Convergence of shape optimization calculations of mechanical components using adaptive biological growth and iterative finite element methods

Abstract

Shape optimization of mechanical components is one of the issues that have been considered in recent years. Different methods were presented such as adaptive biological for reducing costs and increasing accuracy. The effects of step factor, the number of control points and the definition way of control points coordinates in convergence rate were studied. A code was written using ANSYS Parametric Design Language (APDL) which receives the studied parameters as input and obtains the optimum shape for the components. The results show that for achieving successful optimization, step factor should be in a specific range. It is found that the use of any coordinate system in defining control points coordinates and selection of any direction for stimulus vector of algorithm will also result in optimum shape. Furthermore, by increasing the number of control points, some non-uniformities are created in the studied boundary. Achieving acceptable accuracy seems impossible due to the creation of saw form at the studied boundary which is called “saw position”.

Keywords

shape optimization / adaptive biological growth / control points / step factor / optimization rate

References

[1] MeskeR., SauterJ., SchnackE.. Nonparametric gradient-less shape optimization for real-world applications [J]. Struct Multidisc Optim, 2005, 30: 201-218

[2] MATTHECK C. Design in nature-learning from trees [M]. Springer Verlag, 1998: 276.

[3] HellerM., KayeR., RoseL. R. F.. A gradientless finite element procedure for shape optimization [J]. Journal of Strain Analysis, 1999, 34: 323-336

[4] WU Z. On the optimization problem of fillets and holes in plates with curvature constraints [J/OL]. Struct Multidisc Optim, 2007, 10.1007/s00158-007-0139-x

[5] LiangQ. Q., XieY. M., StevenG. P.. Topology optimization of strut-and-tie models in reinforced concrete structures using an evolutionary procedure [J]. ACI Structural Journal, 2000, 972: 322-330

[6] CerrolazaM., AnnicchiaricoW., MartinezM.. Optimization of 2D boundary element models using β-splines and genetic algorithms [J]. Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements, 2000, 24: 427-440

[7] FangH., WangQ.. Multiobjective design of a vehicular structure using metamodelling and an efficient genetic algorithm [J]. Int J Design Engineering, 2007, 1(1): 41-55

[8] KrishnapillaiK., JonesR.. Three-dimensional structural design optimization based on fatigue implementing a genetic algorithm and a non-similitude crack growth law [J]. Finite Element in Analysis and Design, 2009, 45: 132-146

[9] KrishnapillaiK., JonesR.. Structural optimization of 3D damage tolerant components comparing the biological and genetic algorithm solutions [J]. Engineering Failure Analysis, 2009, 16: 713-727

[10] PathakK. K., SehgalD. K.. Gradientless shape optimization using artificial neural networks [J]. Struct Multidisc Optim, 2010, 41(5): 699-709