OPTIMIZATION

Course Contents
6.1 Definition
6.2 Conventional versus
Optimum Design Process
6.3 Engineering Applications
of Optimization
6.4 Statement of an
Optimization Problem
6.5 Terms used in
Optimization
6.6 Classification of
Optimization Problem
6.7 Optimum Design with
Lagrange Multipliers
6.8 Johnson’s Method of
Optimum Design

Department of Mechanical Engineering Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya

Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot Page 6.1
6. Optimization Computer Aided Design (161903)

6.1 Definition
− Optimization is the act of obtaining the best result under given circumstances.
− In design, construction, and maintenance of any engineering system, engineers have
to take many technological and managerial decisions at several stages. The ultimate
goal of all such decisions is either to minimize the effort required or to maximize the
desired benefit.
− Optimization can be defined as the process of finding the conditions that give the
maximum or minimum value of a function.

Fig. 6.1Minimum of f (x) is same as maximum of − f (x).

− The optimum seeking methods are also known as mathematical programming
techniques and are generally studied as a part of operations research.
− Operations research is a branch of mathematics concerned with the application of
scientific methods and techniques to decision making problems and with establishing
the best or optimal solutions.

6.2 Conventional Versus Optimum Design Process

− It is a challenge for engineers to design efficient and cost-effective systems without
compromising their integrity. Fig. 6.2 (a) presents a self-explanatory flowchart for a
conventional design method; Fig. 6.2(b) presents a similar flowchart for the optimum
design method.
− It is important to note that both methods are iterative, as indicated by a loop between
blocks 6 and 3. Both methods have some blocks that require similar calculations and
others that require different calculations. The key features of the two processes are
these:

Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya Department of Mechanical Engineering

Page 6.2 Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot
Computer Aided Design (161903) 6. Optimization

1. The optimum design method has block 0, where the problem is formulated as one of
optimization. An objective function is defined that measures the merits of different
designs.
2. Both methods require data to describe the system in block 1.
3. Both methods require an initial design estimate in block 2.
4. Both methods require analysis of the system in block 3.
5. In block 4, the conventional design method checks to ensure that the performance
criteria are met, whereas the optimum design method checks for satisfaction of all of
the constraints for the problem formulated in block 0.
6. In block 5, stopping criteria for the two methods are checked, and the iteration is
stopped if the specified stopping criteria are met.
7. In block 6, the conventional design method updates the design based on the designer’s
experience and intuition and other information gathered from one or more trial
designs; the optimum design method uses optimization concepts and procedures to
update the current design.

Fig. 6.2 Comparison of (a) conventional design method and (b) optimum design method.

− The foregoing distinction between the two design approaches indicates that the
conventional design process is less formal. An objective function that measures a
design’s merit is not identified. Trend information is usually not calculated; nor is it
used in block 6 to make design decisions for system improvement. In contrast, the
optimization process is more formal, using trend information to make design changes.

Department of Mechanical Engineering Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya

Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot Page 6.3
6. Optimization Computer Aided Design (161903)

6.3 Engineering Applications of Optimization

Optimization, in its broadest sense, can be applied to solve any engineering problem.
Some typical applications from different engineering disciplines indicate the wide
scope of the subject:
1. Design of aircraft and aerospace structures for minimum weight
2. Finding the optimal trajectories of space vehicles
3. Design of civil engineering structures such as frames, foundations, bridges, towers,
chimneys, and dams for minimum cost
4. Minimum-weight design of structures for earthquake, wind, and other types of
random loading
5. Design of water resources systems for maximum benefit
6. Optimal plastic design of structures
7. Optimum design of linkages, cams, gears, machine tools, and other mechanical
components
8. Selection of machining conditions in metal-cutting processes for minimum production
cost
9. Design of material handling equipment, such as conveyors, trucks, and cranes, for
minimum cost
10. Design of pumps, turbines, and heat transfer equipment for maximum efficiency
11. Optimum design of electrical machinery such as motors, generators, and transformers
12. Optimum design of electrical networks
13. Shortest route taken by a salesperson visiting various cities during one tour
14. Optimal production planning, controlling, and scheduling
15. Analysis of statistical data and building empirical models from experimental results to
obtain the most accurate representation of the physical phenomenon
16. Optimum design of chemical processing equipment and plants
17. Design of optimum pipeline networks for process industries
18. Selection of a site for an industry
19. Planning of maintenance and replacement of equipment to reduce operating costs
20. Inventory control
21. Allocation of resources or services among several activities to maximize the benefit
22. Controlling the waiting and idle times and queueing in production lines to reduce the
costs
23. Planning the best strategy to obtain maximum profit in the presence of a competitor
24. Optimum design of control systems.

Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya Department of Mechanical Engineering

Page 6.4 Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot
Computer Aided Design (161903) 6. Optimization

6.4 Statement of an Optimization Problem

An optimization or a mathematical programming problem can be stated as follows.

 x1 
x 
 
Find X =  2  which minimizes f(X)
:
 xn 
Subject to the constraints
gj (X) ≤ 0, j = 1, 2,….., m
lj (X) ≤ 0, j = 1, 2,….., p (6.1)
where X is an n-dimensional vector called the design vector,
f (X) is termed the objective function, and
gj (X) and lj (X) are known as inequality and equality constraints, respectively.
The problem stated in Eq. (6.1) is called a constrained optimization problem.
Some optimization problems do not involve any constraints and can be stated as
 x1 
x 
 
Find X =  2  which minimizes f(X)
:
 xn 
Such problems are called unconstrained optimization problems.

6.5 Terms used in optimization

I. Design Vector and preassigned parameters.
− Any engineering system or component is defined by a set of quantities some of which
are viewed as variables during the design process.
− In general, certain quantities are usually fixed at the outset and these are called
preassigned parameters.
− All the other quantities are treated as variables in the design process and are called
design or decision variables. The design variables are collectively represented as a
design vector.
− As an example, consider the design of the gear pair shown in Fig. 6.3, characterized
by its face width b, number of teeth T1 andT2, center distance d, pressure angle ψ,
tooth profile, and material.
− If center distanced, pressure angle ψ, tooth profile, and material of the gears are fixed
in advance, these quantities can be called preassigned parameters.
− The remaining quantities can be collectively represented by
 x1   b 
   
− A design Vector X =  x2  = T1 
 x  T 
 3  2

Department of Mechanical Engineering Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya

Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot Page 6.5
6. Optimization Computer Aided Design (161903)

Fig. 6.3 Gear pair in mesh.

II. Design Space or Design Variable Space
− If an n-dimensional Cartesian space with each coordinate axis representing a design
variable xi (i = 1, 2, . . . , n) is considered, the space is called the design variable
space or simply design space. Each point in the n-dimensional design space is called a
design point and represents either a possible or an impossible solution to the design
problem.
− In the case of the design of a gear pair, the design point {1.0, 20, 40}T, for example,
represents a possible solution, whereas the design point {1.0,−20, 40.5}T represents an
impossible solution since it is not possible to have either a negative value or a
fractional value for the number of teeth.
III. Design Constraints, Behavior Constraints and Side Constraints
− In many practical problems, the design variables cannot be chosen arbitrarily; rather,
they have to satisfy certain specified functional and other requirements. The
restrictions that must be satisfied to produce an acceptable design are collectively
called design constraints.
− Constraints that represent limitations on the behavior or performance of the system
are termed behavior or functional constraints.
− Constraints that represent physical limitations on design variables, such as
availability, fabricability, and transportability, are known as geometric or side
constraints.
− For example, for the gear pair shown in Fig. 6.2, the face width b cannot be taken
smaller than a certain value, due to strength requirements. Similarly, the ratio of the
numbers of teeth, T1/T2, is dictated by the speeds of the input and output shafts, N1
Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya Department of Mechanical Engineering
Page 6.6 Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot
Computer Aided Design (161903) 6. Optimization

and N2. Since these constraints depend on the performance of the gear pair, they are
called behavior constraints.
− The values of T1 and T2 cannot be any real numbers but can only be integers. Further,
there can be upper and lower bounds on T1 and T2 due to manufacturing limitations.
Since these constraints depend on the physical limitations, they are called side
constraints.
IV. Constraint Surface
− For illustration, consider an optimization problem with only inequality constraints gj
(X) ≤ 0. The set of values of X that satisfy the equation gj (X) = 0 forms a
hypersurface in the design space and is called a constraint surface.
− The constraint surface divides the design space into two regions:
− one in which gj (X) < 0 and the other in which gj(X)>0.
− Thus the points lying on the hypersurface will satisfy the constraint gj (X) critically,
whereas the points lying in the region where gj (X)>0 are infeasible or unacceptable,
and the points lying in the region where gj (X) < 0 are feasible or acceptable. The
collection of all the constraint surfaces gj (X) = 0, j = 1, 2, . . . ,m, which separates the
acceptable region is called the composite constraint surface.

Fig. 6.4 Constraint surfaces in a hypothetical two-dimensional design space.

Department of Mechanical Engineering Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya

Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot Page 6.7
6. Optimization Computer Aided Design (161903)

− Fig.6.4 shows a hypothetical two-dimensional design space where the infeasible

region is indicated by hatched lines. A design point that lies on one or more than one
constraint surface is called a bound point, and the associated constraint is called an
active constraint.
− Design points that do not lie on any constraint surface are known as free points.
− Depending on whether a particular design point belongs to the acceptable or
unacceptable region, it can be identified as one of the following four types:
1. Free and acceptable point
2. Free and unacceptable point
3. Bound and acceptable point
4. Bound and unacceptable point
V. Objective Function
− The criterion, with respect to which the design is optimized, when expressed as a
function of the design variables, is known as the criterion or merit or objective
function.
− The choice of objective function is governed by the nature of problem. The objective
function for minimization is generally taken as weight in aircraft and aerospace
structural design problems.
− In civil engineering structural designs, the objective is usually taken as the
minimization of cost.
− The maximization of mechanical efficiency is the obvious choice of an objective in
mechanical engineering systems design.
− In some situations, there may be more than one criterion to be satisfied
simultaneously.
− For example, a gear pair may have to be designed for minimum weight and maximum
efficiency while transmitting a specified horsepower.
− An optimization problem involving multiple objective functions is known as a
multiobjective programming problem.
− If f1(X) andf2(X) denote two objective functions, construct a new (overall) objective
function for optimization as
f (X) = α1f1(X) + α2f2(X)
− whereα1 and α2are constants whose values indicate the relative importance of one
objective function relative to the other.

6.6 Classification of Optimization Problems

Optimization problems can be classified in several ways, as described below.
(a) Classification Based on the Existence of Constraints
− Any optimization problem can be classified as constrained or unconstrained,
depending on whether constraints exist in the problem.

Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya Department of Mechanical Engineering

Page 6.8 Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot
Computer Aided Design (161903) 6. Optimization

(b) Classification Based on the Nature of the Design Variables

− Based on the nature of design variables encountered, optimization problems can be
classified into two broad categories. In the first category, the problem is to find values
to a set of design parameters that make some prescribed function of these parameters
minimum subject to certain constraints. For example, the problem of minimum-
weight design of a prismatic beam shown in Fig. 6.9a subject to a limitation on the
maximum deflection can be stated as follows:
b 
Find X =   which minimizes
d 
f (X) = ρlbd
subject to the constraints
δtip (X) ≤ δmax
b ≥ 0 and d ≥ 0
− Where ρ is the density and δtip is the tip deflection of the beam. Such problems are
called parameter or static optimization problems.

Fig. 6.5 Cantilever beam under concentrated load.

− In the second category of problems, the objective is to find a set of design parameters,
which are all continuous functions of some other parameter, that minimizes an
objective function subject to a set of constraints. If the cross-sectional dimensions of
the rectangular beam are allowed to vary along its length as shown in Fig. 6.9b, the
optimization problem can be stated as

− Here the design variables are functions of the length parameter t. This type of
problem, where each design variable is a function of one or more parameters, is
known as a trajectory or dynamic optimization problem.

Department of Mechanical Engineering Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya

Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot Page 6.9
6. Optimization Computer Aided Design (161903)

(c) Classification Based on the Physical Structure of the Problem

− Depending on the physical structure of the problem, optimization problems can be
classified as optimal control and nonoptimal control problems.
− Optimal Control Problem. An optimal control (OC) problem is a mathematical
programming problem involving a number of stages, where each stage evolves from
the preceding stage in a prescribed manner.
− It is usually described by two types of variables the control (design) and the state
variables. The control variables define the system and govern the evolution of the
system from one stage to the next, and the state variables describe the behavior or
status of the system in any stage.
(d) Classification Based on the Nature of the Equations Involved
− Another important classification of optimization problems is based on the nature of
expressions for the objective function and the constraints. According to this
classification, optimization problems can be classified as linear, nonlinear, geometric,
and quadratic programming problems. This classification is extremely useful from the
computational point of view since there are many special methods available for the
efficient solution of a particular class of problems. Thus the first task of a designer
would be to investigate the class of problem encountered. This will, in many cases,
dictate the types of solution procedures to be adopted in solving the problem.
− Nonlinear Programming Problem. If any of the functions among the objective and
constraint functions in Eq. (1.1) is nonlinear, the problem is called a nonlinear
programming (NLP) problem. This is the most general programming problem and all
other problems can be considered as special cases of the NLP problem.
− Linear Programming Problem. If the objective function and all the constraints are
linear functions of the design variables, the mathematical programming problem is
called a linear programming (LP) problem. A linear programming problem is often
stated in the following standard form:

Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya Department of Mechanical Engineering

Page 6.10 Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot
Computer Aided Design (161903) 6. Optimization

− Geometric Programming Problem.

− Definition :A function h(X) is called a posynomialif h can be expressed as the sum of
power terms each of the form
cix1ai1x2ai2 ………..xnain
− where ci and aij are constants with ci>0 and xj>0. Thus a posynomial with N terms can
be expressed as
h(X) = c1x1a11 x2a12………xna1n+ ……..+ cNx1aN1 x2aN2………xnaNn
− A geometric programming (GMP) problem is one in which the objective function and
constraints are expressed as posynomials in X.
− Quadratic Programming Problem. A quadratic programming problem is a nonlinear
programming problem with a quadratic objective function and linear constraints. It is
usually formulated as follows:

(e) Classification Based on the Permissible Values of the Design Variables

− Depending on the values permitted for the design variables, optimization problems
can be classified as integer and real-valued programming problems.
− Integer Programming Problem. If some or all of the design variables x1, x2, . . . , xnof
an optimization problem are restricted to take on only integer (or discrete) values,the
problem is called an integer programming problem.
− On the other hand, if all the design variables are permitted to take any real value, the
optimization problem is called a real-valued programming problem.
(f) Classification Based on the Deterministic Nature of the Variables
− Based on the deterministic nature of the variables involved, optimization problems
can be classified as deterministic and stochastic programming problems.
− Stochastic Programming Problem. A stochastic programming problem is an
optimization problem in which some or all of the parameters (design variables and/or
preassigned parameters) are probabilistic (nondeterministic or stochastic).
(g) Classification Based on the Separability of the Functions
− Optimization problems can be classified as separable and nonseparable programming
problems based on the separability of the objective and constraint functions.

Department of Mechanical Engineering Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya

Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot Page 6.11
6. Optimization Computer Aided Design (161903)

− Separable Programming Problem.

− Definition: A function f (X) is said to be separable if it can be expressed as the sumof
n single-variable functions, f1(x1), f2(x2), . . . ,fn(xn), that is,
− A separable programming problem is one in which the objective function and the
constraints are separable and can be expressed in standard form as
n
Find X which minimizes f ( X ) = ∑ f i ( xi )
i =1

n
Subject to g j ( X ) = ∑ g ij ( xi ) ≤ b j , j = 1, 2,……., m
i =1

Where bj is a constant
(h) Classification Based on the Number of Objective Functions
Depending on the number of objective functions to be minimized, optimization problems can
be classified as single and multiobjective programming problems.
Multiobjective Programming Problem. A multiobjective programming problem can be stated
as follows:
Find X which minimizes f1(X), f2(X), . . . ,fk(X)
subject to
gj (X) ≤ 0, j = 1, 2, . . . ,m
wheref1, f2, . . . , fk denote the objective functions to be minimized simultaneously.

Example 6.1:

Fig. 6.6 Tubular column under compression.

Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya Department of Mechanical Engineering

Page 6.12 Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot
Computer Aided Design (161903) 6. Optimization

Design a uniform column of tubular section, with hinge joints at both ends, (Fig. 6.4) to carry
a compressive load P = 2500 kgf for minimum cost. The column is made up of a material that
has a yield stress (σy) of 500 kgf/cm2, modulus of elasticity (E) of 0.85 × 106kgf/cm2, and
weight density (ρ) of 0.0025 kgf/cm3.The length of the column is 250 cm. The stress induced
in the column should be less than the buckling stress as well as the yield stress. The mean
diameter of the column is restricted to lie between 2 and 14 cm, and columns with
thicknesses outside the range 0.2 to 0.8 cm are not available in the market. The cost of the
column includes material and construction costs and can be taken as 5W + 2d, where W is the
weight in kilograms force and d is the mean diameter of the column in centimeters.
The design variables are the mean diameter (d) and tube thickness (t):

 x  d 
X =  1=  
 x2   t 
The objective function to be minimized is given by
f (X) = 5W + 2d
= 5 (ρv) +2d
= 5 (ρAl) + 2d
= 5 (ρlπdt) + 2d
= 9.82x1x2 + 2x1
The behavior constraints can be expressed as
stress induced ≤ yield stress
stress induced ≤ buckling stress
The induced stress is given by

Department of Mechanical Engineering Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya

Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot Page 6.13
6. Optimization Computer Aided Design (161903)

Since there are only two design variables, the problem can be solved graphically as shown
below.
First, the constraint surfaces are to be plotted in a two-dimensional design space where the
two axes represent the two design variables x1 and x2. To plot the first constraint surface, we
have

that is, x1x2≥ 1.593

Thus the curve x1x2 = 1.593 represents the constraint surface g1(X) = 0. This curve can be
plotted by finding several points on the curve. The points on the curve can be found by giving
a series of values to x1 and finding the corresponding values of x2that satisfy the relation x1x2
= 1.593:

These points are plotted and a curve P1Q1 passing through all these points is drawn as shown
in Fig. 6.7, and the infeasible region, represented by g1(X)>0 or x1x2< 1.593,is shown by
hatched lines. Similarly, the second constraint g2(X) ≤ 0 can be expressed as x1x2(x12+ x22 ) ≥
47.3 and the points lying on the constraint surface g2(X) = 0 can be obtained as follows for
x1x2(x12+ x22 ) = 47.3:

Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya Department of Mechanical Engineering

Page 6.14 Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot
Computer Aided Design (161903) 6. Optimization

These points are plotted as curve P2Q2, the feasible region is identified, and the infeasible
region is shown by hatched lines as in Fig. 6.7. The plotting of side constraints is very simple
since they represent straight lines. After plotting all the six constraints, the feasible region can
be seen to be given by the bounded area ABCDEA.

Fig. 6.7 Graphical optimization of Example 6.1.

Next, the contours of the objective function are to be plotted before finding the optimum
point. For this, we plot the curves given by
f (X) = 9.82x1x2 + 2x1 = c = constant
for a series of values of c. By giving different values to c, the contours of f can be plotted
with the help of the following points.

Department of Mechanical Engineering Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya

Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot Page 6.15
6. Optimization Computer Aided Design (161903)

For 9.82 x1 x2 + 2 x1 = 50
x2 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
x1 16.77 12.62 10.10 8.44 7.24 6.33 5.64 5.07

For 9.82 x1 x2 + 2 x1 = 40
x2 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
x1 13.40 10.10 8.08 6.75 5.79 5.06 4.51 4.05

For 9.82 x1 x2 + 2 x1 = 31.58 (Passing through corner point C)

x2 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
x1 10.57 7.96 6.38 5.33 4.57 4.00 3.56 3.20

For 9.82 x1 x2 + 2 x1 = 26.53 (Passing through corner point B)

x2 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
x1 8.88 6.69 5.36 4.48 3.84 3.36 2.29 2.69

For 9.82 x1 x2 + 2 x1 = 20
x2 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
x1 6.70 5.05 4.04 3.38 2.90 2.53 2.26 2.02

These contours are shown in Fig. 6.7 and it can be seen that the objective function cannot be
reduced below a value of 26.53 (corresponding to point B) without violating some of the
constraints.
Thus the optimum solution is given by point B with
d* = x1* = 5.44 cm
t* = x2* = 0.293 cm
fmin = 26.53.

Example 6.2:It is required to design an oil can, shown in Figure 6.8, to hold at least 400 ml
of oil (1 ml = 1 cm3), as well as to meet other design requirements. The cans will be produced
in the billions, so it is desirable to minimize their manufacturing costs. Since cost can be
directly related to the surface area of the sheet metal used, it is reasonable to minimize the
amount of sheet metal required. Fabrication, handling, aesthetics, and shipping considerations
impose the following restrictions on the size of the can: The diameter should be no more than
8 cm and no less than3.5 cm, whereas the height should be no more than 18 cm and no less
than 8 cm.
The two design variables are defined as
D = diameter of the can, cm
H = height of the can, cm

Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya Department of Mechanical Engineering

Page 6.16 Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot
Computer Aided Design (161903) 6. Optimization

x  D
Design vector X =  1  =  
 x2   H 
The objective function is minimization of cost of manufacturing of can
π
f ( x) = π DH + 2 D2
4
f ( x) = 3.14( x1 x2 + 0.5 x12 ) …………………….. (1)
Fig. 6.8 Can
Side constraints
8 ≥ D ≥ 3.5 cm
18 ≥ H ≥ 8 cm ……………………………….. (2)
Behavior constraints
V ≥ 400 ml (or cm3)
π
D 2 H ≥ 400 cm3
4
x12 x2 ≥ 509.3 …………………………………(3)
g(x) = x12 x2 ≥ 509.3
Get the solution from (2), (1) and (a)
x1 3.5 4.5 6 7 8
x2 41.57 25.15 14.14 10.39 8
f(x) 476.08 387.16 323.05 305.37 301.44

At x1 = 8 and x2 = 8 objective function is minimize and also satisfy the side constraints so,
D = 8 cm, H = 8 cm.
To plot the graph and to find feasible region with optimum solution, find x2 for various f(x)
by varying x1.
Let f ( x) = 3.14( x1 x2 + 0.5 x12 ) = 200

x1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
x2 63.19 30.84 19.73 14 10.24 7.61 5.6 3.96

Let f ( x) = 3.14( x1 x2 + 0.5 x12 ) = 300

x1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
x2 95.04 46.71 30.39 21.88 16.6 12.92 10.15 7.94

Department of Mechanical Engineering Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya

Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot Page 6.17
6. Optimization Computer Aided Design (161903)

Fig. 6.9 Graphical optimization

Let f ( x) = 3.14( x1 x2 + 0.5 x12 ) = 400

x1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
x2 127.8 62.7 41 29.89 23 18.28 14.7 11.92

Then g(x) = x12 x2 ≥ 509.3

x1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
x2 509.3 127.3 56.58 31.83 20.37 14.14 10.4 8

Now plot f(200), f(300), f(400) and g(509.3)

Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya Department of Mechanical Engineering

Page 6.18 Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot
Computer Aided Design (161903) 6. Optimization

From the graph BCE is Feasible Region. Point B shows optimum solution which gives
minimum surface area and minimum cost.
D = x1 = 8 cm
H = x2 = 8 cm
f(x) = 301.44

Example 6.3: A company manufactures two machines, A and B. Using available resources;
either 28 A or 14 B can be manufactured daily. The sales department can sell up to 14 A
machines or 24 B machines. The shipping facility can handle no more than 16 machines per
day. The company makes a profit of $400 on each A machine and $600 on each B machine.
How many A and B machines should the company manufacture every day to maximize its
profit?
Design variable
The following two design variables are identified in the problem statement:
xl = number of A machines manufactured each day
x2 = number of B machines manufactured each day
Objective function
The objective is to maximize daily profit, which can be expressed in terms of design variables
as f(x) = 400x1+ 600x2
Identification of constraints:
Design constraints are placed on manufacturing capacity, on sales personnel, and on the
shipping and handling facility.
The constraint on the shipping and handling facility is quite straightforward:
x1+ x2 ≤ 16 (shipping and handling constraint) – Behaviour constraint.
x1 x2
+ ≤ 1 (Manufacturing constraint) – Behaviour constraint.
28 14
x1 x2
+ ≤ 1(Sales Dept. limitations) – Behaviour constraint.
14 24
Finally, the design variables must be non-negative asx1, x2 ≥ 0 – Side constraint.
[Here the formulation remains valid even when a design variable has zero value. The problem
has two design variables and five inequality constraints. All functions of the problem are
linear in variables xl and x2. Therefore, it is a linear programming problem.]
Graphical Solution:
x1+ x2 ≤ 16 → g1
x1 0 16
x2 16 0

Department of Mechanical Engineering Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya

Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot Page 6.19
6. Optimization Computer Aided Design (161903)

Fig. 6.10 Constraint boundary and Feasible/infeasible sidefor the inequality x1+ x2 ≤ 16 in the
profit maximization problem.
x1 x2
+ ≤ 1 → g2
28 14
x1 0 28 2 14
x2 14 0 13 7

Fig. 6.11Feasible region and Graphical solution tothe profit maximization problem
x1 x2
+ ≤1 → g3
14 24

Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya Department of Mechanical Engineering

Page 6.20 Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot
Computer Aided Design (161903) 6. Optimization

x1 0 14
x2 24 0

x1 ≥ 0 → g4
x2 ≥ 0 → g5
Get the optimum function solution (To locate the optimum point)
f(x) = 400x1+ 600x2 Let at (6,4)
= 400 x 6+ 600 x 4
= 4800
f(x) = 400x1+ 600x2= 2400
f(x) = 400x1+ 600x2= 7200
As the contours move up toward point D, feasible designs can be found with larger values for
f(x). It is clear from observation that point D has the largest value for f(x) in the feasible
region. Now simply read the coordinates of point D (4, 12) to obtain the optimum design,
having a maximum value for the profit function as
f(x) = 400x1+ 600x2= 8800.

Example 6.4: A manufacturing firm produces two machine parts using lathes, milling
machines and grinding machines. The different machining times required for each part, the
machining time available on different machines and the profit on each machine part are given
in the following table.
Machining Time required ( in min) Maximum time
Type of Machine available per week
I (x) II (y)
(minutes)
Lathe 10 5 2500
Milling machine 4 10 2000
Grinding machine 1 1.5 450
Profit per unit Rs. 50 Rs. 100
Determine the number of parts I and II to be manufactured per week to maximize the profit.

Let A = number of parts I

B = number of parts II
1. Design vector :
The design vector is given by,
 A
X = 
B ………………(a)
2. Objective function :
The objective function to be maximized is the total profit. It is given by,
f(x) = 50 A + 100 B ……………….(b)
3. Design constraints :

Department of Mechanical Engineering Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya

Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot Page 6.21
6. Optimization Computer Aided Design (161903)

Machining time of lathe machine : 10A + 5B ≤ 2500 ……………..(c)

Machining time of milling machine :4A+ 10B ≤ 2000 ……………..(d)
Machining time of grinding machine : A + 1.5B ≤ 450 ……………..(e)
Non-negativeconstraints : A ≥ 0 and integer …………… (f)
B ≥ 0and integer …………… (g)
From Equation (c),
10 A + 5B
≤1
2500
A B
+ ≤1
250 500
……………………. (h)
From Equation (d),
4 A + 10 B
≤1
2000
A B
+ ≤1
500 200
………………….. (i)
From Equation (e),
A + 1.5B
≤1
450
A B
+ ≤1
450 300
……………………..(j)
4. Plotting of design constraints :
The above design constraints can be plotted in two dimensional design space (A-axis and B-
axis), as shown in Fig. 6.12.
Design Constraint Remark
A B
+ ≤1 Straight line with A - intercept =250 and B - intercept = 500
250 500
A B
+ ≤1 Straight line with A - intercept =500 and B - intercept = 200
500 200
A B
+ ≤1 Straight line with A - intercept =450 and B - intercept = 300
450 300

1. Contours of objective function:

Coordinates of point L :
A = 0, B = 200
Coordinates of point N :
A = 250, B = 0

Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya Department of Mechanical Engineering

Page 6.22 Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot
Computer Aided Design (161903
161903) 6. Optimization

Fig.6.12 Graphical optimization

Coordinates of point M :
Point M can be obtained as intersection of lines,
A B A B
+ =1 + =1
250 500 500 200
500 A + 250 B = 125000 and 200 A + 500 B = 100000
5 A + 2.5 B 1250 and 2 A + 5 B = 1000
10 A + 5 B = 2500
+ 2 A + 5B = + 1000
8 A = 1500

Department of Mechanical Engineering Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya

Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology,
Technology Rajkot Page 6.23
6. Optimization Computer Aided Design (161903)

A =187.5
B = 125
Objective function curve through M :
For objective function curve through M (187.5, 125),
f(X) = P = 50A+ 1008
= 50 x 187.5 + 100 x 125
= 21875
Equation of objective function curve (line) through M is,
50 A + 100 B = 21875
50 A + 100 B
=1
21875
A B
+ =1
437.5 218.75
Optimum solution:
As P = f(X) is maximum at point M, the optimum solution is given by point M with,
A = 187.5 ≈ 187 (As A has to be an integer)
and B = I25
P = f(X) = 50 A + 100 B
= 50 x 187 + 100 x 125
= 21850
Number of parts I, A = 187
Number of parts II, B = 125
Profit, P = Rs.21850

6.7 Optimum Design with Lagrange Multipliers

− The Lagrange Multiplier is a powerful method for finding optima in multivariable
problemsinvolving function constraints.
Consider the objective function
U =U1(x, y, z)
Subject to functional constraints
Ψ1 = Ψ1 (x, y, z) and
Ψ2 = Ψ2 (x, y, z)

Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya Department of Mechanical Engineering

Page 6.24 Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot
Computer Aided Design (161903) 6. Optimization

Example 6.5: A heat exchanger is to be designed for minimum cost. The design
requirement indicated that 300 m of tube length in all be installed for achieving necessary
heat transfer surface.
The total cost of installation has been approximated as:
1) Total cost of tubes = Rs.24500
2) Cost of shell = Rs.875D2.5L
where D = shell diameter and
L = length of each tube ≈ Length of heat exchanger
3) Cost of floor space occupied by the heat exchanger = 700 D L.
The spacing of the tubes is such that 20 tubes can be accommodated in cross sectional area of
l m2insidetheshell.Determine the diameter D and length L of the heat exchanger to minimize
costs.

Department of Mechanical Engineering Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya

Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot Page 6.25
6. Optimization Computer Aided Design (161903)

Example 6.6: Find the solution using the Lagrange multiplier method:
Minimize f (x, y) = kx−1y−2
(x, y) = x2 + y2 − a2 = 0
Subject to g(x,

Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya Department of Mechanical Engineering

Page 6.26 Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology,
Technology Rajkot
Computer Aided Design (161903) 6. Optimization

Example 6.7: Find the dimensions of a cylindrical tin (with top and bottom) made up of
sheet metal to maximize its volume such that the total surface area is equal toA0 = 24π.

If x1 and x2 denote the radius of the base and length of the tin, respectively, the problem can
be stated as
Maximize f (x1, x2) = πx12x2

6.8 Johnson's Method of Optimum Design

In Johnson's method of Optimum Design, any mechanical element design can have 3 formsof
equations:-
(a) Primary Design Equation (PDE)
This is the most important design equation, which expresses the most significant functional
requirement or the most significant undesirable effect. For example, the primary design

Department of Mechanical Engineering Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya

Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot Page 6.27
6. Optimization Computer Aided Design (161903)

equation for an airplane shaft may be the one which expresses its weight, which is an
undesirable effect and needs to be minimized.
(b) Subsidiary Design Equations (SDE)
In a mechanical element, design equations other than PDE are called Subsidiary Design
Equations (SDE). SDE express either functional requirements or significant undesirable
effects, whether they are directly specified or indirectly implied. The most important SDE are
the stress equations, which are generally implied.
(c) Limit Equations or Constraints (LE)
As mentioned previously, various parameters have certain ranges which are expressed in
mathematically simple limit equations. For example, the limitations in stress are imposed by
the strength of the material. Limitations on geometry are imposed by certain functional
requirement or space constraints.

Basic steps in method of Optimum Design:-

l) Problem Formulation:
a. Decide on basic configuration in the form of sketches identifying loads, deflections
and stresses.
b. Summarising the significant constraints, compile the Primary Design Equation,
Subsidairy Design Equation and the Limit Equation.
c. The equations are so combined that the total number of equations is equal to the
number of free variables.
d. These equations are then studied for optimum design.
The above procedure would be clarified in the following sections. Three types of problemsare
encountered in the method of Optimum Design:-
I. Case of Normal Specifications (NS)
II. Case of Redundant Specifications (RS)
III. Case of Incompatible Specifications (lS)

I. Case of Normal Specifications

This is the case in which the final formulation consists of a single PDE. For this type
ofproblem, nf ≥ NS, where nf is the number of free variables and NS is the number of SDEs.
A free variable is one with no constraints imposed by the Limit Equations.
nv= nf + nc
where
nv = Total number of Variables and
nc = Total number of constrained variables.
In this case, it is possible to uniquely determine the optimum solution.

Example 6.8: Design a tensile bar of length L = 200 mm to carry a tensile load of 5 kN
forminimum cost, out of the following materials:

Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya Department of Mechanical Engineering

Page 6.28 Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot
Computer Aided Design (161903) 6. Optimization

Material Mass Density Material cost (Rs / Yield strength

(kg/m3) N Weight) (MPa)
Steel 7500 16 130
AL-alloy 3000 32 50
Titanium Alloy 4800 480 90
Magnesium Alloy 2100 32 20

Fig. 6.13 Simple Tensile Bar

(1) PDE (cost of material is the criterion of optimization)
Let cm = Cost of the bar in Rs.
P = Mass density in kg/m3.
A = Area in m2
L = Length in m
c = Cost of material / weight in Rs/N
cm =Weight of the bar (N) x c
= (Mass Density x Volume) x g x c
= ρ ALgc
PDE is → cm = ρ ALgc
(2) SDE
σ = P/A
where P is the specified load
(3) Linear Equation (LE)
σ ≤ σy/ F.S
(4) Itis observed that c, p, σy are material parameters, A is the geometrical parameter, σ and
cmare undesirable effects, P, L andF.S are functional requirements.
We observe that there is one free variable (A) and one SDE
nf= NS
Simplifying and combining equations

Department of Mechanical Engineering Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya

Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot Page 6.29
6. Optimization Computer Aided Design (161903)

Here, P, L, F.S. are specified quantities and cannot be changed. (g is a constant).

Therefore, from the equation, the material selection factor (MSF) is c ρ /σy
The cost would be minimum for the material having lowest value of (MSF)

cρ
Material MSF =
Sy
16 × 7500
Steel = 923.077
130
32 × 3000
AL-alloy = 1920
50
480 × 4800
Titanium Alloy = 25600
90
32 × 2100
Magnesium Alloy = 3360
20

It is seen that steel has the lowest MSF and hence should be used to cost for achieve
optimization in cost for given conditions
Assuming F.S. = 2, the free variable A (area) can be calculated by using SDE i.e.

Example 6.9: In a light weight equipment, a shaft is transmitting a torque of 900 Nm and is
to have a rigidity of 90 Nm/degree. Assume a factor of safety of 1.5 based on yield stress.
Design the shaft with minimum weight. What will be the change in design for minimum cost?
Assume maximum shear stress theory of failure. Use the following data for the materials:-

Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya Department of Mechanical Engineering

Page 6.30 Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot
Computer Aided Design (161903
161903) 6. Optimization

Mass Density Material cost Yield strength Shear Modulus

Material
(kg/m3) (Rs / N Weight) (MPa) (GPa)
Steel 8500 16 130 80
AL-alloy 3000 32 50 26.7
Titanium Alloy 4800 480 90 40
Magnesium Alloy 2100 32 20 16

Let ρ = Mass Density in kg/m3

K= Torsional rigidity in Nm/radian
MT = Torque rating in Nm
F.S. = 1.5
G= Modulus of rigidity in N/m2
Sy= Yield stress in N/m2
d = Diameter of shaft in m,
L= Length of shaft in m
W = Weight of shaft in N
cm= Material cost/weight (Rs/N)
/N)

(1) PDE:
W = ρ x L x g x d2 x π/4

Department of Mechanical Engineering Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya

Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology,
Technology Rajkot Page 6.31
6. Optimization Computer Aided Design (161903)

MT, F.S. and K aree specified functional requirements. Hence, the minimum
imum MSF will mean
minimum weight.
Calculating from the data given

For Weight For Cost

Material ρG cρ G
MSF = 2 MSF =
Sy Sy 2

8500 × 80 ×109
Steel = 0.04024 0.6438
(130 ×106 )2

3000 × 26.7 ×109

AL-alloy = 0.03204 1.0253
(50 ×106 )2

Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya Department of Mechanical Engineering

Page 6.32 Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology,
Technology Rajkot
Computer Aided Design (161903) 6. Optimization

4800 × 40 ×109
Titanium Alloy = 0.02370 11.3760
(90 ×106 )2

2100 ×16 ×109

Magnesium Alloy = 0.08400 2.6880
(20 ×106 )2

Minimum MSF (0.02370) is for Titanium Alloy and hence it should be used to achieve,
minimum weight for given conditions.

Department of Mechanical Engineering Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya

Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot Page 6.33
6. Optimization Computer Aided Design (161903)

From the table, it is seen that the minimum MSF (0.6438) is tor steel alloy which will result,
in minimum cost.

II. Case of Redundant Specifications:

This is a case in which the final formulation consists of a system of two or more equations.
For the case of redundant specifications, it is not possible to include the effects of all SDEs
and all LEs in a single PDE. This case is generally characterized by the necessity of
eliminating a limited parameter in order to combine a SDE with PDE. Hence, there is
generally an excess number of LEs for such cases and a special procedure is to be followed
for problem solving.
The case of redundant specification occurs when
nf < Ns

III. Case of Incompatible Specifications:

The case of incompatible specifications is a special case of redundant specifications where
the SDE and LEs are such that it is impossible to satisfy them all with any one physically
feasible design of the mechanical element. In such cases, no optimum design solution exists.

Example 6.10 : A simple tensile bar is subjected to the specified constant tensile force ‘F’.
Design the bar with the objective of minimizing the material cost using factor of safety ‘Nf’.
The following limitation is specified in the optimum design.
Lmin ≤ L ≤ Lmax

Fig. 6.14
Cm = material cost of the tensile bar, Rs.
c = cost per unit mass for the bar material, Rs /kg
ρ = mass density of the bar material, kg / m3
A = cross-sectional area of the bar, m2

Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya Department of Mechanical Engineering

Page 6.34 Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot
Computer Aided Design (161903) 6. Optimization

L = length of the bar, m

F = tensile force acting on the bar, N
Nf = factor of safety
σt = tensile stress induced in the bar, N / m2
Syt = yield strength of the bar material, N / m2

l. Primary design equation (P.D.E.):

• The most significant undesirable effect to be minimized is the material cost of the bar
and is given by,
Cm = Cost per unit mass of the bar x Mass of the bar
Cm = c x ρ A L
or Cm = c ρ A L, Rs …………………(a)
2. Subsidiary design equation (S.D.E.) :
• The tensile stress induced in the bar is given by,
σt = F/A …………………(b)
3. Limit equations (L.E.):
• The limit equations are,
σt ≤ Syt / Nf ………………….(c)
Lmin ≤ L ≤ Lmax ………………….(d)
4. Classification of parameters :
Specified Limited Unspecified and
Unlimited
Functional Requirement Parameters F, Nf
Undesirable Effect Parameters σt Cm
Geometrical Parameters L A
Material Parameters c, ρ, Syt

5. Combining S.D.E. with P.D.E. :

• S.D.E. [Equation (b)] is combined with P.D.E. [Equation (a)] by eliminating the
unspecified and unlimited parameter A. Therefore,
C m = c ρ A L / σt ………………………..(e)
• This is developed P.D.E. From Equation (e) it is seen that, the effects of both the limit
equations i.e. Equations (c) and (d) can be included in the developed P.D.E.
• Therefore, this is the base of normal specifications.
6. Combining limit equations with P.D.E. :
• The next step is to include the effects of all limit equations in the developed P.D.E.
• Cm α 1/ σt, hence for minimizing ' Cm', the parameter ' σt' should be placed at its upper
limit i.e. Syt / Nf.
• Again, Cm α L, and hence for minimizing ' Cm' the parameter 'L' should placed at its
lower limit i.e. Lmin.

Department of Mechanical Engineering Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya

Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot Page 6.35
6. Optimization Computer Aided Design (161903)

• Substituting these limiting values, Equation (e) can be written as,

……………(f)
• This is final P.D.E. In order to minimize ' Cm ', the material selection factor [c ρ / Syt ]
should be minimum.
7. Selection of material :
• The material selection factor [c ρ / Syt] is calculated for all the available material and
the material with the lowest value of [c ρ / Syt] is selected.
8. Determination of eliminated parameter :
• The eliminated parameter 'A' can be determined by using S.D.E. [Equation (b)].
Therefore, substituting the limiting value of σt Equation (b),

9. Determination of optimum quantity :

• Finally the most significant undesirable effect to be minimized i.e. ' Cm ', is
determined by using final P.D E [Equation (f)].

Example 6.11: A tensile bar of circular cross-section is subjected to the cyclic tensile force
which varies from zero to maximum. Design the bar with the objective of maximizing the
energy absorption capacity using the factor of safety 'Nf'. The following limitations are to be
used in the design due to space and assembly restrictions.
d ≤ dmax
Lmin ≤ L ≤ Lmax

Fig. 6.15

Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya Department of Mechanical Engineering

Page 6.36 Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot
Computer Aided Design (161903) 6. Optimization

The endurance limit of the test specimen is given by,

Se = 0.5 Sut
The endurance limit of the tensile bar is given by,
Se’ = Ka . Kb . Kc . Kd . Ke . Kg .Se’
Se’ = Ka . Kb . Kc . Kd . Ke . Kg .0.5 Sut
Se = K Sut ……………………….(a)
Where K = Ka . Kb . Kc . Kd . Ke . Kg x 0.5
U = energy absorption capacity of the tensile bar, N-mm
L = length of the bar, mm
A = cross-sectional area of the bar, mm2
d = diameter of the bar, mm
Fmax = maximum force acting on the bar during the cycle, N
δmax = maximum elongation of the bar during the cycle, N
σmax = maximum stress induced in the bar, N/mm2
σm = mean stress, N/mm2
σa = stress arnplitude, N/mm2
Nf = factor of safety
Syt = yield strength of the bar material, N/mm2
Sut = ultimate tensile strength of the bar material, N/mm2
Se = endurance limit of the bar, N/mm2
E = modulus of elasticity of the bar material. N/mm2

1. Primary design equation (P.D.E.) :

The most significant functional requirement to be maximized is the energy absorption
capacity of the tensile bar and is given by,
1
U= Fmax .δ max ……………………………………(b)
2
2. Subsidiary design equations (S.D.E.):
The maximum elongation of the tensile bar is given by,

……………………(c)
The maximum tensile stress induced in the bar is given by,

Department of Mechanical Engineering Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya

Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot Page 6.37
6. Optimization Computer Aided Design (161903)

…………………(d)

3. Limit equations (L.E.) :

Fig. 6.16 Repeated stress

According to the Soderberg criterion, for the safety of the bar against the fatigue failure,

For the repeated stress, as shown in Fig. 6.16, the mean stress and the stress amplitude are
given by,

The Equations (h), (i) and (j) are the limit equations.

Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya Department of Mechanical Engineering

Page 6.38 Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot
Computer Aided Design (161903) 6. Optimization

4. Classification of parameters :
Specified Limited Unspecified and
Unlimited
Functional Requirement Parameters Nf U, Fmax, δmax
Undesirable Effect Parameters σmax
Geometrical Parameters L,d A
Material Parameters c, ρ, Syt

5. Combining S.D.E.'s with P.D.E. :

S.D.E. (c) is combined with P.D.E. [Equation (b)] by eliminating the unspecified and
unlimited parameter ' δmax '. Therefore,

………..(k)
Again S.D.E. (d) is combined with P.D.E. [Equation (k)] by eliminating the unspecified and
unlimited parameter Fmax Hence,

………..(l)
This is developed P.D.E. From Equation (l) it is seen that, the effects of all limit equations i.e.
Equations (h), (i) and (r) can be included in the developed P.D.E.
Therefore, this is the case of normal specifications.
6. Combining limit equations with P.D.E. :
The next step is to include the effects of all limit equations in the developed P.D.E.
U α σ2max, hence for maximizing 'U', the parameter σmax, should be placed at its upper limit
2  K .Sut .S yt 
i.e.  
N f  K .Sut + S yt 
U α d2, hence for maximizing 'U', the parameter d, should be placed at its upper limit i.e. dmax.
Again U α L, hence for maximizing 'U', the L, should be placed at its upper limit i.e. Lmax.
Substituting these limiting values, Equation (l) can be written as,

…………..(m)
This is final P.D.E. In order to maximize ‘U’, the material selection factor
 1  K .S .S 2 
  ut yt
  should be maximum.
  
E K .S + S yt  
 ut


Department of Mechanical Engineering Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya

Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot Page 6.39
6. Optimization Computer Aided Design (161903)

7. Selection of material:
 1  K .S .S  
2

The material selection factor    is calculated for all the available materials
ut yt
 
 E  K .Sut + S yt 
 
 1  K .S .S 2 
and the material with the largest value of     is selected.
ut yt

 E  K .Sut + S yt  

 
8. Determination of eliminated parameters :
The eliminated parameters Fmax and δmax are determined by using S.D.E.’s i.e. Equations (c)
and (d).
Substituting limiting values of σmax and ‘d’ in Equation (d),

9. Determination of optimum quantity :

Finally the most significant functional requirement to be maximized i.e. ‘U’ is determined by
using the final P.D.E. [Equation (m)].

References :
− Engineering Optimization – S. S. Rao
− Introduction to Optimum Design – J. S. Arora
− Machine & CAD – Farzak Haideri

Prepared By: Vimal Limbasiya Department of Mechanical Engineering

Page 6.40 Darshan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Rajkot