Advertisement

Computational Mechanics

, Volume 61, Issue 5, pp 581–598 | Cite as

Experimental validation of 3D printed material behaviors and their influence on the structural topology design

Original Paper
  • 447 Downloads

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the structures achieved by topology optimization and their fabrications by 3D printing considering the particular features of material microstructures and macro mechanical performances. Combining Digital Image Correlation and Optical Microscope, this paper experimentally explored the anisotropies of stiffness and strength existing in the 3D printed polymer material using Stereolithography (SLA) and titanium material using Selective Laser Melting (SLM). The standard specimens and typical structures obtained by topology optimization were fabricated along different building directions. On the one hand, the experimental results of these SLA produced structures showed stable properties and obviously anisotropic rules in stiffness, ultimate strengths and places of fractures. Further structural designs were performed using topology optimization when the particular mechanical behaviors of SLA printed materials were considered, which resulted in better structural performances compared to the optimized designs using ‘ideal’ isotropic material model. On the other hand, this paper tested the mechanical behaviors of SLM printed multiscale lattice structures which were fabricated using the same metal powder and the same machine. The structural stiffness values are generally similar while the strength behaviors show a difference, which are mainly due to the irregular surface quality of the tiny structural branches of the lattice. The above evidences clearly show that the consideration of the particular behaviors of 3D printed materials is therefore indispensable for structural design and optimization in order to improve the structural performance and strengthen their practical significance.

Keywords

3D printing Topology optimization Lattice structure Material anisotropy Static loading test 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work is supported by National Key Research and Development Program (2017YFB1102800), National Natural Science Foundation of China (11722219, 51790171, 5171101743 and 11620101002), Key Research and Development Program of Shaanxi (2017KW-ZD-11 and 2017ZDXM-GY-059). The authors would like to thank Dr Jia Xin from Bright Laser Technology of Northwestern Polytechnical University, Prof Shi Yusheng and Dr Song Bo from Huazhong University of Technology for their support of 3D printing.

References

  1. 1.
    Bendsøe MP, Kikuchi N (1988) Generating optimal topologies in structural design using a homogenization method. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 71:197–224.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-7825(88)90086-2 MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zhu JH, Zhang WH, Xia L (2016) Topology optimization in aircraft and aerospace structures design. Arch Comput Methods Eng 23:595–622.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-015-9151-2 MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Yang R, Chahande A (1995) Automotive applications of topology optimization. Struct Optim 9:245–249.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01743977 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cavazzuti M, Baldini A, Bertocchi E et al (2011) High performance automotive chassis design: a topology optimization based approach. Struct Multidiscip Optim 44:45–56.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-010-0578-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Aage N, Andreassen E, Lazarov BS, Sigmund O (2017) Giga-voxel computational morphogenesis for structural design—PROOF. Nature.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nature23911
  6. 6.
    Aage N, Andreassen E, Lazarov BS (2015) Topology optimization using PETSc: an easy-to-use, fully parallel, open source topology optimization framework. Struct Multidiscip Optim 51:565–572.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-014-1157-0 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Liu H, Zhang W, Gao T (2015) A comparative study of dynamic analysis methods for structural topology optimization under harmonic force excitations. Struct Multidiscip Optim 51:1321–1333.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-014-1218-4 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Duysinx P, Bendsøe MP (1998) Topology optimization of continuum structures with local stress constraints. Int J Numer Methods Eng 43:1453–1478.  https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0207(19981230)43:8%3c1453::AID-NME480%3e3.0.CO;2-2 MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Xia Q, Shi T, Liu S, Wang MY (2012) A level set solution to the stress-based structural shape and topology optimization. Comput Struct 90–91:55–64.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2011.10.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bendsøe MP (1989) Optimal shape design as a material distribution problem. Struct Optim 1:193–202.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01650949 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zhou M, Rozvany GIN (1991) The COC algorithm, part II: topological, geometrical and generalized shape optimization. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 89:309–336.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-7825(91)90046-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mlejnek HP (1992) Some aspects of the genesis of structures. Struct Optim 5:64–69.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01744697 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Allaire G, Jouve F, Toader AM (2004) Structural optimization using sensitivity analysis and a level-set method. J Comput Phys 194:363–393.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2003.09.032 MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Guo X, Zhang W, Zhong W (2014) Doing topology optimization explicitly and geometrically—a new moving morphable components based framework. J Appl Mech 81:81009.  https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4027609 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zhang WH, Zhou Y, Zhu JH (2017) A comprehensive study of feature definitions with solids and voids for topology optimization. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 325.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2017.07.004
  16. 16.
    Gersborg AR, Andreasen CS (2011) An explicit parameterization for casting constraints in gradient driven topology optimization. Struct Multidiscip Optim 44:875–881.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-011-0632-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhu JH, Gu XJ, Zhang WH, Beckers P (2013) Structural design of aircraft skin stretch-forming die using topology optimization. J Comput Appl Math 246:278–288.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cam.2012.09.001 MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Liu S, Li Q, Chen W et al (2015) H-DGTP—a Heaviside-function based directional growth topology parameterization for design optimization of stiffener layout and height of thin-walled structures. Struct Multidiscip Optim 52:903–913.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-015-1281-5 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Xia Q, Shi T (2015) Constraints of distance from boundary to skeleton: for the control of length scale in level set based structural topology optimization. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 295:525–542.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2015.07.015 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gibson Ian, David Rosen BS (2013) Additive manufacturing technologies 3D printing, rapid prototyping, and direct digital manufacturing. Rapid Manuf Assoc.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2113-3
  21. 21.
    Gaynor AT, Meisel NA, Williams CB, Guest JK (2014) Multiple-material topology optimization of compliant mechanisms created via polyjet three-dimensional printing. J Manuf Sci Eng 136:61010–61015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sigmund O (2009) Manufacturing tolerant topology optimization. Acta Mech Sin 25(2):227–239CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gu XJ, Zhu JH, Zhang WH (2012) The lattice structure configuration design for stereolithography investment casting pattern using topology optimization. Rapid Prototyp J 18:353–361.  https://doi.org/10.1108/13552541211250355 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Castilho M, Dias M, Gbureck U (2013) Fabrication of computationally designed scaffolds by low temperature 3D printing. Biofabrication 66:911–917.  https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5082/5/3/035012 Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zhu JH, Yang K, Zhang W (2016) Backbone cup—a structure design competition based on topology optimization and 3D printing. Int J Simul Multidiscip Des Optim 7Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gaynor AT, Meisel NA, Williams CB, Guest JK (2014) Topology optimization for additive manufacturing: considering maximum overhang constraint. In: 15th AIAA/ISSMO Multidiscip Anal Optim Conf 1–8.  https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2014-2036
  27. 27.
    Mirzendehdel AM, Suresh K (2016) Support structure constrained topology optimization for additive manufacturing. CAD Comput Aided Des 81:1–13.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cad.2016.08.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Guo X, Zhou J, Zhang W et al (2017) Self-supporting structure design in additive manufacturing through explicit topology optimization. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 323:27–63.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2017.05.003 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Salmoria GV, Ahrens CH, Fredel M et al (2005) Stereolithography somos 7110 resin: mechanical behavior and fractography of parts post-cured by different methods. Polym Test 24:157–162.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2004.09.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Raju BS, Chandrashekar U, Drakshayani DN (2013) Optimization studies on improving the strength characteristic for parts made of photosensitive polymer. J Inst Eng Ser D 94:35–41.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40033-013-0020-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kruth J-P, Leu MC, Nakagawa T (1998) Progress in additive manufacturing and rapid prototyping. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 47:525–540.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-8506(07)63240-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Bremen S, Meiners W, Diatlov A (2012) Selective laser melting. Laser Tech J 9:33–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Witt WK, Hoppmann II, Buxbaum RS (1953) Determination of elastic constants of orthotropic materials with special reference to laminates. Johns Hopkins Univ Baltimore MD Inst for Cooperative ResearchGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Tsai SW (1965) Experimental determination of the elastic behavior of orthotropic plates. J Eng Ind 87:315–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Bostanabad R, Bui AT, Xie W et al (2016) Stochastic microstructure characterization and reconstruction via supervised learning. Acta Mater 103:89–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Bostanabad R, Chen W, Apley DW (2016) Characterization and reconstruction of 3D stochastic microstructures via supervised learning. J Microsc 264:282–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hao P, Wang Y, Liu C et al (2017) A novel non-probabilistic reliability-based design optimization algorithm using enhanced chaos control method. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 318:572–593.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2017.01.037 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Wang L, Liu D, Yang Y et al (2017) A novel method of non-probabilistic reliability-based topology optimization corresponding to continuum structures with unknown but bounded uncertainties. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 326:573–595.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2017.08.023 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Jiang C, Han X, Liu GR, Liu GP (2008) A nonlinear interval number programming method for uncertain optimization problems. Eur J Oper Res 188:1–13MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.State IJR Center of Aerospace Design and Additive ManufacturingNorthwestern Polytechnical UniversityXi’anChina
  2. 2.MIIT Lab of Metal Additive Manufacturing and Innovative DesignNorthwestern Polytechnical UniversityXi’anChina
  3. 3.Institute of Intelligence Material and Structure, Unmanned System TechnologiesNorthwestern Polytechnical UniversityXi’anChina

Personalised recommendations