Multi-Objective Pile Foundation

Design using Metaheuristic-

Integrated PLAXIS 2D API
Ana Yelina Arif, Min-Yuan Cheng, and Moh Nur Sholeh
National Taiwan University of Science and Technology

The 27th Symposium on Construction Engineering and Management

第27屆營建工程與管理學術研討會
National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University
Table of contents

Results and
01 Introduction 03 Discussion

02 Research 04 Conclusions
Methodology
01 Introduction
● In pile design engineering, safety factor and cost estimation are the most important
aspects for design consideration.
● It is important to use a multi-objective metaheuristic algorithm that can solve both of these
aspects automatically and simultaneously.
● This study will implement multi-objective optimization for pile foundation design
application.
● PLAXIS 2D is used to estimate the safety factor and using the Application Programming
Interface (API) to help integrating it with a new proposed multi-objective algorithm
MOOMA. The cost is calculated based on the number of piles, the height, and the pile cap
configuration.
● Finally, the Indifference Curve is used to determine the most effective design under three
types of loading.
 Research
02 Methodology
Flowchart, Case Study, MOOMA Introduction, and
Preference Function
Research Framework
Objective Value Evaluation of API-Integrated PLAXIS 2D
Case Study
The soil parameters for PLAXIS 2D analysis used in this study are determined from a real-life project by
Wulandari and Tjandra (2015). The case study uses three different loadings; 500, 700, and 1,000 kN.

Soil Parameter Fill Soft Clay Silty Clay Stiff Clay

Pile Design Case Illustration
Thickness (m) 5 8 7 11
Unit weight (kN/m3) 17 15 12.86 15
Saturated unit
20 17 20 18
weight (kN/m3)
Young's modulus
80000 4000 25000 50000
(kN/m2)
Poisson's ratio 0.35 0.25 0.35 0.3
Undrained Cohesion
1 5 10 120
(kN/m2)

Naked Eye Phase
01 (Initialization)
𝑀𝑖+1 = 𝑀𝑖 ∗ 1 − 𝑀𝑖 , 0 ≤ 𝑀0 ≤ 1
Similar to the naked eyes
that are used to observe
or identify objects.
MOOMA Introduction
Objective Lens
02 Phase
𝑀𝑖 𝑛𝑒𝑤 = 𝑀𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡 + 𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑑 0,1 ∗ 1.4 ∗ 𝑀𝑖
The objective lens starts to
magnify the target object Minew
with the best target object Mbest
03 Eyepiece Phase
𝑀𝑗 − 𝑀𝑖 𝑖𝑓 𝑓 𝑀𝑗 dominates 𝑓(𝑀𝑖 ൯
𝑆𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑒 = 𝑀𝑖 − 𝑀𝑗 𝑖𝑓 𝑓 𝑀𝑖 dominates 𝑓(𝑀𝑗 ൯
𝑅𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑜𝑚 𝑖𝑓 𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑤𝑖𝑠𝑒
𝑀𝑖 𝑛𝑒𝑤 = 𝑀𝑖 + 𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑑 0,1 ∗ 0.55 ∗ 𝑆𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑒
By simulating the magnification of
the eyepiece, the magnification
space is determined based on the
selected target object (i and j).
The created space will create a
modified target object Minew.
Preference Function
In order to address imprecision in design parameters, an approach known as the preference function method
is implemented. The preference function used is triangular preference function.
To get the points for the preference function, the safety factor is compared with the available standard and
the cost is compared with the average pile design cost for each loading.

The tangent point will

become the most
preferable design for
the safety factor and
cost.

Safety Factor Cost Preference

Preference Function Function
 Result and
03 Discussion
Optimization Result, Indifference curve, Optimum risk
preference
 Optimization Result

• The highest cost estimation that can be reached for 500 kN is about USD 8,000.
• When the load increases to 700 kN, the highest cost estimation can be doubled to about USD 16,000.
• However, in the 1,000 kN load, the highest cost estimation is roughly the same with 700 kN.

It can be concluded that the design is mostly not effective for the 700 kN load, since the cost is
roughly the same with the 1,000 kN load with only 1.0 difference in the maximum safety factor.
 500 kN 700 kN 1000 kN

Preference Function
Safety Safety Factor
Factor Taiwanese Geotechnical Design Code
Min. safety factor = 3.0 (long-term design)
Avg. safety factor for design = 4.0 (assumption)
Preference is always the same for each loading
SF Indexes (SA, SB) = (2.72, 3.27)
Cost
Average of Several Project Cost
Std. Dev. = 20% of average cost
Each loading has its own preference for cost
Cost
Estimation
estimation

The designer µ(x) is set to 0.7 for both safety

factor and cost estimation.

Cost
(CA, CB) = 3750, 4250 (CA, CB) = 4700, 5300 (CA, CB) = 5650, 6350
Indexes
Combined Index Values After getting the preference functions index
points, they can be drawn at the Pareto Curve as
(CA, SA) (3750, 3.72) (4700, 3.72) (5650, 3.72)
Indifference Curve.
(CB, SB) (4250, 4.27) (5300, 4.27) (6350, 4.27)
 Indifference Curve and Optimum Risk Preference

Load Optimum Optimum Cost Diameter Allowable h piles

n piles
(kN) SF (USD) (m) Compression (ton) (m) When the load increases, the optimum SF
500 5.35 2080 0.30 65.40 3 20
will be lower and the cost will be higher.

700 4.76 2273 0.30 65.40 4 20 The tendency is caused by decreasing

1000 3.74 3120 0.35 85.00 4 20 design reliability in the increasing load.

The optimum design for 700 kN is achieved by adding one more pile from 500 kN design, and the optimum design for
1,000 kN is achieved by increasing the pile allowable compression from 700 kN design.
04 Conclusion
● This study uses PLAXIS 2D integrated with Multi-Objective Optical Microscope
Algorithm (MOOMA) as the tool to search the optimum pile design safety factor and
cost.
● To connect PLAXIS 2D with MOOMA, the Application Programming Interface (API) is
implemented for objective value evaluation.
● The combined framework is tested on a real-life pile design case under the loading of
500, 700, and 1,000 kN.
● The safety factor planning preference is based on the Taiwanese Geotechnical Design
Code, and the cost planning preference is based on average cost for pile design for
each loading.
● By setting the designer preference value of 0.7, the optimum design preference for the
500 kN loading is SF 5.35 and USD 2,080, for the 700 kN loading is SF 4.76 and USD
2,273, and for 1,000 kN loading is SF 3.74 and USD 3,120.
References
● Cheng, Y., Wong, H., Leo, C. J., & Lau, C. (2016). Stability of Geotechnical Structures:
Theoretical and Numerical Analysis (Vol. 1). Bentham Science Publishers.
● Wood, K. L., & Antonsson, E. K. (1989). Computations with imprecise parameters in
engineering design: background and theory.
● Wulandari, P. S., & Tjandra, D. (2015). Analysis of piled raft foundation on soft soil using
PLAXIS 2D. Procedia Engineering, 125, 363-367.
● Zimmermann, H. J. (2001). Fuzzy Control. In H. J. Zimmermann (Ed.), Fuzzy Set Theory—
and Its Applications (pp. 223-264). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-
010-0646-0_11
THANKS!
Do you have any questions?
anayelinaa97@gmail.com

The 27th Symposium on Construction Engineering and Management

第27屆營建工程與管理學術研討會
National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University

CREDITS: This presentation template was

created by Slidesgo, and includes icons by
Flaticon, and infographics & images by Freepik