Volume 14, Issue 4 (10-2024)
IJOCE 2024, 14(4): 539-551 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
TalatAhari S. A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF SINGLE-OBJECTIVE AGAINST MULTI-OBJECTIVE OPTIMIZATION IN STRUCTURAL. IJOCE 2024; 14 (4) :539-551
URL: http://ijoce.iust.ac.ir/article-1-606-en.html
URL: http://ijoce.iust.ac.ir/article-1-606-en.html
School of Computing, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia
Abstract: (2304 Views)
Structural optimization plays a critical role in improving the efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and sustainability of engineering designs. This paper presents a comparative study of single-objective and multi-objective optimization in the structural design process. Single-objective problems focus on optimizing just one objective, such as minimizing weight or cost, while other important aspects are treated as constraints like deflections and strength requirements. Multi-objective optimization addresses multiple conflicting objectives, such as balancing cost, with displacement treated as a secondary objective and strength requirements defined as constraints within the given limits. Both optimization approaches are carried out using Chaos Game Optimization (CGO). While single-objective optimization produces a definitive optimal solution that can be used directly in the final design, multi-objective optimization results in a set of trade-off solutions (Pareto front), requiring a decision-making process based on design codes and practical criteria to select the most appropriate design. Through a real-world case study, this research will assess the performance of both optimization strategies, providing insights into their suitability for modern structural engineering challenges.
Keywords: Single-objective Optimization, Multi-objective Optimization, Structural Optimization, Chaos Game Optimization
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 | This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
