Sensitivity of optimal double-layer grid designs to geometrical imperfections and geometric nonlinearity conditions in the analysis phase

Abstract

This study focuses on exploring the effects of geometrical imperfections and different analysis methods on the optimum design of Double-Layer Grids (DLGs), as used in the construction industry. A total of 12 notable meta-heuristics are assessed and contrasted, and as a result, the Slime Mold Algorithm is identified as the most effective approach for size optimization of DLGs. To evaluate the influence of geometric imperfections and nonlinearity on the optimal design of real-size DLGs, the optimization process is carried out by considering and disregarding geometric nonlinearity while incorporating three distinct forms of geometrical imperfections, namely local imperfections, global imperfections, and combinations of both. In light of the uncertain nature of geometrical imperfections, probabilistic distributions are used to define these imperfections randomly in direction and magnitude. The results demonstrate that it is necessary to account for these imperfections to obtain an optimal solution. It’s worth noting that structural imperfections can increase the maximum stress ratio by up to 70%. The analysis also reveals that the initial curvature of members has a more significant impact on the optimal design of structures than the nodal installation error, indicating the need for greater attention to local imperfection issues in space structure construction.

Graphical abstract

Keywords

double-layer grid / sizing optimization / metaheuristic algorithms / geometrical imperfections / analysis approach

References

[1] Carbas S, Artar M. Comparative seismic design optimization of spatial steel dome structures through three recent metaheuristic algorithms. Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering, 2022, 16(1): 57–74

[2] Fakhimi R, Shahabsafa M, Lei W, He S, Martins J R R A, Terlaky T, Zuluaga L F. Discrete multi-load truss sizing optimization: Model analysis and computational experiments. Optimization and Engineering, 2022, 23(3): 1559–1585

[3] Jawad F K, Ozturk C, Dansheng W, Mahmood M, Al-Azzawi O, Al-Jemely A. Sizing and layout optimization of truss structures with artificial bee colony algorithm. Structures, 2021, 30: 546–559

[4] Liu W, Xu L, Zhu S, Li L, Liu F, Xiong Z. Shape optimization of aluminium alloy spherical reticulated shells considering nonlinearities. Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering, 2022, 16(12): 1565–1580

[5] Paulino D M, Leonel E D. Topology optimization and geometric nonlinear modeling using positional finite elements. Optimization and Engineering, 2021, 23: 1439–1469

[6] Stoiber N, Kromoser B. Topology optimization in concrete construction: A systematic review on numerical and experimental investigations. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 2021, 64(4): 1725–1749

[7] Vu-Bac N, Duong T X, Lahmer T, Zhuang X, Sauer R A, Park H S, Rabczuk T. A NURBS-based inverse analysis for reconstruction of nonlinear deformations of thin shell structures. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2018, 331: 427–455

[8] Vu-Bac N, Duong T X, Lahmer T, Areias P, Sauer R A, Park H S, Rabczuk T. A NURBS-based inverse analysis of thermal expansion induced morphing of thin shells. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2019, 350: 480–510

[9] Vu-Bac N, Rabczuk T, Park H S, Fu X, Zhuang X. A NURBS-based inverse analysis of swelling induced morphing of thin stimuli-responsive polymer gels. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2022, 397: 115049

[10] Es-Haghi M S, Shishegaran A, Rabczuk T. Evaluation of a novel asymmetric genetic algorithm to optimize the structural design of 3D regular and irregular steel frames. Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering, 2020, 14(5): 1110–1130

[11] Al-Bazoon M, Arora J S. Discrete variable optimization of structures subjected to dynamic loads using equivalent static loads and metaheuristic algorithms. Optimization and Engineering, 2022, 23(2): 643–687

[12] Pierezan J, dos Santos Coelho L, Cocco Mariani V, Hochsteiner de Vasconcelos Segundo E, Prayogo D. Chaotic coyote algorithm applied to truss optimization problems. Computers & Structures, 2021, 242: 106353

[13] Nguyen-Van S, Nguyen K T, Luong V H, Lee S, Lieu Q X. A novel hybrid differential evolution and symbiotic organism search algorithm for size and shape optimization of truss structures under multiple frequency constraints. Expert Systems with Applications, 2021, 184: 115534

[14] Tomei V, Grande E, Imbimbo M. Influence of geometric imperfections on the efficacy of optimization approaches for grid-shells. Engineering Structures, 2021, 228: 111502

[15] Bruno L, Sassone M, Venuti F. Effects of the equivalent geometric nodal imperfections on the stability of single layer grid shells. Engineering Structures, 2016, 112: 184–199

[16] Cai J, Gu L, Xu Y, Feng J, Zhang J. Nonlinear stability analysis of hybrid grid shells. International Journal of Structural Stability and Dynamics, 2013, 13(1): 1350006

[17] Guo J. Research on distribution and magnitude of initial geometrical imperfection affecting stability of suspen-dome. Advanced Steel Construction, 2011, 7(4): 344–358

[18] Liu H, Zhang W, Yuan H. Structural stability analysis of single-layer reticulated shells with stochastic imperfections. Engineering Structures, 2016, 124: 473–479

[19] Madah H, Amir O. Truss optimization with buckling considerations using geometrically nonlinear beam modeling. Computers & Structures, 2017, 192: 233–247

[20] Li H, Taniguchi Y. Load-carrying capacity of semi-rigid double-layer grid structures with initial crookedness of member. Engineering Structures, 2019, 184: 421–433

[21] Madah H, Amir O. Concurrent structural optimization of buckling-resistant trusses and their initial imperfections. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 2019, 162: 244–258

[22] KavehAIlchi GhazaanM. Meta-Heuristic Algorithms for Optimal Design of Real-Size Structures. Cham: Springer Cham, 2018

[23] MATLAB. Version 9.10.0. R2021a. Natick, MA: The MathWorks Inc., 2021

[24] Sap2000. Version 23.3.1. Berkeley, CA: Computers and Structures, Inc., 2023

[25] Akbari M A, Zare M, Azizipanah-Abarghooee R, Mirjalili S, Deriche M. The cheetah optimizer: A nature-inspired metaheuristic algorithm for large-scale optimization problems. Scientific Reports, 2022, 12(1): 10953

[26] Kaveh A, Ilchi Ghazaan M. Enhanced colliding bodies optimization for design problems with continuous and discrete variables. Advances in Engineering Software, 2014, 77: 66–75

[27] Zhao W, Wang L, Mirjalili S. Artificial hummingbird algorithm: A new bio-inspired optimizer with its engineering applications. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2022, 388: 114194

[28] Li S, Chen H, Wang M, Heidari A A, Mirjalili S. Slime mould algorithm: A new method for stochastic optimization. Future Generation Computer Systems, 2020, 111: 300–323

[29] Abdollahzadeh B, Gharehchopogh F S, Mirjalili S. African vultures optimization algorithm: A new nature-inspired metaheuristic algorithm for global optimization problems. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 2021, 158: 107408

[30] Trojovská E, Dehghani M. A new human-based metahurestic optimization method based on mimicking cooking training. Scientific Reports, 2022, 12(1): 14861

[31] Naruei I, Keynia F. A new optimization method based on COOT bird natural life model. Expert Systems with Applications, 2021, 183: 115352

[32] Faramarzi A, Heidarinejad M, Stephens B, Mirjalili S. Equilibrium optimizer: A novel optimization algorithm. Knowledge-Based Systems, 2020, 191: 105190

[33] Abdollahzadeh B, Soleimanian Gharehchopogh F, Mirjalili S. Artificial gorilla troops optimizer: A new nature-inspired metaheuristic algorithm for global optimization problems. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 2021, 36(10): 5887–5958

[34] Faramarzi A, Heidarinejad M, Mirjalili S, Gandomi A H. Marine predators algorithm: A nature-inspired metaheuristic. Expert Systems with Applications, 2020, 152: 113377

[35] Abualigah L, Diabat A, Mirjalili S, Abd Elaziz M, Gandomi A H. The arithmetic optimization algorithm. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2021, 376: 113609

[36] NarueiIKeyniaF. Wild horse optimizer: A new meta-heuristic algorithm for solving engineering optimization problems. Engineering with Computers, 2022, 38(S 4): 3025–3056

[37] Kalina M. Stability problems of pyramidal von Mises planar trusses with geometrical imperfection. International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, 2016, 1: 118–123

[38] Santana M, Gonçalves P, Silveira R. Stability and load capacity of an elasto-plastic pyramidal truss. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 2019, 171: 158–173

[39] Zhao Z W, Liu H Q, Liang B, Yan R Z. Influence of random geometrical imperfection on the stability of single-layer reticulated domes with semi-rigid connection. Advanced Steel Construction, 2019, 15(1): 93–99

[40] AISCShapes Database. Version 15.0. Chicago, IL: AISC. 2017

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

Higher Education Press