Optimization and Engineering

, Volume 13, Issue 1, pp 57–78 | Cite as

Topology optimization using the finite cell method

Article
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

Huge effort has been spent over the past decades to develop efficient numerical methods for topology optimization of mechanical structures. Most recent investigations have focused on increasing the efficiency and robustness, improving the optimization schemes and extending them to multidisciplinary objective functions. The vast majority of available methods is based on low order finite elements, assuming one element as the smallest entity which can be assigned material in the optimization process. Whereas the present paper uses only a very simple, heuristic optimization procedure, it investigates in detail the feasibility of high order elements for topology optimization. The Finite Cell Method, an extension of the p-version of FEM is used, which completely separates between the description of the geometry of a structure and cells, where the high order shape functions are defined. Whereas geometry is defined on a (very) fine mesh, the material grid, shape functions live on a much coarser grid of elements, the finite cells. The method takes advantage of the ability of high order elements to accurately approximate even strongly inhomogeneous material distribution within one element and thus boundaries between material and void which pass through the interior of the coarse cells. Very attractive properties of the proposed method can be observed: Due to the high order approach the stress field in the optimized structure is approximated very accurately, no checkerboarding is observed, the iteratively found boundary of the structure is very smooth and the observed number of iterations is in general very small.

Keywords

Topology optimization Finite cell method 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allaire G, Jouve F, Toader A (2004) Structural optimization using sensitivity analysis and a level-set method. J Comput Phys 194/1:363–393 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allaire G, Jouve F (2006) Coupling the level set method and the topological gradient in structural optimization. Solid Mech. Appl. 137/1:3–12 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andreassen E, Clausen A, Schevenels M, Lazarov BS, Sigmund O (2010) Efficient topology optimization in MATLAB using 88 lines of code. Struct Multidiscip Optim. doi: 10.1007/s00158-010-0594-7 MATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Bendsøe MP (1995) Optimization of structural topology, shape and material. Springer, Germany, pp 136–137 Google Scholar
  5. Bendsøe MP, Sigmund O (2004) Topology optimization, theory, methods, and applications. Springer, Berlin MATHGoogle Scholar
  6. Bendsøe MP, Lund E, Olhoff N, Sigmund O (2005) Topology optimization—broadening the areas of application. Control Cybern 34(1):7–35 MATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Bourdin B (2001) Filters in topology optimization. Int J Numer Methods Eng 50:2143–2158 MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Challis JV (2010) A discrete level-set topology optimization code written in Matlab. Struct Multidiscip Optim 41:453–464 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Düster A, Bröker H, Heidkamp H, Heißerer U, Kollmannsberger S, Krause R, Muthler A, Niggl A, Nübel V, Rücker M, Scholz D (2004) AdhoC 4—user’s guide. Lehrstuhl für Bauinformatik, Technische Universität München Google Scholar
  10. Düster A, Parvizian J, Yang Z, Rank E (2008) The finite cell method for three-dimensional problems of solid mechanics. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 197:3768–3782 MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Düster A, Parvizian J, Rank E (2010) Topology optimization based on the finite cell method. Proc Appl Math Mech 10:151–152 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Eschenauer HA, Olhoff N (2001) Topology optimization of continuum structures: a review. Appl Mech Rev 54(4):331–390 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Eschenauer HA, Kobelev HA, Schumacher A (1994) Bubble method for topology and shape optimization of structures. Struct Optim 8:142–51 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Glowinski R, Kuznetsov Y (2007) Distributed Lagrange multipliers based on fictitious domain method for second order elliptic problems. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 196:1498–1506 MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Huang X, Xie YM (2008) A new look at ESO and BESO optimization methods. Struct Multidiscip Optim 35:89–92 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Huang X, Xie YM (2010) A further review of ESO type methods for topology optimization. Struct Multidiscip Optim 41:671–683 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Huang X, Xie YM (2010) Evolutionary topology optimization of continuum structures with an additional displacement constraint. Struct Multidiscip Optim 40:409–616 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Le C, Norato J, Bruns T, Ha C, Tortorelli D (2010) Stress-based topology optimization for continua. Struct Multidiscip Optim 41:605–620 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nguyen TH, Paulino GH, Song J, Le CH (2010) A computational paradigm for multiresolution topology optimization (MTOP). Struct Multidisc Optim 41:525–539. doi: 10.1007/s00158-009-0443-8 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Parvizian J, Fenner RT (1997) Shape optimization by the boundary element method: a comparison between mathematical programming and normal movement approaches. Eng Anal Bound Elem 19:137–145 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Parvizian J, Düster A, Rank E (2007) Finite cell method: h- and p-extension for embedded domain problems in solid mechanics. Comput Mech 41:121–133 MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rahmatalla S, Swan CC (2003) Form finding of sparse structures with continuum topology optimization. J Struct Eng 129(12):1707–1716 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rahmatalla S, Swan CC (2004) A Q4/Q4 continuum structural topology optimization implementation. Struct Multidiscip Optim 27:130–135 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ramière I, Angot P, Belliard M (2007) A fictitious domain approach with spread interface for elliptic problems with general boundary conditions. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 196:766–781 MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rozvany GIN (2001) Aims, scope, methods, history and unified terminology of computer-aided topology optimization in structural mechanics. Struct Multidiscip Optim 21:90–108 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Saul’ev VK (1963) On solution of some boundary value problems on high performance computers by fictitious domain method. Sib Math J 4:912–925 MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  27. Sethian JA, Wiegmann A (2000) Structural boundary design via level set and immersed interface methods. J Comput Phys 163:489–528 MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sigmund O (2007) Morphology-based black and white filters for topology optimization. Struct Multidisc Optim 33:401–424 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sigmund O, Petersson J (1998) Numerical instabilities in topology optimization: a survey on procedures dealing with checkerboards, mesh-dependencies and local minima. Struct Optim 16:68–75 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sigmund O, Clausen PM (2007) Topology optimization using a mixed formulation: an alternative way to solve pressure load problems. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 196:1874–1889 MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Szabó BA, Babuška I (1991) Finite element analysis. Wiley, New York MATHGoogle Scholar
  32. Szabó BA, Düster A, Rank E (2004) The p-version of the finite element method. In: Stein E, de Borst R., Hughes TJR (eds) Encyclopedia of computational mechanics, vol 1. Wiley, New York, pp 119–139 Google Scholar
  33. Tang X, Bassir DH, Zhang W (2010) Shape sizing optimization and material selection based on mixed variables and genetic algorithm. Optim Eng. doi: 10.1007/s11081-010-9125-z Google Scholar
  34. Zhou M, Rozvany GIN (2001) On the validity of ESO type methods in topology optimization. Struct Multidisc Optim 21:80–83 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Xie YM, Steven GP (1997) Evolutionary structural optimization. Springer, London, pp 12–29 MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Industrial EngineeringIsfahan University of TechnologyIsfahanIran
  2. 2.Numerische Strukturanalyse mit Anwendungen in der Schiffstechnik (M-10)Technische Universität Hamburg-HarburgHamburgGermany
  3. 3.Chair for Computation in Engineering, Faculty of Civil Engineering and GeodesyTechnische Universität MünchenMunichGermany

Personalised recommendations