KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering

, Volume 17, Issue 5, pp 1099–1108 | Cite as

A new hybrid optimization algorithm for recognition of hysteretic non-linear systems

  • S. Talatahari
  • N. Mohajer Rahbari
  • A. Kaveh


In this article, a new two-stage hybrid optimization method based on the Particle Swarm Optimization and the Big Bang-Big Crunch algorithm (BB-BC) is introduced for identification of highly non-linear systems. In this hybrid algorithm, the term of the center of mass from the BB-BC algorithm is incorporated into the standard particle swarm optimizer to markedly improve its searching abilities. In order to investigate the effectiveness of the newly formed optimization algorithm in identification of non-linear and hysteretic systems, it is utilized to optimally find the Bouc-Wen model’s parameters for a sample MR damper in which the damper’s force is related to its piston’s motion through a non-linear differential equation. The obtained results indicate that the proposed optimization method is highly robust and accurate and can be utilized successfully in such intricate non-linear identification problems.


particle swarm optimization big bang-big crunch hybrid algorithm parameter identification bouc-wen model hysteresis MR damper 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Atashpaz-Gargari, E. and Lucas, C. (2007). “Imperialist competitive algorithm: An algorithm for optimization inspired by imperialistic competition.” IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, Singapore, pp. 4661–4667.Google Scholar
  2. Bouc, R. (1967). “Forced vibrations of mechanical systems with hysteresis.” Proceeding of the 4th Conference on Nonlinear Oscillations, Prague, Czechoslovakia.Google Scholar
  3. Charalampakis, A. E. and Dimou, C. K. (2010). “Identification of Bouc-Wen hysteretic systems using particle swarm optimization.” Computers and Structures, Vol. 88, Nos. 21–22, pp. 1197–1205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. De Jong, K. (1975). Analysis of the behavior of a class of genetic adaptive systems, PhD Thesis, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.Google Scholar
  5. Dorigo, M., Maniezzo, V., and Colorni, A. (1996). “The ant system: Optimization by a colony of cooperating agents.” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp. 29–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Eberhart, R. C. and Kennedy, J. (1995). “A new optimizer using particle swarm theory.” Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on Micro Machine and Human Science, Nagoya, Japan.Google Scholar
  7. Erol, O. K. and Eksin, I. (2006). “New optimization method: Big Bang-Big Crunch.” Advances in Engineering Software, Vol. 37, No. 2, pp. 106–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Farahmand Azar, B., Mohajer Rahbari, N., and Talatahari, S. (2011). “Seismic mitigation of tall buildings using magneto-rheological dampers.” Asian Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 12, No. 5, pp. 637–649.Google Scholar
  9. Fogel, L. J., Owens, A. J. and Walsh, M. J. A. (1996). Artificial intelligence through simulated evolution, Wiley, Chichester, WS, UK.Google Scholar
  10. Foliente, G. C. (1995). “Hysteresis modelling of wood joints and structural systems.” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 121, No. 6, pp. 1013–1022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gandomi, A. H. and Alavi A. H. (2012). “Krill herd: A new bio-inspired optimization algorithm.” Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation, DOI: 10.1016/j.cnsns.2012.05.010Google Scholar
  12. Gandomi, A. H., Yang, X. S., and Alavi, A. H. (2011). “Mixed variable structural optimization using firefly algorithm.” Computers and Structures, Vol. 89, Nos. 23–24, pp. 2325–2336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gandomi, A. H., Yang, X. S., and Alavi, A. H. (2012). “Cuckoo search algorithm: A metaheuristic approach to solve structural optimization problems.” Engineering with Computers, DOI: 10.1007/s00366-011-0241-yGoogle Scholar
  14. Glover, F. (1977). “Heuristic for integer programming using surrogate constraints.” Decision Sciences, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 156–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Goldberg, D. E. (1989). Genetic algorithms in search optimization and machine learning, Addison-Wesley, Boston.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. Holland, J. H. (1975). Adaptation in natural and artificial systems, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
  17. Kaveh, A., Farahmand Azar, B., and Talatahari, S. (2008). “Ant colony optimization for design of space trusses.” International Journal of Space Structures, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 167–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kaveh, A. and Talatahari, S. (2009a). “Size optimization of space trusses using Big Bang-Big Crunch algorithm.” Computers and Structures, Vol. 87, Nos. 17–18, pp. 1129–1140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kaveh, A. and Talatahari, S. (2009b). “Particle swarm optimizer, ant colony strategy and harmony search scheme hybridized for optimization of truss structures.” Computers and Structures, Vol. 87, Nos. 5–6, pp. 267–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kaveh, A. and Talatahari, S. (2010). “A novel heuristic optimization method: Charged system search.” Acta Mechanica, Vol. 213, Nos. 3–4, pp. 267–289.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kaveh, A. and Talatahari, S. (2012). “Charged system search for optimal design of frame structures.” Applied Soft Computing, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 382–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kirkpatrick, S., Gelatt, C., and Vecchi, M. (1983). “Optimization by simulated annealing.” Science, Vol. 220, No. 4598, pp. 671–680.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Koza, J. R. (1990). Genetic programming: A paradigm for genetically breeding populations of computer programs to solve problems, Report No. STAN-CS-90-1314, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.Google Scholar
  24. Kunnath, S. K. (1997). “Parameter identification for degrading and pinched hysteretic structural concrete systems.” Engineering Structures, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 224–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lin, S. S., Liao, J. C., Liang, T. T. and Juang, C. H. (2002). “Use of bouc-wen model for seismic analysis of concrete piles.” Proceedings of the International Deep Foundations Congress, Orlando, Florida, USA, pp. 372–384.Google Scholar
  26. Mohajer Rahbari, N., Farahmand Azar, B., Talatahari, S., and Safari, H. (2012). “Semi-active direct control method for seismic alleviation of structures using MR dampers.” Structural Control and Health Monitoring, in press, DOI: 10.1002/stc.1515.Google Scholar
  27. Ni, Y. Q., Ko, J. M., and Wong, C. W. (1998). “Identification of nonlinear hysteretic isolators from periodic vibration tests.” Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 217, No. 4, pp. 737–756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Spencer, B. F. Jr., Dyke, S. J., Sain, M. K. and Carlson, D. (1997). “Phenomenological model of a magnetorheological damper.” Journal of Engineering Mechanics, ASCE, Vol. 123, No. 3, pp. 230–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wen, Y. K. (1976). “Method for random vibration of hysteretic systems.” Journal of Engineering Mechanics, ASCE, Vol. 102, No. 2, pp. 249–263.Google Scholar
  30. Yang, X. S. and Gandomi, A. H. (2012). “Bat algorithm: A novel approach for global engineering optimization.” Engineering Computation, Vol. 29, No. 5, pp. 464–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Zhu, X. and Lu, X. (2011). “Parametric identification of bouc-wen model and its application in mild steel damper modeling.” The Proceedings of the Twelfth East Asia-Pacific Conference on Structural Engineering and Construction-EASEC12, Vol. 14, pp. 318–324.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Korean Society of Civil Engineers and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Marand Faculty of EngineeringUniversity of TabrizTabrizIran
  2. 2.Structural Dept., Faculty of Civil EngineeringUniversity of TabrizTabrizIran
  3. 3.Centre of Excellence for Fundamental Studies in Structural EngineeringIran University of Science and TechnologyNarmak, Tehran-16Iran

Personalised recommendations