Structural optimization

, Volume 5, Issue 3, pp 152–158 | Cite as

Design sensitivity analysis with isoparametric shell elements

  • K. Yamazaki
  • G. N. Vanderplaats
Technical Papers

Abstract

This paper deals with design sensitivity calculation by the direct differentiation method for isoparametric curved shell elements. Sensitivity parameters include geometric variables which influence the size and the shape of a structure, as well as the shell thickness. The influence of design variables, therefore, may be separated into two distinct contributions. The parametric mapping within an element, as well as the influence of geometric variables on the orientation of an element in space, is accounted for by the sensitivity calculation of geometric variables, and efficient formulations of sensitivity calculation are derived for the element stiffness, the geometric stiffness and the mass matrices. The methods presented here are applied to the sensitivity calculations of displacement, stress, buckling stress and natural frequency of typical basic examples such as a square plate and a cylindrical shell. The numerical results are compared with the theoretical solutions and finite difference values.

Keywords

Design Variable Cylindrical Shell Shell Thickness Shell Element Mass Matrice 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bennett, J.A.; Botkin, M.E. (eds.) 1986:The optimum shape: automated structural design. New York: Plenum PressGoogle Scholar
  2. Brockman, R.A. 1987: Geometric sensitivity analysis with isoparametric finite elements.Comm. Appl. Num. Meth. 3, 495–499Google Scholar
  3. Brockman, R.A.; Lung, F.Y. 1988: Sensitivity analysis with plate and shell finite elements.Int. J. Num. Meth. Engrg. 26, 1129–1143Google Scholar
  4. Fleury, C.; Braibant, V. 1986: Structural optimization - a new dual method using mixed variables.Int. J. Num. Meth. Engrg. 23, 409–428Google Scholar
  5. Hughes, T., Jr. 1987:The finite element method linear static and dynamic finite element analysis. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-HallGoogle Scholar
  6. Moore, G.J.; Vanderplaats, G.N. 1990: Improved approximations for shape optimal design of shell structures.Proc. 31st AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conf. (held in Long Beach), pp. 161–170Google Scholar
  7. Olhoff, N.; Rasmussen, J. 1991: Study of inaccuracy in semianalytical sensitivity analysis - a model problem.Struct. Optim. 3, 203–213Google Scholar
  8. Thomas, H.L.; Vanderplaats, G.N. 1991: An improved approximation function for stress constraints in plate structures. In: Hernandez, S.; Brebbia, C.A. (eds.)Optimization of structural systems and industrial applications, pp. 115–127. Amsterdam: ElsevierGoogle Scholar
  9. Vanderplaats, G.N.; Salajegheh, V.A. 1989: A new approximation method for stress constraints in structural synthesis.AIAA J. 27, 352–358Google Scholar
  10. Yang, R.J.; Botkin, M.E. 1986: Comparison between the variational and implicit differentiation approaches to shape design sensitivities.AIAA J. 24, 1027–1032Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. Yamazaki
    • 1
  • G. N. Vanderplaats
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Mechanical Systems EngineeringKanazawa UniversityKanazawaJapan
  2. 2.VMA EngineeringGoletaUSA

Personalised recommendations