Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

35 tayangan

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

- Help the Genetic Algorithm to Minimize the Urban Traffic on Intersections
- Size optimization of steel trusses using a genetic algorithm in MATLAB
- Genetic Alg Matlab
- Application of Allied Genetic Algorithms in Sensor Less Speed Adjustment Control for IM Drive System
- Iit Bombay
- Solving Economic Dispatch Problem with Valve-Point Effect using a Modified ABC Algorithm
- A Distributed Genetic Algorithm for Restoration of Vertical Line Scratches
- 4 Ecology GA Regression
- 05_TrussInANSYS.pptx
- A_solution_for_exterior_and_relative_orientation_i.pdf
- Practical Multi Objective ion
- IJEST11-03-02-064
- Decentralize Control
- Realization of Autonomous Soft Computing System Using Computational Intelligence Methods
- Cotton Yarn System
- 2795-8064-1-PB
- Algoritmo Diseño Pisos compuestos erwin_2004_MS
- José Castro Caldas and Helder Coelho_ The Origin of Institutions
- IJSETR-VOL-2-ISSUE-3-676-683
- Truss

Anda di halaman 1dari 15

Algorithm

by

Reprinted from

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF

SPACE STRUCTURES

Volume 24 · Number 1 · 2009

5 Wates Way, Brentwood, Essex CM15 9TB, United Kingdom

Optimum Shape Design of

Space Structures by Genetic

Algorithm

E. Salajegheh*, M. Mashayekhi, M. Khatibinia and M. Kaykha

therefore have a large number of redundant members. It is important to

choose the appropriate number of elements and joints for the structure under

consideration. Optimum shape design of space structures is the aim of the

present work and to achieve an optimal configuration, parameters such as

number of joints, number of members, support conditions and the overall

shape of the structures are considered. To attain a practical configuration,

the presence of the joints of the structures and the locations of the columns

are taken as the shape design variables as well as the cross-sectional area of

the elements of the structures under considerations. The resulting

configurations are very interesting after the removal of unnecessary joints

and columns. It was also observed that a part of sphere might not be

appropriate for the dome structures as usually chosen by the designers. For

different static loading conditions that presented in this research, second or

third order polynomial would be more suitable for the shape of these

structures. In this study, optimum shape design of space structures is

performed using a modified genetic algorithm (MGA).

Key Words: Space structures, double layer grids, domes, shape optimization,

genetic algorithm.

Space structures belong to special category of three Goldberg’s simplified and modified genetic algorithm

dimensional structures with special forms. The most (GA) [3] to optimize some structures in 1992. The

important kind of these structures are double layer weight of the structures was considered as objective

grids, domes and barrel vaults [1]. These structures function and discrete cross-sectional area of

are widely used in hangars, supermarkets, stadiums, members was chosen to be the design variables.

etc, to cover large areas without intermediate Adeli and Cheng, introduced GA to the field of

columns. In these structures, there are many members structural optimization in 1993 (e.g., [4, 5 and 6]).

which have little contribution (relative to their weight) Krishnamoorthy et al. [7] proposed GA with

in load transmission. Hence, omitting such objective-oriented framework which was used in

unnecessary members with regards to the applicability space truss optimization. Farsangi [8] used GA to

of the resultant configuration and optimizing cross- optimize the shape of double layer grids under

sectional area of the remaining members, by scientific gravity loads. The importance of members’ presence

and systematic methods, is the best way to reduce the is discussed without omitting any member or column.

construction weight of these structures. The application of GA to structural optimization is

Optimum Shape Design of Space Structures by Genetic Algorithm

found in [9].

4 17 28 39 52

In this study, topology and geometry optimization

of space structures are performed. Double layer grids 3 16 27 38 51

and space pyramids are optimized topologically and

single layer domes are optimized geometrically. To 2 15 26 37 50

achieve this aim, a modified genetic algorithm (MGA)

1 14 25 36 49

is employed. In the MGA, a new mutation and

Hs

modified elitist selection are proposed. These operators

cause the MGA algorithm converges quickly and the Hc

probability of achieving the global optimization would L

be increased.

13 24 35 48 9 23 34 44

For topology optimization, a structure with specific

divisions and a maximum number of members, which 12 22 33 47 8 43

is called the ground structure, is considered and its

perimeter joints are connected to rigid end columns. 11 21 32 46 7 42

Design variables for the optimization problem are the

10 20 31 45 6 19 30 41

presence of joints and cross-sectional area of

members. In order to reduce the computational weight Figure 1. Joint numbers of top and bottom grids and supports.

of optimization, symmetry properties of the structure

are considered for the elimination of joints.

Table 1. Joint groups considering symmetry

For geometry optimization, single layer domes with

constant rise and span is considered. In this optimization Group

problem, the design variables are the cross-sectional number Joints in each group Position of joints

area of members, equation of the dome curve and

coordinates of joints. A proper selection of a curve for 1 6, 9, 44, 41 Support

dome leads to a suitable placement of joints. 2 7, 19, 8, 23, 34, 43, Support

Consequently, this suitable placement optimizes the 42, 30

load bearing area of joints and configuration of the 3 10, 13, 48, 45 Bottom layer

structure. 4 12, 24, 35, 47, 46, 31, Bottom layer

Optimum shape design of space structures under 20, 11

different static loading conditions is studied considering 5 22, 33, 32, 21 Bottom layer

stress, slenderness ratio and displacement constraints. 6 17, 39, 37, 15 Top layer

In the optimization process, the weight of the structure 7 16, 28, 38, 26 Top layer

is considered as the objective function. 8 27 Top layer

AND GEOMETRY are eliminated in groups of 8, 4 or 1 joints. For example

In space structures topology optimization, geometry of in the structure shown in Fig. 1 number of joints with

the structure and coordinates of joints are kept similar geometry situations is tabulated in Table 1. Their

constant while the presence or absence of joints and presence or absence is governed by one gene.

also cross-sectional areas are selected as design Therefore, in this structure eight genes are needed to

variables. The goal is to find the most efficient parts of express the variability of any joint groups. In order to

the structure which can transmit the applied loads to achieve a practical structure, existence of perimeter

the base without violating the constraints. nodes in top and bottom grids of space structure will not

In this study, the symmetry properties of the structure be encoded in the final optimum structure.

are used for the tabulation of joints, which leads to a In geometry optimization, design variables are

reduction of chromosome length. Presence or absence coordinates of joints and cross-sectional area of

of a joint group is identified by a one bit-gene. A zero members. In the process of optimization, the

indicates that a joint group should not be considered coordinates of joints change in a way that the structure

E. Salajegheh, M. Mashayekhi, M. Khatibinia and M. Kaykha

7 Z

6 5 7

5 67

4 3 5

3 4 7 A

3 7

2 6

3

2 4 5 7

a 1 1 3 a H ri

1

2 3 7 zi B

1 4 5 r

6

Section a-a

gains the most effective state against the applied loads. The order of the polynomial is limited between 2

This situation optimizes the location of joints, their and circumferential divisions on the dome. Therefore,

load bearing area and the configuration of structure. the length of gene for the order of dome curve Ln is

In this research, optimization of single layer domes gained by the following equation:

with constant rise and span is studied. Since domes are

2 Ln ≥ nd − 1 (3)

formed by revolving a curve about a vertical axis, the

best equation for the curve and location of joints on where nd is the circumferential divisions.

this curve are considered as the variables of the Because the radius of dome rings is a continuous

optimization problem. For this purpose, first the variable, the gene length of radius for the ith ring Lr,i is

equation of the curve is determined and then by calculated by the following equation [10].

decoding the radius of each ring of the dome and the

log (ru , i − rl , i )/ e

use of curve equation, the height of joints on each ring Lr , i = INT 1 + ; i = 1,, 2, ..., nd (4)

is calculated. log 2

With regards to the geometry of domes, the where ru,i , rl,i and e are the upper bound, lower bound

equation of curve should have the following properties and required accuracy for the radius of the ith ring,

in the interval [A, B] (Fig. 2). respectively.

1. The curve should have its maximum at A. In this study, discrete variables are used for

∂z

i.e. = 0

optimizing the cross-sectional area of structural

∂r A members. These variables are selected from pipe

2. The curve should be descending in the interval sections with specified thickness and diameter.

∂2 z

[A, B]. i.e. 2 < 0

∂r 3. DECODING OF VARIABLES

where z and r are the height of joints on each ring and

After generating an initial population, the real value of

radius of each ring, respectively.

each design variable is evaluated by decoding, in order

According to above conditions, the curve is chosen

to evaluate the objective function and the magnitudes

to be a polynomial of order n:

of constraint violations.

z = a0 + a1r n (1) In topology optimization, the chromosome is

composed of two parts which includes variables of the

By applying the boundary conditions in Fig. 2 and presence or absence of joints and cross-sectional area

calculating constants (a0 and a1), the equation takes of each member group. Suppose the chromosome

the form: shown in Fig. 3 is an individual from the initial

2 n n population. It is produced for the topology

A ( 0, H ) and B ( S / 2, 0 ) ⇒ z = H − r + 1 (2)

S

optimization of the structure shown in Fig. 1. It is also

assumed that the members of this structure are divided

where H and S are the rise and the span of the dome, into 12 groups in which cross-sectional area of each

respectively. group is selected from 8 profiles.

Optimum Shape Design of Space Structures by Genetic Algorithm

Presence or Absence of

the Joints

IT1 IT2 IT3 IT4 …

1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0

Table 2. Categorizing symmetry positions of joints case, the purlins are designed, and their weights are

considered in the objective function.

Group Symmetry positions of joints

In geometry optimization, the chromosome is

1 37 composed of three parts which includes variables of

2 33, 34 dome curve order, radius of dome rings and cross-

3 31, 32, 35, 36 sectional area of each member group. Decoding the

4 19, 30 order of dome curve equation is accomplished by the

5 24, 25 following equation:

6 20, 21, 28, 29

Ln

n = ∑ Cn (i ) 2( Ln −i ) + 2

7 22, 23, 26,27

(5)

i =1

For decoding the radius of dome rings, first the gene of

the jth ring is transformed to a decimal number Rj and

then its actual value is calculated as follows [10]:

R j (rl , j − ru , j )

rj = rl , j + (6)

−1

Lr, j

2

Hs

where rj is the actual value of radius of the jth ring.

Hc

L

34

4. FORMULATION OF

23

OPTIMIZATION PROBLEM

In optimum shape design of the space structures, the

8 43 aim is to minimize the weight of the structure, under

42

some constraints on stresses, slenderness ratios and

7

displacements. The weight of the structure which

19 30 includes the weight of members, purlins and joints of

the space structures is taken as:

Figure 4. Top and bottom grids and support positions of

decoded structure.

Ne Nj

The first 8 bits in the chromosome relate to the minimize W = ∑ ρe Ai Li + ∑ Wj + Wp (7)

presence and absence of joints. Since the 3rd and 8th i =1 j =1

bits have a zero value, all the joints in 3rd and 8th

groups in Table 2 are omitted from the ground structure. where ρe, Ai, Li, Wj, Wp, Ne and Nj are the material

After decoding, the refined structure is shown in Fig. 4. density, cross-sectional area of ith element, length of

Now for decoding the cross-sectional area of members ith element, equivalent weight of jth joint, the weight

in any group, the remaining 32 bits of the chromosome of purlins, number of members and number of joints

are used. First, the value of each gene is transformed to after decoding of variables, respectively.

a decimal number [2]. Then, by referring to the table of In this study, Mero connector is used for the joints

profiles, properties of members in each group are of space structure. For calculating the equivalent

attained. After omitting the joints of top grid, a suitable weight of jth joint, first the diameter d of the bolt

cladding system is considered and the loads of any which connects the member to this joint is determined

removed joint are transformed to adjacent joints. In this by following formula [11]:

E. Salajegheh, M. Mashayekhi, M. Khatibinia and M. Kaykha

Table 3. Equivalent joint diameter in correspondence To solve a constrained optimization problem its

with the bolt diameter objective function should be modified in such a way

that the constrained problem should be converted to

Bolt diameter 12 16 20 24 27 an unconstrained one, with a modified objective

(mm) function. The modified objective function φ is defined

Equivalent joint 50 75 88 110 130 as [7]:

diameter (mm)

φ = W (1 + r C ) (13)

4Pmax

d= (8) Ne Nj

0.6π Fy C = ∑ ( g σ , i + g λ , i ) + ∑ g δ, (14)

j

i =1 j =1

where Pmax and Fy are maximum force applied to this

joint and yield stress of the bolt, respectively. Then by where C and r̄ are the penalty function and the

the use of design Table 3, appropriate diameter Dj for coefficient of penalty function, respectively.

this joint is selected, and its equivalent weight is The optimum shape design of space structures is a

calculated by the following equation [11]: minimization problem, and hence the fitness function

must be chosen such that the higher the weight of an

W j = 0.9 π ρ j D 3j (9) individual, the lower is its fitness and vice-versa. The

following relation is selected as the measure of

where ρj is the material density of jth joint. fitness [7]:

In this study, the AISC code provisions are

employed for the stress limits and local buckling Fi = φmax + φmin − φi (15)

criteria [12]. All its recommendations for stresses and

slenderness ratios in elements such as tension, where φmax , φmin and φi are the maximum and

compression, bending stresses and their combination minimum modified objective function value in a

are considered. The stress constraint gσ and the generation and the modified objective function value

slenderness ratio constraint gλ are taken as: of the ith individual, respectively.

gσ = ∑ max k − 1, 0 (10)

k σk Optimum shape design of space structures under

different static loading conditions is studied. Effective

λ loads on double layer grids which include gravity and

g λ = ∑ max k − 1, 0 (11) lateral loads are as follows:

k λk

(16)

allowable stress, member slenderness ratio and the E x = E y = 0.125 DL

allowable slenderness ratio for the members of space

structure in the kth load combination, respectively. where DL, Ex and Ey are distributed dead load and

In the optimization process, the horizontal distributed lateral forces in x and y directions,

displacements are limited to the rise of dome or the respectively.

height of columns /200, i.e. δH = H / 200, and the vertical For dome structures, the applied dead load is similar

displacements are limited to the span of dome or width to double layer grids, and snow and wind loads are also

of double layer grid/360, i.e.δ V = S / 360 [13]. The considered according to the ANSI code [14]. The dome

displacement constraint gδ is expressed as follows: roof snow load Ps is obtained by multiplying the flat

roof snow load Pf by the roof slope factor Cs [14]:

δk

gδ = ∑ max − 1, 0 (12)

k δu SL = CS p f (17)

where δk, δu are the displacement of joints in the kth In this research, the flat roof snow load is taken as

load combination and the allowable displacement, 150 kg/m2, and the roof slope factor is determined as

respectively. follows [14]:

Optimum Shape Design of Space Structures by Genetic Algorithm

ϕ

ALGORITHM (MGA)

R

In spite of its enormous capabilities, John Holland

Elevation simple genetic algorithm (GA) had deficiencies and it

was not capable of solving all problems. Some

investigations have been performed to improve the

method which led to outstanding results. Through some

Wind modifications, the GA would be able to solve almost all

θ

R

optimization problems. Many successful applications

of genetic algorithm in the field of structural

p cos θ

engineering are reported [6, 16, 17 and 18]. In this

Plan

study, a new mutation and modified elitist selection

Figure 5. Distribution of the wind load. were presented for modification of GA. This modified

genetic algorithm (MGA) was used for optimizing

shape design of space structures. In the MGA the

1.0

0 ≤ α ≤ 45 selection is made using the method presented in [14],

α − 45 and the adaptive crossover which is a combination of

CS = 1 − 45 < α < 70 (18)

uniform and two-point crossover is used [19].

25

The elitist selection is a strategy that carries over the

0 α ≥ 70

best individual in a population unchanged into the next

where α is the dome slope. generation. Elitist selection proposed by Coley [20] is

It is usual to represent dynamic loading, such as used in this study, but this operator is modified. In

wind effect, by statically equivalent for the purposes of each generation, the best individual is compared with

design. The wind load on dome structures is composed the best individual in the previous generation. If this

of pressure on the wind side and suction on the individual is worse, the worst individual of current

leeward side. Here the load component acting generation would be replaced by the best individual in

perpendicular to the middle surface WL is taken into the previous generation.

account. Assuming that the wind acts in the direction In simple mutation operator, value of bit mutated is

of the meridian plane θ = 0, this component of the ignored. In this paper, for solving this problem a new

wind pressure is defined as [15]: mutation operator is presented. This operator estimates

the value of bit before any mutation. Therefore, it

WL = p sin ϕ cos θ (19) increases the rate of convergence, and the probability

of achieving the global optimization is also increased.

where p represents the static wind pressure intensity. The

In this new mutation procedure, first one bit is chosen

components due to friction forces are negligible

randomly and then the value of this bit is compared

magnitude. Fig. 5 shows the distribution of the wind load

with the corresponding bit in the best individual.

given by Eq. (19) on a dome. The static wind pressure

According to this comparison, two cases are possible:

intensity is calculated according to the ANSI code [14].

a. If the value of these bits is the same, the mutation

In this process, the basic wind speed, importance factor

in the random bit will not occur.

are taken as 32m/s2 and 1, respectively.

b. If the value of these bits is not the same, the

In the optimization process, the constraints should

mutation in the random bit will occur.

be calculated for load combinations proposed by AISC

For showing the capability of MGA compared to

code. The load combinations are as follows [12]:

GA, various truss examples with fixed geometries

DL presented in [21] have been solved. Their results

indicate that the MGA is a powerful search and

for duoble layer grids: 0.75( DL ± E x ) ;

optimization method for solving structural engineering

0.75( DL ± E )

y problems compared to GA. For example, the 25-bar

(20) space truss shown in Fig. 6 has been considered. Full

DL

DL + SL list of design data has been presented in [21]. The best

result is compared to the solutions reported by Erbatur

for domes :

0.75 ( DL + WL ) et al. [21] in Table 4. The MGA found an optimum

0.75 ( DL + SL + W weight of 220.58 kg after 40 generations. The

E. Salajegheh, M. Mashayekhi, M. Khatibinia and M. Kaykha

Table 4. The comparison table for 25-bar space truss Table 5. Available pipe profiles

Optimal cross-sectional areas (cm2) No D(cm) t(cm) No D(cm) t(cm)

1 6.03 0.29 9 21.91 0.45

Element Erbatur et al. [21]

2 7.61 0.29 10 27.30 0.50

group GAOS-Level1 GAOS-level2 MGA 3 8.89 0.32 11 32.39 0.50

1 0.65 0.65 0.65 4 10.80 0.36 12 35.56 0.80

2 6.45 7.74 1.29 5 11.43 0.36 13 40.64 0.88

3 21.94 20.65 21.94 6 13.97 0.40 14 45.72 1.00

4 1.29 0.65 0.65 7 16.83 0.45 15 50.80 0.88

5 3.87 7.10 13.55 8 19.37 0.45 16 55.88 0.88

6 7.09 5.81 7.10

7 5.80 20.58 3.23

8 19.35 21.94 21.94 convergence history of this example using the GA and

Weight (kg) 233.86 224.12 220.58 the MGA is presented in Fig. 7.

7. NUMERICAL EXAMPLES

Z

1 2 After many experiments, the population size and the

number of generation in each stage were taken as 50

and 100, respectively. The probability of crossover and

mutation were taken as 0.9 and 0.005, respectively,

and to avoid the change of MGA operations into a

perfect random search method, for the presence of

3 4

6 joints a mutation rate 0.001 is employed. The modulus

5

of elasticity, material density and yield stress are taken

as 2.1 106 kg/cm2 , 7850 kg/m3 and 2400 kg/cm2,

respectively.

8

7

7.1. 16 16 Double Layer Grid

X

This is a square-on-square space structure with 605

9 joints, the topology of which is shown in Fig. 8. The

10

Y joint spacing in the top and bottom chord is 3 m, while

the depth of the double layer grid is 3.75 m. In this

example, the number of member groups after a

Figure 6. Configuration of 25-bar space truss. preliminary analysis was assumed as 3 each for column,

bottom, web and top grids, which resulted in 12 design

700 variables. Cross-sectional area of members is selected

600 from the pipe profiles available in Table 5. The

optimum topology design is compared with the

Minimum weight

500

GA optimized ground structure in Table 6. Comparing

MGA

400 results of optimization, the weight of the optimum

shape becomes 10.29% less than the ground structure.

300

The optimum shapes of structure are shown in Figs. 9 to

200 13.

100 The resulting configuration is interesting, and the

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 joints in some places are omitted. If the double layer

Number of generations

grid is replaced by a flat squire plate with semi fixed

Figure 7. Convergence history for 25-bar space truss. edges and distributed uniform loads, it can be seen that

the removed joints are related to the points of zero

Optimum Shape Design of Space Structures by Genetic Algorithm

Table 6. Properties of the optimum ground structure and optimum topology structure

Optimum ground structure Optimum topology structure

Number of joints 605 496

Number of elements 2108 1620

Weight (kg) 72938 66190

Generations 68 94

3.75 m

7m

15@3 m

E. Salajegheh, M. Mashayekhi, M. Khatibinia and M. Kaykha

Optimum Shape Design of Space Structures by Genetic Algorithm

Table 7. Properties of the optimum ground structure and optimum topology structure

Optimum ground structure Optimum topology structure

Number of joints 577 521

Number of elements 2400 1824

Weight (kg) 48038 36996

Generations 57 86

No D(cm) t(cm) No D(cm) t(cm)

1 5 0.20 9 22 0.65

2 7 0.30 10 24 0.70

3 10 0.45 11 25 0.65

4 12 0.50 12 31 0.65

5 15 0.60 13 34 0.70

6 17 0.60 14 38 0.65

7 20 0.70 15 42 0.65

8 21 0.60 16 45 0.65

No. Bottom Top Second order Third order Circular

1 150 300 192.18 276.56 322.48

2 300 450 304.68 417.18 483.42

3 450 600 484.06 567.18 644

4 600 750 754.31 651.56 804.10

5 750 900 867.18 855.93 963.61

6 900 1050 904.68 979.68 1122.40

7 1050 1200 1148.43 1120.31 1280.35

8 1200 1350 1270.31 1270.31 1437.35

9 1350 1500 1459.31 1410.93 1593.28

10 1500 1700 1645.31 1645.31 1748.03

11 1700 1850 1835.93 1807.83 1901.48

12 1850 2000 1957.81 1854.68 2053.51

13 2000 300 2135.93 2032.81 2204.02

14 2150 2300 2154.68 2257.81 2352.88

Optimum weight (kg) 56833 48133 70822

Generations 82 93 68

bending moment of the flat plate. Thus the optimal shown in Fig. 14.a. This optimum shape is similar to

places of the joints are analogous to the variation of the optimum topology design of a plate shown in Fig.

bending moment and internal stresses of similar flat 14.b. that was obtained in [22], but the optimum shape

plates. is not practical. In order to achieve a practical

If presence and absence of all of the joints are topology, existence of perimeter nodes in top and

considered as variable, some perimeter joints are bottom grids of space structure was not considered as

removed from the optimum shape of space structure variable.

E. Salajegheh, M. Mashayekhi, M. Khatibinia and M. Kaykha

7.2. Double Layer Space Pyramid Figure 19. Structure optimized with a second order

A double layer space pyramid with 577 joints, the polynomial.

topology of which is shown in Fig. 15 is selected. In

this example, the number of member groups after a the optimum shape is logic and the distribution of joints

preliminary analysis was assumed as 3 each for bottom, is analogous to the stress distribution of a continuum

web and top grids, which resulted in 9 design variables. pyramid.

Cross-sectional area of members is selected from the

pipe profiles available in Table 5. The optimum 7.3. Dome Geometry Optimization

topology design is compared with the optimized The dome shown in Fig. 18 has 5 meridional and 8

ground structure in Table 7. The weight of the optimum circumferential divisions. The rise and the span of the

shape is 23% better than the optimal weight of the dome are 8 m and 50 m, respectively. Members of the

ground structure. The optimum shapes of structure dome are collected in eighteen distinct groups with

are shown in Figs. 16 and 17. It can be observed that the manner of the members grouping being similar to

Optimum Shape Design of Space Structures by Genetic Algorithm

leads to a suitable placement of joints. Consequently,

this suitable placement optimizes the load bearing area

of joints and configuration of the structure. The

numerical examples show that second and third order

polynomials are the best types of curves for the dome

under different static load cases that presented in this

research. It should be noted that the obtained

configurations are suitable for the assumption presented

in this paper. Other factors such as non-linear, collapse

and reliability analyses, etc. should be investigated.

REFERENCES

[1] Parke, G. and Disney, P., Space Structures 5, Thomas

Telford, London, 2002.

[2]. Rajeev, S. and Krishnamoorthy, C.S., Discrete

optimization of structures using genetic algorithms,

Journal of Structural Engineering ASCE, 1992, 118(5),

1233–1238.

[3]. Goldberg, D.E., Genetic algorithms in search,

Figure 20. Structure optimized with a third order polynomial. optimization and machine learning. Massachusetts,

Addison-Wesley publishing Company, 1989.

[4]. Adeli, H. and Cheng, N.-T., Integrated Genetic

Fig. 2. Cross-sectional area of members is selected

Algorithm for Optimization of Space Structures, Journal

from the pipe profiles available in Table 8. After of Aerospace Engineering, ASCE, 1993, 6(4), 315–328.

ground structure optimization, it is concluded that [5] Adeli, H. and Cheng, N.-T., Augmented Lagrangian

second and third order polynomial weigh less than Genetic Algorithm for Structural Optimization, Journal

parabolas with other orders. For the optimum shapes of Aerospace Engineering, ASCE, 1994, 7(1), 104–118.

[6] Adeli, H. and Cheng, N.-T., Concurrent Genetic

that are shown in Figs. 19 and 20, top and bottom Algorithm for Optimization of Large Structures,

boundary of radius of circumferences and optimized Journal of Aerospace Engineering, ASCE, 1994, 7(3),

value of radius are given in Table 9. The weight 276–296.

percentage reduction of second and third order [7] Krishnamoorthy, C.S., Prasanna, V.P. and Sudarshan, R.,

Object-oriented framework for genetic algorithm with

polynomials are 19.8% and 32%, respectively. application to space truss optimization, Journal of

Computing in Civil Engineering, 2002, 16(1), 66–75.

8. CONCLUSION [8] Farsangi, E., Topological optimization of double layer

In this paper, an modified genetic algorithm (MGA) grids using genetic algorithms: Proceedings of 5th

was implemented for optimizing shape design of large International Conference on Space Structure, Telford,

space structures to confirm the ability of the GA in London, 2002, 459–468.

[9] Topping, B.H.V., Montero, G. and Montenegro, K.,

shape structural optimization. The following remarks Proceeding of the 8th International Conference on

can be made: Computational Structures Technology, Civil-Comp

This paper proposes a methodology for optimum press, Scotland, 2006.

topology design of large space structures, which takes [10] Kaveh, A. and Kalatjari, V., Topology optimization of

trusses using genetic algorithm, force method and graph

into account discrete variations in the member cross-

theory, International Journal for Numerical Methods in

sectional areas and the presence or absence of the Engineering, 2003, 58, 771–791.

joints. The proposed methodology provides a practical [11] Dianat, N., Space Structures Company, Private

and scientific basis to find the optimum shape of space communications, Tehran, Iran, 2005.

structures which can replace the trial and error [12] American Institute of Steel Construction, AISC Manual,

2005.

methods for removal of joints in these structures. The [13] Iranian Code of Practice for Seismic Resistant Design of

presented examples have demonstrated that by Building, BHRC Publication, Tehran, 2006.

employing the methodology efficient topology for [14] American National Standards. Minimum design loads for

space structures can be found. buildings and other structures, (ANSI A58.1), 1982.

E. Salajegheh, M. Mashayekhi, M. Khatibinia and M. Kaykha

[15] Ventsel, E. and Krauthammer, Th., Thin Plates and [19] Spears, W. M., Adapting crossover in a genetic

Shells: Theory, Analysis, and Application, Marcel algorithm, European Journal of Operational Research,

Dekker, New York, 2001. 1992, 4, 392–404.

[16] Kaveh, A. and Kalatjari, V., Genetic algorithm for [20] Coley, D., An introduction to genetic algorithms for

discrete-sizing optimal design of trusses using the force scientists and engineers, World Scientific Publishing,

method, International Journal for Numerical Methods in London, 1999.

Engineering, 2002, 55, 55–72. [21] Erbatur, F. Hasancebi, O. Tutuncu, I. and Kilic, H.,

[17] Salajegheh, E. and Gholizadeh, S. Optimum design of Optimal design of planar and space structures with

structures by an improved genetic algorithm using neural genetic algorithms, Journal of Computers and Structures,

networks, Advances in Engineering Software, 2005, 2000, 75, 209–224.

36(11–12), 757–767. [22] Liang, Q and Steven, G., A performance-based

[18] Salajegheh, E. and Heidari, A. Optimum design of optimization method for topology design of continuum

structures against earthquake by adaptive genetic structures with mean compliance constraint, Journal of

algorithm using wavelet networks, Structural and Computer methods in applied mechanics and

Multidisciplinary Optimization, 2004, 28(4), 277–285. engineering, 2001, 191, 1471–1489.

- Help the Genetic Algorithm to Minimize the Urban Traffic on IntersectionsDiunggah olehWhite Globe Publications (IJORCS)
- Size optimization of steel trusses using a genetic algorithm in MATLABDiunggah olehDr Muhamma Imran Babar
- Genetic Alg MatlabDiunggah olehapi-3712774
- Application of Allied Genetic Algorithms in Sensor Less Speed Adjustment Control for IM Drive SystemDiunggah olehsajs201
- Iit BombayDiunggah olehBradley Owens
- Solving Economic Dispatch Problem with Valve-Point Effect using a Modified ABC AlgorithmDiunggah olehAamirNawaz
- A Distributed Genetic Algorithm for Restoration of Vertical Line ScratchesDiunggah olehDamián Abalo Mirón
- 4 Ecology GA RegressionDiunggah olehNgo Bich
- 05_TrussInANSYS.pptxDiunggah olehThota Sri K Haritha
- A_solution_for_exterior_and_relative_orientation_i.pdfDiunggah olehKent Lloyd Manoza
- Practical Multi Objective ionDiunggah olehgyoginder
- IJEST11-03-02-064Diunggah olehFariha Nishi
- Decentralize ControlDiunggah olehfalcon_vam
- Realization of Autonomous Soft Computing System Using Computational Intelligence MethodsDiunggah olehAnonymous vQrJlEN
- Cotton Yarn SystemDiunggah olehIAEME Publication
- 2795-8064-1-PBDiunggah olehhn_317
- Algoritmo Diseño Pisos compuestos erwin_2004_MSDiunggah olehjorojasu
- José Castro Caldas and Helder Coelho_ The Origin of InstitutionsDiunggah olehpcastro2
- IJSETR-VOL-2-ISSUE-3-676-683Diunggah olehkinfegeta
- TrussDiunggah olehTikar Mengkuang
- Survey Paper v4Diunggah olehAnonymous TxPyX8c
- saga-lncsDiunggah olehAnonymous TxPyX8c
- 212EE4253-7.pdfDiunggah olehAttaur Rahman
- AMR.842.695Diunggah olehVarun
- IJETR032765Diunggah oleherpublication
- UASJournal Vol2 Issue1 Livermore Lindholm Neal Cobb ColombiDiunggah olehkeshavuvce
- 78c75b8cf081b2b3dd5e80848df32425951cDiunggah olehJunaid Arshad
- Han 2009Diunggah olehVL66Gaming
- GADiunggah olehArnab Roy
- Double Deck Destination Control System.pdfDiunggah olehMetin Ağaya

- 5essDiunggah olehDurairaju Vaithilingam
- HVPD Technical Document for on Line PD Testing of MV HV Cables May 2009Diunggah olehJ. Mauricio A. Bejarano
- vogtgate.pdfDiunggah olehRomner Cordova
- 10g to 11g Upgrade Using 11g RatDiunggah olehtheahmadkhan
- Operations Manual 2013 RevisedDiunggah olehwidyana
- broendum_com_en_vacuum_insight (1).pdfDiunggah olehYoga San
- Flash SterilizationDiunggah olehTanya Gori
- ConnectionDiunggah olehCebeiller Sdn Bhd
- Along Da Riles 8Diunggah olehPRHS_Society
- AIX Security GuideDiunggah olehGridmark
- Copa Airlines Story English Part 2Diunggah olehemenacho24
- Lieutenant D. Jim Nobach emails (Aviation Division)Diunggah olehAndrew Charles Hendricks
- vb-hacDiunggah olehArt Tarcena
- Steel Intelligence 2Diunggah olehalves_joao
- Dwelling Unit CalculationsDiunggah olehjonathan
- LEBM7301-04.pdfDiunggah olehVictor Nunez
- Especificación de construcción electricoDiunggah olehGermaín Hernández Gómez
- EnsayoDiunggah olehjaime yesid contreras
- Flex_separation_systems_P_separators_605_615.pdfDiunggah olehJoshua MOUNOWAH
- CSCI124-Lesson 1 (C++ Revision)Diunggah olehDesmond Kc
- Wienerberger Penter BrochureDiunggah olehBintang Kedjora
- Ansi.ahri Standard 1250 (I-p)-2009Diunggah olehletmez
- Plan Ai²TS 2017 - 18 (1)Diunggah olehChirag Hegde
- Aditya Birla Group PptDiunggah olehPooja_Shah020186
- Problem StatementDiunggah olehAgarwal Shubham
- VAR_PFDiunggah olehSISWANTO
- IT Director Project Manager in San Francisco CA Resume Charles RidlonDiunggah olehCharlesRidlon
- Mbd Annular SectionDiunggah olehCompra Venta De Maquinaria Industrial
- 01-04-2010 Mdrc Range e210 System Pro m Compact EnglishDiunggah olehTaekeun Yoon
- Composite ManufacturingDiunggah olehKamlesh Dalavadi

## Lebih dari sekadar dokumen.

Temukan segala yang ditawarkan Scribd, termasuk buku dan buku audio dari penerbit-penerbit terkemuka.

Batalkan kapan saja.