Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Optimization of weight and collapse energy of space structures using the multi-objective modified crow search algorithm

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

Abstract

Due to the use of space structures in monumental and significant buildings, providing adequate safety and proper structural performance must always be taken into account. In this study, the geometric and material nonlinear behaviors are directly considered in the design of space structures so that the resulting designs are economical while having appropriate collapse behavior. Weight and collapse energy are considered the objective functions, and the problem is considered as a multi-objective optimization problem. This is the first attempt to combine the weight and collapse energy simultaneously for the optimal design of structures. To solve such problems, two new multi-objective algorithms based on the recently introduced crow search algorithm (CSA) have been proposed. These algorithms are called multi-objective crow search algorithm (MOCSA) and multi-objective modified crow search algorithm (MOMCSA). MOCSA and MOMCSA have similar structures and details, except that the MOCSA generates the new solution as the CSA approach does while generating the new solution in the MOMCSA is modified. The modification of the search vector and the search range is employed as two simple and effective changes in MOMCSA to enhance the exploration and exploitation. To evaluate the proposed algorithms, three space structures were optimized using the proposed algorithms and two well-known algorithms, MOPSO and NSGA-II. The results indicate superiority of MOMCSA to the other algorithms.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig.1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Schmidt LC, Morgan P, Hanaor A (1982) Ultimate load testing of space trusses. J Struct Div 108(6):1324–1335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Hanaor A, Marsh C, Parke GA (1989) Modification of behavior of double-layer grids: overview. J Struct Eng 115(5):1021–1037

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Sheidaii MR, Parke GAR, Abedi K, Behravesh A (2001) Dynamic snap-through buckling of truss-type structures. Int J Space Struct 16(2):85–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Rashidyan S, Sheidaii MR (2017) Improving double-layer space trusses collapse behavior by strengthening compression layer and weakening tension layer members. Adv Struct Eng 20(11):1757–1767

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Deb K (2001) Multi objective optimization using evolutionary algorithms. Wiley, Chichester

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Zavala GR, Nebro AJ, Luna F, Coello Coello CA (2013) A survey of multi-objective metaheuristics applied to structural optimization. Struct Multidiscip Optim 49(4):537–558

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Papadrakakis M, Lagaros ND, Plevris V (2002) Multi-objective Optimization of skeletal structures under static and seismic loading conditions. Eng Optim 34:645–669

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Coello CA, Toscano G (2005) Multiobjective structural optimization using a micro-genetic algorithm. Struct Multidiscip Optim 30(5):388–403

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Paya I, Yepes V, Gonz´alez-Vidosa F, Hospitaler A (2008) Multiobjective optimization of concrete frames by simulated annealing. Comput-Aided Civ Inf 23(8):596–610

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Su R, Wang X, Gui L, Fan Z (2011) Multi-objective topology and sizing optimization of truss structures based on adaptive multi-island search strategy. Struct Multidiscip Optim 43(2):275–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kaveh A, Laknejadi K (2013) A new multi-swarm multi-objective optimization method for structural design. Adv Eng Softw 58:54–69

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Xiong Z, Li XH, Liang JC, Li LJ (2018) A multi-objective hybrid algorithm for optimization of grid structures. Int J Appl Mech 10(01):1850009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kaveh A, Mahdavi VR (2019) Multi-objective colliding bodies optimization algorithm for design of trusses. J Comput Des Eng 6(1):49–59

    Google Scholar 

  16. Gholizadeh S, Fattahi F (2019) Multi-objective design optimization of steel moment frames considering seismic collapse safety. Eng Comput pp.1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-019-00886-y

  17. 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Techasen T, Wansasueb K, Panagant N, Pholdee N, Bureerat S (2019) Simultaneous topology, shape, and size optimization of trusses, taking account of uncertainties using multi-objective evolutionary algorithms. Eng Comput 35(2):721–740

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Kumar S, Tejani GG, Pholdee N, Bureerat S (2020) Multi-objective modified heat transfer search for truss optimization. Eng Comput pp.1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-020-01010-1

  20. Askarzadeh A (2016) A novel metaheuristic method for solving constrained engineering optimization problems: crow search algorithm. Comput Struct 169:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Jain M, Rani A, Singh V (2017) An improved crow search algorithm for high-dimensional problems. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 33(6):3597–3614

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Allaoui M, Ahiod B, El-Yafrani M (2018) A hybrid crow search algorithm for solving the DNA fragment assembly problem. Expert Syst Appl 102:44–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Movahediyan Z, Askarzadeh A (2018) Multi-objective optimization framework of a photovoltaic-diesel generator hybrid energy system considering operating reserve. Sustain Cities Soc 41:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Hinojosa S, Oliva D, Cuevas E, Pajares G, Avalos O, Gálvez J (2018) Improving multi-criterion optimization with chaos: a novel multi-objective chaotic crow search algorithm. Neural Comput Appl 29(8):319–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Fallah H, Kisi O, Kim S, Rezaie-Balf M (2019) A new optimization approach for the least-cost design of water distribution networks: improved crow search algorithm. Water Resour Manag 33(10):3595–3613

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Rizk-Allah RM, Hassanien AE, Slowik A (2020) Multi-objective orthogonal opposition-based crow search algorithm for large-scale multi-objective optimization. Neural Comput Appl 32(17):1–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Makhdoomi S, Askarzadeh A (2020) Optimizing operation of a photovoltaic/diesel generator hybrid energy system with pumped hydro storage by a modified crow search algorithm. J Energy Storage 27:101040

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Javidi A, Salajegheh E, Salajegheh J (2019) Enhanced crow search algorithm for optimum design of structures. Appl Soft Comput 77:274–289

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Coello CAC, Pulido GT, Lechuga MS (2004) Handling multiple objectives with particle swarm optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 8(3):256–279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Deb K, Pratap A, Agarwal S, Meyarivan TA (2002) A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 6(2):182–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Coello CAC, Van Veldhuizen DA, Lamont GB (2002) Evolutionary algorithms for solving multi-objective problems. Kluwer Academic Publishers, New York

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. McKenna F, Fenves GL (2001) The OpenSees command language manual. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  33. Kamyab R, Salajegheh E (2013) Size optimization of nonlinear scallop domes by an enhanced particle swarm algorithm. Int J Civ Eng 11(3):77–89

    Google Scholar 

  34. Hassanzadeh A, Gholizadeh S (2019) Collapse-performance-aided design optimization of steel concentrically braced frames. Eng Struct 197:109411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Gholizadeh S, Moghadas RK (2014) Performance-based optimum design of steel frames by an improved quantum particle swarm optimization. Adv Struct Eng 17(2):143–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Rezazadeh F, Talatahari S (2020) Seismic energy-based design of BRB frames using multi-objective vibrating particles system optimization. Structures 24:227–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Hill CD, Blandford GE, Wang ST (1989) Post-buckling analysis of steel space trusses. J Struct Eng ASCE 115(4):900–919

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Ramesh G, Krishnamoorthy CS (1994) Inelastic post-buckling analysis of truss structures by dynamic relaxation method. Int J Numer Methods Eng 37(21):3633–3657

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  40. Thai HT, Kim SE (2009) Large deflection inelastic analysis of space trusses using generalized displacement control method. J Constr Steel Res 65(10–11):1987–1994

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Thai HT, Kim SE (2011) Nonlinear inelastic time-history analysis of truss structures. J Constr Steel Res 67(12):1966–1972

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Thai HT, Kim SE (2011) Practical advanced analysis software for nonlinear inelastic dynamic analysis of steel structures. J Constr Steel Res 67(3):453–461

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Truong VH, Kim SE (2018) Reliability-based design optimization of nonlinear inelastic trusses using improved differential evolution algorithm. Adv Eng Softw 121:59–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Knowles JD, Corne DW (2000) Approximating the nondominated front using the Pareto archived evolution strategy. Evol Comput 8(2):149–172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Yang XS, Deb S, Fong S (2014) Metaheuristic algorithms: optimal balance of intensification and diversification. Appl Math Inf Sci 8(3):977

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Zitzler E, Deb K, Thiele L (2000) Comparison of multi-objective evolutionaryalgorithms:empirical results. Evol Comput 8(2):173–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eysa Salajegheh.

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

Javidi, A., Salajegheh, E. & Salajegheh, J. Optimization of weight and collapse energy of space structures using the multi-objective modified crow search algorithm. Engineering with Computers 38, 2879–2896 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-020-01276-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-020-01276-5

Keywords

Navigation