I want to perform topography Optimization with increasing the frequency and reducing the mass. Can you please suggest me which objective and constraints I need to give in the model.
Hi Muttu, You can use frequency and mass fraction responses. Constraint will be on frequency and objective will be to minimize mass fraction. Remember that you will probably have to use the EIGRL card to extract natural frequencies and corresponding mode shapes to be used in the optimization.
HELLO, NICE VID , IS THERE ANY CHANCE U CAN HELP ME WITH SOME PROJECT , I WANT TO DO TOPOGRAPHY OPTIMIZATION ON A CONTROL ARM OF A 2008 VOLKSWAGEN GOL ?!
Thank you for showing another informative analysis. A quick question, is the shape change contour result (thickness plot?) based on the bead parameter with the draw height of 4.0 mm? In other words, will the result be different if you change it to 5 or 6.0 mm, perhaps with the smaller width? It's good to see you can minimize the deformation about 1/10 by doing this. I know the topography optimization is not objective to weight reduction only but did you also see any positive effects on weight/stress with the optimized result?
Yes indeed...the shape change contour is based on the bead parameters. If we change the draw height and width, the contour will definitely change. The values I used for these parameters are industry standards based on actual manufacturing constraints for sheet metal bending. We can experiment with these values but going beyond the range I mentioned will become a problem for manufacturing. As such, only performing topography optimization did not provide any benefits with regard to weight reduction but there are several techniques to couple topology and topography together in the same analysis. That provides much better results along with significant weight reduction. I will surely work on making a video about combined topology and topography soon!
@@AeroswapThank you for the detailed explanations. Yeah it makes sense to keep the parameters as it is for the manufacturing constraints. I would love to see the combined analysis, it would strengthen us FE analysts to provide a complete solution package including strength assessment, optimization and manufacturing also.
No, this type of optimization is only applicable for shell structures. For solid parts, you can try shape and size optimization to increase the stiffness. Glad to know you liked the videos!
Hey Dileep! Topology optimization is about reducing the overall weight of a component by removal of excess material from regions of the model. Topography optimization does not necessarily reduce the weight. It just makes the component stiffer by modifying the surface geometry. Subsequently, topography optimization is only applicable for sheet metal parts. On the other hand, topology can be used on any geometry. Hope this clears your doubt.
@@Aeroswap Any topology optimization method is able to generate and/or remove holes in the design domain. Based on what is explained above, it seems that "topography" optimization refers to "shape" optimization (commonly known with this name in the literature). The main difference between these two classes of methods resides in the freedom the framework has to change the design (topology opt has more freedom than shape because shape optimization preserves the same topology).
![Topology Optimization using Hypermesh [Optistruct Tutorial]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/-Uw7YWTy5so/mqdefault.jpg)
![Topology Optimization using Hypermesh [Optistruct Tutorial]](/img/tr.png)
![Size Optimization using Hypermesh [Optistruct Tutorial]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/iyZSk-Zhmp4/mqdefault.jpg)
![Combined Optimization using Hypermesh [Optistruct Tutorial]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/TsNaPiz9uQI/mqdefault.jpg)
Thanks Friend for posting nice video on Optimization. Keep posting similar Videos.
Glad you liked the videos!
Excellent video
Thank you :)
Superb explanation bro... thanks
Glad it was helpful :)
I want to perform topography Optimization with increasing the frequency and reducing the mass. Can you please suggest me which objective and constraints I need to give in the model.
Hi Muttu,
You can use frequency and mass fraction responses. Constraint will be on frequency and objective will be to minimize mass fraction. Remember that you will probably have to use the EIGRL card to extract natural frequencies and corresponding mode shapes to be used in the optimization.
Nice explanation
HELLO, NICE VID , IS THERE ANY CHANCE U CAN HELP ME WITH SOME PROJECT , I WANT TO DO TOPOGRAPHY OPTIMIZATION ON A CONTROL ARM OF A 2008 VOLKSWAGEN GOL ?!
Hi there,
My email address is provided on the About page of this channel. Feel free to reach out and I will be happy to help out the best I can :)
Thank you for showing another informative analysis.
A quick question, is the shape change contour result (thickness plot?) based on the bead parameter with the draw height of 4.0 mm? In other words, will the result be different if you change it to 5 or 6.0 mm, perhaps with the smaller width? It's good to see you can minimize the deformation about 1/10 by doing this. I know the topography optimization is not objective to weight reduction only but did you also see any positive effects on weight/stress with the optimized result?
Yes indeed...the shape change contour is based on the bead parameters. If we change the draw height and width, the contour will definitely change. The values I used for these parameters are industry standards based on actual manufacturing constraints for sheet metal bending. We can experiment with these values but going beyond the range I mentioned will become a problem for manufacturing.
As such, only performing topography optimization did not provide any benefits with regard to weight reduction but there are several techniques to couple topology and topography together in the same analysis.
That provides much better results along with significant weight reduction.
I will surely work on making a video about combined topology and topography soon!
@@AeroswapThank you for the detailed explanations. Yeah it makes sense to keep the parameters as it is for the manufacturing constraints. I would love to see the combined analysis, it would strengthen us FE analysts to provide a complete solution package including strength assessment, optimization and manufacturing also.
@@kenkim2687 I totally agree!
@@Aeroswap Dear Swapnil, will be looking forward to it! i.e. combined topology and topography optimization tutorial!
Hi Ali,
Here is the link for combined topology topography optimization tutorial -
ua-cam.com/video/TsNaPiz9uQI/v-deo.html
Can topography optimization be applied to solid parts? I could not. I wanted to increase the stiffness. Also, your videos are very explain. Thanks.
No, this type of optimization is only applicable for shell structures. For solid parts, you can try shape and size optimization to increase the stiffness.
Glad to know you liked the videos!
Explain about Super element analysis
This is an advanced type of finite element analysis. Thanks for the suggestion!
Hey Swapnil, Great work!
Can u explain the difference between topology and topography optimization techniques?
Hey Dileep!
Topology optimization is about reducing the overall weight of a component by removal of excess material from regions of the model.
Topography optimization does not necessarily reduce the weight. It just makes the component stiffer by modifying the surface geometry. Subsequently, topography optimization is only applicable for sheet metal parts.
On the other hand, topology can be used on any geometry.
Hope this clears your doubt.
@@Aeroswap Any topology optimization method is able to generate and/or remove holes in the design domain. Based on what is explained above, it seems that "topography" optimization refers to "shape" optimization (commonly known with this name in the literature). The main difference between these two classes of methods resides in the freedom the framework has to change the design (topology opt has more freedom than shape because shape optimization preserves the same topology).
Thanks for the detailed information!