Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Multi-objective heat transfer search algorithm for truss optimization

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Engineering with Computers Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the real world, we often come across conditions like optimization of more than one objective functions concurrently which are of conflicting nature and that makes the prospect of the problem more intricate. To overpower this contrasting state, an efficient meta-heuristic (MH) is required, which provides a balanced trade-off between diverging objective functions and gives an optimum set of solutions. In this article, a recently proposed MH called Heat Transfer Search (HTS) algorithm is enforced to elucidate the structural optimization problems with Multi-objective functions (described as MOHTS). MOHTS is an efficient MH which works on the principle of heat transfer and thermodynamics, where search agents are molecules which interact with other molecules and with surrounding through conduction, convection, and radiation modes of heat transfer. Five challenging benchmark problems of truss optimization have been taken into consideration here to examine the effectiveness of MOHTS. Procure results through the proposed method show the predominance over considered MHs. These benchmark problems are considered for discrete design variables for the structural optimization problem with two objectives, namely minimization of truss weight and maximization of nodal displacement. Here, the Pareto-optimal front achieved through computational experiments, in the process of optimization, is evaluated by three distinct performance quality indicators namely the Hypervolume, the Front spacing metric, and Inverted Generational Distance. Also, the obtained results after a number of runs are compared with other existing optimizers in the literature like multi-objective ant system, multi-objective ant colony system, and multi-objective symbiotic organism search, which manifest the superiority in the performance of the proposed algorithm over others. The statistical analysis of the experimental work has been carried out by conducting Friedman’s rank test and Post-Hoc Holm–Sidak test.

Graphic abstract

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Tejani GG, Bhensdadia VH, Bureerat S (2016) Examination of three meta-heuristic algorithms for the optimal design of planar steel frames. Adv Comput Des 1(1):79–86

    Google Scholar 

  2. Tejani GG, Savsani VJ, Bureerat S, Patel VK (2017) Topology and size optimization of trusses with static and dynamic bounds by modified symbiotic organisms search. J Comput Civil Eng 32(2):04017085

    Google Scholar 

  3. Tejani GG, Savsani VJ, Patel VK, Savsani PV (2018) Size, shape, and topology optimization of planar and space trusses using mutation-based improved metaheuristics. J Comput Des Eng 5(2):198–214

    Google Scholar 

  4. Leitmann G (1977) Some problems of scalar and vector-valued optimization in linear viscoelasticity. J Optim Theory Appl 23(1):93–99

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Stadler W (1977) Natural structural shapes of shallow arches. J Appl Mech 44(2):291–298

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Stadler W (1978) Natural structural shapes (the static case). Q J Mech Appl Math 31(2):169–217

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Koski J (1979) Truss optimization with vector criterion. Tampereen teknillinen korkeakoulu, Tampere

    Google Scholar 

  8. Koski J (1980) Truss optimization with vector criterion: examples. The Tampere University of Technology, Tampere

    Google Scholar 

  9. Carmichael DG (1980) Computation of Pareto optima in structural design. Int J Numer Meth Eng 15(6):925–929

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Marler RT, Arora JS (2010) The weighted sum method for multi-objective optimization: new insights. Struct Multidiscip Optim 41(6):853–862

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Hasançebi O, Erbatur F (2002) Layout optimization of trusses using simulated annealing. Adv Eng Softw 33(7–10):681–696

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Lamberti L (2008) An efficient simulated annealing algorithm for design optimization of truss structures. Comput Struct 86(19–20):1936–1953

    Google Scholar 

  13. Sonmez M (2011) Artificial Bee Colony algorithm for optimization of truss structures. Appl Soft Comput 11(2):2406–2418

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kaveh A, Talatahari S (2010) A novel heuristic optimization method: charged system search. Acta Mech 213(3–4):267–289

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Gandomi AH, Talatahari S, Yang XS, Deb S (2013) Design optimization of truss structures using cuckoo search algorithm. Struct Des Tall Spec Build 22(17):1330–1349

    Google Scholar 

  16. Gandomi AH, Talatahari S, Tadbiri F, Alavi AH (2013) Krill herd algorithm for optimum design of truss structures. Int J Bio-Inspired Comput 5(5):281–288

    Google Scholar 

  17. Gholizadeh S, Ebadijalal M (2018) Performance based discrete topology optimization of steel braced frames by a new metaheuristic. Adv Eng Softw 123:77–92

    Google Scholar 

  18. Tejan G, Savsani V (2016) Teaching-learning-based optimization (TLBO) approach to truss structure subjected to static and dynamic constraints. In: Proceedings of International Conference on ICT for Sustainable Development (pp. 63–71). Springer, Singapore

  19. Kaveh A, Zolghadr A (2014) Democratic PSO for truss layout and size optimization with frequency constraints. Comput Struct 130:10–21

    Google Scholar 

  20. Doğan B, Ölmez T (2015) A new metaheuristic for numerical function optimization: vortex Search algorithm. Inf Sci 293:125–145

    Google Scholar 

  21. Gonçalves MS, Lopez RH, Miguel LFF (2015) Search group algorithm: a new metaheuristic method for the optimization of truss structures. Comput Struct 153:165–184

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kaveh A, Zolghadr A (2017) Truss shape and size optimization with frequency constraints using tug of war optimization. Asian J Civil Eng 7(2):311–333

    Google Scholar 

  23. Mirjalili S (2016) SCA: a sine-cosine algorithm for solving optimization problems. Knowl-Based Syst 96:120–133

    Google Scholar 

  24. Deb K, Gulati S (2001) Design of truss-structures for minimum weight using genetic algorithms. Finite Elem Anal Des 37(5):447–465

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Zitzler E, Deb K, Thiele L, Coello CC, Coello CAC, Corne D (eds) (2001) Evolutionary multi-criterion optimization. International Conference; Proceedings. Zurich, Switzerland, March 7–9, 2001 (No. 1993). Springer Science & Business Media

  26. Coello CACC (2001) A short tutorial on evolutionary multiobjective optimization. In: International Conference on evolutionary multi-criterion optimization (pp. 21–40). Springer, Berlin

  27. Osyczka A (2002) Evolutionary algorithms for single and multicriteria design optimization. Struct Multidiscip Optim 24:88–89

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Kaveh A, Kabir MZ, Bohlool M (2019) Optimum design of three-dimensional steel frames with prismatic and non-prismatic elements. Eng Comput. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-019-00746-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Kumar S, Tejani GG, Mirjalili S (2018) Modified symbiotic organisms search for structural optimization. Eng Comput 1:1–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-018-0662-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Kalita K, Dey P, Haldar S, Gao XZ (2019) Optimizing frequencies of skew composite laminates with metaheuristic algorithms. Eng Comput 1:1–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-019-00728-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Gholizadeh S, Poorhoseini H (2016) Seismic layout optimization of steel braced frames by an improved dolphin echolocation algorithm. Struct Multidiscip Optim 54(4):1011–1029

    Google Scholar 

  32. Gholizadeh S, Milany A (2018) An improved fireworks algorithm for discrete sizing optimization of steel skeletal structures. Eng Optim 50(11):1829–1849

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  33. Nguyen H, Moayedi H, Foong LK, Al Najjar HAH, Jusoh WAW, Rashid ASA, Jamali J (2019) Optimizing ANN models with PSO for predicting short building seismic response. Eng Comput 1:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-019-00733-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Ghaleini EN, Koopialipoor M, Momenzadeh M, Sarafraz ME, Mohamad ET, Gordan B (2019) A combination of artificial bee colony and neural network for approximating the safety factor of retaining walls. Eng Comput 35(2):647–658

    Google Scholar 

  35. Tejani GG, Savsani VJ, Bureerat S, Patel VK, Savsani P (2018) Topology optimization of truss subjected to static and dynamic constraints by integrating simulated annealing into passing vehicle search algorithms. Eng Comput. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-018-0612-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Cheng MY, Prayogo D, Tran DH (2015) Optimizing multiple-resources leveling in multiple projects using discrete symbiotic organisms search. J Comput Civil Eng 30(3):04015036

    Google Scholar 

  37. Panda A, Pani S (2016) A symbiotic organisms search algorithm with adaptive penalty function to solve multi-objective constrained optimization problems. Appl Soft Comput 46:344–360

    Google Scholar 

  38. Tran DH, Cheng MY, Prayogo D (2016) A novel multiple objective symbiotic organisms search (MOSOS) for time–cost–labor utilization tradeoff problem. Knowl-Based Syst 94:132–145

    Google Scholar 

  39. Tran DH, Luong-Duc L, Duong MT, Le TN, Pham AD (2018) Opposition multiple objective symbiotic organisms search (OMOSOS) for time, cost, quality and work continuity tradeoff in repetitive projects. J Comput Des Eng 5(2):160–172

    Google Scholar 

  40. Angelo JS, Bernardino HS, Barbosa HJ (2015) Ant colony approaches for multiobjective structural optimization problems with a cardinality constraint. Adv Eng Softw 80:101–115

    Google Scholar 

  41. Gholizadeh S, Baghchevan A (2017) Multi-objective seismic design optimization of steel frames by a chaotic meta-heuristic algorithm. Eng Comput 33(4):1045–1060

    Google Scholar 

  42. Tejani GG, Pholdee N, Bureerat S, Prayogo D (2018) Multiobjective adaptive symbiotic organisms search for truss optimization problems. Knowl-Based Syst 161:398–414

    Google Scholar 

  43. Ghasemi MR, Varaee H (2017) A fast multi-objective optimization using an efficient ideal gas molecular movement algorithm. Eng Comput 33(3):477–496

    Google Scholar 

  44. Luh GC, Chueh CH (2004) Multi-objective optimal design of truss structure with immune algorithm. Comput Struct 82(11–12):829–844

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  45. Kaveh A, Laknejadi K (2011) A novel hybrid charge system search and particle swarm optimization method for multi-objective optimization. Expert Syst Appl 38(12):15475–15488

    Google Scholar 

  46. Zhang Q, Li H (2007) MOEA/D: a multiobjective evolutionary algorithm based on decomposition. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 11(6):712–731

    Google Scholar 

  47. Reyes-Sierra M, Coello CC (2006) Multi-objective particle swarm optimizers: a survey of the state-of-the-art. Int J Comput Intell Res 2(3):287–308

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  48. Zitzler E (1999) Evolutionary algorithms for multiobjective optimization: methods and applications, vol 63. Shaker, Ithaca

    Google Scholar 

  49. Techasen T, Wansasueb K, Panagant N, Pholdee N, Bureerat S (2018) Simultaneous topology, shape, and size optimization of trusses, taking account of uncertainties using multi-objective evolutionary algorithms. Eng Comput. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/370/1/012029

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Chisari C (2018) Tolerance-based Pareto optimality for structural identification accounting for uncertainty. Eng Comput 35:1–15

    Google Scholar 

  51. Gomes GF, de Almeida FA, Alexandrino PDSL, da Cunha SS, de Sousa BS, Ancelotti AC (2018) A multiobjective sensor placement optimization for SHM systems considering Fisher information matrix and mode shape interpolation. Eng Comput 35:1–17

    Google Scholar 

  52. Cuevas E, Echavarría A, Ramírez-Ortegón MA (2014) An optimization algorithm inspired by the states of matter that improves the balance between exploration and exploitation. Appl Intell 40(2):256–272

    Google Scholar 

  53. Ceruti A (2018) Meta-heuristic multidisciplinary design optimization of wind turbine blades obtained from circular pipes. Eng Comput 35:1–17

    Google Scholar 

  54. Caponetto R, Fortuna L, Fazzino S, Xibilia MG (2003) Chaotic sequences to improve the performance of evolutionary algorithms. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 7(3):289–304

    Google Scholar 

  55. Liu SH, Mernik M, Bryant BR (2009) To explore or to exploit: an entropy-driven approach for evolutionary algorithms. Int J Knowl-Based Intell Eng Syst 13(3–4):185–206

    Google Scholar 

  56. Patel VK, Savsani VJ (2015) Heat transfer search (HTS): a novel optimization algorithm. Inf Sci 324:217–246

    Google Scholar 

  57. Raja BD, Patel V, Jhala RL (2017) Thermal design and optimization of the fin-and-tube heat exchanger using heat transfer search algorithm. Therm Sci Eng Prog 4:45–57

    Google Scholar 

  58. Tejani G, Savsani V, Patel V (2017) Modified sub-population based heat transfer search algorithm for structural optimization. Int J Appl Metaheuristic Comput IJAMC 8(3):1–23

    Google Scholar 

  59. Tejani GG, Savsani VJ, Patel VK, Mirjalili S (2019) An improved heat transfer search algorithm for unconstrained optimization problems. J Comput Des Eng 6(1):13–32

    Google Scholar 

  60. Degertekin SO, Lamberti L, Hayalioglu MS (2017) Heat transfer search algorithm for sizing optimization of truss structures. Lat Am J Solids Struct 14(3):373–397

    Google Scholar 

  61. Hazra A, Das S, Basu M (2018) Heat transfer search algorithm for non-convex economic dispatch problems. J Inst Eng India Ser B 99(3):273–280

    Google Scholar 

  62. Maharana D, Kotecha P (2016) Simultaneous heat transfer search for computationally expensive numerical optimization. In: 2016 IEEE Congress on evolutionary computation (CEC) (pp. 2982–2988). IEEE

  63. Savsani P, Mohamed A (2018) Tawhid. Discrete heat transfer search for solving travelling salesman problem. Math Found Comput 1(3):265–280

    Google Scholar 

  64. Savsani V, Patel V, Gadhvi B, Tawhid M (2017) Pareto optimization of a half car passive suspension model using a novel multiobjective heat transfer search algorithm. Model Simul Eng. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/2034907

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Tawhid MA, Savsani V (2018) ∈-Constraint heat transfer search (∈-HTS) algorithm for solving multi-objective engineering design problems. J Comput Des Eng 5(1):104–119

    Google Scholar 

  66. Deb K (1999) Multi-objective genetic algorithms: problem difficulties and construction of test problems. Evol Comput 7(3):205–230

    Google Scholar 

  67. Circiu MS, Leon F (2010) Comparative study of multiobjective genetic algorithms. Buletinul Institutului Politehnic din Iaşi

  68. Khare M, Patnaik T, Khare A (2009) A comparison of multiobjective evolutionary algorithms. In: Proceeding of National Conference on emerging trends in software & networking technologies (ETSNT’09) (pp. 205–209)

  69. Deb K (2008) Introduction to evolutionary multiobjective optimization. Multiobjective optimization. Springer, Berlin, pp 59–96

    Google Scholar 

  70. Qu BY, Zhu YS, Jiao YC, Wu MY, Suganthan PN, Liang JJ (2018) A survey on multi-objective evolutionary algorithms for the solution of the environmental/economic dispatch problems. Swarm Evol Comput 38:1–11

    Google Scholar 

  71. Mirjalili S, Jangir P, Saremi S (2017) Multi-objective ant lion optimizer: a multi-objective optimization algorithm for solving engineering problems. Appl Intell 46(1):79–95

    Google Scholar 

  72. Cengel YA, Boles MA (2008) Thermodynamics: an engineering approach. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  73. Cengel YA (2007) Heat and mass transfer. Tata McGraw-Hill Education, New York

    Google Scholar 

  74. Tejani G, Savsani V, Patel V (2017) Modified sub-population based heat transfer search algorithm for structural optimization. Int J Appl Metaheuristic Comput IJAMC 8(3):1–23

    Google Scholar 

  75. Deb K, Mohan M, Mishra S (2005) Evaluating the ε-domination based multi-objective evolutionary algorithm for a quick computation of Pareto-optimal solutions. Evol Comput 13(4):501–525

    Google Scholar 

  76. Angelo J, Bernardino HS, Barbosa HJC (2012) Multi-objective ant colony approaches for structural optimization problems. In: Proceedings of the eleventh international conference on computational structures technology, Civil-Comp Press, Stirlingshire (UK)

  77. Knowles JD, Thiele L, Zitzler E (2006) A tutorial on the performance assessment of stochastic multiobjective optimizers. TIK-Report 214

  78. Schott JR (1995) Fault-tolerant design using single and multicriteria genetic algorithm optimization (No. AFIT/CI/CIA-95-039). Air Force Inst of Tech Wright-Patterson Afb Oh

  79. Sierra MR, Coello CAC (2005) Improving PSO-based multi-objective optimization using crowding, mutation and ∈-dominance. In: International conference on evolutionary multi-criterion optimization. Springer, Berlin, pp. 505–519

  80. Tejani GG, Pholdee N, Bureerat S, Prayogo D, Gandomi AH (2019) Structural optimization using multi-objective modified adaptive symbiotic organisms search. Expert Syst Appl 125:425–441

    Google Scholar 

  81. Derrac J, García S, Molina D, Herrera F (2011) A practical tutorial on the use of nonparametric statistical tests as a methodology for comparing evolutionary and swarm intelligence algorithms. Swarm Evol Comput 1(1):3–18

    Google Scholar 

  82. Holm S (1979) A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scand J Stat 6:65–70

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, School of Technology, GSFC University, Vadodara, Gujarat, India

    Ghanshyam G. Tejani

  2. Department of Mechanical Engineering, GPERI, Gujarat Technological University, Gujarat, India

    Sumit Kumar

  3. Faculty of Engineering and Information Systems, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, NSW, 2007, Australia

    Amir H. Gandomi

  4. School of Business, Stevens Institute of Technology, Hoboken, NJ, 07030, USA

    Amir H. Gandomi

Authors
  1. Ghanshyam G. Tejani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sumit Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Amir H. Gandomi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ghanshyam G. Tejani.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tejani, G.G., Kumar, S. & Gandomi, A.H. Multi-objective heat transfer search algorithm for truss optimization. Engineering with Computers 37, 641–662 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-019-00846-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-019-00846-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation