Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-wxvwp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T12:57:50.509Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Decision Theory and the Shape of Structures

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 July 2016

R. F. D. Porter Goff
R. F. D. Porter Goff*
Affiliation:
Department of Engineering, University of Leicester
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Engineering structures are usually designed to minimise weight or some other cost criterion, subject to specified loading and functional conditions being met. The techniques of decision theory may be applied if the cost can be described mathematically in terms of the design variables. In particular, dynamic programming may be applicable to designs for which the parameter values can be derived sequentially. Dynamic programming is here introduced to obtain minimum weight layouts for two types of cantilever structure and comparisons are made with known Michell solutions. The results suggest that other near optimum configurations could be systematically derived under conditions less restrictive than those assumed by the Michell theory.

Information

Type
Technical Notes
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 70 , Issue 663 , March 1966, pp. 448 - 452
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 1966

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1. Johnston, J. Decision Theory, New Help in Solving Business Problems. Progress (Unilever Quart), Vol. 49, No. 276, pp 164–171, Spring 1963.Google Scholar
2. Foulkes, J. Minimum Weight Design and the Theory of Plastic Collapse. Quart Appl Math, Vol. 10, No. 4, pp 347–358, 1953.Google Scholar
3. Dorn, W. S., Gomory, R. E. and Greenbero, H. J. Automatic Design of Optimal Structures. J de Mecanique, Vol. 3, No. l, pp 25–52, Mars 1964.Google Scholar
4. Hemp, W. S. Studies in the Theory of Michell Structures. 11th Inter Cong Appl Mech, Munich, 1964.Google Scholar
5. Chan, H. S. Y. Optimum Structural Design and Linear Programming. CoA Rep Aero 175, Sept. 1964.Google Scholar
6. Schmit, L. A. The Use of Computers in Minimum-weight Structural Design. ASME Paper No. 63-MD-47.Google Scholar
7. Bellman, R. Dynamic Programming. Princeton University Press, 1957.Google ScholarPubMed
8. Kalaba, R. Design of Minimal-weight Structures for Given Reliability and Cost. J Aerospace Sci, Vol. 29, No. 3, pp 355–356, March 1962.Google Scholar
9. Michell, A. G. M. The Limits of Economy of Material in Frame Structures. Phil Mag, Ser. 6, Vol. 8, pp 589–597, 1904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Schmidt, L. C. Minimum Weight Layouts of Elastic, Statically Determinate, Triangulated Frames under Alternative Load Systems. J Mech Phys Solids, Vol. 10, pp 139–149, April 1962.Google Scholar
11. Chan, A. S. L. The Design of Michell Optimum Structures. CoA Rep, No. 142, December 1960.Google Scholar