constraints can be geometric constraints and structural
loads.S. Gharehbaghiaet al. [5] investigated for the constraints in accordance with IS 456: 2000.
optimizationof RC frames under the combination of gravity Beam Constraints:
and equivalentstatic lateral loads. A real valued model of
particleswarm optimization (PSO) algorithm was utilized to Deflection Criteria Constraint [22]
performthe optimization process. Mahmoud et al.[6],studieda For Continuous beams,
method to develop an optimization model using ArtificialBee Span
Colony (ABC) Algorithm, satisfying the strengthand  26
Eff .Depth
serviceability constraints of the ACI318-08code. A.Kavehet
al.[7] studied the optimization of RC plane framesusing Big
Bang - Big Crunch algorithm(BB-BC). Thestudy was done l
 26 (1)
for gravity and lateral loads and constraintequation was d
formulated based on ACI318-08 code.
Flexural Capacity Constraint:
III. OPTIMIZATION PROBLEM
The problem is to minimise the cost of RC framed structure. Mu  Mulim  0 (2)
The optimization process involves the selection of design
variables, formulation of objective function and formulation Minimum Area of Tensile Reinforcement:
of constraint equation.
As per clause 26.5.1.1a of IS 456:2000 [22],
A. Selection of Design variables minimum tensile reinforcement is decided by theequation,
The cross sectional dimensions and areas of reinforcement
for columns and beams are considered as design variables. Ast 0.85
For beams:  (3)
bd f y
Effective depth: X1
Reinforcing area at top: X2
Reinforcement area at bottom: X3 Maximum Reinforcement Area:
Diameter of stirrups: X4 Ast
 0.04 (4)
Spacing of Stirrups: X5 bD
For columns: Shear Strength Constraint:
Effective depth: X6
Vu
Longitudinal reinforcement area : X7 Nominal Shear Stress,  v 
Set of discrete values for effective depth of beam: bd
(225-600),step size 25 100 Ast
Set of discrete values for effective depth of column: Reinforcement Ratio, Pt 
bd
(275-600),step size 25
The magnitude of design shear strength has beencalculated
Set of discrete values for stirrups dia: (8mm , 10mm)
by the empirical formula,
B. Formulation of Objective Function
The objective function is to minimise the cost ofstructure. A c 
0.85( (0.8 fck )  1  5   1
Frame consists of beam and column sections.Hence 6
minimising the cost of frame is expressed as 0.8 fck
Minimize(Costframe)  Minimize(Costbeam  Costcolumn)
 or 1, whichever is greater.
6.89 Pt
The cost of a structural member consists of cost ofconcrete, If  v   c ,provide minimum shear reinforcement as per the
cost of steel and cost of formwork required inthe construction equation,
of the member.
Asv 0.4
The optimization problem can be expressed in mathematical  (5)
form as, (bSv ) 0.87 f y

Minimize f=  (CcVc +Cs sVs+Cf Af )element

where,

Published By:
195 Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
& Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
 International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology (IJEAT)
ISSN: 2249 – 8958, Volume-5, Issue-4, April 2016

If  v   c the difference in design shear strength of the RC

beam and the nominal shear stressis to betaken care by
providing stirrups.
( v   c ) bd Asv
 (6)
 0.87 fyd  Sv
where,
Asv- Area of shear reinforcement,
Sv- spacing of stirrups.
As per IS 456-2000 clause 26.51.5[22].
The spacing of the stirrups,
Sv  0.75d or Sv  300 (7)
where,
 v - Nominal Shear stress of beam
Vu-Shear Force due to design loads
b- Width of Beam
d- Effective Depth of Beam
Figure 1: plan
Column Constraints
Geometric Constraints:
Width of column ≤Depth of Column
Wc≤Dc (8)
where,
Wc- Width of the column
Dc- Depth of the column

Axial Capacity Constraint:

As per Clause 39.3, IS456:2000,
Ultimate Axial Capacity ,
Pu  0.4 fckAc  0.67 fyAs

P-Pu ≤0 (9) Figure 2: Elevation

At least 4 reinforcement bars should be considered inthe 4
where, corners of the beam cross section as shown in Fig 3.
Ac- Area of Concrete
As- Area of Steel
P- Axial Capacity of the column

Minimum Reinforcement Area:

As
1 0 (10)
( 0.008WcDc )

Maximum Reinforcement area:

As
1  0 (11)
(0.03WcDc )
The problem is a multi-variable, single objective, dynamic,
constraint, discrete, non-linear programming
(NLP)optimization problem.
Figure 3:Minimum Reinforcement in Beam and column
In order to compute the cost of optimally designed frame, the
internal forces including axial force, shear force and bending D. Constant Parameters
moments in the frame are required. Modelling and analysis of
Some of the parameters related to structural elements are
a three-bay, three storey reinforced concrete symmetrical
treated as constants, which is given in Table 1.
frame is performed.
Table 1: Constant Parameters

The frame is shown in Fig 1 and Fig 2 Parameter Value

Shape of members Rectangular
fck 25 N/mm2
fy 415 N/mm2
Storey Height 3.3 m

Published By:
196 Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
& Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
 Optimised Cost Design of Reinforced Concrete Frame

Width of Beam & 200 mm Table 2: Grouping of Beams and Columns

Column
Clear Cover for Beams 25 mm Type Designation
Clear Cover for columns 40 mm Exterior Column C1
Live Loads 4 KN/m2 Interior Column C2
Live Load on terrace 1 KN/m2 Exterior Beams B1
Floor Finish 1 KN/m2 Interior Beams B2
Cost of Concrete Rs 9000/m3 Beams at terrace level B3
(fck=25) F. Optimisation Procedure
Cost of Steel (fy=415) Rs 60000/MT
Cost of Formwork Rs 400 /m2 Optimisation was carried out using GA Global
(Assumed) Optimisation toolbox in MATLAB software. Since
optimization problem contains integer constraints, no
custom function can be provided for creation function,
E. Grouping of Elements crossover function, mutation function or initial
In order to reduce the complexity of optimization,grouping of scores[23].After several iterations, it is found that
beams and columns have been done basedon the position and population size of 200and Generation value of 200 gives
loading conditions. The grouping ofbeams and columns is feasible solution by GAtool. The GA design assumed one
done as given in Fig 4(a), Fig 4(b) and in row of continuous bars in both the positive and negative
Table 2. moment zones and bar cut off is omitted.
A Graphical User Interface GUI) was developed in
MATLAB software to customize the various parameters
involved in the study. All constant parameters were given
as input and cost of frame and design variables were
displayed as output.

IV. RESULTS & DISCUSSIONS

The optimised result obtained is shown in Table
3fordifferent groups of beams and columns, which are also
presented in terms of graphs.

Figure 4(a): Grouping of Beams and Columns

Figure 5: GA Convergence History for 200 generations

Fig 5 shows that optimization was proceeded smoothly and
optimized result i.e., minimum cost of the frame is obtained
at 200 iterations.

Figure 4(b): Grouping of Beams and Columns

Published By:
197 Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
& Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
 International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology (IJEAT)
Table 3: Optimised Result of Beams and Columns
The GA optimized result is validated with manual design
values for all groups of beams and columns.
a. Comparative Study
Figure 6: Comparison of Eff. depth from GA and ETABS
Table 4: Comparison of GA result and ETABS design
result
198
ISSN: 2249 – 8958, Volume-5, Issue-4, April 2016
Figure 7: Comparison of reinforcement area from GA
and ETABS
Fig 6 shows comparison of GA optimized effective depth
with ETABS designed value of the same.
Fig 7 shows comparison of GA optimized area of
reinforcement with ETABS designed value of the same.
Table 4 shows comparison of optimisation result with
ETABS design result.
Table 5 shows Comparison of cost obtained from ETABS
designed cost and GA optimized cost.
From Table 5, it is seen that compared to ETABS designed
Cost, optimized cost is reduced for beams and for columns.
The percentage reduction in frame cost of optimized design
is about 17%.
Table 5: Comparison of cost obtained from ETABS
designed cost and GA optimized cost
b. Effect of Grade of Concrete on the Cost of Frame
Fig 8 shows variation of Frame cost with different grades
of concrete.
Figure 8: Frame Cost Vs Grade of Concrete
Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
& Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.
 Optimised Cost Design of Reinforced Concrete Frame
Fig 8 shows that the relationship between grade of concrete
and the total cost of frame is linear in nature.
V. CONCLUSIONS
Following conclusions are extracted from the present study:
1. The three bay three storey frame composed of beams and
columns was successfully optimised using GAoptimization.
2. The optimized design is confirming to the specification in
the IS 456:2000 Code.
3. In this study, heuristic technique , Genetic Algorithm
optimization tool is found to be efficient for the optimized
design of RC Frames.
4. The variables used to obtain optimal design are effective
depth and the area of reinforcement of beams andcolumns.
5. The results obtained using GA optimization were validated
by comparing it with results obtained by manual calculation.
The optimized result obtained for area of reinforcement f or
beams and columns are exactlymatches with the values
obtained through manual calculation. Hence it can be
concluded that the designobtained by the proposed technique
is safe and economical.
6. Variation of frame cost with grade of concrete is studied
and found to be minimal. It is observed that the variation is
almost linear for grade of concrete M20,M25, and M30 and
slightly increased by 7.6% for M35.
7. Comparison of optimized result with ETABS designresult
was studied. It was found that reduction indepth of the beam
and reinforcement are maximum25%, whereas for columns it
is more than 50%.
8. Cost comparison is done with ETABS result. It is found
that 7.5% reduction in beams and 45% reduction in columns
can be obtained. Overall cost of frames reduced by 17% in
the optimised result.
9. The higher cost reduction for columns is due to less
variables and constraints considered.
VI. SCOPE FOR FUTURE WORK
The study can be further extended by
consideringindividualstructural elements without grouping
them.
A sensitivity analysis can be studied to understand the
variation and effect of different parameters like span, live
load etc. on cost of frame.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The first author acknowledges the support provided byChrist
University Faculty of Engineering.
REFERENCES
1. Aga A, Adam F M, Design Optimization of ReinforcedConcrete
Frames, Open Journal of Civil Engineering,5, 74-83 ,2015
2. Ketkuka T S, Abubakar I, S P Ejeh, Optimum DesignSensitivity Of
Reinforced Concrete Frames, InternationalJournal of Advanced
Engineering Research andTechnology (IJAERT) Volume 2 Issue 5,
August 2014,ISSN No.: 2348 8190,2014
3. Yousif S T and Najem M Rabi, Optimum Cost Designof Reinforced
Concrete Columns Using Genetic Algorithms,Al-Rafidain Engineering
Vol.22, No. 1,2014
4. Gholizadeh S. and Aligholizadeh V., Optimum designof reinforced
concrete frames using bat meta-heuristicalgorithm, Int. J. Optim. Civil
Eng., 2013; 3(3):483-497 ,2013
199
5. Gharehbaghia S. and Fadaee M.J., Design Optimizationof RC
Frames under Earthquake Loads. InternationalJournal of
Optimization in Civil Engineering, 2,459-477.,2012
6. Mahmoud Maher Jahjouh, Design Optimization ofRC Frames using
Artificial Bee Colony Algorithm,Msc(Civil Eng.) Thesis,The Islamic
University ofGaza,2012
7. Kaveh A and Sabzi O., Optimal design of reinforcedconcrete frames
Using big bang-big crunch algorithm,International Journal of Civil
Engineering, Vol. 10,No. 3,2012
8. Yousif S.T., ALsaffar. I.S. and Ahmed, S.M. , OptimumDesign of
Singly and Doubly Reinforced ConcreteRectangular Beam Sections:
Artificial NeuralNetworks Application, Iraqi Journal of Civil
EngineeringVol. 6,1-19,2012
9. Camp. C.V., Pezeshk, S. and Hansson, H., FlexuralDesign of
Reinforced Concrete Frames Using a GeneticAlgorithm, Journal of
Structural Engineering(ASCE), 129, 105-115,2003
10. Moharrami H. and Grierson, D.E , Computer AutomatedDesign of
Reinforced Concrete Frameworks.Journal of Structural Engineering
(ASCE), 119, 2036-2058,1993
11. Izadi. M. Niaki and Maheri M. R, Optimum designof 2-d reinforced
concrete frames using a genetic algorithm,3rd International
Conference on Concrete andDevelopment ,2014
12. Bikramjit Singh, Optimisation of RCC Beam, InternationalJournal of
Engineering, Business and EnterpriseApplications (IJEBEA), 14-
316,2014
13. Mehta S Zubin, Cost Optimization of ConcreteBeam Element By
Direct Exhaustive Search Method,International Journal of
Innovations in Engineeringand Technology(IJIET), Vol.2, Issue2.
ISSN:2319-1058,2013
14. Gandomi AH, Mixed variable structural optimizationusing Firefly
Algorithm, Computers and Structures,Vol. 10 ,2011
15. Mohammed A Ismail, Design Optimization of StructuralConcrete
Beams Using Genetic Algorithms,Msc(Civil Eng.) Thesis, The
Islamic University ofGaza,2007
16. Rajeev S and Krishnamoorthy C S, GeneticAlgorithm-Based
Methodology for Design Optimizationof Reinforced Concrete
Frames, Computer-AidedCivil and Infrastructure Engineering,
Vol.13,1998
17. J H Holland, Adaptation in Natural and ArtificialSystems.AnnArbor,
MI: MIT Press, 1975.
18. David Beasley, An overview of genetic algorithms:Part 2, research
topics. University Computing,15(4):170-181, 1993.
19. Arora J S(1989), Introduction to Optimum Design,McGraw-Hill,
20. N Subramanian, Design of Reinforced ConcreteStructures , Oxford
University Press
21. Rao S S, Engineering Optimization: Theory andPractice, John Wiley
and Sons
22. IS 456:2000 code, ”Plain and Reinforced Concrete-Code of Practice”
23. MathworksInc., Global OptimizationToolbox: User’s Guide
(r2011b),http://www:mathworks:com=help=pd fdoc/gads/gadstb.pdf
Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
& Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.