Advertisement

Hybrid Invasive Weed Optimization-Shuffled Frog-Leaping Algorithm for Optimal Design of Truss Structures

  • A. KavehEmail author
  • S. Talatahari
  • N. Khodadadi
Research Paper
  • 3 Downloads

Abstract

In this paper, an efficient hybrid optimization algorithm based on invasive weed optimization algorithm and shuffled frog-leaping algorithm is presented for optimum design of trusses. The shuffled frog-leaping algorithm is a population-based cooperative search metaphor inspired by natural memetic, and the invasive weed optimization algorithm is an optimization method based on dynamic growth of weeds colony. The proposed algorithm utilizes the shuffled frog-leaping algorithm for finding optimal solution region rapidly and the invasive weed optimization is used to exploit global solutions. Different benchmark truss structures are optimized using the new hybrid algorithm. This algorithm converges to better or at least the same solutions compared to some other methods, while the number of structural analyses is reduced. The outcomes are compared to those obtained previously using other recently developed metaheuristic optimization methods.

Keywords

Invasive weed optimization (IWO) Shuffled frog-leaping algorithm (SFLA) Hybrid (SFLA–IWO) algorithm Optimal design Truss structures 

References

  1. Camp CV (2007) Design of space trusses using Big Bang–Big Crunch optimization. J Struct Eng ASCE 133:999–1008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Camp C, Bichon J (2004) Design of space trusses using ant colony optimization. J Struct Eng ASCE 130(5):741–751CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Camp C, Pezeshk S, Cao G (1998) Optimized design of two dimensional structures using a genetic algorithm. J Struct Eng ASCE 124(5):551–559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Degertekin SO (2012) Improved harmony search algorithms for sizing optimization of truss structures. Comput Struct 92:229–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Elbeltagi E, Hezagy T, Grierson D (2005) Comparison among five evolutionary-based optimization algorithms. Adv Eng Inform 19:43–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Erbatur F, Hasancebi O, Tutuncu I, Kilic H (2014) Optimal design of planar and space structures with genetic algorithms. Comput Struct 75:209–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Erol O, Eskin I (2009) New optimization method: Big Bang–Big Crunch. Adv Eng Softw 37:106–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eusuff Muzaffar, Lansey Kevin, Pasha Fayzul (2006) Shuffled frog-leaping algorithm: a memetic meta-heuristic for discrete optimization. Eng Optim 38:129–154MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Huynh T-H (2008) A modified shuffled frog leaping algorithm for optimal tuning of multivariable PID controllers. In: IEEE international conference on industrial technologyGoogle Scholar
  10. Juang C-F (2004) A hybrid of genetic algorithm and particle swarm optimization for recurrent network design. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part B Cybern 34(2):997–1006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kaveh A (2017) Advances in metaheuristic algorithms for optimal design of structures, 2nd edn. Springer, ChamCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Kaveh A, Bakhshpoori T (2016) A new metaheuristic for continuous structural optimization: water evaporation optimization. Struct Multidiscip Optim 54(1):23–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kaveh A, Ilchi Ghazaan M (2014) Enhanced colliding bodies optimization for design problems with continuous and discrete variables. Adv Eng Softw 77:66–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kaveh A, Kalatjari V (2002) Genetic algorithm for discrete sizing optimal design of trusses using the force method. Int J Numer Methods Eng 55:55–72CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. Kaveh A, Kalatjari V (2003) Topology optimization of trusses using genetic algorithm, force method, and graph theory. Int J Numer Methods Eng 58(5):771–791CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. Kaveh A, Kalatjari V (2004) Size/geometry optimization of trusses by the force method and genetic algorithm. Z Angew Math Mech 84(5):347–357MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. Kaveh A, Khayatzadeh M (2012) A novel metaheuristic method: ray optimization. Comput Struct 112–113:238–294Google Scholar
  18. Kaveh A, Mahdavi VR (2016) Optimal design of truss structures using a new optimization algorithm based on global sensitivity analysis. Struct Eng Mech Int J 60(6):1093–1117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kaveh A, Shojaee S (2007) Optimal design of skeletal structures using ant colony optimization. Int J Numer Methods Eng 5(70):563–581CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. Kaveh A, Talatahari S (2008) A hybrid particle swarm and ant colony optimization for design of truss structures. Asian J Civil Eng 9(4):329–348Google Scholar
  21. Kaveh A, Talatahari S (2009) Size optimization of space trusses using Big Bang–Big Crunch algorithm. Comput Struct 87:1129–1140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kaveh A, Talatahari S (2010) Optimal design of skeletal structure via the charge system search algorithm. Comput Struct 82:781–789Google Scholar
  23. Kaveh A, Zakian P (2018) Improved GWO algorithm for optimal design of truss structures. Eng Comput 34(4):685–707CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kaveh A, Zolghadr A (2016) Tug of war optimization: new metahuristic algorithm. Int J Optim Civ Eng 6(4):469–493Google Scholar
  25. Kaveh A, Farahmand Azar B, Talatahari S (2008) Ant colony optimization for design of space trusses. Int J Space Struct 23(3):167–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kaveh A, Bakhshpoori T, Afshari E (2014) An efficient hybrid particle swarm and swallow swarm optimization algorithm. Comput Struct 143:40–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lee KS, Geem ZW (2004) A new structural optimization method based on the harmony search algorithm. Comput Struct 82:781–798CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Li LJ, Ren FM, Liu F, Wu QH (2006) An improved particle swarm optimization method and its application in civil engineering. In: Topping BHV, Montero G, Montenegro R (eds) Proceedings of the fifth international conference on engineering computational technology. Civil Comp Press, StirlingshireGoogle Scholar
  29. Li LJ, Huang ZB, Liu F, Wu QH (2007) A heuristic particle swarm optimizer for optimization of pin connected structures. Comput Struct 85:340–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Løvbjerg M, Rasmussen TK, Krink T (2001) Hybrid particle swarm optimize with breeding and subpopulations. In: GECCOGoogle Scholar
  31. Mehrabian AR, Lucas C (2006) A novel numerical optimization algorithm inspired from weed colonization. Ecol Inform 1:355–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nguyen DH (2015) A hybrid SFL-Bees algorithm. Int J Comput Appl 128(5):13–18Google Scholar
  33. Rajeev S, Krishnamoorthy CS (1992) Discrete optimization of structures using genetic algorithms. J Struct Eng ASCE 118(5):1233–1250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Saka MP (2007) Optimum geometry design of geodesic domes using harmony search algorithm. Adv Struct Eng 10(6):595–606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Saka MP (2009) Optimum design of steel sway frames to BS5950 using harmony search algorithm. J Constr Steel Res 65(1):36–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Schutte JJ, Groenwold AA (2003) Sizing design of truss structures using particle swarms. Struct Multidiscip Optim 25:261–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Soh CK, Yang J (1996) Fuzzy controlled genetic algorithm search for shape optimization. J Comput Civ Eng ASCE 10(2):143–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Toğan V, Daloğlu AT (2006) Optimization of 3D trusses with adaptive approach in genetic algorithms. Eng Struct 28:1019–1027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Yang Ch-S, Chuang L-Y, Ke Ch-H, Yang Ch-H (2008) A combination of shuffled frog-leaping algorithm and genetic algorithm for gene selection. J Adv Comput Intell Inform 12(3):218–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Shiraz University 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre of Excellence for Fundamental Studies in Structural EngineeringIran University of Science and TechnologyNarmak, TehranIran
  2. 2.Department of Civil EngineeringUniversity of TabrizTabrizIran

Personalised recommendations