KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Gazi University Journal of Science / 2018 / Cilt: 31 - Sayı: 2

Comparison of Two Metaheuristic Algorithms on Sizing and Topology Optimization of Trusses and Mathematical Functions

Ali MORTAZAVİ
Vedat TOĞAN
Ayhan NUHOĞLU
Sayfa
416–435
Yayın Tarihi
2018-06-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Achieved results demonstrate the superiority of the iPSO in comparison with TLBO in both search capability and convergence rate.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Optimum solution of an anticipated problem is generally reached through minimizing or maximizing a governing real function while sometimes should satisfy various predefined limitations.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:In this respect, current study intends to compare the performances of two different common metaheuristic optimization algorithms as integrated particle swarm optimizer (iPSO) and teaching and learning based optimizer (TLBO).
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Achieved results demonstrate the superiority of the iPSO in comparison with TLBO in both search capability and convergence rate.
🔬Tür:Modelleme & Sayısal Simülasyon
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:size and topology optimization · particle swarm optimization · teaching learning based optimization

Abstract

Optimum solution of an anticipated problem is generally reached through minimizing or maximizing a governing real function while sometimes should satisfy various predefined limitations. Selecting an algorithm as a main optimizer plays a key role on the solution process. In this respect, current study intends to compare the performances of two different common metaheuristic optimization algorithms as integrated particle swarm optimizer (iPSO) and teaching and learning based optimizer (TLBO). The TLBO is two-phase algorithm while the iPSO is a single-phase algorithm. Their capabilities are compared over some benchmark cases including mathematical functions and structural optimization problems. To increase the complexity of the test problems both size and topology specifications of the structural systems are simultaneously taken as the decision variables. Achieved results demonstrate the superiority of the iPSO in comparison with TLBO in both search capability and convergence rate.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

MORTAZAVİ, A., TOĞAN, V., NUHOĞLU, A. (2018). Comparison of Two Metaheuristic Algorithms on Sizing and Topology Optimization of Trusses and Mathematical Functions. Gazi University Journal of Science, Cilt: 31 - Sayı: 2, 416–435. https://ajindex.com/articles/254461

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (14)

  1. Mortazavi, A. and Toğan, V., "Simultaneous size, shape, and topology optimization of truss structures using integrated particle swarm optimizer", Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 54: 715-736, (2016)
  2. Dede, T. and Togan, V., "A teaching learning based optimization for truss structures with frequency constraints", Structural Engineering and Mechanics, 53: 833-845, (2015)
  3. Mortazavi, A. and Togan, V., "Particle Swarm Optimizer integrated with fly-back mechanism and weighted particle for optimization of the truss structures", 11st International congress on advances in civil engineering, Istanbul, Turkey, (2014)
  4. Miguel, L.F.F., Lopez, R.H. and Miguel, L.F.F., "Multimodal size, shape, and topology optimisation of truss structures using the Firefly algorithm", Advances in Engineering Software, 56: 23-37, (2013)
  5. Sonmez, M., "Discrete optimum design of truss structures using artificial bee colony algorithm", Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 43: 85-97, (2011)
  6. Aydoğdu, İ., Akın, A. and Saka, M.P., "Design optimization of real world steel space frames using artificial bee colony algorithm with Levy flight distribution", Advances in Engineering Software, 92: 1-14, (2016)
  7. Lamberti, L., "An efficient simulated annealing algorithm for design optimization of truss structures", Computers & Structures, 86: 1936-1953, (2008)
  8. Hasançebi, O., "Adaptive evolution strategies in structural optimization: Enhancing their computational performance with applications to large-scale structures", Computers & Structures, 86: 119-132, (2008)
  9. Camp, C., "Design of Space Trusses Using Big Bang–Big Crunch Optimization", Journal of Structural Engineering, 133: 999-1008, (2007)
  10. Achtziger, W. and Stolpe, M., "Global optimization of truss topology with discrete bar areas—Part II: Implementation and numerical results", Computational Optimization and Applications, 44: 315-341, (2007)
  11. Camp, C. and Bichon, B., "Design of Space Trusses Using Ant Colony Optimization", Journal of Structural Engineering, 130: 741-751, (2004)
  12. Noilublao, N. and Bureerat, S., "Simultaneous Topology, Shape, and Sizing Optimisation of Plane Trusses with Adaptive Ground Finite Elements Using MOEAs", Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2013: 9, (2013)
  13. Kennedy, J. and Eberhart, R., "Particle swarm optimization", Neural Networks, 1995. Proceedings., IEEE International Conference on, 4: 1942-1948 vol.1944, (1995)
  14. Mortazavi, A. and T