4.7 Article

Fully parallel level set method for large-scale structural topology optimization

期刊

COMPUTERS & STRUCTURES
卷 221, 期 -, 页码 13-27

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.compstruc.2019.05.010

关键词

Parallel computing; Level set method; Large-scale structural topology optimization; Uniform and non-uniform structured meshes; Compactly supported radial basis function

资金

  1. Hong Kong Scholars Program [XJ2016024]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [2042018kf0016]
  3. Chongqing Research Program of Basic Research and Frontier Technology [cstc2016jcyjA0058]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To realize large-scale or high-resolution structural topology optimization design, a fully parallel parameterized level set method with compactly supported radial basis functions (CSRBFs) is developed based on both the uniform and non-uniform structured meshes. In this work, the whole computation process is parallelized, including mesh generation, sensitivity analysis, calculation and assembly of the element stiffness matrices, solving of the structural state equation, parameterization and updating of the level set function, and output of the computational results during the optimization iterations. In addition, some typical numerical examples, in which the calculation scale is up to 7 million 8-node hexahedral elements, are carried out for verifying the effectiveness of the proposed method. Finally, the computing time is also analyzed in detail. It is found that: (1) In the optimized structures, the thin sheet-like components gradually replace the truss-like ones when refining the mesh, (2) the parameterization process of the level set function will become fast as long as the non-uniformity of mesh is not very high and the supported radius of CSRBF is small enough, and (3) more than 80% of the total computing time is always consumed for solving the structural state equation during the finite element analysis (FEA). (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据