Actuator Layout Optimization for Adaptive Structures Performing Large Shape Changes

  • Arka P. ReksowardojoEmail author
  • Gennaro Senatore
  • Ian F. C. Smith
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10864)


Adaptive structures are sensed and actuated to modify internal forces and shape to maintain optimal performance in response to loads. The use of large shape changes as a structural adaptation strategy to counteract the effect of loads has been investigated previously. When large shape changes are employed, structures are designed to change shape as the load changes thus giving the opportunity to homogenize stresses. In this way, the design is not governed by peak loads that occur very rarely. Simulations have shown a significant amount of embodied energy can be reduced with respect to optimized active structures limited to small shape changes and with respect to passive structures. However, in these previous studies, the actuator layout was assigned a-priori.

This paper presents a new method to search for an actuator layout that is optimum to counteract the effect of loads via large shape changes. The objective is to design the actuation system allowing the structure to ‘morph’ into shapes optimized to maximize material utilization for each load case. A combination of simulated annealing and the nonlinear force method is proposed to meet both the actuator placement problem and to determine appropriate actuator commands. A heuristic for near-neighbor generation based on the actuator control efficacy is employed to explore effectively the large search space. Case studies show the proposed method converges to the global optimum for simple configurations and generally produces actuator layouts enabling shape control even with a low number of actuators.


Adaptive structures Shape control Actuator layout optimization Nonlinear force method Stochastic search 



The research presented in this paper is supported by the Swiss Government Excellence Scholarship (ESKAS-Nr: 2016.0749).


  1. 1.
    Straube, J.: Green building and sustainability. Building Science Digests, 24 October 2006Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gil, L., Andreu, A.: Shape and cross-section optimisation of a truss structure. Comput. Struct. 79, 681–689 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wang, D., Zhang, W., Jiang, J.: Truss shape optimization with multiple displacement constraints. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 191, 3597–3612 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Shea, K., Smith, I.F.C.: Improving full-scale transmission tower design through topology and shape optimization. Struct. Eng. 132(5), 781–790 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Senatore, G., Duffour, P., Hanna, S., Labbe, F., Winslow, P.: Adaptive structures for whole life energy savings. Int. Assoc. Shell Spat. Struct. (IASS) 52(170), 233–240 (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Senatore, G., Duffour, P., Winslow, P.: Whole-life energy and cost assessment of adaptive structures - case studies. J. Struct. Eng. (ASCE) (in press)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Senatore, G., Duffour, P., Winslow, P., Wise, C.: Shape control and whole-life energy assessment of an “infinitely stiff” prototype adaptive structure. Smart Mater. Struct. 27(1), 015022 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Reksowardojo, A., Senatore, G., Smith, I.: Large and reversible shape changes as a strategy for structural adaptation. In: Proceeding of International Association for Shell and Spacial Structures (IASS) (2017)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Skelton, R.E., Sultan, C.: Integrated design of controllable tensegrity structures. Adapt. Struct. Mater. Syst. 54, 27–35 (1997)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Soong, T.T., Manolis, G.D.: Active structures. J. Struct. Eng. 113(11), 2290–2302 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Manning, R.A.: Optimum design of intelligent truss structures. In: Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, Co-located (1991)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Furuya, H., Haftka, R.Z.: Placing actuators on space structures by genetic algorithms and effectiveness indexes. Struct. Optim. 9, 69–75 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Begg, D.W., Liu, X.: On simultaneous optimization of smart structures – part II: algorithms and examples. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 184(1), 25–37 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    de Jager, B., Skelton, R.: Input/output selection for planar tensegrity models. In: Proceedings of 40th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, Orlando (2001)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Korkmaz, S., Ben Hadj Ali, N., Smith, I.F.C.: Configuration of control system for damage tolerance of a tensegrity bridge. Adv. Eng. Inform. 26, 145–155 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Grierson, D.: Pareto multi-criteria decision making. Adv. Eng. Inform. 22, 371–384 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sauve, R.: Advances in dynamic relaxation techniques for nonlinear finite element. J. Press. Vessel Technol. 117, 170–176 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Patnaik, S.: An integrated force method for discrete analysis. Int. J. Numer. Meth. Eng. 6, 237–251 (1973)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Senatore, G.: Adaptive building structures. Doctoral dissertation, University College London, London (2016)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yuan, X., Liang, X., Li, A.: Shape and force control of prestressed cable-strut structures based on nonlinear force method. Adv. Struct. Eng. 19(12), 1917–1926 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pellegrino, S.: Structural computations with the singular value decomposition of the equilibrium matrix. Int. J. Solids Struct. 30(21), 3025–3035 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    You, Z.: Displacement control of prestressed structures. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 144, 51–59 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Luo, Y., Lu, J.: Geometrically non-linear force method for assemblies with infinitesimal mechanisms. Comput. Struct. 84, 2194–2199 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kahla, N., Kebiche, K.: Nonlinear elastoplastic analysis of tensegrity systems. Comput. Struct. 22, 1552–1566 (2000)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Xu, X., Luo, Y.: Non-liear displacement control of prestressed cable structures. J. Aerosp. Eng. 223, 1001–1007 (2009)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pellegrino, S., Calladine, C.: Matrix analysis of statically and kinematically indeterminate frameworks. Int. J. Solids Struct. 22, 409–428 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lax, P., Burstein, S., Lax, A.: Calculus with Applications and Computing. Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences, New York University, New York (1972)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Achtziger, W.: On simultaneous optimization of truss geometry and topology. Struct. Multidiscipl. Optim. 33, 285–304 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Pastor, M., Binda, M., Harčarik, T.: Modal assurance criterion. Procedia Eng. 48, 543–548 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kirkpatrick, S., Gelatt, J.C., Vecchi, M.: Optimization by simulated annealing. Science 220, 671–679 (1983)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Metropolis, N., Rosenbluth, A., Teller, A., Teller, E.: Equation of state calculations by fast computing machines. J. Chem. Phys. 21, 1087–1092 (1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Reddy, G., Cagan, J.: An improved shape annealing algorithm for truss topology generation. ASME J. Mech. Des. 117, 315–321 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Onoda, J., Hanawa, Y.: Actuator placement optimization by genetic and improved simulated annealing algorithms. AIAA J. 31, 1167–1169 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Arora, J., Elwakeil, O., Chahande, A.: Global optimization methods for engineering applications: a review. Struct. Optim. 9, 137–159 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Cheh, K., Goldberg, J., Askin, R.: A note on the effect of neighborhood structure in simulated annealing. Comput. Oper. Res. 18(6), 537–547 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Eurocode 1 Actions on structures—General actions—Part 1–4: Wind (1991)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Applied Computing and Mechanics Laboratory (IMAC), School of Architecture, Civil and Environmental Engineering (ENAC)Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (EPFL)LausanneSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations