Comparison of BESO and SIMP to Do Structural Topology Optimization in Discrete Digital Design, and then Combine Them into a Hybrid Method

Conference paper


On account of the high efficiency of discrete digital design when comparing with 3d-printing in the background of additive manufacture, this essay is going to introduce a hybrid high-efficiency method that is combined with BESO and SIMP for solving topology optimization in discrete digital design. The reason is that both BESO in Karamba3D and SIMP in Millipede have some disadvantages and cannot optimize the structure in an extremely efficient way in discrete design. Based on the project TRANSFOAMER (Chen Ran, Chen Zhilin, Shao Gefan, Wei Na, 2016–2017), RC4, Bartlett School of Architecture, loads of tests will be conducted to demonstrate how hybrid method is operated and why it is more efficient than each single method. Finally, the method will be applied to the project to design some productions.


Discrete design Topology optimization BESO SIMP 


  1. Aremu, A., Ashcroft, I., Hague, R., Wildman, R.: Suitability of SIMP and BESO Topology Optimization Algorithm for Additive Manufacture. PHD. Wolfson School of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, Loughborough University, pp. 679–692 (2010)Google Scholar
  2. Beghini, L., Beghini, A., Katz, N., Baker, W., Paulino, G.: Connecting architecture and engineering through structural topology optimization. Eng. Struct. 59, 716–726 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bendsøe, M., Kikuchi, N.: Generating optimal topologies in structural design using a homogenization method. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 71(2), 197–224 (1988)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bendsøe, M.: Optimal shape design as a material distribution problem. 1st ed. [Lyngby]: Danmarks Tekniske Højskole. Matematisk Institut (1989)Google Scholar
  5. Buchanan, R.: Wicked problems in design thinking. Des. Issues 8(2), 5 (1992)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carpo, M.: Breaking the curve. ArtForum 52(6), 168–173 (2014)Google Scholar
  7. Gershenfeld, N., Carney, M., Jenett, B., Calisch, S., Wilson, S.: Macro-fabrication with digital materials: robotic assembly. In: Architectural Design: Material Synthesis: Fusing the Physical and the Computational, vol. 85, no. 5, pp. 122–7 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Goodman, N.: “Analogues and digits.” Languages of art: an approach to a theory of symbols, pp. 159–164. Hackett Publishing, Indianapolis, IN (1968)Google Scholar
  9. Huang, X., Xie, Y.M.: Convergent and mesh-independent solutions for the bidirectional evolutionary structural optimization method. Finite Elem. Anal. Des. 43, 11 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kohler, G.: ROK-Rippmann Oesterle Knauss GmbH|Projects|The Programmed Wall.
  11. Marcus Vitruvius Pollio BC.14. The ten books on architecture. 1st edn.Google Scholar
  12. Martinez, J.: A note on the theoretical convergence properties of the SIMP method. Struct. Multidiscip. Optim. 29(4), 319–323 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Moritz, H., Orlinski, A., Clemens, P., Matthew, T., Robert, V., Christoph, Z.: BESO for karamba. Clemens Preisinger, Vienna (2017)Google Scholar
  14. Querin, O., Steven, G., Xie, Y.: Evolutionary structural optimisation (ESO) using a bidirectional algorithm. Eng. Comput. 15(8), 1031–1048 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Razvan, C.: Overview of Structural Topology Optimization Methods for Plane and Solid Structures. Annals of the Oradea University. Fascicle of Management and Technological Engineering, vol. XXIII (XIII), 2014/3(3) (2014)Google Scholar
  16. Retsin, G.: Discrete assembly and digital materials in architecture. In: Proceedings of ECAADE 34, FABRICATION|Robotics: Design & Assembling, Vol. 1 (Aug 2016), pp. 143–151 (2015)Google Scholar
  17. Retsin, G., Gracia, M., Soler, V.: Discrete computation for additive manufacturing. Fabricate 2017, 178–183 (2017)Google Scholar
  18. Rietz, A.: Sufficiency of a finite exponent in SIMP (power law) methods. Struct. Multidiscip. Optim. 21(2), 159–163 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Rittel, H.: Second generation design methods. In: Interview in Design Methods Group, 5th Anniversary Report, DMG Occasional Paper 1, 1972, pp. 5–10. Reprinted in Cross, N. (ed.) Developments in Design Methodology, pp. 317–327. Wiley, Chichester (1984)Google Scholar
  20. Saddiqi, Z.A.: Concrete Structures, 2nd edn. Help Civil Engineering Publisher, Lahore (1997)Google Scholar
  21. Sanchez, J.: “polyomino-Reconsidering Serial Repetition in Combinatorics”. In: ACADIA 14: Design Agency, 23--25 Oct. 2014, Los Angeles, ACADIA/Riverside Architectural Press, p. 91–100 (2014)Google Scholar
  22. Sigmund, O.: A 99-line topology optimization code written in Matlab. Struct. Multidiscip. Optim. 21(2), 120–127 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Bartlett School of ArchitectureUniversity College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations