0
Technical Brief

A Topology Optimization Method With Constant Volume Fraction During Iterations for Design of Compliant Mechanisms

[+] Author and Article Information
Chih-Hsing Liu

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
National Cheng Kung University,
Tainan 701, Taiwan
e-mail: chliu@mail.ncku.edu.tw

Guo-Feng Huang

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
National Cheng Kung University,
Tainan 701, Taiwan

Manuscript received September 13, 2015; final manuscript received February 13, 2016; published online March 18, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Xilun Ding.

J. Mechanisms Robotics 8(4), 044505 (Mar 18, 2016) (7 pages) Paper No: JMR-15-1256; doi: 10.1115/1.4032812 History: Received September 13, 2015; Revised February 13, 2016

This study presents a topology optimization method for design of complaint mechanisms with maximum output displacement as the objective function. Unlike traditional approaches, one special characteristic of this method is that the volume fraction, which is defined as the calculated volume divided by the full volume, remains the same value throughout the optimization process based on the proposed pseudodensity and sensitivity number update scheme. The pseudodensity of each element is initially with the same value as the prespecified volume fraction constraint and can be decreased to a very small value or increased to one with a small increment. Two benchmark problems, the optimal design of a force–displacement inverter mechanism and a crunching mechanism, are provided as the illustrative examples to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed method. The results agree well with the previous studies. The proposed method is a general approach which can be used to synthesize the optimal designs of compliant mechanisms with better computational efficiency.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Xie, Y. M. , and Steven, G. P. , 1993, “ A Simple Evolutionary Procedure for Structural Optimization,” Comput. Struct., 49(5), pp. 885–896. [CrossRef]
Xie, Y. M. , and Steven, G. P. , 1997, Evolutionary Structural Optimization, Springer, West Sussex, London.
Bendsøe, M. P. , 1989, “ Optimal Shape Design as a Material Distribution Problem,” Struct. Optim., 1(4), pp. 193–202. [CrossRef]
Bendsøe, M. P. , and Sigmund, O. , 1999, “ Material Interpolation Schemes in Topology Optimization,” Arch. Appl. Mech., 69(9–10), pp. 635–654. [CrossRef]
Sigmund, O. , 2001, “ A 99 Line Topology Optimization Code Written in matlab,” Struct. Multidiscip. Optim., 21(2), pp. 120–127. [CrossRef]
Bendsøe, M. P. , and Sigmund, O. , 2003, Topology Optimization: Theory, Methods and Applications, Springer, Berlin.
Sigmund, O. , 1997, “ On the Design of Compliant Mechanisms Using Topology Optimization,” Mech. Struct. Mach., 25(4), pp. 493–524. [CrossRef]
Querin, O. M. , Steven, G. P. , and Xie, Y. M. , 2000, “ Evolutionary Structural Optimisation Using an Additive Algorithm,” Finite Elem. Anal. Des., 34(3–4), pp. 291–308. [CrossRef]
Ansola, R. , Veguería, E. , Canales, J. , and Tárrago, J. A. , 2007, “ A Simple Evolutionary Topology Optimization Procedure for Compliant Mechanism Design,” Finite Elem. Anal. Des., 44, pp. 53–62. [CrossRef]
Ansola, R. , Veguería, E. , Maturana, A. , and Canales, J. , 2010, “ 3D Compliant Mechanisms Synthesis by a Finite Element Addition Procedure,” Finite Elem. Anal. Des., 46(9), pp. 760–769. [CrossRef]
Huang, X. , and Xie, Y. M. , 2007, “ Convergent and Mesh-Independent Solutions for the Bidirectional Evolutionary Structural Optimization Method,” Finite Elem. Anal. Des., 43(14), pp. 1039–1049. [CrossRef]
Huang, X. , and Xie, Y. M. , 2009, “ Bi-Directional Evolutionary Topology Optimization of Continuum Structures With One or Multiple Materials,” Comput. Mech., 43(3), pp. 393–401. [CrossRef]
Huang, X. , and Xie, Y. M. , 2010, Evolutionary Topology Optimization of Continuum Structures: Methods and Applications, Wiley, West Sussex, UK.
Li, Y. , Huang, X. , Xie, Y. M. , and Zhou, S. , 2013, “ Bi-Directional Evolutionary Structural Optimization for Design of Compliant Mechanisms,” Key Eng. Mater., 535–536, pp. 373–376. [CrossRef]
Alonso, C. , Querin, O. M. , and Ansola, R. , 2013, “ A Sequential Element Rejection and Admission (Sera) Method for Compliant Mechanisms Design,” Struct. Multidiscip. Optim., 47(6), pp. 795–807. [CrossRef]
Zhou, H. , and Mandala, A. R. , 2012, “ Topology Optimization of Compliant Mechanisms Using the Improved Quadrilateral Discretization Model,” ASME J. Mech. Rob., 4(2), p. 021007. [CrossRef]
Chen, Y.-H. , and Lan, C.-C. , 2012, “ An Adjustable Constant-Force Mechanism for Adaptive End-Effector Operations,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 134(3), p. 031005. [CrossRef]
Xu, Q. , 2012, “ New Flexure Parallel-Kinematic Micropositioning System With Large Workspace,” IEEE Trans. Rob., 28(2), pp. 478–491. [CrossRef]
Dai, J. S. , and Ding, X. , 2006, “ Compliance Analysis of a Three-Legged Rigidly-Connected Compliant Platform Device,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 128(4), pp. 755–764. [CrossRef]
Liu, C.-H. , and Lee, K.-M. , 2012, “ Dynamic Modeling of Damping Effects in Highly Damped Compliant Fingers for Applications Involving Contacts,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control, 134(1), p. 011005. [CrossRef]
Lee, K.-M. , and Liu, C.-H. , 2012, “ Explicit Dynamic Finite Element Analysis of an Automated Grasping Process Using Highly Damped Compliant Fingers,” Comput. Math. Appl., 64(5), pp. 965–977. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Initial design domain with load scheme

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

(a) Input and (b) output load cases

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Update scheme with constant volume fraction during iterations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Flowchart of the proposed topology optimization procedure

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Force–displacement inverter mechanism: (a) analysis domain and (b) optimal topology

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Topology optimization results for the inverter mechanism: (a) objective function and volume fraction calculated throughout iterations and (b) optimal topologies at specific iterations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Crunching mechanism: (a) analysis domain and (b) optimal topology

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Topology optimization results for the crunching mechanism: (a) objective function and volume fraction calculated throughout iterations and (b) optimal topologies at specific iterations

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In