Unit 4 Result and Discussion

The outcome of the optimal design of a precast reinforced concrete portal frame using
Eurocode 2 or any structural design process will depend on several factors, including specific
project requirements, constraints, and design objectives. Eurocode 2, which is the European
standard for the design of concrete structures, provides guidelines and requirements for the
design of concrete structures, including precast reinforced concrete portal frames. As
explained in Section 1, the main objective of this study is to discover the negligible cost
feasible for a cantilever load-bearing wall using both GRG and transformative streamlining.
Subsequently, a detailed investigation will be carried out to differentiate the results obtained
from each separate methodology. This section presents the discoveries related to three
aspects: The situation that is associated with the minimum utilization rate is the basic point of
this work is to look at the utilization of the Sumed up Decreased Slope (GRG) shift in the
basic model cantilever load-bearing wall. This study aims to find the most ingenious
approach to the development of a cantilever load-bearing wall.
This study focuses on the use of the development method in the development of the load-
bearing wall, followed shortly by a complete examination and correlation of the obtained
results. The basic goal of using graphs and tables is to increase the clarity and
comprehensibility of the topic. This study means to analyze the influence of plan
components, specifically wall thickness (Tw) and required steel wall area, on the general
result. The objective of this estimate is to decide on the required area of steel for the
foundation of the design, given a length of 1 meter (Asw) and a predefined base thickness
(Tb). This study plans to analyze the attributes of curve support (ASb), heel width (Wh), and
toe width (Wt). What's more, the subject includes an assessment of both dynamic scheduling
imperatives and uninvolved scheduling requirements. The survey reliably met its objectives.
Seven individual main plan points should be upgraded to achieve the ideal setting for a pre-
engineered supported basic gate contour in accordance with Eurocode 2. The longitudinal
support parts (A1, A2, A3 and A4) and aspects (h1, h2 and h3) are of interest. Next are the
elements of the material used to maintain the expansion of the shell at a stable value of b =
200 mm:
It was decided that the yield strength of steel, given by Fyk, is 500 N/mm2 and that the
trademark of cement, denoted by Fck, is 20 N/mm.
The final outcome of the optimal design of a precast reinforced concrete portal frame using
Eurocode 2 or any structural design process will depend on several factors, including specific
project requirements, constraints and design objectives. Eurocode 2, which is the European
standard for the design of concrete structures, provides guidelines and requirements for the
design of concrete structures, including precast reinforced concrete portal frames.
Here are some of the key outcomes you can expect from the design process:
The design process will begin with a static analysis to determine the loads and forces acting
on the gantry frame. This includes consideration of gravity loads (e.g. dead and live loads)
and lateral loads (e.g. wind or seismic loads).
The design will include a selection of materials such as concrete mix design and type and
quality of reinforcement. Eurocode 2 provides guidelines for material properties and
specifications.
The final design will determine the geometry of the prefabricated portal frame, including the
dimensions of columns, beams, and connections.
Eurocode 2 provides requirements for the design of reinforcement details such as the
diameter and spacing of reinforcement bars, cover, and span lengths.
The design will need to ensure that the structure meets the required performance criteria, such
as load-deflection limits and stability requirements.
The design process may also include a foundation design to support the portal frame. This
will depend on the specific conditions of the project.
The end result should include detailed construction drawings and specifications that the
construction team can use to build the precast reinforced concrete portal frame.
In some cases, the design process may include an optimization phase to minimize
construction costs while meeting safety and performance requirements. This can lead to the
selection of an "optimal" design based on economy.
The final design should ensure compliance with Eurocode 2 and all relevant national or local
building codes and regulations.
The end result will be comprehensive project documentation that can be used for permitting,
construction, and inspection.
4.1 Methodology
Data analysis for the optimal design of a precast reinforced concrete portal frame using
Eurocode 2 involves a structured process. Here is a methodology to guide you through this
analysis:
 Data Collection:
Begin by gathering all relevant data for my project, including architectural drawings, site
conditions, load conditions, and any specific design requirements.

 Load Analysis:
Analyze the load conditions on the gantry frame to include dead loads, service loads, wind
loads, and any other applicable loads. Ensure compliance with Eurocode 2 load provisions.
  Material properties:
Collect data on material properties, including concrete strength, reinforcement types, and
properties, and any special material considerations for precast elements.
 Geometric configuration:
Define the geometric configuration of the portal frame, including column and beam sizes,
spans, and any architectural constraints.
 Structural analysis:
Perform static analysis using appropriate software or methods to determine internal forces,
moments, and deflections in the frame under various load combinations and Eurocode 2
serviceability limits.
 Reinforcement design:
Design reinforcement details taking into account Eurocode 2 requirements for reinforcement
ratios, coverage, and minimum and maximum bar diameters.
 Foundation design:
If necessary, design a foundation for the gantry frame to ensure it safely transfers the load to
the soil or supporting structure.
 Stability analysis:
Perform a stability analysis to ensure that the gantry frame is stable under all loading
conditions and to prevent buckling or overturning.
 Compliance with Eurocode 2:
Ensure that all aspects of the design, including materials, loads, and structural configurations,
comply with the relevant provisions of Eurocode 2.
 Optimization:
If cost optimization is the goal, consider different design alternatives, including different
element sizes, materials, or configurations, to find the most cost-effective solution while
meeting structural and safety requirements.
 Documentation:
Properly document analysis results, including all calculations, design assumptions, and
compliance with Eurocode 2. Create detailed design drawings and specifications.
 Peer review:
Have the design and analysis reviewed by a qualified structural engineer to ensure accuracy
and safety?
 Regulatory compliance:
Ensure the design complies with local building codes and regulations in addition to Eurocode
2.
 Construction support:
During construction, provide support to the construction team, including clarifying all design
details and conducting site inspections to verify that the structure meets the design.
 Quality Assurance:
Perform quality control and assurance measures to verify that materials and construction meet
design specifications.
 Final check:
Perform a final inspection to confirm that the precast reinforced concrete portal frame has
been constructed according to the design.
This methodology involves a systematic approach to data collection, analysis, and design to
ensure the safe and efficient construction of a precast reinforced concrete portal frame by
Eurocode 2 and other relevant standards and regulations.

4.2 Generalized Reduced Gradient (GRG) Method

Generalized Reduced Gradient (GRG) is used in conjunction with Excel Solver to perform
the optimization process. During the development of the project, the aforementioned process
was repeatedly used to ensure consistency with previous research and discussions with the
academic advisor.
The primary goal of the optimization process is to find optimal values for the design variables
(A1, A2, A3, A4, h1, h2, and h3) to minimize or maximize a given objective or set of
objectives. This must be done in a way that meets both the requirements of Eurocode 2 and
any other applicable guidelines for the project.
The Generalized Reduced Gradient (GRG) method is a scientific optimization method used to
find the best answer to nonlinear optimization problems with continuous variables. Excel
Solver is a tool that is widely used in engineering, economics, and many other fields. The
function in question is an important part of it. The main thing it does is solve challenging
optimization problems. Below is a complete overview of the Generalized Reduced Gradient
(GRG) method.
The GRG method is often used to solve complex optimization problems. The problems above
are related to finding the minimum or maximum value of the objective function while
respecting a set of rules that have already been set. It is important to note that the variables of
interest are continuous, which means that they can take on any real number within a certain
range. The "objective function" is explained using the GRG method. The function in question
tells you what the goal you want to achieve is to reduce costs, make more money, or improve
design features. It depends on the selection variables what the objective function is. Decision
factors are parameters or values that can be changed within certain limits to make the purpose
function work better. In civil engineering, these factors include things like size, quality of
materials, and various structural elements.
When optimization problems arise, there are often limits to overcome. Constraints are limits
or restrictions that are placed on selected variables. They include things like upper and lower
bounds, equality or inequality equations, or structural requirements. Because of these
constraints, we can say that the viable region is where the best answer must be located.
Iterative process: The GRG method uses an iterative process to converge to the best answer.
The first step in the process is to make an initial guess about the selection variables. The
algorithm finds the gradient of the objective function and the Hessian matrix for each
iteration and then changes the selected variables based on this knowledge. The above process
continues until the convergence condition is met.
There is a condition called the convergence criterion that tells the GRG technique when to
stop working. This condition determines when the process will end. In general, this process
involves checking whether the difference in the objective function or decision variables
between rounds is less than a certain level.
One of the advantages of the GRG method is that it can be used in a variety of ways to solve
difficult nonlinear optimization problems. Excel Solver is a tool that is widely used because it
works quickly and is useful. This method works especially well when it is difficult to find an
analytical answer. The GRG method is used in many fields, including engineering (for
example, structural design and process optimization), banking (for example, portfolio
optimization), and logistics (for solving routing problems). When used in construction, this
method makes it easy to find the best plans to use the least number of materials or make the
structure as strong as possible. For example, the GRG method gives good answers in many
different real-world situations, which shows how robust it is. Still, there is no guarantee that
the algorithm will always find the world's best solution when things are highly nonlinear and
have more than one mode. In such situations, the process may converge to a local optimum,
making default values even more important.
In summary, the Generalized Reduced Gradient (GRG) method is a great way to solve
nonlinear optimization problems. This method is often used in engineering and other fields
to find the best answers that meet specific goals while staying within the limits that have been
set. This method can help improve structural engineering designs by making them cost-
effective and maintaining structural strength.
 Dimension of Portal Frame
Symbo
Dimension Value (in m) Value (in mm)
l
Length of Span L 15 15000

Length of half-span L2 7.5 7500

Length of Bay B 3 3000

Height of Column H1 5 5000
Height of Rafter H2 1 1000
Length of Rafter L3 7.57 7566.37
In Rad In degree
Angle of Rafter ϴ 0.13 7.53
Dimension of Column
Width b 0.2 200
Depth at the base h1 0.2 200
Depth at the Eaves h2 0.6 600
Dimension of Rafter
Width b 0.2 200
Depth at Haunch h2 0.6 600
Depth at the Apex h3 0.3 300

Analysis of LC1
Reactions KN Member AB
Ray 54.54 RBx (KN)
REy 54.54 Ruby (KN)
Check 0 MBA (KNm)

RAx 25.65
REx 25.65
Fig 3

Fig 4

4.3 Sensitivity analysis

The design of RC structures involves achieving a large set of cost-related objectives,
and service and strength criteria. Given this, the first objective can be expressed as
minimization of construction costs, given by

g(x)= C/C0 – 1 >0

where C is the actual cost of the structure and CO is the reference cost it represents
the initial cost of each cycle of analysis and optimization. Therefore, the price is always one
of the primary objectives for the optimization algorithm. The cost of building the structure
was expressed in costs per volume of materials (concrete, reinforcing steel, and formwork).
Regarding operating conditions, NP EN 1992-1-1 (2010) states a limit Stress restraint, crack
control, and deflection control states. Take it in
The objective related to concrete compressive stress can be expressed as
 where the applied stress, c σ, must be less than 45% of the characteristic value
compressive strength of concrete (fck). This limit ensures that the concrete stays inside
the range of linear creep and also longitudinal cracking is restricted. Cracking is controlled by
prescribing the minimum longitudinal reinforcement area.

4.4 Structural analysis

The analysis of RC structures requires considering the instantaneous and the time--
dependent behavior of concrete. Here, the concrete was modeled as a linear
viscoelastic material and the time-dependent effects of aging, shrinkage, and creep
were computed according to NP EN 1992-1-1 (2010) formulation. The increase in the
modulus of elasticity with time due to concrete aging can be expressed as

where Ecm is the mean modulus of elasticity of concrete at an age of 28 days, t is the
age of the concrete in days and s is a coefficient depending on the cement type. The
deformation of a concrete member loaded with a stress σc at an age t0 is time-dependent
and can be expressed as the sum of stress-dependent,

where ( )0, is the creep function. If the acting stresses are less than 0.45 fck, the
principle of superposition is valid and the creep strain varies linearly with the applied
stress. Here, the creep strain is obtained by the approximation of the creep function,
( )0, ttJ, by a Dirichlet series (Bazant, 1988) leading to
 The shrinkage deformation depends on the member notional size, the age of the
concrete at the beginning of the drying shrinkage, the environmental relative humidity, the
cement type, and the concrete compressive strength. Equivalent nodal forces were used to
simulate the time-dependent effects in the finite element model. These forces are calculated
from the shrinkage and creep strains for a given time interval and produce the same
displacement field as the time-dependent effect, from which the actual deformation and stress
states are computed. For a detailed description of the time-dependent effects’ modeling please
refer to previous works by the authors (Martins et al., 2015; Martins et al., 2016). The RC
was considered with an elastic behavior for analysis purposes and the material nonlinearities
were accounted for in the member’s design. The cross-sections were considered as
homogeneous concrete cross-sections disregarding the steel reinforcement which was
considered only for design purposes. These considerations follow the usual assumptions in
the analysis and design of RC-framed structures. The beams and columns were modeled with
2-node and 12-degrees-of-freedom Euler-Bernoulli beam elements. To consider the second-
order effects the stiffness matrix of the columns is computed considering the elastic and
geometric contributions and the structural analysis is carried out in an iterative way to
perform a second-order elastic analysis.
4.5 Design variables
The design variables considered were the cross-sectional dimensions of the beams and
columns, and areas of longitudinal and shear reinforcement. Figure 2 presents the design
considered variables. All of these variables have a direct impact on the cost of the structure
and have been assumed to be continuous. However, the final solution must be practical and
therefore characterized by discrete values of design variables. There are several approaches to
obtain solutions to discrete variable optimization problems (Arora et al., 1994). Since the
individual sizes are close to each other in this problem, rounding has been adopted to
efficiently obtain discrete practical solutions.
4.6 Continuous beam optimization
Unit costs and properties of the considered materials are shown in Table 1. Unit prices
for materials, including construction costs, were obtained from ITeC (2019). The
beam was subjected to uniformly distributed permanent and live loads and three load cases
were considered. In the first loading state, the beam was subjected to quasi-static
load combination, a long-term analysis (18250 days), and serviceability were performed
limit state design goals were considered. The second and third load cases correspond to the
basic load condition related to the verification of the limit state of bearing capacity,
with the payload positioned to obtain maximum values of internal forces. Table 1
represents the 6 design variables considered. A concrete cover was considered and
constant design parameter. Figure 4 shows the evolution of the cost of the structure during the
iterations analysis and optimization process. The original design was defined by the
attachment of a cross beam cross-section dimensions according to preliminary design rules
(height = span/12), calculation of corresponding internal forces, and calculation of steel
reinforcement. The algorithm converges to the optimal solution after a small number of
iterations (20 iterations) with a cost reduction of 11.7%. Table 1 lists the initial and optimized
values of design variables. It can be stated that the reduction in costs is mainly caused by a
reduction in cross-sectional dimensions, which also means a reduction in production costs
from work. Figure 5 shows the normalized values of the strength design targets for the
optimized solution. Maximum design values of bending resistance lenses are close to zero at
the midspan of lateral spans and midspan supports. The maximum values of the shear
resistance design targets occur at intermediate supports. For a long-term load condition, the
optimal solution is a maximum value for vertical beam deflection of 12 cm, which
corresponds to the cutoff value (range/500) established for this design objective. It is worth
that if time-dependent effects were neglected the optimal solution with 9.8% lower costs be
achieved. This is caused by a decrease in the beam's vertical deflection, i.e. height of the
cross-section may be reduced, which will be reflected in the shrinkage of the concrete and
formwork costs. This result highlights the importance of taking time dependence into account
effects in the optimal design algorithm.
4.6.1. Column optimization in biaxial bending and axial force
This example involves an RC cantilever column subjected to its weight and
load shown in Figure 6. Table 2 describes the 4 design variables considered. The
concrete cover was considered a constant design parameter. Design objectives related to
cost and robustness verifications were defined. Figure 7 shows that the algorithm converges
to the optimal solution with less than 50 iterations. Table 2 lists the initial and optimized
design values variables. A cost reduction of 12.1% can be observed due to the reduction of
cross-sectional dimensions and Asw/s as As increases. Figure 8 shows that normalized design
target values of combined bending resistance and axial force approach zero on the support.
Design goals for shear resistance are constant along the longitudinal axis of the column and
their value is given by the minimum value prescribed for Asw/s.
4.6.2. Optimization of the reinforced concrete frame
This example concerns the optimization of a frame structure of real-size RC with 5 floors and
3 fields in each horizontal direction as shown in Figure 9. The properties of the considered
materials are shown in Table 3. The concrete cover was considered a constant design
parameter that can be defined by environmental exposure class. A 35mm cover was used in
this example. Final the finite element model of the structure has 336 nodes and 440 elements.
A total of 7 load states corresponding to usability and the limit state of bearing capacity
verifications were considered. Table 4 describes the load conditions. The dead weight (DL)
includes the dead weight of the frame structure, exterior and interior walls, and RC slabs on
each floor with a thickness of 0.20 m (thickness of 0.15 m on the roof). The applied loads
with values of 4 kN/m2 and 0.4 kN/m2 were considered as under tension. load (LL) on floors
and roofs. Load distribution from plate to beams was calculated concerning the affected areas
of each beam. Wind action (W) was considered by nodal forces equivalent to the applied
wind pressure of 0.66 kN/m2 on building facades. Seismic action was considered using a
modal/spectral approach to the elastic response spectra of NP EN 1998-1-1 (2010). 20 modes
in total were considered as an approach to the response of the structure under seismic action.
According to
Multiple initial designs were defined with a varying cross-section of element dimensions.
Square and rectangular columns with h and b ranging from 0.30 m to 0.60 m with a step size
of 0.10 m were considered. Beams with h 0.50 m and 0.60 m and ab 0.25 m and 0.30 m, were
adopted. In the first step, 36 original designs were created and analyzed and those not
meeting the service design objectives were excluded. For the remaining designs
corresponding areas of reinforcement that meet the strength design goals were calculated. In
the second step, some proposals that did not meet Design goals regarding maximum
reinforcement area were excluded and the remaining 14 original designs were optimized. The
results presented correspond only solution with minimal costs. Figure 10 shows the evolution
of structure costs through an optimization process. The algorithm converges after a relatively
small number of iterations (60 iterations), which emphasizes its computational efficiency.
Table 6 summarizes the total number of costs and costs of concrete, reinforcement, and
formwork. total price a reduction of 27.2% can be observed due to the reduction of
reinforcement areas and also in cross-sectional dimensions. This also translates into cost-
reduction formwork. In the final solution, formwork forms the main percentage,
approximately 59.6% of the total cost. Concrete represents 17.9% of total costs, As accounts
for 16.9%, and the remaining cost is accounted for by Asw. These results are obvious
depending on the values adopted for unit costs. It forces the cost of formwork solutions that
reduce the height of the beams to minimize the formwork area contact with concrete surfaces.
To ensure the design objectives of the fortress it is compensated by increasing the amount of
reinforcement. A rounding process was adopted to obtain a practical solution. That is, values
of concrete cross-sectional dimensions were rounded to the nearest discrete size available in
50 mm increments. This solution meets the stress and strength design lenses with a maximum
distortion of 9.6% in beam deflection. To improve it solution, the height of the beams was
rounded up, which ensured a feasible solution. If the solution obtained in this way does not
meet some of the objectives of the strength design, new the optimization process must be
performed considering only the reinforcement areas as design variables. Reducing the
number of design variables makes it a faster analysis and optimization process. The ultimate
practical reinforcement solution detailing, on which the adequate performance of the RC
structure depends, must be defined with the intervention of the designer. In this example, this
solution represents increasing the total cost by 5.1% concerning the continuous optimal
solution. For the Asw/s, the typical 2-leg stirrup solution was adopted. Figure 11 presents, for
example, the reinforcement detail for beam B1
Conclusions
The following conclusions can be drawn:
• Correct the usual trial-and-error process of designing RC frame structures, an integrated
tool for analysis and optimization was developed when designing these structures. The
analysis takes into account time-dependence effects, second-order effects, geometric
imperfections, static loads, and seismic action.
• The design of RC frame structures can be solved as a multi-purpose optimization problem
with minimum cost, service, and power objectives criteria. The use of a gradient-based
algorithm presents a difficulty that arises from the dependence of resistance of RC members
on design variables. This was it solved by calculating the sensitivity of the design objectives
in the normalized form.
• A practical solution can be optimized with discrete values of the design variables obtained
by rounding the continuous optimal solution.
• The developed method represents an effective procedure for achieving optimization
practical solutions from a technical point of view, taking everyone into account relevant
actions and objectives of the proposal.
• Future research work should consider slabs and shear walls that were ignored as simplifying
assumptions in this article. Moreover, to obtain more uniform solutions of details and full use
of material strength capacity, the redistribution of bending moments must be considered