Advertisement

Level set-based isogeometric topology optimization for maximizing fundamental eigenfrequency

  • Manman Xu
  • Shuting WangEmail author
  • Xianda Xie
Open Access
Research Article
  • 32 Downloads
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Structural Topology Optimization

Abstract

Maximizing the fundamental eigenfrequency is an efficient means for vibrating structures to avoid resonance and noises. In this study, we develop an isogeometric analysis (IGA)-based level set model for the formulation and solution of topology optimization in cases with maximum eigenfrequency. The proposed method is based on a combination of level set method and IGA technique, which uses the non-uniform rational B-spline (NURBS), description of geometry, to perform analysis. The same NURBS is used for geometry representation, but also for IGA-based dynamic analysis and parameterization of the level set surface, that is, the level set function. The method is applied to topology optimization problems of maximizing the fundamental eigenfrequency for a given amount of material. A modal track method, that monitors a single target eigenmode is employed to prevent the exchange of eigenmode order number in eigenfrequency optimization. The validity and efficiency of the proposed method are illustrated by benchmark examples.

Keywords

topology optimization level set method isogeometric analysis eigenfrequency 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 51675197).

References

  1. 1.
    Suzuki K, Kikuchi N. A homogenization method for shape and topology optimization. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 1991, 93(3): 291–318zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sigmund O. A 99 line topology optimization code written in Matlab. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 2001, 21(2): 120–127MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pedersen N L. Maximization of eigenvalues using topology optimization. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 2000, 20(1): 2–11Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Du J, Olhoff N. Minimization of sound radiation from vibrating bimaterial structures using topology optimization. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 2007, 33(4–5): 305–321Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Iga A, Nishiwaki S, Izui K, et al. Topology optimization for thermal conductors considering design-dependent effects, including heat conduction and convection. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 2009, 52(11–12): 2721–2732zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yamada T, Izui K, Nishiwaki S. A level set-based topology optimization method for maximizing thermal diffusivity in problems including design-dependent effects. Journal of Mechanical Design, 2011, 133(3): 031011Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bendsøe M P, Kikuchi N. Generating optimal topologies in structural design using a homogenization method. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 1988, 71(2): 197–224MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bendsøe M P. Optimal shape design as a material distribution problem. Structural Optimization, 1989, 1(4): 193–202Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rozvany G I N, Zhou M, Birker T. Generalized shape optimization without homogenization. Structural Optimization, 1992, 4(3–4): 250–252Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bourdin B, Chambolle A. Design-dependent loads in topology optimization. ESAIM. Control, Optimisation and Calculus of Variations, 2003, 9: 19–48MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wang M Y, Zhou S. Phase field: A variational method for structural topology optimization. Computer Modeling in Engineering & Sciences, 2004, 6(6): 547–566MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Xie Y M, Steven G P. A simple evolutionary procedure for structural optimization. Computers & Structures, 1993, 49(5): 885–896Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Querin O M, Steven G P, Xie Y M. Evolutionary structural optimisation (ESO) using a bidirectional algorithm. Engineering Computations, 1998, 15(8): 1031–1048zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Díaz A, Sigmund O. Checkerboard patterns in layout optimization. Structural Optimization, 1995, 10(1): 40–45Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jog C S, Haber R B. Stability of finite element models for distributed-parameter optimization and topology design. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 1996, 130(3–4): 203–226MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sigmund O. Materials with prescribed constitutive parameters: An inverse homogenization problem. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 1994, 31(17): 2313–2329MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Petersson J, Sigmund O. Slope constrained topology optimization. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 1998, 41(8): 1417–1434MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sethian J A, Wiegmann A. Structural boundary design via level set and immersed interface methods. Journal of Computational Physics, 2000, 163(2): 489–528MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Osher S J, Santosa F. Level set methods for optimization problems involving geometry and constraints: I. Frequencies of a two-density inhomogeneous drum. Journal of Computational Physics, 2001, 171(1): 272–288MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Allaire G, Jouve F, Toader A M. A level-set method for shape optimization. Mathematical Rendering, 2002, 334(12): 1125–1130 (in French)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wang M Y, Wang X, Guo D. A level set method for structural topology optimization. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2003, 192(1–2): 227–246MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Allaire G, Jouve F, Toader A M. Structural optimization using sensitivity analysis and a level-set method. Journal of Computational Physics, 2004, 194(1): 363–393MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dijk N P, Langelaar M, Keulen F. Explicit level-set-based topology optimization using an exact Heaviside function and consistent sensitivity analysis. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2012, 91(1): 67–97MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wang S, Wang M Y. Radial basis functions and level set method for structural topology optimization. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2006, 65(12): 2060–2090MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Luo Z, Tong L, Wang M Y, et al. Shape and topology optimization of compliant mechanisms using a parameterization level set method. Journal of Computational Physics, 2007, 227(1): 680–705MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gomes A A, Suleman A. Application of spectral level set methodology in topology optimization. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 2006, 31(6): 430–443MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hughes T J R, Cottrell J A, Bazilevs Y. Isogeometric analysis: CAD, finite elements, NURBS, exact geometry and mesh refinement. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2005, 194(39–41): 4135–4195MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Grebennikov A I. Isogeometric approximation of functions of one variable. USSR Computational Mathematics and Mathematical Physics, 1982, 22(6): 42–50MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nguyen T, Jüttler B. Parameterization of contractible domains using sequences of harmonic maps. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Curves and Surfaces. Berlin: Springer, 2010, 501–514Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Xu G, Mourrain B, Duvigneau R, et al. Constructing analysissuitable parameterization of computational domain from CAD boundary by variational harmonic method. Journal of Mathematical Physics, 2013, 252: 275–289zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Xu G, Mourrain B, Duvigneau R, et al. Optimal analysis-aware parameterization of computational domain in isogeometric analysis. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Geometric Modeling and Processing. Berlin: Springer, 2010, 236–254Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Xu G, Mourrain B, Duvigneau R, et al. Analysis-suitable volume parameterization of multi-block computational domain in isogeometric applications. Computer-Aided Design, 2013, 45(2): 395–404MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Bazilevs Y, Calo V M, Cottrell J A, et al. Isogeometric analysis using T-splines. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2010, 199(5–8): 229–263MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Wu Z, Huang Z, Liu Q, et al. A local solution approach for adaptive hierarchical refinement in isogeometric analysis. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2015, 283: 1467–1492MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Nguyen-Thanh N, Kiendl J, Nguyen-Xuan H, et al. Rotation free isogeometric thin shell analysis using PHT-splines. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2011, 200(47–48): 3410–3424MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Nguyen-Thanh N, Nguyen-Xuan H, Bordas S P A, et al. Isogeometric analysis using polynomial splines over hierarchical T-meshes for two-dimensional elastic solids. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2011, 200(21–22): 1892–1908MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Atroshchenko E, Tomar S, Xu G, et al. Weakening the tight coupling between geometry and simulation in isogeometric analysis: From sub- and super-geometric analysis to geometry-independent field approximation (GIFT). International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2018, 114(10): 1131–1159MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Speleers H, Manni C, Pelosi F, et al. Isogeometric analysis with Powell-Sabin splines for advection-diffusion-reaction problems. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2012, 221–222: 132–148MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Auricchio F, Da Veiga L B, Hughes T J R, et al. Isogeometric collocation methods. Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences, 2010, 20(11): 2075–2107MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Xu G, Li M, Mourrain B, et al. Constructing IGA-suitable planar parameterization from complex CAD boundary by domain partition and global/local optimization. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2018, 328: 175–200MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Simpson R N, Bordas S P, Trevelyan J, et al. A two-dimensional isogeometric boundary element method for elastostatic analysis. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2012, 209–212: 87–100MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Lian H, Simpson R N, Bordas S. Stress analysis without meshing: Isogeometric boundary-element method. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers: Engineering and Computational Mechanics, 2013, 166(2): 88–99Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Peng X, Atroshchenko E, Kerfriden P, et al. Isogeometric boundary element methods for three dimensional static fracture and fatigue crack growth. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2017, 316: 151–185MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Peng X, Atroshchenko E, Kerfriden P, et al. Linear elastic fracture simulation directly from CAD: 2D NURBS-based implementation and role of tip enrichment. International Journal of Fracture, 2017, 204(1): 55–78Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Simpson R N, Scott M A, Taus M, et al. Acoustic isogeometric boundary element analysis. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2014, 269: 265–290MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Lian H, Kerfriden P, Bordas S P A. Shape optimization directly from CAD: An isogeometric boundary element approach using T-splines. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2017, 317: 1–41MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Lian H, Kerfriden P, Bordas S P. Implementation of regularized isogeometric boundary element methods for gradient-based shape optimization in two-dimensional linear elasticity. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2016, 106(12): 972–1017MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Hughes T J R, Reali A, Sangalli G. Efficient quadrature for NURBSbased isogeometric analysis. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2010, 199(5–8): 301–313MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Reali A. An isogeometric analysis approach for the study of structural vibrations. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 2006, 10(spec01): 1–30Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Bazilevs Y, Calo V M, Zhang Y, et al. Isogeometric fluid-structure interaction analysis with applications to arterial blood flow. Computational Mechanics, 2006, 38(4–5): 310–322MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Bazilevs Y, Calo V M, Hughes T J R, et al. Isogeometric fluidstructure interaction: Theory, algorithms, and computations. Computational Mechanics, 2008, 43(1): 3–37MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Xu G, Mourrain B, Duvigneau R, et al. Parameterization of computational domain in isogeometric analysis: Methods and comparison. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2011, 200(23–24): 2021–2031MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Wall W A, Frenzel M A, Cyron C. Isogeometric structural shape optimization. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2008, 197(33–40): 2976–2988MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Cho S, Ha S H. Isogeometric shape design optimization: Exact geometry and enhanced sensitivity. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 2009, 38(1): 53–70MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Kiendl J, Bletzinger K U, Linhard J, et al. Isogeometric shell analysis with Kirchhoff-Love elements. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2009, 198(49–52): 3902–3914MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Wang Y, Benson D J. Isogeometric analysis for parameterized LSMbased structural topology optimization. Computational Mechanics, 2016, 57(1): 19–35MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Buffa A, Sangalli G, Vázquez R. Isogeometric analysis in electromagnetics: B-splines approximation. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2010, 199(17–20): 1143–1152MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Lee S, Kwak B M, Kim I Y. Smooth boundary topology optimization using B-spline and hole generation. International Journal of CAD/CAM, 2007, 7(1): 11–20Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Seo Y D, Kim H J, Youn S K. Isogeometric topology optimization using trimmed spline surfaces. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2010, 199(49–52): 3270–3296MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Hassani B, Khanzadi M, Tavakkoli S M. An isogeometrical approach to structural topology optimization by optimality criteria. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 2012, 45(2): 223–233MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Tavakkoli S M, Hassani B, Ghasemnejad H. Isogeometric topology optimization of structures by using MMA. International Journal of Optimization in Civil Engineering, 2013, 3(2): 313–326zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Dedè L, Borden M J, Hughes T J R. Isogeometric analysis for topology optimization with a phase field model. Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering, 2012, 19(3): 427–465MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Díaaz A R, Kikuchi N. Solutions to shape and topology eigenvalue optimization problems using a homogenization method. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 1992, 35(7): 1487–1502MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Tenek L H, Hagiwara I. Static and vibrational shape and topology optimization using homogenization and mathematical programming. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 1993, 109(1–2): 143–154zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Xie Y M, Steven G P. Evolutionary structural optimization for dynamic problems. Computers & Structures, 1996, 58(6): 1067–1073zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Ma Z D, Kikuchi N, Hagiwara I. Structural topology and shape optimization for a frequency response problem. Computational Mechanics, 1993, 13(3): 157–174MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Ma Z D, Cheng H C, Kikuchi N. Structural design for obtaining desired eigenfrequencies by using the topology and shape optimization method. Computing Systems in Engineering, 1994, 5(1): 77–89Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Kim T S, Kim Y. Mac-based mode-tracking in structural topology optimization. Computers & Structures, 2000, 74(3): 375–383Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Sigmund O, Jensen J S. Systematic design of phononic band-gap materials and structures by topology optimization. Philosophical Transactions: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 2003, 361(1806): 1001–1019MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Kosaka I, Swan C C. A symmetry reduction method for continuum structural topology optimization. Computers & Structures, 1999, 70(1): 47–61MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Neves M M, Rodrigues H, Guedes J M. Generalized topology design of structures with a buckling load criterion. Structural Optimization, 1995, 10(2): 71–78Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Allaire G, Jouve F. A level-set method for vibration and multiple loads structural optimization. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2005, 194(30–33): 3269–3290MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Shu L, Wang M Y, Fang Z, et al. Level set based structural topology optimization for minimizing frequency response. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 2011, 330(24): 5820–5834Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Xia Q, Shi T, Wang M Y. A level set based shape and topology optimization method for maximizing the simple or repeated first eigenvalue of structure vibration. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 2011, 43(4): 473–485MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Liu T, Li B, Wang S, et al. Eigenvalue topology optimization of structures using a parameterized level set method. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 2014, 50(4): 573–591MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Hassani B, Hinton E. A review of homogenization and topology optimization III—Topology optimization using optimality criteria. Computers & Structures, 1998, 69(6): 739–756zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Nguyen V P, Anitescu C, Bordas S P A, et al. Isogeometric analysis: An overview and computer implementation aspects. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 2015, 117: 89–116MathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by/4.0/.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Mechanical Science and EngineeringHuazhong University of Science and TechnologyWuhanChina

Personalised recommendations