An improved fully stressed design evolution strategy for layout optimization of truss structures

FSD-ES is improved to handle the displacement constraints more efficiently.The improved version follows the principles of contemporary evolution strategies.Evaluation of a kinematically unstable design is revised.Complicated truss optimization test problems are developed.The improved FSD-ES is demonstrated to outperform the best available peer methods. During the recent decade, truss optimization by meta-heuristics has gradually replaced deterministic and optimality criteria-based methods. While they may provide some advantages regarding their robustness and ability to avoid local minima, the required evaluation budget grows fast when the number of design variables is increased. This practically limits the size of the problems to which they can be applied. Furthermore, many recent stochastic optimization methods handle the size optimization only, the potential saving from which is highly limited, when compared to the most sophisticated, and obviously the most challenging scenario, simultaneous topology, shape and size (TSS) optimization. In a recent study by the authors, a method based on combination of optimality criteria and evolution strategies, called fully stressed design based on evolution strategies (FSD-ES), was proposed for TSS optimization of truss structures. FSD-ES outperformed available truss optimizers in the literature, both in efficiency and robustness. The contribution of this study is twofold. First, an improved version of FSD-ES method, called FSD-ES-II, is proposed. In comparison with the earlier version, it takes the displacement constraints in the resizing step into account and can handle constraints governed by practically used specifications. Update of strategy parameters is also revised following contemporary and new developments in evolution strategies. Second, a test suite involving a number of complicated TSS optimization problems is chosen to overcome usual shortcomings in the available benchmark problems. For each problem, performance of FSD-ES-II is compared with the best results available in the literature, often showing a significant superiority of the proposed approach.

[1]  Guan-Chun Luh,et al.  Optimal design of truss-structures using particle swarm optimization , 2011 .

[2]  M. Géradin,et al.  Optimality criteria and mathematical programming in structural weight optimization , 1978 .

[3]  Hai Huang,et al.  Improved genetic algorithm with two-level approximation for truss topology optimization , 2014 .

[4]  Oliver Kramer,et al.  Evolutionary self-adaptation: a survey of operators and strategy parameters , 2010, Evol. Intell..

[5]  Ali Ahrari,et al.  Fully Stressed Design Evolution Strategy for Shape and Size Optimization of Truss Structures , 2013 .

[6]  Martin Fischer,et al.  Cifecenter for Integrated Facility Engineering Fully Constrained Design: a Scalable Method for Discrete Member Sizing Optimization of Steel Frame Structures , 2022 .

[7]  Subramaniam Rajan,et al.  Sizing, Shape, and Topology Design Optimization of Trusses Using Genetic Algorithm , 1995 .

[8]  Nikolaus Hansen,et al.  Completely Derandomized Self-Adaptation in Evolution Strategies , 2001, Evolutionary Computation.

[9]  A. Kaveh,et al.  Sizing, geometry and topology optimization of trusses using force method and supervised charged system search , 2014 .

[10]  A. Kaveh,et al.  Topology optimization of trusses considering static and dynamic constraints using the CSS , 2013, Appl. Soft Comput..

[11]  A. Kaveh,et al.  Simultaneous topology and size optimization of structures by genetic algorithm using minimal length chromosome , 2006 .

[12]  Claude Fleury,et al.  An efficient optimality criteria approach to the minimum weight design of elastic structures , 1980 .

[13]  Solomon Tesfamariam,et al.  A survey of non-gradient optimization methods in structural engineering , 2013, Adv. Eng. Softw..

[14]  Ali Kaveh,et al.  THE CMA EVOLUTION STRATEGY BASED SIZE OPTIMIZATION OF TRUSS STRUCTURES , 2011 .

[15]  Sujin Bureerat,et al.  Technical Note: Simultaneous topology, shape and sizing optimisation of a three-dimensional slender truss tower using multiobjective evolutionary algorithms , 2011 .

[16]  Leandro Fleck Fadel Miguel,et al.  Multimodal size, shape, and topology optimisation of truss structures using the Firefly algorithm , 2013, Adv. Eng. Softw..

[17]  A. Kaveh,et al.  Sizing, geometry and topology optimization of trusses via force method and genetic algorithm , 2008 .

[18]  Carsten Ebenau,et al.  An advanced evolutionary strategy with an adaptive penalty function for mixed-discrete structural optimisation , 2005, Adv. Eng. Softw..

[19]  O. Hasançebi,et al.  Layout optimization of trusses using improved GA methodologies , 2001 .

[20]  Saeed Gholizadeh,et al.  Layout optimization of truss structures by hybridizing cellular automata and particle swarm optimization , 2013 .

[21]  Fuat Erbatur,et al.  Layout optimisation of trusses using simulated annealing , 2002 .

[22]  Mehmet Polat Saka,et al.  OPTIMUM DESIGN OF PIN-JOINTED STEEL STRUCTURES WITH PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS , 1990 .

[23]  Bernhard Sendhoff,et al.  Covariance Matrix Adaptation Revisited - The CMSA Evolution Strategy - , 2008, PPSN.

[24]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  Simultaneous topology, shape and size optimization of truss structures by fully stressed design based on evolution strategy , 2015 .

[25]  Leandro Fleck Fadel Miguel,et al.  Shape and size optimization of truss structures considering dynamic constraints through modern metaheuristic algorithms , 2012, Expert Syst. Appl..

[26]  K. Deb,et al.  Design of truss-structures for minimum weight using genetic algorithms , 2001 .

[27]  E. Salajegheh,et al.  Optimum design of trusses with discrete sizing and shape variables , 1993 .

[28]  B. H. V. Topping,et al.  Shape Optimization of Skeletal Structures: A Review , 1983 .

[29]  M. Papadrakakis,et al.  Structural optimization using evolutionary algorithms , 2002 .

[30]  A. Kaveh,et al.  Comparison of nine meta-heuristic algorithms for optimal design of truss structures with frequency constraints , 2014, Adv. Eng. Softw..

[31]  O. Hasançebi,et al.  AUTOMATED SIZING OF TRUSS STRUCTURES USING A COMPUTATIONALLY IMPROVED SOPT ALGORITHM , 2013 .

[32]  O. Hasançebi,et al.  Discrete sizing optimization of steel trusses under multiple displacement constraints and load cases using guided stochastic search technique , 2015 .

[33]  Anne Auger,et al.  Comparing results of 31 algorithms from the black-box optimization benchmarking BBOB-2009 , 2010, GECCO '10.

[34]  O. Hasançebi,et al.  Guided stochastic search technique for discrete sizing optimization of steel trusses: A design-driven heuristic approach , 2014 .

[35]  Reza Razani,et al.  Behavior of fully stressed design of structures and its relationshipto minimum-weight design. , 1965 .

[36]  Jeroen Coenders,et al.  An optimality criteria based method for discrete design optimization taking into account buildability constraints , 2014 .

[37]  O. Hasançebi,et al.  Performance evaluation of metaheuristic search techniques in the optimum design of real size pin jointed structures , 2009 .

[38]  Thomas Bäck,et al.  Contemporary Evolution Strategies , 2013, Natural Computing Series.

[39]  O. Hasançebi,et al.  On efficient use of simulated annealing in complex structural optimization problems , 2002 .

[40]  O. Hasançebi,et al.  Adaptive evolution strategies in structural optimization: Enhancing their computational performance with applications to large-scale structures , 2008 .

[41]  Carmine Pappalettere,et al.  Metaheuristic Design Optimization of Skeletal Structures: A Review , 2010 .

[42]  Hans-Paul Schwefel,et al.  Evolution strategies – A comprehensive introduction , 2002, Natural Computing.