In this paper, the topology optimization method is extended to arrive at the desired deformation behavior within local structural domains by distinguishing and suppressing specific deformation in a certain direction. Compared to the standard topology optimization and existing shape preserving design method, the contribution of this paper is twofold. First, Artificial Weak Elements (AWE) are defined and attached to the appropriate local domain. The strain energies of the AWE are calculated as a measurement to describe the deformation behavior quantitatively. Second, particular orthotropic material properties are defined for the AWE according to the given direction of the desired deformation, which formulate Orthotropic Artificial Weak Elements (AWEort). By introducing the constraint on the strain energy of the AWEort into a standard compliance based topology optimization, the deformation in the corresponding direction is suppressed, resulting in the desired deformation behavior. Several numerical examples are tested and compared to the standard topological design to illustrate the effect of the directional deformation behavior design.
Topology optimization Directional deformation behavior design Strain energy Orthotropic artificial weak element (AWEort)
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access
This work is supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (11432011, 11620101002), National Key Research and Development Program (2017YFB1102800), Key Research and Development Program of Shaanxi (S2017-ZDYF-ZDXM-GY-0035).
Bendsøe MP, Kikuchi N (1988) Generating optimal topologies in structural design using a homogenization method. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 71:197–224MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
Sigmund O, Petersson J (1998) Numerical instabilities in topology optimization: a survey on procedures dealing with checkerboards, mesh-dependencies and local minima. Structural Optimization 16:68–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanford B, Beran P (2012) Optimal compliant flapping mechanism topologies with multiple load cases. J Mech Des 134:51007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanford B, Beran P, Kobayashi M (2013) Simultaneous topology optimization of membrane wings and their compliant flapping mechanisms. AIAA J 51:1431–1441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Svanberg K (2007) On a globally convergent version of MMA. 7th World Congress on structural and multidisciplinary optimization. COEX Seoul, KoreaGoogle Scholar
Tsai TD, Cheng CC (2013) Structural design for desired eigenfrequencies and mode shapes using topology optimization. Struct Multidiscip Optim 47:673–686MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
Wang MY, Chen S, Wang X, Mei Y (2005) Design of multimaterial compliant mechanisms using level-set methods. J Mech Des 127:941–956CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xia Q, Shi T, Wang MY, Liu S (2010) A level set based method for the optimization of cast part. Struct Multidiscip Optim 41:735–747CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xie YM, Steven GP (1993) A simple evolutionary procedure for structural optimization. Comput Struct 49:885–896CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yan J, Cheng GD, Liu L (2008) A uniform optimum material based model for concurrent optimization of thermoelastic structures and materials. Int J Simul Multidiscip Des Optim 2:259–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang JX, Wang B, Niu F (2014) Optimal design of concentrated force diffusion for short shell structure using hierarchical radial ribs (in Chinese). Chinese J Comput Mech 31(2):141–148Google Scholar
Zhu JH, Zhang WH, Beckers P (2009) Inergrated layout design of multi-componment system. Int J Number Methods Eng 78:631–651Google Scholar