STRUCTURAL OPTIMIZATION OF AN L-SHAPED BRACKET SUBJECTED TO DIFFERENT LOADING CONDITIONS

Page 1

e-ISSN: 2582-5208 International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering Technology and Science Volume:02/Issue:10/ October -2020

Impact Factor- 5.354

www.irjmets.com

STRUCTURAL OPTIMIZATION OF AN L-SHAPED BRACKET SUBJECTED TO DIFFERENT LOADING CONDITIONS Mr. Chandaka Ramana*1, Dr.P.Vijaya Kumar *2, Mr.Y.Kesava Rao *3, Dr. V. Nagabushan Rao *4 *1 PG

Student, Department of ME, Raghu Institute of Technology, Visakhapatnam, AP, INDIA.

*2 Professor, *3 Assistant

Department of ME, Raghu Institute of Technology, Visakhapatnam, AP, INDIA.

Professor, Department of ME, Raghu Institute of Technology, Visakhapatnam, AP, INDIA.

*4 Professor,

Department of ME, Raghu Institute of Technology, Visakhapatnam, AP, INDIA.

ABSTRACT Topology optimization is a very powerful tool in many areas of design such as optics, electronics and structural mechanics. The field materialized from structural design and so topology optimization applied in this context is also known as structural optimization. In this work, a software based approach for topology optimization of an L-shaped bracket to achieve 60% weight reduction subjected to various loading conditions is presented through a commercially available finite element simulation software. The effect of varying the loading conditions on topology and final compliance together with the von- Misses stress value of the L-shaped bracket is presented here. Also determine if weight reduction pockets can be generated in the L-shaped structure and redesign the structure based on the results from topology optimization, and conduct parametric optimization to minimize weight subject to the deformation constraint. Keywords: Topology, Von Misses, Optimization, L-Bracket, Optimum Design.

I.

INTRODUCTION

Designers are many times faced with the problems of deciding the optimal layout (distribution of material) or topology of the design. They have to make trade-offs between various factors to achieve a sensible design, which satisfies the performance criteria imposed on it satisfactorily. While doing this he has to examine a large number of candidate solutions and find a globally optimal solution which satisfies the boundary conditions imposed on it. The task of searching globally optimal solutions is more cumbersome when the design is at conceptual stage.

Fig 1: Categories of optimization Therefore, in an optimization problem, different candidate solutions are compared with each other, and then the best or optimal solution is obtained which means that solution quality is fundamental. In engineering, the optimization of an objective function is basically the maximization or minimization of a problem subjected to constraints. Optimization can basically be categorized into three types namely: (a) sizing (mass), (b) shape and (c) topology (layout). Refer Figure 1. Additive manufacturing (AM), also referred to as Rapid prototyping (RP), Additive layer manufacturing (ALM), 3D printing, and many other names is a new manufacturing technique that allows fast fabrication of computer models designed with three-dimension (3D) computer aided design (CAD) software.

www.irjmets.com

@International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering, Technology and Science

[157]


e-ISSN: 2582-5208 International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering Technology and Science Volume:02/Issue:10/ October -2020

Impact Factor- 5.354

www.irjmets.com

Nowadays, this technology is seen as a potential game changer in a wide variety of industries, from shoes to aircraft manufacturers.

II.

METHODOLOGY

The above stated problem was solved with ANSYS Workbench simulation software and the step by step procedure for from design to solve, followed to get desired results in terms of topological optimization. Structural optimizations.

Fig: 2 L-shaped Specimen

III.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The defined problem was solved and analyzed using FEM based Ansys Software 16.0 and the results are shown in figures below.

Fig 3: Total deformation of body

www.irjmets.com

@International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering, Technology and Science

[158]


e-ISSN: 2582-5208 International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering Technology and Science Volume:02/Issue:10/ October -2020

Impact Factor- 5.354

www.irjmets.com

Fig 4: Equivalent (von-misses) stresses of body A DOE table listing nine design points is generated. To run finite element simulations for the nine different design scenarios. It will take a while to finish running all the simulations. After completion, review the nine design points (simulation results) listed in the Table. The parameters defined in the project are: P1 - Height1.L67 [mm] P2 - Height2.L71 [mm] P3 - Total Deformation Maximum [mm] P4 - Solid Mass [kg] The following header line defines the name of the columns by reference to the parameters. Table 1: Design Points Name

P1

P2

P3

P4

DP 0

22

9

0.550219226

0.004897774

DP 1

18

9

0.420071687

0.005753343

DP 2

20

9

0.457140364

0.005338454

DP 3

22

9

0.550219226

0.004897774

DP 4

18

10

0.496225101

0.00563661

DP 5

22

10

0.606715451

0.004771293

DP 6

18

11

0.663965661

0.005520745

DP 7

20

11

0.713541592

0.00509451

DP 8

22

11

0.817034547

0.004645588

The Parameter set in the project schematic. In the Table of Design Points shown below, DP1, DP2, and DP3 are feasible solutions that meet the design requirements. Among them, DP3 achieves the best result in minimizing the total weight while meeting the maximum total deformation requirement. It has a value of 22 mm for height1 and 9 mm for height2. The response surface of the maximum total deformation as a function of height1 and height2 is shown in the Response Chart.

www.irjmets.com

@International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering, Technology and Science

[159]


e-ISSN: 2582-5208 International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering Technology and Science Volume:02/Issue:10/ October -2020

Impact Factor- 5.354

www.irjmets.com

Fig 5: Response chart for P3

Fig 6: Total deformation before applying optimizing parameters

Fig 7: Total deformation after optimization

www.irjmets.com

@International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering, Technology and Science

[160]


e-ISSN: 2582-5208 International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering Technology and Science Volume:02/Issue:10/ October -2020

Impact Factor- 5.354

www.irjmets.com

In Design optimization problems using ANSYS Workbench to reduce the weight of an L-shaped structure is observed. The total deformation of an L- shaped structure are compared before parametric optimization (0.42875 mm) and after parameterization (0.29837 mm). The DP3 values are more suitable for getting proper design of an L-shaped structure.

IV.

CONCLUSION

The following conclusions are drawn from the present work, this paper presents Structural optimization of the engine bracket using finite element analysis (FEA) of a challenge that was proposed from Automobile industry. Structural optimization is conducted according to the two objective functions. The manufacturing model is obtained and compared with the original model according to the Maximum equivalent stress, mass reduction and total deformations. In this Design optimization problem using ANSYS 16.0 Workbench to reduce the weight of an L-shaped structure is observed. The total deformation of an L- shaped structure are compared before parametric optimization (0.42875 mm) and after parameterization (0.29837 mm). The DP3 values are more suitable for getting proper design of an Lshaped structure.

V.

REFERENCES

[1]

Onuh S O and Yahaya Y Y 1999 Rapid prototyping technology: Applications and benefits for rapid product development, J. Intell. Manuf. 10 301–311 [2] Burns M 1993 Automated fabrication improving productivity in manufacturing, 1st Edition. PTR Prentice Hall New Jersey [3] Sigmund O K and Maute K 2013 Topology optimization approaches, Struct. Multidiscip. Optim. 48 1031–1055. [4] Jaydeep M. Bhatt, et al, Nov.12- Oct. 13, “Design and analysis of an aerial scissor lift”, Journal of Information, Knowledge and Research in Mechanical Engineering, ISSN 0975 – 668X, Volume02,ISSUE -02,452. [5] Bendsoe M P and Kikuchi N 1988 Generating optimal topologies in structural design using a homogenization method, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 71 197 - 224 [6] Sigmund O K and Maute K 2004 Topological optimization, theory, methods and application, Springer Verlag, Berlin [7] Rozvany G I N, Zhou M and Birker T 1992 Generalized shape optimization without homogenization, Struct. Optim. 4 250-252 [8] Rozvany G I N 2001 A critical review of established methods of structural topology optimization, Struct. Multidiscip. Optim. 37 217-237. [9] Querin O M, Steven G P and Xie Y M 1998 Evolutionary structural optimization using a bidirectional algorithm Eng. Comput. 15 1031-1048 [10] Huang X and Xie Y M 2007 Convergent and mesh-independent solutions for the bi-directional evolutionary structural optimization method, Finite Elem. Anal. Des. 43 1039-1040

www.irjmets.com

@International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering, Technology and Science

[161]


Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.