Premium
COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF DIFFERENT OPTIMIZATION ALGORITHMS FOR STRUCTURAL DESIGN APPLICATIONS
Author(s) -
PATNAIK S. N.,
CORONEOS R. M.,
GUPTILL J. D.,
HOPKINS D. A.
Publication year - 1996
Publication title -
international journal for numerical methods in engineering
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.421
H-Index - 168
eISSN - 1097-0207
pISSN - 0029-5981
DOI - 10.1002/(sici)1097-0207(19960530)39:10<1761::aid-nme925>3.0.co;2-q
Subject(s) - sequential quadratic programming , computer science , mathematical optimization , algorithm , reliability (semiconductor) , linear programming , quadratic programming , mathematics , power (physics) , physics , quantum mechanics
Non‐linear programming algorithms play an important role in structural design optimization. Fortunately, several algorithms with computer codes are available. At NASA Lewis Research Centre, a project was initiated to assess the performance of eight different optimizers through the development of a computer code CometBoards. This paper summarizes the conclusions of that research. CometBoards was employed to solve sets of small, medium and large structural problems, using the eight different optimizers on a Cray‐YMP8E/8128 computer. The reliability and efficiency of the optimizers were determined from the performance of these problems. For small problems, the performance of most of the optimizers could be considered adequate. For large problems, however, three optimizers (two sequential quadratic programming routines, DNCONG of IMSL and SQP of IDESIGN, along with Sequential Unconstrained Minimizations Technique SUMT) outperformed others. At optimum, most optimizers captured an identical number of active displacement and frequency constraints but the number of active stress constraints differed among the optimizers. This discrepancy can be attributed to singularity conditions in the optimization and the alleviation of this discrepancy can improve the efficiency of optimizers.