0
Research Papers: Design Automation

Ranked-Based Sensitivity Analysis for Size Optimization of Structures

[+] Author and Article Information
Babak Dizangian

Department of Civil Engineering,
University of Sistan and Baluchestan,
Zahedan 9816811775, Iran

Mohammad Reza Ghasemi

Department of Civil Engineering,
University of Sistan and Baluchestan,
Zahedan 9816745437, Iran
e-mail: mrghasemi@hamoon.usb.ac.ir

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Design Automation Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF MECHANICAL DESIGN. Manuscript received January 13, 2015; final manuscript received August 6, 2015; published online October 16, 2015. Assoc. Editor: Nam H. Kim.

J. Mech. Des 137(12), 121402 (Oct 16, 2015) (10 pages) Paper No: MD-15-1022; doi: 10.1115/1.4031295 History: Received January 13, 2015; Revised August 06, 2015

This article proposes a novel ranked-based method for size optimization of structures. This method uses violation-based sensitivity analysis and borderline adaptive sliding technique (ViS-BLAST) on the margin of feasible nonfeasible (FNF) design space. ViS-BLAST maybe considered a multiphase optimization technique, where in the first phase, the first arbitrary local optimum is found by few analyses and in the second phase, a sequence of local optimum points is found through jumps and BLASTs until the global optimum is found. In fact, this technique reaches a sensitive margin zone where the global optimum is located, with a small number of analyses, utilizing a space-degradation strategy (SDS). This strategy substantially degrades the high order searching space and then proceeds with the proposed ViS-BLAST search for the optimum design. Its robustness and effectiveness are then defied by some well-known benchmark examples. The ViS-BLAST not only speeds up the optimization procedure but also it ensures nonviolated optimum designs.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Arora, J. S. , 2007, Optimization of Structural and Mechanical Systems, World Scientific, Singapore.
Choi, K. K. , and Kim, N.-H. , 2006, Structural Sensitivity Analysis and Optimization 1: Linear Systems, Springer, New York.
Lagaros, N. D. , Papadrakakis, M. , and Kokossalakis, G. , 2002, “ Structural Optimization Using Evolutionary Algorithms,” Comput. Struct., 80(7), pp. 571–589. [CrossRef]
Chapman, C. D. , Saitou, K. , and Jakiela, M. J. , 1994, “ Genetic Algorithms as an Approach to Configuration and Topology Design,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 116(4), pp. 1005–1012. [CrossRef]
Erbatur, F. , Hasançebi, O. , Tütüncü, İ. , and Kılıç, H. , 2000, “ Optimal Design of Planar and Space Structures With Genetic Algorithms,” Comput. Struct., 75(2), pp. 209–224. [CrossRef]
Li, M. , Azarm, S. , and Aute, V. , 2005, “ A Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithm for Robust Design Optimization,” 7th Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (GECCO '05), ACM, Washington, DC, pp. 771–778.
Toğan, V. , and Daloğlu, A. T. , 2006, “ Optimization of 3D Trusses With Adaptive Approach in Genetic Algorithms,” Eng. Struct., 28(7), pp. 1019–1027. [CrossRef]
Chapman, C. D. , and Jakiela, M. , 1996, “ Genetic Algorithm-Based Structural Topology Design With Compliance and Topology Simplification Considerations,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 118(1), pp. 89–98. [CrossRef]
Narayanan, S. , and Azarm, S. , 1999, “ On Improving Multiobjective Genetic Algorithms for Design Optimization,” Struct. Optim., 18(2–3), pp. 146–155. [CrossRef]
Degertekin, S. O. , Saka, M. P. , and Hayalioglu, M. S. , 2008, “ Optimal Load and Resistance Factor Design of Geometrically Nonlinear Steel Space Frames Via Tabu Search and Genetic Algorithm,” Eng. Struct., 30(1), pp. 197–205. [CrossRef]
Lamberti, L. , 2008, “ An Efficient Simulated Annealing Algorithm for Design Optimization of Truss Structures,” Comput. Struct., 86(19), pp. 1936–1953. [CrossRef]
Hasançebi, O. , and Erbatur, F. , 2002, “ On Efficient Use of Simulated Annealing in Complex Structural Optimization Problems,” Acta Mech., 157(1–4), pp. 27–50. [CrossRef]
Camp, C. , Bichon, B. , and Stovall, S. , 2005, “ Design of Steel Frames Using Ant Colony Optimization,” J. Struct. Eng., 131(3), pp. 369–379. [CrossRef]
Li, H. , and Chandrashekhara, K. , 2012, “ Structural Optimization of Laminated Composite Blade Using Particle Swarm Optimization,” ASME Paper No. IMECE2012-88313.
Mourelatos, Z. P. , and Zhou, J. , 2005, “ A Design Optimization Method Using Evidence Theory,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 128(4), pp. 901–908. [CrossRef]
Nguyen, T. , Ghabraie, K. , and Tran-Cong, T. , 2014, “ Applying Bi-Directional Evolutionary Structural Optimisation Method for Tunnel Reinforcement Design Considering Nonlinear Material Behavior,” Comput. Geotech., 55, pp. 57–66. [CrossRef]
Gandomi, A. , Yang, X.-S. , and Alavi, A. , 2013, “ Cuckoo Search Algorithm: A Metaheuristic Approach to Solve Structural Optimization Problems,” Eng. Comput., 29(1), pp. 17–35. [CrossRef]
Yang, X.-S. , 2005, “ Engineering Optimizations Via Nature-Inspired Virtual Bee Algorithms,” Artificial Intelligence and Knowledge Engineering Applications: A Bioinspired Approach, J. Mira and J. Álvarez , eds., Springer, Berlin, pp. 317–323.
Oftadeh, R. , and Mahjoob, M. , 2010, “ A New Structural Optimization Method Based on Group Hunting of Animals: Hunting Search (HuS),” ASME Paper No. ESDA2010-24565.
Li, L. J. , Huang, Z. B. , Liu, F. , and Wu, Q. H. , 2007, “ A Heuristic Particle Swarm Optimizer for Optimization of Pin Connected Structures,” Comput. Struct., 85(7–8), pp. 340–349. [CrossRef]
Yang, X.-S. , Koziel, S. , and Leifsson, L. , 2013, “ Computational Optimization, Modelling and Simulation: Recent Trends and Challenges,” Procedia Comput. Sci., 18, pp. 855–860. [CrossRef]
Belegundu, A. D. , and Chandrupatla, T. R. , 2011, Optimization Concepts and Applications in Engineering, Cambridge University Press, New York.
Venkayya, V. B. , 1971, “ Design of Optimum Structures,” Comput. Struct., 1(2), pp. 265–309. [CrossRef]
Camp, C. , and Bichon, B. , 2004, “ Design of Space Trusses Using Ant Colony Optimization,” J. Struct. Eng., 130(5), pp. 741–751. [CrossRef]
Lee, K. S. , and Geem, Z. W. , 2004, “ A New Structural Optimization Method Based on the Harmony Search Algorithm,” Comput. Struct., 82(9–10), pp. 781–798. [CrossRef]
Sonmez, M. , 2011, “ Artificial Bee Colony Algorithm for Optimization of Truss Structures,” Appl. Soft Comput., 11(2), pp. 2406–2418. [CrossRef]
Rizzi, P. , 1976, “ Optimization of Multi-Constrained Structures Based on Optimality Criteria,” AIAA/ASME/SAE 17th Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, King of Prussia, PA, pp. 1579–1588.
Kaveh, A. , Sheikholeslami, R. , Talatahari, S. , and Keshvari-Ilkhichi, M. , 2014, “ Chaotic Swarming of Particles: A New Method for Size Optimization of Truss Structures,” Adv. Eng. Software, 67(1), pp. 136–147. [CrossRef]
Perez, R. E. , and Behdinan, K. , 2007, “ Particle Swarm Approach for Structural Design Optimization,” Comput. Struct., 85(19–20), pp. 1579–1588. [CrossRef]
Degertekin, S. O. , 2012, “ Improved Harmony Search Algorithms for Sizing Optimization of Truss Structures,” Comput. Struct., 92–93(2), pp. 229–241. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

The pseudocode of BLAST

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Flowchart of Vis-BLAST

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Phase 2; progressive jumps and BLASTs to find the best solution XG

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

The 25-bar space truss

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Selecting initial random designs by dividing the searching space into subspaces; the 25-bar truss example

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

First sensitivity analysis at Xdp1; the 25-bar truss example

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Convergence history of optimum weight; 25-bar truss example

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

The 72-bar space truss

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

First sensitivity analysis at Xdp1 ; the 72-bar truss example

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Convergence history of best weight of 72-bar truss example

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

The 200-bar planar truss

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

First sensitivity analysis at Xdp1; the 200-bar truss example

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Convergence history of optimum weight; 200-bar truss

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In