oru.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Topology optimization of hyperelastic bodies including non-zero prescribed displacements
Department of Management and Engineering, The Institute of Technology, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Jönköping University, Jönköping, Sweden.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-6821-5727
2013 (English)In: Structural and multidisciplinary optimization (Print), ISSN 1615-147X, E-ISSN 1615-1488, Vol. 47, no 1, p. 37-48Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Resource type
Text
Abstract [en]

Stiffness topology optimization is usually based on a state problem of linear elasticity, and there seems to be little discussion on what is the limit for such a small rotation-displacement assumption. We show that even for gross rotations that are in all practical aspects small (<3 deg), topology optimization based on a large deformation theory might generate different design concepts compared to what is obtained when small displacement linear elasticity is used. Furthermore, in large rotations, the choice of stiffness objective (potential energy or compliance), can be crucial for the optimal design concept. The paper considers topology optimization of hyperelastic bodies subjected simultaneously to external forces and prescribed non-zero displacements. In that respect it generalizes a recent contribution of ours to large deformations, but we note that the objectives of potential energy and compliance are no longer equivalent in the non-linear case. We use seven different hyperelastic strain energy functions and find that the numerical performance of the Kirchhoff–St.Venant model is in general significantly worse than the performance of the other six models, which are all modifications of this classical law that are equivalent in the limit of infinitesimal strains, but do not contain the well-known collapse in compression. Numerical results are presented for two different problem settings.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Springer, 2013. Vol. 47, no 1, p. 37-48
Keywords [en]
Hyperelasticity, Potential energy, Compliance, Optimality criteria
National Category
Applied Mechanics Mechanical Engineering
Research subject
Mechanical Engineering
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-48269DOI: 10.1007/s00158-012-0819-zISI: 000312878800004Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84871979511OAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-48269DiVA, id: diva2:904430
Note

Funding Agency:

Swedish Foundation for Strategic Research through the ProViking programme

Available from: 2012-01-26 Created: 2016-02-15 Last updated: 2017-11-30Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Strömberg, Niclas

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Strömberg, Niclas
In the same journal
Structural and multidisciplinary optimization (Print)
Applied MechanicsMechanical Engineering

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 513 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf