Advertisement

Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization

, Volume 37, Issue 5, pp 463–473 | Cite as

Imposing maximum length scale in topology optimization

  • James K. GuestEmail author
Research Paper

Abstract

This paper presents a technique for imposing maximum length scale on features in continuum topology optimization. The design domain is searched and local constraints prevent the formation of features that are larger than the prescribed maximum length scale. The technique is demonstrated in the context of structural and fluid topology optimization. Specifically, maximum length scale criterion is applied to (a) the solid phase in minimum compliance design to restrict the size of structural (load-carrying) members, and (b) the fluid (void) phase in minimum dissipated power problems to limit the size of flow channels. Solutions are shown to be near 0/1 (void/solid) topologies that satisfy the maximum length scale criterion. When combined with an existing minimum length scale methodology, the designer gains complete control over member sizes that can influence cost and manufacturability. Further, results suggest restricting maximum length scale may provide a means for influencing performance characteristics, such as redundancy in structural design.

Keywords

Topology optimization Length scale Manufacturing constraints Structural redundancy Pore size Stokes flow 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bendsøe MP (1989) Optimal shape design as a material distribution problem. Struct Optim 1:193–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Benson HY, Vanderbei RJ, Shanno DF (2002) Interior-point methods for nonconvex nonlinear programming: Filter methods and merit functions. Comput Optim Appl 23:257–272zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. Borrvall T, Petersson J (2003) Topology optimization of fluids in stokes flow. Int J Numer Methods Fluids 41:77–107zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. Duysinx P, Sigmund O (1998) New developments in handling stress constraints in optimal material distributions. In: 7th Symposium on multidisciplinary analysis and optimization (AIAA/USAF/NASA/ISSMO held in St. Louis, MO), AIAA-98-4906, pp 1501–1509Google Scholar
  5. Evgrafov A (2005) The limits of porous materials in topology optimization of stokes flows. Appl Math Optim 52:263–277zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. Gersborg-Hansen A, Sigmund O, Haber RB (2005) Topology optimization of channel flow problems. Struct Multidisc Optim 30:181–192CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. Guest JK, Prévost JH, Belytschko T (2004) Achieving minimum length scale in topology optimization using nodal design variables and projection functions. Int J Numer Methods Eng 61:238–254zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Guest JK, Prévost JH (2006a) A penalty function for enforcing maximum length scale criterion in topology optimization. In: 11th AIAA/ISSMO multidisciplinary analysis and optimization conference proceedings (AIAA/ISSMO held in Portsmouth, VA), AIAA 2006-6938Google Scholar
  9. Guest JK, Prévost JH (2006b) Topology optimization of creeping fluid flows using a Darcy–Stokes finite element. Int J Numer Methods Eng 66:461–484zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Guest JK, Prévost JH (2007) Design of maximum permeability material structures. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 196:1006–1017zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Petersson J, Sigmund O (1998) Slope constrained topology optimization. Int J Numer Methods Eng 41:1417–1434zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. Poulsen TA (2003) A new scheme for imposing minimum length scale in topology optimization. Int J Numer Methods Eng 57:741–760zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. Rozvany GIN, Zhou M, Birker T (1992) Generalized shape optimization without homogenization. Struct Optim 4:250–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Sigmund O (1997) On the design of compliant mechanisms using topology optimization. Mech Struct Mach 25:495–526Google Scholar
  15. Sigmund O (2007) Morphology-based black and white filters for topology optimization. Struct Multidisc Optim 33:401–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Svanberg K (1987) The method of moving asymptotes—a new method for structural optimization. Int J Numer Methods Eng 24:359–373zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. Svanberg K (1995) A globally convergent version of MMA without linesearch. In: Rozvany GIN, Olhoff N (eds) Proceedings of the first world congress of structural and multidisciplinary optimization. Pergamon, Goslar, pp 9–16Google Scholar
  18. Wiker N, Klarbring A, Borrvall T (2007) Topology optimization of regions of Darcy and Stokes flow. Int J Numer Methods Eng 69:1374–1404CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringJohns Hopkins UniversityBaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations