Finite element model updating using fish school search and volitive particle swarm optimization

被引:33
作者
Boulkaibet, I. [1 ]
Mthembu, L. [1 ]
De Lima Neto, F. [2 ,3 ]
Marwala, T. [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Johannesburg, Dept Elect & Elect Engn Sci, Ctr Intelligent Syst Modelling, ZA-2006 Johannesburg, Gauteng, South Africa
[2] Univ Pernambuco, Sch Engn, Comp Engn Program, BR-50720001 Recife, PE, Brazil
[3] Univ Johannesburg, Dept Elect & Elect Engn Sci, ZA-2006 Johannesburg, South Africa
[4] Univ Johannesburg, Off Deputy Vice Chancellor, ZA-2006 Johannesburg, South Africa
关键词
Finite element model (FEM); fish school search (FSS); genetic algorithm (GA); particle swarm optimization (PSO); volitive PSO; STRUCTURAL DYNAMIC-MODELS; GENETIC ALGORITHM; IDENTIFICATION; ASSIGNMENT;
D O I
10.3233/ICA-150495
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
A customized version of Fish School Search (FSS) algorithm and the innovative volitive operator of FSS (which is incorporated into the regular particle swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm) are applied to the finite element model (FEM) updating problem. These algorithms are tested on the updating of two real structures namely; an unsymmetrical H-shaped beam and a GARTEUR SM-AG19 structure. The results thereof are compared with results of two other metaheuristic algorithms: Genetic Algorithm (GA) and Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) on the same structures. The GA and PSO algorithms being the most popular metaheuristic algorithms used in the model updating area. It is observed that on average, the FSS and PSO algorithms produce more accurate results than the GA. In this paper we confirm that the FSSb (i.e. a customised version of the FSS algorithm, with minor modifications) and the hybrid algorithm - the Volitive PSO (i.e. the volitive operator of FSS into PSO) - are also more effective in this optimization task, producing superior results when updating the underlining Finite Element Model of both structures.
引用
收藏
页码:361 / 376
页数:16
相关论文
共 44 条
  • [1] Adeli H., 2006, COST OPTIMIZATION ST
  • [2] Adeli H., 1995, MACHINE LEARNING NEU
  • [3] Distributed parameter model updating using the Karhunen-Loeve expansion
    Adhikari, S.
    Friswell, M. I.
    [J]. MECHANICAL SYSTEMS AND SIGNAL PROCESSING, 2010, 24 (02) : 326 - 339
  • [4] NEW LOOK AT STATISTICAL-MODEL IDENTIFICATION
    AKAIKE, H
    [J]. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, 1974, AC19 (06) : 716 - 723
  • [5] Bastos CJA, 2008, IEEE SYS MAN CYBERN, P2645
  • [6] Boulkaibet I., 2013, 1st BRICS 11th CBIC Brazilian Con ress on Com utational Intelli ence Brazil
  • [7] Boulkaibet I., 2012, Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Mechanics, V29, P75
  • [8] Bratton D., P 2007 IEEE SWARM IN
  • [9] Bursi O.S., 2014, COMPUTER AIDED CIVIL, V29
  • [10] Carvallo J., MECH SYSTEMS SIGNAL, V21, P2715