Advertisement

Structural Optimization of Hatch Cover Based on Bi-directional Evolutionary Structure Optimization and Surrogate Model Method

  • Kai Li (李楷)
  • Yanyun Yu (于雁云)
  • Jingyi He (何靖仪)
  • Decai Zhao (赵德财)
  • Yan Lin (林焰)
Article
  • 2 Downloads

Abstract

Weight reduction has attracted much attention among ship designers and ship owners. In the present work, based on an improved bi-directional evolutionary structural optimization (BESO) method and surrogate model method, we propose a hybrid optimization method for the structural design optimization of beam-plate structures, which covers three optimization levels: dimension optimization, topology optimization and section optimization. The objective of the proposed optimization method is to minimize the weight of design object under a group of constraints. The kernel optimization procedure (KOP) uses BESO to obtain the optimal topology from a ground structure. To deal with beam-plate structures, the traditional BESO method is improved by using cubic box as the unit cell instead of solid unit to construct periodic lattice structure. In the first optimization level, a series of ground structures are generated based on different dimensional parameter combinations, the KOP is performed to all the ground structures, the response surface model of optimal objective values and dimension parameters is created, and then the optimal dimension parameters can be obtained. In the second optimization level, the optimal topology is obtained by using the KOP according to the optimal dimension parameters. In the third optimization level, response surface method (RSM) is used to determine the section parameters. The proposed method is applied to a hatch cover structure design. The locations and shapes of all the structural members are determined from an oversized ground structure. The results show that the proposed method leads to a greater weight saving, compared with the original design and genetic algorithm (GA) based optimization results.

Key words

hatch cover structure optimization multi-level optimization bi-directional evolutionary structural optimization response surface method 

CLC number

U 663 

Document code

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    YUAN Y, WANG D Y, LI Z. Optimization of ship structure based on support vector machine [J]. Ship Science and Technology, 2013, 35(7): 12–17 (in Chinese).Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    JANG C D, NA S S. Development of optimum structural design system for double hull oil tankers [J]. Journal of the Society of Naval Architects of Korea, 2000, 37(1): 118–126 (in Korean).Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    YANG J M, HWANG C N. Optimization of corrugated bulkhead forms by genetic algorithm [J]. Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 2002, 10(2): 146–153.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    REN H J, ZHANG Q Y, HU Y M, et al. Optimization of small waterplane area twin-hull ship structure based on parametric sub-model [J]. Journal of Huazhong University of Science and Technology (Natural Science Edition), 2015, 43(11): 88–92 (in Chinese).Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    SEKULSKI Z. Structural weight minimization of high speed vehicle-passenger catamaran by genetic algorithm [J]. Polish Maritime Research, 2009, 16(2): 11–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    ANDRIć J, žANIć V, GRGIć M. Structural optimization of corrugated transverse bulkheads made of stainless steel [J]. Brodogradnja, 2010, 61(1): 18–27.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    QIU WQ, YANG DQ, GAO C, et al. Structural design in cargo tank region for oil tankers based on topology optimization [J]. Ship &Boat, 2016, 162(5): 1–11 (in Chinese).Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    TEMPLE D, COLETTE M. A goal-programming enhanced collaborative optimization approach to reducing lifecyle costs for naval vessels [J]. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 2016, 53(6): 1261–1275.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    TAWFIK B E, LEHETA H, ELHEWY A, et al. Weight reduction and strengthening of marine hatch covers by using composite materials [J]. International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, 2017, 9(2): 185–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    UM T S, ROH M I. Optimal dimension design of a hatch cover for lightening a bulk carrier [J]. International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, 2015, 7(2): 270–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    AKPAN U O, KOKO T S, AYYUB B M, et al. Reliability-based optimal design of steel box structures. II: Ship structure applications [J]. ASCE-ASME Journal of Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Systems, Part A: Civil Engineering, 2015, 1(3): 1–8.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    YANGW Z, YUE Z F, LI L, et al. Aircraft wing structural design optimization based on automated finite element modelling and ground structure approach [J]. Engineering Optimization, 2016, 48(1): 94–114.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    YU Y Y, LIN Y, CHEN M, et al. A new method for ship inner shell optimization based on parametric technique [J]. International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, 2015, 7(1): 142–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    ARRIETA A J, STRIZ A G. Optimal design of aircraft structures with damage tolerance requirements [J]. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 2005, 30(2): 155–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    HUANG H Y,WANG D Y. Static and dynamic collaborative optimization of ship hull structure [J]. Journal of Marine Science and Application, 2009, 8(1): 77–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    KONG Y M, CHOI S H, SONG J D, et al. OPTSHIP: a new optimization framework and its application to optimum design of ship structure [J]. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 2006, 32(5): 397–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    XIE Y M, STEVEN G P. Evolutionary structural optimization for dynamic problems [J]. Computers &Structures, 1996, 58(6): 1067–1073.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    CHU D N, XIE Y M, HIRA A, et al. Evolutionary structural optimization for problems with stiffness constraints [J]. Finite Elements in Analysis and Design, 1996, 21(4): 239–251.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    YANG X Y, XIE Y M, STEVEN G P, et al. Bidirectional evolutionary method for stiffness optimization [J]. AIAA Journal, 1999, 37(11): 1483–1488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    QUERIN O M, YOUNG V, STEVEN G P, et al. Computational efficiency and validation of bi-directional evolutionary structural optimization [J]. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2000, 189(2): 559–573.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    LIU J S, PARKS G T, CLARKSON P J. Metamorphic development: A new topology optimization method for continuum structures [J]. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 2000, 20(4): 288–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    HUANG X D, XIE Y M, BURRY M C. A new algorithm for bi-directional evolutionary structural optimization [J]. JSME International Journal, Series C: Mechanical Systems, Machine Elements and Manufacturing, 2006, 49(4): 1091–1099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    ZEGARD T, PAULINO G H. Bridging topology optimization and additive manufacturing [J]. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 2016, 53(1): 175–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    LEE J C, SHIN S C, KIM S Y. An optimal design of wind turbine and ship structure based on neuroresponse surface method [J]. International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, 2015, 7(4): 750–769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [25]
    SU Z J, XIAO R B, ZHONG Y F. An improved multidisciplinary feasible method using DACE approximation approach [J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2005, 16(2): 335–340.Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    SRINIVAS V, RAMANJANEYULU K. An integrated approach for optimum design of bridge decks using genetic algorithms and artificial neural networks [J]. Advances in Engineering Software, 2007, 38(7): 475–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. [27]
    LA ROCCA G, VAN TOOREN M J L. Knowledgebased engineering approach to support aircraft multidisciplinary design and optimization [J]. Journal of Aircraft, 2009, 46(6): 1875–1885.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. [28]
    MUHAMMAD S. Parameterized automated generic model for aircraft wing structural design and mesh generation for finite element analysis [D]. LinkÖping, Sweden: LinkÖping University, 2011.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Shanghai Jiaotong University and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kai Li (李楷)
    • 1
  • Yanyun Yu (于雁云)
    • 1
  • Jingyi He (何靖仪)
    • 1
  • Decai Zhao (赵德财)
    • 1
  • Yan Lin (林焰)
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Naval Architecture and Ocean EngineeringDalian University of TechnologyDalian, LiaoningChina

Personalised recommendations