Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Non-linear response optimization with OptiStruct Altair Engineering – 2011 Hans Gruber – Business Development Radioss Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. OptiStruct and Nonlinearities… Plasticity? Contact OptiStruct 7.0 Large Sliding? Complex Material models like rubber, foam, ..? Dynamic behaviour? Large Displacement? Crash? Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. OptiStruct and Nonlinearities… Plasticity OptiStruct 11.0 Contact OptiStruct 7.0 Large Sliding Complex Material models like rubber, foam, .. OptiStruct 11.0 OptiStruct 11.0 Dynamic behaviour Large Displacement OptiStruct 11.0 OptiStruct 11.0 Crash OptiStruct 11.0 Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Content Optimization capability overview Solver integration Methods for nonlinear response optimization Examples Topology Optimization of a gear box cover (contact) Free shape Optimization connecting rod and a roll structure (geometric nonlinear) Size/Shape Optimization of a bumper (crash) Topology Optimization of a bumper (crash) Topography Optimization of a automotive door (multi body dynamics) Workflow (including live demo) Summary Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Introduction - Optimization Disciplines … with integrated FEA solver … generic study tool for arbitrary solvers, includes DOE and Stochastics Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Introduction - Optimization Disciplines •SIMP (truss) •Shape Basis Vectors •Free Size (shear panel, composite) (morphing technique) •Shape Basis Vectors •Continuous, Discrete •Beadfraction Response •PBARL optimization •Free Shape OptiStruct only Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Methods for Nonlinear Optimization – 10.0 Nonlinear Contact (geometric linear) OptiStruct After solving the contact problem optimization is performed on a linear equation Sensitivity calculation wrt. design variables Geometric Nonlinear (implicit and explicit) HyperStudy Limitations Long calculation times (many nonlinear function calls, depending on the number of DV) Topology-, Freesize, Topograhy and FreeShape Optimization are not possible No integrated approach Advantage Flexibility Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Solver integration (with optimization) OptiStruct RADIOSS FEA MBD Geometric linear Geometric non-linear Rigid and flexible bodies Linear: Non-linear: Implicit: Explicit: • Kinematic Static Quasi-static • Quasi-static • Impact • Dynamic Dynamic Plasticity • Dynamic • FSI • Static Buckling Contact • Post-buckling • Thermal • Quasi-static • Materials • Materials • Contact • Contact Thermal Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Methods for Nonlinear response optimization OptiStruct 11.0 Nonlinear Contact (NLSTAT) After solving the contact problem optimization is performed on a linear equation Sensitivity calculation wrt. design variables Geometric Nonlinear (NLGEOM, IMPDYN, EXPDYN) Gradients can be very expensive or unavailable Transferring the nonlinear problem into a series of linear problems is more efficient (ESLM - Equivalent static load method) For both methods, existing optimization techniques (for linear problems) could be used Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Concept of Equivalent Static Load Method Analysis Dynamic Problem Load time history d Optimization Static Problem Load Design variables Equivalent static loads fteq = Kdt t • Originally developed to handle transient events (MBD) in optimization • Modified for (geometric) nonlinear optimization • Nonlinear implicit • Nonlinear explicit Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Concept of Equivalent Static Load Method • Sequential static response optimization with the equivalent static loads • Nonlinear analysis (outer loop), Static optimization (inner loop) • fteq = Kdt will be determined in order to reach the same response field as nonlinear analysis (including dynamic effects) • Modified method to perform stress correction Start Nonlinear Analysis displacement Calculate equivalent static loads Update design variables Time Step t0 t1 t2 L Load set Solve static response optimization No feq0 feq1 feq2 L tn time feqn Yes Converged Stop Questions so far? Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Examples Contact, linear Geometry, implicit solution method Topology Optimization Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Nonlinear Optimization Contact Analysis Topology Optimization of a Gearbox Cover Bolted flange transfers forces from housing to gearbox Flange (Design Space) Gearbox Reduce mass of flange Contact modeled between housing, flange and gearbox Displacement Plot Force Bearing housing Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Nonlinear Optimization Contact Analysis Topology Optimization of a Gearbox Cover Design Results: Contact modeled with linear spring elements Contact modeled with nonlinear GAP elements Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Nonlinear Optimization Contact Analysis Speedup for nonlinear sub iterations during optimization • • • • • Gap status will be taken as initial conditions for next iteration Contact is solved in every optimization iteration Less nonlinear iterations if material distribution doesn’t change much Example ZF: Topology Optimization of a Gearbox Cover Reduction of Nonlinear iterations of about 74% Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Examples Plastic Material, nonlinear Geometry, implicit solution method FreeShape Optimization Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Free Shape Optimization of a Connecting Rod • Analysis Type: Geometric Non-Linearity (NLGEOM) • Material: Johnson-Cook Elastic-Plastic Material • Loading: Bearing Pressure (causing bending about the Z-axis) • Problem Formulation: • Objective Function: Minimize Volume • Design Constraints: Element Strain ≤ 0.08 Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Free Shape Design Variable Grids • With 1-plane Symmetry Manufacturing Constraint Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Optimization Results – Shape Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Optimization Results – Plastic Strain Max plastic strain reduction: 0.14 to 0.007 Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Roll Structure Optimization • Analysis Type: Implicit, quasi-static, nonlinear geometry • Optimization model Min (mass) s.t. displacement and stress (based on requirements) • Shape Change: • Mass was reduced by > 16% • 5 outer loops (nonlinear function calls) © Force India Formula One Team Ltd Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Roll Structure Optimization • Comparison final shape: nonlinear vs. linear Displacements differ by 3,4% Stresses differ by 7% - 15% • Underestimation of stresses would lead to additional mass • Additional design cycles are necessary • One step solution with ESL © Force India Formula One Team Ltd Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Examples Dynamic problem, nonlinear Geometry, explicit solution method Size&Shape Optimization Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Size and Shape Optimization of a Bumper • Analysis Type: Explicit Dynamics (EXPDYN) • Analysis Setup: Moving wall velocity = 2.5 m/s Rigid wall mass = 1000 Kg Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Size and Shape Optimization of a Bumper Baseline Design Results Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Optimization Formulation • Design Variables: Gauge: Bumper backing plate: 1.5 ≤ 2.0 ≤ 3.0 Bumper top and bottom sections: 2.0 ≤ 2.5 ≤ 3.5 Shape Thickness design variables 5 Bumper section shape variables • Design Constraints: Maximum allowable mass ≤ 14 Kg Baseline design mass ~ 12 Kg • Objective Function: Shape design variables Minimize bumper intrusion Objective function Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Size and Shape Optimization of a Bumper Optimized Design Results Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Design Comparison Baseline Design Optimized Design Backing plate thickness = 2 mm Bumper sections = 2.5 mm Mass = 12 Kg Intrusion = 100% Backing plate thickness = 3 mm Bumper sections = 3.04 mm Mass = 14 Kg Intrusion = 87% Bumper intrusion improved by ~ 13% 10 nonlinear function calls (outer loops) Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Examples Dynamic problem, nonlinear Geometry, explicit solution method Topology Optimization Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Topology Optimization of a bumber • Introduction of rips as topology design space (connected by tied contact) • Objective is max (d1-d2) • S.t. m < mtarget Topology design space inside profile Deformation due to crash loading Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Topology Optimization of a bumber Optimization Results • Objective was improved by 43% • Mass is unchanged Density result Deformation before optimization Deformation after optimization Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Examples Multi Body Dynamics Topography Optimization Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Topography Optimization for Door Slam Objective Function: *Geo Metro Model from the NHTSA website Minimize (Max) Compliance from the inner panel Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Optimized Bead Pattern *Geo Metro Model from the NHTSA website Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Max Deflection under Door Slam ~ 19% Displacement Reduction *Geo Metro Model from the NHTSA website Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Topography Optimization using ESLM Current Design Optimized Design Proposal Topography Optimization Results Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. RADIOSS - Speed up solutions Hybrid MPP version • • • Hybrid version combines the benefit of booth Radioss parallel versions SMP & SPMD inside an unique code with enhanced performance. Hybrid version means high flexibility : adapt to customer’s needs and hardware their resources & evolution. Perfect Repeatability Multi Domain • • The global model is replaced by physically equivalent sub domains (no limitations) Significant reduction of the CPU time with same accuracy Nehalem 2.80 GHz Cluster Neon 1 million elements Speedups 16 SPMD domains vs # SMP threads 8 ms simulation 6 Advanced Mass Scaling • • New technology based on a modification of the mass matrix to increase the time step Applicable to full models 5,08 5 Speedups 3,65 4 3,8 3 2,9 1,95 2 RADIOSS competitor* 1,88 1 1 11 2 3 4 5 #threads 6 7 8 Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Workflow for optimization with ESL FEM/CAD Models • Unchanged workflow (vs. linear optimization) • Analysis Model setup • Set up of nonlinear load case(s) using bulk syntax • Definition of the optimization model (design variables, objective, constraints) • ESL parameter Demo Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Optimization Methods OptiStruct RADIOSS FEA MBD Geometric linear Geometric non-linear Rigid and flexible bodies Linear: Non-linear: Implicit: Explicit: • Kinematic Static Quasi-static • Quasi-static • Impact • Dynamic Dynamic Plasticity • Dynamic • FSI • Static Buckling Contact • Post-buckling • Thermal • Quasi-static • Materials • Materials • Contact • Contact Thermal Direct sensitivities ESL Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. Summary – Nonlinear response optimization with OptiStruct OptiStruct could be applied on a wide range of nonlinear application All optimization disciplines are supported ESL is a effective and efficient approach for MBD and nonlinear response optimization Various analysis solution methods are possible: quasi static/dynamic implicit or explicit Integrated solver and optimization environment Optimization could performed on multiple load cases (MDO) Unchanged workflow Copyright © 2011 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved. References 1. Altair OptiStruct, Users Manual v11.0, (2011), Altair Engineering inc., Troy MI. 2. Byung Soo Kang,YawKang Shyy, Design of Flexible Bodies in Multibody Dynamic Systems using Equivalent Static Load Method, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics 3. David Mylett, Dr. Simon Gardner Force India Formula One Team Ltd., Principal Roll Structure Design Using Non-Linear Implicit Optimisation in Radioss, 7th Altair CAE Technology Conference, UK 4. Gruber H.; Schuhmacher, G.;Förtsch, C.; Rieder, E., Optimization assisted structural design of the rear fuselage of the A400M, a new military transport aircraft, *Altair Engineering, NAFEMS Seminar: “Optimization in Structural Mechanics”, April 27-28, 2005, Wiesbaden Germany 5. Hans Gruber, Warren Dias, Dennis Schwerzler, Altair Engineering; Structural Optimization in Automotive Design, automotive CAE Grand Challenge 2011, 19th – 20th March, 2011 6. Prof. Dr. Lothar Harzheim, Adam Opel AG –ITDC, The Challenge of Shape and Topology Optimization, automotive CAE Grand Challenge 2011, 19th–20thMarch, 2011 7. Ki-Jong Park and Gyung-Jin Park, Structural Optimization for Non-Linear Behavior Using Equivalent Static Loads, 16th World Congresses of Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, Rio de Janeiro, 30 May - 03 June 2005, Brazil 8. Uwe Schramm, Optimization Processes for Aerospace Structures, 8th World Congress on, Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, June 1 - 5, 2009, Lisbon, Portugal