Simulation Shape optimization

[Anonymous]

Hi everybody,

I'm still a student working on my these. I'm trying to use Fusion 360 Ultimate in oorder to make a topology optimization of a piece like this.This is the initial piece

It has one target (the central body, that has to be optimized) and two parts: the back rectangle fixed and the end part where I will put a force. 

About constraints, i'm not sure that i did the right choise. My piece as to be fixed on the back part (which is actually a support part) with four bolts and can't move from there. The piece that i will 3d print is the central body and the top surface where i will put a force.

I made two simulations, one with 4 bolts in the holes and the back surface fixed, with conctact separetion between the central body and the back rectangle (included the holes surfaces) and bounded between all the other surfaces.

Separation conctacts between the two surfaces and also the four cilinders5 fixed constraints

The second simulation was made with 5 constraints fixed: one on the back surface as the previous one and 4 on the holes surface beetween the central body and the back rectangle.One fixed constraint and the four bolts

I obteined two differents results and I would like to know which one is the good one. And if there is something wrong on my choises.

Thank's a lot.

F. Piccatto

[innovatenate · Accepted solution]

I'm not sure what the benefit of the bolted connections and base plate is in this case, could elaborate on that?

Just as an example, I went through the process of running a shape optimization on a similar looking part. To make it easier, I removed the bolted contacts and the additional base plate from the simulation. This removed the need to have the base plate altogether to perform a shape optimization on this design.

I preserved the geometry for the bolt holes, and applied a load  (with symmetry plane) to run a shape optimization.

I used the promote command to get a Mesh Body of the results.

I then remodeled the component to look more like my mesh results. 

And then ran a Static Stress Simulation to verify.

I'm wondering if this process might be a bit easier to use instead. I've attached to sample files to look through if you're curious. 

I hope it helps.

[Anonymous]

Thank you very much Nathan, 

your answer was very helpful. I've thought to do like you suggested but I was not sre about the suppression of the bolts. 

Now my question is: when do we have to use the bolts? In my case I will have the 3D printed piece that is exactly what you kept in your example and the support metal part where i will only fix the piece inorder to test it.

Why shouldn't I consider it on my design? And isn't that an error to not consider the conctacts and the bolts? 

I also have an other question about the structural constraints parts; during my test the base plate and the surface of the bracket will not be able to move. The four hole and the bolts will fix the bracket to the base metal plate. Should I consider the constraints like this: 

Five structural constraints in order to complitly fix the bracket. But since the result with teh four hole structural constraints is different:

 

I'm not sure that The 5 locks solution is the correct one. 

I have attached the file if you want to see the project.

Thank you in advance for your kind help.

Federica Piccatto