Structural optimization

, Volume 5, Issue 1–2, pp 12–25 | Cite as

DCOC: An optimality criteria method for large systems Part I: theory

  • M. Zhou
  • G. I. N. Rozvany
Technical Papers


A highly efficient new method for the sizing optimization of large structural systems is introduced in this paper. The proposed technique uses new rigorous optimality criteria derived on the basis of the general methodology of the analytical school of structural optimization. The results represent a breakthrough in structural optimization in so far as the capability of OC and dual methods is increased by several orders of magnitude. This is because the Lagrange multipliers associated with the stress constraints are evaluated explicitly at the element level, and therefore, the size of the dual-type problem is determined only by the number of active displacement constraints which is usually small. The new optimaliy criteria method, termed DCOC, will be discussed in two parts. Part I gives the derivation of the relevant optimality criteria, the validity and efficiency of which are verified by simple test examples. A detailed description of the computational algorithm for structures subject to multiple displacement and stress constraints as well as several loading conditions is presented in Part II.


Lagrange Multiplier Structural Optimization Optimality Criterion Computational Algorithm Simple Test 
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. Berke, L. 1970: An efficient approach to the minimum weight design of deflection limited structures.Rep. Air Force Flight Dynamics Lab. Ohio, USA.AFFDL-TM-70-4 Google Scholar
  2. Canfield, R.A. 1990: High-quality approximations of eigenvalues in structural optimization.AIAA J. 28, 1116–1222Google Scholar
  3. Fleury, C. 1979: A unified approach to structural weight minimization.Comp. Meth. Appl. Mech. Engrg. 20, 17–38Google Scholar
  4. Gallagher, R.H. 1975:Finite element analysis — fundamentals. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-HallGoogle Scholar
  5. Haftka, R.T.; Gürdal, Z.; Kamat, M.P. 1990:Elements of structural optimization. Dordrecht: KluwerGoogle Scholar
  6. Huang, N.C. 1971: On principle of stationary mutual complementary energy and its application to structural design.Zeit. ang. Math. Phys. 22, 608–620Google Scholar
  7. Masur, E.F. 1970: Optimum stiffness and strength of elastic structures.J. Eng. Mech. Div. ASCE 96, 621–640Google Scholar
  8. McGuire, W.; Gallagher, R.H. 1979:Matrix structural analysis. New York: WileyGoogle Scholar
  9. Michell, A.G.M. 1904: The limits of economy of material in framestructures.Phil. Mag. 8, 589–597Google Scholar
  10. Mróz, Z. 1972: Multiparameter optimal design of plates and shells.J. Struct. Mech. 1, 371–392Google Scholar
  11. Olhoff, N. 1976: A survey of optimal design of vibrating structural elements.Shock and Vibr. Digest,8, 8, 3–10,8, 9, 3–10Google Scholar
  12. Prager, W.; Rozvany, G.I.N. 1977: Optimization of the structural geometry. In: Bednarek, A.R.; Cesari, L. (eds.):Dynamical Systems, pp. 265–293. New York: Academic PressGoogle Scholar
  13. Prager, W.; Shield, R.T. 1967: A general theory of optimal plastic design.J. Appl. Mech. 34, 184–186Google Scholar
  14. Prager, W.; Taylor, J.E. 1968: Problems of optimal structural design.J. Appl. Mech. 35, 102–106Google Scholar
  15. Rozvany, G.I.N. 1989:Structural design via optimality criteria. Dordrecht: KluwerGoogle Scholar
  16. Rozvany, G.I.N.; Zhou, M. 1991a: The COC algorithm, part I: cross-section optimization or sizing.Comp. Meth. Appl. Mech. Engrg. 89, 281–308Google Scholar
  17. Rozvany, G.I.N.; Zhou, M. 1991b: A note on truss design for stress and displacement constraints by optimality criteria methods.Struct. Optim. 3, 45–50Google Scholar
  18. Schmit, L.A. 1960: Structural design by systematic synthesis.Proc. 2nd Conf. Electronic Comp., pp. 105–122. New York: ASCEGoogle Scholar
  19. Schmit, L.A.; Farshi, B. 1974: Some approximation concepts for structural synthesis.AIAA J. 12, 692–699Google Scholar
  20. Schmit, L.A.; Miura, H. 1976: Approximation concepts for efficient structural synthesis.NASA CR-2552 Google Scholar
  21. Shield, R.T.; Prager, W. 1970: Optimum structural design for given deflection.Zeit. ang. Math. Phys. 21, 513–523Google Scholar
  22. Sobieszczanski-Sobieski, J.; James, B.B.; Dovi, A.R. 1983: Structural optimization by multi-level decomposition.Proc. AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS 24th Structures, Structural Dynamics and Material Conf. (held in Lake Tahoe, Nevada). AIAA Paper No. 83-0832-CPGoogle Scholar
  23. Sobieszczanski-Sobieski, J.; James, B.B.; Riley, F. 1985: Structural optimization by generalized multi-level optimization.Proc. AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS 26th Structures, Structural Dynamics and Material Conf. (held in Orlando, Fl.). AIAA Paper No. 85-0697-CPGoogle Scholar
  24. Starnes, J.H.; Haftka, R.T. 1979: Preliminary design of composite wings for buckling stress and displacement constraints.J. Aircraft 6, 564–470Google Scholar
  25. Vanderplaats, G.N.; Salajegheh, E. 1988: An efficient approximation technique for frequency constraints in frame optimization.Int. J. Num. Meth. Engrg. 26, 1057–1069Google Scholar
  26. Vanderplaats, G.N.; Salajegheh, E. 1989: A new approximation method for stress constraints in structural synthesis.AIAA J. 27, 352–358Google Scholar
  27. Venkayya, V.B.; Khot, S.; Berke, L. 1973: Application of optimality criteria approaches on automated design of large practical structures.2nd Symp. Struct. Optim. (held in Milano, Italy), pp. 3.1–3.19, AGARD CP-123Google Scholar
  28. Zhou, M. 1989: Geometrical optimization of trusses by A two-level approximation concept.Struct. Optim. 1, 235–240Google Scholar
  29. Zhou, M. 1992:A new discretized optimality criteria method in structural optimization. Doctoral Dissertation, Essen University, FB 18/115, Düsseldorf: VDI VerlagGoogle Scholar
  30. Zhou, M.; Rozvany, G.I.N. 1991: The COC algorithm, part II: topological, geometrical and generalized shape optimization.Comp. Meth. Appl. Mech. Engrg. 89, 309–336Google Scholar
  31. Zhou, M., Xia, R.W. 1990: Two-level approximation concept in structural synthesis.Int. J. Num. Meth. Engrg. 29, 1681–1699Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Zhou
    • 1
  • G. I. N. Rozvany
    • 1
  1. 1.FB. 10, Essen UniversityEssen 1Germany

Personalised recommendations