Advertisement

Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization

, Volume 46, Issue 4, pp 585–595 | Cite as

Enhanced analysis of design sensitivities in topology optimization

  • Nikolai GerzenEmail author
  • Franz-Joseph Barthold
Research Paper

Abstract

This paper outlines an enhanced analysis of the design sensitivities beyond the standard computation of the gradient values. It is based on the analytical derivation and efficient computation of the Fréchet derivatives of objectives and constraints with respect to the full space of all possible design variables. This overhead of sensitivity information is examined by a singular value decomposition (SVD) in order to detect major and minor influence and response modes of the considered structure. Thus, this methodology leads to valuable qualitative and quantitative insight which is so far unused in standard approaches to structural optimization. This knowledge enables the optimiser to understand and improve the models systematically which are usually set up entirely by engineering experience and intuition. Furthermore, a reduction of the complete design space to the most valuable subspace of design modifications demonstrates the information content of the decomposed sensitivities. The generic concept is applied to topology optimization which is a challenging model problem due to the large number of independent design variables. The details specific to topology optimization are outlined and the pros and cons are discussed. An illustrative example shows that reasonable optimal designs can be obtained with a small percentage of properly defined design variables. Nevertheless, further research is necessary to improve the overall computational efficiency.

Keywords

Sensitivity analysis Singular value decomposition (SVD) Model reduction Topology optimization 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We gratefully acknowledge the support of the German Research Foundation (DFG) under grant no. BA 1828/3-1.

References

  1. Allaire G (2002) Shape optimization by the homogenization method. SpringerGoogle Scholar
  2. Amir O, Bendsœe MP, Sigmund O (2009) Approximate reanalysis in topology optimization. Int J Numer Methods Eng 78(12):1474–1491zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. ARPACK (2011) http://www.caam.rice.edu/software/ARPACK/ Accessed 31 Jan 2011
  4. Barthelemy JFM, Haftka RT (1993) Approximation concepts for optimum structural design - a review. Struct Optim 5:129–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barthold FJ (2008) Remarks on variational shape sensitivity analysis based on local coordinates. Eng Anal Bound Elem 32:971–985zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bendsøe MP, Sigmund O (1999) Material interpolation schemes in topology optimization. Arch Appl Mech 69:635–654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bendsøe M, Sigmund O (2003) Topology optimization. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Borrvall T (2001) Topology optimization of elastic continua using restriction. Arch Comput Methods Eng 8,4:51–385MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bruns TE, Tortorelli DA (2001) Topology optimization of non-linear elastic structures and compliant mechanisms. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 190:3443–3459 doi: 10.1016/S0045-7825(00)00278-4 zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Choi KK, Kim NH (2005a) Structural sensitivity analysis and optimization 1 - linear systems. Springer Science+Business Media, IncGoogle Scholar
  11. Choi KK, Kim NH (2005b) Structural sensitivity analysis and optimization 2 - nonlinear systems and applications. In: Mechanical engineering series. SpringerGoogle Scholar
  12. DeRose G, Díaz A (1999) Single scale wavelet approximation in layout optimization. Struct Optim 18:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. de Ruiter MJ, van Keulen F (2004) Topology optimization using a topology description function. Strct Multidisc Optim 26(6):406–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Díaz A, Sigmund O (1995) Checherboard patterns in layout optimization. Struct Optim 10:40–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gerzen N, Materna D, Barthold FJ (2011) The inner structure of sensitivities in nodal based shape optimization. Comput Mech 49(3):379-396. doi: 10.1007/s00466-011-0648-8 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Haug EJ, Choi KK, Komkov V (1986) Design sensitivity analysis of structural systems. Academic Press, OrlandozbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. Jog CS, Haber R (1996) Stability of finite element models for distributed-parameter optimization and topology design. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 130:203–226MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kim YY, Yoon GH (2000) Multi-resolution multi-scale topology optimization - a new paradigm. Int J Solids Struct 37(39):5529–5559MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nguyen TH, Paulino GH, Song J, Le CH (2010) A computational paradigm for multiresolution topology optimization (mtop). Struct Multidisc Optim 41:525–539MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Nocedal J, Wright S (2006) Numerical optimization. Springer Science and Business MediaGoogle Scholar
  21. Paulino GH, Le C (2010) A modified q4/q4 element for topology optimization. Struct Multidisc Optim 37(3):255–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Poulsen T (2002) Topology optimization in wavelet space. Int J Numer Methods Eng 53:567–582. doi: 10.1002/nme.285 MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Schittkowski K (1983) On the convergence of a sequential quadratic programming method with an augmented lagrangian line search function. Optim, Math Oper Stat 14:197–216MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. Sigmund O (2007) Morphology-based black and white filters for topology optimization. Struct Multidisc Optim 33:401–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Stainko R (2006) An adaptive multilevel approach to the minimal compliance problem in topology optimization. Commun Numer Methods Eng 22(2):109–118MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Svanberg K (1987) The method of moving asymptotes-a new method for structural optimization. Int J Numer Methods Eng 24(2):359–373MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Svanberg K (2002) A class of globally convergent optimization methods based on conservative convex separable approximations. SIAM J Optim 12(2):555–573. doi: 10.1137/S1052623499362822 MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Tikhonov AN, Concharsky A, Stepanov V, Yagola AG (1995) Numerical methods for the solution of ill-posed problems. Kluwer Academic PublishersGoogle Scholar
  29. Zhou M, Rozvany GIN (1991) The COC algorithm, part II: topological, geometry and generalized shape optimization. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 89:197–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Numerical Methods and Information ProcessingDortmund University of TechnologyDortmundGermany

Personalised recommendations