MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414398829 · doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2025.114792

Stress-constrained topology optimization of heterogeneous lattice structures for additive manufacturing

2025· article· en· W4414398829 on OpenAlexaff
Jikai Liu, Shuzhi Xu, Yifan Guo

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials & Design · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTopology Optimization in Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaShandong University
KeywordsHomogenization (climate)Topology optimizationIsotropyTopology (electrical circuits)Lattice (music)AnisotropyCauchy stress tensorFinite element methodStress (linguistics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study presents a topology optimization method for heterogeneous lattice structures subject to stress constraints. The proposed approach extends the ordered SIMP (Solid Isotropic Material with Penalization) framework to incorporate a composite material failure criterion. Specifically, a modified Tsai–Hill yield criterion is employed to characterize the anisotropic yielding behavior of the heterogeneous lattice, which is subsequently integrated into the optimization as a stress constraint. To address the variation in yield strength across different lattice configurations, a normalization strategy is applied to the stress field. Additionally, a P-norm aggregation scheme is introduced to efficiently handle local stress constraints while reducing computational cost. The equivalent elastic tensor and yield strength of each lattice configuration are obtained using a representative volume element (RVE) based on homogenization theory. The effectiveness of the proposed method is demonstrated through a series of 2D cases, achieving lightweight structural designs that satisfy stress constraints. Finally, full-scale mechanical analysis and 3D printing experimental validation further confirm the strength reinforcement of the optimized results.

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 categoriesnone
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 score0.899
Threshold uncertainty score0.807

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.221 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterials & DesignSame topicTopology Optimization in EngineeringFrench-language works237,207