Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Optimal design of planar slider-crank mechanism using teaching-learning-based optimization algorithm

  • Published:
Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, a two stage optimization technique is presented for optimum design of planar slider-crank mechanism. The slidercrank mechanism needs to be dynamically balanced to reduce vibrations and noise in the engine and to improve the vehicle performance. For dynamic balancing, minimization of the shaking force and the shaking moment is achieved by finding optimum mass distribution of crank and connecting rod using the equimomental system of point-masses in the first stage of the optimization. In the second stage, their shapes are synthesized systematically by closed parametric curve, i.e., cubic B-spline curve corresponding to the optimum inertial parameters found in the first stage. The multi-objective optimization problem to minimize both the shaking force and the shaking moment is solved using Teaching-learning-based optimization algorithm (TLBO) and its computational performance is compared with Genetic algorithm (GA).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. H. Chaudhary and S. K. Saha, Dynamics and balancing of multibody systems, Springer-Verlag, Berlin (2009).

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. G. G. Lowen, F. R. Tepper and R. S. Berkof, Balancing of linkages–an update, Mechanism and Machine Theory, 18 (3) (1983) 213–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. V. H. Arakelian and M. R. Smith, Shaking force and shaking moment balancing of mechanisms: a historical review with new examples, ASME Journal of Mechanical Design, 127 (2005) 334–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. V. V. Wijk, J. L. Herder and B. Demeulenaere, Comparison of various dynamic balancing principles regarding additional mass and additional inertia, ASME Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics, 1 (2009) 041006-1-9.

  5. M. J. Walker and K. Oldham, A general theory of force balancing using counterweights, Mechanism and Machine Theory, 13 (1978) 175–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. F. R. Tepper and G. G. Lowen, General theorems concerning full force balancing of planar linkages by internal mass redistribution, ASME Journal of Engineering for Industry, 94 (3) (1972) 789–796.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. I. S. Kochev, A new general method for full force balancing of planar linkages, Mechanism and Machine Theory, 23 (6) (1988) 475–480.

    Google Scholar 

  8. G. G. Lowen, F. R. Tepper and R. S. Berkof, The quantitative influence of complete force balancing on the forces and moments of certain families of four-bar linkages, Mechanism and Machine Theory, 9 (1974) 299–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. R. S. Berkof, Complete force and moment balancing of inline four-bar linkage, Mechanism and Machine Theory, 8 (1973) 397–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. G. Feng, Complete shaking force and shaking moment balancing of 26 types of four-, five-and six-bar linkages with prismatic pairs, Mechanism and Machine Theory, 25 (2) (1990) 183–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. I. Esat and H. Bahai, A theory of complete force and moment balancing of planar linkage mechanisms, Mechanism and Machine Theory, 34 (1999) 903–922.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. C. Bagci, Complete shaking force and shaking moment balancing of link mechanisms using balancing idler loops, ASME Journal of Mechanical Design, 104 (1982) 482–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. T. W. Lee and C. Cheng, Optimum balancing of combined shaking force, shaking moment, and torque fluctuations in high speed linkages, ASME Journal of Mechanisms, Transmissions, and Automation in Design, 106 (2) (1984) 242–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. H. Chaudhary and S. K. Saha, Balancing of four-bar mechanisms using maximum recursive dynamic algorithm, Mechanism and Machine Theory, 42 (2) (2007) 216–232.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Z. Li, Sensitivity and robustness of mechanism balancing, Mechanism and Machine Theory, 33 (7) (1998) 1045–1054.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. M. R. Farmani, A. Jaamialahmadi and M. Babaie, Multiobjective optimization for force and moment balance of a four bar linkage using evolutionary algorithms, Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology, 25 (12) (2011) 2971–2977.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. S. Erkaya, Investigation of balancing problem for a planar mechanism using genetic algorithm, Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology, 27 (7) (2013) 2153–2160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. K. Chaudhary and H. Chaudhary, Dynamic balancing of planar mechanisms using genetic algorithm, Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology, 28 (10) (2014) 4213–4220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. B. Feng, N. Morita and T. Torii, A new optimization method for dynamic design of planar linkage with clearances at joints, ASME Journal of Mechanical Design, 124 (2002) 68–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. H. Azegami, L. Zhou, K. Umemura and N. Kondo, Shape optimization for a link mechanism, Structural Multidiscipline Optimization, 48 (1) (2013) 115–125.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. D. Xu and G. K. Ananthasuresh, Freeform skeletal shape optimization of compliant mechanisms, ASME Journal of Mechanical Design, 125 (2003) 253–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. G. Yoganand and D. Sen, Link geometry synthesis for prescribed inertia, Proc. of 15 th National Conference on Machines and Mechanisms, IIT Madras, India (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  23. Y. M. Xie and G. P. Steven, Evolutionary structural optimization for dynamic problems, Computers and Structures, 58 (6) (1996) 1067–1073.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Y. Kim, A. Tan, B. Yang, W. Kim, B. Choi and Y. An, Optimum shape design of rotating shaft by ESO method, Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology, 21 (2007) 1039–1047.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. D. Sen, S. Chowdhury and S. R. Pandey, Geometric design of interference-free planar linkages, Mechanism and Machine Theory, 39 (2004) 737–759.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. G. N. Sandor and A. G. Erdman, Advanced Mechanism Design–Analysis and Synthesis, Vol. 2, Prentice Hall, New Jersey (1984).

  27. F. Freudenstein, Approximate synthesis of four-bar linkages, Resonance, 15 (8) (2010) 740–767.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. A. A. Sherwood and B. A. Hockey, The optimization of mass distribution in mechanisms using dynamically similar systems, Journal of Mechanisms, 4 (1968) 243–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. N. C. Huang, Equimomental system of rigidly connected equal particles, Journal of Guidance, Control and Dynamics, 16 (6) (1983) 1194–1196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. J. J. Crisco and R. D. McGovern, Effective calculation of mass moments of inertia for segmented homogenous threedimensional objects, Journal of Biomechanics, 31 (1998) 97–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. M. E. Mortenson, Geometric modeling, McGraw Hill Education (India) Private Limited, New Delhi, India (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  32. I. Zeid and R. Sivasubramanian, Cad/Cam–Theory and practice, Tata McGraw-Hill, New Delhi, India (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  33. S. Brlek, G. Labelle and A. Lacasse, The discrete green theorem and some applications in discrete geometry, Theoretical Computer Science, 346 (2005) 220–225.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  34. R. T. Marler and J. S. Arora, Survey of multi-objective optimization methods for engineering, Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 26 (6) (2004) 369–395.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  35. J. Mariappan and S. Krishnamurty, A generalised exact gradient method for mechanism synthesis, Mechanism and Machine Theory, 31(4) (1996) 413–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. K. Deb, Optimization for engineering design–algorithms and examples, PHI learning private limited, New Delhi (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  37. Y. Gao, L. Shi, and P. Yao, Study on multi-objective genetic algorithm, Proc. of 3 rd World Congress on Intelligent Control and Automation, Hefei, China (2000).

    Google Scholar 

  38. J. S. Arora, Introduction to optimum design, McGraw-Hill Book Company, Singapore (1989).

    Google Scholar 

  39. R. V. Rao and V. J. Savsani, Mechanical design optimization using advanced optimization techniques, Springer-Verlag London, UK (2012).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  40. R. V. Rao and G. G. Waghmare, A comparative study of a teaching–learning-based optimization algorithm on multiobjective unconstrained and constrained functions, Journal of King Saud University–Computer and Information Sciences, 26 (2014) 332–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. K. Deb, An efficient constraint handling method for genetic algorithm, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 186 (2000) 311–336.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  42. R. V. Rao, V. J. Savsani and D. P. Vakharia, Teachinglearning-based optimization: A novel method for constrained mechanical design optimization problems, Computer-Aided Design, 43 (2011) 303–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. V. Arakelian and S. Briot, Simultaneous inertia force/moment balancing and torque compensation of slider -crank mechanisms, Mechanics Research Communications, 37 (2010) 265–269.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  44. R. T. Marler and J. S. Arora, The weighted sum method for multi-objective optimization: new insights, Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 41 (2010) 853–862.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Malaviya National Institute of Technology Jaipur, Jaipur, India

    Kailash Chaudhary & Himanshu Chaudhary

Authors
  1. Kailash Chaudhary
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Himanshu Chaudhary
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kailash Chaudhary.

Additional information

Recommended by Associate Editor Cheolung Cheong

Kailash Chaudhary received B.E. from University of Rajasthan Jaipur and M.E. from Jai Narain Vyas University Jodhpur both in Mechanical Engineering. He is currently a Ph.D. scholar in Mechanical Engineering department at Malaviya National Institute of Technology Jaipur, India. His research area is dynamic balancing and shape optimization of planar mechanisms.

Himanshu Chaudhary is an Associate Professor in Mechanical Engineering at Malaviya National Institute of Technology Jaipur (Rajasthan, India). He received his B.E. from Rajasthan Technical University Kota (erstwhile Engineering College Kota) and M.Tech. from Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Kanpur both in Mechanical Engineering. He received his Ph.D. from Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Delhi in 2007. His research interests include Multibody System Dynamics, Dynamic Balancing and Optimization of Machines and Mechanisms including Robotic Systems.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chaudhary, K., Chaudhary, H. Optimal design of planar slider-crank mechanism using teaching-learning-based optimization algorithm. J Mech Sci Technol 29, 5189–5198 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12206-015-1119-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12206-015-1119-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation