Constructive Solid Geometry Based Topology Optimization Using Evolutionary Algorithm

Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 201)

Abstract

Over the past two decades, structural optimization has been performed extensively by researchers across the world. Most recent investigations have focused on increasing the efficiency and robustness of gradient based optimization techniques and extending them to multidisciplinary objective functions. The existing global optimization techniques suffer with requirement of enormous computational effort due to large number of variables used in grid discretization of problem domain. The paper proposes a novel methodology named as Constructive Geometry Topology Optimization Method (CG-TOM) for topology optimization problems. It utilizes a set of nodes and overlapping primitives to obtain the geometry. A novel graph based repair operator is used to ensure consistent design and real parameter genetic algorithm is used for optimization. Results for standard benchmark problems for compliance minimization have been found to give better results than existing methods in literature. The method is generic and can be extended to any two or three dimensional topology optimization problem using different primitives.

Keywords

Structural optimization Toplogy optimazation Genetic algorithm Constructive geometry 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. M.P. Bendsøe and O. Sigmund, Topology optimization: theory, methods, and applications, Springer Verlag, 2003.Google Scholar
  2. B. Bochenek and K. Tajs-Zielińska, Novel local rules of cellular automata applied to topology and size optimization, Engineering Optimization 44 (2012), no. 1, 23–35.Google Scholar
  3. M. De Berg, O. Cheong, and M. Van Kreveld, Computational geometry: algorithms and applications, Springer-Verlag New York Inc, 2008.Google Scholar
  4. D.E. Goldberg, Genetic algorithms in search, optimization, and machine learning, Addison-wesley, 1989.Google Scholar
  5. M.J. Jakiela, C. Chapman, J. Duda, A. Adewuya, and K. Saitou, Continuum structural topology design with genetic algorithms, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 186 (2000), no. 2, 339–356.Google Scholar
  6. E. Kita and T. Toyoda, Structural design using cellular automata, Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization 19 (2000), no. 1, 64–73.Google Scholar
  7. C. Mattheck and S. Burkhardt, A new method of structural shape optimization based on biological growth, International Journal of Fatigue 12 (1990), no. 3, 185–190.Google Scholar
  8. OM Querin, GP Steven, and YM Xie, Evolutionary structural optimisation (eso) using a bidirectional algorithm, Engineering Computations: Int J for Computer-Aided Engineering 15 (1998), no. 8, 1031–1048.Google Scholar
  9. G.I.N. Rozvany, A critical review of established methods of structural topology optimization, Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization 37 (2009), no. 3, 217–237.Google Scholar
  10. K. Tai, G.Y. Cui, and T. Ray, Design synthesis of path generating compliant mechanisms by evolutionary optimization of topology and shape, Journal of Mechanical Design 124 (2002), 492.Google Scholar
  11. S. Xu, Y. Cai, and G. Cheng, Volume preserving nonlinear density filter based on heaviside functions, Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization 41 (2010), no. 4, 495–505.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer India 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Faez Ahmed
  • Bishakh Bhattacharya
    • 1
  • Kalyanmoy Deb
    • 1
  1. 1.Indian Institute of TechnologyKanpurIndia

Personalised recommendations