Advertisement

Engineering with Computers

, Volume 26, Issue 2, pp 193–203 | Cite as

Design of tensegrity structures using parametric analysis and stochastic search

  • Landolf Rhode-BarbarigosEmail author
  • Himanshu Jain
  • Prakash Kripakaran
  • Ian F. C. Smith
Original Article

Abstract

Tensegrity structures are lightweight structures composed of cables in tension and struts in compression. Since tensegrity systems exhibit geometrically nonlinear behavior, finding optimal structural designs is difficult. This paper focuses on the use of stochastic search for the design of tensegrity systems. A pedestrian bridge made of square hollow-rope tensegrity ring modules is studied. Two design methods are compared in this paper. Both methods aim to find the minimal cost solution. The first method approximates current practice in design offices. More specifically, parametric analysis that is similar to a gradient-based optimization is used to identify good designs. Parametric studies are executed for each system parameter in order to identify its influence on response. The second method uses a stochastic search strategy called probabilistic global search Lausanne. Both methods provide feasible configurations that meet civil engineering criteria of safety and serviceability. Parametric studies also help in defining search parameters such as appropriate penalty costs to enforce constraints while optimizing using stochastic search. Traditional design methods are useful to gain an understanding of structural behavior. However, due to the many local minima in the solution space, stochastic search strategies find better solutions than parametric studies.

Keywords

Tensegrity Bridge Structural design Optimization Stochastic search 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Authors would like to thank the Swiss National Science Foundation for supporting this work. They are also grateful to Prof. René Motro and his research team at LMGC (Université de Montpellier II). N. Bel Hadj Ali is thanked for discussion and advice.

References

  1. 1.
    Perlberg D (1977) Snelson and structure. Artforum Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pugh A (1976) An introduction to tensegrity. University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Motro R (ed) (2005) Tenségrité. Hermes Science, ParisGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tibert AG, Pellegrino S (2003) Deployable tensegrity masts. 44th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC structures, structural dynamics, and material conference and exhibit. Norfolk, VAGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tibert AG, Pellegrino S (2003) Review of form-finding methods for tensegrity structures. Int J Space Struct 18(4):209–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Masic M, Skelton RE, Gill PE (2006) Optimization of tensegrity structures. Int J Solids Struct 43(16):4687–4703zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fuller RB (1975) Synergetics: explorations in the geometry of thinking. Macmillan Publishing, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kebiche K, Kazi-Aoual MN, Motro R (1999) Geometrical non-linear analysis of tensegrity systems. Eng Struct 21(9):864–876CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Quirant J, Kazi-Aoual MN, Motro R (2003) Designing tensegrity systems: the case of a double layer grid. Eng Struct 25(9):1121–1130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Arora JS, Elwakeil OA, Chahande AI, Hsieh CC (1995) Global optimization methods for engineering applications: a review. Struct Multidiscip Optim 9(3):137–159Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kicinger R, Obayashi S, Arciszewski T (2007) Evolutionary multiobjective optimization of steel structural systems in tall buildings. In: Obayashi S, Deb K, Poloni C, Hiroyasu T, Murata T (eds) Evolutionary multi-criterion optimization proceedings. Springer, Berlin, pp 604–618CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Degertekin SO, Saka MP, Hayalioglu MS (2008) Optimal load and resistance factor design of geometrically nonlinear steel space frames via tabu search and genetic algorithm. Eng Struct 30(1):197–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Camp CV, Bichon BJ (2004) Design of space trusses using ant colony optimization. J Struct Eng 130(5):741–751CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shea K, Smith IFC (2006) Improving full-scale transmission tower design through topology and shape optimization. J Struct Eng 132(5):781–790CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Domer B, Fest E, Lalit V, Smith IFC (2003) Combining dynamic relaxation method with artificial neural networks to enhance simulation of tensegrity structures. J Struct Eng 129(5):672–681CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Domer B, Raphael B, Shea K, Smith IFC (2003) A study of two stochastic search methods for structural control. J Comput Civil Eng 17(3):132–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Paul C, Lipson H, Cuevas FV (2005) Evolutionary form-finding of tensegrity structures. Genetic and evolutionary computation conference. Washington DC, pp 3–10Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Raphael B, Smith IFC (2003) A direct stochastic algorithm for global search. Appl Math Comput 146(2–3):729–758zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shea K, Fest E, Smith IFC (2002) Developing intelligent tensegrity structures with stochastic search. Adv Eng Inform 16(1):21–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Svenerudh P, Raphael B, Smith IFC (2002) Lowering costs of timber shear-wall design using global search. Eng Comput 18(2):93–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Motro R, Maurin B, Silvestri C (2006) Tensegrity rings and the hollow rope. IASS symposium 2006, new olympics, new shells and spatial structures. Beijing, pp 470–471Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pellegrino S, Calladine CR (1986) Matrix analysis of statically and kinematically indeterminate frameworks. Int J Solids Struct 22(4):409–428CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nishimura Y, Murakami H (2001) Initial shape-finding and modal analyses of cyclic frustum tensegrity modules. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 190(43–44):5795–5818zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    SIA (2003) Steel construction. Swiss Society of Engineers and Architects, ZurichGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    SIA (2003) Basis of structural design. Swiss Society of Engineers and Architects, ZurichGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Barnes MR (1999) Form finding and analysis of tension structures by dynamic relaxation. Int J Space Struct 14:89–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Fest E, Shea K, Smith IFC (2004) Active tensegrity structure. J Struct Eng 130(10):1454–1465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Adam B, Smith IFC (2008) Reinforcement learning for structural control. J Comput Civil Eng 22(2):133–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Adam B (2007) Adaptive civil engineering structures. Thesis no. 3750, EPFLGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Landolf Rhode-Barbarigos
    • 1
    Email author
  • Himanshu Jain
    • 2
  • Prakash Kripakaran
    • 1
  • Ian F. C. Smith
    • 1
  1. 1.Applied Computing and Mechanics Laboratory, ENAC-IIC-IMAC, Station 18Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL)LausanneSwitzerland
  2. 2.Department of Civil EngineeringIITMumbaiIndia

Personalised recommendations