2015
DOI: 10.1007/s00158-015-1229-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Level set topology optimization of stationary fluid-structure interaction problems

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
45
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 58 publications
(45 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
0
45
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Note that this approach restricts the number an element edge can be intersected by the fluid-solid interface to at most one. Therefore, the geometry resolution is limited by the size of an XFEM element, and convergence issues have been observed if sub-element-size features tend to emerge in the optimization process [24].…”
Section: Parametrization Of the Level Set Functionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Note that this approach restricts the number an element edge can be intersected by the fluid-solid interface to at most one. Therefore, the geometry resolution is limited by the size of an XFEM element, and convergence issues have been observed if sub-element-size features tend to emerge in the optimization process [24].…”
Section: Parametrization Of the Level Set Functionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…External and internal phase boundaries are described implicitly by the zero level set isosurfaces of a Level Set Function (LSF), φ (x), where x is the position vector [18,19,20]. LSMs are well-suited for topology optimization because smooth differentiable changes in the LSFs lead to changes in the topology of the body, such as holes merging or splitting [21,22,23]; however, these changes may lead to discontinuities in the physical response [24].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Better representations at the cost of a more involved implementations are achieved by remeshing or discontinuous enrichments like those provided by the extended FEM . For the particular case of design‐dependent loads, this last alternative was used in the works of Jenkins and Maute (fluid‐solid interaction) and Coffin and Maute (thermal conduction problems).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Topology optimisation for fluid systems began with the treatment of Stokes flow by Borrvall and Petersson [11] and has since been applied to Navier-Stokes flow [12], as well as passive transport problems [13,14], reactive flows [15], transient flows [16,17,18], fluid-structure interaction [19,20], amongst many others. The extension of topology optimisation to turbulent fluid flow is still in its infancy [21,22].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%