An Application of Bi-Directional Evolutionary Structural Optimisation for Optimising Energy Absorbing Structures Using a Material Damage Model


Article Preview

The Bi-directional Evolutionary Structural Optimisation (BESO) method is a numerical topology optimisation method developed for use in finite element analysis. This paper presents a particular application of the BESO method to optimise the energy absorbing capability of metallic structures. The optimisation objective is to evolve a structural geometry of minimum mass while ensuring that the kinetic energy of an impacting projectile is reduced to a level which prevents perforation. Individual elements in a finite element mesh are deleted when a prescribed damage criterion is exceeded. An energy absorbing structure subjected to projectile impact will fail once the level of damage results in a critical perforation size. It is therefore necessary to constrain an optimisation algorithm from producing such candidate solutions. An algorithm to detect perforation was implemented within a BESO framework which incorporated a ductile material damage model.



Edited by:

Grant P. Steven, Qing Li and Zhongpu (Leo) Zhang




D. Stojanov et al., "An Application of Bi-Directional Evolutionary Structural Optimisation for Optimising Energy Absorbing Structures Using a Material Damage Model", Applied Mechanics and Materials, Vol. 553, pp. 836-841, 2014

Online since:

May 2014




[1] G. Lu and T. Yu. Energy Absorption of Structures and Materials. Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge, UK, (2003).

[2] C.B.W. Pedersen. Topology optimization design of crushed 2d-frames for desired energy absorption history. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 25(5-6): 368–382, (2003).


[3] M. Avalle, G. Chiandussi, and G. Belingardi. Design optimization by response surface methodology: application to crashworthiness design of vehicle structures. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 24(4): 325–332, (2002).


[4] R. Lust. Structural optimization with crashworthiness constraints. Structural optimization, 4(2): 85–89, (1992).


[5] G.H. Yoon and Y.Y. Kim. Topology optimization of material-nonlinear continuum structures by the element connectivity parameterization. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 69(10): 2196–2218, (2007).


[6] X Huang, Y M Xie, and G Lu. Topology optimization of energy-absorbing structures. International Journal of Crashworthiness, 12(6): 663-675, (2007).


[7] G.I.N. Rozvany, M. Zhou, and T. Birker. Generalized shape optimization without homogenization. Structural optimization, 4(3-4): 250–252, (1992).


[8] X. Huang, Y.M. Xie, and M.C. Burry. A new algorithm for Bi-Directional Evolutionary Structural Optimization. JSME international journal. Series C, Mechanical systems, machine elements and manufacturing, 49(4): 1091-1099, Dec (2006).


[9] O.M. Querin. Evolutionary structural optimisation: Stress based formulation and implementation, (1997).

[10] G.I.N. Rozvany, O.M. Querin, Z. Gaspar, and V. Pomezanski. Extended optimality in topology design. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 24(3): 257–261, (2002).


[11] Dassault Systèmes. Abaqus Analysis User's Manual, Version 6. 11, (2011).

[12] G.R. Johnson and W.H. Cook. A constitutive model and data for metals subjected to large strains, high strain rates and high temperatures. In Proc. 7th International Symposium on Ballistics, pages 541–547, The Hague, The Netherlands, April (1983).

[13] G.R. Johnson and W.H. Cook. Fracture characteristics of three metals subjected to various strains, strain rates, temperatures and pressures. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 21(1): 31-48, (1985).


[14] G. Kay, D. Goto, and R. Couch. Statistical testing and material model characterization of aluminum and titanium for transport airplane rotor burst fragment shielding. Technical Report DOT/FAA/AR-07/26, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, California, August (2007).

Fetching data from Crossref.
This may take some time to load.