Advanced Form-Finding of Tensegrity Structures
Advanced Form-Finding of Tensegrity Structures
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 22 May 2009
Accepted 28 October 2009
Available online 30 November 2009
Keywords:
Tensegrity structure
Single value decomposition
Form-nding
Eigenvalue problem
a b s t r a c t
A numerical method is presented for form-nding of tensegrity structures. The topology and the types of
members are the only information that requires in this form-nding process. The eigenvalue decomposition of the force density matrix and the single value decomposition of the equilibrium matrix are performed iteratively to nd the feasible sets of nodal coordinates and force densities which satisfy the
minimum required rank deciencies of the force density and equilibrium matrices, respectively. Based
on numerical examples it is found that the proposed method is very efcient and robust in searching
self-equilibrium congurations of tensegrity structures.
2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
The tensegrity structures rst proposed by Fuller [1] have been
developed in recent years due to their innovative forms, lightweight and deployability. They belong to a class of free-standing
pre-stressed pin-jointed cablestrut system where contacts are allowed among the struts [2]. Their classication is presented as
Class 1 (where bars do not touch) and Class 2 (where bars do connect to each other at a pivot) [3]. As a pioneering work of formnding, so-called force density method was proposed by Schek
[4] for form-nding of tensile structures. Motro et al. [5] presented
the dynamic relaxation which has been reliably applied to tensile
structures [6] and many other non-linear problems. Vassart and
Motro [7] employed the force density method in symbolic form
for searching new congurations. Recently, Masic et al. [8], Zhang
and Ohsaki [9] and Estrada et al. [10] developed new numerical
methods using a force density formulation. Micheletti et al. [11]
used a marching procedure for nding stable placements of a given
tensegrity, and Zhang et al. [12] employed a rened dynamic relaxation procedure for form-nding of nonregular tensegrity systems.
Most recently, Rieffel et al. [13] introduced an evolutionary algorithm for producing large irregular tensegrity structures. Tibert
and Pellegrino [14] presented a review paper for the existing methods for form-nding problem of tensegrity structures. The most recent review for this problem can be found in Juan and Tur [15].
In most available form-nding methods, the symmetry of structure and/or some of member lengths must be assumed known in
advance. Moreover, element force density coefcients are solved
in symbolic form. For example, (i) symmetric properties are
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +82 2 3408 3287; fax: +82 2 3408 3331.
E-mail address: [email protected] (J. Lee).
0045-7949/$ - see front matter 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.compstruc.2009.10.006
238
Csk;p
8
for p i;
>
<1
1 for p j;
>
:
0
otherwise:
Member/node
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
Q diagq;
q fq1 ; q2 ; . . . ; qb gT
in which each component of this vector is the force fi to length li ratio qi fi =li known as force density or self-stressed coefcient in [7].
Without external loading, Eq. (3) can be rewritten neglecting the
self-weight of the structure as
Dx Df xf ;
6a
Dy Df yf ;
6b
Dz Df zf ;
6c
nn
where matrices D2 R
and Df 2 R
nnf
D C QC;
7a
Df C QCf
If the free nodes are numbered rst, then to the xed nodes, Cs can
be divided into two parts as
or by
Cs C Cf ;
D CT diagqC;
7b
8a
CT QCx CT QCf xf px ;
3a
CT QCy CT QCf yf py ;
3b
CT QCz CT QCf zf pz ;
3c
Df C diagqCf :
Dx 0;
9a
Dy 0;
9b
Dz 0;
9c
8b
Di;j
8
q
>
>
< Pk
qk
>
> k2X
:
0
4
(3)
(4)
(5)
1
(1)
3
(6)
(2)
2
Fig. 1. A two-dimensional two-strut tensegrity structure. The thick and thin lines
represent the struts and cables, respectively.
q1 q4 q5
6
q1
6
D6
4
q5
q4
q1
q1 q2 q6
q5
q2
q4
q6
q2
q2 q3 q5
q3
q6
q3
q3 q4 q6
3
7
7
7:
5
11
239
Dx y z 0 0 0:
12
However, by substituting Eq. (8) into Eq. (9) the equilibrium equations of the tensegrity structure can be expressed as
CT diagqCx 0;
13a
C diagqCy 0;
13b
CT diagqCz 0:
13c
Aq 0;
20
14
s nA P 1;
CT diagCx
B
C
A @ CT diagCy A:
15
C diagCz
Eq. (12) presents the relation between force densities and nodal
coordinates, while Eq. (14) shows the relation between projected
lengths in x; y and z directions, respectively and force densities. Both
Eqs. (12) and (14) are linear homogeneous systems of self-equilibrium equations with respect to nodal coordinates and force densities, respectively.
nD n rD ;
16
nD P d 1:
17
4. Form-nding process
The proposed form-nding procedure only needs to know the
topology of structure in terms of the incidence matrix C, and type
of each member, i.e. either cable or strut which is under tension or
compression, respectively. Based on element type, the initial force
density coefcients of cables (tension) are automatically assigned
as +1 while those of struts (compression) as 1, respectively, as
follows:
8
<
q 1
1 1
:|{z}
0
cables
9T
=
1
{z
1 1} :
|
;
21
struts
nD d 1;
nA 1;
22a
22b
where nD and nA are minimum required rank deciencies of the
force density and equilibrium matrices, respectively.
4.1. Eigenvalue decomposition of force density matrix
The square symmetric force density matrix D can be factorized
as follows by using the eigenvalue decomposition [20]:
D UKUT ;
23
nA b r A ;
k1 6 k2 6 6 kn :
maxrD n d 1:
18
19
where r A rankA. The second rank deciency condition which ensures the existence of at least one state of self-stress can be stated as
24
240
negative eigenvalues of D. There are two cases need to be considered. The rst one is p 6 nD , and the other is p > nD .
nD
x y
/
z 2 U
1
/2
/n :
D
25
ki 0 i 1; 2; . . . ; nD :
26
bnD
C/ C/
L CU
1
2
C/n
C/i 0
nD
27
if
eigenvector bases of U
28
or which /i causes
detjLd Ld T j 0;
q
C/i 2 C/j 2 C/k 2 :
30
KT KE KG ;
31
where
ea
KG I3 D
AT ;
32a
k1 k2 kr 0;
|
{z}
rigid-body motions
34
where r dd 1=2 is the number of independent rigid-body
motions. Using this criterion, stability of any pre-stressed or
tensegrity structure can be controlled by checking eigenvalues
of tangent stiffness matrix of the structure [24,23]. In short,
the best scenario of conguration in 3-dimensional space is
formed by three best candidate eigenvectors selected from the
rst fourth eigenvector bases which corresponding to the rst
fourth smallest eigenvalues, respectively. These eigenvalues
will be gradually modied to be zero by the proposed iterative
form-nding algorithm. In other words, the proposed formnding procedure has repeatedly approximated equilibrium
conguration such that
Dx y
z 0 0 0:
35
A UVWT ;
36
r1 P r2 P P rb P 0:
37
Aq 0:
38
32b
d KT d > 0
positive stiffness
Eq. (28) shows /i is linearly dependent with the vector I1 while
Eq. (29) proves at least one of b members in d-dimensional
structure has a zero length. If there is no /i which satises
are chosen
Eqs. (28) and (29), the rst three eigenvectors of U
as nodal coordinates x y z for 3-dimensional tensegrity
structure.
Accordingly, D will nally have the required rank deciency nD
without any negative eigenvalue. It implies D is positive semidenite, and any tensegrity structure falling into this case is
super stable regardless of material properties and level of
self-stress coefcients [1719,25].
KE A diag
29
where Ld 2 Rb which indicates the vector of lengths of b members from any combination of d eigenvectors among nD above
eigenvector bases in d-dimensional space (assuming d 3) is
given by
Ld
or
33
U u1
W w1
u2
w2
urA jm1
wb1 jq1
mdnrA
39a
39b
where the vectors m2 Rdn denote the m dn rA innitesimal mechanisms; and the vector q1 2 Rb matching in signs
241
(5)
(6)
In summary, the eigenvalue decomposition of force density matrix D and the single value decomposition of the equilibrium matrix A are performed iteratively to nd the feasible sets of nodal
coordinates [x y z] and force density vector q which satisfy
the minimum required rank deciencies of the force density and
equilibrium matrices as presented in Eq. (22), respectively.
Let the coordinates of node i be denoted as pi xi yi zi 2 R3 .
It should be noted that since the tensegrity structure without xed
nodes is a free body in the space, the force density vector q does
not change under afne transformation [28,29,8] which transforms
i as follows:
pi to p
i pi T t;
p
40
1 0 0
(7)
(8)
(9)
(3)
(2)
Table 2
The force density coefcients of the 2-D hexagonal tensegrity structure.
Force density
coefcients
Estrada et al.
[10]
Present
q1 q6
q7 q9
1.0
0.5
1.0
0.5
1.0
-0.5
0.4
B
C
T @ 0 1 0 A:
0 0 1
41
0.2
0.0
-0.2
ef Aq:
-0.4
q
ef ef T :
(1)
(4)
42
-0.6
Two set of parameters which are nodal coordinates and force density vector can be simultaneously dened by proposed form-nding
procedure through following algorithm.
0.2
0.4
Algorithm
Step 1: Dene C by Eq. (1) for the given topology of tensegrity
structure.
Step 2: Specify the type of each member to generate initial force
density vector q0 by Eq. (21). Set i 0.
Step 3: Calculate Di using Eq. (8).
Step 4: Carry out Eq. (23) to dene x y zi through Eq. (35).
Step 5: Determine Ai by Eq. (15).
Step 6: Perform Eq. (36) to dene qi1 through Eq. (38).
Step 7: Dene Di1 with qi1 by Eq. (8). If Eq. (22) is satised, the
solutions exist. Otherwise, set i i 1 and return to Step 4.
Step 8: If D is positive semi-denite, go to Step 10. Otherwise,
specify material property, force density coefcient for each
member based on force density vector found.
Step 9: If Eq. (34) is fullled, go to Step 10. Otherwise, set i i 1
and return to Step 4.
Step 10: The process is terminated until Eq. (43) has been
checked. The nal coordinates and force density vector are the
solutions. Otherwise, set i i 1 and return to Step 4.
(4)
(5)
(8)
(3)
(7)
(1)
(6)
(2)
2
Fig. 4. A two-dimensional four-strut tensegrity structure.
0.4
0.2
0.0
-0.2
-0.4
5. Numerical examples
Numerical examples are presented for several tensegrity structures using Matlab Version 7.4 (R2007a) [31]. Based on algorithm
0.2
0.4
242
Table 3
Eigenvalues of the tangent stiffness matrix of the 2-D four-strut tensegrity structure.
Axial stiffness
k1
k2
k3
k4
k5
k6
k7
ei ai 10
11.2930
11.2930
14.1421
20.0000
34.1421
43.1334
43.1334
(21)
(13)
(14)
9
11
(15)
(9)
(1)
4
(22) (24)
12
(30)
q0 fq1 q6 1; q7 q9 1gT :
44
(23)
0.7
(18) (20)
(16)
(26)
(17)
(29)
(28)
(25) (11)
(10)
5
(2)
(27)
(4)
(3)
(5)
1
0.6
(19)
10
8
(12)
(7)
(6)
0.5
Design error ()
(8)
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
Table 4
The force density coefcients of the expandable octahedron tensegrity structure.
Force density
coefcients
Estrada et al.
[10]
Present
q1 q24
q25 q30
1.0
1.5
1.0
1.5
1.0
1.5
b 0.4
0.3
0.4
12
0.2
0.3
0.1
5
0.2
0
0.1
0
9
7
10
8
4
11
0.3
12
0.2
11
0.3
0.5
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.4
12
10
5
0.4
0.5
0.1
0
0.2
0.3
14
Fig. 8. The convergence of the proposed iterative algorithm for the expandable
octahedron.
a
0.5
10
0.4
0.5
0.4
0.2
Fig. 7. The obtained geometry of the expandable octahedron tensegrity structure. (a) Top view, (b) perspective view.
0.2
0.4
243
prestress levels [1719,25]. Consequently, the proposed form-nding procedure with limited information about the incidence matrix
and element prototype is indeed capable of nding a self-equilibrium stable tensegrity structure by imposing the two necessary
rank deciency conditions.
5.1.2. Four-strut tensegrity
As a next example, consider a two-dimensional four-strut
tensegrity structure comprising four struts and four cables
(Fig. 4). Similarly, the only information is the incidence matrix C
and the type of each member which is employed to automatically
assign the initial force density vector by proposed form-nding
procedure as
q0 fq1 q4 1; q5 q8 1gT :
45
q fq1 q4 1; q5 q8 2gT :
46
q1 q24
q25 q30
ls =lc
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
0.9073
0.8856
0.8811
0.8802
0.8800
0.8800
0.8800
0.8800
0.8800
0.8800
0.8800
0.8800
0.8800
1.2658
1.3095
1.3179
1.3196
1.3199
1.3200
1.3200
1.3200
1.3200
1.3200
1.3200
1.3200
1.3200
1.6180
1.6325
1.6330
1.6330
1.6330
1.6330
1.6330
1.6330
1.6330
1.6330
1.6330
1.6330
1.6330
6.321
1.181
2.330
4.700
9.000
2.000
3.722
7.443
1.489
2.977
5.955
1.191
2.382
0.7
101
101
102
103
104
104
105
106
106
107
108
108
109
0.6
Design error ()
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
Table 6
The force density coefcients of the truncated icosahedron tensegrity structure.
Force density coefcients
q1 q60
q61 q90
q91 q120
1.0000
0.6775
0.3285
a
0.15
56
0.1
0.05
0
47
9
42
26
27
39
40
0.05
25
60
34
1
21 5
38
39
37
13
41
42
22
2
12
40
36
15
19
18
0.2
0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05
0.1
35
50
21
28
56
53
5
54
3
33
1
14
5227 29
17
2630
51
55
322
3511
78
13 1231
16
69
10
0.2
0.15
22
57
16
60
0.2
17
0.05
25
49
15
0.15
11
20
30
46
58
34
3
14
0.15
47
24
48
23
20
59
0.1
23
4341
19
36
37
0.05
45
35
43
25
18
38
24
6
10
31
44
20
45
44
0.1
33
58
0.05
0.1
846
48
59
15
0.2
40
Fig. 10. The convergence of the proposed iterative algorithm for the truncated
icosahedron.
0.15
30
28
32
10
29
50
49
55
57
0.2
51
53
54
1.0000
0.6775
0.3285
52
0.2
Present
0.2
0.2
0.1
Fig. 9. The obtained geometry of the truncated icosahedron tensegrity structure. (a) Top view, (b) perspective view.
0.1
0.2
244
by Estrada et al. [10] using symbolic analysis and numerical method, respectively. The calculated force density vector after normalizing with respect to the force density coefcient of the cable 1, as
presented in Table 4, agrees well with those of Tibert and Pellegrino [14] and Estrada et al. [10]. The associated stable conguration
of the structure is presented in Fig. 7. All of struts and cables have
the same length, respectively. The length ratio between struts and
cables is ls =lc 1:633 coinciding with the one ls =lc 1:63299 stated by Estrada et al. [10]. The form-nding procedure converges in
13 iterations. The design error convergence is described in Fig. 8
with 2:382 109 .
In order to illustrate the proposed form-nding procedure, main
specication at every step of iteration is presented in Table 5. As
can be seen from this table, for the practical purpose it seems
the proposed algorithm sufciently converges at iteration 6, but
for the demonstration of the efciency all iterations are displayed.
The structure obtained has only one self-stress state s 1 and
one innitesimal mechanism m 1 except for its six rigid-body
motions. Accordingly, it belongs to statically and kinematically
indeterminate structure [22]. The force density matrices D is positive semi-denite which leads structure to super stable regardless
of materials and prestress levels [1719,25].
The associated conguration of the structure whose nodal coordinates are obtained and displayed in Fig. 12. The form-nding procedure converges in only one iteration with the design error
3:279 1015 . The structure obtained has only one state of
self-stress s 1 and no innitesimal mechanism m 0 after
constraining its six rigid-body motions indicating it is statically
indeterminate and kinematically determinate [22].
Similar to the force density matrix D of the four-strut tensegrity,
that of the octahedral cell is also negative semi-denite (possessing one negative eigenvalue) implying that the structure is not
super stable. Accordingly, tangent stiffness of the structures has
been investigated using Eq. (34). For simplicity, all members are
assumed to have the same axial stiffness ei ai 2. The force density
coefcient of each member is directly set as Eq. (47). The nonzero
eigenvalues of KT after neglecting rst six zero ones corresponding
to six rigid-body motions are listed in Table 7 which shows the
smallest is 0.1002; i.e., the structure is mechanically stable.
6
(5)
(6)
(12)
(9)
(11)
(10)
(13)
2
(1)
(7)
(8)
(4)
(2)
(3)
48
5
Fig. 11. An octahedral cell tensegrity structure.
47
2
1
0.5
b
5
0.6
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.4
0.1
0.6
0.2
0.3
0.4
6
5
0.5
3
0.5
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.4
0.2
Fig. 12. The obtained geometry of the octahedral cell tensegrity structure. (a) Top view, (b) perspective view.
0.2
0.4
245
k1
k2
k3
k4
k5
k6
k7
k8
k9
k10
k11
k12
ei ai 2
0.1002
1.9605
2.4870
2.8353
3.6434
3.9516
4.1584
4.1802
9.2446
9.4750
9.5693
12.3043
3
(3)
(17)
8
(6)
(8)
(9)
(15)
(7)
(18)
9
(5)
(14)
(2)
(11)
(12)
(16)
(13) 7
(10)
(1)
(4) 5
1
Fig. 13. A three-dimensional six-strut tensegrity dome structure.
0.6
0.4
5
7
0.4
0.2
0.2
9
8
0.2
5
4
7
6
1
0.2
82
0.4
4
6
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.4
0
0.2
0.4
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.6
Fig. 14. The obtained geometry of the three-dimensional six-strut tensegrity dome structure (a) Top view, (b) Perspective view.
246
Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs of Korean government. The authors also would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their suggestions in improving the standard of the
manuscript.
References
[1] Fuller RB. Synergetics explorations in the geometry of thinking. London,
UK: Macmillan; 1975.
[2] Wang BB. Free-standing tension structures. From tensegrity systems to cable
strut systems. London and New York: Taylor and Francis; 2004.
[3] Pinaud JP, Solari S, Skelton RE. Deployment of a class 2 tensegrity boom. Proc
SPIE Smart Struct Mater 2004;5390:15562.
[4] Schek HJ. The force density method for form nding and computation of
general networks. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 1974;3:11534.
[5] Motro R, Najari S, Jouanna P. Static and dynamic analysis of tensegrity systems.
In: Proceedings of the international symposium on shell and spatial structures,
computational aspects. Springer; 1986. p. 2709.
[6] Barnes MR. Form nding and analysis of tension structures by dynamic
relaxation. Int J Space Struct 1999;14(2):89104.
[7] Vassart N, Motro R. Multiparametered form nding method: application to
tensegrity systems. Int J Space Struct 1999;14(2):14754.
[8] Masic M, Skelton R, Gill P. Algebraic tensegrity form-nding. Int J Solids Struct
2005;42(1617):483358.
[9] Zhang JY, Ohsaki M. Adaptive force density method for form-nding problem
of tensegrity structures. Int J Solids Struct 2006;43(18-19):565873.
[10] Estrada G, Bungartz H, Mohrdieck C. Numerical form-nding of tensegrity
structures. Int J Solids Struct 2006;43(22-23):685568.
[11] Micheletti A, Williams WO. A marching procedure for form-nding for
tensegrity structures. J Mech Mater Struct 2007;2(5):10126.
[12] Zhang L, Maurin B, Motro R. Form-nding of nonregular tensegrity systems. J
Struct Eng ASCE 2006;132(9):143540.
[13] Rieffel J, Valero-Cuevas F, Lipson H. Automated discovery and optimization of
large irregular tensegrity structures. Comput Struct 2009;87(56):36879.