A topological derivative method for topology optimization

  • Julian A. Norato
  • Martin P. Bendsøe
  • Robert B. Haber
  • Daniel A. Tortorelli
Research Paper

Abstract

We propose a fictitious domain method for topology optimization in which a level set of the topological derivative field for the cost function identifies the boundary of the optimal design. We describe a fixed-point iteration scheme that implements this optimality criterion subject to a volumetric resource constraint. A smooth and consistent projection of the region bounded by the level set onto the fictitious analysis domain simplifies the response analysis and enhances the convergence of the optimization algorithm. Moreover, the projection supports the reintroduction of solid material in void regions, a critical requirement for robust topology optimization. We present several numerical examples that demonstrate compliance minimization of fixed-volume, linearly elastic structures.

Keywords

Topology optimization Fictitious domain Geometry projection Topological derivative 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allaire G, Jouve F, Toader A (2002) A level-set method for shape optimization. C R Math Acad Sci 334(12):1125–1130MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. Allaire G, de Gournay F, Jouve F, Toader A (2004a) Structural optimization using topological and shape sensitivity via a level set method. Internal report 555, Ecole PolytechniqueGoogle Scholar
  3. Allaire G, Jouve F, Toader A (2004b) Structural optimization using sensitivity analysis and a level-set method. J Comput Phys 194(1):363–393MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. Belytschko T, Xiao S, Parimi C (2003) Topology optimization with implicit functions and regularization. Int J Numer Methods Eng 57:1177–1196MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bendsøe M (1989) Optimal shape design as a material distribution problem. Struct Optim 1:193–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bendsøe MP, Haber RB (1993) The michell layout problem as a low volume fraction limit of the perforated plate topology optimization problem: An asymptotic study. Struct Optim 6:263–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bendsøe MP, Sigmund O (2003) Topology optimization. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York theory, methods and applicationsGoogle Scholar
  8. Bloomenthal J (1988) Polygonization of implicit surfaces. Comput Aided Geom Des 5(4):341–355MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. Céa J, Garreau S, Guillaume P, Masmoudi M (2000) The shape and topological optimizations connection. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 188:713–726MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Eschenauer HA, Kobelev V, Schumacher A (1994) Bubble method for topology and shape optimization of structures. Struct Optim 8:42–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Garreau S, Guillaume P, Masmoudi M (2001) The topological asymptotic for PDE systems: the elasticity case. SIAM J Control Optim 39(6):1756–1778 (electronic)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. Haber RB, Jog CS, Bendsøe MP (1996) A new approach to variable-topology shape design using a constraint on perimeter. Struct Optim 11:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kohn R, Strang G (1986) Optimal design and relaxation of variational problems. Commun Pure Appl Math 39(1):1–25 (part I), 139–182 (part II), and 353–357 (part III)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. Mei Y, Wang X (2004) A level set method for structural topology optimization and its applications. Adv Eng Softw 35:415–441MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Norato J, Haber R, Tortorelli D, Bendsøe MP (2004) A geometry projection method for shape optimization. Int J Numer Methods Eng 60(14):2289–2312MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Olhoff N, Bendsøe MP, Rasmussen J (1991) On CAD-integrated strutural topology and design optimization. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 89(1–3):259–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Pedersen P (1989) On optimal orientation of orthotropic materials. Struct Optim 1(2):101–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Pedersen P (1990) Bounds on elastic energy in solids of orthotopic materials. Struct Optim 35(1):55–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Pedersen P (1998) Some general optimal design results using anisotropic, power law nonlinear elasticity. Struct Optim 15(2):73–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Pedersen P (2003a) A note on design of fiber-nets for maximum stiffness. J Elast 73(1):127–145MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Pedersen P (2003b) Optimal designs—structures and materials—problems and tools. http://www.fam.web.mek.dtu.dk/pp.html
  22. Pedersen P, Pedersen N (2005) An optimality criterion for shape optimization in eigenfrequency problems. Struct Multidiscipl Optim 29(6):457–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rozvany G (2000) Basic geometrical properties of exact optimal composite plates. Comput Struct 76(1–3):263–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rozvany G, Zhou M (1991) Applications of the coc method in layout optimization. Comput Struct 76(1–3):263–275Google Scholar
  25. Sokołowski J, Zochowski A (1999) On the topological derivative in shape optimization. SIAM J Control Optim 37(4):1251–1272 (electronic)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  26. Wang MY, Wang X, Guo D (2003) A level set method for structural topology optimization. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 192:227–246MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  27. Zhou M, Rozvany G (2001) On the validity of eso type methods in topology optimization. Struct Optim 21:80–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Julian A. Norato
    • 1
  • Martin P. Bendsøe
    • 2
  • Robert B. Haber
    • 1
  • Daniel A. Tortorelli
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Mechanical Science and EngineeringUniversity of Illinois at Urbana–ChampaignUrbanaUSA
  2. 2.Department of MathematicsTechnical University of DenmarkLyngbyDenmark

Personalised recommendations