Skip to main content
Log in

A study of direct vs. approximation methods in structural optimization

  • Brief Notes
  • Published:
Structural optimization Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This note discusses the performances and applications of two methods generally used in structural optimization. One is the direct method which applies a nonlinear programming (NLP) algorithm directly to the structural optimization problem. The other is the approximation method which utilizes the engineering sense very well. The two methods are compared through standard structural optimization problems with truss and beam elements. The results are analysed based on the convergence performances, the number of function calculations, the quality of the cost functions, etc. The applications of both methods are also discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Arora, J.S. 1979:Introduction to optimum design. New York: McGraw-Hill

    Google Scholar 

  • Arora, J.S. 1985: A user's manual for truss design problems with IDESIGN 3.3.Technical Report No. ODL 85.6, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Iowa

  • Arora, J.S.; Tseng, C.H. 1986:IDESIGN user's manual. Optimal Design Laboratory. College of Engineering, University of Iowa

  • Barthelemy, J.-F.M.; Haftka, R.T. 1993: Approximation concepts for optimum structural design — a review.Struct. Optim. 5, 129–144

    Google Scholar 

  • Haug, E.J.; Arora, J.S. 1979:Applied optimal design. New York: John Wiley and Sons

    Google Scholar 

  • Mills-Curran, W.C.; Lust, R.V.; Schmit, L.A. 1983: Approximation method for space frame synthesis.AIAA J. 21, 1571–1580

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, G.J.; Park Y.S.; Lee, S.H. 1993: Comparisons of the direct method and approximation method in structural optimization. Pan-Pacific Conference of Computer Engineering

  • Park, Y.S.; Lee, S.H.; Park, G.J. 1994: A study of performances between direct method and approximation method in structural optimization.KSME J. 18, 313–322 (in Korean)

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmit, L.A.; Miura, H. 1976: A new structural analysis/synthesis capability — ACCESS 1.AIAA J. 14, 661–671

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmit, L.A.; Farshi, B. 1974: Some approximation concepts for structural synthesis.AIAA J. 12, 692–699

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, H.L.; Vanderplaats, G.N.; Shyy, Y.-K. 1992: A study of move limit adjustment strategies in the approximation concepts approach to structural synthesis.Proc. 4th AIAA/USAF/NASA/OAI Symp. on Multi-Analysis & Optimization, pp. 507–512

  • Vanderplaats, G.N. 1985:ADS — A FORTRAN program for automated design synthesis. Version 1.10 (public domain program). Santa Barbara, CA

  • Vanderplaats, G.N.; Salajegheh, E. 1989: New approximation method for stress constraints in structural synthesis.AIAA J. 27, 352–358

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Park, Y.S., Lee, S.H. & Park, G.J. A study of direct vs. approximation methods in structural optimization. Structural Optimization 10, 64–66 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01743697

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01743697

Keywords

Navigation