Advertisement

Optimization of Complex Structure Based on Human-Computer Interaction Method

  • Lei LiuEmail author
  • Aijun Ma
  • Hongying Liu
  • Xuemei Feng
  • Meng Shi
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9731)

Abstract

To solve the problem of structural optimization of complex structure under dynamic response constraints, a human-computer interaction method was proposed combined with advantages of human and computer in structural optimization, and being used in structural optimization of an aerospace assembly to verify its practicability and effectiveness. The method was mainly based on two steps: topology optimization by human-computer interaction and size optimization by computer. The aerospace assembly after structural optimization based on the method could satisfy the dynamic environment requirement and the results showed that first integral vibration frequency raised 41.1 % and magnification of acceleration dropped 25.2 % while the mass remained essentially unchanged. Also the experimental results compared with the simulation results showed that the relative error was less than 5 %, which proved the effectiveness of the simulation design. The human-computer interaction method might provide a reference for similar products not limited to aerospace field.

Keywords

Structure optimization Human-computer interaction method Aerospace assembly Dynamic response constraints Topology optimization by human-computer interaction Size optimization by computer 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Funded by the manned space engineering of China is gratefully acknowledged. Besides, we are very grateful for prof. Qinghua Hu for providing the initial aerospace assembly model.

References

  1. 1.
    Tibert, G.: Deployable tensegrity structures for space applications. Royal Institute of Technology (2002)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Christensen, P.W., Klarbring, A.: An Introduction to Structural Optimization. Springer Science & Business Media, Heidelberg (2008)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rong, J.H., Xie, Y.M., Yang, X.Y., Liang, Q.Q.: Topology optimization of structures under dynamic response constraints. J. Sound Vib. 234(2), 177–189 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Choi, K.K., Kim, N.H.: Structural Sensitivity Analysis and Optimization 1: Linear Systems. Springer Science & Business Media, Heidelberg (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nugen, T.T., Yang, S., Brake, J.: Evolutionary dynamic optimization: a survey of the state of the art. Swarm Evol. Comput. 6, 1–24 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Stolpe, M., Svanberg, K.: An alternative interpolation scheme for minimum compliance topology optimization. Struct. Multidiscipline Optim. 22(2), 116–124 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bendsoe, M.P., Sigmund, O.: Topology Optimization: Theory, Methods and Application. Springer, New York (2003)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schlegel, M., Marquardt, W.: Detection and exploitation of the control switching structure in the solution of dynamic optimization problems. J. Process Control 16(3), 275–290 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Akesson, J., Arzen, K.E., Gafvert, M., Bergdahl, T., Tummescheit, H.: Modeling and optimization with optimica and JModelica.org-languages and tools for solving large-scale dynamic optimization problems. Comput. Chem. Eng. 34(11), 1737–1749 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Krog, L., Tucker, A., Rollema, G.: Application of topology, sizing and shape optimization methods to optimal design of aircraft components. In: Proceedings 3rd Altair UK HyperWorks Users Conference (2012)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sobieszczanski-Sobieski, J., Haftka, R.T.: Multidisciplinary aerospace design optimization: survey of recent developments. Struct. Optim. 14(1), 1–23 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Xie, Y.M., Steven, G.P.: A simple evolutionary procedure for structural optimization. Comput. Struct. 49(5), 885–896 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lee, K.S., Geem, Z.W.: A new structural optimization method based on the harmony search algorithm. Comput. Struct. 82(9), 781–798 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Durgun, İ., Yildiz, A.R.: Structural design optimization of vehicle components using cuckoo search algorithm. Mater. Test. 54(3), 185–188 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lambe, A.B., Martins, J.R.: Extensions to the design structure matrix for the description of multidisciplinary design, analysis, and optimization processes. Struct. Multidisciplinary Optim. 46(2), 273–284 (2012)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Deaton, J.D., Grandhi, R.V.: A survey of structural and multidisciplinary continuum topology optimization: post 2000. Struct. Multidisciplinary Optim. 49(1), 1–38 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lei Liu
    • 1
    Email author
  • Aijun Ma
    • 1
  • Hongying Liu
    • 1
  • Xuemei Feng
    • 1
  • Meng Shi
    • 1
  1. 1.China Astronaut Research and Training CenterBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations