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

net/publication/334193929

Comparison of grey wolf, whale, water cycle, ant lion and sine-cosine
algorithms for the optimization of a vehicle engine connecting rod

Article  in  Materials Testing · March 2018

DOI: 10.3139/120.111153

CITATIONS READS

169 689

3 authors, including:

Ali Riza Yildiz

Bursa Uludag University
183 PUBLICATIONS   9,321 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

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

The Harris hawks, grasshopper and multi-verse optimization algorithms for the selection of optimal machining parameters in manufacturing operations View project

Optimization of thin-walled structures using Gravitational Search Algorithm (GSA), League Championship Algorithm (LCA), Firefly Algorithm(FFA), Bat Algorithm(BA),
Interior Search Algorithm(ISA), Imperialist Competitive Algorithm (ICA) View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ali Riza Yildiz on 16 February 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 MP 111153
COMPONENT-ORIENTED TESTING 1

Comparison of grey wolf, whale,

water cycle, ant lion and sine-
cosine algorithms for the optimi-
zation of automobile connecting
rod components
Ali Rıza Yıldız, Bursa, Turkey
Article Information
Correspondence Address
Prof. Dr. Ali Rıza Yıldız
Department of Automotive Engineering
Uludağ University
Görükle, Bursa, Turkey
E-mail: aliriza.yildiz@btu.edu.tr
Keywords
Connecting rod, grey wolf algorithm, water cycle
algorithm, whale algorithm, ant lion algorithm,
sine-cosine algorithm, optimum design
The product design process has a very important effect on product costs.
It aims to develop products that are able to compete by achieving an op-
timum design in the product design process. This research presents the
first application in the literature of the grey wolf, whale, water cycle, ant
lion and sine-cosine optimization algorithms for the optimization of ve-
hicle components. In this study, the optimal structural model of a vehi-
cle connecting rod was determined. In the optimization process, various
design alternatives were created by using the latin hypercube method.
Stress analysis was performed for each of these designs. According to
the generated responses, equations for objective and constraint func-
tions were obtained. The optimization problem was solved using the
above mentioned algorithms which have been newly developed in the
literature, resulting in optimum connection rod design. The results dem-
onstrate that the grey wolf, whale, water cycle, ant lion and sine-cosine
algorithms are very important options in optimizing design and manu-
facturing optimization problems.

Today’s competitive conditions are chal-
lenging and force engineers and compa-
nies to develop competitive and sustaina-
ble solutions in the design and manufactur-
ing processes of air, sea and land vehicle
components. [1-20].
In recent years, researchers working on
optimal design and manufacturing have
started to use population-based techniques
such as genetic algorithms, the particle
swarm optimization algorithm, the har-
mony search algorithm, the artificial im-
mune algorithm, the artificial bee colony
algorithm, the gravitational search algo-
rithm, the interior search algorithm and
charged system search algorithms instead
of traditional methods that require deriva-
tive processing to reach optimum designs
more quickly [1-30]. For instance: a new
topology optimization of continuum struc-
tures using genetic algorithms was devel-
oped by Yildiz and Saitou [2]. The proposed
approach is used in multi-component de-
sign of vehicle components.
Recently, Karagöz and Yildiz used the inte-
rior search algorithm, the imperialist com-
petitive algorithm, the league championship
algorithm, the gravitational search algo-
rithm, the hybrid gravitational search-nelder
mead algorithm, the bat algorithm, the
cuckoo search algorithm, the firefly algo-
rithm and the particle swarm algorithm to
develop crash performance of a thin-walled
crash box in light of the formative history [3].
The grey wolf, whale, water cycle, ant lion
and sine-cosine algorithms are optimization
methods that have proven to be superior to
other well-known methods in terms of their
ability to reach optimum solutions in the lit-
erature [4-8].The whale optimization algo-
rithm (WOA) [5] mimics the social behavior
of humpback whales. Whales are the largest
mammals in the world. The water cycle al-
gorithm (WCA) [6] is based on a detailed
examination of the water cycle process and
the way rivers and streams flow into the sea
in the real world. The basic inspiration of
the ant lion optimization algorithm (ALO)
[7] is the hunting behavior of ant lions. The
ALO covers five stages of hunting: the ran-
dom walk of ants, trap building, entrapment

60 (2018) 3  © Carl Hanser Verlag, München  Materials Testing

2 COMPONENT-ORIENTED TESTING

of ants in traps, catching prey, and re-build-
ing traps. Mirjalili [8] developed sine-cosine
optimization for solving optimization prob-
lems. The airfoil design problem of an air-
craft was solved to show the effectiveness of
the algorithm in [8].
The connecting rod is a part of the motor
located between the piston and the crank
and transmits the axial torque. Connecting
rods are used in many engine types. The
connecting rods are exposed to repetitive
loads millions of times. Under these loads,
the connecting rod are subject to longitudi-
nal pressure due to gas pressure on the
piston head, to reciprocal tensile and com-
pressive forces due to variations in piston
speed, to buckling due to oscillatory mo-
tion, and to buckling due to large compres-
sion forces [10].
The basic function of the connecting rod
is to transmit the push motion from the pis-
ton in the form of crankshaft rotation mo-
tion. The connecting rods must be suffi-
ciently durable to withstand the stressthat
occurs when a motor is moving within the
engine, undergoing approximately 2,000-
3,000 revolutions per minute during nor-
equations of two or more orders should be Grey wolf optimization
used. In such cases, first order polynomial algorithm
equations are insufficient to define the
problem, which leads to a preference for The grey wolf optimization algorithm
second order polynomial equations [8, 9]. (GWO) was developed by Mirjalili et al. [4],
Exponential models which resemble poly- inspired by the leadership hierarchy and
nomial models are empirical models and hunting mechanism of grey wolves [4]. The
eliminate the disadvantages of polynomial grey wolves are classified as alpha, beta,
models. The exponential models used by delta and omega. The main parameters of
researchers are shown in Equations (1) and the GWO involve encircling, hunting and
(2). The coefficients of these models can be attacking the prey.
estimated using the least squares method. In the GWO, the alpha (α) solution is
considered thebest. The second and third
m best solutions are defined as beta (β) and
y i = β0 + ∑ βi x rii
(1) delta (δ) respectively. The other solutions
i=1 in addition to the alpha, beta and delta ones
ri are called omega (ω). α, β, and δ control
( )
m
y i = β0 + ∑ βi x i − x0,i
(2) hunting (optimization) in the GWO. The fol-
i=1 lowing equations are mathematical models
of encircling behavior:
The exponential models used in predicting
responses are shown in the Equations (3), !" ! !" !"
(4) and (5). (7)
D () ()
= C ⋅ Xp t − X t
m !" !" !" !"
log
(3)y i = β0 ∑ β i x i X( ) ()
t +1 = X p t − A ⋅ D
(8)
i=1

mal operation and exposed to millions of

repetitive loads. Lightweight connecting
⎛
y = β0 + ⎜ 1− e
(4)
( −Bixi) ⎞ !"
with t: current iteration, X p: position vector
⎝ ⎟⎠ !" !
rod design is important to reduce inertia of the prey, A and C : coefficient vectors and
!" !" !
forces in the directional and stopping ⎛y −y ⎞ m X : position vector of a grey wolf. A and C
⎟ = β0 + ∑ β i x i
0 i
movements of each piston [10]. (5)
log ⎜ are obtained as follows:
In this study, optimum design of the con- ⎝ yi ⎠ i=1

necting rod is carried out using the grey !" ! ! !

wolf, whale, water cycle, ant lion and sine- The second-order polynomial equation, (9)
A = 2a ⋅r1 − a
cosine optimization algorithms. which enables an estimation of the response
surface and the least-squares method, is ! !
Meta-modeling and response presented in Equation (6) (E[ε] = 0), and the C = 2⋅r 2
(10)
surface method variance (σ2) is constant (Var[ε] = σ2),
where the mathematical form of the selected
!"
The main implication of a meta-model is to model is appropriate and therefore able to where the components of α are linearly de-
obtain an approximate model of the system represent the real mean response. creased from 2 to 0 and r1, r2 are random
using function values at ​​ the points of the (ε~N(0,σ2)) is assumed to apply to the values in [0, 1].
specific sample [2, 8, 9]. In the meta-mode- least squares method. The fact that random Grey wolves can recognize the location
ling process, the values ​​of the objective error (εi) has normal distribution with re- of prey and encircle them. The hunt is
function of the sample point are obtained spect to the validity of the hypothesis tests usually controlled by the alpha. The delta
so that the values ​​of the design variables is important for the correctness of the coef- and beta sh rarely participate in hunting.
remain at the initial ranges. The response ficients and the regression model. Obtain- The following equations are used in this
surface method is used to examine the ex- ing the best unbiased estimators is achieved regard.
perimental field of variables and to deter- by random error (εi) being independent and
mine the relationship between system re- its variance being constant [8]. !" ! !" !"
sponse and independent variables that ef- m m
(11)
D α = C1 ⋅ X α − X
fect it. The response surface methodology y i = β0 + ∑ β j x j + ∑ β k x j x k
includes optimization techniques used in (6) 1≤j≤m 1≤j≤k≤m !" ! !" !"
the system response and used to find the ( )
+ εi i = 1,2,3...n D β = C2 ⋅ X β − X
(12)
desired levels of process variables [8, 9].
If the system response has a linear func- With m: Number of independent variables, !" ! !" !"
tion of the independent variable, a polyno- yi: Dependent variable, n: Number of obser- (13)
D δ = C3 ⋅ X δ − X
mial equation of the first order may be pre- vations, β: Model coefficient to be esti-
ferred. However, if there are nonlinear mated, xiji: Independent variable and εi:
( )
!" !" !" !"
curves on the response surface, polynomial observed random error [8, 9]. (14)
X 1 = X α − A1 ⋅ Dα

60 (2018) 3
 COMPONENT-ORIENTED TESTING 3

( )
!" !" !" !"
X2 = Xβ − A2 ⋅ Dβ (15) forces, pushing force has a greater effect sign shown in Figure 5, where the result-
than pulling force. In this paper, the pa- ing data were transformed into equations
rameters considered for connecting rod de- by the methods described above. As a re-
( )
!" !" !" !"
X 3 = X δ − A 3 ⋅ Dδ (16) sign (see Figure 3) are determined as sult of the finite element analysis on the
weight and maximum stress. optimum design, displacement and stress
!" !" !" The design variables x1, x2, x3, x4, x5 and distributions as shown in Figures 6 and 7,
!"
X ( )
t +1 =
(17)
X1 + X2 + X3
3
x6 are shown in Figure 4. The lower and up- respectively, are obtained.
per limits of the design variables are given The convergence curves of the grey wolf,
in Table 1. whale, water cycle, ant lion and sine-cosine
More detailed information about the GWO Analysis of the finite elements of fifty algorithms for optimization of connecting
algorithm can be found in [4]. different designs yielded the optimal de- rod are given in Figure 8. Tables 2 com-

Optimum design of a vehicle

connecting rod

The connecting rod has a connecting role

between piston and crankshaft in an en-
Figure 3: Initial design
gine as shown in Figure 1. of the connecting rod
It is preferable forconnecting rod be light
enabling force lines to be as continuous as
possible. Before determining the forces and
the boundary conditions on a connecting
rod, some important measurements, shown
in Figures 2, and 3D data of the connecting
rod are generated.
A connecting rod is subjected to forces
generated by mass and fuel combustion.
Since gas forces are larger than inertia

Figure 4: Design variables

Design variables Lower limit value Upper limit limit

X1 6° 15°
Figure 1: Connecting rods of a crankshaft
X2 24 30
X3 8 16
X4 16 20
X5 25 85
X6 1 7

Table 1: Design variables and lower as well as upper limits

Figure 5: Optimum
design of the connecting
rod

Figure 2: Basic dimensions of the connecting road

60 (2018) 3
4 COMPONENT-ORIENTED TESTING
pares the total mass and stress obtained
from each algorithm. Table 2 shows that
the GWO was the most robust optimizer
and that the SCA and the ALO were the
worst optimizers in solving the connecting
rod optimization problem. The lowest
weight of the components was reached by
the GWO at 500 g after 200 function evalu-
ations. The results show that the grey wolf
optimization algorithm performs better
than the whale and water cycle, ant lion
and sine-cosine optimization algorithms in
the optimum design.
Conclusions
In this study, grey wolf, whale, water cy-
cle, ant lion, sine-cosine optimization algo-
rithms are used for optimum design for a
connecting rod in an automobile internal
combustion engine. Six design variables
were identified in the optimization study
and different designs were created by the
latin hypercube method so that the upper
and lower limits of these variables would
not be violated. For each design, stress
analysis was performed and the stress val-
ues ​​and the weight of each part were calcu-
lated for the connecting rod. According to
the results, mathematical equations were
obtained using the response surface
method for stress and weight values. These
equations were obtained by optimizing the
Figure 6: Maximum displacement for optimum connecting rod
Figure 8: Convergence curve of the GWO,WCA,
WOA, SCA and ALO for the connecting rod
system using optimization algorithms. The
optimum design does not violate the maxi-
mum stress of 100 MPa. The weight of the
optimum design is 500 g. The weight of the
optimum design is 31.7 % less than the ini-
tial design.
The results show that the grey wolf,
whale, water cycle, ant lion and sine cosine
algorithms can be used effectively for solv-
ing real-world optimization problems in
automotive and other industries.
References
 1 B. S. Yildiz, H. Lekesiz, A. R. Yildiz: Structural
design of vehicle components using gravita-
tional search and charged system search algo-
rithms, Materials Testing, 58 (2016), No. 1,
pp. 79-81,
DOI:10.3139/120.110819
 2 A. R. Yildiz, K. Saitou: Topology synthesis of
multicomponent structural assemblies in con-
tinuum domains, ASME Journal of Mechanical
Design 133 (2011), No. 1, pp. 1-9,
DOI:10.1115/1.4003038
 3 S. Karagöz, A. R. Yildiz: A comparison of re-
cent metaheuristic algorithms for crashworthi-
ness optimisation of vehicle thin-walled tubes
considering sheet metal forming effects, Inter-
national Journal of Vehicle Design, 73 (2017),
No. 1-3, pp. 179-188,
DOI:10.1504/IJVD.2017.082593
 4 S. Mirjalili, S. M. Mirjalili, A. Lewis: Grey Wolf
Optimizer, Advances in Engineering Software
69 (2014) pp. 46-61,
DOI: 10.1016/j.advengsoft.2013.12.007
Figure 7: Maximum stress for optimum connecting rod
Table 2: Optimum results
© Carl Hanser Verlag, München  Materials Testing  60 (2018) 3
 5 S. Mirjalili, A. Lewis: The whale optimization
algorithm, Advances in Engineering Software
95 (2016) pp. 51-67,
DOI:10.1016/j.advengsoft.2016.01.00
 6 H. Eskandar, A. Sadollah, A. Bahreininejad,
M. Hamdi: Water cycle algorithm – A novel
metaheuristic optimization method for solving
constrained engineering optimization prob-
lems, Computers and Structures 110–111
(2012) pp. 151-166,
DOI:1016/j.compstruc.2012.07.010
 7 S. Mirjalili: Ant lion optimizer, Advances in
Engineering Software 83 (2015) pp. 80-98,
DOI: 10.1016/j.advengsoft.2015.01.010
 8 S. Mirjalili: SCA: a sine cosine algorithm for
solving optimization problems, Knowledge-
Based System 96 (2016), pp. 120-133,
DOI:10.1016/j.knosys.2015.12.022
 9 A. R. Yildiz: Comparison of evolutionary-based
optimization algorithms for structural design
optimization, Engineering Applications of Arti-
ficial Intelligence 28 (2013) No. 1, pp. 327-333,
DOI: 10.1016/j.engappai.2012.05.014
10 D. Gopinatha, Ch. V. Sushma: Design and opti-
mization of four wheeler connecting rod using
finite element analysis, Materials Today: Pro-
ceedings 2 (2015 ) pp. 2291-2299,
DOI:10.1016/j.matpr.2015.07.267
11 A. R. Yildiz: Optimal structural design of
vehicle components using topology design and
optimization, Materials Testing 50 (2008),
No. 4, pp. 224-228,
DOI:10.3139/120.100880
12 E. Acar, K. N. Solanki: Improving accuracy of ve-
hicle crashworthiness response predictions us-
ing ensemble of metamodels, International Jour-
nal of Crashworthiness 14 (2009), pp. 49-61,
DOI:10.1080/13588260802462419

13 K. Hamza, K. Saitou: Automated vehicle struc-
tural crashworthiness design via a crash mode
matching algorithm. Transactions of ASME,
Journal of Mechanical Design 133 (2011),
pp. 011003-1–011003-9,
DOI: 10.1115/1.4003037
14 A. Kaveh, S. Talatahari: Charged system search
for optimal design of frame structures, Applied
Soft Computing 12 (2012), pp. 382-393,
DOI:10.1016/j.asoc.2011.08.034
15 E. Rashedi, H. Nezamabadi-pour, S. Saryazdi:
GSA: A Gravitational Search Algorithm, Infor-
mation Sciences 17(2009),No.9, pp. 2232-2248,
DOI:10.1016/j.ins.2009.03.004
16 A. R. Yildiz:Optimal structural design of
vehicle components using topology design and
optimization, Materials Testing 50 (2008),
No. 4, pp. 224-228,
DOI:10.3139/120.100880
17 P. Zhu, Y. Zhang, G. L. Chen: Metamodel-based
lightweight design of an automotive front-body
structure using robust optimization, Proceed-
ings of the Institution of Mechanical Engi-
neers, Part D: Journal of Automobile Engineer-
ing 223 (2009), No. 9, pp. 1123-1133,
DOI:10.1243/09544070JAUTO1045
18 A. R. Yildiz: A novel particle swarm optimiza-
tion approach for product design and manufac-
turing. International Journal of Advance Man-
ufacturing Technology 40 (2009), pp. 617-628
DOI:10.1007/s00170-008-1453-1
19 A. R. Yildiz, N. Kaya, Orhan B. Alankuş,
F. Ozturk: Optimal design of vehicle compo-
nents using topology design and optimization,
International Journal of Vehicle Design
34 (2004), pp. 387-398,
DOI:10.1504/IJVD.2004.004064
20 H. J. Soh, J. H. Yoo: Optimal shape design of a
brake calliper for squeal noise reduction con-
sidering system instability, Proceedings of the
Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part D:
Journal of Automobile Engineering 224
(2010), No.7, pp. 909-925,
DOI:10.1243/09544070JAUTO1385
21 N. Pholdee, S. Bureerat: Hybridisation of real-
code population-based incremental learning
and differential evolution for multiobjective
design of trusses, Information Sciences
223 (2013), pp. 136-152,
DOI:10.1016/j.ins.2012.10.008
22 J. K. Kim, Y. J. Kim, W. H. Yang, Y. C. Park,
K. H. Lee: Structural design of an outer tie rod
for a passenger car, International Journal of Au-
tomotive Technology 12 (2011), pp. 375-381,
DOI:10.1007/s12239-011-0044-6
23 H. S. Park, X. P: Dang: Structural optimization
based on CAD/CAE integration and metamod-
eling techniques, Computer-Aided Design
42 (2010), pp. 889-902,
DOI:10.1016/j.cad.2010.06.003  ings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers,
24 H. A. Gandomi: Interior Search Algorithm
(ISA): A novel approach for global Optimiza-
tion, ISA Transactions 53 (2014),
pp. 1168-1183 ,
DOI:10.1016/j.isatra.2014.03.018
25 B. S. Yildiz, A. R. Yildiz: Moth-flame opti­
mization algorithm to determine optimal
machining parameters in manufacturing
processes, Materials Testing, 59 (2017),
No. 5, pp. 425-429,
DOI:10.3139/120.111024
60 (2018) 3
View publication stats
COMPONENT-ORIENTED TESTING 5
Abstract
Optimierung eines Fahrzeugmotorpleuels mittels des Grey-Wolf-Algo-
rithmus. Der Designprozess von technischen Produkten hat erhebliche
Auswirkungen auf die Kosten der Produkte. Es besteht das Ziel, Produkte
zu entwickeln, die Wettbewerbsmöglichkeiten haben, indem ein optima-
les Design im Entwicklungsprozess erzielt wird. In der diesem Beitrag
zugrunde liegenden Studie wurde das optimale strukturelle Modell einer
Pleuelstange für einen Fahrzeugmotor ermittelt. In dem Optimierungspro-
zess wurden fünfzig verschiedene Designalternativen kreiert, indem das
Latin-Hypercube-Verfahren angewandt wurde und eine Spannungsana-
lyse für jedes dieser Designs durchgeführt wurde. Entsprechend der so
generierten Antworten wurden Gleichungen für die Ziel- und Nebenbe-
dingungsfunktion ermittelt. Die Optimierungsaufgabe wurde mittels des
Grey-Wolf-Optimierungsalgorithmus gelöst, der kürzlich aus der Literatur
entnommen wurde und damit das optimale Design des Pleuels erzielt.
26 A. R. Yildiz, E. Kurtuluş, E. Demirci, The author of this contribution
B. S. Yildiz, S. Karagöz: Optimization of thin-
wall structures using hybrid gravitational Prof. Ali Rıza Yıldız is a Professor in the Depart-
search and Nelder-Mead algorithm, Materials ment of Automotive Engineering, Uludağ Univer-
Testing, 58 (2016), No. 1, pp. 75-78, sity, Bursa, Turkey. He worked in the field of
DOI:10.3139/120.110823 multi-component topology optimization of struc-
27 N. Pholdee, S. Bureerat, A. R. Yildiz: Hybrid tures as Research Associate at the University of
real-code population-based incremental learn- Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA. Furthermore, he
ing and differential evolution for many-objec- worked on a NSF and DOE funded research pro-
tive optimisation of an automotive floor-frame, jects at the Center for Advanced Vehicular Sys-
International Journal of Vehicle Design
tems (CAVS), Mississippi State University, USA.
73 (2017), No. 1-3, pp. 20-53,
In 2015, he has been a winner of TÜBA-GEBİP
DOI:10.1504/IJVD.2017.082578
Young Scientist Outstanding Achievement Award
28 M. Kiani, A. R. Yildiz: A comparative study of
given by the Turkish Academy of Sciences
non-traditional methods for vehicle crashwor-
(TÜBA). He also received METU (Middle East
thiness and NVH Optimization, Archive and
Technical University) Prof. Mustafa N. Parlar
Computational Methods Engineering
Foundation Research Incentive Award in 2015. In
23 (2016), pp. 723-734,
2017, The TUBITAK Incentive Award, given to
DOI:10.1007/s11831-015-9155-y
29 B. S. Yildiz, H. Lekesiz, A. R. Yildiz: Structural scientists who are under the age of 40 and who
design of vehicle components using gravita- have proved to have the necessary qualifications
tional search and charged system search algo- to contribute to science in the future at an inter-
rithms, Materials Testing, 58 (2016),No. 1, national level, has been given to Professor Dr. Ali
pp. 79-81, Rıza Yildiz. His research interests are finite ele-
DOI:10.3139/120.110819 ment analysis of automobile components, light-
30 A. R. Yildiz: A new hybrid particle swarm weight design, composite materials, vehicle de-
optimization approach for structural design op- sign, vehicle crashworthiness, shape and topol-
timization in the automotive industry, Proceed- ogy optimization of vehicle components,
meta-heuristic optimization techniques and sheet
Part D: Journal of Automobile Engineering metal forming. He has been serving as a technical
226 (2012), No. 10, pp. 1340-1351, consultant to R&D Projects of Automobile Facto-
DOI:10.1177/0954407012443636 ries in Bursa, Turkey.
Bibliography
DOI 10.3139/120.111153
Materials Testing
60 (2018) 3, pages xxx-xxx
© Carl Hanser Verlag GmbH & Co. KG
ISSN 0025-5300