Paper detail

Ambiguous phase assignment of discretized 3D geometries in topology optimization

Level set-based immersed boundary techniques operate on nonconforming meshes while providing a crisp definition of interface and external boundaries. In such techniques, an isocontour of a level set field interpolated from nodal level set values defines a problem's geometry. If the interface is explicitly tracked, the intersected elements are typically divided into sub-elements to which a phase needs to be assigned. Due to loss of information in the discretization of the level set field, certain geometrical configurations allow for ambiguous phase assignment of sub-elements, and thus ambiguous definition of the interface. The study presented here focuses on analyzing these topological ambiguities in embedded geometries constructed from discretized level set fields on hexahedral meshes. The analysis is performed on three-dimensional problems where several intersection configurations can significantly affect the problem's topology. This is in contrast to two-dimensional problems where ambiguous topological features exist only in one intersection configuration and identifying and resolving them is straightforward. A set of rules that resolve these ambiguities for two-phase problems is proposed, and algorithms for their implementations are provided. The influence of these rules on the evolution of the geometry in the optimization process is investigated with linear elastic topology optimization problems. These problems are solved by an explicit level set topology optimization framework that uses the extended finite element method to predict physical responses. This study shows that the choice of a rule to resolve topological features can result in drastically different final geometries. However, for the problems studied in this paper, the performances of the optimized design do not differ.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.