Applications of Neural Networks in Modeling and Design of Structural Systems

  • P. Hajela
Part of the CISM International Centre for Mechanical Sciences book series (CISM, volume 404)


There has been considerable recent activity in exploring biological motivated computational paradigms in problems of engineering analysis and design. Such computational models are placed in a broad category of soft-computing tools that span the gap between traditional procedural methods of computation on one side, and heuristics driven inference engines (non procedural methods) on the other. Of these, methods of neural computing and evolutionary search have been extensively explored in problems of structural analysis and design. The purpose of the present chapter is two-fold. It provides an overview of those neural network architectures that are pertinent to the problem of structural analysis and design, including the back-propagation network, the counterpropagation network, the ART network, and the Hopfield network. It then provides a summary of select applications of neurocomputing in the field of structural synthesis. This summary includes the applications of neural networks in function modeling, in establishing causality in design data, in function optimization, and in diagnostics of structural systems.


Hide Layer Design Variable Input Pattern Training Pattern Layer Neuron 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Rumelhart, D.E. and NcClelland J.L..: Parallel Distributed Processing, Volume 1, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachussets, 1988.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rumelhart, D.E. and NcClelland J.L..: Parallel Distributed Processing, Volume 2, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachussets, 1988.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hajela, P..: Stochastic Search in Discrete Structural Optimization — Simulated Annealing, Genetic Algorithms and Neural Networks, Discrete Structural Optimization, Springer, New York, pp. 55–134, (ed. W. Gutkowski), 1997.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Neter, J., Wasserman, W., and Kutner, M.H..: Applied Linear Regression Models, 2nd ed., Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1989.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hajela, P. and Kim, B..: “Classifier Systems for Enhancing Neural Network Based Global Function Approximations”, proceedings of the 7th AIAA/NASA/ISSMO/USAF Multi-disciplinary Analysis and Optimization Meeting, St. Louis Missouei, 1998.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Barron, A.R..: “Neural Network Approximation”, proceedings of the Seventh Yale Workshop on Adaptive and Learning Systems, pp. 69–72, Yale University, New Haven, CT, 1992.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hecht-Nielsen, R..: “Counterpropagation Networks”, Journal of Applied Optics, Vol. 26, 1987, pp. 4979–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Szewczyk, Z., and Hajela, P..: “Feature Sensitive Neural Networks in Structural Response Estimation”, proceedings of the ANNIE’92, Artificial Neural Networks in Engineering Conference, November 1992.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fu, B. and Hajela, P.: “Minimizing Distortion in Truss Structures: A Hopfield Network Solution”, Computing Systems in Engineering, vol. 4, no. 1, 69–74, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Carpenter, G.A. and Grossberg, S..: “A MAssively Parallel Architecture for a Self-Organizing Neural Pattern Recognition MAchine”, Computer Vision, Graphics, and Image Processing, Vol. 37, pp. 54, 1987.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Grossberg, S..: (ed.), The Adaptive Brain, Vol. I and II, Amsterdam, North-Holland, Elsevier, 1987.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Grossberg, S..: (ed.), Neural Networks and Neural Intelligence, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 1988.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fu, B. and Hajela, P., and Berke, L..: “ART Networks in Automated Conceptual Design of Structural Systems”, Computing Systems in Engineering, Vol. 4, No. 2–3, pp.121–133, 1993.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sobieszczanski-Sobieski, J..: “Multidisciplinary Design Optimization: An Emerging New Engineering Discipline”, World Congress on Optimal Design of Structural Systems, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, August 2–6, 1993.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Toison, R.H. and Sobieszczanski-Sobieski, J..: “Multidisciplinary Analysis and Synthesis: Needs and Opportunities”, AIAA Paper No. 85–0584, 1985.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Abdi, F., Ide, H., Levine, M., and Austel, L..: “The Art of Spacecraft Design: A Multi-disciplinary Challenge”, 2nd NASA/Air Force Symposium on Recent Advances in Multi-disciplinary Analysis and Optimization, NASA CP-3031, Sep. 1988.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Venter, G. et al..: “Construction of Response Surfaces for Design Optimization Applications,” proceedings of the 6th AIAA/NASA/USAF/ISSMO Conference on Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization, pp.548–564, September 4–6, 1996, Bellevue, Washington.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wang, B..: “A New Method for Dual Response Surface Optimization”, proceedings of the 6th AIAA/NASA/USAF/ISSMO Conference on Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization, pp.1805–1814, September 4–6, 1996, Bellevue, Washington.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Giunta, A.A..: “Aircraft Multidisciplinary Design Optimization Using Design of Experiments Theory and Response Surface Modeling,” Ph.D. dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, May, 1997.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hajela, P. and Berke, L..: “Neurobiological Computational Models in Structural Analysis and Design”, Computers and Structures, Vol. 41, No. 4, pp. 657–667, 1991.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Berke, L., and Hajela, P..: “Application of Artificial Neural Networks in Structural Mechanics”, Structural Optimization, Vol 3, No. 1, 1992.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Berke, L., and Hajela, P..: “Application of Artificial Neural Networks in Structural Mechanics”, NASA TM-102420, 1990.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Alam, J., and Berke, L..: “Application of Artificial Neural Networks in Nonlinear Analysis of Trusses”, NASA TM, 1993.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ghaboussi, J., Garrett, J.H., Jr., and Wu, X..: “Knowledge-Based Modeling of Material Behavior with Neural Networks”, Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 117 (1), 1991, pp. 132–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Brown, D.A., Murthy, P.L.N., and Berke, L..: “Computational Simulation of Composite Ply Micromechanics Using Artificial Neural Networks”, Microcomputers in Civil Engineering, 6, 1991, pp. 87–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Szewczyk, Z., and Hajela, P.: “Feature Sensitive Neural Networks in Structural Response Estimation”, proceedings of the ANNIE92, Artificial Neural Networks in Engineering Conference, November 1992.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Szewczyk, Z., and Hajela, P.: “Neural Network Based Selection of Dynamic System Parameters”, Transactions of the CSME , Vol. 17, No. 4A, pp. 567–584, 1993.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Szewczyk, Z., and Hajela, P.: “Neural Network Based Damage Detection in Structures”, proceedings of the ASCE 8th Computing in Civil Engineering Conference, Dallas, Texas, June 6–8, 1992.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Soeiro, F.J..: Structural Damage Assessment Using Identification Techniques, Ph. D. dissertation, University of Florida, 1990.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hajela, P., and Lee, E..: “Topological Optimization of Rotorcraft Subfloor Structures for Crashworthiness Considerations”, Computers and Structures, vol. 64, no 1–4, pp. 65–76, 1997.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    ABAQUS User’s Manual, Vol. I, Version 5.2, 1992.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wittlin, G. and Gamon, M.A..: Experimental Program for the Development of Improved Helicopter Structural Crashworthiness Analytical and Design Techniques, USAAMRDL Technical Report 72–72A,72Bi, May 1973.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Cronkhite, J.D. and Berry, V.L..: Crashworthy Airframe Design Concepts — Fabrication and Testing, NASA CR-3603, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC, September, 1982.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Bauchau, O. A., and Kang, N.K..: “A Multibody Formulation for Helicopter Structural Dynamic Analysis”, Journal of American Helicopter Society, Vol. 38, No. 2, pp. 3–14, April 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Teboub, Y..: Integrated Design of Composite Structures for Damage Detection and Mitigation, Ph.D. Thesis, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York, 1996.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Sobieski-Sobieszczanski, J..: “Optimization by Decomposition: A Step from Hierarchic to Non-Hierarchic Systems. In Recent Advances in Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization”, NASA CP 3031, 1988.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Bloebaum, C. L., Hajela, P. and Sobieski-Sobieszczanski, J..: “Non-Hierarchic System Decomposition in Structural Optimization”, Engineering Optimization, Vol. 19, pp. 171–186, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Adelman, H., and Mantay, W.A..: (eds), Integrated Multidisciplinary Optimization of Rotorcraft: A Plan for Development, NASA TM 101617, May 1989.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Sobieski-Sobieszczanski, J..: “A Linear Decomposition Method for Large Optimization Problems-Blueprint for Development”, NASA TM 83248, February 1982.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    M. Arslan and P. Hajela.: “Counterpropagation Neural Networks in Decomposition Based Optimal Design”, Computers and Structures, vol 65, no. 5, pp. 641–650, December 1997.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Arslan, M.A., Hajela, P..: “Use of Artifical Neural Networks to Enhance the Concurrent Subspace Optimization Strategy”, proceedings of the International Symposium on Optimization and Innovative Design, JSME Paper No. 153, edited by H. Yamakawa, M. Yoshimura, S. Morishita and M. Arakawa, July 28-July 30, 1997, Tokyo, Japan.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Arslan, M.A..: Domain Decomposition in Multidisciplinary Design: Role of Artificial Neural Networks and Intelligent Agents, Ph.D dissertation, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, April 1998.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Wien 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. Hajela
    • 1
  1. 1.Rensselaer Polytechnic InstituteTroyUSA

Personalised recommendations