Mass minimization with conflicting dynamic constraints by topology optimization using sequential integer programming

Larsson, Johan; Wennhage, Per; Göransson, Peter

doi:10.1016/j.finel.2021.103683

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…4. Compute the stiffness matrix 𝐾, taking into account the design variables expressed in Equation (30), and obtaining the soil-structure equilibrium equation given in Equation (15) or Equation ( 16). 5.…”

Section: Algorithmmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this paper, we employ the TOBS method for solving the optimization problem at hand, given its numerous advantages. Notably, TOBS has already been successfully adopted for forced vibration and electromagnetis applications, 15,16 showcasing its effectiveness when dealing with discrete variables and multiphysics problems. This method's versatility and success in various fields provide a strong foundation for its implementation in the current study, and we believe that it will lead to valuable insights and solutions for the problem under investigation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

On the influence of soil flexibility in structural topology optimization

Cortez

Sivapuram

Barros

et al. 2023

Num Anal Meth Geomechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper investigates for the first time the effect of soil flexibility in structural topology optimization. The case of a structure resting on an underlying soil is explored. The response of the soil is modeled using the Indirect Boundary Element Method (IBEM). The structure is modeled using Finite Element Method (FEM) and the soil domain is coupled by imposing continuity and equilibrium conditions at the soil‐structure interface. Original soil stress influence functions are derived to model voids in the soil. The optimization is carried out by using the Topology Optimization of Binary Structures (TOBS), a recently developed method that employs sequential integer linear programming and the branch‐and‐cut algorithm. Structural compliance minimization subject to a volume constraint is solved. Selected optimization problems are solved for various soil‐to‐structure flexibility ratios. Results show that the soil flexibility may have a significant impact in both the optimized topology and in the achievable compliance of the structure. Results considering voids on the soil, which increases the soil flexibility, affected the final topology of the structures as well as the optimized values.

show abstract

Section: Algorithmmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the influence of soil flexibility in structural topology optimization

Cortez

Sivapuram

Barros

et al. 2023

Num Anal Meth Geomechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Formulated as the objective function or constraint(s) in topology optimizations, there are many examples where requirements were directly cast into optimization problems. Frequently considered quantities of interest are eigenvalues or -frequencies (Tsai and Cheng, 2013;Ma et al, 1994;Pedersen, 2000), mass (Larsson et al, 2022), stiffness or compliance (Bruggi and Duysinx, 2012), displacements (Rodriguez et al, 2020) or stresses (Da Silva et al, 2021). In addition to the aforementioned quantifiable requirements, requirements on the design itself, its manufacturability or functionality can also be considered in (numerical) optimizations.…”

Section: State Of the Artmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Treatment of Requirements in Dfam: Three Industrial Use Cases

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Optimization-driven design offers advantages over traditional experience-based mechanical design. As an example, topology optimization can be a powerful tool to generate body shapes for Additive Manufacturing (AM). This is helpful, when (1) load paths are non-intuitive due to complex design domains or boundary conditions, or (2) the design process is to be automated to minimize effort associated with experience-based design. However, practically relevant boundary conditions are often difficult to put into a formal mathematical language to, for example, either feed it into a topology optimization algorithm, or provide precise quantitative criteria for CAE-supported manual design. This paper presents a survey of three industry use cases and identifies three types of requirements: the first can be directly cast into parts of an optimization problem statement (∼ 40%), the second is considered indirectly by adapting the optimization problem without explicit reference to the requirement (∼ 20%), and the third is only assessed after the design is finalized (∼ 40%). For categories 2 and 3 we propose directions of improvement to support formulating complex design tasks as unambiguous design problems.

show abstract