A shape optimization approach based on natural design variables and shape functions

Belegundu, Ashok D.; Rajan, Subramaniam

doi:10.1016/0045-7825(88)90061-8

Cited by 165 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, a thickness change in the plate has to be matched by an equal thickness change in the filler plate for the assembly to function. The key equation to implement shape optimization is [14,15,16] …”

Section: Shape Optimization Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

MPI-enabled Shape Optimization of Panels Subjected to Air Blast Loading

Argod

Belegundu

Aziz

et al. 2008

Int. J. Simul. Multidisci. Des. Optim.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-The problem of finding the optimal shape of an aluminum plate to mitigate air blast loading is considered. The goal is to minimize the dynamic displacement of the plate relative to the test fixture, while monitoring plastic strain values, mass, and envelope constraints. This is a computationally challenging problem owing to (a) difficulty with finding optimal shapes with higher dimensional shape variations, (b) non-differentiable, non-convex and computationally expensive objective and constraint functions, and (c) difficulties in controlling mesh distortion that occur during explicit finite element analysis. An approach based on coupling LS-DYNA finite element software and a differential evolution (DE) optimizer is presented. Since DE involves a population of designs which are then crossed-over and mutated to yield an improved generation, it is possible to use coarse parallelization wherein a computing cluster is used to evaluate fitness of the entire population simultaneously. However, owing to highly dissimilar computing time per analysis, a result of mesh distortion and minimum time step in explicit finite element analysis, implementation of the parallelization scheme is challenging. Sinusoidal basis shapes are used to obtain an optimized 'double-bulge' shape. = maximum plastic strain at failure ε = equivalent plastic strain M = total mass of the structure M max = upper limit for the mass of the structure T = thickness of the structure (plate) at any (x, y) location in the plate t min = Minimum thickness allowed z = vector of z-coordinate of the nodes z U = upper limit on z-coordinate z L

show abstract

Section: Shape Optimization Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

MPI-enabled Shape Optimization of Panels Subjected to Air Blast Loading

Argod

Belegundu

Aziz

et al. 2008

Int. J. Simul. Multidisci. Des. Optim.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, Jackson [18] described the structure of flow configurations of chemical reactors with a super-structure, although without explicitly mentioning the term. Various recent works [19,20,21] use the terminology for other engineering fields too. A super-structure prescribes the possible design alternatives to be considered in optimisation, which results in a selection of alternatives.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Toolbox for super-structured and super-structure free multi-disciplinary building spatial design optimisation

Boonstra¹,

Blom

Hofmeyer³

et al. 2018

Advanced Engineering Informatics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…They discussed the problem of finding the optimum shape of two-dimensional structures. Since then many other authors have modified and improved the approach of using nodal coordinates of finite element model as design variables [134,135,136,137,138]. Petchsasithon et.…”

Section: Sizing / Shape Optimisationmentioning

confidence: 99%