CollegeofMechanicalandElectricalEngineering

ModernDesignTheory&Methodology

IDS313070001W

NameAndrs Gonzlez Fallas

SpecialtyMechanical Engineering

TeacherProf. Zhu Shifan

May 29, 2014

Design methods for deployable truss structures

Andrs Gonzlez Fallas
College of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering

AbstractThis paper gives a general review of the different design methods used for the design of a deployable truss
structure. First, a short review of the history and development of the design as a science will be presented.
Then, the methods: simulation, optimization and finite element, will be explained, according to the
sequence in which a truss is developed.
Key wordsDesign method, simulation, optimization, finite element, deployable structure


Introduction
Since the beginning of times, human beings have done design. From the wheel to
canals, from walls to airplanes, the development and construction of new structures
has involved the analysis of forces, the definition of shapes and other variables in
order to get the desired product. As many other areas of knowledge, the ideas and
tendencies in design were transmitted from the master to his students; many
structures were built in a determined way because that was the way they were done in
that specific place or that precise moment.
But the literature shows examples of the humanity trying to develop general
methodologies for solving problems in different fields of life. Polya [1] did some
work about this in the field of mathematics; Redtenbacher, Reuleaux and Bach are
some examples of other scientists and engineers who tried, as early as in 1840s,
to provide basis for support, letting others to build using their suggestions for
improvement. Other name that is mentioned in literature is Zwicky, whose goal was to
gather and record the knowledge of the world in a way that it could be viewed and
retrieved by other people who could need it as a reference.
This paper focuses specifically on the methodology and design theories followed
in the pursuit of designing deployable truss structures. After the study of cases
like the one proposed by Skelton [2] in 2013, the systematic design theory, also
known as total design, was selected for this paper. Since the theory establishes the
main idea about how the process design will be done, a methodology is necessary in
order to establish the exact steps. For this kind of problem, and according to
Skelton, three steps are to be followed: simulation method, optimal method and
finite element method. These three, with the systematic theory are going to be
explained later.

History of design research
The decade of 1920 sets a waypoint in engineering history, with the
establishment of the Bauhaus [3], the school where, according to literature, many
different roots of design research came from. After the academy was closed, most of
the members moved to Great Britain, Russia or US, where they helped to create design
institutes or departments in many universities. Illinois Institute of Technology and
Harvard are two examples of their hosts in US; while the Technical University of
Munich in Germany and the University of Cambridge in England are other names around
the world.
It can be said that this movement was motivated by the end of the World War I and
the desire of the countries to be well prepared for another war. During this period of
time, engineers from the countries involved in the war began a race to develop new and
more efficient weapons such as tanks, aircrafts and guns. But, when the war had finished,
this equipment was obsolete and needed to be replaced with modern artifacts. With the
knowledge gained during the war, researchers and engineers began developing the first
research studies on design and performance improvement were realized, being the
aircrafts the main focus of these efforts.
Parallel to the military efforts, civil companies began to do research in the fields
of fatigue and efficiency. By the decade of 1920s, Volkswagen, the German car
manufacturer, developed thousands of performance tests on their models with the aim of
producing physically powerful and long lasting cars. This influenced their engineers and
the design process itself letting the company to bring to the customers new and unusual
designs that proved to be long lasting and reliable; models that were in the market for
more than eighty years.
Two decades later, another big international war made its appearance in the world
scenario: the World War II. Although by then there was not much work done in the field
of engineering design research, it was already recognized as a problem-solving and
decision making activity. For the first one, some names to be mentioned are Wickelgren
[1], who developed problem solving methods for mathematics; Newell and Simon studied
about problem solving thinking and Starfield established relationships to computer
techniques.
On the other hand, as a decision making activity, Miller [1] proposed a structure of
human decisions as one of the basic steps of the design process. Starr, following the
same line of thinking, defined the design as an almost pure decision process [1].
Other researchers, like Ackoff, Argyris and Schen, proposed links between system
thinking and company management, in order to take concern of the customer satisfaction.
In this same focus, the cybernetics played an important role in rational behavior;
it was employed in economy, to obtain information and to make decisions using computer
systems. This influenced many design researchers, methodologists and theoreticians. The
main approaches were developed from artificial intelligence, especially using the method
of expert systems. This method was, and is still in the present time, useful for
diagnosis and evaluation of the work of design groups; but also a basic step in the
stages of layout, drafting and embodiment design steps in the process design.
After the World War II, the design research also took in consideration the
relationship between human performance and machines. The concept of ergonomics was known
by designers and applied during the war; it motivated the creation of interdisciplinary
studies, including anatomists, physiologists, industrial officers, design engineers and
architects, among other professions. These efforts lead to the creation of the Ergonomic
Research Society in 1949 [3].
There is a relative gap in literature until the decade of 1960s, when many works
from around the world can be found. Germany saw the establishment of the Institute of
Design technology at the Technical University of Munich and the journal Konstruktion
(Engineering Design). Several other universities followed this tendency and opened their
respective Institutes. These institutions produced original and actual researches and
publications about what was defined by Hubka [3] in 1965 as design science.
Also in Europe, but in Great Britain, the home of the industrial revolution, some
early attempts of doing investigation on the design process were made. Marples [1] is
among this group; he proposed a model of a decision tree to represent the design process.
Written media, like the Felden Report, Design Studies or the Journal of Engineering
Design were founded during this decade [1]; in the same way conferences were organized
to present the state of the art in design methodology. A series of important books were
published since then, with the topics varying from philosophy of design to decision
theory. It is important to notice a difference between the development of design science
in Great Britain and in other countries. Hubka [1] explains the institutionalization of
design in this country. While in other countries the efforts were developed among groups
with related interests inside the academia, Great Britain founded institutions like the
Council for Industrial Design, later renamed as The Design Council, or the Institution
of Mechanical Engineers. These institutions were borne with defined tasks and areas of
research.
The history in the United States shows that the development of the design research
was patchy, done around regional centers, with many different schools of thought.
However, it can be noticed that the majority of the works are based on creativity;
psychological insights were incorporated consciously and unconsciously. During the
1960s, books about design instruction were written by E. Pare, Woodson, Parr, Wilson
and others [1]. Alger combines the creative process with mathematical methods for the
evaluation of solutions.
For the decade of 1980s, design research received a new impulse with the
establishment of new academic research units in many departments of design, financed by
the the National Science Foundation Initiative on Design Theory and Methodology [1].
Also during this decade, the American Society of Mechanical Engineers started the ASME
Design Theory and Methodology Conference, still run annually, and with the inclusion
of other engineering disciplines.
The history in other countries has been the same, with more or less intensity. But
they all have in common that, since its birth, the design science has played an
important role in the engineering field, with efforts from the public and private sector,
especially at the universities.

Design as a science
Among science, there is a necessity to develop theories that can give an
explanation to natural phenomena. Scientific theories include statements that define
some kind of system. These scientific principles are also employed in the
engineering sciences and give the base of the fields of thermodynamics, mechanics
and materials sciences, among others. However, engineering design is different since
its theories and hypothesis cannot be tested by laboratory experiments; it involves
broader considerations like people and organizations. This gives it engineering
design the title of technology.
In Hurst [4] can be found a definition of engineering design. It is defined as
the total activity necessary to establish and define solutions to problems not
solved before, or new solutions to problems which have previously been solved in a
different way. The same author mentions the main characteristics of engineering
design as trans-disciplinary, highly complex and iterative.
Hubka [1] gives a definition for design as a noun and as a verb. For the first
one, meaning the outward appearance and pattern of objects, artifacts, systems,
products. This involves studying how and why things look and behave the way they are,
including the possibility of mathematics or computer based analysis. As a verb, it
is defined as a process of establishing which of several alternative ways things
could be done, which of these is most promising, and how to implement that choice,
with continual reviews, additions and corrections to the work.
The design research can be considered from the physical embodiment, as a human
activity, from the meaning and purpose of the creation, from the embodiment of
configurations and as the systematic search and acquisition of knowledge. According
to Bayazit [3], the objectives of the design research are the study, research and
investigation of the artificial made by human beings, and the way these activities
have been directed either in academic studies or manufacturing organizations. This
agrees with the definition that can be found in an Oxford dictionary, which defines
design as to conceive a mental plan for something. In this way, previous
definitions converge into the idea of Boyle et.al. [5] of design as an intelligent
and imaginative manipulation of, or intervention in, our material and non material
environments.
Kroes [6] and Hubka [1] agree in the fact that there are two paradigms within
design research: design as a rational activity for problem solving and design as a
reflective practice. Kroes also makes a difference between design methodology and
research methodology; being the first concept process oriented and the later concept
more descriptive and product oriented.
The process of designing is dependent on the object that is to be designed, but
it can be studied and presented in a general form. Hubka [1] states that the design
process can be taught if certain conditions are present, being the basic of these
the existence of the theory, and the right educational methods and media. This is
the main idea behind the creation of many design institutes in universities around
the world.

Systematic design
Pugh [7] defines design under the concept of total design, as the systematic
activity developed to satisfy a necessity and covers all the stages, from the
identification of the necessity to the selling of the final product. As the
definition says, it is a systematic process which requires a methodology to define
the steps to be followed by the designer. In this way, Chaur [8] mentions the
definition of design methodology given by Nigel Cross as the study of the
principles, practices and procedures of design in a wide sense. Its central
objective is related with the how to design, and includes the study of how
designers work and think; the establishment of appropriate structures for the design
process, and the reflection about the nature and extension of design knowledge and
its application to design problems.
According to Cross [9], these design methodologies can be classified into two
groups: descriptive and prescriptive; these two compliment the previous two stated
by Takeda [10]: cognitive and computational. Descriptive models show the sequence of
activities that occur in design, like the basic model and the French model. The
prescriptive, as it name says, prescribes a pattern of design activities. The
cognitive explains the behavior of the designer; while the computational express the
way a computer could develop the design task.
A design methodology, according to Pahl and Beitz [11], must encourage a problem
directed approach; foster understanding and inventiveness; be compatible with the
concepts, findings and methods of other disciplines, not rely on finding solutions
by chance and reflect the findings of modern ergonomics and cognitive psychology,
among others. This leads to a solution in a faster and direct way. Systematic design
gives an effective way to make the design and production process a more rational
view.
The Total Design method, proposed by Pugh [7], is based on a descriptive sense
of the process, composed by generic activities (valid for any product to be designed)
like market analysis, conceptual design, detail design, manufacturing and selling.
Besides the nucleus, there are specifications of design that are those
particular characteristics related to the concrete study case and that delimit the
range of the nucleus of the design. But the main characteristics of this model are:
the necessary interaction of as many disciplines as it is necessary to solve the
problem, being these technical disciplines or not; the clear definition of the
design specifications that are going to be taken in consideration during the entire
process and that defines the frontier of design; and the continuous approach to
the solution through the feedback that leads to alternate states of divergence
(concepts generation) and convergence (systematic evaluation). This gradual approach
to the solution is denominated by Pugh as controlled convergence method and uses
a valuation matrix that compares the solution alternatives with the previously
established criteria.
Capuz Rizo [12] mentions other terms referring to this method used by authors
who have written about the topic, such as concurrent engineering, simultaneous
engineering, collaborative engineering, engineering for life cycle, integrated
engineering or integrated product development, according to the environment where it
is used. The terms concurrent and simultaneous remark the parallelism between the
product design and the process design; the term concurrent was first used by the
military industry in the United States of America. The term life cycle is used to
highlight the influences that over the design have other factors different to the
manufacturing process: reliability, safety, economy of use and maintenance, and
reduction of environmental impact, among others. Collaborative remarks the aspects
of teamwork, multidisciplinary communication and multidepartment collaboration; when
the focus of the definition is over the importance of the computer tools for the
coordination of teams and the simultaneous activities, then the word integrated can
be used.
The systematic design, or total design, is proposed as an alternative to the
classical design and manufacturing paradigm. In this model, each stage of the design
process is developed consecutively, in a way that each stage of the sequence
doesnt begin until the previous is concluded. If during the process an error is
noticed, it goes back to the corresponding stage. This process is relatively slow
and doesnt promote the interdepartmental cooperation. As explained before, the
total design, through the multidisciplinary communication and cooperation, lets
parallel stages to be developed at the same time, ensuring the transmission of
information between departments.

Simulation method
The activity of indirectly exploring the behavior of any system through a
prototype has been used for a long time. Since the Greek civilization [13], this has
been done to obtain valid knowledge within given limits and assumptions. And,
because this activity requires the construction of a prototype or model, is the
nature of this model (physical or abstract) what has conditioned this activity.
Despite the tradition, it was not until the 20
th
century when the activity was
systematized and denominated as simulation and included in a knowledge field.
This inclusion took in consideration the big analogy between the simulation process
and the scheme of the scientific method, the created necessity, after the World War
II, of optimizing every activity and the development of computers that allowed doing
mathematical calculations at a never seen speed.
Ingalls [14] mentions the definition of simulation given by Shannon, he defines
it as the process of designing a model of a real system and conducting experiments
with this model for the purpose either of understanding the behavior of the system
or of evaluating various strategies (within the limits imposed by a criterion or set
of criteria) for the operation of the system. According to Garzon [15], the
simulation is part of the operational investigation; it presents two well defined
fields: first the programming (mathematical) and, second the simulation (also
mathematical).
The mathematical programming consists mainly in structuring mathematical models
of various characteristics, with input and output values; with an objective function
to be maximized or minimized (depending on the requirement of each design), subject
to a series of established restrictions such as algebraic equations (linear or
nonlinear), differential equations (ordinary or partial), finite differences or
integrations.
The mathematical simulation consists in experimenting with the models generated
by the mathematical programming, giving values to the input variables and observing
the output values; it means it is the experimental branch of the operational
investigation. The input and output of the simulation are abstract values for the
variable that are being managed and not strictly quantities that can be measured
using instruments. The simulation in operational investigation is an abstract
laboratory where the designer can experiment with the information.
To simulate is not the same to optimize, as it will be explained further in this
paper; it consists more precisely in perturbing or stimulating a model to, according
to its main structure, reflect the corresponding characteristics and effects given
by the received stimulus, according to the interpretation given in the model.
The mathematical simulation, besides requiring a mathematical model, makes use
of a solution sequence that allows, for each chosen group of values for the input
data, to organize the calculus and grant to obtain the values for the output data.
If this sequence is not available, algorithms must be used to develop internally
that sequence.
The simulation process has two stages, synthesis and analysis, in a sequence,
tending to optimize the process to satisfy given criteria. Between stages fast
calculations are to be done; this is what links simulation with the design process,
because, thanks to this fast response it lets explore multiple possibilities during
the synthesis stage, helping to improve the design configuration.
In the synthesis stage it is developed a new technological alternative for the
process in matter; this way a new concept of the structure is obtained or new values
for the operation conditions, over the base of the same structure. During the
analysis stage these results are analyzed and compared with the criteria of
optimization established to evaluate the feasibility of the option.
In this point can be clearly identified the relationship and difference between
simulation and design. The simulation gives fast answers to multiple calculus
problems, while the design implies to define values to those variables that are
chosen to deal with the degrees of freedom, through criteria developed by the
experience or by optimization theory.

Optimization method
The simulation method is a powerful tool that lets designers to model a
determined problem as a function that can give numerical values according to some
variables. But in the most of the cases design is made for a specific case that
require specific results: the shortest distance, the fastest speed, the biggest
capacity or the lightest structure. For this step of the design process another
method is introduced now.
The majority of the problems in the real world have many solutions, and some
have infinite solutions. The purpose of the optimization is to find and identify the
best solution, among all the possible solutions, for a given problem, in terms of
any criteria of effectiveness or performance. From a mathematical point of view,
optimization can be defined as the process of finding the conditions that give the
maximum or minimum value of a function [16]. Many of the design processes can be
modeled as a function, which shows the behavior of machines, heat, flows or the
shape of structures. Since the invention of the calculus, by Isaac Newton and
Gottfried Leibnitz, different methods have been developed for obtaining the minimum
value of these functions, which can vary from sophisticated mathematical procedures
(both analytical and numerical) to the simple but smart application of arithmetic.
In the structural field, one of the first problems where the mathematical
optimization techniques were used is the general truss design problem. Rao [16]
explains that, among others, the principal solution techniques used for this kind of
problem are the optimality criteria approach and the mathematical programming. The
first technique, the optimality criteria approach, is based on the principle that
the optimum structure will present certain known characteristics. On the other hand,
the mathematical programming technique assumes that there are no imposed initial
conditions upon the optimum; since there is no previous information about the
optimum structure, a very general search technique is then used for arriving to the
optimum result.
The actual interest in optimization can be traced back to the World War II [16],
when the British army developed a system to assign resources in a fast and low-cost
way. These lead to the creation of the concept of operations research. Rao [11]
defines it as a branch of mathematics concerned with the application of scientific
methods and techniques to decision making problems and with establishing the best or
optimal solutions. Linear programming was the solution for the British armys
problem. Messler [17] defines it as an optimization method applicable for the
solution of problems in which the objective function and the constraints appear as
linear functions of the decision variables. It is considered a revolutionary
development that allows making optimal decisions in complex situations. Its
contribution to the science is so valuable that four Nobel prizes have been awarded
for research using linear programming.
Many applications can be mentioned among the linear programming. Maybe the
earliest is the oil industry, where it is used to define quantities of different
kinds of fuel to be produced, in order to get the highest profit. It has been used
also in manufacturing industry for the analysis of inventories of production. Other
industries are the food-processing, the iron and steel, the paper and the civil
aviation.
For many years, the simplex method was the main process used to solve and
analyze linear programming problems. In 1984 Karmarkar [16] proposed a method for
solving large scale linear programming problems in a more efficient way. It is
classified among the interior methods because the points generated by this algorithm
are located in the interior of the feasible space. Although several other methods
have been developed over the years for solving LP problems, the simplex method
continues to be the most efficient and popular method for solving general LP
problems. Karmarkar has been shown to be up to 50 times as fast as the simplex
algorithm.
According to Rao [16], Karmarkars method is based on the following two
observations:
1- If the current solution is near the center of the polytope of solutions, we
can move along the steepest descent direction to reduce the value of f by a
maximum amount.
2- The solution space can always be transformed without changing the nature of
the problem so that the current solution lies near the center of the polytope.

The optimization problems can be classified based on the existence of
constraints, on the physical structure of the problem, on the nature of the
equations involved, on the permissible values of the design variables, on the
deterministic nature of the variables, on the separability of the functions, on the
number of objective functions or based on the nature of the design variables. For
the last classification, the problem is to find values to a set of design parameters
that make some prescribed function of these parameters minimum subject to certain
constraints. This is the classification that suits the truss design problem.
Palambros and Wilde [18] propose another classification, assuming that an
optimization problem is someway defined. They define three classifications:
analytical methods using differential calculus (not enough for nonlinear problems),
numerical methods like algorithms (iterative processes) and others like graphical
methods.
The optimization of the mathematical representation of real processes has two
types of difficulties: the formulation of the mathematical modeling (representation
of the function to be optimized) and the technique of solution. For the last, has to
be considered the existence of some local and global extreme values; it is supposed
that the coefficients and variables of the model (objective function) are not random
variables; and the rounding errors have to be considered too.

Finite Element Method
After the simulation and the modeling of the problem and then the optimization
to obtain the desired characteristics for the structure, another method can be used
to predict the behavior of the final design. The finite element method is widely
used in civil and aeronautical engineering, as well as in mechanical engineering,
for the analysis of stress, deformation and fluid mechanics. It has been so
successful that experimental methods such as brittle coatings, strain gauges or
photo elastic effects are now considered obsolete.
Many engineering problems are either very difficult or impossible to be solved
using conventional analytical methods. These methods involve finding mathematical
equations that can define the required variables, like the stress distribution or
the velocity of a fluid. In previous years it was a common practice to simplify
these problems to a point where analytical solutions could be obtained; solutions
that had a little resemblance to the solution of the real problem. In short, most
problems in engineering and science can only be solved numerically using what is
known as numerical analysis employing numerical methods. The overall purpose of the
field of numerical analysis is to design and asses techniques that give approximate,
but quite accurate, solutions to complicated problems.
The availability of high capacity digital computers has had a big impact in the
use of numerical methods for the solution of engineering problems. Finite element
method is among the most versatile classes of these numerical methods. It was first
used in the structural analysis and since then it has achieved great success in the
engineering field, demonstrating its suitability in continuum mechanics like heat
transfer.
First developed in 1943 by Richard Courant, he used the Ritz method of numerical
analysis and minimization to obtain approximated solutions for a vibration system.
Later in 1956, Turner, Clough, Martin and Topp published an article where they
established a wider definition of numerical analysis. Its topic was the rigidity and
deformation of complex structures [19].
The main idea behind the finite element method is the application of discrete
solutions on finite element spaces to approximate the continuous solutions on an
infinite dimension space, this using the variational principle. It involves dividing
the physical systems into small sub regions or elements. Each one of these elements
is a simple unit and its behavior can be readily analyzed. A characteristic of the
finite element method is that it poses different levels of complexity, from
sophisticated methods to straightforward ones, so the method can be adapted to the
complexity of the problem. This can be done using large number of elements, instead
of resorting the mathematical expressions required by other analytical solutions.
Maybe one of the main advantages of finite element methods is the ease how they can
be applied to problems that involve geometrically complicated systems. However, this
flexibility requires the use of a large amount of numerical computations; larger
number of elements increases the sets of simultaneous algebraic equations to be
solved, and this can only be done efficiently with the aid of high capacity
computers.
Nowadays the finite element method is widely used in the industry and many new
research papers can be found often. The computers have given the effective tool to
solve the multiple equations that finite element method presents, whose practical
development has been proportional to the advances in the computers architecture.
Besides allowing the decentralization of the finite elements software, has
contributed to spread its use through sophisticated graphical suites that facilitate
the modeling and synthesis of results. Now it is possible the intelligent connection
between the techniques of structural analysis, computer assisted design and
manufacturing techniques.

Conclusion
The design can be well described in two main objectives: problem solving and
decision making. As it was explained along the present paper, since the World War I
the engineering community has been interested in developing guidelines for the
solution of actual and new problems. Since then, this effort has helped engineers
from around the world to create new designs in a faster way, helping them to choose
the best existent methodology for a specific kind of problem, without the time
consuming task of creating a new methodology. This can be the explanation of why the
humanity achieved so many advances in a short time: spaceships on the Moon,
airplanes than flight faster than the sound, satellites, submarines, skyscrapers,
worldwide computer networks... maybe more advances than the rest of the history of
humanity together.
There is much more work to be done in the design research field as it is always
evolving. The influence of other areas of science, like chemistry or information
technologies, gives not only new tools for the solution of problems and for making
decisions during some or all of the stages of the design process, but also
sophisticated materials that let engineers to change the way they design structures.
Although this paper focuses on a specific problem and the methods for solving it,
it would be interesting to do further research to find out alternative methodologies
used by different authors.

References

[1] V. Hubka and W. E. Eder, Design Science: introduction to the Needs, Scope and Organization
of Engineering Design Knowledge, London: Springer, 1995.
[2] K. Nagase and R. Skelton, "Double Helical Tensegrity Structures," in Multi-scale Modeling and
Characterization of Innovative Materials and Structures, Cetara, 2013.
[3] N. Bayazit, "Investigating Design: A review of forty years of design research," Design Issues,
vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 16-30, 2004.
[4] K. S. Hurst, Engineering Design Principles, London: Arnold, 1999.
[5] G. Boyle, C. Cooke, N. Cross, J. Forster, G. Leslie, E. Rhodes, J. Rooney, R. Roy, G. Rzevski, P.
Steadman and D. Walker, T204 Design: Principles and Practice Course Team, London: The
Open University, 1995.
[6] P. Kroes, "Design methodology and the nature of technical artefacts," Design Studies, vol. 23,
no. 3, pp. 287-302, 2002.
[7] S. Pugh, Total Design. Integrated Methods for Successful Product Engineering, Wokingham:
Addison-Wesley Pub. Co., 1990.
[8] J. Chaur Bernal, Diseo conceptual de productos asistidos por ordenador: Un estudio analtico
sobre aplicaciones y definicin de la estructura bsica de un nuevo programa, Barcelona:
Universidad Politcnica de Catalua, 2004.
[9] N. Cross, Mtodos de diseo. Estrategias para el diseo de productos, Mxico: Limusa Wiley,
1999.
[10] H. e. Takeda, "Modeling Design Process," AI Magazine, no. 11, pp. 37-48, 1990.
[11] G. Pahl and W. Beitz, Engineering Design: A Systematic Approach, Glasgow: Springer-Verlag
London Ltd., 1996.
[12] S. Capuz Rizo, Introduccin al proyecto de produccin. Ingeniera concurrente para el diseo
del producto, Valencia: Editorial Universidad Politcnica de Valencia, 1999.
[13] D. Bogoya Maldonado, "Naturaleza de la simulacin," Ingeniera e Investigacin, vol. 33, pp. 7-
15, 1996.
[14] R. G. Ingalls, "Introduction to simulation," in Proceedings of the 2008 Winter Simulation
Conference, Phoenix, 2008.
[15] C. A. Garzn Gaitn, Sistemas integrados de informacin para produccin, Bogot:
Universidad Nacional de Colombia, 2006.
[16] S. S. Rao, Engineering optimization: theory and practice, 4 ed., New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons,
Inc., 2009.
[17] J. Robert W. Messler, Engineering Problem-Solving 101, New York: McGraw-Hill, 2013.
[18] P. Y. Palambros and D. J. Wilde, Principles of Optimal Design: Modeling and Computation,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
[19] M. Turner, R. Clough, H. Martin and L. Topp, "Stiffness and Deflection Analysis of Complex
Structures," Journal of Aeronautical Science, vol. 9, no. 23, pp. 805-823, 1956.
[20] A. B. Templeman, "Optimum Truss Design Using Approximating Functions," in Symposium on
Optimization in Structural Design, Warsow, 1973.