Bridging topology optimization and additive manufacturing
- 6.2k Downloads
- 75 Citations
Abstract
Topology optimization is a technique that allows for increasingly efficient designs with minimal a priori decisions. Because of the complexity and intricacy of the solutions obtained, topology optimization was often constrained to research and theoretical studies. Additive manufacturing, a rapidly evolving field, fills the gap between topology optimization and application. Additive manufacturing has minimal limitations on the shape and complexity of the design, and is currently evolving towards new materials, higher precision and larger build sizes. Two topology optimization methods are addressed: the ground structure method and density-based topology optimization. The results obtained from these topology optimization methods require some degree of post-processing before they can be manufactured. A simple procedure is described by which output suitable for additive manufacturing can be generated. In this process, some inherent issues of the optimization technique may be magnified resulting in an unfeasible or bad product. In addition, this work aims to address some of these issues and propose methodologies by which they may be alleviated. The proposed framework has applications in a number of fields, with specific examples given from the fields of health, architecture and engineering. In addition, the generated output allows for simple communication, editing, and combination of the results into more complex designs. For the specific case of three-dimensional density-based topology optimization, a tool suitable for result inspection and generation of additive manufacturing output is also provided.
Keywords
Additive manufacturing Ground structure method Density-based topology optimization Three-dimensional optimal structures Structural manufacturingNotes
Acknowledgments
The authors appreciate constructive comments and insightful suggestions from the anonymous reviewers. We are thankful to the support from the US National Science Foundation under grant CMMI #1335160. We also acknowledge the support from SOM (Skidmore, Owings and Merrill LLP) and from the Donald B. and Elizabeth M. Willett endowment at the University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign. Any opinion, finding, conclusions or recommendations expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the sponsors.
Supplementary material
References
- Achtziger W (2007) On simultaneous optimization of truss geometry and topology. Struct Multidiscip Optim 33(4-5):285–304CrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- Allaire G, Francfort G (1993) A numerical algorithm for topology and shape optimization. In: Bendsøe M P, Mota Soares C A (eds) Topology design of structures. Springer Netherlands, Sesimbra, pp 239–248Google Scholar
- Allaire G, Kohn R (1993) Topology optimization and optimal shape design using homogenization. In: Bendsøe M P, Mota Soares CA (eds) Topology design of structures. Springer Netherlands, Sesimbra, pp 207–218Google Scholar
- Almeida SRM, Paulino GH, Silva ECN (2009) A simple and effective inverse projection scheme for void distribution control in topology optimization. Struct Multidiscip Optim 39(4):359–371CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Ambrosio L, Buttazzo G (1993) An optimal design problem with perimeter penalization. Calc Var Partial Diff Equ 1(1):55–69CrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- Andreassen E, Clausen A, Schevenels M, Lazarov BS, Sigmund O (2011) Efficient topology optimization in MATLAB using 88 lines of code. Struct Multidiscip Optimi 43(1):1–16CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- ASTM ISO (2013) ASTM52915-13, Standard specification for additive manufacturing file format (AMF) Version 1.1. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PAGoogle Scholar
- Bendsøe MP (1989) Optimal shape design as a material distribution problem. Struct Optim 1(4):193–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Bendsøe MP, Kikuchi N (1988) Generating optimal topologies in structural design using a homogenization method. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 71(2):197–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Bendsøe MP, Sigmund O (2003) Topology optimization: theory, methods and applications. Engineering Online Library, 2nd edn. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
- Bourdin B (2001) Filters in topology optimization. Int J Numer Methods Eng 50(9):2143–2158CrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- Brackett D, Ashcroft I, Hague R (2011) Topology optimization for additive manufacturing. In: 22nd annual solid freeform fabrication symposium, pp 348–362Google Scholar
- Bruns TE, Tortorelli DA (2001) Topology optimization of non-linear elastic structures and compliant mechanisms. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 190(26-27):3443–3459CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- Brutzman D, Daly L (2010) X3D: extensible 3D graphics for Web authors, 1st edn. Morgan Kaufmann, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
- Chen Y (2006) A mesh-based geometric modeling method for general structures. In: ASME 2006 international design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering conference. PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
- Christensen P, Klarbring A (2009) An introduction to structural optimization, 1st edn. Springer, BerlinzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- Crump S (1992) Apparatus and method for creating three-dimensional objects. US Patent 5,121,329Google Scholar
- Deaton JD, Grandhi RV (2013) A survey of structural and multidisciplinary continuum topology optimization: post 2000. Struct Multidiscip Optim 49(1):1–38CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Deckard C (1989) Method and apparatus for producing parts by selective sintering. US Patent 4,863,538Google Scholar
- Dewhurst P, Srithongchai S (2005) An investigaton of minimum-weight dual-material symmetrically loaded wheels and torsion arms. J Appl Mech 72(2):196–202CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- Dewhurst P, Taggart D (2009) Three-dimensional cylindrical truss structures: a case study for topological optimization. In: Hernández S, Brebbia C A (eds) Computer aided optimum design in engineering XI. WIT Press, pp 83–94Google Scholar
- Díaz A, Sigmund O (1995) Checkerboard patterns in layout optimization. Struct Optim 10(1):40–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Dorn WS, Gomory RE, Greenberg HJ (1964) Automatic design of optimal structures. J Mecanique 3(1):25–52Google Scholar
- EOS GmbH (2014) Electro optical systems: orthopaedic technology. http://www.eos.info/industries_markets/medical/orthopaedic_technology
- France AK (2013) Make: 3D printing - the essential guide to 3D printers. Maker Media, SebastopolGoogle Scholar
- Gaynor AT, Meisel Na, Williams CB, Guest JK (2014) Multiple-material topology optimization of compliant mechanisms created via PolyJet three-dimensional printing. J Manuf Sci Engi 136(6):061015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Gilbert M, Tyas A (2003) Layout optimization of large-scale pin-jointed frames. Eng Comput 20(8):1044–1064CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- Graczykowski C, Lewiński T (2005) The lightest plane structures of a bounded stress level transmitting a point load to a circular support. Control Cybern 34(1):227–253zbMATHGoogle Scholar
- Graczykowski C, Lewiński T (2006a) Michell cantilevers constructed within trapezoidal domains—Part I: geometry of Hencky nets. Struct Multidiscip Optim 32(5):347–368CrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- Graczykowski C, Lewiński T (2006b) Michell cantilevers constructed within trapezoidal domains—Part II: virtual displacement fields. Struct Multidiscip Optim 32(6):463–471CrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- Graczykowski C, Lewiński T (2006c) Michell cantilevers constructed within trapezoidal domains—Part III: force fields. Struct Multidiscip Optim 33(1):1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Graczykowski C, Lewiński T (2007) Michell cantilevers constructed within trapezoidal domains—Part IV: complete exact solutions of selected optimal designs and their approximations by trusses of finite number of joints. Struct Multidiscip Optim 33(2): 113–129CrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- 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(2):238–254CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- Haber RB, Jog CS, Bendsøe MP (1996) A new approach to variable-topology shape design using a constraint on perimeter. Struct Opt 11(1-2):1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hegemier G, Prager W (1969) On Michell trusses. Int J Mech Sci 11(2):209–215CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- Hemp WS (1973) Optimum structures, 1st edn. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- Hull C (1986) Apparatus for production of three-dimensional objects by stereolithography. US Patent 4,575,330Google Scholar
- Jones R, Haufe P, Sells E, Iravani P, Olliver V, Palmer C, Bowyer A (2011) RepRap — the replicating rapid prototyper. Robotica 29(1):177–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Karmarkar N (1984) A new polynomial-time algorithm for linear programming. Combinatorica 4(4):373–395CrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- Lewiński T (2004) Michell structures formed on surfaces of revolution. Struct Multidiscip Optim 28(1):20–30CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Lewiński T, Rozvany GIN (2007) Exact analytical solutions for some popular benchmark problems in topology optimization—Part II: three-sided polygonal supports. Struct Multidiscip Optim 33(4-5):337–349CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Lewiński T, Rozvany GIN (2008a) Analytical benchmarks for topological optimization—Part IV: square-shaped line support. Struct Multidiscip Optim 36(2):143–158CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Lewiński T, Rozvany GIN (2008b) Exact analytical solutions for some popular benchmark problems in topology optimization—Part III: L-shaped domains. Struct Multidiscip Optim 35(2):165–174CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Lewiński T, Rozvany GIN, Sokół T, Bołbotowski K (2013) Exact analytical solutions for some popular benchmark problems in topology optimization III: L-shaped domains revisited. Struct Multidiscip Optim 47 (6):937–942CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Lewiński T, Zhou M, Rozvany GIN (1994a) Extended exact least-weight truss layouts?–Part II: unsymmetric cantilevers. Int J Mech Sci 36(5):399–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Lewiński T, Zhou M, Rozvany GIN (1994b) Extended exact solutions for least-weight truss layouts?–Part I: cantilever with a horizontal axis of symmetry. Int J Mech Sci 36(5):375–398CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- Lipson H, Kurman M (2013) Fabricated: the new world of 3D printing, 1st edn. Wiley, IndianapolisGoogle Scholar
- Liu K, Tovar A (2014) An efficient 3D topology optimization code written in Matlab. Struct Multidiscip Optim. doi: 10.1007/s00158-014-1107-x
- Meiners W, Wissenbach K, Gasser A (1998) Shaped body especially prototype or replacement part production. DE Patent 19,649,865Google Scholar
- Meisel NA, Gaynor A, Williams CB, Guest JK (2013) Multiple-material topology optimization of compliant mechanisms created via polyjet 3d printing. In: 24rd annual international solid freeform fabrication symposium, pp. 980–997Google Scholar
- Michell AGM (1904) The limits of economy of material in frame-structures. 6 8(47):589–597zbMATHGoogle Scholar
- Ohsaki M (2010) Optimization of finite dimensional structures, 1st edn. CRC Press, BocaCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Petersson J (1999) A finite element analysis of optimal variable thickness sheets. SIAM J Numer Anal 36(6):1759–1778CrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- Ramos AS, Paulino GH (2014) Convex topology optimization for hyperelastic trusses based on the ground-structure approach. Struct Multidiscip OptimGoogle Scholar
- Reinhart G, Teufelhart S (2011) Load-adapted design of generative manufactured lattice structures. Phys Procedia 12(Part A):385–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Rezaie R, Badrossamay M, Ghaie a, Moosavi H (2013) Topology optimization for fused deposition modeling process. Procedia CIRP 6:521–526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Rozvany G, Gollub W (1990) Michell layouts for various combinations of line supports—I. Int J Mech Sci 32(12):1021– 1043CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- Rozvany G, Gollub W, Zhou M (1997) Exact Michell layouts for various combinations of line supports—Part II. Struct Optim 14(2-3):138–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Rozvany GIN (1998) Exact analytical solutions for some popular benchmark problems in topology optimization. Struct Optim 15(1):42–48CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- Rozvany GIN (2009) A critical review of established methods of structural topology optimization. Struct Multidiscip Optim 37(3):217–237CrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- Salmi M (2013) Medical applications of additive manufacturing in surgery and dental care. Phd thesis, Aalto University, Helsinki, FinlandGoogle Scholar
- Salmi M, Tuomi J, Paloheimo K-S, Björkstrand R, Paloheimo M, Salo J, Kontio R, Mesimäki K, Mäkitie AA (2012) Patient-specific reconstruction with 3D modeling and DMLS additive manufacturing. Rapid Prototyp J 18(3):209–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Sigmund O (1997) On the design of compliant mechanisms using topology optimization. Mech Struct Mach 25(4):493–524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Sigmund O (2001) A 99 line topology optimization code written in Matlab. Struct Multidiscip Optim 21 (2):120–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Sigmund O (2007) Morphology-based black and white filters for topology optimization. Struct Multidiscip Optim 33(4-5):401–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Sigmund O, Maute K (2013) Topology optimization approaches. Struct Multidiscip Optim 48(6):1031–1055CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Sigmund O, Petersson J (1998) Numerical instabilities in topology optimization: a survey on procedures dealing with checkerboards, mesh-dependencies and local minima. Struct Optim 16(1):68–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Sokół T (2011) A 99 line code for discretized Michell truss optimization written in mathematica. Struct Multidiscip Optim 43(2):181–190CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- Sundararajan V (2011) Topology optimization for additive manufacturing of customized meso-structures using homogenization and parametric smoothing functions. Msc thesis, University of Texas at AustinGoogle Scholar
- Sutradhar A, Park J, Carrau D, Miller MJ (2014) Experimental validation of 3D printed patient-specific implants using digital image correlation and finite element analysis. Comput Biol Med 52:8–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Sutradhar A, Paulino GH, Miller MJ, Nguyen TH (2010) Topological optimization for designing patient-specific large craniofacial segmental bone replacements. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 107(30):13222–13227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Topping BHV (1983) Shape optimization of skeletal structures: A review. J Struct Eng 109(8):1933–1951CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Villanueva CH, Maute K (2014) Density and level set-XFEM schemes for topology optimization of 3-D structures. Comput Mech 54(1):133–150CrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- Wang F, Lazarov BS, Sigmund O (2011) On projection methods, convergence and robust formulations in topology optimization. Struct Multidiscip Optim 43(6):767–784CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- Wittbrodt B, Glover aG, Laureto J, Anzalone G, Oppliger D, Irwin J, Pearce J (2013) Life-cycle economic analysis of distributed manufacturing with open-source 3-D printers. Mechatronics 23(6):713–726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Wright MH (2004) The interior-point revolution in optimization: history, recent developments, and lasting consequences. Bull Amer Math Soc 42(1):39–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Xu S, Cai Y, Cheng G (2010) Volume preserving nonlinear density filter based on heaviside functions. Struct Multidiscip Optim 41(4):495–505CrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- Zegard T. (2014) Structural optimization: from continuum and ground structures to additive manufacturing. Phd thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign, Urbana, ILGoogle Scholar
- Zegard T, Paulino GH (2014a) GRAND – Ground structure based topology optimization on arbitrary 2D domains using MATLAB. Struct Multidiscip Optim 50(5):861–882CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Zegard T, Paulino GH (2014b) GRAND3 – Ground structure based topology optimization on arbitrary 3D domains using MATLAB. Struct Multidiscip Optim. doi: 10.1007/s00158-015-1284-2
- Zhou M, Rozvany GIN (1991) The COC algorithm, Part II: topological, geometrical and generalized shape optimization. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 89(1-3):309–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar