Abstract
In recent years, the state of the art in shape optimization has advanced due to new approaches proposed by various researchers. A fundamental difficulty in shape optimization is that the original finite element mesh may become invalid during large shape changes. Automatic remeshing and “velocity field” approaches are most commonly used for conventionalh-type finite element analysis to address this problem.
In this paper, we describe a different approach to shape optimization based on the use of high-orderp-type finite elements tightly coupled to a parameterized computational geometry module. The advantages of this approach are as follows.
Accurate results can be obtained with much fewer finite elements, so large shape changes are possible without remeshing.
Automatic adaptive analysis may be performed so that accurate results are achieved at each step of the optimization process.
Since the elements derive their geometric mapping from the underlying geometry, the fundamental equivalent of “velocity field” element shape updating may be readily achieved.
Results are presented for sizing and shape optimization with this approach and contrasted with previous results from the literature.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Arora, J.S. 1989:Introduction to optimum design. New York: McGraw-Hill
Arora, J.S. 1991: Sequential linearization and quadratic programming techniques. A chapter for structural optimization: status and promise.AIAA Series, Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics
Balch, C. 1991: Structural finite elements with high order basis functions.Proc. ASME Comp. Engng. Conf.
Belegundu, A.D.; Rajan, S.D. 1988: A shape optimization approach based on natural design variables and shape functions.Comp. Meth. Appl. Mech. Engng. 66, 87–106
Belegundu, A.D.; Zhang, S. 1992: Mesh distortion control in shape optimization.Proc. 33rd SDM Conf. (held in Dallas, TX), pp. 2516–2525
Choi, K.K.; Chang, K.-H. 1991: Shape design sensitivity analysis and what-if workstation for elastic solids.Proc. 32nd SDM Conf. pp. 578–587 (held in Baltimore, MD)
Haug, E.; Choi, K.; Komkov, V. 1986:Design sensitivity analysis of structural systems. Orlando: Academic Press
King, R.; Welch, K. 1991: Modeling the interface between incompatible finite element boundaries.SAE Technical Paper, SP-884
Kodiyalam, S.; Kumar, V.; Finnigan, P. 1991: A constructive solid geometry approach to three-dimensional shape optimization.Proc. 32nd Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conf. (held in Baltimore, MD)
Rajan, S.; Gani, L. 1990: A comparison of natural and geometric approaches for shape optimal design.Proc. 31st SDM Conf. (held in Long Beach, CA), pp. 196–205. Washington D.C.: AIAA
Shyy, Y.; Fleury, C.; Idzapanah, K. 1988: Shape optimal design using high order finite elements.Comp. Meth. Appl. Mech. Engng. 71, 99
Szabo, B.; Babuska, I. 1989:Finite element analysis. New York: Wiley
Thanedar, P.; Arora, J.; Li, G.; Liu, T. 1990: Robustness, generality, and efficiency of optimization algorithms for practical application.Struct. Optim. 2, 203–212
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Thanedar, P., King, R. Shape optimization using adaptive high-order finite elements. Structural Optimization 6, 189–193 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01743511
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01743511