Colliding Bodies Optimization

  • A. Kaveh


This chapter presents a novel efficient metaheuristic optimization algorithm called colliding bodies optimization (CBO) for optimization. This algorithm is based on one-dimensional collisions between bodies, with each agent solution being considered as the massed object or body. After a collision of two moving bodies having specified masses and velocities, these bodies are separated with new velocities. This collision causes the agents to move toward better positions in the search space. CBO utilizes a simple formulation to find minimum or maximum of functions; also it is independent of parameters [1].


Design Variable Slenderness Ratio Metaheuristic Algorithm Space Truss Charged System Search 
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.


  1. 1.
    Kaveh A, Mahdavi VR (2014) Colliding bodies optimization: a novel meta-heuristic method. Comput Struct 139:18–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kaveh A, Mahdavi VR (2014) Colliding bodies optimization method for optimum design of truss structures with continuous variables. Adv Eng Softw 70:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tolman RC (1979) The principles of statistical mechanics. Clarendon Press, Oxford (Reissued)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tsoulos IG (2008) Modifications of real code genetic algorithm for global optimization. Appl Math Comput 203:598–607MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Coello CAC (2000) Use of a self-adaptive penalty approach for engineering optimization problems. Comput Ind 41:113–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    He Q, Wang L (2007) An effective co-evolutionary particle swarm optimization for constrained engineering design problem. Eng Appl Artif Intell 20:89–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Montes EM, Coello CAC (2008) An empirical study about the usefulness of evolution strategies to solve constrained optimization problems. Int J Gen Syst 37:443–473MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kaveh A, Talatahari S (2010) A novel heuristic optimization method: charged system search. Acta Mech 213:267–289CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ragsdell KM, Phillips DT (1976) Optimal design of a class of welded structures using geometric programming. ASME J Eng Ind Ser B 98:1021–1025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Deb K (1991) Optimal design of a welded beam via genetic algorithms. AIAA J 29:2013–2015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Coello CAC, Montes EM (1992) Constraint-handling in genetic algorithms through the use of dominance-based tournament. IEEE Trans Reliab 41(4):576–582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sandgren E (1988) Nonlinear integer and discrete programming in mechanical design. In: Proceedings of the ASME design technology conference, Kissimine, FL, pp 95–105Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kannan BK, Kramer SN (1994) An augmented Lagrange multiplier based method for mixed integer discrete continuous optimization and its applications to mechanical design. Trans ASME J Mech Des 116:318–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Deb K, Gene AS (1997) A robust optimal design technique for mechanical component design. In: Dasgupta D, Michalewicz Z (eds) Evolutionary algorithms in engineering applications. Springer, Berlin, pp 497–514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Belegundu AD (1982) A study of mathematical programming methods for structural optimization. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Iowa, Iowa, USAGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Arora JS (1989) Introduction to optimum design. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Soh CK, Yang J (1996) Fuzzy controlled genetic algorithm search for shape optimization. J Comput Civil Eng ASCE 10:143–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lee KS, Geem ZW (2004) A new structural optimization method based on the harmony search algorithm. Comput Struct 82:781–798CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kaveh A, Khayatazad M (2012) A novel meta-heuristic method: ray optimization. Comput Struct 112–113:283–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) (1989) Manual of steel construction—allowable stress design, 9th edn. AISC, Chicago, ILGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rajeev S, Krishnamoorthy CS (1992) Discrete optimization of structures using genetic algorithms. Struct Eng ASCE 118:1233–1250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Schutte JJ, Groenwold AA (2003) Sizing design of truss structures using particle swarms. Struct Multidiscip Optim 25:261–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Erbatur F, Hasançebi O, Tütüncü I, Kiliç H (2000) Optimal design of planar and space structures with genetic algorithms. Comput Struct 75:209–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Camp CV, Bichon J (2004) Design of space trusses using ant colony optimization. J Struct Eng ASCE 130:741–751CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Perez RE, Behdinan K (2007) Particle swarm approach for structural design optimization. Comput Struct 85:1579–1588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Camp CV (2007) Design of space trusses using Big Bang–Big Crunch optimization. J Struct Eng ASCE 133:999–1008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kaveh A, Talatahari S (2009) A particle swarm ant colony optimization for truss structures with discrete variables. J Constr Steel Res 65:1558–1568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hasançebi O, Çarbas S, Dogan E, Erdal F, Saka MP (2009) Performance evaluation of metaheuristic search techniques in the optimum design of real size pin jointed structures. Comput Struct 87:284–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lingyun W, Mei Z, Guangming W, Guang M (2005) Truss optimization on shape and sizing with frequency constraints based on genetic algorithm. J Comput Mech 25:361–368CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Gomes MH (2011) Truss optimization with dynamic constraints using a particle swarm algorithm. Expert Syst Appl 38:957–968CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kaveh A, Zolghadr A (2011) Shape and size optimization of truss structures with frequency constraints using enhanced charged system search algorithm. Asian J Civil Eng 12:487–509Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Makiabadi MH, Baghlani A, Rahnema H, Hadianfard MA (2013) Optimal design of truss bridges using teaching–learning-base optimization algorithm. Int J Optim Civil Eng 3(3):499–510Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    AustRoads. 92 (1992) Austroads bridge design code. Australasian Railway Association, NSWGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Kaveh
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Civil Engineering, Centre of Excellence for Fundamental Studies in Structural EngineeringIran University of Science and TechnologyTehranIran

Personalised recommendations