Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization

, Volume 50, Issue 3, pp 505–515 | Cite as

Conceptual and basic designs of the Mobile Harbor crane based on topology and shape optimization



The Mobile Harbor (MH) has been recently proposed as a novel maritime cargo transfer system that can move to a container ship anchored in the deep sea and handle containers directly at sea with the aid of a stabilized MH crane. Because this system operates under at-sea conditions, the MH crane must be designed to support an inertia load and wind force, as well as its self-weight. The wave-induced motions of the MH, e.g. rolling, pitching, and heaving, generate a significant amount of inertia load, which has not been considered in the design of conventional quayside cranes installed on stable ground. Wind force is also a critical design factor due to the higher wind velocity in the open sea. In addition to the aforementioned structural rigidity, mass minimization is also important in the structural design of MH cranes because it reduces the overturning moment and therefore enhances ship stability. In this paper, the sensitivities of the design-dependent loads (i.e. self-weight, inertia load, and wind force) are derived with respect to the design variables, and then a topology optimization is conducted with the derived sensitivities in order to obtain a conceptual design. Then, the conceptual design is elaborated into a three-dimensional basic design through shape optimization with design regulations for offshore cranes. Through the integrated design process with the topology and shape optimizations, a conceptual and basic design is successfully obtained for the MH crane.


Topology optimization Shape optimization Design-dependent load Mobile Harbor Offshore crane 



This work was supported by the Industrial Strategic Technology Development Program (10036235, Development of the core technology of light weight crane for mobile harbor) funded by the Ministry of Knowledge Economy (MKE, Korea). We would like to thank Dr. Krister Svanberg at KTH (Stockholm, Sweden) for providing the GCMMA code for academic research.


  1. Bendsoe MP (1989) Optimal shape design as a material distribution problem. Struct Optim 1:193–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bendsoe MP, Kikuchi N (1988) Generating optimal topologies in structural design using a homogenization method. Comput Method Appl Mech Eng 71:197–224CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. Bruyneel M, Duysinx P (2005) Note on topology optimization of continuum structures including self-weight. Struct Multidiscip Optim 29:245–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Du J, Olhoff N (2004a) Topological optimization of continuum structures with design-dependent surface loading - part I: new computational approach for 2D problems. Struct Multidiscip Optim 27(3):151–165CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. Du J, Olhoff N (2004b) Topological optimization of continuum structures with design-dependent surface loading - part II: algorithm and examples for 3D problems. Struct Multidiscip Optim 27(3):166–177CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. Hammer VB, Olhoff N (2000) Topology optimization of continuum structures subjected to pressure loading. Struct Multidiscip Optim 19:85–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hassani B, Hinton E (1998) A review of homogenization and topology optimization I—homogenization theory for media with periodic structure. Comput Struct 69:707–717CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. James K (2012) Aerostructural shape and topology optimization of aircraft wings. Ph.D. thesis, University of TorontoGoogle Scholar
  9. Jang IG, Kim IY (2009) Computational simulation of trabecular adaptation progress in human proximal femur during growth. J Biomech 42(5):573–580CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. Jang IG, Kim IY (2010) Application of design space optimization to bone remodeling simulation of trabecular architecture in human proximal femur for higher computational efficiency. Finite Elem Anal Des 46(4):311–319CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. Jang IG, Kwak BM (2006) Evolutionary topology optimization using design space adjustment based on fixed grid. Int J Numer Method Eng 66(11):1817–1840CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. Jang IG, Kwak BM (2008) Design space optimization using design space adjustment and refinement. Struct Multidiscip Optim 35(1):41–54CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. Kim IY, Kwak BM (2002) Design space optimization using a numerical design continuation method. Int J Numer Method Eng 53:1979–2002CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. Kim EH, Jung YS, Yu YG, Kwon SW, Ju HJ, Kim SH, Kwak BM, Jang IG, Kim KS (2013) Auto-positioning of sliding planes based on virtual force. Int J Control Autom Syst 11(4):798–804Google Scholar
  15. Kim EH, Kwak KW, Kim YK, Kim SH, Kwak BM, Jang IG, Kim KS (2014) An advanced cargo handling system operating at sea. Int J Control Autom Syst. doi: 10.1007/s12555-013-0189-3
  16. Krog L, Tucker A, Rollema G (2002) Application of topology, sizing, and shape optimization methods to optimal design of aircraft components. In: Proceedings of 3rd Altair UK HyperWorks users conferenceGoogle Scholar
  17. Osher S, Sethian JA (1988) Front propagating with curvature dependent speed: algorithms based on Hamilton–Jacobi formulations. J Comput Phys 78:12–49CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. Park KS, Chang SY, Youn SK (2003) Topology optimization of the primary mirror of a multi-spectral camera. Struct Multidiscip Optim 25:46–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Pedersen N (2000) Maximization of eigenvalues using topology optimization. Struct Multidiscip Optim 20:2–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Querin OM, Steven GP, Xie YM (1998) Evolutionary structural optimization (ESO) using a bidirectional algorithm. Eng Comput 15:1031–1048CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. Stolpe M, Svanberg K (2001) An alternative interpolation scheme for minimum compliance topology optimization. Struct Multidiscip Optim 22:116–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Svanberg K (2002) A class of globally convergent optimization methods based on conservative convex separable approximations. SIAM J Optim 12:555–573CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  23. Wang MY, Wang X, Guo D (2003) A level set method for structural topology optimization. Comput Method Appl Mech Eng 192:227–246CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. Xie YM, Steven GP (1993) A simple evolutionary procedure for structural optimization. Comput Struct 49:885–896CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Yang RJ, Chuang CH (1994) Optimal topology design using linear programming. Comput Struct 52:265–275CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. Zhang H, Zhang X, Liu S (2008) A new boundary search scheme for topology optimization of continuum structures with designdependent loads. Struct Multidiscip Optim 37(2):121–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Zakhama R, Abdalla MM, Gürdal Z, Smaoui H (2010) Wind load modeling for topology optimization of continuum structures. Struct Multidiscip Optim 42(1):157–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Cho Chun Shik Graduate School for Green TransportationKorea Advanced Institute of Science and TechnologyDaejeonRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Department of Mechanical EngineeringKorea Advanced Institute of Science and TechnologyDaejeonRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations