Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A multi-objective sequential method for manufacturing cost and structural optimization of modular steel towers

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Engineering with Computers Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper proposes a methodological approach for the multi-objective optimization of steel towers made from prefabricated cylindrical stacks that are typically used in the oil and gas sector. The goal is to support engineers in designing economical products while meeting structural requirements. The multi-objective optimization approach involves the minimization of the weights and costs related to the manufacturing and assembly phases. The method is based on three optimization levels. The first is used in the preliminary design phase when a company receives a request for proposal. Here, minimal information on the order is available, and the time available to formulate an offer is limited. Thus, parametric cost models and simplified 1-D geometries are used in the optimization loop performed by genetic algorithms. The second phase, the embodiment design phase, starts when an offer becomes an order based on the results of the first stage. Simplified shell geometries and advanced parametric cost models are used in the optimization loop, which present a restricted problem domain. In the last phase involving detailed design, a full 3-D computer-aided design model is generated, and specific finite-element method simulations are performed. The cost estimations, given the high levels of detail considered, are analytic and are performed using dedicated software.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Zheng P, Xu X, Yu S, Liu C (2017) Personalized product configuration framework in an adaptable open architecture product platform. J Manuf Syst 43:422–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2017.03.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Lim LL, Alpan G, Penz B (2017) A simulation-optimization approach for sales and operations planning in build-to-order industries with distant sourcing: focus on the automotive industry. Comput Ind Eng 112:469–482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2016.12.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Kristianto Y, Helo P, Jiao RJ (2015) A system level product configurator for engineer-to-order supply chains. Comput Ind 72:82–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2015.04.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Sylla A, Guillon D, Vareilles E, Aldanondo M, Coudert T, Geneste L (2018) Configuration knowledge modeling: how to extend configuration from assemble/make to order towards engineer to order for the bidding process. Comput Ind 99:29–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2018.03.019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. André S, Elgh F, Johansson J, Stolt R (2017) The design platform—a coherent platform description of heterogeneous design assets for suppliers of highly customised systems. J Eng Des 28:599–626. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544828.2017.1376244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Duchi A, Tamburini F, Parisi D, Maghazei O, Schönsleben P (2017) From ETO to mass customization: a two-horizon ETO enabling process. In: Bellemare J, Carrier S, Nielsen K, Piller F (eds) Managing complexity. Springer proceedings in business and economics. Springer, Cham, pp 99–113. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29058-4_8

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Elgh F (2012) Decision support in the quotation process of engineered-to-order products. Adv Eng Inform 26:66–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2011.07.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Trentin A, Perin E, Forza C (2012) Product configurator impact on product quality. Int J Prod Econ 135:850–859. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2011.10.023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Raffaeli R, Savoretti A, Germani M (2017) Design knowledge formalization to shorten the time to generate offers for engineer to order products. Lect Notes Mech Eng. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45781-9_110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Caron F, Fiore A (1995) “Engineer to order” companies: how to integrate manufacturing and innovative processes. Int J Proj Manag 13:313–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Willner O, Gosling J, Schönsleben P (2016) Establishing a maturity model for design automation in sales-delivery processes of ETO products. Comput Ind 82:57–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2016.05.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Brière-Côté A, Rivest L, Desrochers A (2010) Adaptive generic product structure modelling for design reuse in engineer-to-order products. Comput Ind 61:53–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2009.07.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Pahl KHGG, Beitz W, Feldhusen J (2004) Engineering design: a systematic approach. Springer, Berlin. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-3581-4

    Book  Google Scholar 

  14. Myrodia A, Kristjansdottir K, Hvam L (2017) Impact of product configuration systems on product profitability and costing accuracy. Comput Ind 88:12–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2017.03.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Gholizadeh S, Baghchevan A (2017) Multi-objective seismic design optimization of steel frames by a chaotic meta-heuristic algorithm. Eng Comput 33:1045–1060. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-017-0515-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Cicconi P, Germani M, Bondi S, Zuliani A, Cagnacci E (2016) A design methodology to support the optimization of steel structures. Procedia CIRP 50:58–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.05.030

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Uys PE, Farkas J, Jármai K, van Tonder F (2007) Optimisation of a steel tower for a wind turbine structure. Eng Struct 29:1337–1342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2006.08.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Cicconi P, Raffaeli R, Marchionne M, Germani M (2018) A model-based simulation approach to support the product configuration and optimization of gas turbine ducts. Comput Aided Des Appl 15(6):807–818. https://doi.org/10.1080/16864360.2018.1462564

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Duverlie P, Castelain JM (1999) Cost estimation during design step: parametric method versus case based reasoning method. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 15:895–906. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001700050147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Papavasileiou GS, Charmpis DC (2016) Seismic design optimization of multi-storey steel-concrete composite buildings. Comput Struct 170:49–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2016.03.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Lagaros ND, Karlaftis MG (2016) Life-cycle cost structural design optimization of steel wind towers. Comput Struct 174:122–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2015.09.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Giagkiozis I, Fleming PJ (2015) Methods for multi-objective optimization: an analysis. Inf Sci (Ny). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2014.08.071

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Nguyen A-T, Reiter S, Rigo P (2014) A review on simulation-based optimization methods applied to building performance analysis. Appl Energy 113:1043–1058. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.08.061

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Castorani V, Vita A, Mandolini M, Germani M (2017) A CAD-based method for multi-objectives optimization of mechanical products. Comput Aided Des Appl 14(5):563–571. https://doi.org/10.1080/16864360.2016.1274528

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Martini K (2016) Multiobjective structural optimization of frameworks using enumerative topology. Comput Struct 173:61–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2016.05.020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Arnout S, Lombaert G, Degrande G, De Roeck G (2012) The optimal design of a barrel vault in the conceptual design stage. Comput Struct 92–93:308–316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2011.10.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Hao P, Wang B, Li G (2012) Surrogate-based optimum design for stiffened shells with adaptive sampling, AIAA J. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.J051522

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Brown NC, Mueller CT (2016) Design for structural and energy performance of long span buildings using geometric multi-objective optimization. Energy Build 127:748–761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2016.05.090

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Tort C, Şahin S, Hasançebi O (2017) Optimum design of steel lattice transmission line towers using simulated annealing and PLS-TOWER. Comput Struct 179:75–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2016.10.017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Zou XK, Chan CM, Li G, Wang Q (2007) Multiobjective optimization for performance-based design of reinforced concrete frames. J Struct Eng 133:1462–1474. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2007)133:10(1462)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Kaveh A, Laknejadi K, Alinejad B (2011) Performance-based multi-objective optimization of large steel structures. Acta Mech 223(2):355–369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00707-011-0564-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Shin H, Singh MP (2017) Minimum life-cycle cost-based optimal design of yielding metallic devices for seismic loads. Eng Struct 144:174–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.04.054

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Liang JC, Li LJ, He JN (2015) Performance-based multi-objective optimum, design for steel structures with intelligence algorithms. Int J Optim Civ Eng 5:79–101

    Google Scholar 

  34. Negm HM, Maalawi KY (2000) Structural design optimization of wind turbine towers. Comput Struct 74:649–666. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-7949(99)00079-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Karpat F (2013) A virtual tool for minimum cost design of a wind turbine tower with ring stiffeners. Energies 6:3822–3840. https://doi.org/10.3390/en6083822

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Bazeos N, Hatzigeorgiou G, Hondros I, Karamaneas H, Karabalis D, Beskos D (2002) Static, seismic and stability analyses of a prototype wind turbine steel tower. Eng Struct 24:1015–1025. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(02)00021-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Kaveh A (2013) Optimal analysis of structures by concepts of symmetry and regularity. Springer Vienna, Vienna. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7091-1565-7

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  38. Zou X-K (2012) Optimal seismic performance-based design of reinforced concrete buildings. In: Structural seismic design optimization and earthquake engineering, IGI Global, Pennsylvania, United States, pp 208–231. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-1640-0.ch009

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  39. Ozturk M, Kocaoglan S, Sonmez FO (2016) Concurrent design and process optimization of forging. Comput Struct 167:24–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2016.01.016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Bruno D, Lonetti P, Pascuzzo A (2016) An optimization model for the design of network arch bridges. Comput Struct 170:13–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2016.03.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Steponavičė I, Ruuska S, Miettinen K (2014) A solution process for simulation-based multiobjective design optimization with an application in the paper industry. Comput Des 47:45–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cad.2013.08.045

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Li G, Zhou R-G, Duan L, Chen W-F (1999) Multiobjective and multilevel optimization for steel frames. Eng Struct 21:519–529

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Amrani A, Zouggar S, Zolghadri M, Girard P (2010) Supporting framework to improve Engineer-To-Order product lead-times. IFAC Proc 43:102–107. https://doi.org/10.3182/20100908-3-PT-3007.00022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Vasconcellos JM, Harduim M, Araujo P (2014) Multi-criteria optimization applied to tankers preliminary design. In: Maritime Technology and Engineering. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 309–314. https://doi.org/10.1201/b17494-43

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  45. American Society of Civil Engineers (2006) ASCE STANDARD ASCEISEI 7-05 minimum design loads for buildings and other structures

  46. American Institute of Steel Construction (2010) ANSI/AISC 360-10: specification for structural steel buildings, specification for structural steel buildings

  47. Australian Standard (2011) AS1170-2011: structural design actions

  48. Australian Standard (1998) AS 4100-1998: steel structures designs

  49. CICIND (Organization) (1999) Model code for steel chimneys, CICIND

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Industrial Engineering and Mathematical Sciences, Università Politecnica delle Marche, via Brecce Bianche 12, 60131, Ancona, Italy

    Paolo Cicconi, Vincenzo Castorani, Michele Germani, Marco Mandolini & Alessio Vita

Authors
  1. Paolo Cicconi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Vincenzo Castorani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michele Germani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Marco Mandolini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Alessio Vita
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paolo Cicconi.

Additional information

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

Cicconi, P., Castorani, V., Germani, M. et al. A multi-objective sequential method for manufacturing cost and structural optimization of modular steel towers. Engineering with Computers 36, 475–497 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-019-00709-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-019-00709-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation