# American Institute of Mathematical Sciences

July  2014, 10(3): 777-794. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2014.10.777

## Solving structural engineering design optimization problems using an artificial bee colony algorithm

 1 School of Mathematics and Computer Applications, Thapar University Patiala, Patiala - 147004, Punjab, India

Received  June 2012 Revised  June 2013 Published  November 2013

The main goal of the present paper is to solve structural engineering design optimization problems with nonlinear resource constraints. Real world problems in engineering domain are generally large scale or nonlinear or constrained optimization problems. Since heuristic methods are powerful than the traditional numerical methods, as they don't requires the derivatives of the functions and provides near to the global solution. Hence, in this article, a penalty guided artificial bee colony (ABC) algorithm is presented to search the optimal solution of the problem in the feasible region of the entire search space. Numerical results of the structural design optimization problems are reported and compared. As shown, the solutions by the proposed approach are all superior to those best solutions by typical approaches in the literature. Also we can say, our results indicate that the proposed approach may yield better solutions to engineering problems than those obtained using current algorithms.
Citation: Harish Garg. Solving structural engineering design optimization problems using an artificial bee colony algorithm. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2014, 10 (3) : 777-794. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2014.10.777
##### References:

show all references

##### References:
 [1] Mohsen Abdolhosseinzadeh, Mir Mohammad Alipour. Design of experiment for tuning parameters of an ant colony optimization method for the constrained shortest Hamiltonian path problem in the grid networks. Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 2021, 11 (2) : 321-332. doi: 10.3934/naco.2020028 [2] Ziteng Wang, Shu-Cherng Fang, Wenxun Xing. On constraint qualifications: Motivation, design and inter-relations. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2013, 9 (4) : 983-1001. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2013.9.983 [3] Claudia Lederman, Noemi Wolanski. An optimization problem with volume constraint for an inhomogeneous operator with nonstandard growth. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems, 2021, 41 (6) : 2907-2946. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2020391 [4] Abderrazak Chrifi, Mostafa Abounouh, Hassan Al Moatassime. Galerkin method of weakly damped cubic nonlinear Schrödinger with Dirac impurity, and artificial boundary condition in a half-line. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - S, 2021  doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2021030 [5] Deren Han, Zehui Jia, Yongzhong Song, David Z. W. Wang. An efficient projection method for nonlinear inverse problems with sparsity constraints. Inverse Problems & Imaging, 2016, 10 (3) : 689-709. doi: 10.3934/ipi.2016017 [6] Reza Lotfi, Yahia Zare Mehrjerdi, Mir Saman Pishvaee, Ahmad Sadeghieh, Gerhard-Wilhelm Weber. A robust optimization model for sustainable and resilient closed-loop supply chain network design considering conditional value at risk. Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 2021, 11 (2) : 221-253. doi: 10.3934/naco.2020023 [7] Bingru Zhang, Chuanye Gu, Jueyou Li. Distributed convex optimization with coupling constraints over time-varying directed graphs†. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2021, 17 (4) : 2119-2138. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2020061 [8] Israa Mohammed Khudher, Yahya Ismail Ibrahim, Suhaib Abduljabbar Altamir. Individual biometrics pattern based artificial image analysis techniques. Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 2021  doi: 10.3934/naco.2020056 [9] Sabyasachi Dey, Tapabrata Roy, Santanu Sarkar. Revisiting design principles of Salsa and ChaCha. Advances in Mathematics of Communications, 2019, 13 (4) : 689-704. doi: 10.3934/amc.2019041 [10] Chonghu Guan, Xun Li, Rui Zhou, Wenxin Zhou. Free boundary problem for an optimal investment problem with a borrowing constraint. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2021  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2021049 [11] David Cantala, Juan Sebastián Pereyra. Endogenous budget constraints in the assignment game. Journal of Dynamics & Games, 2015, 2 (3&4) : 207-225. doi: 10.3934/jdg.2015002 [12] Yi Gao, Rui Li, Yingjing Shi, Li Xiao. Design of path planning and tracking control of quadrotor. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2021  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2021063 [13] Alberto Bressan, Ke Han, Franco Rampazzo. On the control of non holonomic systems by active constraints. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems, 2013, 33 (8) : 3329-3353. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2013.33.3329 [14] Manuel de León, Víctor M. Jiménez, Manuel Lainz. Contact Hamiltonian and Lagrangian systems with nonholonomic constraints. Journal of Geometric Mechanics, 2021, 13 (1) : 25-53. doi: 10.3934/jgm.2021001 [15] Miguel R. Nuñez-Chávez. Controllability under positive constraints for quasilinear parabolic PDEs. Mathematical Control & Related Fields, 2021  doi: 10.3934/mcrf.2021024 [16] Yue Qi, Xiaolin Li, Su Zhang. Optimizing 3-objective portfolio selection with equality constraints and analyzing the effect of varying constraints on the efficient sets. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2021, 17 (4) : 1531-1556. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2020033 [17] Jamal Mrazgua, El Houssaine Tissir, Mohamed Ouahi. Frequency domain $H_{\infty}$ control design for active suspension systems. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - S, 2021  doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2021036 [18] Peng Zhang, Yongquan Zeng, Guotai Chi. Time-consistent multiperiod mean semivariance portfolio selection with the real constraints. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2021, 17 (4) : 1663-1680. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2020039 [19] Eduardo Casas, Christian Clason, Arnd Rösch. Preface special issue on system modeling and optimization. Mathematical Control & Related Fields, 2021  doi: 10.3934/mcrf.2021008 [20] Sarra Delladji, Mohammed Belloufi, Badreddine Sellami. Behavior of the combination of PRP and HZ methods for unconstrained optimization. Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 2021, 11 (3) : 377-389. doi: 10.3934/naco.2020032

2019 Impact Factor: 1.366