See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/350985634

Advanced Metaheuristic Techniques for Mechanical Design Problems: Review

Article  in  Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering · April 2021

DOI: 10.1007/s11831-021-09589-4

CITATIONS READS

45 802

6 authors, including:

Mohamed Elsayed Abd Elaziz Ammar Elsheikh

377 PUBLICATIONS   15,301 CITATIONS   

Tanta University
181 PUBLICATIONS   6,868 CITATIONS   
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Diego Oliva Laith Abualigah

University of Guadalajara, CUCEI Al al-Bayt University
265 PUBLICATIONS   6,320 CITATIONS    367 PUBLICATIONS   12,480 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

2022 CEC Special Session CEC-SS-8 Partitioning and Clustering for Evolutionary Computation View project

Improving Salp Swarm Algorithm View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Laith Abualigah on 22 April 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-021-09589-4

ORIGINAL PAPER

Advanced Metaheuristic Techniques for Mechanical Design Problems:

Review
Mohamed Abd Elaziz1   · Ammar H. Elsheikh2 · Diego Oliva3 · Laith Abualigah4 · Songfeng Lu5 · Ahmed A. Ewees6

Received: 27 September 2020 / Accepted: 8 April 2021

© CIMNE, Barcelona, Spain 2021

Abstract
The design of complex mechanical components is a time-consuming process which involves many design variables with
multiple interacted objectives and constraints. Traditionally, the design process of mechanical components is performed
manually depending on the intuition and experience of the designer. In recent decades, automatic methods have been proposed
to effectively search diverse and large parameter spaces. There is a growing interest in design optimization of mechanical
systems using metaheuristic algorithms to improve the product lifecycle and performance and minimize the cost. Nowa-
days, there is a growing interest in design optimization of mechanical systems using metaheuristic algorithms to improve
the product lifecycle and performance and minimize the cost. This review article demonstrates the applications of different
metaheuristic algorithms in enhancing the design process of different mechanical systems. First, the basic concepts of com-
mon used metaheuristic algorithms are introduced. Then the applications of theses algorithms in optimization of different
mechanical systems are discussed.

Abbreviations MFO Moth-flame optimization

ALO Ant-lion optimizer PSO Particle swarm optimization
ABC Artificial Bee Colony QEA Quantum-inspired Evolutionary Algorithm
CGO Chaos Game Optimization SA Simulated annealing
CSA Cuckoo Search algorithm TLBO Teaching learning-based optimization
DBE Decomposition-based evolutionary TEO Thermal exchange optimization algorithm
DE Differential evolution TSA Tunicate swarm algorithm
EO Equilibrium optimizer WEO Water evaporation optimization algorithm
GA Genetic algorithms ER-WCA​ Water cycle algorithm evaporation rate
GSA Gravitational search algorithm WOA Whale optimization algorithm
GWO Grey Wolf Optimization
MBA Mine Blast Algorithm

2
* Mohamed Abd Elaziz Production Engineering and Mechanical Design Department,
abd_el_aziz_m@yahoo.com Faculty of Engineering, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt
3
Ammar H. Elsheikh Depto. de Ciencias Computacionales, Universidad de
ammar_elsheikh@f-eng.tanta.edu.eg Guadalajara, CUCEI, Av. Revolución 1500, Guadalajara, Jal,
Mexico
Diego Oliva
4
diego.oliva@cucei.udg.mx Faculty of Computer Sciences and Informatics, Amman Arab
University, Amman 11953, Jordan
Laith Abualigah
5
aligah.2020@gmail.com Hubei Engineering Research Center on Big Data Security,
School of Cyber Science and Engineering, Huazhong
Songfeng Lu
University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430074,
lusongfeng@hust.edu.cn
China
Ahmed A. Ewees 6
Department of Computer, Damietta University,
ewees@du.edu.eg
Damietta 34517, Egypt
1
Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, Zagazig
University, Zagazig, Egypt

13
Vol.:(0123456789)

1 Introduction
The main objective of the design process of any mechani-
cal component is obtaining the best compromise between
both technological and economic imperatives so that the
product lifecycle and performance could be maximized
and the cost could be minimized. The design optimiza-
tion processes involve multiple interacted objectives and
constraints which contain mixed design variables. The
design constraints may have a nonlinear nature related to
different design issues such as material behavior, geomet-
ric conditions, and body dynamics. Several mathematical
approaches have been used to develop classical program-
ming algorithms to solve these design problems. These
classical algorithms require the knowledge of the objec-
tive function gradients [1]. Moreover, the classical algo-
rithms usually failed to obtain the global optimal solutions
due to trapping in local minima. Therefore, metaheuristic
optimization approaches have been proposed as effective
alternatives to classical deterministic methods as they
do not require any knowledge regarding gradient of the
objective function to obtain the global solution [2]. These
metaheuristic algorithms can be classified into three main
categories: evolutionary algorithms, swarm algorithms,
and physical-based algorithms. The evolutionary algo-
rithms such as genetic algorithms or differential evolution
mimic the principles id natural evolutionary process to
develop robust optimization techniques. Swarm algorithms
such as particle swarm optimization and whale optimiza-
tion algorithm mimic the collective behavior of different
beings. The physical-based algorithms are inspired by a
real-world physical process such as simulated annealing
or gravitational search algorithm. In recent years differ-
ent types of metaheuristics optimization algorithms have
been successfully used in various engineering applications
such as design of machinery [3, 4], aircraft design [5],
structural analysis [6], power generation [7], machining
applications [8], automotive industries [9, 10], and so on.
In this paper, the applications of different metaheuris-
tic algorithms in optimization of the design of different
mechanical components. First, the basics of common
used metaheuristic algorithms such as Genetic Algo-
rithms (GA), Simulated Annealing (SA), Particle Swarm
Optimization (PSO), Artificial Bee Colony (ABC), Water
Cycle Algorithm Evaporation Rate (ER-WCA), Mine Blast
Algorithm (MBA), Moth-flame optimization (MFO), Grey
Wolf Optimization (GWO), Differential Evolution (DE),
Ant-Lion optimizer (ALO), decomposition-based evolu-
tionary (DBE), Quantum-inspired Evolutionary Algorithm
(QEA), Whale Optimization Algorithm (WOA), and Salp
Swam Algorithm (SSA) are briefly explained. Then, their
applications in optimization of design process of different
13
M. Abd Elaziz et al.
mechanical systems such as gear train, cam, wind tur-
bine blade, aircraft wing, and combustion equipment are
introduced.
The organization of the rest of this paper is given
as follows: Sect.  2 presents the general concepts of the
metaheuristic used inside this review. Section 3 introduces
the metaheuristic techniques which applied for design appli-
cations. Section 4 presents discussion and challenges. In
Sect. 5, the conclusion and future work are introduced.
2 Metaheuristic Algorithms
2.1 Genetic Algorithm
Genetic Algorithms (GA) are very popular optimization
approaches, they are part of evolutionary methods. The GA
imitates the natural selection from Darwin’s theory [11]. GA
are composed of four stages, (1) Initialization, (2) Selec-
tion, (3) Crossover and (4) Mutation. In the initialization
process as in other metaheuristics is performed randomly.
In it a population of candidate solutions are created by pick-
ing random positions in a multidimensional bounded search
space. In Eq. (1) is presented the initialization process that is
performed for most of the metaheuristic algorithms.
( )
xi,j = lj + rand ⋅ ubj − lbj (1)
From Eq. (1) xi,j ∈ X  , is the ith chromosome in the dimen-
sion j and X is the population; rand is a random variable
uniformly distributed between 0 and 1. The variables ubj and
lbj corresponds to the upper and lower bounds of the search
space, respectively. The chromosomes must be evaluated on
the fitness function after their initialization. The standard
GA uses the roulette wheel as a selection mechanism, at
this stage two element of the population are extracted based
on their fitness values. Such selected elements are the par-
ents that will manipulated to create new solutions. In the
crossover the elements extracted in the selection process are
combined to generate the offspring, here is used a parameter
called crossover probability (CR) to control the activation of
this stage. Finally, the mutation stage occurs to replace the
current offspring with a new random element, in this point
is used the mutation factor mf  . The Eq. (1) shows how this
process is performed.
{
xi if mf > 𝜎
xi =
xi∗ otherwise
, 𝜎 ∈ [0, 1]. (2)
2.2 Simulated Annealing
The Simulated Annealing (SA), was introduced by Kirkpat-
rick et al. [12]. It is a single-solution-based metaheuristic
Advanced Metaheuristic Techniques for Mechanical Design Problems: Review
optimization approach inspired by the annealing in metal-
lurgy. In the SA the cooling process of metals is controlled to
build stable crystal structures in order to reduce their defects.
The SA considers the energy of a thermodynamic system
as the values that will be optimized. The SA is an iterative
procedure that modifies the positions of the candidate solu-
tions by a random walk. Here are considered the changes of
temperate. When the temperatures are high the SA operators
perform large movements and it has more probabilities to
accept solutions far away from the global optimal. How-
ever, this me situation permits to avoid suboptimal solutions.
Meanwhile, if the temperatures are low the movement of
solutions and the probability to accept bad solutions is low.
The SA starts {with an initial
} state s and with a cooling
mechanism T = t0 , t1 , ...tn  , ti is the temperature at each
iteration as in ti > 0, limi→+∞ ti = 0 . After the initialization,
the iterative process begins. At each iteration (k) a solution
s′ computed close to the solution sk using a random variable.
The amount of randomness depends of the temperature ti,
it means that the random value becomes higher when the
temperature increases, and it will be lower when tempera-
ture decrease. After that, both solution s′ and sk solutions
are compared and the best solution is selected according to
the fitness value. The SA also possess a probability pk that
permits to accept the s′ as a new solution k + 1 or to maintain
the current solution sk. The value of ­pk is computed by the
following equation.
� � � �� ��
⎧ f s −f (ŝ k) � � � �
⎪ exp − if f s� − f sk > 0
pk = ⎨ ti (3)
⎪1 � � � �
⎩ if f s� − f sk ≤ 0
The cooling mechanism then permits to modify the tempera-
ture and new solutions are generated that have a probability
to be accepted (or not) into the set of solutions. This process
is performed along several iterations and the stop criteria is
set by a final temperature.
2.3 Particle Swarm Optimization
The particle swarm optimization (PSO) was introduced by
Kennedy and Eberhard [13]. This algorithm is inspired in
the swarm behavior of fish or birds in nature. The PSO is
also the source of the swarm intelligence that now is used in
many applications as robotics. Different to other approaches,
it has not crossover or mutation operators, it makes the PSO
more flexible to work with linear spaces. The PSO as other
similar approaches starts with the initialization of a random
population in this case each solution is called particle. The
particles can perform movements along the search space. For
the movement each particle is attracted to the current global
best G and its own best historic location s∗i  , finally it has also
certain randomness. If a particle finds a better location than
the previous one, the position is updated. There is always
a global best for all the population, then the PSO aims to
optimize it along the iterations.
In the PSO before moving the particles, there is neces-
sary to compute a velocity vector vi for each particle. In
the following equation is presented the process to compute
velocity:
vt+1
i
= vti + ∝ 𝜖1 ⊙ ||G∗ − s∗i || + 𝛽𝜖2 ⊙ ||s∗i − sti || (4)
where 𝜖1 and 𝜖2 are random variables uniformly distributed
between 0 and 1. The operator ⊙ is the Hadamard product
(or point to point product). α and β are learning parameter
that permits to control de acceleration of the movement.
Their values must be tuned by the designer. It is important
to mention that the initial velocity for all the particles is set
to zero. The new positions of the population are computed
by using the following equation:
st+1 = sti + vt+1 . (5)
i i
2.4 Artificial Bee Colony
The Artificial Bee Colony (ABC) as proposed in [14] and it
takes as an initiation some features of the honeybee behavior.
In the ABC each solution within the search space includes a
parameter set representing food source locations. The ‘‘fit-
ness value’’ refers to the food source quality that is linked
to the food’s location. The ABC starts by initializing a set
of random solutions (food sources). Once the population has
been initialized, three process will be performed to find the
optimal solution, such operations are (1) send the employed
bees, (2) select the food sources using onlookers’ bees and
(3) determine the scouts’ bees.
The employed bees in the ABC are in charge to produce
new solutions. To generate the employed bees the initial
population is divided into two parts with the same number
of elements. One part is for the employed bees and the other
for the onlookers. The new food source positions computed
by the employed bees are obtained by using the following
equation:
( )
NF i,j = si,j + 𝜑 si,j − sk,j , ∀i ≠ k (6)
where NF is the new food source, s is a candidate solution
(food source), 𝜑 is a random vector with values normally
distributed between − 1 and 1. The index i corresponds th
the number of food source in the population, the index j is
for the dimensions
[ ] of the problem, the index k is defined as
k ∈ rand 1, Ns  . Where Ns is the total amount of food sources
contained in the population. Once the new food sources
are created in the employed bees phase, it is necessary to
13
 M. Abd Elaziz et al.

compute the fitness of each solution. In the ABC the fit- ⎡ Sea ⎤
ness depends on the objective function but is not the same. ⎢ River1 ⎥
For a minimization problem the fitness (fit) is computed as ⎢ River ⎥
⎢ 2 ⎥ ⎡ s1 , s1 , … s1 ⎤
follows: ⎢⋮ ⎥ ⎢ s12 , s22 , … sN2 ⎥
{ TP = ⎢ RiverNRiv ⎥=⎢ 1 2 N
⎥ (9)
1 ⎢ ⎥ ⎢⋮
⎢ CStreamNRiv+1 ⎥ ⎣ sNpop , sNpop , … sNpop ⎥⎦
if Ji ≥ 0
fiti = 1+Ji ( ) (7)
1 + abs Ji if Ji < 0 ⎢ CStreamNRiv+2 ⎥ 1 2 N
⎢⋮ ⎥
where Ji is the objective function value of each solution. ⎢ ⎥
⎣ CStreamNpop ⎦
A greedy selection is applied to select the best elements
between the food sources generated in the initialization and Npop is the population the population has the objective func-
the obtained by the employed bees. tion values that are stored in another vector defined as Cost.
In the onlooker’s bee procedure performs a selection of NRiv is the number of rivers that must be set according to
the food sources by using a probability factor (Probi). The the problem. Then Cost can be divided into ­CostNRiv+1 for
Probi is then computed as: the values of the stream and Costn for the rivers and sea.
The sea and rives can absorb the streams and the amount of
fit
Probi = ∑N i water entering to them may vary. Then the streams for each
(8)
s
p=1
fitp sea and river are computed as follows:

By using the probability, it is possible to select a food source
by an onlooker bee. the fitness of a food source increases,
then the probability of be selected by an onlooker is big-
ger. The food sources selected in the onlooker’s bee phase
will be modified by generating a new food source as in the
employed bee stage.
The last phase of the ABC is for the scout’s bees that are
used when a food source has not possibilities to be improved.
In this case it is used a variable to count the number of tri-
als for improved a food source. When this counter reaches
a limit of trial the food source is abandoned and instead to
be modified by the onlookers a news solution is created by
using the random initialization process.
2.5 Water Cycle Algorithm Evaporation Rate
The Water Cycle Algorithm Evaporation Rate (ER-WCA)
as proposed as a modification of the WCA [15]. Taking as
a base WCA, it is inspired in the water cycle process and
in the way that rivers and streams flow downhill to the sea.
As part of the hydrologic cycle the water is evaporated and
produce clouds that returns the water in rain. In the WCA
they are considered rains or precipitation and the water helps
to construct the streams. In the ER-WCA it is created an
initial population of streams that are randomly distributed in
the search space. The best element of the population is also
extracted after the evaluation on the objective function and it
is considered the sea. The solutions that are close to the cur-
rent best are considered rivers and the rest of streams flow to
the rivers and by consequence to the sea. A[ candidate stream ]
then is an array defined as CStream = s1 , s2 , s3 , … , sN  ,
where N is the number of dimension. The total population
(TP) is ten defined as follows:
Cn = Costn − CostNRiv+1 , n = 1,2, 3, … , NRiv (10)
�� � �
� Cn �
NSn = round �� ∑NRiv �� × (Npop − NRiv) (11)
� n=1 Cn �
� �
where ­NSn is the number of streams that flow to a river or
sea. The next step in the ER-WCA is the exploitation where
the news positions of streams are computed. To obtain the
new positions they are used the next equations:
( )
S⃗str (t + 1) = S⃗str (t) + rand × a × S⃗River (t) − S⃗str (t)
( )
S⃗str (t + 1) = S⃗str (t) + rand × a × S⃗Sea (t) − S⃗str (t)
( )
S⃗River (t + 1) = S⃗River (t) + rand × a × S⃗Sea (t) − S⃗River (t)
(12)
From the previous equations a is permits to control the flow
distance, this value is commonly se to 2 [ER_WCA]. rand is
a random value uniformly distributed between 0 and 1. Such
equations computes the position of streams flowing to rivers
and sea, also they compute the values of rivers who pour to
the sea. Once the new positions are computed, the rivers and
sea are updated according to the objective function.
The ER-WCA has two evaporation procedures, they
permit to create new solutions by considering some rules.
The first permits to check the rivers and streams to verify
if they are closer to the sea. The rule 1 then is defined as
i
if ‖S�⃗Sea − S�⃗River ‖ < dmax or rand < 0.1 in this case a new
new
stream ( S�⃗str (t + 1) ) is generated by using the random ini-
tialization that is common in most of the metaheuristics.
This rule permits to generate new streams in different loca-
tions, in this case the dmax is a predefined small number close
to zero. Meanwhile, the index i = 1,2,…,Nsr − 1.

13
Advanced Metaheuristic Techniques for Mechanical Design Problems: Review

�
In the rule 2 is defined the raining procedure for streams ⎛ �
i � mkn+1 ⎞
that flow to the sea as if ‖S�⃗Sea − S�⃗str ‖ < dmax . In this case Skn+1 = Ske(n+1) + exp⎜−� k ⎟Skn , n = 0,1, 2,3, … (15)
the index i = 1, 2, …, NS1 and the new streams are com- ⎜ dn+1 ⎟
⎝ ⎠
puted as follows:
new √ where Ske(n+1) is the location of the exploded mine collided
S�⃗str (t + 1) = S�⃗Sea (t) + 𝜇×R (13) by shrapnel, The variables dn+1
k
and mkn+1 corresponds to the
distance and slope (or direction) of the expelled shrapnel
where R is random vector of size N that corresponds to the
pieces, respectively. The position of Ske(n+1) is computed by
number of dimensions in the problem. μ is a coefficient
the following equation:
related to the searching region close to the sea, a smaller
value permits a search around the sea, the value of μ is com- Ske(n+1) = dnk × rand × cos(𝜃), n = 0,1, 2,3, … (16)
monly set to 0.1. For the rules 1 and 2 the value of dmax could
be adaptively computed using the maximum number of itera- rand is a random number uniformly distributed. ϴ is the
tions (Max_iteration) as in the next equation: angle of the shrapnel pieces defined as 𝜃 = 360∕Ns . The dis-
tance and slope (or direction) of the expelled shrapnel pieces
dmax (t + 1)
dmax (t + 1) = dmax (t) − (14) are obtained by using the next equations:
Max_iteration √
( k )2 ( k )2
The rule 3 considers the use of the evaporation rate
k
dn+1 = Sn+1 − Skn + Fn+1 − Fnk (17)
(ER) this permits that the worst rivers and streams can
move �to better solutions. � The ER is the computed as
∑ k
Fn+1 − Fnk
ER = NSn ∕NRiv − 1 × rand, n = 2, … , NRiv   . T h e n mkn+1 = , n = 1,2, 3, … (18)
the rule 3 then works with the following condition Skn+1 − Skn
( )
if (exp(−t∕Max_iteration) < rand) and NS < ER then the
where F is the objective function value of S. The initial dis-
new i
new stream ( S�⃗str (t + 1) ) is create by the random initializa-
tion. Notice that this rule is only applied to the rivers. tance is computed by the difference between the upper and
lower bounds of the search space.

2.6 Mine Blast Algorithm

The Mine Blast Algorithm (MBA) is an optimization
approach proposed in in 2013 [16]. The MBA was created
based on the mine bomb explosions where occurs a chain
of explosions due to the pieces of shrapnel colliding with
different bombs in a mine field. Under this approach they
are considered mine bombs of different sizes and with dif-
ferent amounts of power. An exploiting mine expels the
shrapnel pieces. In the MBA the casualties caused by the
shrapnel pieces are modeled in a function (f(s)). In this
case, a high value for casualties in an area indicates the
presence of other mines with different explosive power.
The MBA starts with the initialization of random
shot points that are stored in a vector Sk0 . Also, the MBA
requires a population of Np elements that is obtained from
the first shot explosion that produce (Ns) shrapnel pieces.
The first shot point then is created as in other metaheuris-
tics by using a normal random distribution in the search
space.
To explain the operators of the MBA let’s suppose
that {S is}the current location of a mine bomb defined as
S = Sm , m = 1,2, 3, … , Nd . Nd is the number of decision
variables. Then the shrapnel pieces are generated by the
explosions and cause that other mines explode in a location
Sn+1 using the following equation:
2.7 Moth‑Flame Optimization (MFO)
Moth-flame optimization (MFO) is an optimization tech-
nique mimics the moth’s behavior in nature [17]. Moths fly
by defining a fixed angle for the moon then it converges to
the light, this action makes the moths fly in a straight path.
The authors of MFO formed that mathematically to solve
different optimization problems. In this regard, the moths
are formed as a solution ( Mi , i = 1, 2, … , N  ) and their posi-
tions are considered as the problem parameters, whereas, the
optimal position is called flames. The mathematical model
of the MFO algorithm is listed below.
MFO = (P, F, T) (19)
where P denotes a random population; F is the main function
to move moths around search space, T is a parameter used to
stop the optimization process. In function F, the moths’ posi-
tion are updated by the flames using the following equation:
( )
Mi = S Mi , Fj = Di ⋅ ebt ⋅ cos(2𝜋t) + Fj (20)
where S denotes the spiral function. Mi and Fj are the ith
moth and ith flame, respectively. Di defines the distance
between the ith moth and ith flame. b denotes a constant to
determine the shape of the logarithmic spiral. t is generated

13
 M. Abd Elaziz et al.

randomly in the range [− 1, 1]. The distance D is calculated | |

X1 = ||X𝛼 − A1 ⋅ D𝛼 ||, X2 = |X𝛽 − A2 ⋅ D𝛽 |, X3 = ||X𝛿 − A3 ⋅ D𝛿 ||
as follows: | |
(28)
| |
Di = |Fj − Mi | (21) X1 + X2 + X3
| | X(t + 1) = (29)
3
The MFO maintains its exploitation phase from decreasing
the flames number by using the following equation: where A1 , A2 and A3 are calculated using Eq. 25. C1 , C2 and
C3 are calculated using Eq. 26.
( )
N−1
Flame number = round Nf − c × (22)
T 2.9 Differential Evolution (DE)
where Nf and c denote the maximum number of flames and
the current iteration, respectively. Differential evolution (DE) is an optimization technique,
belongs to the evolutionary algorithms [19]. It begins by
2.8 Grey Wolf Optimization (GWO) generating a random population. This population is continu-
ally updated using evolutionary operations (i.e. the mutation,
Grey Wolf Optimization (GWO) is a bio-inspired crossover, and selection) until meeting the termination con-
metaheuristic algorithm proposed by to simulate the social dition. These operations are defined as follows.
behavior of wolves [18]. In GWO, the optimization search Mutation Phase This phase is performed as follows:
starts by randomly generating a wolves’ population. This ( k )
vki = xr1 (30)
k k
+ 𝛽 ∗ xr2 − xr3 , i = (1, 2, … , N)
population is continuously updated during hunting to esti-
mate the prey’s location. The prey in this algorithm is con- where k is the iteration numbers. r1, r2, and r3 are randomly
sidered as the optimum solution. generated in the range [1, N]. N is the population size. 𝛽 is
To mathematically form the hierarchy of the wolves, the a mutation scaling factor, it affects the differential variation
optimum solution is called α wolf. Whereas, the second- within two solutions.
best and third-best solutions are formed as 𝛽 and 𝛿 wolves, Crossover Phase It tries to improve the potential diversity
respectively. The three types of wolves lead the searching of the population by using both xi and vi solutions to generate
process (hunting), while the other wolves follow them. The the offspring ui at the kth iteration. This phase is performed
hunting process is split to three phases: tracking, encircling, using the following equation:
and attacking. These phases are modeled as in the following
{
equations. vkij if ra < 𝛾
ukij = (31)
| | xijk otherwise
D = |C ⋅ X p − X | (23)
| |
where ra represents a random value in the range [0, 1] 𝛾 is a
| | predefined parameter.
X(t + 1) = |Xp − A ⋅ D| (24)
| | Selection Phase In this phase DE compares the parent and
its corresponding offspring to select and save the best one for
where D denotes the distance between the wolf X the prey
the next iteration as in the following equation:
Xp . t denotes the current iteration. C and A represent coef-
ficient vectors. These vectors are computed as follows: { k
ui if f (uki ) < xik
(32)
k+1
xi = k
xi otherwise
A = 2a ⋅ r1 − a (25)
where f (uki ) is the fitness value of uki.
C = 2r2 (26)
where r1 and r2 represent random vectors in the range [ 0, 1] . 2.10 Ant‑Lion Optimizer
a is linearly decreased from 2 to 0. If |A| < 1 makes the wolf
to attack towards the prey. Ant-lion optimizer (ALO) is a metaheuristic algorithm
The X position is generated according to the positions of, which mimics the nature foraging action of the ant-lions
𝛽 and 𝛿 using the following equations: [20]. The ALO performs some phases to optimize any prob-
lems; these phases are described in the following parts.
| |
D𝛼 = ||C1 ⋅ X𝛼 − X ||, D𝛽 = |C2 ⋅ X𝛽 − X |, D𝛿 = ||C3 ⋅ X𝛿 − X ||,
| |
(27) • Random Walks of Ants Ants use a random walk technique
to update their position at each iteration by the following
equation:

13
Advanced Metaheuristic Techniques for Mechanical Design Problems: Review
( ( ) ) ( ( ) ) ( )
X(t) = [0, cs 2r t1 − 1 , cs 2r t2 − 1 , … , cs(2r tn − 1)]
where cs denotes cumulative sum. n and t define the
maximum number of iterations and the current iteration,
respectively. r(t) is a function which takes 1 if a random
value < 0.5 otherwise it takes 0.
The random walk values are normalized to save it in the
boundaries using the following equation:
(X ti − ai ) × (dit − cti )
Xit = + cti
(bi − ai )
where cti and dit represent the max and min ith values at tth
iteration. bi and ai represent the max and min of ith values
of the random walk.
• Trapping Phase This phase simulates the affected of the
trap in the random walks of ants.
cti = ct + altj
dit = dt + altj
where ct and dt are vectors which contain the min and
max boundaries of all variables. cti and dit represent the
min and max boundaries of ith ants at the tth iteration.
alti is the position of jth ant-ions.
• Building a Trap This phase applies the roulette wheel
selection for choosing the ant-lions to simulate the
hunting behavior.
• Sliding Ants In this phase ant-lions try to slide ants in
their pits. This conduct is mathematically modeled by
the following equations.
ct
ct =
I These measures are consequently applied to guide the con-
dt
dt =
I
where I is computed using the following equation:
t Eq. (43).
I = 10𝜔
T
where t and T denote the current and max iteration. 𝜔 is
a constant based on the iteration number.
Catching Prey and Rebuilding the Pit In this phase,
the ant-lion updates its position to hunt new ants as in the
following equation:
{ ( )
antti if f antti < f (altj )
(33)
altj =
altj otherwise (40)
where antit is the position of ith ants at tth iteration.
Elitism This phase saves the best ant-lion in all iterations
based on its fitness value. The elite is used to improve the
movement of ants by the roulette wheel as follows:
RtA + RtE
antti = (41)
2
where RtA represents the random walk around the chosen
(34)
ant-lion. RtE represents the random walk around the elite.
2.11 Decomposition‑Based Evolutionary
The decomposition-based evolutionary (DBE) is given
below [21]. The approach produces W points/positions on
the hyperplane with a uniform area of 𝛿 = 1∕s . The gen-
eration rules of the reference points is represented using a
(35) 3-objective function ( M = 3 ) with an given area of 𝛿 = 0.2
( s = 5 ). The rule results in the creation of 21 points are cal-
culated using Eq. (42).
(36)
W = (m + s − 1)Cs (42)
The reference areas are determined by creating a straight
line from the beginning of each point. The population size
of the DBE algorithm is established to the number of points.
The original population includes W individuals made sto-
chastically within the shifting bounds. The solutions are
consequently selected randomly to point areas through the
initialization phase.
Where w is a factor vector at any provided area. A value
of d2 = 0 guarantees the solutions are correctly aligned with
the necessary connecting area guaranteeing excellent diver-
sity, while a less value of d1 means excellent convergence.
(37)
vergence and diversity of the algorithm.
The ideal location of a population is expressed by
(38) z = (f1min , f2min , … , fMmin ) . The objection of the hyperplane
with the objective axes are indicated by a1 , a2 , … , aM  . The
general mathematical of these points can be expressed using
(39)
C1f1 , C2f2 , C3f3 , … , CMf M = 1 (43)
where, C1 , C2 , … , CM are the unit average. The objection
of the plane are presented by a1 = 1∕C1 , a2 = 1∕C2 and
aM = 1∕CM .
In the case, the number of given solutions are smaller
than M or any of the aj ’s are negative, aj ’s are set to f max
j . Each solution is consequently estimated using Eq. (44).
13

fj(x) − zj
fj� (x) = (44)
aj − zj
where ∀j = 1, 2, 3, … , M .
In the recombination method, two-child solutions are
made utilizing binary crossover and mutation. The first child
is recognized as an individual trying to restore any parent
in the solutions.
In the steady-state model, if a child’s solution is non-
dominated concerning the positions in the solutions, it tries
to access the solutions by a replacement. The child solution
plays with all given solutions in a random direction until it
reaches a successful replacement or has struggled with all
solutions. If we express the distances as d1r , d2r for a rth
solution and d1c , d2c presents the distances for the child
solution for rth position area, a child will be a a winner if,
d2c is smaller than d2r.
2.12 Quantum‑Inspired Evolutionary Algorithm
In this section, the searching procedure of the Quantum-
inspired Evolutionary Algorithm (QEA) is presented as fol-
lows [22]. Several different designs can be utilized to repre-
sent the solutions for individuals in evolutionary algorithms.
The models can be categorized as numeric, binary, and sym-
bolic [23]. QEA utilizes a new design for the probabilistic
description, which is based on the theory of qubits, called a
Q-bit. It is as a string of Q-bits, which are illustrated below.
A Q-bit is described as the shortest length of informa-
tion in QEA, which is represented with a couple of num-
bers (𝛼, β ) as:
[ ]
𝛼 of non-domination, each solution should be associated with
(45)
β other solutions to find its domination. For each solution,
where |𝛼|2 + |𝛽|2 = 1 . |𝛼|2 provides the probability value that
the Q-bit will be determined in the 0 nations and |𝛽|2 pro-
vides the probability value that the Q-bit will be determined
in the 1 nations. A Q-bit may be in the 1, 0, or in a linear
superposition of the two.
Definition 2  A Q-bit position as a string of m Q-bits is deter-
mined as follows.
[ ]
𝛼1 |𝛼2 |𝛼m
𝛽1 |𝛽2 |𝛽m (46)
where ||𝛼i || + ||𝛽i || = 1.i = 1, 2, … , m.
2 2
Q-bit design has the benefit that it can express a lin-
ear superposition of nations. For instance, if there is a
13
M. Abd Elaziz et al.
three-Q-bit rule with three combinations of amplitudes
such as follows.
⎡ √
1
� √1 1
⎤
⎢ 2 2 2√ ⎥ (47)
⎢ √
1 −1
�√ � 23 ⎥
⎣ 2 2 ⎦
Evolutionary computing (EC) with Q-bit reproduction has
a better nature of population variety than others since it
can describe linear superposition of nations probabilisti-
cally. Only one Q-bit individual such is sufficient to express
eight nations, but in binary design, at least eight strings,
(000), (001), (010), (011), (100), (101), (110), and (111)
are required.
Definition 3  A Q-gate is represented as a change operator of
QEA, by which procedure the updated Q-bit can complete
the normalization requirement, |𝛼 � | + |𝛽 � | = 1 , where 𝛼 ′ and
𝛽 ′ are the values of the new Q-bit.
The following rotation issue is employed as a Q-gate in
QEA, such as follows.
[ ( ) ( )]
( ) cos( Δθi) −sin( Δθ)i
U Δ𝜃i =
sin Δθi cos Δθi (48)
where Δ𝜃i , i = 1, 2, … , m , is a revolution angle of any Q-bit
to 0 or 1 nation relying on its sign.
2.13 Non‑Dominated Sorting Genetic (NDSG)
In this section, the non-dominated sorting genetic (NDSG)
algorithm is presented as in [24]. Several models are rep-
resenting as follows. To sort N of solutions using the level
O(mN) comparisons are needed, where m is the number of
objective functions. The overall complexity will be O(mN 2 )
to determine the solutions of the first non-dominated group
for the population [24]. A fast non-dominated sorting is
described as follows, which needs O(mN 2 ) computations.
Two entities are calculated for each solution: (1) ni , which
denotes the number of solutions dominate the solution num-
ber i  , and (2) Si , which denotes a set of solutions which have
been dominated by the solution number i  . The estimation of
these two operations needs O(mN) comparisons—all those
cases which have ni = 0 and provide them in a list F1 . The
current front is called F1 . Forthwith, for each solution in F1 ,
each position ( j ) is visited in its set Si and decrease its nj
value. To do that, if for any position j , the count becomes
zero included in a new listing H  . During all solutions of F1
have been verified, the solutions in the list F1 are declared as
members of the first front. Then, the process is continuing
using the recently distinguished front H .
Advanced Metaheuristic Techniques for Mechanical Design Problems: Review
To evaluate the density of solutions besieging a spe-
cific point in the candidate solutions, the distance measure
between two points is used as an objective function. This
value of idistance works as an evaluation of the size of the giant
cuboid surrounding point number i  . The distance of the i  th
solution is the average side-length of the cuboid.
The crowded measurement operator (≥ n ) controls the
selection rule at the different steps of the method to a uni-
formly dispersed excuse Pareto-optimal solution. Let us sup-
pose that every position i in the solution has two features.
• Non-domination rank ( irank)
• Local crowding distance ( idistance)
A partial order ≥ n is defined as follows.
( ) ( ) that the fluctuation area of A is additionally reduced by
i ≥ nj if irand > jrand or irand = jrand and (idistance > jdistance )
(49)
The above equation is between two solutions with various
non-domination orders; the solution with the lower rank is
preferred. Contrarily, if two solutions have the same objec-
tive value, the solution which is established in a targeted area
with the smallest number of points.
2.14 Whale Optimization Algorithm (WOA)
In this section, the inspiration for the Whale Optimization
Algorithm (WOA) is presented. Next, the mathematical
representation is given. Whales are recognized as the most
massive mammals animals in the environment. A grown-
up whale has 30 m long and 180 weight. There are seven
various principal varieties of this enormous mammal such
as right, killer, finback, minke, humpback, blue, and Sei.
Whales are chiefly recognized as predators. They never
sleep due to the breath from the outside of oceans [25].
Half of the intellectual only sleeps. The new information
about the whales is that they are brilliant animals with a
passion. Figure 4 presents this mammal.
In this section, the mathematical representation of
encircling, spiral bubble-net, and seek for prey is presented
[26].
Humpback whales can identify the position of prey and
surround them. After determining the best solution, the
other solutions will seek to update their attitudes close to
the best-obtained solution. This behavior is expressed by
Eq. (50).
D = |CX ∗ (t) − X(t)|
X(t + 1) = X ∗ (t) − A ⊙ D
where t means the current iteration, A and C are coef-
ficient values calculated by Eqs. (52) and (53), X ∗ is the
best-obtained solution so far, X is a solution, ⊙ is a mul-
tiplication operator for element-by-element, and | ⋅ | is the
absolute sign. It is meriting mentioning that X ∗ should be
renewed in each iteration.
A = 2A ⊙ r − A (52)
C =2⊙r (53)
where A is a value linearly reduced from 2 to 0 throughout
iterations, and r is a vector of random values in [0,1].
In this part, two strategies are outlined to model the bub-
ble-net behavior of humpback whales mathematically.
(a) Shrinking encircling strategy: This behavior is per-
formed by reducing the value of A in Eq. (51). Remark
A. From another perspective, A is a random value in the
interval [−a, a ] where a is reduced in the interval [2 0]
throughout iterations. Establishing random values for
A in [− 1 1].
(b) Spiral updating strategy: In this strategy, the distance
between the whale ( X , Y) and prey (X ∗ , Y ∗ ) is com-
puted. A spiral equation is next produced among the
whale and prey position to simulate the helix-shaped
tendency of humpback whales as in Eq. (54).
X(t + 1) = D� ⊙ ebl ⊙ cos(2𝜋l) + X ∗ (t) (54)
where
D� = |X ∗ (t) + X(t)| (55)
Equation (55) shows the distance value between the ith
whale and the prey, b is a constant value for determin-
ing the spiral shape, and l is a random value in [− 1 1].
The general mathematical model is presented in Eq. (56)
to discriminate between the shrinking encircling strategy or
the spiral strategy to update whales.
{ ∗
X (t) − A ⊙ D if p < 0.5
X(t + 1) =
D� ⊙ ê{bl} ⊙ cos(2𝜋l) + X̂ ∗ (t) if p ≥ 0.5
(56)
where, p is a random value in [0 1].
In the Exploration phase search strategy, humpback
whales explore the search space randomly rely on the avail-
able solutions positions. Therefore, A is utilized with ran-
dom numbers (i.e., values > 1 or values < −1). This strategy
(50) allows the WOA to perform exploration search as follows
when |A| > 1.
(51)
D = ||C ⊙ Xrand − X || (57)
13

X(t + 1) = Xrand − A ⊙ D (58)
where Xrand is a random whale taken from the current
solutions.
2.15 Salp Swam Algorithm
This part shows the Salp Swarm Algorithm (SSA) and rep-
resents its main components [27]. It also involves descrip-
tions of the exploitation, exploration, and convergence of
this algorithm. The marine animals give unusual behavior,
such as grouping behavior. For instance, the groups of salps
called the salp chain. Although their living situations are
challenging to locate, the natural researchers conclude that
the motivations for this behavior improve the salps to pro-
duce better movement and foraging.
SSA is a population search method proposed by Mirjalili
et al. in [27]. The SSA’s behavior can be suasible through the
salp chain exploring for optimal food region (i.e., the objec-
tive of this salps is the optimal food region in the available
search space named F. The individuals of salp are classified
into leaders or followers based on the positions in the chain.
The chain began the search with a leader to guide the fol-
lowers in their movements.
Algorithm 4 presents the pseudo-code of conventional
SSA, where the simplicity of SSA and its similarity to other
optimization algorithms can be seen. It begins by the solu-
tions initialization, a set of solutions X are used, and each
one has n positions (salps) as outlined in Eq. (59). Then, it
calculates each salp’s fitness to find the salp with the best
fitness value (i.e., leader). The leader location is renewed
using Eq. (59).
⎡ x1
1
x11 … xd1 ⎤
⎢ x12 x22 … xd2 ⎥
Xi = ⎢
⋮ ⎥⎥ (59)
⎢ ⋮1 ⋮ ⋱
⎣ x1 x21 … xd1 ⎦
{ ( ) tion procedures have a very complex nature and the need
yi + r1 ((ubi − lbi )r2 + lbi )r3 ≥ 0
x11 = (60)
yi + r1 ( ubi − lbi r2 + lbi )r3 < 0
where xi1 is the first position in the ith solution, and yi is
the ith food position. lbi and ubi represent the lower and the
upper bound values, and r1 is calculated by Eq. (61), r2 , r3
are two random numbers between [0 1].
( )2
− 4l
(61)
r1 = 2e L
where L and l denote the number of iterations and the cur-
rent iteration, respectively. It’s meriting mentioning that
the r1 is an essential coefficient in SSA to make a balance
between exploration and exploitation through the search
13
M. Abd Elaziz et al.
process. Equation (62) presents the mathematical update of
followers positions when j ≥ 2:
1 2
j
xi = 𝜆t + 𝛿0 t (62)
2
where 𝜆0 is the first speed and t is the iteration. Regarding
the 𝜆0 = 0 , the following equation is used for this effect.
( )
j 1 j j−1
xi = xi + xi (63)
2
In case any salps go outside of the given area, Eq. (64) exem-
plifies how to return them to the given area.
⎧ lj if xj ≤ lj
⎪ i
j
xi = ⎨ uj if xji ≥ uj (64)
⎪ xj otherwise.
⎩ i
3 Metaheuristic for Design Applications
3.1 Gear Train
A gear train is a mechanical power transmission system in
which two or more gears with same module are working
together and transmit power via teeth engagement [28]. The
gears are mounted on shafts so the teeth of the mating gears
roll on each other on its pitch circle. Gear train has been
utilized in most of mechanical power transmission systems
that used in automobile, aerospace, and machine tools. Gear
design optimization is a complex problem that involves
large number of design parameters [29]. A conventional
gear design involves computations based on tooth surface
durability, tooth bending strength, tooth surface fatigue, effi-
ciency, interference, etc. Many empirical formulas, tables,
and graphs have been established to design different types
of gear train [30]. Therefore, conventional design optimiza-
to advanced metaheuristic optimization techniques arises.
Mendi et al. [31] used GA to minimize the volume of the
gear box shown in Fig. 1. Three objective functions were
considered in this study: gear volume, shaft volume, and
rolling bearing dimensions. Nine design variables were con-
sidered: module, number of teeth, width ratio, shaft length,
shaft diameter, bearing external diameter, bearing shaft
diameter, and bearing width. The deformation of the tooth
surface, tooth root fracture, bearing life, and the torsional
strength of the shafts were used as design constraints. The
volume was minimized by about 17 ­dm3 when GA is used
compared with conventional analytical approaches. Miler
et al. [32] carried out a multi-objective optimization study on
Advanced Metaheuristic Techniques for Mechanical Design Problems: Review

overall weight of the gears as an objective function while

preserving five predefined constraints (bending strength of
tooth, torsional strength of shafts for pinion and gear, sur-
face durability, and center distance). Then they considered
three more constraints including interference, surface fatigue
strength, and width to module ratio. The results of both of
PSO and SA are approximately the same and they are bet-
ter than those obtained using GA. However, PSO is faster
than SA and GA as the former requires less number of itera-
tions for convergence to obtain the optimal solution. One
more advantage of PSO and SA over GA is their simplicity
as there is no need to special genetic operators or complex
encoding and decoding process.

3.2 Cam Design

A cam is a mechanical component that used to transform

rotary motion into transitional motion, change transitional
motion direction, and/or control the translation motion of
another mechanical component called follower. Complex
mechanical linkages with complicated motions may be
replaced by a simple cam/follower mechanism. A prescribed
Fig. 1  Gearbox elements [31] motion of the follower is defined by designing the cam pro-
file as in Fig. 2.
Cams are classified according to their shape into: disk
a simple gear train using GA to minimize the power losses or plate cams, cylindrical or drum cam, and linear cam. In
and transmission volume based on ISO 6336:2006 standard. disk cams, the follower oscillates or reciprocates in a plane
Optimization variables consisted of the number of teeth of perpendicular to the cam axis. In cylindrical cams, the fol-
the pinion the gear module, the profile shift coefficients of lower oscillates or reciprocates in a plane parallel to the cam
the pinion and the gear, and the face width. The obtained axis. In linear cams, the follower oscillates or reciprocates
results indicated that the increase in the gear module and based on the translation motion of the cam. It may also be
the gear profile shift coefficient decreases the power loss.
Whang and Zhou [33] applied SA technique to determine
the optimal design parameters that minimize the weight of a
simple gear train. Bending strength, shaft torsional strength,
durability, and center distance were considered as design
constraints. The obtained results indicated that SA is more
efficient than GA in optimizing that problem as GA needs
a complex encoding and decoding process which is time
consuming process. Tamboli et al. [34] performed a multi-
objective optimization to minimize the material and cost of
heavy duty helical gear pair using PSO technique while the
strength and performance requirements are fulfilled based
on DIN standard. The objective function is represented by
the volume of the gear pair. Five constraints were consid-
ered based on strength considerations including: contact
stress, factor of safety from pitting, contact ratio, face width
constraint, number of teeth constraint, and helix angle con-
straints. Savsani et al. [35] used PSO and SA to find the
optimal of design parameters of a spur gear train that mini-
mize the overall weight. Five design variables (gear width,
pinion shaft diameter, gear shaft diameter, number of teeth
of pinion, and module) has been considered to minimize the Fig. 2  A disk cam with an eccentric roller follower [44]

13

classified according to the constraint type of the follower
into: positive derive cam and preloaded spring cam. In the
positive derive cam, the cam and follower are inherently
kept in contact without any external forces. In the preloaded
spring cam, a spring is used to keep the follower in contact
with the cam. The followers are classified according to the
type of motion into: translating and oscillating followers.
The followers are also classified according to the type of
contacting surface with the cam into: knife edge, roller, flat
faced, and spherical faced followers.
There are many mathematical methods to express the cam
profile. The typical standard motions functions are harmonic,
modified harmonic, modified trapezoidal, cycloid, and poly-
nomial. For some operating conditions such as very high
speeds, cam profiles should be precisely designed to achieve
optimal the kinematical and dynamical characteristics.
GA was employed to design and optimize cam shape for
any type of cam mechanism [36]. The proposed approach id
based on converting the shape optimization problem into a
parametric optimization problem. To define the cam geom-
etry in parametric form, the cam profile boundary is defined
by a B-spline curve. The obtained results succeeded to mini-
mize the fluctuation of the induced dynamic force and conse-
quently minimize the induced vibration, noise, friction, and
wear. In another study, cam size, contact stress, and input
torque of a cam with of flat‐face follower were minimized
using GA considering different design parameters such as
cam radius of base circle, the width of the follower, and
the follower offset [37]. Fang and Chen [38] used GA to
optimize the design of a cam profile. A uniform five-degree
B-spline of was employed to describe the cam profile. Qin
and He [39] employed GA to optimize the profile a valve
train cam in a diesel engine. The acceleration peak has sig-
nificantly decreased at the opening phase of the valve.
Improved Non-dominated Sorting GA was proposed
to design and optimize the cam profile considering non-
uniform rational basis spline curves to define the profile
[40]. The obtained results by the proposed approach were
compared with those of conventional GA; and better perfor-
mances were achieved. Mandal and Naskar [41] proposed a
hybrid approach composed of GA incorporated with fuzzy
membership function to obtain the optimal design of a disk
cam via minimizing the cam-follower acceleration jerk. Both
of B-splines and classical splines have been employed to
define the displacement of the cam. They reported that the
control points can be utilized to decrease the cam-follower
acceleration jerk.
Zhi et al. [42] employed ACO to optimize the cam pro-
file of an internal combustion engine via minimizing vibra-
tion, noise, and crash of the operated mechanism and con-
sequently maximizing its dynamic performance. PSO has
been also used to obtain the optimal cam profiles for two
different design problems: minimization of acceleration and
13
M. Abd Elaziz et al.
minimization of time [43]. In the first problem, the PSO was
employed to minimize an objective function of two inde-
pendent variables. The cam profile that has the minimum
acceleration is obtained. In the second problem, the PSO was
employed t minimize the cam cycle time considering con-
stant velocity segment and by applying cubic interpolations.
Abderazek et  al. [44] employed seven different
metaheuristic approaches to optimize the design disk cam
with a translating roller follower. The algorithms are: SSA,
MFO, ALO, multi verse optimizer (MVO), GWO, ER, and
MBA. The design problem is formulated as multi-objective
optimization to maximize the performance and strength
resistance and to minimize the congestion of the cam. As
all of the investigated algorithms are classified as non-
constrained optimization approaches, an exterior penalty
method is employed to perform the constraint optimization.
The polynomial 3-4-5 degree profile showed a better per-
formance than that of modified harmonic motion, cycloi-
dal motion, and polynomial 4-5-6-7 degree profile for all
metaheuristic approaches. MBA required the highest com-
putational time among all investigated algorithms.
3.3 Wind Turbine Blade
Wind turbines have been used to harvest wind energy to
convert it to electrical energy which greatly reduces the envi-
ronmental, social, and economic impact from energy con-
sumption. Turbine blade is the main component in any wind
turbine. Wind turbine blade design is a complex problem
that involves many interacting objectives and constraints and
should be based on various design criteria such as structural
integrity, aerodynamic efficiency, reliability, cost, manufac-
turing convenience, noise minimization, and transportation
feasibility [45–47]. The design process usually includes two
main subprocess: aerodynamic design and structural design.
The former is responsible for determining the outer geom-
etry of the blade while the latter is responsible for selecting
materials, and the internal structure of the blade.
Chan et al. [48] proposed a hybrid approach to maximize
power coefficient of the Savonius wind turbine via optimiz-
ing the blade shape as in Fig. 3. This approach consists of
GA incorporated into ANSYS Fluent as a computational
fluid dynamics simulation software, thereby the blade geom-
etry definition is coupled with mesh generation. The opti-
mized blade geometry enhanced the time-averaged power
coefficient by about 33% compared with conventional semi-
circular blades. Jureczko et al. [49] introduced an optimiza-
tion investigation on wind turbine blade to minimize vibra-
tions by selecting the optimal values of the web thickness,
the shell thickness, the arrangement of stiffening ribs, and
the number of stiffening ribs. The constrains of the optimiza-
tion were the structure strength, global stability of individual
nodes, local stability of blade nose, and avoiding rotating
Advanced Metaheuristic Techniques for Mechanical Design Problems: Review
Fig. 3  Geometry of the Savo-
nius wind turbine with: a con-
ventional semicircular blades; b
optimized shape [48]
the rotor with a speed equal to the natural frequency of the
blade. A modified GA algorithm has been developed to solve
the problem considering the following GA parameters: 20
individuals, 50 populations, 0.7 probability of crossing, and
0.03 probability of mutation. In another study, a hybrid con-
sists of GA and an inverse design method is introduced to
maximize the annual energy production of stall-regulated
horizontal-axis wind turbines to determine the optimum
blade chord and blade pitch, and twist distributions [50].
Selecting the proper dimensioned gap between the sta-
tionary casing and the rotating blade tip is another criteria
that should be fulfilled to avert mechanical failures resulted
from blade rubbing. A tip leakage flow is highly complex
three-dimensional flow that cause undesirable thermal
effects and consequently impair the overall efficiency of
the turbine. Maral et al. [51] presented a novel tip carv-
ing approach to minimize the side effects of the tip leakage
flow using a hybrid GA based approach. The optimal carved
blade tip shape was obtained considering leakage and heat
transfer loss as objective functions that should minimized.
Three different meta-models have been integrated with con-
ventional GA, namely artificial neural network, support vec-
tor machine, and extreme learning machine. First the meta-
models are trained using data set consists of 55 blade tip.
Then more data sets are predicted using the meta-models
which used in the optimization process.
Vianna Neto et al. [52] developed a metaheuristic mul-
tiobjective optimization methodology for the geometry of
rotor blade to maximize wind turbines energy production
and to minimize the mass of the blade. The developed meth-
odology reduced the number of aerodynamic-to-structural
design loops by considering aerodynamic blade design
instead of actual blade structural design which consequently
reduced the computational cost and the design time. Four
different metaheuristic algorithms were used: NDSG, QIE,
DBE, and DE. The elapsed time for executing 30 individual
runs was 5.30, 3.28, 10.84, and 5.00 h for NDSG, QIE, DBE,
and DE, respectively. Smoother blade geometry has been
obtained which may facilitate manufacturing process.
PSO is another metaheuristic tool that has been used to
optimize the wind turbine. Ceruti [53] determined the opti-
mal blade geometry of a small-size wind turbine using PSO
by selecting the optimal airfoil sweep and chord distribution
that facilities the manufacturing process. The blade shape
and wind turbine performance has been calculated using the
Blade-Element Method considering external forces acting
on the blades. Ma et al. [54] developed a hybrid optimi-
zation methodology in which PSO and FAST software are
integrated to optimize a floating wind turbine via comput-
ing the optimal blade geometry. The influence of waves
on the power of the floating wind turbine is studied in this
paper. They reported that to increase the average power and
decrease the power fluctuation, the wave height should be
decreased. The maximum power has been increased by about
3.8% using the computed parameters.
3.4 Aircraft Wing
In the past century, commercial aircrafts have undergone
remarkable developments via applying advanced aerody-
namic design as shown in Fig. 4. Wind tunnels have been
used as a main tool to test aerodynamics behavior of dif-
ferent aircrafts since 1960s despite the long time required
for executing the design cycle (reaches 15,000 h for some
cases [55]). Later, computational fluid dynamics (CFD)
approaches have been used to as a powerful tool to aircrafts
aerodynamic design [56] in which complicated mathemati-
cal models is solved numerically. Those CFD approaches
require simplified assumptions to solve complicated math-
ematical models with high computational costs. And aircraft
designers had to do manual adjustments during optimiza-
tion process which require skillful labors and consuming
much time. Then, gradient-based optimization methods such
as steepest descent method, Newton’s method, and conju-
gate gradient method have been used to minimize human
error [57]. However, the high nonlinear nature of aerody-
namic design process hinders the use of these methods in
such applications as it is hard to determine the flow field
13

Fig. 4  Commercial aircrafts
design development in last
decades [63]
gradient. Intelligent optimization methods, such as GA, SA,
and PSO have brought about a new era for commercial air-
crafts design optimization as it enhances the design results
with more diversified solutions [58]. Wing is considered
as one of the main aerodynamic components of an aircraft.
Airfoil geometry optimization is essential for wing design
and optimization.
Gardner and Selig [59] used GA to determine optimal
airfoil geometry considering manipulation of the velocity
distribution. Both of a simple GA and a hybrid GA (GA
integrated with a local search method) have been used in
this study. An outperform airfoil with enhanced efficiency
has been designed using the developed approaches. Khurana
et al. [60] utilized a hybrid PSO algorithm (integrated with a
local line search algorithm) to determine the optimal design
of airfoil. The results indicated that reasonable aerodynamic
and geometric convergence was achieved for airfoils operat-
ing at high Reynolds number (over 2.0 million).
To overcome the problems related to metaheuristic
optimization methods such as slow convergence rate and
trapping into local optimum. Wang et al. [61] constructed
an optimization platform to design airfoil. The proposed
platform consists of a modified PSO algorithm integrated
with an aerodynamic analysis program, a classical airfoil
parametric method (Hicks–Henne function), and a surrogate
model. The traditional PSO algorithm has been modified
through: (1) representing the particle velocity using both of
particle position and its variation; (2) the particle velocity
is updated considering an oscillating term. The first con-
verts the PSO to a second-order precision method while
the second enlarges the searching domain and enhances the
convergence capabilities. The optimization process success-
fully improves the transonic aerodynamic performance of
13
M. Abd Elaziz et al.
two different airfoils: basic airfoil and wingtip airfoil for a
commercial aerobus. The optimization constraints consid-
ered in that study are Mach number, Reynolds number, and
cognitive trust parameter. For basic airfoil, the drag diver-
gence characters have been decreased by 0.0019 and 0.0061
at Mach number of 0.72 and 0.75, respectively. While for
the wingtip airfoil, the drag divergence characters have been
decreased by 0.0023 and 0.0031 at Mach number of 0.71 and
0.75, respectively. In another work, Wickramasinghe et al.
[62] presented another PSO based frame work consists of a
computational flow solver and a flexible airfoil parametric
method. First, the shape of an airfoil is defined using ten
decision variables, which used to create the airfoil shape
using the proposed framework. Then the flow solver is used
to obtain values for the lift, drag and moment coefficients
using explicit constraints. Finally, the objective functions
are defined, using the obtained coefficients, and minimized
using the proposed PSO algorithm. The proposed approach
was used to derive an enhanced airfoil with better charac-
teristics compared with the conventional NLF0416 airfoil.
Tao et al. [63] proposed an improved PSO algorithm to
optimize aerospace wing at drag divergence Mach number.
The proposed algorithm consists of a conventional PSO
algorithm integrated with centroidal Voronoi tessellations
method which enables generation of particles positions with
better dispersion. Moreover, oscillating scheme with sec-
ond order is used and a new item (fitness distance ratio)
is added for better velocities and positions updating. The
results indicated that the proposed algorithm exhibits better
convergence compared with the conventional PSO. Moreo-
ver the following benefits have been obtained: (1) the drag
coefficients is reduced; (2) the drag increment is reduced at
drag divergence Mach number.
Advanced Metaheuristic Techniques for Mechanical Design Problems: Review
Koreanschi et al. [64] improved the aerodynamic perfor-
mances of an aircraft wing tip using three different optimi-
zation techniques: GA, ABC, and a gradient method. Two
objective functions were considered to be minimized in this
study: the transition point delay from laminar towards turbu-
lent flow and the drag coefficient. GA showed better results
compared with ABC and gradient method. The GA (which
had the best results among others) was used to optimize
another two objective functions: the transition advancement
towards the leading edge and the transition delay towards
the trailing edge of the airfoil. An improvement of 31% and
17% were achieved for transition advancement and transition
delay, respectively.
Hashimoto et al. [65] presented an aerodynamic optimi-
zation study on a high-wing configuration to determine the
optimal fuselage-wing shapes using an adaptive range multi-
objective GA (ARMOGA) [66]. The proposed approach
helps to reduce the computational cost and the total number
of function evaluations needed due to its ability to do inten-
sified searches and to adapt the search regions using popula-
tion statistics. The optimization procedures take three main
stages: (1) fuselage upper surface optimization, (2) aircraft
nose shape optimization, (3) wing shape and fuselage opti-
mization to maximize the lift-to-drag ratio via minimizing
the shock wave over the wing. Chiba et al. [67] used the
same modified GA approach (ARMOGA) suggested by [65]
to optimize an aeroelastic wing by changing the shape of
wing aerofoil, dihedral and twist distributions while keep-
ing the wing topology without changes. The multiobjective
optimization is performed considering three objectives:
(1) maximizing take-off weight, (2) minimizing the block
fuel, (3) maximizing drag divergence. In another study [68],
ARMOGA has been used in wing design optimization to
minimize twisting and bending moments of the wings as
well as supersonic and transonic drag coefficients. More
than seventy variables have been considered in that study
to describe the warp shape, wing’s planform, and thickness
distribution.
3.5 Combustion Equipment
Design of combustion equipment is a costly cumbersome
process that involves multiple build and try procedures
to obtain the optimal eco-friendly design configuration
[69–71]. The obtained design should fulfill technical and
environmental requirements to minimize the emission
of harmful gasses and preserving system efficiency at a
reasonable level. Biomass fuels combustion devices and
their hybridization with other conventional fossil fuels
have been attracted the attention of researchers to avoid
serious problems related to greenhouse gas emissions [72].
Smith et al. [73] proposed an advanced shape optimization
tool called Sculptor integrated with a commercial com-
putational fluid dynamics code STARCCM to optimize
the design of a biomass burner system. Arbitrary Shape
Deformation method has been used to manipulate the
geometry of the burner using computational fluid dynam-
ics and computer aided design environment. Mahmood
et al. [74] used PSO technique is used to obtain empirical
formulas that used to predict the homogeneity of mixture
inside a compressed natural gas–hydrogen–air inside the
mixer of dual fuel engine. PSO has been integrated with
ANSYS Workbench to manipulate simulation models. The
proposed mixture consisted of stationary parts: air inlet,
fuel inlet, mixing outlet, pin, nuts, bolts, grooves, cov-
ers, and the main body; and moveable parts: shafts, valve,
bevel gears, large nut, and a stepper motor as shown in
Fig. 5. Three design parameters of the mixer holes have
been considered: number, diameter, angle, and location.
The proposed approach has successfully control mixture
homogeneity via selecting the optimal operating and
design parameters. Zhao et al. [75] optimized the perfor-
mance of diesel engine combined with Rankine cycle in
terms of fuel economy and power output using PSO. The
PSO algorithms along with MATLAB SIMULINK were
used to improve the power output of the engine at full
load. the power output and brake specific fuel consumption
were improved by 3.24% and 3.13%, respectively, when
the engine operated at 3600 rpm under full-load condition.
A maximum reduction of 5.71% on the brake specific fuel
consumption of the system was obtained when the engine
operated at 3600 rpm under partial engine load. Recently,
hybrid mutation PSO algorithm is proposed to optimize
the structure parameters of an engine drive system to
enhance its vibration control [76]. The hybrid algorithm
enhanced the diversity and the convergence rate of the
PSO. The investigated parameters of the engine are: ini-
tial installation angle of the tensioner arm, tensioner arm
length, torsional stiffness of the tensioner torsional spring,
and initial torque of the tensioner. The results obtained by
the proposed algorithm shown better accuracy compared
with other metaheuristic optimization methods.
GA has been also used to optimize combustion systems
and equipment. Liu et al. [77] introduced an attempt to
minimize the fuel consumption and polluted emissions of
a diesel/natural gas dual fuel engine by obtaining the opti-
mal geometry of combustion chamber and the correspond-
ing diesel injection parameters using GA. They reported
that ­CH4 emission could be minimized and the fuel econ-
omy could be improved using a straight combustion. A
reasonable thermal efficiency of 50.2% has been obtained
with an injection timing of − 16.45° crank angle after top
dead center. In another study, the emission of ­NOX and the
brake specific fuel consumption of an automotive diesel
13

Fig. 5  Parts of the proposed
mixer [74]
engine are reduced by about 20% and 1%, respectively, by
applying GA-based optimization [9].
4 Discussion
From the aforementioned section, it is obvious that the
metaheuristic optimization algorithms could be suc-
cessfully used to optimize the design process of differ-
ent mechanical systems. Metaheuristics algorithms give
approximate results and could be applied to any optimiza-
tion problem. They find a good solution with reasonable
accuracy and the exact solution is not guaranteed. These
kinds of algorithms start with local search and extend
their search capabilities to advanced learning techniques.
GA and PSO are the most common used algorithms in
13
M. Abd Elaziz et al.
mechanical optimization field as summarized in Table 1
(see Fig. 6). Other new algorithms such as TEO, TSA,
EO, CGO, GSA, and TLBO should be extensively inves-
tigated in future work to prove their capabilities to solve
these optimization problems. Different comparative
investigations between different metaheuristic optimiza-
tion algorithms to solve the optimization problem of dif-
ferent mechanical systems and components such as gear
design, gear train, cam design, mechanism synthesis, heat
exchangers designs, aircraft design, valve design, pumps,
automobile design, and others should be carried out.
Incorporating metaheuristic algorithms with other tools
to avoid premature convergence could be considered in
our future work.
Notwithstanding the results of the MH techniques, still,
some challenges are facing the using of metaheuristic
Advanced Metaheuristic Techniques for Mechanical Design Problems: Review

Table 1  Metaheuristics algorithms used in optimization of mechanical system

2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011

GA [4, 78–81] [51, 82–84] [32, 48, 85–88] [89–91] [92] [93] [94] [37, 95] [40, 96] [39, 97]
SA [98] [82] [35]
PSO [98–104] [76, 105] [53, 54, 103, 106, 107] [108] [34, 109] [35, 43, 61]
ABC [104, 110] [82] [111] [112] [113] [114] [115] [116] [117]
ER-WCA​ [44]
MFO [44] [118]
GWO [44, 104, 119, 120] [121] [122]
DE [123] [82] [124] [125] [126]
ALO [44] [127] [128] [129]
DBE [130] [131] [132] [133]
QEA
WOA [104, 134] [122]
SSA [44]
CSA [98, 110] [135] [136] [137]
WEO [110]
TEO [110]
TSA [138]
EO [139]
CGO [140]
GSA [101] [118]
TLBO [98]

techniques to find the optimal solution for the mechanical
design problems. To describe these challenges, the follow-
ing points are given.
1. Absence of benchmarking and standard results: there
are some benchmark results published in the literature,
which is not enough. In these benchmarks, scholars have
employed various mechanical design problems and ana-
lyzed the outcomes with decision trees to provide the
best training outcomes.
2. Most of MH techniques have several parameters that
required to determine during the process of finding the
optimal solution for the mechanical design problems.
The process of determine the suitable values for those
parameters is time-consuming, and in some cases is con-
sidered as an optimization process.
3. The MH techniques that applied still suffer from some
limitations such as stuck in local optimal since it needs
to balance between the exploration and exploitation.
This effect on the quality of the final output.
To tackling these limitations, new concepts and opera-
tors can be combined with these MH techniques such
as reinforcement learning, gradient descent, and Nelder
mead. In addition, different concept of hybridization can
be applied to enhance the performance of MH to balance
the exploration and exploitation.
5 Conclusion
In this review paper, the applications of metaheuristic opti-
mization algorithms in design optimization of mechanical
systems are discussed. Different common used metaheuris-
tic algorithms are briefly explained. Five different mechani-
cal design topics have been discussed considering the uti-
lization of metaheuristic algorithms to improve the design
accuracy. Mechanical design is a cumbersome problem
which involves multiple interacted constraints and objec-
tives with mixed design variables (discrete, integer, and
continuous). The design constraints may have a nonlinear
nature related to different design issues such as material
behavior, geometric conditions, and body dynamics. There-
fore, metaheuristic algorithms have been proved to be the
optimal robustness optimization tool that can overcome the
problems related to the mechanical design process.

13

Fig. 6  The summary of publication of MH techniques according to the mechanical design problem
Future aspects and challenges of this research includ-
ing: optimizing DNN structure using other recent opti-
mization algorithms, modifying them by introduc-
ing more powerful methods such as hybridizing them
or adding new operators to these algorithms. These
propositions can improve the ability of the optimiza-
tion algorithms to solve major problems in DNNs and
enhance their performance. Furthermore, DNNs can be
employed in several other applications, such as mili-
tary, financial fraud detection, mobile advertising, rec-
ommendation systems, drug discovery and toxicology,
visual art processing, computer vision, natural language
processing, etc.
13
M. Abd Elaziz et al.
Acknowledgments  This work is supported by the Hubei Provinci-
nal Science and Technology Major Project of China under Grant No.
2020AEA011 and the Key Research & Developement Plan of Hubei
Province of China under Grant No. 2020BAB100. Also, China Post-
doctoral Science Foundation Grant No. 2019M652647.
References
1. Cheng M-Y, Prayogo D (2014) Symbiotic Organisms Search:
a new metaheuristic optimization algorithm. Comput Struct
139:98–112
2. Oliva D, Elaziz MA, Elsheikh AH, Ewees AA (2019) A review
on meta-heuristics methods for estimating parameters of solar
cells. J Power Sources 435:126683
Advanced Metaheuristic Techniques for Mechanical Design Problems: Review
3. Ransegnola T, Zhao X, Vacca A (2019) A comparison of helical
and spur external gear machines for fluid power applications:
design and optimization. Mech Mach Theory 142:103604
4. Cui D, Wang G, Lu Y, Sun K (2020) Reliability design and opti-
mization of the planetary gear by a GA based on the DEM and
Kriging model. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 203:107074
5. Fei C, Liu H, Zhu Z, An L, Li S, Lu C (2020) Whole-process
design and experimental validation of landing gear lower drag
stay with global/local linked driven optimization strategy. Chin
J Aeronaut 34:318–328
6. Jahangiri M, Hadianfard MA, Najafgholipour MA, Jahangiri
M, Gerami MR (2020) Interactive autodidactic school: a new
metaheuristic optimization algorithm for solving mathematical
and structural design optimization problems. Comput Struct
235:106268
7. Zayed ME, Zhao J, Elsheikh AH, Li W, Elaziz MA (2020) Opti-
mal design parameters and performance optimization of ther-
modynamically balanced dish/Stirling concentrated solar power
system using multi-objective particle swarm optimization. Appl
Therm Eng 178:115539
8. Elsheikh AH, Deng W, Showaib EA (2020) Improving laser
cutting quality of polymethylmethacrylate sheet: experimental
investigation and optimization. J Market Res 9:1325–1339
9. Millo F, Arya P, Mallamo F (2018) Optimization of automotive
diesel engine calibration using genetic algorithm techniques.
Energy 158:807–819
10. Sun G, Tian J, Liu T, Yan X, Huang X (2018) Crashworthiness
optimization of automotive parts with tailor rolled blank. Eng
Struct 169:201–215
11. Grefenstette JJ (1993) August. Genetic algorithms and machine
learning. In: Proceedings of the sixth annual conference on Com-
putational learning theory, pp 3–4
12. Kirkpatrick S, Gelatt CD, Vecchi MP (1983) Optimization by
simulated annealing. Science 220:671–680
13. Kennedy J, Eberhart R (1995) Particle swarm optimization. In:
Proceedings of ICNN’95-international conference on neural net-
works, pp 1942–1948
14. Karaboga D (2005) An idea based on honey bee swarm for
numerical optimization, Technical report-tr06. Erciyes Univer-
sity, Engineering Faculty, Computer
15. Sadollah A, Eskandar H, Bahreininejad A, Kim JH (2015) Water
cycle algorithm with evaporation rate for solving constrained
and unconstrained optimization problems. Appl Soft Comput
30:58–71
16. Sadollah A, Bahreininejad A, Eskandar H, Hamdi M (2013) Mine
blast algorithm: a new population based algorithm for solving
constrained engineering optimization problems. Appl Soft Com-
put 13:2592–2612
17. Mirjalili S (2015) Moth-flame optimization algorithm: a
novel nature-inspired heuristic paradigm. Knowl-Based Syst
89:228–249
18. Mirjalili S, Mirjalili SM, Lewis A (2014) Grey wolf optimizer.
Adv Eng Softw 69:46–61
19. Price KV (1996) Differential evolution: a fast and simple numeri-
cal optimizer. In: Proceedings of North American fuzzy informa-
tion processing, pp 524–527
20. Mirjalili S (2015) The ant lion optimizer. Adv Eng Softw
83:80–98
21. Asafuddoula M, Ray T, Sarker R (2014) A decomposition-based
evolutionary algorithm for many objective optimization. IEEE
Trans Evol Comput 19:445–460
22. Han K-H, Kim J-H (2002) Quantum-inspired evolutionary algo-
rithm for a class of combinatorial optimization. IEEE Trans Evol
Comput 6:580–593
23. Hinterding R (1999) Representation, constraint satisfaction and
the knapsack problem. In: Proceedings of the 1999 Congress
on evolutionary computation-CEC99 (Cat. No. 99TH8406), pp
1286–1292
24. Deb K, Agrawal S, Pratap A, Meyarivan T (2000) A fast elit-
ist non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm for multi-objective
optimization: NSGA-II. In: International conference on parallel
problem solving from nature, pp 849–858
25. Hof PR, Van der Gucht E (2007) Structure of the cerebral cor-
tex of the humpback whale, Megaptera novaeangliae (Cetacea,
Mysticeti, Balaenopteridae). Anat Rec 290:1–31
26. Mirjalili S, Lewis A (2016) The whale optimization algorithm.
Adv Eng Softw 95:51–67
27. Mirjalili S, Gandomi AH, Mirjalili SZ, Saremi S, Faris H, Mir-
jalili SM (2017) Salp swarm algorithm: a bio-inspired optimizer
for engineering design problems. Adv Eng Softw 114:163–191
28. Marjanovic N, Isailovic B, Marjanovic V, Milojevic Z, Blagoje-
vic M, Bojic M (2012) A practical approach to the optimization
of gear trains with spur gears. Mech Mach Theory 53:1–16
29. Armillotta A (2019) Tolerance analysis of gear trains by static
analogy. Mech Mach Theory 135:65–80
30. Li X, Wang A (2019) A modularization method of dynamic
system modeling for multiple planetary gear trains transmission
gearbox. Mech Mach Theory 136:162–177
31. Mendi F, Başkal T, Boran K, Boran FE (2010) Optimization of
module, shaft diameter and rolling bearing for spur gear through
genetic algorithm. Expert Syst Appl 37:8058–8064
32. Miler D, Žeželj D, Lončar A, Vučković K (2018) Multi-objective
spur gear pair optimization focused on volume and efficiency.
Mech Mach Theory 125:185–195
33. Wang H, Zou Z (2011) Design of optimization of gear train
weight based on reliability simulated annealing. In: Proceedings
2011 international conference on transportation, mechanical, and
electrical engineering (TMEE), pp 883–886
34. Tamboli K, Patel S, George PM, Sanghvi R (2014) Optimal
design of a heavy duty helical gear pair using particle swarm
optimization technique. Proc Technol 14:513–519
35. Savsani V, Rao RV, Vakharia DP (2010) Optimal weight design
of a gear train using particle swarm optimization and simulated
annealing algorithms. Mech Mach Theory 45:531–541
36. Lampinen J (2003) Cam shape optimisation by genetic algorithm.
Comput Aided Des 35:727–737
37. Tsiafis I, Mitsi S, Bouzakis K, Papadimitriou A (2013) Optimal
design of a cam mechanism with translating flat-face follower
using genetic algorithm. Tribol Ind 35:255–260
38. Fang R, Chen H (2010) Research on cam curve optimal design
based on genetic algorithm. In: 2010 second international confer-
ence on computer modeling and simulation, pp 249–252
39. Qin W, He J (2010) Optimum design of local cam pro-
file of a valve train. Proc Inst Mech Eng C J Mech Eng Sci
224:2487–2492
40. Ge RY, Guo P (2012) Flexible cam profile synthesis method
using NURBS and its optimization based on genetic algorithm.
In: Advanced materials research, pp 69–72
41. Mandal M, Naskar TK (2009) Introduction of control points in
splines for synthesis of optimized cam motion program. Mech
Mach Theory 44:255–271
42. Zhi L, Zhansheng L, Yigong L (2005) Dynamic simulation of
distribution cam mechanism in internal combustion engine based
on ant colony algorithm. Trans Chin Soc Agric Eng 6
43. Bravo HR, Flocker WF (2011) Optimizing cam profiles using the
particle swarm technique. ASME. J Mech Des 133(9):091003
44. Abderazek H, Yildiz AR, Mirjalili S (2020) Comparison of
recent optimization algorithms for design optimization of a cam-
follower mechanism. Knowl-Based Syst 191:105237
45. Sessarego M, Feng J, Ramos-García N, Horcas SG (2020)
Design optimization of a curved wind turbine blade using neural
13

networks and an aero-elastic vortex method under turbulent
inflow. Renew Energy 146:1524–1535
46. Keshavarzzadeh V, Ghanem RG, Tortorelli DA (2019) Shape
optimization under uncertainty for rotor blades of horizontal axis
wind turbines. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 354:271–306
47. Kear M, Evans B, Ellis R, Rolland S (2016) Computational aero-
dynamic optimisation of vertical axis wind turbine blades. Appl
Math Model 40:1038–1051
48. Chan CM, Bai HL, He DQ (2018) Blade shape optimization
of the Savonius wind turbine using a genetic algorithm. Appl
Energy 213:148–157
49. Jureczko M, Pawlak M, Mężyk A (2005) Optimisation of wind
turbine blades. J Mater Process Technol 167:463–471
50. Selig MS, Coverstone-Carroll VL (1996) Application of a
genetic algorithm to wind turbine design. J Energy Res Technol
118:22–28
51. Maral H, Alpman E, Kavurmacıoğlu L, Camci C (2019) A
genetic algorithm based aerothermal optimization of tip carving
for an axial turbine blade. Int J Heat Mass Transf 143:118419
52. Vianna Neto JX, Guerra Junior EJ, Moreno SR, Hultmann
Ayala HV, Mariani VC, Coelho LS (2018) Wind turbine blade
geometry design based on multi-objective optimization using
metaheuristics. Energy 162:645–658
53. Ceruti A (2019) Meta-heuristic multidisciplinary design optimi-
zation of wind turbine blades obtained from circular pipes. Eng
Comput 35:363–379
54. Ma Y, Zhang A, Yang L, Hu C, Bai Y (2019) Investigation on
optimization design of offshore wind turbine blades based on
particle swarm optimization. Energies 12:1972
55. Boeing, Boeing: commercial airplanes—747 fun facts. https://​
www.​boeing.​com/​comme​rcial/​747/. Accessed Sept 2020
56. Chattot J-J (2004) Computational aerodynamics and fluid dynam-
ics: an introduction. Springer, Berlin
57. Li M, Bai J, Li L, Meng X, Liu Q, Chen B (2019) A gradient-
based aero-stealth optimization design method for flying wing
aircraft. Aerosp Sci Technol 92:156–169
58. Skinner SN, Zare-Behtash H (2018) State-of-the-art in aero-
dynamic shape optimisation methods. Appl Soft Comput
62:933–962
59. Allen Gardner B, Michael S (2003) Airfoil design using a genetic
algorithm and an inverse method. In: AIAA, vol. 200320043
60. Khurana M, Winarto H, Sinha A (2008) Airfoil geometry
parameterization through shape optimizer and computational
fluid dynamics. In: 46th AIAA aerospace sciences meeting and
exhibit, p 295
61. Wang Y-y, Zhang B-q, Chen Y-c (2011) Robust airfoil optimi-
zation based on improved particle swarm optimization method.
Appl Math Mech 32:1245
62. Wickramasinghe UK, Carrese R, Li X (2010) Designing air-
foils using a reference point based evolutionary many-objective
particle swarm optimization algorithm. In: IEEE congress on
evolutionary computation, pp 1–8
63. Tao J, Sun G, Wang X, Guo L (2019) Robust optimization for
a wing at drag divergence Mach number based on an improved
PSO algorithm. Aerosp Sci Technol 92:653–667
64. Koreanschi A, Sugar Gabor O, Acotto J, Brianchon G, Portier G,
Botez RM et al (2017) Optimization and design of an aircraft’s
morphing wing-tip demonstrator for drag reduction at low speed,
part I—aerodynamic optimization using genetic, bee colony and
gradient descent algorithms. Chin J Aeron 30:149–163
65. Hashimoto A, Jeong S, Obayashi S (2015) Aerodynamic optimi-
zation of near-future high-wing aircraft. Trans Jpn Soc Aeronaut
Space Sci 58:73–82
66. Sasaki D, Obayashi S (2005) Efficient search for trade-offs by
adaptive range multi-objective genetic algorithms. J Aerosp
Comput Inf Commun 2:44–64
13
M. Abd Elaziz et al.
67. Chiba K, Oyama A, Obayashi S, Nakahashi K, Morino H
(2007) Multidisciplinary design optimization and data mining
for transonic regional-jet wing. J Aircr 44:1100–1112
68. Sasaki D, Morikawa M, Obayashi S, Nakahashi K (2001) Aero-
dynamic shape optimization of supersonic wings by adaptive
range multiobjective genetic algorithms. In: International
conference on evolutionary multi-criterion optimization, pp
639–652
69. Gil AV, Zavorin AS, Starchenko AV (2019) Numerical investiga-
tion of the combustion process for design and non-design coal in
T-shaped boilers with swirl burners. Energy 186:115844
70. Xie Y, Tu Y, Jin H, Luan C, Wang Z, Liu H (2019) Numerical
study on a novel burner designed to improve MILD combustion
behaviors at the oxygen enriched condition. Appl Therm Eng
152:686–696
71. Musa O, Xiong C, Weixuan L, Wenhe L (2019) Combustion
characteristics of a novel design of solid-fuel ramjet motor with
swirl flow. Aerosp Sci Technol 92:750–765
72. Pantaleo AM, Camporeale SM, Sorrentino A, Miliozzi A, Shah
N, Markides CN (2020) Hybrid solar-biomass combined Bray-
ton/organic Rankine-cycle plants integrated with thermal stor-
age: techno-economic feasibility in selected Mediterranean areas.
Renew Energy 147:2913–2931
73. Smith JD, Sreedharan V, Landon M, Smith ZP (2020) Advanced
design optimization of combustion equipment for biomass com-
bustion. Renew Energy 145:1597–1607
74. Mahmood HA, Mariah Adam N, Sahari BB, Masuri SU (2018)
Development of a particle swarm optimisation model for esti-
mating the homogeneity of a mixture inside a newly designed
CNG-H2-AIR mixer for a dual fuel engine: an experimental and
theoretic study. Fuel 217:131–150
75. Zhao R, Zhang H, Song S, Yang F, Hou X, Yang Y (2018) Global
optimization of the diesel engine–organic Rankine cycle (ORC)
combined system based on particle swarm optimizer (PSO).
Energy Convers Manage 174:248–259
76. Zhu H, Hu YM, Zhu WD, Fan W, Zhou BW (2020) Multi-objec-
tive design optimization of an engine accessory drive system
with a robustness analysis. Appl Math Model 77:1564–1581
77. Liu J, Wang J, Zhao H (2018) Optimization of the injection
parameters and combustion chamber geometries of a diesel/
natural gas RCCI engine. Energy 164:837–852
78. Simon VV (2020) Multi-objective optimization of hypoid
gears to improve operating characteristics. Mech Mach Theory
146:103727
79. Parmar A, Ramkumar P, Shankar K (2020) Macro geometry
multi-objective optimization of planetary gearbox considering
scuffing constraint. Mech Mach Theory 154:104045
80. Donghui L, Zhenwei F, Zhang Y, Jian Z, Fengtian Y (2020) Opti-
mum design and experiment of composite leaf spring landing
gear for electric aircraft. Chin J Aeronaut 33(10):2649–2659
81. Fei C-W, Li H, Liu H-T, Lu C, Keshtegar B, An L-Q (2020) Mul-
tilevel nested reliability-based design optimization with hybrid
intelligent regression for operating assembly relationship. Aerosp
Sci Technol 103:105906
82. Yalcin Y, Orhon M, Pekcan O (2019) An automated approach
for the design of Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls incorpo-
rating metaheuristic optimization algorithms. Appl Soft Comput
74:547–566
83. Cheng Z, Lu Z, Qian J (2019) A new non-geometric transmis-
sion parameter optimization design method for HMCVT based
on improved GA and maximum transmission efficiency. Comput
Electron Agric 167:105034
84. Song CY, Lee J, Choi HY (2020) Multi-objective optimization in
the vibration characteristics of a hydraulic steering system using
a conservative and feasible response surface method. Eng Optim
52:465–483
Advanced Metaheuristic Techniques for Mechanical Design Problems: Review
85. Rai P, Agrawal A, Saini ML, Jodder C, Barman AG (2018) Vol-
ume optimization of helical gear with profile shift using real
coded genetic algorithm. Proc Comput Sci 133:718–724
86. Peng M, Lin J, Liu X (2018) Optimizing design of powertrain
transmission ratio of heavy duty truck. IFAC-PapersOnLine
51:892–897
87. Robison A, Vacca A (2018) Multi-objective optimization of
circular-toothed gerotors for kinematics and wear by genetic
algorithm. Mech Mach Theory 128:150–168
88. Zhang J, Qin X, Xie C, Chen H, Jin L (2018) Optimization design
on dynamic load sharing performance for an in-wheel motor
speed reducer based on genetic algorithm. Mech Mach Theory
122:132–147
89. Eckert JJ, Santiciolli FM, Bertoti E, Costa ES, Corrêa FC, Silva
LCAE et al (2018) Gear shifting multi-objective optimization
to improve vehicle performance, fuel consumption, and engine
emissions. Mech Des Struct Mach 46:238–253
90. Wang C, Wang S, Wang G (2019) Volume models for different
structures of spur gear. Aust J Mech Eng 17:145–153
91. Zhang J-Y, Cai S-J, Li Y-J, Zhou X, Zhang Y-X (2017) Optimi-
zation design of multiphase pump impeller based on combined
genetic algorithm and boundary vortex flux diagnosis. J Hydro-
dyn Ser B 29:1023–1034
92. Eckert JJ, Corrêa FC, Santiciolli FM, Costa ES, Dionísio HJ,
Dedini FG (2016) Vehicle gear shifting strategy optimization
with respect to performance and fuel consumption. Mech Des
Struct Mach 44:123–136
93. Yu W, Li B, Jia H, Zhang M, Wang D (2015) Application of
multi-objective genetic algorithm to optimize energy effi-
ciency and thermal comfort in building design. Energy Build
88:135–143
94. Castillo O, Cervantes L (2014) Genetic design of optimal type-1
and type-2 fuzzy systems for longitudinal control of an airplane.
Intell Autom Soft Comput 20:213–227
95. Karathanassis IK, Papanicolaou E, Belessiotis V, Bergeles GC
(2013) Multi-objective design optimization of a micro heat sink
for concentrating photovoltaic/thermal (CPVT) systems using a
genetic algorithm. Appl Therm Eng 59:733–744
96. Yildiz AR (2013) Comparison of evolutionary-based optimiza-
tion algorithms for structural design optimization. Eng Appl
Artif Intell 26:327–333
97. Shi X (2011) Design optimization of insulation usage and space
conditioning load using energy simulation and genetic algorithm.
Energy 36:1659–1667
98. Godwin Raja Ebenezer N, Ramabalan S, Navaneethasanthakumar
S (2020) Design optimisation of mating helical gears with profile
shift using nature inspired algorithms. Aust J Mech Eng 1–8
99. Wang C, Koh JM, Yu T, Xie NG, Cheong KH (2020) Mate-
rial and shape optimization of bi-directional functionally graded
plates by GIGA and an improved multi-objective particle swarm
optimization algorithm. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng
366:113017
100. Haidong S, Ziyang D, Junsheng C, Hongkai J (2020) Intelligent
fault diagnosis among different rotating machines using novel
stacked transfer auto-encoder optimized by PSO. ISA Trans
105:308–319
101. Kar D, Ghosh M, Guha R, Sarkar R, Garcia-Hernandez L, Abra-
ham A (2020) Fuzzy mutation embedded hybrids of gravitational
search and particle swarm optimization methods for engineering
design problems. Eng Appl Artif Intell 95:103847
102. Gu J, Zhao Z, Chen Y, He L, Zhan X (2020) Integrated opti-
mal design of configuration and parameter of multimode hybrid
powertrain system with two planetary gears. Mech Mach Theory
143:103630
103. Chen S-Y, Wu C-H, Hung Y-H, Chung C-T (2018) Optimal
strategies of energy management integrated with transmission
control for a hybrid electric vehicle using dynamic particle
swarm optimization. Energy 160:154–170
104. Atila Ü, Dörterler M, Durgut R, Şahin İ (2020) A comprehen-
sive investigation into the performance of optimization meth-
ods in spur gear design. Eng Optim 52:1052–1067
105. Lebaal N (2019) Robust low cost meta-modeling optimization
algorithm based on meta-heuristic and knowledge databases
approach: Application to polymer extrusion die design. Finite
Elem Anal Des 162:51–66
106. Zhang B, Song B, Mao Z, Li B (2018) Layout optimization of
landing gears for an underwater glider based on particle swarm
algorithm. Appl Ocean Res 70:22–31
107. Sun S, Wang S, Wang Y, Lim TC, Yang Y (2018) Prediction
and optimization of hobbing gear geometric deviations. Mech
Mach Theory 120:288–301
108. Wu Q, Cole C, McSweeney T (2016) Applications of particle
swarm optimization in the railway domain. Int J Rail Transp
4:167–190
109. Carbonelli A, Rigaud E, Perret-Liaudet J, Pelloli E, Barday D
(2014) Low noise design of a truck timing multi-stage gear:
robust optimization of tooth surface modifications. In: Lyon P,
Velex Ed (eds) International Gear Conference 2014: 26th–28th
August 2014. Chandos Publishing, Oxford, pp 200–207
110. Kaveh A, Biabani Hamedani K, Milad Hosseini S, Bakhsh-
poori T (2020) Optimal design of planar steel frame structures
utilizing meta-heuristic optimization algorithms. Structures
25:335–346
111. Li K, Yu Y, Wang Y, Hu Z (2018) Research on structural opti-
mization method of FRP fishing vessel based on artificial bee
colony algorithm. Adv Eng Softw 121:250–261
112. Fang J, Sun G, Qiu N, Steven GP, Li Q (2017) Topology opti-
mization of multicell tubes under out-of-plane crushing using
a modified artificial bee colony algorithm. ASME. J Mech Des
139(7):071403
113. Aydoğdu İ, Akın A, Saka MP (2016) Design optimization of
real world steel space frames using artificial bee colony algo-
rithm with Levy flight distribution. Adv Eng Softw 92:1–14
114. Liang J-H, Lee C-H (2015) A Modification artificial bee col-
ony algorithm for optimization problems. Math Probl Eng
2015:581391
115. Garg H (2014) Solving structural engineering design optimiza-
tion problems using an artificial bee colony algorithm. J Ind
Manag Optim 10:777–794
116. Jahjouh MM, Arafa MH, Alqedra MA (2013) Artificial Bee
Colony (ABC) algorithm in the design optimization of RC
continuous beams. Struct Multidiscip Optim 47:963–979
117. Akay B, Karaboga D (2012) Artificial bee colony algorithm
for large-scale problems and engineering design optimization.
J Intell Manuf 23:1001–1014
118. Shilaja C, Arunprasath T (2019) Optimal power flow using
moth swarm algorithm with gravitational search algorithm
considering wind power. Futur Gener Comput Syst 98:708–715
119. Gupta S, Deep K (2020) A memory-based Grey Wolf Optimizer
for global optimization tasks. Appl Soft Comput 93:106367
120. Tripathi S, Shrivastava A, Jana KC (2020) Self-Tuning fuzzy
controller for sun-tracker system using Gray Wolf Optimization
(GWO) technique. ISA Trans 101:50–59
121. Dörterler M, Şahin İ, Gökçe H (2019) A grey wolf optimizer
approach for optimal weight design problem of the spur gear.
Eng Optim 51:1013–1027
122. Nayak B, Misra B, Choudhury TR (2018) Meta-heuristic opti-
mization algorithms for design of gain constrained state variable
filter. AEU-Int J Electron C 93:7–18
123. Chai J, Huang P, Sun Y (2020) Differential evolution-based
system design optimization for net zero energy buildings under
climate change. Sustain Urban Areas 55:102037
13

124. Truong V-H, Kim S-E (2018) Reliability-based design optimi-
zation of nonlinear inelastic trusses using improved differential
evolution algorithm. Adv Eng Softw 121:59–74
125. de Vasconcelos Segundo EH, Amoroso AL, Mariani VC, dos
Santos Coelho L (2017) Economic optimization design for shell-
and-tube heat exchangers by a Tsallis differential evolution. Appl
Therm Eng 111:143–151
126. Ho-Huu V, Nguyen-Thoi T, Le-Anh L, Nguyen-Trang T (2016)
An effective reliability-based improved constrained differential
evolution for reliability-based design optimization of truss struc-
tures. Adv Eng Softw 92:48–56
127. Pati PR, Satpathy MP (2019) Investigation on red brick dust filled
epoxy composites using ant lion optimization approach. Polym
Compos 40:3877–3885
128. Coelho LS, Maidl G, Pierezan J, Mariani VC, Luz MVF, Leite
JV (2018) Ant Lion approach based on Lozi Map for multiob-
jective transformer design optimization. In: 2018 international
symposium on power electronics, electrical drives, automation
and motion (SPEEDAM), pp 280–285
129. Mirjalili S, Jangir P, Saremi S (2017) Multi-objective ant lion
optimizer: a multi-objective optimization algorithm for solving
engineering problems. Appl Intell 46:79–95
130. Dai C, Lei X, He X (2020) A decomposition-based evolutionary
algorithm with adaptive weight adjustment for many-objective
problems. Soft Comput 24:10597–10609
131. Han D, Du W, Du W, Jin Y, Wu C (2019) An adaptive decompo-
sition-based evolutionary algorithm for many-objective optimiza-
tion. Inf Sci 491:204–222
132. Tanabe R, Ishibuchi H (2018) A decomposition-based evolution-
ary algorithm for multi-modal multi-objective optimization. In:
International conference on parallel problem solving from nature,
pp 249–261
13
View publication stats
M. Abd Elaziz et al.
133. Shankar Bhattacharjee K, Kumar Singh H, Ray T (2017) A novel
decomposition-based evolutionary algorithm for engineering
design optimization. ASME. J Mech Des 139(4):041403
134. Got A, Moussaoui A, Zouache D (2020) A guided population
archive whale optimization algorithm for solving multiobjective
optimization problems. Expert Syst Appl 141:112972
135. Panda S, Mishra D, Biswal B (2019) An approach for design
optimization of 3R manipulator using Adaptive Cuckoo Search
algorithm. Mech Des Struct Mach 48(6):1–26
136. Du T-S, Ke X-T, Liao J-G, Shen Y-J (2018) DSLC-FOA:
improved fruit fly optimization algorithm for application to
structural engineering design optimization problems. Appl Math
Model 55:314–339
137. Pauline O, Sin HC, Sheng DDCV, Kiong SC, Meng OK (2017)
Design optimization of structural engineering problems using
adaptive cuckoo search algorithm. In: 2017 3rd international
conference on control, automation and robotics (ICCAR), pp
745–748
138. Kaur S, Awasthi LK, Sangal AL, Dhiman G (2020) Tunicate
Swarm Algorithm: a new bio-inspired based metaheuristic para-
digm for global optimization. Eng Appl Artif Intell 90:103541
139. Gupta S, Deep K, Mirjalili S (2020) An efficient equilibrium
optimizer with mutation strategy for numerical optimization.
Appl Soft Comput 96:106542
140. Talatahari S, Azizi M (2020) Optimization of constrained math-
ematical and engineering design problems using chaos game
optimization. Comput Ind Eng 145:106560
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.