Pre-processing parallel and orthogonally positioned structural design elements to be used within the finite element method

Hofmeyer, H.; Roosmalen, Maarten van; Gelbal, F Firat

doi:10.1016/j.aei.2010.06.004

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…First, the Architectural Elements are provided with geometrical and material properties, and, consequently, are redefined as Structural Elements. Second, geometrical redefinition has to be performed (method A in Hofmeyer et al, 2011). Figure 4 illustrates the two reasons for geometrical redefinition and its concept: geometrical redefinition can be regarded as a procedure to remove the T-joints of Lines of Areas by rebuilding the geometry using additional Lines and Areas.…”

Section: The Coevolutionary Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coevolutionary and genetic algorithm based building spatial and structural design

Hofmeyer

Delgado

2015

AIEDAM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, two methods to develop and optimize accompanying building spatial and structural designs are compared. The first, a coevolutionary method, applies deterministic procedures, inspired by realistic design processes, to cyclically add a suitable structural design to the input of a spatial design, evaluate and improve the structural design via the finite element method and topology optimization, adjust the spatial design according to the improved structural design, and modify the spatial design such that the initial spatial requirements are fulfilled. The second method uses a genetic algorithm that works on a population of accompanying building spatial and structural designs, using the finite element method for evaluation. If specific performance indicators and spatial requirements are used (i.e., total strain energy, spatial volume, and number of spaces), both methods provide optimized building designs; however, the coevolutionary method yields even better designs in a faster and more direct manner, whereas the genetic algorithm based method provides more design variants. Both methods show that collaborative design, for example, via design modification in one domain (here spatial) to optimize the design in another domain (here structural) can be as effective as monodisciplinary optimization; however, it may need adjustments to avoid the designs becoming progressively unrealistic. Designers are informed of the merits and disadvantages of design process simulation and design instance exploration, whereas scientists learn from a first fully operational and automated method for design process simulation, which is verified with a genetic algorithm and subject to future improvements and extensions in the community.

show abstract

Section: The Coevolutionary Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coevolutionary and genetic algorithm based building spatial and structural design

Hofmeyer

Delgado

2015

AIEDAM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[HD15] where a 3D architectural design is provided with structural elements via a grammar [DH13]. These elements were then automatically made conformal [HvRG11], stable [SH12] and optimized [HD13]. Subsequently, the architectural design is modified—as a function of its related structural performance—and updated to conform to the initial building plan.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrated Structural–Architectural Design for Interactive Planning

Steiner

Mousavian

Saradj

et al. 2016

Computer Graphics Forum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Traditionally, building floor plans are designed by architects with their usability, functionality and architectural aesthetics in mind; however, the structural properties of the distribution of load‐bearing walls and columns are usually not taken into account at this stage. In this paper, we propose a novel approach for the design of architectural floor plans by integrating structural layout analysis directly into the planning process. In order to achieve this, we introduce a planning tool which interactively enforces checks for structural stability of the current design, and which on demand proposes how to stabilize it if necessary. Technically, our solution contains an interactive architectural modelling framework as well as a constrained optimization module where both are based on respective architectural rules. Using our tool, an architect can predict already in a very early planning stage whose designs are structurally sound such that later changes due to stability reasons can be prevented. We compare manually computed solutions with optimal results of our proposed automated design process in order to show how much our proposed system can help architects to improve the process of laying out structural models optimally.

show abstract

Automated design studies: Topology versus One-Step Evolutionary Structural Optimisation

Hofmeyer

Delgado

2013

Advanced Engineering Informatics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pre-processing parallel and orthogonally positioned structural design elements to be used within the finite element method

Cited by 4 publications

References 42 publications

Coevolutionary and genetic algorithm based building spatial and structural design

Coevolutionary and genetic algorithm based building spatial and structural design

Integrated Structural–Architectural Design for Interactive Planning

Automated design studies: Topology versus One-Step Evolutionary Structural Optimisation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About