Advertisement

A new level-set based approach to shape and topology optimization under geometric uncertainty

Research Paper

Abstract

Geometric uncertainty refers to the deviation of the geometric boundary from its ideal position, which may have a non-trivial impact on design performance. Since geometric uncertainty is embedded in the boundary which is dynamic and changes continuously in the optimization process, topology optimization under geometric uncertainty (TOGU) poses extreme difficulty to the already challenging topology optimization problems. This paper aims to solve this cutting-edge problem by integrating the latest developments in level set methods, design under uncertainty, and a newly developed mathematical framework for solving variational problems and partial differential equations that define mappings between different manifolds. There are several contributions of this work. First, geometric uncertainty is quantitatively modeled by combing level set equation with a random normal boundary velocity field characterized with a reduced set of random variables using the Karhunen–Loeve expansion. Multivariate Gauss quadrature is employed to propagate the geometric uncertainty, which also facilitates shape sensitivity analysis by transforming a TOGU problem into a weighted summation of deterministic topology optimization problems. Second, a PDE-based approach is employed to overcome the deficiency of conventional level set model which cannot explicitly maintain the point correspondences between the current and the perturbed boundaries. With the explicit point correspondences, shape sensitivity defined on different perturbed designs can be mapped back to the current design. The proposed method is demonstrated with a bench mark structural design. Robust designs achieved with the proposed TOGU method are compared with their deterministic counterparts.

Keywords

Topology optimization Geometric uncertainty Level set method Shape optimization 

Nomenclature

a (x, ω)

A continuous random field

\(\overline{a} (x)\)

The mean function of a (x, ω)

ai (x)

The i-th eigenfunction

DΩ( ∙ )

The operator of shape derivative

J(Ω(z), u)

Performance functional

li·j

The j-th node of the i-th variable

\(\emph{w}_{i\cdot j}\)

The j-th weight of the i-th variable

M

The number of random variables

n

Normal vector

p(z)

Joint probability density function of the random variables z

u

State/displacement vector

u(X, t) or U(x, t)

Displacement vector connecting the positions of a particle in the undeformed configuration to its counter point in the deformed configuration to its counter point in the deformed configuration

\(\nabla_{\rm X}\)u

The material displacement gradient tensor

\(\nabla_{\rm x}\)U

The spatial displacement gradient tensor

R

Rotation tensor

t

Time

U

The right stretch tensor

V

The left stretch tensor

V(X)

Velocity at a point of the boundary

Vn(X)

Normal velocity

Vτ(X)

Tangential velocity

X

Material coordinate

z

Random variables in the system

μ

The mean of a response/random variable

λi

The ith eigenvalue

ξi(ω)

Independent random variables with zero mean and unit variance

ϕ(x)

Level set function

\(\boldsymbol{\Psi} \)(x,t)

A mapping between the initial and deformed domains

τ

The pseudo time

σ

Standard deviation of a response/random variable

Ω

Geometry

Ω(z) or Ωz

Random geometry

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their helps in greatly improving the quality of this manuscript.

References

  1. Abramowitz M, Stegun IA (1965) Handbook of mathematical functions, with formulas, graphs, and mathematical tables. Dover, MineolaGoogle Scholar
  2. Adalsteinsson D, Sethian J (2003) Transport and diffusion of material quantities on propagating interfaces via level set methods. J Comput Phys 185(1):271–288MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Allaire G (2002) Shape optimization by the homogenization method. Springer, New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Allaire G (2007) Conception optimale de structures. Springer, New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Allaire G, Jouve F et al (2004) Structural optimization using sensitivity analysis and a level-set method. J Comput Phys 194(1):363–393MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Belytschko T, Liu WK et al (2000) Nonlinear finite elements for continua and structures. Wiley, New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Bertalmío M, Sapiro G et al (1999) Region tracking on level-sets methods. IEEE Trans Med Imag 18(5):448–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bertalmío M, Cheng L-T et al (2001) Variational problems and partial differential equations on implicit surfaces. J Comput Phys 174:759–780MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bonet J, Wood RD (2008) Nonlinear continuum mechanics for finite element analysis. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bucher C (2009) Computational analysis of ramdomness in structural mechanics. CRC, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Burger M (2003) A framework for the construction of level set methods for shape optimization and reconstruction. Interfaces Free Bound 5:301–329MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Canuto C, Kozubek T (2007) A fictitious domain approach to the numerical solution of PDEs in stochastic domains. Numer Math 107(2):257–293MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chen S, Merriman B et al (1995) A simple level set method for solving stefan problems. J Comput Phys 135:8–29MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chen S, Wang MY et al (2008) Shape feature control in structural topology optimization. Comput Aided Des 40(9):951–962CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chopp DL (2001) Some improvements of the fast marching method. SIAM J Sci Comput 23(1):230–244MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. de Gournay F (2006) Velocity extension for the level-set method and multiple eigenvalues in shape optimization. SIAM J Control Optim 45(1):343–367MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Delfour MC, Zolésio J-P (2002) Shapes and geometries: metrics, analysis, differential calculus, and optimization. SIAM, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  18. Engels H (1980) Numerical quadrature and cubature. Academic, LondonMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. Ghanem RG, Doostan A (2006) On the construction and analysis of stochastic models: characterization and propagation of the errors associated with limited data. J Comput Phys 217:63–81MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ghanem RG, Spanos PD (1991) Stochastic finite elements: a spectral approach. Springer, New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. Guest JK (2009) Imposing maximum length scale in topology optimization. Struct Multidisc Optim 37(5):463–473MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Guest J, Prévost J et al (2004) Achieving minimum length scale in topology optimization using nodal design variables and projection functions. Int J Numer Methods Eng 61:238–254MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gumbert CR, Newman PA et al (2002) Effect of random geometric uncertainty on the computational design of A 3-D flexible wing. In: 20th AIAA applied aerodynamics conferenceGoogle Scholar
  24. Haldar A, Mahadevan S (2000) Reliability assessment using stochastic finite element analysis. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. Jin R, Du X et al (2003) The use of metamodeling techniques for optimization under uncertainty. J Struct Multidisc Optim 25(2):99–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kalsi M, Hacker K et al (2001) A comprehensive robust design approach for decision trade-offs in complex systems design. J Mech Des 123(1):1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kim NH, Wang H et al (2006) Efficient shape optimization under uncertainty using polynomial chaos expansions and local sensitivities. AIAA J 44(5):1112–1115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lee S, Chen W (2008) A comparative study of uncertainty propagation methods for black-box type functions. Struct Multidisc Optim 37(3):239–253MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lee SH, Chen W et al (2009) Robust design with arbitrary distributions using Gauss-type quadrature formula. Struct Multidisc Optim 39(3):227–243MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Luo J, Luo Z et al (2008) A new level set method for systematic design of hinge-free compliant mechanisms. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 198(2):318–331MATHGoogle Scholar
  31. Memoli F, Sapiro G et al (2003) Solving variational problems and partial differential equations mapping into general target manifolds. J Comput Phys 19:263–292MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  32. Murat F, Simon S (1976) Etudes de problemes d’optimal design. Lect Notes Comput Sci 41:54–62 (Berlin, Springer Verlag)Google Scholar
  33. Nouy A, Schoefs F et al (2007) X-SFEM, a computational technique based on X-FEM to deal with random shapes. Eur J Comput Mech 16(2):277–293MATHGoogle Scholar
  34. Nouy A, Clement A et al (2008) An extended stochastic finite element method for solving stochastic partial differential equations on random domains. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 197(51–52):4663–4682MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Osher S, Fedkiw R (2003) Level sets methods and dynamic implicit surfaces. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  36. Osher S, Sethian J (1988) Fronts propagating with curvature-dependent speed: algorithms based on Hamilton-Jacobi formulations. J Comput Phys 79:12–49MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Padula SL, Gumbert CR et al (2006) Aerospace applications of optimization under uncertainty. Optim Eng 7(3):317–328MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Peng D, Merriman B et al (1999) A pde-based local level set method. J Comput Phys 155:410–438MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pironneau O (1984) Optimal shape design for elliptic systems. Springer, New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
  40. Pons J-P, Hermosillo G et al (2006) Maintaining the point correspondence in the level set framework. J Comput Phys 220(1):339–354MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Poulsen T (2003) A new scheme for imposing minimum length scale in topology optimization. Int J Numer Methods Eng 57:741–760MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rahman S, Xu H (2004) A univariate dimension-reduction method for multi-dimensional integration in stochastic mechanics. Probab Eng Mech 19(4):393–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sethian JA (1999) Level set methods and fast marching methods. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeMATHGoogle Scholar
  44. Sigmund O (2007) Morphology-based black and white filters for topology optimization. Struct Multidisc Optim 33:401–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sigmund O (2009) Manufacturing tolerant topology optimization. Acta Mech Sin 25:227–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sokolowski J, Zolesio JP (1992) Introduction to shape optimization: shape sensitivity analysis. Springer, New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
  47. Stefano G (2009) The stochastic finite element method: past, present and future. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 198:1031–1051CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wang M, Wang XM et al (2003) A level set method for structural topology optimization. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 192:227–246MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Xiu D, Tartakovsky DM (2007) Numerical methods for differential equations in random domains. SIAM J Sci Comput 28(3):1167–1185MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Xu H, Rahman S (2004) A generalized dimension-reduction method for multi-dimensional integration in stochastic mechanics. Int J Numer Methods Eng 61:1992–2019MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Xu J-J, Zhao H-K (2003) An Eulerian formulation for solving partial differential equations along a moving interface. J Sci Comput 19(1–3):573–594MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Zabaras N (2007) Spectral methods for uncertainty quantification. Available online at http://mpdc.mae.cornell.edu/
  53. Zhao Y-G, Ono T (2001) Moment methods for structural reliability. J Struct Saf 23:47–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringNorthwestern UniversityEvanstonUSA
  2. 2.Altair Engineering, Inc.IrvineUSA

Personalised recommendations