paper

© All Rights Reserved

0 views

paper

© All Rights Reserved

- Evolutionary Algorithms in Engineering and Computer Science
- Optimization Kanban
- Optimizing design of spring using genetic algorithm full report
- Bio-Inspired Computational Algorithms and Their Applications
- Time Table Generation Projects in java
- xm81
- Cec2013 Lsgo Benchmark Tech Report
- matlab ga
- Shared Crossover Method for Solving Traveling Salesman Problem
- Three Interconnected Parameters for Genetic Algorithms
- Darwin
- HEUR-D-16-00224_3.pdf
- Face Liveness Detection for Biometric Antispoofing Applications using Color Texture and Distortion Analysis Features
- METHODS FOR DECIPHERING THE ZODIAC 340-CIPHER
- Ji 2516561662
- journal on diaphram walls
- Exam Timetabling Problem Using Genetic Algorithm
- PHASE BALANCING USING HEREFORD RANCH ALGORITHM
- 18-xvalen03
- rp038_ICEEN2011-N081

You are on page 1of 6

Kemal Keskin

Abdurrahman Karamancioglu

Eskisehir Osmangazi University

Eskisehir, Turkey

Email: kkeskin@ogu.edu.tr

Eskisehir Osmangazi University

Eskisehir, Turkey

Email: akaraman@ogu.edu.tr

concerns have increased importance of energy-efficient transportation. In this manuscript, an energy-efficient train operation

based on finding optimal speed profile is studied. As a natureinspired metaheuristic approach, Firefly algorithm is employed

to find optimal switching points of the train control signal. In

problem formulation, energy consumption is taken as major part

of objective function and travel time is being included as penalty

factor. In order to verify the obtained results, a simulation is

performed. Besides firefly algorithm, genetic algorithm is also

used to compare results. Two algorithms are simulated on test

track with various grade profiles for several times. Both of

them considered four phases (maximum acceleration, cruising,

coasting and braking) of train motion. Furthermore with the

help of relaxing boundary conditions, algorithms are able to

organize motion phases excluding cruising phase. Simulation

results demonstrated that, compared to the GA, FA provides

more accurate and persistent solutions. In addition, it can be

converged to solution in small iterations, so it is compatible for

using in real time problem solving.

KeywordsFirefly algorithm, train operation, energy efficiency

I. I NTRODUCTION

Due to their high capacity, comfort, safety and low energy

consumption railway systems has taken a significant place

in urban transportation. Investments on urban rail transit

increases day by day. For example in Turkey, urban rail transit

stood just in a few cities at the beginning of this century. But

nowadays, it has increased to 21 cities with total distance

over 750 kilometers. Extension of rail network requires to

add new trains to inventory. It is clear that the major part

of energy consumption in a urban rail transit system is due

to trains. From this point of view, growing energy demand

and environmental concerns has drawn attention to energy

efficiency in rail transportation.

Studies on energy efficient train operation problems have

been a focus of the researchers for decades. As a milestone

in 1968, Ichikawa studied optimal control of train problem

by utilizing maximum principle [1]. The author considered

optimal train operation problem as a bounded state variable

problem. In order to provide energy efficiency, Pontragins

maximum principle was applied. Hoang et al. proposed an

heuristic optimization algorithm to reduce energy consumption

and direct search method was utilized to confirm tunnel

trajectories [2]. The relation between speed profile for given

trajectory and energy consumption of train was realized [4],

specific points - it can be called as critical speed values may help to reduce energy consumption. In this manner, four

motion phases (maximum acceleration, cruising, coasting and

braking) were defined based on throttle formation. Howlett

showed four phases should be applied successively in order to

decrease fuel consumption [4], [5], [6]. Maximum principle

was used in another research to give an analytical solution

of finding optimal control sequences and equations which

satisfy energy efficient movement of train between successive

stations within fixed time [7]. Also Khmelnitsky was studied to

provide an analytical solution by utilizing maximum principle.

In addition to other research, variable grade levels and speed

limits were considered [8].

Since energy efficient train operation problem consists of

not only discrete but also continuous terms together, it is

complicated such that analytical methods are hard to apply.

In recent years, development in technology have attracted

researchers to use several evolutionary and search algorithms.

Genetic Algorithm (GA) is one of the metaheuristic algorithms

which was utilized frequently in optimal train operation problems. During coasting phase there is no traction force affects

train motion, so energy is not consumed. Finding coasting

points plays a key role in energy saving train operation. In this

manner, Chang and Sim presented a GA based method in the

sense of time and service quality concerns. The authors defined

penalty factors to add these concerns into problem formulation

[9]. GA was compared with Artificial Neural Network (ANN)

in a real test path to confirm its performance [10]. However

GA and Simulated Annealing (SA) differ each other basically,

they can be combined to create a powerful algorithm. An

hybrid algorithm which was based on GA and SA combination

was proposed and used to find cruising and coasting points

[11]. Dynamic programming (DP) method solves optimal

control problems by breaking it down into a collection of

simpler subproblems and gives high accurate results [12].

Miyatake and Ko first formulated train operation as an optimal

control problem and then applied DP, gradient method and

sequential quadratic programming to solve it [13]. Particle

swarm optimization (PSO) is a metaheuristic search algorithm

with advantage of fast convergence. Dominguez et al. used

PSO in the sense of multi objective optimization of automatic

train operation system design. The authors considered not only

692

service quality [14].

In recent years metaheuristic algorithms which are inspired

by nature has attracted a great deal of attention for solving global optimization problems. One of the nature-inspired

metaheuristic algorithm is Firefly Algorithm (FA). Algorithm

basically takes its main idea from flashing action of fireflies

and it was first formulated by Xin-She Yang [15]. Even though

FA is a new method and has not applied to optimal train

operation problem previously, it has drawn attentions of many

optimization researchers in different areas for instance, [16],

[17], [18], [19].

II. T RAIN M ODEL F ORMULATION

Energy efficient train operation might be satisfied with welldefined train model and train operation. A train model can

be described based on basic physics formulations especially

Newtons second law.

70

position of the train, Ft is the traction force which is bounded

with maximum traction force Ftmax , 0 Ft Ftmax , Fb is

the braking force which is considered mostly taken a constant

value, R, Rg , Rc are all resistances against to train motion,

basic resistance, resistance caused by track grade, resistance

caused by curves respectively.

In practice basic resistance R includes air and rolling

resistances. It is substantially depends on speed of train and

can be formulated by utilizing Davis equation [20].

R = a + b v + c v2

(2)

characteristics. Grade resistance Rg caused by track grade. It

takes positive value for uphill parts of track and takes negative

value for downhill parts of track. Rg can be calculated as

follows:

Rg = m g sin

(3)

Curve resistance Rc does not have an explicit formulation. In

order to calculate Rc , Roeckls formula [21] can be used.

6.3

m

r 55

4.9

Rc =

m

r 30

Rc =

for

r 300m.

for

r < 300m.

60

(1)

(4)

Speed(km/h)

dx

=v

dt

Ft Fb

dv

=

R Rg Rc

dt

m

During an operation, energy consumption of train mainly

depends on how to operate train through the track. According

to the reference [6], considering a flat, straight and long track,

an optimal train operation must have four motion phases:

maximum acceleration (MA), cruising (CR), coasting (CO),

and braking (BR).

As shown in Fig. 1, at the beginning of motion MA phase

is applied to start train up and reach the cruising speed as fast

as possible. Note that, at some point, it switches to CR phase

and train goes on its journey with a fixed speed value. CO is

a significant phase of train operation for energy efficiency. It

is applied between CR and BR phases. In CR phase, there is

no speed change so acceleration is equal to zero. Train moves

throughout the travel under already gained momentum. When

safe stopping distance is reached, train starts to braking. In

order to provide safe stopping at next stop, BR phase must

start at this point.

50

40

30

20

10

MA

Station 1

CR

CO

Position(m)

BR

Station 2

manner, it is clear that coasting phase is the most economic

one since no energy is consumed in this phase. However employing coasting phase helps to decrease energy consumption,

it dramatically causes increment of travel time.

Motors of train produce a force which is called as tractive

effort to supply train motion via tractive force. Tractive effort

is a function of trains speed and it can be calculated as follows

P

(5)

v

where P is locomotives power, is the transformation

constant refers to converting motor power to traction effort,

v is the current speed of train and 2650 is for unit conversion

[2].

With the help of this equation, tractive effort and also

consumed power can be calculated as follows. From (5), the

consumed power (P) is defined by the following equation.

Ft = 2650

P =

693

Ft v

2650

(6)

consumption, power is integrated over time.

Z T

E=

P dt

(7)

0

Considering the continuous time system dynamics in differential equations (1), state variables can be transformed into

discrete time in time interval [0, T ] for N steps as,

vk+1 = vk + ak t

vk + vk+1

t

xk+1 = xk +

2

k {0, , N }

(8)

train at step k respectively. t represents step size:

T

t =

N

For k {0, , N }, the quantities Fk and vk determines

instantaneous power at the k th step by (6), and the total

energy consumption throughout the journey is the sum of

consumptions at each step:

E=

A. Genetic Algorithm

As one of evolutionary algorithms, the genetic algorithm,

is a kind of heuristic search method that is used widely for

finding global optimum solutions. Genetic algorithm has been

utilized to find a solution for optimization problems in various

research areas such as optimal control problem, timetable

problems, vehicle routing problems, power electronics design.

Specifically considering works related to railway systems can

be found in [2], [9], [10], [11].

Genetic algorithms search procedure is inspired by natural genetics analogically. Algorithm starts with an initial

population including chromosomes that represent candidate

solutions. Each chromosome is assigned a score with regard

to fitness function (objective function). New generations are

created by applying genetic operators (crossover, mutation)

to chromosomes. In this manner, after several generations,

chromosomes which have better scores survive.When the

termination condition is met, the chromosome with best score

corresponds to optimal or suboptimal solution. A pseudo code

for generic genetic algorithm is given with Algorithm 1 below.

Algorithm 1: Generic Genetic Algorithm

N

X

Fk v k

t

2650

k = 0, 1, , N

(9)

begin

g0

initialization P1 (g)

evaluation P1 (g)

while not termination criteria do

recombination P1 (g) P2 (g)

evaluation P2 (g)

selection P1 (g) and P2 (g) P1 (g + 1)

g g + 1

k=0

Energy consumptions of each phase can be calculated singularly by utilizing formula mentioned above. After that they can

combined together in order to calculate total energy consumption. In MA phase, tractive effort takes attainable maximum

value. It is considered after MA phase CR phase comes. So

the speed value at point k1 stays same until this phase ends. In

this phase Fk value is variable and equals to sum of opposing

resistance values. When train reaches point k2 , CR phase ends

and CO phase starts. For subsequent phases (CO and BR),

no energy is consumed due to zero tractive effort. Therefore,

defining cruising start time as tCR = k1 t and coasting start

time as tCO = k2 t, we can write optimization problem

below as:

k2

k1

X

X

Fk v k

Fk vCR

min

t +

t

tCR ,tCO

2650

2650

k=0

k=k1+1

0 Fk Fmax

0 vk vmax ;

v(0) = 0;

v(N ) = 0

(N k2 )t stopping distance

k1 k2 N

This optimization statement corresponds to a train operation

between successive stations [11].

IV. A LGORITHMS

The genetic algorithm (GA) is the most widely used heuristic algorithm, therefore, it is traditional to compare performances of other heuristic algorithms to the GA. For this reason

a very brief introduction of GA is presented prior to the firefly

algorithm.

B. Firefly Algorithm

Firefly Algorithm is a metaheuristic optimization tool which

is inspired by lightning behaviour of fireflies. It was proposed

by Xin She Yang in 2008 [15]. Algorithm mainly depends

on light intensity changes. Different flashings have various

meanings, constitutively two of them has more importance:

attracting mating partners and attracting the hunt. Additionally,

flashing works as a warning system for external threats [15].

Firefly algorithm has three main rules [15].

1) All fireflies has no gender. Any of them can be attracted

to other fireflies.

2) Attractiveness is comparative to brightness. For instance,

considering two flashing fireflies, one which has less

glitter moves will move towards to more glitter one.

When distance increases, attractiveness and brightness

decrease expectedly. If both fireflies are not glitter

enough to attract other one, then random movement

occurs.

3) The view of objective function defines the brightness of

a firefly. Brightness can basically be relative to the value

694

it can be defined various ways.

823

Vertical

position

(m)

822,5

Two topics are significant for firefly algorithm: light intensity and attractiveness. Basically, the light intensity I(r) can

be defined related to the inverse square law [15]

0.5%

822

0.8%

821,5

- 0.75%

821

Is

I(r) = 2

r

820

between fireflies. Attractiveness is directly related to the light

intensity seen by neighbor fireflies. Let is attractiveness of

a firefly, it can be defined as [15]

= 0 er

k=1

of ith firefly. Finally the movement of firefly i to firefly j is

determined by [15]

2

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

650

700

750

800

850

900

950

1000

1050

1100

1150

1200

1250

1300

1350

1400

1450

1500

1550

1600

1650

1700

819,5

(11)

absorption coefficient. The distance between two fireflies i and

j at points xi and xj can be defined as following [15]

v

u d

uX

rij = kxi xj k = t

(xi,k xj,k )2

(12)

xi = xi + 0 erij (xj xi ) + i ,

0.25%

820,5

(10)

(13)

Considering given three rules and definitions above, algorithms pseudo code is given in Algorithm 2. Detailed information about algorithm can be found in [15]

Algorithm 2: Firefly Algorithm [15]

Objective function f (x), x = (x1 , , xd )T ;

Generate initial population of fireflies xi (i = 1, 2, , n);

Light intensity Ii at xi is determined by f (xi );

Define light absorption coefficient ;

while (t < M axGeneration) do

for i = 1:n all n fireflies do

for i = 1:n all n fireflies do

if (Ii < Ij ) then

Move Firefly i towards j;

end

Vary attractiveness with distance r via

exp[r];

Evaluate new solutions and update light

intensity;

end

end

Rank the fireflies and find the current global best g

end

Postprocess results and visualization

V. E XPERIMENTAL S TUDY

Energy efficient train operation problem is considered for a

test path which has various grade levels and speed limitations.

A train model based on formulations in (1) is implemented

in computer environment. Furthermore a real-like test path is

modeled. Considering all these, switching points for CR and

CO phases are calculated by FA. With proposed speed profile,

train motion is simulated. In order to show its efficiency,

obtained results are compared with GA.

A. Test Environment

During test A light weight tram is modeled which has 571

hp power in total and maximum operating speed is 70 km/h.

A real-like track is modeled with uphill and downhill sections.

Variation in level with regard to track length and also gradient

are given in Figure 2.

The experiments are performed on Intel(R) Core(TM) i74710HQ CPU 2.5 GHz and Microsoft Windows 10 operating

system. A MATLAB program is implemented to simulate train

motion and apply speed profiles.

B. Test I

A track which is 1700 meters in length with two uphill parts

followed by a downhill and an uphill section is designed for

test. It is considered that train operation has all motion phases.

Firefly algorithm is employed as a global optimization tool to

find optimum switching points for CR and CO phases. Initial

parameters for the algorithm are set as follows: population

size: 30, iteration size: 35, alpha: 0.5, beta: 0.2, gamma: 1,

lower bounds [30,1000] and upper bounds [1700,1700]. Here

upper bounds are selected same and in a large interval. The

aim of that is relaxing algorithm to modify number of motion

phases. In other words, CR phase can be omitted from phase

sequence if it is required.

There is a trade off between time and energy consumptions. As one of them rises, then the other one goes down.

Throughout the journey, a time limit is set to satisfy schedule.

In this way, time concerns are taken into account while energy

consumption is minimizing.

In order to optimize energy efficiency of train operation,

FA and GA are employed. Obtained results are given in

695

TABLE I

F IREFLY ALGORITHM TEST RESULTS

Iteration

1

2

3

4

5

242

243

244

244

248

1376

1376

1376

1374

1365

4.86

4.86

4.86

4.86

4.85

133

142

102

88

142

TABLE II

G ENETIC ALGORITHM TEST RESULTS

Iteration

1

2

3

4

5

337

702

414

404

307

1404

1446

1393

1391

1446

5.15

6.21

5.31

5.28

5.20

points which refer to a point that motion phase switches

to another and at the same time energy consumption and

algorithm running time are given in Table I. Table II represents results for genetic algorithm. The energy efficient train

operation problem is solved several times by utilizing both

these algorithms. Metaheuristic algorithms usually can provide

different solutions for same problem. FA differs from others

when it is compared in persistency and accuracy. For instance,

as seen from Table I, all parameters stay roughly same at

each iteration except algorithm running time. For the test,

algorithms function counts are fixed to 1040. Time limit is

defined as a penalty factor and it is taken as 105 seconds.

When energy consumptions are taken into consideration, FA

saves about 8.5% more energy as against GA.

94

183

108

195

190

C. Test II

results show that not only for computational time but also

performance of solution, FA exhibits outstanding performance

in comparison to GA.

696

70

Speed

(km/h)

60

50

40

30

20

10

Firefly Alg.

Genetic Alg.

Time (s)

0

0

3,8

7,6

11,4

15,2

19

22,8

26,6

30,4

34,2

38

41,8

45,6

49,4

53,2

57

60,8

64,6

68,4

72,2

76

79,8

83,6

87,4

91,2

95

98,8

102,6

106,4

110,2

114

117,8

121,6

125,4

129,2

133

136,8

140,6

144,4

148,2

152

155,8

159,6

163,4

167,2

171

174,8

178,6

182,4

186,2

190

193,8

197,6

201,4

205,2

Figure 3 demonstrates stations and path features. There are

two critical curvatures which limit the train speed specifically

at point A and point B, speed is restricted to 35 km/h and

15 km/h respectively. Grade levels of path is also taken into

account, and train stops at all stations.

Genetic and Firefly algorithms were applied to find the

problem with the test conditions described above to the

optimum energy efficient train operation. Function counts for

both algorithms are set to 1000. Travel time is restricted to 205

seconds. Since metaheuristic algorithms may give different

results each run, sufficiently many algorithm runs have been

performed. Figure 4 demonstrates speed vs time graph of two

algorithms results.

When the speed profile found by utilizing FA is applied

to the train, it reached last station in 205 seconds with 8.43

kwh energy consumption. On the other hand, when the GA

solution is applied, it finished the travel in 205 seconds as

well and 8.71 kwh energy consumption. When computational

times of algorithms are compared, FA outperforms GA, more

specifically, FA spends half the time spent by GA. Obtained

VI. C ONCLUSION

In this study, a nature-inspired optimization approach for

energy efficient operation of a train is proposed. As a global

optimization problem, energy efficient train operation problem

can be considered as finding an optimal speed profile. The

objective function is defined as energy consumption along the

journey. Furthermore punctuality and speed limits are taken

into account. GA which is a popular optimization tool and

FA are employed to optimize this problem. Obtained results

showed that FA produces better solution with high accuracy

when it is compared to GA. Besides that even lower function

count size FA preserves its persistency to finding optimal

solution. Therefore FA can be good alternative solver for realtime problems.

R EFERENCES

[1] K. Ichikawa, Application of optimization theory for bounded state

variable problems to the operation of train, Bull. Jpn. Soc. Mech. Eng.,

vol. 11, no. 47, pp. 857-865, Oct. 1968

[2] H. H. Hoang, M. P. Polis, and A. Haurie, Reducing energy consumption

through trajectory optimization for a metro network, IEEE Transactions

on Automatic Control, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 590-595, 1975.

[3] J. Cheng, P. Howlett, Application of Critical Velocities to the Minimisation of Fuel Consumption in the Control of Trains, Automatica, vol.

28, no. 1, pp. 165-169, Jan. 1992.

[4] P. Howlett, An Optimal Strategy for The Control of A Train, J. Austral.

Math. Soc. Ser. B 31, pp. 454-471, 1990.

[5] J. Cheng, P. Howlett, A Note on the Calculation of Optimal Strategies

for the Minimization of Fuel Consumption in the Control of Trains,

IEEE Transaction on Automatic Control, vol. 38, no. 11, pp. 1730-1734,

Nov. 1993.

[6] P. Howlett, The Optimal Control of A Train, Annals of Operations

Research, vol. 98, no. 1-4, pp. 65-87, Dec. 2000.

[7] Liu, R. and Golovitcher, I., Energy-efficient operation of rail vehicles,

Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, vol. 37, no. 10, pp.

917-932, Dec. 2003.

IEEE Transaction on Automatic Control, vol. 45, no. 7, pp. 1257-1266,

Jul. 2000.

[9] C. S. Chang and S. S. Sim, Optimising train movements through

coast control using genetic algorithms, IEE ProceedingsElectric Power

Application, vol. 144, no. 1, pp. 65-73, Jan. 1997.

[10] S. Acikbas, M.T. Soylemez, Coasting point optimisation for mass rail

transit lines using artificial neural networks and genetic algorithms, IET

Electric Power Applications, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 172-182, May 2008.

[11] K. Keskin, A. Karamancioglu, A hybrid optimization algorithm for

energy efficient train operation, Innovations in Intelligent SysTems and

Applications (INISTA), 2015 International Symposium on, pp. 1-6, Sep

2015.

[12] R. Franke, P. Terwiesch, M. Meyer, An algorithm for the optimal control of the driving of trains, Proceedings of the 39th IEEE Conference

on Decision and Control, pp. 2123-2128, Dec. 2000.

[13] M. Miyatake, H. Ko, Optimization of Train Speed Profile for Minimum

Energy Consumption, IEEJ Transactions on Electrical and Electronic

Engineering, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 263-269, May 2010.

[14] M. Dominguez, A. Fernandez-Cardador, A. P. Cucala, T. Gonsalves, A.

Fernandez, Multi objective particle swarm optimization algorithm for

the design of efficient ATO speed profiles in metro lines, Engineering

Applications of Artificial Intelligence, vol. 29 pp. 43-53, Mar. 2014.

[15] X. S. Yang, Nature-Inspired Metaheuristic Algorithms, Luniver Press,

2008.

[16] J. Kwicien, B. Filipowicz, Firefly algorithm in optimization of queueing

systems, Bulletin of The Polish Academy Of Sciences, Technical

Sciences, Vol. 60, No. 2, pp. 363-368, 2012.

[17] M. Mitic, Z. Miljkovic, Bio-inspired approach to learning robot motion trajectories and visual control commands, Expert Systems with

Applications, Vol. 42, pp. 2624-2637, 2015.

[18] K. Tesch, K. Kaczorowska, Arterial cannula shape optimization by

means of the rotational firefly algorithm, Engineering Optimization,

Vol. 48, No. 3, pp. 497-518, 2016.

[19] X. S. Yang, Firefly Algorithm, Levy Flights and Global Optimization,

Research and Development in Intelligent Systems XXVI, pp. 209-218,

2010.

[20] T. Davis, Transportation Energy Data Book, 20th ed. Washington, DC,

2000.

[21] D. Huerlimann, A. B. Nash, OPENTRACK - Simulation of railway

networks, user manual version 1.3., ETH Zurich: Institute for Transportation Planning and Systems, 2003.

697

- Evolutionary Algorithms in Engineering and Computer ScienceUploaded byVan Le
- Optimization KanbanUploaded byaspvolvo
- Optimizing design of spring using genetic algorithm full reportUploaded bydesign_amrita
- Bio-Inspired Computational Algorithms and Their ApplicationsUploaded byashish
- Time Table Generation Projects in javaUploaded byDrMohamed Mustaq
- xm81Uploaded byDeep Dave
- Cec2013 Lsgo Benchmark Tech ReportUploaded byhamidnasiri1369
- matlab gaUploaded bygreenday3
- Shared Crossover Method for Solving Traveling Salesman ProblemUploaded bySEP-Publisher
- Three Interconnected Parameters for Genetic AlgorithmsUploaded byCollin Watts
- DarwinUploaded byKoteswara Rao
- HEUR-D-16-00224_3.pdfUploaded byouamrimouhamedamine
- Face Liveness Detection for Biometric Antispoofing Applications using Color Texture and Distortion Analysis FeaturesUploaded byEditor IJRITCC
- METHODS FOR DECIPHERING THE ZODIAC 340-CIPHERUploaded byloanthi666
- Ji 2516561662Uploaded byAnonymous 7VPPkWS8O
- journal on diaphram wallsUploaded byRanjith Bhushan
- Exam Timetabling Problem Using Genetic AlgorithmUploaded byesatjournals
- PHASE BALANCING USING HEREFORD RANCH ALGORITHMUploaded bytissatom
- 18-xvalen03Uploaded bymghgol
- rp038_ICEEN2011-N081Uploaded byvida2
- Final Conference Paper 2019Uploaded byVikas Mahurkar
- PEA_MIFAPUploaded byKhaled Meri
- Structural WeightUploaded byTian Tian
- 1-s2.0-S0360835205001403-mhainUploaded byAmrik Singh
- ICECE04Uploaded byonderin
- Chapter 4Uploaded byLuis Alberto Migliorero
- Generation of Optimum Sequence of Operations Using Ant Colony Algorithm by Sudeep SinghUploaded bySudeep Kumar Singh
- CE14Uploaded byKrishna Ramya Chowdary
- WCAMMO09T04Uploaded bysel2183vam
- Multi-objective Optimal Tuning of Multi-loop Control Systems by using Evolutionary ComputationUploaded byGambier

- Module 2_Lecture 3Uploaded bylvrevathi
- Guest-Lecturer-Advertisement-2019-20_20190506092425_27053Uploaded bylvrevathi
- DAC&DSPUploaded bylvrevathi
- Lecture 38Uploaded bylvrevathi
- Mod4_Lec2Uploaded bylvrevathi
- Mod4_Lec2.pdfUploaded bylvrevathi
- Chemical Process Control.pdfUploaded bylvrevathi
- Lecture 24Uploaded bylvrevathi
- Lecture 23Uploaded bylvrevathi
- Lecture 22Uploaded bylvrevathi
- WEEK_1Uploaded bylvrevathi
- LectureUploaded bylvrevathi
- Hardware Modelling using VerilogUploaded byYogesh Tiwari
- Week 12 Lecture Material.pdfUploaded bylvrevathi
- Module 6_Lecture 1.pdfUploaded bylvrevathi
- EI68010-Computer Control of Processes question bank.pdfUploaded bylvrevathi
- Module 5_Lecture 4.pdfUploaded bylvrevathi
- Mod4_Lec3.pdfUploaded bylvrevathi
- Mod4_Lec1Uploaded bylvrevathi
- Module 3_Lecture 3Uploaded bylvrevathi
- Module 2_Lecture 3.pdfUploaded bylvrevathi
- Mod 8_Lecture 1Uploaded bylvrevathi
- Mod 8_Lecture 1Uploaded bylvrevathi
- Mod 8_Lecture 3Uploaded bylvrevathi
- 49-ConnectedVehicles_1Uploaded bylvrevathi
- Week8-done_justifications.pdfUploaded bylvrevathi
- DS Week 7 Lecture MaterialUploaded bylvrevathi

- ijhs-2-2-0134Uploaded byKarisma Nanda
- 25 Calorie Savings Tips by kevin zahriUploaded byMohanesh
- 5_CTERP1A_5AUploaded byachalconst
- Components of the Comprehensive History and Pe Write UpUploaded bynewbie2k
- Water Borne DiseasesUploaded bymarkwechenje
- crestron st-1550cUploaded byJay Langdon
- Joseph Allen SteinUploaded bymoon
- Ricky.jay. .How.to.Throw.cards.basicUploaded byshoucker
- Mulligan.pdfUploaded byAlexandru Iordache
- Fields Calculator CookbookUploaded byAnonymous P2ZN8X
- MIG0600MS Instruction ManualUploaded byNitish Bhaje
- 6m60 Engine-sm-mitsubishi Fd100n Fd120n Fd135n Fd150an Fd160an Forklift Trucks Service R-Uploaded byfilesonic
- green2.pdfUploaded byEven Sharma
- Alkali Silica ReactionUploaded byAztec Mayan
- LAB INTERNAL SCOPE.docxUploaded bybefoa
- Jack Williamson - Passage to Saturn.pdfUploaded byLucas Alves
- US EPA 2016Uploaded byfatjon
- 2 2 3 p turbinedesignUploaded byapi-254646214
- Missing and Isometric Views PptUploaded byChaithanya Chatrathi
- Greedy Genetic AlgorithmUploaded byZiaul Arif
- suzlonUploaded bySameer B Rupani
- TankPadfoundationConstruction-Vol6 2 6Uploaded byselvakumar
- Tutorial- Digital painting by Marko DjurdjevicUploaded byMirko DocFile Failoni
- Chapter 4Uploaded byw1000000
- 101 Plant Care Tips for Your Interior Plants CapeUploaded byguywire62
- Pocket Gprs MicroUploaded byAnonymous BkmsKXzwyK
- niiUploaded byTalib Ali
- MR-1Uploaded byabeid khamis
- Electrical-Engineering-portal.com-5 Steps to Choose Best Motor for Your ApplicationUploaded byRobert Galarza
- 7.2 the Respiratory StructreUploaded byAzneezal Ar-Rashid