Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Optimizing DVA placement using evolutionary algorithms for dynamic beam loading Cover

Optimizing DVA placement using evolutionary algorithms for dynamic beam loading

Studia Geotechnica et Mechanica
Volume 47 (2025): Issue 2 (June 2025)
By: Monika Podwórna and  Jacek Grosel  
Open Access
|May 2025
Figures & tables

Figures & Tables

Figure 1:

The model of the load.

Figure 2:

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

Figure 3:

The basic structure of genetic algorithms.

Figure 4:

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)]

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].

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].

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].

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].

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].

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].

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.

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].
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/sgem-2025-0011 | Journal eISSN: 2083-831X | Journal ISSN: 0137-6365
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 167 - 178
Submitted on: Oct 3, 2024
Accepted on: Mar 28, 2025
Published on: May 29, 2025
Published by: Wroclaw University of Science and Technology
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year
Keywords:
Dynamic Vibration Absorber,
Stochastic Load,
Genetic Algorithm
Related subjects:
Geosciences,
Geosciences, other,
Materials sciences,
Composites,
Porous materials,
Physics,
Mechanics and fluid dynamics

© 2025 Monika Podwórna, Jacek Grosel, published by Wroclaw University of Science and Technology
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Volume 47 (2025): Issue 2 (June 2025)
Previous article
Next article