MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210441159 · doi:10.1115/imece2021-73439

Topology Optimization of Cracked Structures With Manufacturing Constraints

2021· article· en· W4210441159 on OpenAlexaff
Anahita Habibian, Abdolrasoul Sohouli, Afzal Suleman

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTopology Optimization in Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTopology optimizationNetwork topologyRobustness (evolution)Classification of discontinuitiesMathematical optimizationMinificationComputer scienceStiffnessDesign for manufacturabilityPoint (geometry)Engineering design processTopology (electrical circuits)MathematicsEngineeringFinite element methodMechanical engineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Topology optimization (TO) is a tool used in the design process to improve the structure’s performance, e.g. increasing the stiffness. However, the final topologies typically include complex shapes making them impractical or unrealizable from a fabrication point-of-view. This issue stems from the limitations that the currently available manufacturing methods have, such as milling. Hence, considering these limits as the manufacturing constraints into the optimization problem would shorten the post-processing time. Moreover, the existence of initial damage such as cracks is another common issue of engineering structures, resulting in unreliable topologies if neglected. These two challenges are the main motivations of this study. A projection method is utilized to restrict the range of solutions to a manufacturable design domain by projecting the design variable into a pseudo-density field. The main advantage of this approach is that the manufacturing restrictions are achieved naturally, without adding constraints to the TO problem, which leads to a straightforward calculation of sensitivities. This technique allows the designer to define, for instance, a minimum member size as well as a minimum hole size as geometrical constraints. In order to penalize the intermediate phases, the popular Solid Isotropic Material with Penalty method (SIMP) is employed. The Peri-dynamics theory is used to study the structure’s behaviour because of its ability to introduce discontinuities without requiring complicated mathematical expressions as opposed to its counterpart mesh-based approaches. The robustness of the proposed method is demonstrated through some compliance minimization problems.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.759
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.191 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTopology Optimization in EngineeringFrench-language works237,207