Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization

, Volume 55, Issue 1, pp 237–256 | Cite as

Optimal design of large-scale space steel frames using cascade enhanced colliding body optimization

  • A. KavehEmail author
  • A. BolandGerami


In structural size optimization usually a relatively small number of design variables is used. However, for large-scale space steel frames a large number of design variables should be utilized. This problem produces difficulty for the optimizer. In addition, the problems are highly non-linear and the structural analysis takes a lot of computational time. The idea of cascade optimization method which allows a single optimization problem to be tackled in a number of successive autonomous optimization stages, can be employed to overcome the difficulty. In each stage of cascade procedure, a design variable configuration is defined for the problem in a manner that at early stages, the optimizer deals with small number of design variables and at subsequent stages gradually faces with the main problem consisting of a large number of design variables. In order to investigate the efficiency of this method, in all stages of cascade procedure the utilized optimization algorithm is the enhanced colliding bodies optimization which is a powerful metaheuritic. Three large-scale space steel frames with 1860, 3590 and 3328 members are investigated for testing the algorithm. Numerical results show that the utilized method is an efficient tool for optimal design of large-scale space steel frames.


Optimal design Large-scale structures Cascade Design code constraints (DVC) Space steel frames Enhanced colliding bodies optimization (ECBO) 


  1. American Institute of Steel Construction (1989) Manual of steel construction: allowable stress design. American Institute of Steel ConstructionGoogle Scholar
  2. Aydoğdu İ, Akın A, Saka MP (2016) Design optimization of real world steel space frames using artificial bee colony algorithm with Levy flight distribution. Adv Eng Softw 92:1–14. doi: 10.1016/j.advengsoft.2015.10.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Charmpis DC, Lagaros ND, Papadrakakis M (2005) Multi-database exploration of large design spaces in the framework of cascade evolutionary structural sizing optimization. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 194:3315–3330. doi: 10.1016/j.cma.2004.12.020 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Dreyer T, Maar B, Schulz V (2000) Multigrid optimization in applications. J Comput Appl Math 120:67–84. doi: 10.1016/S0377-0427(00)00304-6 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Dumonteil P (1992) Simple equations for effective length factors. Eng J AISC 29(3):111–115Google Scholar
  6. Fister I, Fister Jr I, Zumer JB (2012) Memetic artificial bee colony algorithm for large-scale global optimization. In: Evolutionary Computation (CEC), 2012 I.E. Congress on. pp 1–8Google Scholar
  7. Hellesland J (2011) Review and evaluation of effective length formulasGoogle Scholar
  8. Hsieh S-T, Sun T-Y, Liu C-C, Tsai S-J (2008) Solving large scale global optimization using improved particle swarm optimizer. In: Evolutionary Computation, 2008. CEC 2008. (IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence). IEEE Congress on. pp 1777–1784Google Scholar
  9. Kaveh A (2014) Advances in metaheuristic algorithms for optimal design of structures, Springer International Publishing, Switzerland, doi:  10.1007/978-3-319-05549-7
  10. Kaveh A, Ilchi Ghazaan M (2014) Enhanced colliding bodies optimization for design problems with continuous and discrete variables. Adv Eng Softw 77:66–75. doi: 10.1016/j.advengsoft.2014.08.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kaveh A, Ilchi Ghazaan M (2015) Optimal design of dome tr uss structures with dynamic frequency constraints. Struct Multidiscip Optim. doi: 10.1007/s00158-015-1357-2 Google Scholar
  12. Kaveh A, Mahdavi VR (2014) Colliding bodies optimization method for optimum design of truss structures with continuous variables. Adv Eng Softw 70:1–12. doi: 10.1016/j.advengsoft.2014.01.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kaveh A, Talatahari S (2011) Optimization of large-scale truss structures using charged system search. Int J Optim Civ Eng 15–28Google Scholar
  14. Lagaros ND (2013) A general purpose real-world structural design optimization computing platform. Struct Multidiscip Optim 49:1047–1066. doi: 10.1007/s00158-013-1027-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Mazzoni S, McKenna F, Scott M (2006) OpenSees command language manualGoogle Scholar
  16. Papadrakakis M, Lagaros ND, Tsompanakis Y (1998) Structural optimization using evolution strategies and neural networks. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 156:309–333CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. Patnik SN, Coroneos RM, Hopkins DA (1997) A cascade optimization strategy for solution of difficult design problems. Int J Numer Methods Eng 40:2257–2266. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0207(19970630)40:12<2257::AID-NME160>3.0.CO;2-6 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. Saka, M. P. and OH (2009) Adaptive harmony search algorithm for design code optimization of steel structures. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  19. Sarma KC, Adeli H (2002) Life-cycle cost optimization of steel structures. Int J Numer Methods Eng 55:1451–1462. doi: 10.1002/nme.549 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. Schulz V, Book HG (1997) Partially reduced sqp methods for large-scale nonlinear optimization problems. Nonlinear Anal Theory Methods Appl 30:4723–4734. doi: 10.1016/S0362-546X(97)00198-3 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. Singh D, Agrawal S (2016) Self organizing migrating algorithm with quadratic interpolation for solving large scale global optimization problems. Appl Soft Comput 38:1040–1048CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sobieszczanski-Sobieski J, James BB, Dovi AR (1985) Structural optimization by multilevel decomposition. AIAA J 23:1775–1782. doi: 10.2514/3.9165 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. Sobieszczanski-Sobieski J, James BB, Riley MF (1987) Structural sizing by generalized, multilevel optimization. AIAA J 25:139–145. doi: 10.2514/3.9593 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Specification A (2005) Specification for structural steel buildings. ANSI/AISCGoogle Scholar
  25. Talatahari S, Kaveh A (2015) Improved bat algorithm for optimum design of large-scale truss structures. Int J Optim Civil Eng 5:241–254Google Scholar
  26. The MathWorks (2013) MATLAB, Natick, Massachusetts, USAGoogle Scholar
  27. Wang Q, Arora JS (2007) Optimization of large-scale truss structures using sparse SAND formulations. Int J Numer Methods Eng 69:390–407. doi: 10.1002/nme.1773 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. Yang Z, Tang K, Yao X (2008) Large scale evolutionary optimization using cooperative coevolution. Inf Sci (Ny) 178:2985–2999MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre of Excellence for Fundamental Studies in Structural EngineeringIran University of Science and TechnologyTehranIran

Personalised recommendations