Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An efficient Kriging-based framework for computationally demanding constrained structural optimization problems

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A literature survey reveals that many structural optimization problems involve constraint functions that demand high computational effort. Therefore, optimization algorithms which are able to solve these problems with just a few evaluations of such functions become necessary, in order to avoid prohibitive computational costs. In this context, surrogate models have been employed to replace constraint functions whenever possible, which are much faster to be evaluated than the original functions. In the present paper, a global optimization framework based on the Kriging surrogate model is proposed to deal with structural problems that have expensive constraints. The framework consists of building a single Kriging model for all the constraints and, in each iteration of the optimization process, the metamodel is improved only in the regions of the design space that are promising to contain the optimal design. In this way, many constraints evaluations in regions of the domain that are not important for the optimization problem are avoided. To determine these regions, three search strategies are proposed: a local search, a global search, and a refinement step. This optimization procedure is applied in benchmark problems and the results show that the approach can lead to results close to the best found in the literature, with far fewer constraints evaluations. In addition, when problems with more complex structural models are considered, the computational times required by the framework are significantly shorter than those required by other methods from the literature, including another Kriging-based adaptative method.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • American Institute of Steel Construction (1989) Manual of steel construction: allowable stress design, 9th edn. American Institute of Steel Construction, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Atashpaz-Gargari E, Lucas C (2007) Imperialist competitive algorithm: an algorithm for optimization inspired by imperialistic competition. In: 2007 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, pp 4661–4667

  • Bichon BJ (2008) Efficient global reliability analysis for nonlinear implicit performance functions. AIAA J 46(10):2459–2468

    Google Scholar 

  • Camp C, Pezeshk S, Cao G (1998) Optimized design of two-dimensional structures using a genetic algorithm. J Struct Eng 124(5):551

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng MY, Prayogo D (2014) Symbiotic organisms search: a new metaheuristic optimization algorithm. Comput Struct 139:98–112

    Google Scholar 

  • Chunna L, Hai F, Chunlin G (2020) Development of an efficient global optimization method based on adaptive infilling for structure optimization. Struct Multidisc Optim 62:3383–3412

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman TF, Li Y (1996) An interior, trust region approach for nonlinear minimization subject to bounds. SIAM J Optim 6:418–445

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Dong H, Song B, Dong Z, Wang P (2016) Multi-start space reduction (MSSR) surrogate-based global optimization method. Struct Multidisc Optim 54:907–926

    Google Scholar 

  • Dong H, Song B, Dong Z, Wang P (2018) SCGOSR: surrogate-based constrained global optimization using space reduction. Appl Soft Comput 65:462–477

    Google Scholar 

  • Dong H, Wang P, Song B, Zhang Y, An X (2020) Kriging-assisted discrete global optimization (KDGO) for black-box problems with costly objective and constraints. Appl Soft Comput J 94:106429

    Google Scholar 

  • Durantin C, Marzat J, Balesdent M (2016) Analysis of multi-objective Kriging-based methods for constrained global optimization. Comput Optim Appl 63:903–926

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Echard B, Gayton N, Lemaire M (2011) AK-MCS: an active learning reliability method combining kriging and Monte Carlo simulation. Struct Saf 33:145–154

    Google Scholar 

  • Fallahian S, Hamidian D, Seyedpoor SM (2009) Optimal design of structures using the simultaneous perturbation stochastic approximation algorithm. Int J Comput Methods 6(2):1–16

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Forrester AIJ, Sóbester A, Keane AJ (2008) Engineering design via surrogate modelling: a practical guide. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Gandomi AH, Yang XS, Alavi AH (2011) Mixed variable structural optimization using Firefly algorithm. Comput Struct 89:2325–2336

    Google Scholar 

  • Gandomi AH, Yang XS, Alavi AH (2013) Cuckoo search algorithm: a metaheuristic approach to solve structural optimization problems. Eng Comput 29:17–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Gebremedhen HS, Woldemichael DE, Hashim FM (2020) A firefly algorithm based hybrid method for structural topology optimization. Adv Model Simul Eng Sci 7(44):1010

    Google Scholar 

  • Gil L, Andreu A (2001) Shape and cross-section optimisation of a truss structure. Comput Struct 79:681–689

    Google Scholar 

  • Gomes HM (2011) Truss optimization with dynamic constraints using a particle swarm algorithm. Expert Syst Appl 38:957–968

    Google Scholar 

  • Gonçalves MS, Lopez RH, Miguel LFF (2015) Search group algorithm: a new metaheuristic method for the optimization of truss structures. Comput Struct 153:165–184

    Google Scholar 

  • Gramacy RB, Gray GA, Digabel SL, Lee HKH, Ranjan P, Wellsk G, Wild SM (2015) Modeling an augmented lagrangian for blackbox constrained optimization. Technometrics 58(1):1–11

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Holland JH (1975) Adaptation in natural and artificial system. Univ. Michigan Press, Michigan

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsu YL, Liu TC (2007) Developing a fuzzy proportional-derivative controller optimization engine for engineering design optimization problems. Eng Optim 39(6):679–700

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Jones D, Schonlau M, Welch WJ (1998) Efficient global optimization of expensive black-box functions. J Glob Optim 13(4):455–492

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Juliani MA, Milanez MO, Gomes WJS (2019) Structural optimization of trusses under elastic and inelastic buckling constraints. In: XL Ibero-Latin American Congress on Computational Methods in Engineering (CILAMCE)

  • Kaveh A, Hassani M (2009) Simultaneous analysis, design and optimization of structures using force method and ant colony algorithms. Asian J Civ Eng 10(4):381–396

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaveh A, Khayatazad M (2013) Ray optimization for size and shape optimization of truss structures. Comput Struct 117:82–94

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaveh A, Talatahari S (2010) Optimal design of skeletal structures via the charged system search algorithm. Struct Multidisc Optim 41:893–911

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaveh A, Zolghadr A (2011) Shape and size optimization of truss structures with frequency constraints using enhanced charged system search algorithm. Asian J Civ Eng 12(4):487–509

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaveh A, Zolghadr A (2012) Truss optimization with natural frequency constraints using a hybridized CSS-BBBC algorithm with trap recognition capability. Comput Struct 102–103:14–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaveh A, Zolghadr A (2017) Truss shape and size optimization with frequency constraints using tug of war optimization. Asian J Civ Eng 18(2):311–333

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy J, Eberhart R (1995) Particle swarm optimization. In: Proceedings of the 1995 IEEE-international conference on neural networks, pp 1942–1948

  • Krige DG (1951) A statistical approach to some basic mine valuation problems on the Witwatersrand. J S Afr Inst Miner Metall 52(6):119–139

    Google Scholar 

  • Kroetz HM, Moustaphac M, Beck AT, Sudret B (2020) A two-level kriging-based approach with active learning for solving time-variant risk optimization problems. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 203:107033

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar S, Tejani GG, Mirjalili S (2019) Modified symbiotic organisms search for structural optimization. Eng Comput 35:1269–1296

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee TH, Jung JJ (2008) A sampling technique enhancing accuracy and efficiency of metamodel-based RBDO: constraint boundary sampling. Comput Struct 86:1463–1476

    Google Scholar 

  • Li Y, Wu Y, Zhao J, Chen L (2017) A kriging-based constrained global optimization algorithm for expensive black-box functions with infeasible initial points. J Glob Optim 67:343–366

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Liu H, Xu S, Chen X, Wang X, Ma Q (2017) Constrained global optimization via a DIRECT-type constraint-handling technique and an adaptive metamodeling strategy. Struct Multidisc Optim 55:155–177

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Madah H, Amir O (2017) Truss optimization with buckling considerations using geometrically nonlinear beam modeling. Comput Struct 192:233–247 

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MathWorks (2017) MATLAB: Primer

  • McGuire W, Gallagher RH, Ziemian RD (2014) Matrix structural analysis

  • McKay MD, Beckman RJ, Conover WJ (1979) A comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code. Technometrics 21(2):239–345

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Meng Z, Zhang D, Li G, Yu B (2019) An importance learning method for non-probabilistic reliability analysis and optimization. Struct Multidisc Optim 59:1255–1271

    Google Scholar 

  • Miguel LFF, Fadel-Miguel LF (2012) Shape and size optimization of truss structures considering dynamic constraints through modern metaheuristic algorithms. Expert Syst Appl 39:9458–9467

    Google Scholar 

  • Miguel LFF, Fadel Miguel LF, Lopez RH (2015) A firefly algorithm for the design of force and placement of friction dampers for control of man-induced vibrations in footbridges. Optim Eng 16:633–661

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Nanakorn P, Meesomklin K (2001) An adaptive penalty function in genetic algorithms for structural design optimization. Comput. Struct 79:2527–2539

    Google Scholar 

  • Parr JM, Keane AJ, Forrester AIJ, Holden CME (2012) Infill sampling criteria for surrogate-based optimization with constraint handling. Eng Optim 44(10):1147–1166

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Qian J, Yi J, Cheng Y, Liu J, Zhou Q (2020) A sequential constraints updating approach for kriging surrogate model-assisted engineering optimization design problem. Eng Comput 36:993–1009

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao SS (2020) Engineering optimization: theory and practice. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Schevenels M, McGinn S, Rolvink A, Coenders J (2014) An optimality criteria based method for discrete design optimization taking into account buildability constraints. Struct Multidisc Optim 50:755–774

    Google Scholar 

  • Shi R, Liu L, Long T, Wu Y, Tang Y (2019) Filter-based adaptive kriging method for black-box optimization problems with expensive objective and constraints. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 347:782–805

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Soh CK, Yang J (1996) Fuzzy controlled genetic algorithm search for shape optimization. J Comput Civ Eng 10(2):143–150

    Google Scholar 

  • Spillers WR, MacBain KM (2009) Structural optimization. Springer, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Tejani GG, Savsani VJ, Patel VK, Mirjalili S (2018) Truss optimization with natural frequency bounds using improved symbiotic organisms search. Knowl-Based Syst 143:162–178

    Google Scholar 

  • Tejani GG, Savsanin VJ, Patel VK (2016) Adaptive symbiotic organisms search (SOS) algorithm for structural design optimization. J Comput Des Eng 3:226–249

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang GG (2003) Adaptive response surface method using inherited Latin hypercube design points. J Mech Des 125(2):210–220

    Google Scholar 

  • Wei L, Tang T, Xie X, Shen W (2011) Truss optimization on shape and sizing with frequency constraints based on parallel genetic algorithm. Struct Multidisc Optim 43:665–682

    Google Scholar 

  • Wei L, Zhao M, Wu G, Meng G (2005) Truss optimization on shape and sizing with frequency constraints based on genetic algorithm. Comput Mech 35:361–368

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Wu Y, Yin Q, Jie H, Wang B, Zhao J (2018) A RBF-based constrained global optimization algorithm for problems with computationally expensive objective and constraints. Struct Multidisc Optim 58:1633–1655

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Yang X (2009) Firefly algorithms for multimodal optimization. In: Stochastic algorithms: foundations and applications, SAGA 2009, Lecture notes in Computer Sciences 5792, pp 169–178

  • Yang Z, Qiu H, Gao L, Cai X, Jiang C, Chen L (2020) Surrogate-assisted classification-collaboration differential evolution for expensive constrained optimization problems. Inf Sci 508:50–63

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang Y, Han ZH, Zhang KS (2018) Variable-fidelity expected improvement method for efficient global optimization of expensive functions. Struct Multidisc Optim 58:1431–1451

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao L, Wang P, Song B, Wang X, Dong H (2020) An efficient kriging modeling method for high-dimensional design problems based on maximal information coefficient. Struct Multidisc Optim 61:39–57

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Ziemian RD, McGuire W (2007) Tutorial for MASTAN2: version 3.0. Wiley, Hoboken

    Google Scholar 

  • Zuo W, Bai J, Li B (2014) A hybrid OC-GA approach for fast and global truss optimization with frequency constraints. Appl Soft Comput 14:528–535

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support from Scientific and Technological Research Support Foundation of Santa Catarina State and Coordination of Superior Level Staff Improvement (FAPESC/CAPES, public call n\(\circ\) 03/2017) and National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq, via Grant 302489/2017-7).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Center for Optimization and Reliability in Engineering (CORE), Federal University of Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC, Brazil

    Marcela A. Juliani & Wellison J. S. Gomes

Authors
  1. Marcela A. Juliani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wellison J. S. Gomes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marcela A. Juliani.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Replication of results

All the examples are implemented in MATLAB. The full datasets, as well as the source codes, can be available from the corresponding author upon request.

Additional information

Responsible Editor: Matthew Gilbert

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Juliani, M.A., Gomes, W.J.S. An efficient Kriging-based framework for computationally demanding constrained structural optimization problems. Struct Multidisc Optim 65, 4 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-021-03095-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-021-03095-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation