Boosting the Concept of Topography Optimized Parts

Boosting the ConceptBoosting the Conceptof Topography Optimized Partsof Topography Optimized Parts

Rodrigo BENEVIDESRodrigo BENEVIDESSimulation EngineerSimulation EngineerValeo Powertrain Thermal Systems Valeo Powertrain Thermal Systems –– La VerriLa Verrièère (France)re (France)

Altair HTC Congress – November 2011

II

The Valeo Group

New Organization� Powertrain Systems

� Comfort and Driving Assistance Systems

� Visibility Systems

� Thermal Systems– Climate Control

– Powertrain Thermal Systems

– Compressors

– Front-End Module

Global Presence

Climate Control Compressors Front-End ModulePowertrainThermal Systems

II

Introduction

Motivation� Reducing time to market = being competitive

Objective� To decrease the product development time

How� Implementing structural optimization simulation and adapt its

usage to the company teams structure

� Making methodologies to apply the best practices

Object of this Study� Water Charger Air Cooled part made of a constant thickness

aluminum plate

II

Simulation Model

Constrained Edges

Internal Pressure

Constant Thickness

Zone of Allowable Changes

Water Charger Air Cooled

Stress Criterion < Fatigue limit (called F in this presentation)

II

2.07 F

Trial & Error Process

ProductConcept

TraditionalSimulation

OK!Approved?YESYES

NONO

1.10 F

Additional Solution : .Increase the ThicknessIncrease the Thickness

... $ $ $ $ $ $ .

-47%

InitialInitialDesignDesign After TrialAfter Trial

and Errorand Error

FatigueLimit (F)

many loopsmany loops

x F x F

II

Classical Optimization Process


OK!Approved?YESYES

NONO

InitialConcept

OptimizationSimulation

GeometryInterpretation

2.07 F

0.86 F

FatigueLimit Problem is : .

Optimization Shape Optimization Shape Result Hard to InterpretResult Hard to Interpret

-59%

InitialInitialDesignDesign

ClassicalClassicalOptimizationOptimization

some loopssome loops

x F x F

II

Topography Optimization Result

Designer has difficulty to interpret the shape got directly from the optimization

Mesh treatment is needed to deliver a geometry easier to be interpreted.

II

Interpretation by OSSmooth

OriginalOriginalMeshMesh

AfterAfterOSSmoothOSSmooth

II

Interpretation by Shell Offset

OriginalOriginal

1x Offset procedure1x Offset procedure



3) Offset positive

4) Offset negative

1) Half thicknessSteps :

2) CFD corners

II

x F x F x Fx F

Tested Mesh Treatment

OSSmoothOSSmooth OSSmooth + OSSmooth + Shell OffsetShell Offset

Shell OffsetShell OffsetNo treatmentNo treatment

0.78 F

1.13 F

+ 42%+ 42% + 11%+ 11%-- 2%2%0.80 F

0.88 F

II


Optimization Process with Mesh Treatment

InitialConcept


OK!Approved?OptimizationSimulation

GeometryInterpretation

MeshTreatment

2.07 F

0.85F

0.82F

FatigueLimit (F)

-59%

-61%

TreatedTreatedMeshMesh

FinalFinalDesign AidedDesign Aided

by Treated Meshby Treated Mesh

x F

x Fx F

II

FinalFinalDesign AidedDesign Aided

by Treated Meshby Treated Mesh

Trial & ErrorTrial & ErrorDesignDesign

Final Comparison


Max Stress = 2.07 F

Max Stress = 1.10 FAbove Stress LimitTime = 12 days

Max Stress = 0.82 FTime = 3 days

–– 61% in Stress61% in Stress



4 times faster4 times faster

II

Conclusion

Trial and Error way of designing was time consuming and did not lead to good results.

The mesh treatment made the geometry interpretation easier than by using the result got directly from t he optimization iteration.

In this study, treating the mesh by Offsets resulte d in lower stress comparing to the OSSmooth method.

Teams must work together. In this process, some additional tasks can be implemented, but in the end the global time of the product development is reduced, and the quality improved.

Boosting the Concept of Topography Optimized Parts

Technology

Transcript of Boosting the Concept of Topography Optimized Parts