Advertisement

Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization

, Volume 60, Issue 4, pp 1687–1707 | Cite as

Free sizing optimization of a front hood using the ESL method: overcoming challenges and traps

  • Artem KarevEmail author
  • Lothar Harzheim
  • Rainer Immel
  • Matthias Erzgräber
Industrial Application
  • 122 Downloads

Abstract

Topology and free sizing optimization are very important tools in the early design phase. Yet, they are only well established for optimization problems based on linear analysis. In the nonlinear analysis area—in particular crash—such kind of optimization cannot be applied due to the unavailability of gradients. A workaround is to create linear auxiliary load cases approximating the nonlinear load case at different time steps, which can be used in optimization based on linear statics analysis. The equivalent static load (ESL) method provides a procedure to create such auxiliary load cases in a well-defined way. However, it is a great challenge to translate nonlinear requirements and responses to linear statics system. For this reason, strain energy is often used as objective function even if it does not reflect the real objective in the optimization task. In this study, different formulations for a front hood free sizing optimization problem are assessed for their ability to translate the actual objective of the nonlinear system to the linear statics system. It turns out that even though such formulations can be found, they show no advantage in comparison to simpler formulations. The best performance was obtained using mass as objective function, whereas the strain energy formulation fails due to the tendency to favor huge mesh deformations in void areas. The reason for such behavior and the related issues appearing especially in topology and free sizing optimization are discussed in detail. Finally, recommendations are given on how to improve the performance of ESL-based optimization.

Keywords

Equivalent static loads Topometry Crash Pedestrian protection 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interests

Artem Karev, Lothar Harzheim, Rainer Immel, and Matthias Erzgräber declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Choi WS, Park GJ (2002) Structural optimization using equivalent static loads at all the time intervals. Comput Methods Appl Mathematics 191(19):2077–2094zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. Harzheim L (2014) Strukturoptimierung, Grundlagen und Anwendungen, 2. Auflage. Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Harri Deutsch GmbH, Frankfurt a.MGoogle Scholar
  3. Harzheim L, Magalhães F, Graffe M, Schirmer R (2014) Investigation of the ESL (equivalent static load) method to optimize crash load cases. VDI Ber 2224:51–71Google Scholar
  4. Jeong SB, Yoon S, Xu S, Park GJ (2010) Non-linear dynamic response structural optimization of an automobile frontal structure using equivalent static loads. Proc Inst Mech Eng D J Automobile Eng 224(4):489–501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Kim YI, Park GJ (2010) Nonlinear dynamic response structural optimization using equivalent static loads. Comput Methods Appl Mathematics 199(9–12):660–676zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. Park GJ (2011) Technical overview of the equivalent static loads method for non-linear static response structural optimization. Struct Multidiscip Optim 43:319–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Park KJ, Lee JN, Park GJ (2005) Structural shape optimization using equivalent static loads transformed from dynamic loads. Int J Numer Methods Eng 63:589–602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Shin MK, Park KJ, Park GJ (2007) Optimization of structures with nonlinear behavior using equivalent loads. Comput Methods Appl Mathematics 196(4–6):1154–1167zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. Yoon JM, Lee Y, Park SO, Han YH, Park GJ (2018) Crash optimization considering the head injury criterion. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part D: Journal of Automobile Engineering.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0954407018809298

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Numerical Methods in Mechanical EngineeringTechnische Universität Darmstadt|DarmstadtGermany
  2. 2.Opel Automobile GmbH, BahnhofsplatzRüsselsheim am MainGermany

Personalised recommendations