Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T16:55:17.317Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Layout synthesis of fluid channels using generative graph grammars

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 July 2014

Amir Hooshmand  and
Matthew I. Campbell
Amir Hooshmand
Affiliation:
Institute for Advanced Study, Technische Universität München, Lichtenbergstrasse 2a, D-85748 Garching, Germany
Matthew I. Campbell*
Affiliation:
School of Mechanical, Industrial, and Manufacturing Engineering, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, USA
*
Reprint requests to: Matthew I. Campbell, School of Mechanical, Industrial, and Manufacturing Engineering, Oregon State University, 408 Rogers Hall, Corvallis, OR 97331-6001, USA. E-mail: matt.campbell@oregonstate.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper presents a new technique for shape and topology optimization of fluid channels using generative design synthesis methods. The proposed method uses the generative abilities of graph grammars with simulation and analysis power of conventional computational fluid dynamics methods. The graph grammar interpreter GraphSynth is used to carry out graph transformations, which define different topologies for a given multiple-inlet multiple-outlet problem. After evaluating and optimizing the generated graphs, they are first transformed into meaningful three-dimensional shapes. These solutions are then analyzed by a computational fluid dynamics solver for final evaluation of the possible solutions. The effectiveness of the proposed method is checked by solving a variety of available test problems and comparing them with those found in the literature. Furthermore, by solving very complex large-scale problems, the robustness and effectiveness of the method is tested. To extend the work, future research directions are presented.

Keywords

Computational Design SynthesisDesign AutomationFluid Channel Layout SynthesisGraph GrammarTopology Optimization
Type
Research Article
Information
AI EDAM , Volume 28 , Issue 3: Computational Design Synthesis , August 2014 , pp. 239 - 257
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Aage, N., Poulsen, T.H., Gersborg-Hansen, A., & Sigmund, O. (2007). Topology optimization of large scale stokes flow problems. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization 35(2), 175–180.Google Scholar
Aichholzer, O., Aurenhammer, F., Alberts, D., & Gärtner, B. (1996). A novel type of skeleton for polygons. Journal of Universal Computer Science 1, 752–761.Google Scholar
Akin, Ö., & Akin, C. (1998). On the process of creativity in puzzles, inventions, and designs. Automation in Construction 7(2–3), 123–138.Google Scholar
Alber, R., & Rudolph, S. (2004). On a grammar-based design language that supports automated design generation and creativity. In Knowledge Intensive Design Technology (Borg, J., Farrugia, P., & Camilleri, K., Eds.), 1st ed., pp. 19–35. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Andreasen, C.S., Gersborg, A.R., & Sigmund, O. (2009). Topology optimization of microfluidic mixers. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids 61(5), 498–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barequet, G., Goodrich, M.T., Levi-Steiner, A., & Steiner, D. (2004). Contour interpolation by straight skeletons. Graphical Models 66(4), 245–260.Google Scholar
Bendsøe, M.P., & Sigmund, O. (2003). Topology Optimization. Vasa (p. 370). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Bolognini, F., Shea, K., Vale, C.W., & Seshia, A.A. (2006). A multicriteria system-based method for simulation-driven design synthesis. Proc. 32nd Design Automation Conf., Parts A and B, Vol. 2006, pp. 651–661. Philadelphia, PA: ASME.Google Scholar
Borrvall, T., & Petersson, J. (2003). Topology optimization of fluids in Stokes flow. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids 41(1), 77–107.Google Scholar
Cagan, J. (2001). Engineering shape grammars: where we have been and where we are going. In Formal Engineering Design Synthesis (Antonsson, E.K., & Cagan, J., Eds.), pp. 65–92. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
CGAL. (2013). CGAL, Computational Geometry Algorithms Library. Accessed at http://www.cgal.org December 1, 2013.Google Scholar
Chakrabarti, A., Shea, K., Stone, R., Cagan, J., Campbell, M., Hernandez, N.V., & Wood, K.L. (2011). Computer-based design synthesis research: an overview. Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering 11(2), 021003.Google Scholar
Challis, V.J., & Guest, J.K. (2009). Level set topology optimization of fluids in Stokes flow. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 79(10), 1284–1308.Google Scholar
Chase, S.C. (2002). A model for user interaction in grammar-based design systems. Automation in Construction 11, 161–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drumheller, M. (2002). Constraint-based design of optimal transport elements. Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering 2(4), 302.Google Scholar
Duan, X.-B., Ma, Y.-C., & Zhang, R. (2008). Shape-topology optimization for Navier–Stokes problem using variational level set method. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics 222(2), 487–499.Google Scholar
Eftekharian, A. a., & Ilieş, H.T. (2012). Medial zones: formulation and applications. Computer-Aided Design 44(5), 413–423.Google Scholar
Eschenauer, H.A., & Olhoff, N. (2001). Topology optimization of continuum structures: a review. Applied Mechanics Reviews 54(4), 331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evgrafov, A. (2006). Topology optimization of slightly compressible fluids. ZAMM 86(1), 46–62.Google Scholar
Gersborg-Hansen, A., Sigmund, O., & Haber, R. (2005). Topology optimization of channel flow problems. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization 30(3), 181–192.Google Scholar
Guest, J.K., & Prévost, J.H. (2006 a). Optimizing multifunctional materials: design of microstructures for maximized stiffness and fluid permeability. International Journal of Solids and Structures 43(22–23), 7028–7047.Google Scholar
Guest, J.K., & Prévost, J.H. (2006 b). Topology optimization of creeping fluid flows using a Darcy–Stokes finite element. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 66(3), 461–484.Google Scholar
Guest, J.K., & Prévost, J.H. (2007). Design of maximum permeability material structures. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 196(4–6), 1006–1017.Google Scholar
Heisserman, J. (1994). Generative geometric design. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 14(2), 37–45.Google Scholar
Helms, B., Schultheiss, H., & Shea, K. (2013). Automated mapping of physical effects to functions using abstraction ports based on bond graphs. Journal of Mechanical Design 135(5), 051006.Google Scholar
Helms, B., & Shea, K. (2012). Computational synthesis of product architectures based on object-oriented graph grammars. Journal of Mechanical Design 134(2), 021008.Google Scholar
Hoisl, F. (2012). Visual Interactive 3-D Spatial Grammars in CAD for Computational Design Synthesis. München: Technische Universität München.Google Scholar
Hwang, F., Richards, D., & Winter, P. (1992). The Steiner Tree Problem (p. 352). Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Jang, G., Panganiban, H., & Chung, T.J. (2010). P1-nonconforming quadrilateral finite element for topology optimization. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 84(6), 685–707.Google Scholar
Kurtoglu, T., Swantner, A., & Campbell, M.I. (2010). Automating the conceptual design process: “from black box to component selection.” Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 24(1), 49.Google Scholar
Lewis, W., Weir, J., & Field, B. (2001). Strategies for solving complex design problems in engineering design. In Proc. 13th Int. Conf. Engineering Design (Culley, S., Duffy, A., McMahon, C., & Wallace, K., Eds.), pp. 109–116. Glasgow: Professional Engineering Press.Google Scholar
Liu, H., & Li, P. (2013). Maintaining equal operating conditions for all cells in a fuel cell stack using an external flow distributor. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 38(9), 3757–3766.Google Scholar
Liu, Z., Gao, Q., Zhang, P., Xuan, M., & Wu, Y. (2010). Topology optimization of fluid channels with flow rate equality constraints. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization 44(1), 31–37.Google Scholar
Mullins, S., & Rinderle, J.R. (1991). Grammatical approaches to engineering design: part I. An introduction and commentary. Research in Engineering Design 2(3), 121–135.Google Scholar
Okkels, F., Olesen, L.H., & Bruus, H. (2005). Application of topology optimization in the design of micro- and nanofluidic systems. NSTI-Nanotech 1, 575–578.Google Scholar
Olesen, L.H., Okkels, F., & Bruus, H. (2006). A high-level programming-language implementation of topology optimization applied to steady-state Navier-Stokes flow. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 65(7), 975–1001.Google Scholar
Open CASCADE. (2013). Salome platform. Accessed at http://www.salome-platform.org December 1, 2013.Google Scholar
OpenCFD Ltd. (2013). OpenFoam. Accessed at http://www.openfoam.com December 1, 2013.Google Scholar
Schaefer, J., & Rudolph, S. (2005). Satellite design by design grammars. Aerospace Science and Technology 9(1), 81–91.Google Scholar
Shea, K. (1997). Essays of Discrete Structures: Purposeful Design of Grammatical Structures by Directed Stochastic Search. Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Mellon University.Google Scholar
Shea, K., Aish, R., & Gourtovaia, M. (2003). Towards integrated performance-based generative design tools. Proc. eCAADe21, Digital Design, pp. 553–560, Graz, Austria.Google Scholar
Shea, K., & Cagan, J. (1999). The design of novel roof trusses with shape annealing: assessing the ability of a computational method in aiding structural designers with varying design intent. Design Studies 20, 3–23.Google Scholar
Simon, H.A. (1973). The structure of ill structured problems. Artificial Intelligence 4(3–4), 181–201.Google Scholar
Stefan, P., & Rudolph, S. (2007). Re-engineering exterior design: generation of cars by means of a formal graph-based engineering design language. Proc. 16th Int. Conf. Engineering Design, pp. 28–30, Paris.Google Scholar
Vangelooven, J., De Malsche, W., Op De Beeck, J., Eghbali, H., Gardeniers, H., & Desmet, G. (2010). Design and evaluation of flow distributors for microfabricated pillar array columns. Lab on a Chip 10(3), 349–356.Google Scholar
Zhou, S., & Li, Q. (2008). A variational level set method for the topology optimization of steady-state Navier–Stokes flow. Journal of Computational Physics 227(24), 10178–10195.Google Scholar