Iteration and Optimization

Iteration is just a repeated calculation.

If we want to solve an equation x + 1 = 5 , we can assume x and check whether x + 1 = 5 or not. If not, we can try another value of x and repeat this calculation until x + 1 = 5.
 

In this simple equation, we can solve x = 5 - 1 = 4 easily. But some engineering problems are more complicated and iteration is more efficient and/or sometimes iteration is the only way to find the solution.
 

If we want to solve another equation xy = 5, this is rather complicated because there are infinite combinations of x and y’s. However, if we can add some “constraints” like we want to minimize x + y, we can find the solution and this is called the “optimization problem”.

(If another condition is something like, x + y = 4, this is not an optimization problem because there is only one set of solutions.)

 
In our pile cap problems, there are many combinations of pile cap dimensions that satisfy all requirements. In this case, we can try to find the pile cap dimensions that satisfy all requirements and corresponds to the minimum volume, and this is a good example of both “Iteration” and “Optimization”.

(There can be an argument that the minimum volume can not be optimum. Someone can insist that the optimum shall be minimum cost and we have to consider reinforcements, forwork, etc. The author has no objection to this, but still believes minimum volume is a good choice as the target.)

 

“Optimization” does need “Iteration” and the purpose of “Iteration” is “Optimization”, so these two terminologies are somewhat mixed and have different meanings for each engineer. It is not a universal/correct definition, but the author accepts “Iteration” as checks for all possible scenarios, and “Optimization” as finding only the optimum in the fastest way.
 

Creep Analysis 6

Creep Analysis 7

Think about a two-span continuous bridge, as shown in Fig 1. Let's calculate the secondary creep moments. Detailed dimensions and creep factors, etc., are not important, and the MIDAS file "Creep 2ndary Check"is attached for the reader's reference.

Creep Analysis 1 

Unsymmetric Section Analysis

Overview

Sometimes we need tiresome calculations, even though they are not critical nor difficult, but they are essential, and they take time if we do not have proper tools. One of these is the moment of inertia calculation for cracked, circular concrete sections. We need this calculation when we perform service stress checks for flexure and deflection checks.

Creep Analysis 3

The blog article of Creep Analysis 3 showed how Dr. Ghali et al. explained the creep analysis by flexibility methods.


To better understand the creep behavior, solve the previous example in a less efficient way. Here, different sign conventions will be applied.

Unsymmetric Section Analysis

Creep Analysis 3

We have gone through two different approaches by Dr. El-Badry so far. You can find the previous articles via these two links: Creep Analysis 1, Creep Analysis 2.

For creep analysis, the most common problem in the real-world design is continuous girders built as span by span. This example is very well explained by Dr. Ghali et al. (Concrete structures, Stresses, and deformations, 4th ed., CRC press, Example 4-2). Dr. Ghali et al. explained this problem by flexibility methods. The author will solve this same problem by stiffness methods. The programs do the matrix formulation and equation solve, and only the load matrix formulation and post-processing are our concern in the stiffness methods. Two MIDAS files are attached.


First, the author wants to define the sign convention for member forces clearly.

Creep Analysis 2 

The midas model is for a multi-channel prestressed girders bridge 30 ft span and 24.75 ft width. The bridge is composed of 9-channel prestressed girders placed side by side. The bridge was modeled with frame elements for the girder's webs and plate elements for the girder's flange. Bridge dimensions and midas models are shown below.

The scary part of FEM is sometimes FEM gives wrong results without any error message. The analysis may be meaningless if an engineer cannot check or interpret the results. Let’s consider a simple example similar to the case from Dr. Gallagher (Finite Element Analysis: Fundamentals, 1975).