Acceso abierto

Optimizing DVA placement using evolutionary algorithms for dynamic beam loading

Monika Podwórna

Monika Podwórna

Wrocław University of Science and TechnologyWrocław, Poland
Perfil de Orcid
Buscar este autor en
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Podwórna, Monika
 y 
Jacek Grosel

Jacek Grosel

Wrocław University of Science and TechnologyWrocław, Poland
Perfil de Orcid
Buscar este autor en
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Grosel, Jacek
  
29 may 2025
Optimizing DVA placement using evolutionary algorithms for dynamic beam loading's Cover Image
Acerca de este artículo
Artículo anterior
Artículo siguiente
Cite
Descargar portada
Categoría del artículo: Original Study
Publicado en línea: 29 may 2025
Páginas: 167 - 178
Recibido: 03 oct 2024
Aceptado: 28 mar 2025
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/sgem-2025-0011
Palabras clave
© 2025 Monika Podwórna et al., published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Figure 1:

The model of the load.
The model of the load.

Figure 2:

The model of the analyzed system (na=2).
The model of the analyzed system (na=2).

Figure 3:

The basic structure of genetic algorithms.
The basic structure of genetic algorithms.

Figure 4:

The scheme of the genetic algorithm.
The scheme of the genetic algorithm.

Figure 5:

The Δ plot in the case of: a) E[w(0.5L,t)], b) σ[(0.5L,t)]
The Δ plot in the case of: a) E[w(0.5L,t)], b) σ[(0.5L,t)]

Figure 6.

The optimal position of two absorbers xai∈〈0.25L;0.75L〉 for two different directions of traffic moving with the constant velocity v=0.8 vcr for the adjustment function – the minimum of the expected value of deflection functions in the middle span of the bridge’s beam E[w].
The optimal position of two absorbers xai∈〈0.25L;0.75L〉 for two different directions of traffic moving with the constant velocity v=0.8 vcr for the adjustment function – the minimum of the expected value of deflection functions in the middle span of the bridge’s beam E[w].

Figure 7:

The optimal parameter κai=ωai/ωs of two absorbers for two different directions of traffic moving with the constant velocity v=0.8 vcr for the adjustment function – the minimum of the expected value of deflection functions in the middle span of the bridge’s beam E[w].
The optimal parameter κai=ωai/ωs of two absorbers for two different directions of traffic moving with the constant velocity v=0.8 vcr for the adjustment function – the minimum of the expected value of deflection functions in the middle span of the bridge’s beam E[w].

Figure 8:

The adjustment function – the minimum of the expected value of deflection functions in the middle span of the bridge’s beam E[w].
The adjustment function – the minimum of the expected value of deflection functions in the middle span of the bridge’s beam E[w].

Figure 9.

The optimal position of two absorbers xai∈〈0.25L;0.75L〉 for two different directions of traffic moving with the constant velocity v=0.8 vcr for the adjustment function – the minimum of the standard deviation of deflection functions in the middle span of the bridge’s beam σ[w].
The optimal position of two absorbers xai∈〈0.25L;0.75L〉 for two different directions of traffic moving with the constant velocity v=0.8 vcr for the adjustment function – the minimum of the standard deviation of deflection functions in the middle span of the bridge’s beam σ[w].

Figure 10:

The optimal parameter κai=ωai/ωs of two absorbers for two different directions of traffic moving with the constant velocity v=0.8 vcr for the adjustment function – the minimum of the standard deviation of deflection functions in the middle span of the bridge’s beam σ[w].
The optimal parameter κai=ωai/ωs of two absorbers for two different directions of traffic moving with the constant velocity v=0.8 vcr for the adjustment function – the minimum of the standard deviation of deflection functions in the middle span of the bridge’s beam σ[w].

Figure 11:

The adjustment function – the minimum of standard deviation of the deflection functions in the middle span of the bridge’s beam σ[w].
The adjustment function – the minimum of standard deviation of the deflection functions in the middle span of the bridge’s beam σ[w].

Figure 12:

Comparison of the system’s response when applying one and two absorbers for different velocity v=0.7 ÷2.4 vcr for the adjustment function – the minimum of the standard deviation.
Comparison of the system’s response when applying one and two absorbers for different velocity v=0.7 ÷2.4 vcr for the adjustment function – the minimum of the standard deviation.

Figure 13:

The optimal position of one or two absorbers xai∈〈0.25L;0.75L〉 for different velocity v=0.7 ÷2.4 vcr for the adjustment function – the minimum of the standard deviation of deflection functions in the middle span of the bridge’s beam σ[w].
The optimal position of one or two absorbers xai∈〈0.25L;0.75L〉 for different velocity v=0.7 ÷2.4 vcr for the adjustment function – the minimum of the standard deviation of deflection functions in the middle span of the bridge’s beam σ[w].
Idioma:
Inglés
Calendario de la edición:
4 veces al año
Temas de la revista:
Geociencias, Geociencias, otros, Ciencia de los materiales, Compuestos, Materiales porosos, Física, Mecánica y dinámica de fluidos
RSS Feed de revista