Nisa Pro Shape

Disclaimer
CRANES
SOFTWARE,
INC.
MAKES
NO
WARRANTY
OR
REPRESENTATIONS IN CONNECTION WITH NISA/HEAT, NISA/EMAG,
NISA/ROTOR, NISA/CIVIL, NISA II, DISPLAY III/IV, NISA-COMPOSITE,
ENDURE, NISAOPT, FEAP, NISA/3D-FLUID, DYMES, OR ANY OTHER
SOFTWARE PROGRAM OF CRANES SOFTWARE, INC. (HEREINAFTER
REFERRED TO AS NISA/DISPLAY SOFTWARE), EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING ANY IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. CRANES SOFTWARE, INC.
MAKES NO WARRANTY AND ASSUMES NO LIABILITY FOR THE NISA/
DISPLAY SOFTWARE. CRANES SOFTWARE, INC. ASSUMES NO
RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE USE OF THE PROGRAMS OR FOR THE
ACCURACY OR VALIDITY OF ANY RESULTS OBTAINED FROM THE
NISA/DISPLAY SOFTWARE. CRANES SOFTWARE, INC. SHALL NOT BE
LIABLE FOR LOSS OF PROFIT, LOSS OF BUSINESS, OR OTHER
FINANCIAL LOSS WHICH MAY BE CAUSED DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY
BY THE NISA/DISPLAY SOFTWARE, WHEN USED FOR ANY PURPOSE OR
USE, OR DUE TO ANY DEFECT OR DEFICIENCY THEREIN.
Any questions relating to the use or interpretation of the SOFTWARE or their
operation should be directed to:
Cranes Software, Inc.
1607 E. Big Beaver Road, Suite 250
Troy, MI, 48083, USA
Tel: (248) 689-0077
Fax: (248) 689-7479
NOTICE FOR U.S. GOVERNMENT USERS ONLY: RESTRICTED RIGHTS
LEGEND.
Use, duplication or disclosure by the Government is subject to restrictions as set
forth in subparagraph (c)(1)(ii) of the Rights in Technical Data and Computer
Software clause at DFARS 252.227-7013.
NISA, DISPLAY III/IV, ENDURE, NISAOPT, FEAP, NISA/3D-FLUID, NISA/

EMAG, NISA/HEAT, NISA/ROTOR, NISA/CIVIL and DYMES are registered
trademarks of Cranes Software, Inc.
Copyright 2005-2007 by the Cranes Software, Inc. 1607 E. Big Beaver Road,
Suite 250, Troy, Michigan 48083, U.S.A.
All rights reserved. No part of this manual may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval
system, or transmitted in any way without the prior authorization of Cranes
Software, Inc.
iii
Table of Contents
Preface - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - vi
Version 15.0 New Features - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - viii
1. Introduction - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1.1
1.1 General - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -1.1
1.2 Introduction to Version 91.0 - - - - - - - - - - - - -1.3
2. Theoretical Overview and Practical
Considerations - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2.1
2.1 Shape Optimization - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2.1
2.2 Sensitivity Analysis - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2.6
3. Data Input Files - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3.1
3.1 NISA II Analysis Data Input File - - - - - - - - - -3.2
3.2 Shape Optimization Data Input File - - - - - - - -3.5
3.2.1 Control Commands - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3.7
3.2.2 Problem Title - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3.15
3.2.3 Symmetry/Anti-Symmetry Plane Definitions - 3.15
3.2.4 Stress Response Quantities or Constraints - - - 3.17
3.2.5 Displacement Response Quantities or
Constraints - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3.20
3.2.6 Stiffness Constraints - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3.23
3.2.7 Fabricational Constraints - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3.24
3.2.8 Variable Linking (Element Linking) - - - - - - - 3.26
3.2.9 Material Unit Costs - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3.31
3.2.10 Regions for Sensitivity Information - - - - - - 3.32
iv
3.2.11 Ending the Optimization Data Input File - - -3.33
3.3 Batch File - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3.34

4. Output Files - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4.1
A. Users Manual for DIVELM - - - - - - - - - - - - - A.1
B. Example Problems - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.1
B.1 Simply Supported Panel in Plane Stress - - - - - B.3
B.2 Cantilever panel in plane stress with two load
cases - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.21
B.3 Square panel in plane stress with displacement constraints - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.31
B.4 Solid Cantilever with Tip Loading - - - - - - - B.41
B.5 Solid Cantilever Under two Load Cases - - - - B.55
B.6 Plate in Bending with Displacement
Constraint - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.70
B.7 Panel with Uniform Edge Loads - - - - - - - - - B.85
B.8 Rectangular Panel with Opening--Response Sensitivity
Analysis - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.95
B.9 DIVELM Example Problem - - - - - - - - - - - B.105
B.10 Tunnel Cross-Section in Plane-strain - - - - B.120
Preface
You have with you the latest version of NISA - A standard in Finite Element
Analysis. NISA is one of the few, commercially available, proven and robust
Finite Element Analysis software that has enjoyed a long-standing presence in
the arena of engineering analysis and design. Today it is the result of more than
three decades of innovation and dedication of highly skilled scientists, technology architects and software engineers. As a result, generations of scientists,
engineers and researchers have come to depend on NISA to solve their most
complex engineering problems.
NISA which has a heritage of more than 30 years, changed hands from EMRC,
to Cranes Software, Inc. in July of 2005. Cranes Software, Inc is a wholly
owned subsidiary of Cranes Software International Limited - a global software
products and solutions provider. With this change comes an induction of fresh
talent and resources which is poised to take NISA to a new level in the world of
FEA. NISA Version 15.0 is the achievement of a great development team
which has worked rigorously for the past year in accordance to the best in breed
software development life cycle management practices. As manuals are very
important to us, a lot of thought has gone into the design and content of the
manuals. These have been totally revamped as per the new features and look of
the product. New additions to the various modules have been consolidated and
presented in an integrated manner.
The NISA Shell is now more appropriately called Application Launcher. The
new application launcher makes selecting modules, input/ output files, analysis
type and various CAD/FEA translators a simple task. Significant updates and
error correction have been made to individual modules of the NISA suite of
programs.
vii
Version 15.0 New Features
NISA II: Improved iterative and sparse matrix equation solvers; end release for
pipe and elbow element; General spring element (NKTP=38) upgraded to a
general spring and damper element; facility to input user element stiffness,
mass, and damping matrices; rigid link forces output for linear transient
dynamic analysis; ability to post process larger problems involving multiple
load cases.
ADVANCED DYNAMICS: Multiple Support Excitation, for shock spectrum
analysis to handle non-uniform support excitations. This feature also includes
seven modal summation rules namely ABS, SRSS, CQC, Grouping Method,
Ten percent Method, Double Sum Method, and with & without Missing Mass;
Centroidal Stresses, Stress Resultants at Element Centroid and Base Shear
computation for Shock Spectrum Analysis.
DYSPAN: Spectrum compatible Power Spectral Density generation.
ENDURE: Improved functionality of features in Shell; expansion of crack
propagation configurations; Automatic identification of EDI path; Automatic
mesh generation for plate, pipe, and elbow with different types of cracks; and
fatigue initiation theory based on the MANSON approach.
DISPLAY III: Pre & post processing support new features of NISA modules.
In addition to this, general features are: Viewing the input function such as time
amplitude, spectra etc. as a graph; Realistic plot for 3-D General Beam, 3-D
Straight pipe, 3-D Elbow elements (NKTP=48); Automatic selection of Master
and Slave node for Rigid links; Post processing of Non-linear Beam element
(NKTP 39) stresses; Post processing of 3-D beam results such as - filtering of
the results and report generation, reporting maximum stresses and ASME ratios
at critical points across section; Option to plot the XY points in the graph with-
viii
out the connecting lines; Area under the curve with respect to X-Axis; History
plot for nonlinear results for external results; Reading/ Writing of Multiple
External results for linear and nonlinear static analyses; Viewing results for
complete model using Symmetry for external results; Variation of stress triaxiality along a line of nodes; Crack mouth opening displacement graph; Crack
opening area calculation; facility to integrate fluid quantities such as pressure,
temperature on surface.
DISPLAY IV: Pre & post processing support new features of NISA modules.
Key additional features in DISPLAY IV are: Enhancement of Dialog boxes,
accelerator keys. XP style file open dialog; enhancement of Entity-Status view
in the workspace to facilitate the deletion of a single entity or the entire group
using mouse right click or by using Delete key on the keyboard; a wizard that
helps navigate analysis data.
Up-gradation of translators such as SAT2NEU translator to support ACIS R16
geometry kernel; Solid Works translator S/W 2007; geometric import from
IGES 5.3 version.
EMAG: 3D-Magnetodynamic analysis (harmonics) and 3D Transient Magnetic analysis capabilities using magnetic vector potential and electric scalar
potential (with and without massive conductors).
NISA/HEAT3 and 3DFLUID: Heat Flux computation and Printing of Heat
Balance Sheet, Sparse Matrix Equation Solver has been implemented; printing
of Local Reynolds and Peclet numbers.
NISA/CIVIL: Revised code of practice conforming to ACI 318 -2005, BS
8110-1997, BS 5950-1:2000 and LRFD 2002 for concrete and steel designs,
Module to design pipes conforming to ASME-NB, NC & ND codes is now part
of NISA/CIVIL. More emphasis is given to produce good structural design
drawings of RCC slabs, Beams, Columns, Footings, & structural steel drawings, Inclusion of concrete and steel quantities in structural drawings, customized design report generation in ASCII, MS-Word and MS-Excel formats,
stress resultants, contours for shell elements, reinforcement contouring for shell
elements, combined isolated footings for expansion joint columns, improved
realistic plots, standard animation feature for all Stress Resultants and Eigen
Modes, animation of Color Contours.
ix
Chapter
1
Introduction
1.1
General
The efforts at NISA aimed at developing high quality software for industrial
applications in optimum structural design have resulted in the NISAOPT family of
programs SECOPT, STROPT and SHAPE. These programs are intended to cover
major applications in optimum structural design:
-
SECOPT is for the optimization of beam cross-sections.
STROPT is for the optimization of structures of fixed shape.
SHAPE is for the shape optimization of two and three dimensional continuum structures.
Both STROPT and SHAPE are finite element programs integrated with NISA II,
which is utilized as the main analysis module. Therefore they are supported by the
same array of pre- and post-processors and database interfaces as NISA II.
Currently SHAPE offers the following capabilities:
Shape optimization of large scale solid, shell, or planar structures for linear
response under multiple cases of static loading, without the need for boundary parameterization.
Sensitivity analysis of structural response as a separate option.
Two major modes of shape optimization, one mode limiting the shape variation to the existing boundaries, the other allowing for new boundaries to be
created.
1-1
General
A wide selection of stress and displacement constraints with practically no

limit on the number of constraints to be prescribed.
Specification of fabricational constraints, imposed by freezing certain parts of

the design at the outset.
Variable linking to enhance solution quality and speed as well as user control
on solution.
A powerful optimization method based on Lagrange multipliers and optimality criteria.
A convenient direct restart capability based on data input files generated for
each design improvement.
In addition, SHAPE takes full advantage of the following features of NISA II:
The wavefront solution method for the equilibrium equations.
The wavefront minimization option.
Use of the NISA II data input file for the finite element model description.
The DISPLAY II or III pre- and post-processors.
It is anticipated that future versions of SHAPE will be able to handle given value
constraints as well as automatic re-meshing.
The following sections provide a description of the program, and of the input and
output files associated with the program. DIVELM, the companion program to
SHAPE, used for converting brick finite element models into tetrahedron finite
element models, is described in Appendix A. Finally some example problems,
demonstrating the use of the program and interpretation of results, are presented.
1-2
Introduction
1.2
Introduction to Version 91.0

With the release of SHAPE Version 91.0, a substantial number of additions and
enhancements to the program have been made. The reliability of the program has
also been increased further by new error checks as well as necessary bug fixes. The
improvements, which cover both theoretical and practical fronts, are listed below:
1. The following elements are now also available for shape optimization and sensitivity analysis (see Section 3.1):
-
the triangular plane-strain element (NISA II element type NKTP=2,

NORDR=10)
the triangular axisymmetric solid element (NISA II element type

NKTP=3, NORDR=10)
2. The following (in addition to total material volume) may also be specified by
the user as objective functions to be minimized (see Section 3.2.1 1):
-
total material mass: This will be based on material mass densities

described with the finite element model.
total material cost: Each cost quantity may be defined per unit volume or
per unit mass, whichever is appropriate for the related material.
As a result, structures made up of different materials can be optimized more
accurately.
3. Two types of variable linking have been introduced (see Section 3.2.8) to
improve
-
the manufacturability of shapes to be obtained as a result of optimization.
the speed of solution.
4. The user can now specify hydrostatic "follower" pressure that will move
together with the changing boundaries, while at the same time acting normal to
the boundary (See Note 3 in Section 7.3.4 (*PRESSURE) of the NISA II
Users Manual, and also Note (g) in Section 3.1 of this manual).
1-3
5. Fabricational constraints can be entered much more easily for complex systems, simply by specifying the material ID numbers (See Section 3.2.7) for
regions to be frozen, if these regions carry separate material ID numbers. The
same new facility is also applicable to sensitivity analysis if the user has to
define one or more regions of the structure (See Section 3.2.10) from which
the sensitivity coefficients are requested.
6. The integrity of the finite element model with respect to topological errors that
cause hinge nodes or hinge edges is checked before the start of optimization,
and a complete list of any problem spots is given.
7. Active or critical constraints are now identified externally at each stage during
optimization. Thus, the user can follow these by means of the log file or the
summary file.
8. If the initial design is not feasible and no feasible design can be found within
the first design step, the program will still create updated data input files (i.e.
finite element model file and optimization file) for any improvements to the
initial design. Re-starting the job with the best improvement may eventually
lead to a feasible and optimized design (see Example Problem
9. Where appropriate, the program will detect elements with negative volume
(due to incorrect nodal incidence) and report these to the user before stopping.
10. Boundary smoothing will now take into consideration also the original boundaries related to the starting shape so that more realistic smoothing is achieved.
Thus, remaining original boundaries will be smoothed only at their borders.
An option to override this facility is also available. (Section 3.2.1 1)
11. SHAPE now supports also the *G2 data group of NISA II. This data is written
out in *LCSYS format into the files created by the program.
12. Some comments in the output files have been improved.
13. DIVELM now supports also the *G2 and *MPCEQN data groups of NISA II
(see Appendix A).
14. SHAPE 91.0 and DIVELM 91.0 are compatible with NISA II 91.0.
15. The following bugs have been fixed in the new version.
1-4
Introduction
- Excessive memory and disk space requirement for some problems with
multiple load cases.(In the 90.0 version only, of latest update date
08.30.90).
- Failure to optimize some types of intersecting shell problems.
- Failure at stress constraint evaluation for some problems with accessory
beam elements.
- The writing of multipoint constraint (MPC) data into the created NISA II
data input files.
- The writing of rotational acceleration and coordinate shift data into the
created NISA II data input files.
- Element serial numbers for non-existent elements with NKTP = 0,
NORDR = 0 that were written out in the *ELTYPE data group of the
NISA II data input files generated during optimization, or by DIVELM.
1-5
1.3

Since the release of SHAPE Version 89.0 in September 1989, practical
requirements have necessitated an intermediate Version 89.12 which was released
in limited numbers in order to fulfill immediate demand with an improved
program. The manual for Version 89.0 is also applicable to SHAPE Version 89.12,
although 89.12 has some added capabilities which are also in Version 90.0 and are
described in this manual.
As this manual should be received by the user together with SHAPE Version 90.0,
the differences between Version 90.0 and 89.0 will be described here. A major
enhancement to the program is the addition of the user interface for sensitivity
analysis of structural response, and this is described in detail elsewhere in the
manual.
The new capabilities and improvements are as follows:
1. SHAPE Version 90.0 is compatible with NISA II Version 90.0, thus incorporating various improvements in NISA II related to linear static analysis. (Version 89.12 was compatible with NISA 89.0 and Version 89.0 was compatible
with NISA 88.7)
2. SHAPE now has a new capability whereby users can ask for and output structural response sensitivity analysis results, either in list form into the ASCII
output file, and/or in binary form into the post-processing file for use with the
DISPLAY post-processor, with a summary in the ASCII output file. This capability is very easy to use and requires only a few command lines to activate. It
is also designed to be very flexible in order to fit user requirements. In previous versions sensitivity analysis was done only during an optimization run and
the results were not available to the user.
3. Sensitivity analysis is now fully supported for rotated local displacement coordinate systems as well.Therefore one can constrain also:
(a)
displacements at nodes with rotated local displacement coordinate systems (**)
(b)
the stresses in elements which have nodes that have rotated local displacement coordinate systems.
1-6
Introduction
4. Both SHAPE and DIVELM now support *LCSYSTEM data group when writing out NISA II type input data files. As a result, rotated local displacement
coordinate systems are now fully supported by SHAPE.
5. Users can now differentiate among the principal stresses when specifying
stress constraints. Previously one could constrain only the principal stress with
the highest absolute value.
(**)Version 89.0 had this capability also, but it was not fully tested.
6. Users can now impose different limits on the negative and positive values of
the constrained response quantities (stress and displacement) where applicable. Previous versions allowed limits only on the maximum absolute values of
the response quantities (this option is still available).
7. SHAPE can now also treat load cases composed of load case combinations,
and constraints on the response for these combined load cases.
8. Users may now associate a random, non-repeated, load case ID number with
each load case. Otherwise the program will assign load case ID numbers in the
same sequence as load case appearance, starting with 1.Constraints are defined
for load case ID numbers.
9. Model errors or inconsistencies may cause failure in SHAPE due to the existence or eventual creation of hinge edges and/or hinge nodes which cannot be
removed by the program. To guide the user to the problem areas, SHAPE will
now output a list of these edges and/or nodes at the time of failure. Most of
these model errors are of the type that will not be obvious during a linear analysis (e.g. topology errors) or even with a pre- or post processor, unless specific
information is available. Typical model errors or inconsistencies that lead to
this are identified in the manual in Sections 3.1, 3.2.1 1, and 3.2.3.
10. Handling of nodes on symmetry planes has been improved in terms of tolerance requirements by giving the user the option of specifying this tolerance.
The program will also warn the user in most cases of deficient symmetry
boundary conditions.
11. SHAPE will prevent the overwriting of either of the two input files if, when
naming the output file, the user mistakenly specifies the same (path)name as
one of the two input files. This protection may not be available or necessary on
some computers.
1-7
12. Program will now automatically name the scratch files and the user does not
need to enter a scratch file code.
13. Speed of the program has been increased by about 15-20% in terms of the cpu
time, due to improved file management and algorithmic improvements.
14. Several bugs have been corrected, including an important one that may have
caused failure when reaction computation is specified for an optimization run
that has displacement constraints (This can be circumvented on Version 89.0
and earlier by removing the reaction computation requirement for optimization
runs).
15. In DIVELM, the handling of the pressure load distribution as elements are
converted from bricks and wedges to tetrahedra has been improved. DIVELM
now supports linear variation of pressure for 8 and 6 noded solids and constant
pressure for 20 and 14 noded solids.
16. The pressure data is now output from DIVELM in *PRESSURE format rather
than the older *L1 format. Other modifications are described in the manual as
appropriate for the related input. As usual, the input is handled in an upward
compatible manner. SHAPE will still read in any *L1 data.
1-8
Introduction
1.4

This version of the SHAPE optimization program comes with improved theory as
well as algorithm designed to yield more accurate solutions to the shape
optimization problem. As with the earlier versions, it is being released only after
very intensive numerical testing to ensure quality and reliability.
With this release, SHAPE is now able to treat a wider variety of problems, and is
able to address certain special extreme cases previous versions were not able to
deal with.
The major enhancements may be itemized as follows:
1. The algorithm has been improved substantially to reflect the theoretical

advances achieved. Therefore, it is now possible to get closer to the global
optimum solution.
2. Some problems encountered with implicit symmetry in the earlier versions
have been resolved satisfactorily and accurately. SHAPE will now almost
always generate perfectly or very close to symmetrical results for symmetrical
problems. Rare exceptions may still occur due to use of very small elements or
other currently insurmountable numerical difficulties (e.g. lack of perfect symmetry in the nodal coordinate input). Variable linking, to be introduced at a
later date, will eliminate any remaining exceptions.
3. Accessory elements such as bars, beams, point masses and springs can now be
used along with the continuum elements in the finite element model. These
elements do not undergo design variation currently, nor may stress constraints
be imposed on them.
4. Important improvements have been accomplished related to the topological
considerations that preserve the integrity of the structure.
5. The program is now able to achieve a higher computational speed per iteration
while the number of iterations still remains largely problem dependent.
6. Optimum design of shells is now more reliable for the solution of intersecting
shell structures.
7. Shell boundary smoothing has been improved to a satisfactory level.
1-9
8. The creation of boundary smoothed files is now left to the discretion of the
user through a newly available option.
9. The updated optimization input files output with every design improvement
are now in much more compact format.
10. The concept of efficiency has been relaxed slightly under certain conditions in
order to increase the speed of solution without loss in quality within the optimality criteria solution stage.
11. Bug fixes.
1-10
Chapter
2
Theoretical Overview and Practical
Considerations
2.1
Shape Optimization
SHAPE uses the Lagrange multiplier formulation to generate what are generally
known as the optimality criteria expressions. Constraints on structural response
quantities, such as nodal displacements and element stresses, can be written in the
form necessary to set up these expressions, by means of sensitivity analysis. The
relations employed by SHAPE for this purpose are exact at the design they are
computed. Thus, each constrained response quantity ri can be represented exactly
in terms of the element contributions by:
n
r i = b ij
j =1
(2.1)
where n is the number of elements in the model. In terms of the element volumes
vj,which are the implicit design variables, one can write ri as (see also Section 2.2,
Equation 2.10):
n c ij
r i = ----v
j =1 j
The total material volume of the structure being given by
2-1
(2.2)
Shape Optimization
n
V= vj
j=1
(2.3)
and the constraints being defined as

r i ri
i = 1, , m
(2.4)
the Lagrangian can be set up as below:

T
L = V+ f

(2.5)
where
n
1
-----=
fi=
r i j =
c ij
------ 1
v
1 j
(2.6)
and i is a Lagrange multiplier associated with the ith constraint such that the
second term in Equation 2.4 vanishes. The optimality criteria expressions are then
obtained by setting
L
----- - = 0
v
(2.7)
where 0 is a vector of zero values.
At a given design, the optimality criteria expressions, supplemented by the

condition that at a solution
m
=
i vj
i =1 j =1
2-2
(2.8)
Theoretical Overview and Practical Considerations
(where m is the total number of contraints), can be posed as an optimization subproblem and solved for a selected set of "active" constraints to obtain a new design.
It should be noted that for "passive" constraints the Lagrange multipliers would be
zero. SHAPE performs this selection automatically. Also, based on the quality of
the new design, measured particularly in terms of its efficiency, SHAPE decides on
whether to update the active set and re-solve the optimality criteria problem or to
accept the design and continue into the next stage of optimization. In general,
several steps of active set updating and re-design may be necessary at this stage.
All shape changes in this stage are obtained by discretizing the solution into 0-1
decisions and appropriately removing elements.
The next stage involves a series of intermediate designs based on a sensitivity
approach similar to that used in obtaining the optimality criteria. The intermediate
designs are aimed at increasing the efficiency of the design to try and insure that
the optimum design will be a subset of the most efficient design obtained in this
stage. In SHAPE, the measure of efficiency is the "virtual volume" obtained as the
ratio of the material volume to the most critical factor (limiting value of response/
actual value of response) to the constraint surface. Shape optimization without due
regard for efficiency quickly embeds the design at an inferior local optimum. Thus,
at this stage, some of the previously removed elements are restored to the structure
based on the results of sensitivity analysis.
This iterative intermediate design stage ends when the program selects one of the
generated designs as the most efficient design. This completes one design step.
The next design step is a repetition of the outlined procedure, starting with this
most efficient design from the last design step.
The optimization process will continue until the user specified total number of
iterations or design steps (see Section 3.2.1 for definitions) is satisfied. Execution
will end earlier if the program is not able to improve upon the last most efficient
design generated.
If the number of iterations prescribed is found to be insufficient after the process
ends, it is possible to restart the process from the last most efficient design found
by the program (see Section 4: Output Files). At least one design step must have
been completed for this purpose, unless the user wishes to restart from an available
feasible design of lower efficiency.
2-3
Shape Optimization
One of the important and user friendly features of SHAPE is that no boundary
parameterization of the structure is required for shape optimization. With boundary
parameterization, even relatively small design changes may create substantial
distortion of elements, necessitating frequent re-meshing of the model.
Instead, SHAPE is designed to optimize structures modeled by a fine mesh of
small and simple elements. Thus, over a given region, the combined effect of these
small elements over that region simulates a larger more sophisticated element, with
an important advantage in terms of shape optimization: the element shape
manipulation is now simplified into decisions regarding the conservation or
deletion of elements.
With this approach, very large design changes may be accomplished without the
need for any refinement of the finite element mesh, while always retaining
elements with excellent aspect ratios. On the other hand, the generated designs may
be expected to have a surface roughness of the order of the size of an element. With
small elements, the relative error due to this generally will be small. In any case,
bearing in mind also the highly nonlinear and discontinuous nature of the problem,
the user should not treat the computed design as the blueprint for the application
design, but rather should use it more as a guide to the final design. It is strongly
recommended that an application design be created based on the optimized shape,
modeled perhaps with more sophisticated finite elements and re-analyzed, and
tested for any further modifications that may be necessary. Upon request by the
user, SHAPE creates and outputs boundary smoothed design files which may be
used as guides to the application designs.
In some cases, after extensive optimization of a structure, SHAPE may stop
execution not because the optimum design has been reached, but because it is not
possible to proceed any further with the remaining finite element mesh. If further
optimization is required, the latest most efficient design (as will be indicated by
SHAPE) should be conservatively re-modeled with a refined finite element mesh
and re-submitted for shape optimization. One should note that there will be some
difference between the computed responses for the refined and unrefined designs
with the response for the refined mesh being more accurate.
Since, with the current version of the program, the program is not able to add
material beyond the set presented by the initial design, it is good practice to start
2-4
Theoretical Overview and Practical Considerations
out with a feasible design (a design envelope) that is believed to encompass the
optimum design.
SHAPE can be applied in one of two major modes:
1.
The general shape optimization mode (default)

(BOUND = OFF, see Section 3.2.1)
2.
The boundary shape optimization mode

(BOUND = ON, see Section 3.2.1)
In the first mode, material may be removed from anywhere in the structure (except
for regions frozen by the user). Thus, holes and cutouts may form and expand
within the structure. This first mode may be especially useful in determining a
basic shape for a new system. Due to the high rate of modification that takes place
in this mode, relatively small inaccuracies in the shape may be encountered.
If or when the basic shape of the system is well known or when much of the design
is already frozen by the user/designer, it may be more appropriate to use the second
mode of shape optimization which allows for shape variation only on the original
boundaries, i.e., without creating new boundaries. It should be noted that cutouts
may still form in solids with this mode, however, cavities (internal holes) will not.
In addition to the two major modes of shape optimization, the user also has a
choice regarding whether any breaks should be allowed to take place. As a default,
such breaks are allowed, which makes it likely that unnecessary ribs or bars will
break off and be removed. At times, this may also create an important change in the
stress distribution. Setting the break option off will prevent any breaks from
occurring.
2-5
Sensitivity Analysis
2.2
Sensitivity Analysis
A facility in the form of a user interface allows SHAPE to be used for sensitivity
analysis only, as an alternative to the shape optimization capacity. With this facility,
SHAPE can perform sensitivity analysis for stress and displacement response
quantities prescribed by the user, process the results, and make them available
either in ASCII or binary format for browsing or for post-processing as desired.
This very flexible capacity can be activated with only a few commands (see
Section 3.2.1 2 Sensitivity Analysis Commands), and, in some cases, with the
addition of a new data group (see Section 3.2.10 Regions for Sensitivity
Information).
Two types of information are available through the sensitivity analysis option. By
means of Equation 2.1
n
r i = b ij
j =1
(2.9)
one can determine which elements in the structure contribute most and, perhaps
just as importantly, least to the response quantity r i .Therefore, one type of
information to be obtained from the sensitivity analysis is the element
contributions b ij of Equation 2.1. For sensitivity analysis, one virtual load case is
generated for each relevant response quantity. The structure is then analyzed for
these load cases simultaneously. This is a relatively fast process since the structural
stiffness matrix already will have been reduced during the solution for the first
actual load case. Then each term bij can be computed as a dot product of two
vectors.
T
bij = zij yj

(2.10)
where z ij is due to the virtual load case generated for the response quantity ri and
yj is due to the actual load case. This operation may be viewed as a projection of
2-6
Chapter
3
Data Input Files
For shape optimization or sensitivity analysis applications SHAPE requires

two data input files:
1.NISA II analysis data input file (Section 3.1)

2.SHAPE data input file for optimization or sensitivity analysis (Section
3.2)
-
If just a linear static analysis is needed, then only the NISA II analysis data
input file is required.
For running the program, a batch command file (see Section 3.3, Batch File) will
be necessary (unless the interactive mode is used, in which case the program will
prompt the user).
3-1
NISA II Analysis Data Input File
3.1

The preparation of this file basically follows the guidelines in the NISA II User
Manual which the user should be familiar with. However, with this version of
SHAPE, there are some exceptions as well as limitations that should be considered,
and these are listed herein:
(a) The type of analysis should be STATIC.
(b) Currently, the following are not supported:
- different boundary conditions for different load cases
- prescribed non-zero displacements (program will run, but sensitivities
will be incorrect (*)).
- non-zero right hand side constants for MPC (multi-point constraint)
equations.
- orthographic material with stress constraints (program will run, but sensitivities for any stress quantities will be incorrect(*)).
- temperature loading
(c) Only the following element types from the NISA II library are supported:
- for plane stress models: the three noded triangular element (NKTP = 1;
NORDR = 10).
- for plane strain models: the three noded triangular element (NKTP = 2;
NORDR = 10).
- for axisymmetric solid models: The three noded triangular element
(NKTP = 3; NORDR = 10).
- for general solid models: the four noded tetrahedron element (NKTP = 4;
NORDR = 20). (see last two paragraphs in this Section 3.1).
- for shell models: the three noded triangular thin shell element (NKTP =
40; NORDR = 10).
3-2
Data Input Files
- rigid elements (and MPC equations) which may be used to model spot
welds, bolted connections, or to distribute applied loads.
- accessory elements which may be necessary for an accurate model.
These elements are beams (NKTP = 11, 12, 13; NORDR = 1), spars
(NKTP = 14, 15; NORDR = 1 ), springs (NKTP = 17, 18, 21, 22, 38;
NORDR = 1), and/or point masses (NKTP = 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30;
NORDR = 1). While the contribution of these elements to the structural
response is taken into account, currently they are not subject to variation during shape optimization. Also any stress constraints placed on
these elements will be ignored by the program. (see Section 3.2.4,
Stress Constraints).
(*)
The iterative solution and intermediate design stage may still provide some degree of optimization. Orthographic material problems with only displacement and fabricational constraints will run correctly.
(d) The limitations imposed on the value of KSTR (in the *LDCASE data group)
for Version 90.0 and earlier are no longer in effect. The user may select any
appropriate value of KSTR. However, it should be noted that, for optimization
and sensitivity analysis purposes, the program uses the element centroidal
stesses, which are automatically computed when there are stress constraints.
(e) For load cases due to load combinations:
- For only an analysis, SHAPE will process load combinations exactly as
NISA II does.
- For optimization purposes, SHAPE will combine load case results for
any constrainable element stress or nodal displacement response
quantity. The displacement combination requires that the variable
IDISP described under the *LDCOMB data group in the NISA II User
Manual be set to 1. For constraint evaluation purposes, any
displacements in rotated local coordinates are combined in rotated local
coordinates. The element stresses are combined automatically in case
there are stress constraints, therefore the value of ISTRS in the
*LDCOMB data group is immaterial.
(f) SHAPE supports the 26, 27 post-processing files for analysis-only and sensitivity analysis runs, but not for shape optimization runs. While requesting the
3-3
saving of these files during an optimization run will not cause any problem,
the files will not be read properly by the DISPLAY post-processor.
(g) SHAPE now supports hydrostatic "follower"* pressure loading. To activate
this for a given pressure load, the corresponding LFN entry in the *PRESSURE data group of the NISA II data input file should be set equal to -1.
Thus, the load will follow the changing boundary and keep acting normal to
the boundary. To prevent any problems after the shape has changed, it is suggested that only one type of hydrostatic follower pressure be applied to the
structure for a given load case. LFN = 0 or LFN = 1 can still be used if hydrostatic follower pressure loading is not intended. As opposed to true hydrostatic
loading, the value of the pressure is not depth dependent with this version of
SHAPE.
Since it is difficult to model solids with tetrahedra, for the convenience of SHAPE
users a companion program DIVELM (see Appendix A) has been written to
convert models that use brick and wedge elements into models using tetrahedra.
The user should note that the tetrahedron element gives a stiffer response than the
more sophisticated brick element. However, each brick or wedge element is
divided into a sufficient number of tetrahedra for accurate analysis.
It is important for the original brick model or a manually prepared tetrahedron
model to be free of topological errors (such as topologically incorrect cracks) as
otherwise SHAPE may fail with a "hinge edge or hinge node" message. This type
of error is usually unnoticed during a linear static analysis (see also Sections 3.2.3
item 2 and 3.2.1 1 SYMTOlerance).
(*)"
follower" is used in this instance to emphasize that the pressure moves with the changing
boundary.
3-4
Data Input Files
3.2
Shape Optimization Data Input File

Information related to the optimization process is to be entered into this file. This is
a free format file.The input consists of the following entry blocks:
- process control commands
(Section 3.2.1)
- title
(Section 3.2.2)
- symmetry information for partial models
(Section 3.2.3)
- stress response or constraints specification
(Section 3.2.4)
- displacement response or constraints

specification
(Section 3.2.5, 3.2.6)
- stiffness constraints specification
(Section 3.2.6)
- fabricational constraints specification
(Section 3.2.7)
- variable linking data
(Section 3.2.8)
- material unit costs data
(Section 3.2.9)
- regions for sensitivity information
(Section 3.2.10)
- end of data indicator
(Section 3.2.11)
Fabricational constraints should always be specified (see Section 3.2.7). Also there
must be at least one stress or displacement response or constraint specified. In
addition, the symmetry information should be supplied if the finite element model
makes use of symmetry boundary conditions as otherwise the quality of the final
design may be adversely affected.
In the stress and displacement response or constraint specifications as well as
fabricational constraint specifications, non-existent or accessory elements or nonexistent nodes are allowed to be specified within an incrementation or within a list,
and will be ignored by the program. Otherwise, leaving out these element or node
numbers would require longer and more complicated input.
3-5
The blocks may follow any order within the file, except for the process control
commands which should be in the beginning of the file, and the end of data
indicator which should be the last entry in the file. All information of one type
should be contained only in one block of that type.
Entry of data follows these simple guidelines:
-
There is no restriction on the length of each entry in a line. However,

each line of input is restricted to a maximum of 80 characters.
Letters may be entered either in lower or upper case or in a mixture

thereof.
A comma (,) or a blank should be entered between two successive entries

in a line. A repeated comma (,,) implies a zero for the entry. A comma
after the last entry in a line is optional.
All the leading and trailing blanks for each entry in a line of input are
ignored. However, a blank character is interpreted as a delimiter in the
absence of a comma separating two successive entries in a line. Repeated
blanks do not imply zero entries, except for the case of omitted trailing
entries.
A slash (/) serves as a horizontal repetition character. For example, 2.5 //

is interpreted as 2.5,2.5,2.5. Slashes need not be separated by commas or
blanks.
A special tab character ($) has the effect of supplying zero entries for all
skipped variables up to the variable following the character. For example,
in the data for *SYMPL data group, each line of input contains seven
entries and there is a tab character ($) available between the fourth and
fifth entries (Refer to Section 3.2.3). Thus the following lines of input are
equivalent:
SYMM, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0
SYMM, 0.0, 0.0 $ 1.0, 0.0, 0.0
SYMM, 0.0 $ 1.0, 0.0, 0.0
SYMM $ 1.0, 0.0, 0.0
3-6
Data Input Files
A comma before or after a tab character is optional. The available tab

character locations are indicated in the following sections.
3.2.1
Comment lines are allowed anywhere in the input file. A comment line
should start with two asterisks **.
A blank line is completely ignored. It does not imply null entries, nor is it
counted as a line where a line count is indicated.
Control Commands
This information consists of the commands given below grouped in a perceived
order of importance. If the default values are to be used, then the relevant line may
be omitted.
These commands may be abbreviated by the first five letters (shown in capitals).
The available options are shown within square brackets, and the default values
are shown in curly brackets. These are followed by description of the commands.
3.2.1 1 Shape Optimization Commands

MINIMize
{ VOLume }
MASs
COS t
To specify the quantity to be minimized for an optimum design. When Minimize =

COSt, the user has to enter the *MCOSTs (material unit costs) data group (see
Section 3.2.9). For minimization of total material mass (or cost based on mass), the
material mass densities have to be entered into the NISA II data input file.
LIMIT
zero or positive integer

{ 100 }
3-7
To specify the maximum number of iterations allowed: each immediate design is

counted as one iteration; the solution of the optimality criteria based problem at the
beginning of each design step is also counted as one iteration regardless of the
number of times the active set is updated. Thus, the number of analysis will be
somewhat higher than the specified number of iterations unless the execution ends
earlier.
STEPS
(*)
limit
To specify the maximum number of design steps allowed.
BOUNDary
ON
{ OFF }
To switch ON the option of limiting shape changes only to variation of

originally existing boundaries of the structure, i.e. new internal boundaries are
not created if the BOUND switch is ON.
BREAK
{ ON }
OFF
3-8
Data Input Files
To switch OFF the option of allowing breaks within the structure. Thus, for
example, ribs or bars which are not necessary for the optimum design will be
allowed to remain in the structure if the BREAK switch is OFF
ACTIVe set

{ 500 }
(*)Therefore specifying neither LIMIT nor STEPS will cause both values to default to 100
3-9
.
Maximum number of constraints to be dynamically allocated to the active set at a
given time. The actual number is decided upon by the program, and will be less
than or equal to ACTIV. This command may be helpful in two specific cases:
1. When the active set may include more than 500 constraints, the program will
truncate it at 500. The user may restart the job with a higher number for
ACTIV.
2. Rarely, for substantially large problems, several hundred constraints in the
active set may slow down considerably the solution for the Lagrange multipliers, or the error in this solution (output into the log file) may be large, or memory may be insufficient. The user may then limit the maximum number of
entries in the active set to a number smaller than 500.
value
SYMTOlerance
5
1 10
Absolute out-of-plane tolerance to check whether a node is on a symmetry or antisymmetry plane or not. If some nodes on such plane(s) are not within this tolerance
of the rest, SHAPE may fail with a "hinge edge or hinge node" message (see also
Section 3.1 last paragraph and 3.2.3 item 2).
INTEGrity check
{ YES }
NO
To specify whether the user wishes the program to check for hinge nodes or hinge
edges in the finite element model before proceeding further. With the YES option,
the job will stop with a fatal error message if any hinges are discovered. If there are
intentional hinges (an unlikely possibility) or if the user wishes to continue
3-10
Data Input Files
anyway, this switch can be set to NO and no errors will be generated as long as the
hinge regions are frozen or are not otherwise subject to material removal.
SMOOTh
YES
{ NO }
ONLY
To create boundary smoothed finite element input files. The ONLy option is
used to create a smoothed file only, without optimization or analysis. This is
useful mainly when the NO option has been used during optimization.
Selected designs can then be smoothed separately. SMOOTh = ONLy has
precedence over all other commands. (see also SMOOPtion, BASEFilename,
and SFILEname commands below)
SMOOPtion
{ INItialfile }
CURrentfile
The SMOOPtion command is necessary if the user does not mind the original
boundaries to be smoothed as well when SMOOTh = ONLy command is
executed. In this case SMOOP = CURrentfile should be specified. Otherwise
the default of SMOOP = INItialfile is activated and the user needs to use the
command BASEFilename described below.
BASEFilename
initial shape filename
The basefile name is required for SMOOP = INItial file (the default for
SMOOP). Thus, remaining parts of the original boundaries will not be
smoothed except at their borders.This file must be resident at the directory the
job is to be run.To prevent any problems, both the initial file and the optimized
3-11
file that is to be smoothed have to be the original files. Otherwise a perfect

match may not be possible.
SFILEname
filename
{ ns2smooth$000 }
To assign a name to the boundary smoothed file when the SMOOTh = ONLy
option is used.
3.2.1 2 Sensitivity Analysis Commands

The following commands are necessary when the user wishes to run only
sensitivity analysis and to have access to the sensitivity analysis results:
SENSItivity information
{ OFF }
TOTal
DERivative
BOTh
TOTAL will compute the element contributions bij of Equation 2.1.

DERIVATIVE will compute the partial derivatives eij of Equation 2.10.
BOTH will activate both procedures. OFF is self-explanatory. However if
SENSI is not OFF then sensitivity analysis takes precedence over shape
3-12
Data Input Files
optimization, except for the case of SMOOT=ONLY in which case only

boundary smoothing is done (see Section 3.2.1 1).
LISTSensitivities
OFF
{ ON }
ALL
positive integer
This command will regulate the output of the sensitivity information into the
ASCII output file. If ON (the default), the sensitivity analysis results will be
output for up to 50 response quantities. The user may instead choose to give
the actual number of response quantities for which the sensitivity information
is to be output, or to use the ALL option.
SAVESensitivities
{ OFF }
ON
ALL
positive integer
This command will regulate the saving of sensitivity information into the
postprocessing file (file 27) to be used with the DISPLAY post-processor.
(The SEN command available with DISPLAY II Version 90.0 starting with
05.01.90 update is to be used for post-processing of SHAPE sensitivity
information). The NISA data input file should contain a command to save
files 26 and 27. The elemental values saved in file 27 can be converted to
nodal averaged values within the DISPLAY post-processor by the ENR
command. If ON, sensitivity information for up to 50 response quantities will
be saved in file 27.
3-13
SORTResponse quantities
{ OFF }
ON
This command is very useful in case limiting values are specified for response
quantities. When this command is ON, the response quantities are sorted in
degree of criticalness and are output in that order. Otherwise they are output in
order of appearance, which may not be desirable unless sensitivity
information is requested only for a few response quantities or unless the ALL
setting is used with the LISTS or SAVES commands (see above).
LISTLength
ALL
REGions
positive integer
{ 100 }
When listing the sensitivity information into the ASCII output file with the
LISTS command, the long lists would make browsing virtually impossible if
the contributions from all the elements were listed for each response quantity.
Thus, as a default, the contribution from only up to 100 elements are listed,
unless the user specifies ALL or a different number. Alternatively, the user
may provide a *SREGIONS bulk data group (see Section 3.2.10) indicated by
the REGIONS setting. Then the sensitivity information to be output will
contain only the contributions from the elements specified in the *SREGIONS
data block.
SORTLists
OFF
ON
REVerse
{ ON ,ON }
3-14
Data Input Files
By default the entries for each list to be output into the ASCII output file are
sorted since the lists may be limited in length (see LISTL above). The element
contributions b ij and the partial derivatives e ij may be sorted differently by
means of specifying two switches separated by a comma. If both types of lists
are asked for (SENSI = BOTH) then the first switch will regulate the sorting
of the element contributions bij and the second switch will regulate the sorting
of the partial derivatives e ij . If only one switch is specified however, it will
regulate both types of lists. The setting ON will sort the entries in order of
decreasing algebraic value and REVERSE will sort the entries in order of
increasing algebraic value. Thus, for example SORTL = ON,REVERSE will
sort bij in order of decreasing algebraic value and eij in order of increasing
algebraic value. Note that this ordering may be 13 preferable to the default,
due to the difference in sign between b ij and e ij .
3.2.2
Problem Title
This title will appear in the SHAPE.OUT and OPTFILE$ijk files (see Section 4,
Output Files). The default is a blank line.
Start with
*TITLE
The problem title may use up to 6 lines, starting with the line after *TITLE.
However, only the first line will appear in the OPTFILE$ijk files.
3.2.3
Symmetry/Anti-Symmetry Plane Definitions

The user is advised to make full use of any symmetry or anti-symmetry conditions
in order to decrease the size of the problem to be solved. If the finite element model
has been prepared making use of such conditions (including axi-symmetric solids),
and the design is not frozen at the symmetry and/or anti-symmetry planes, for
shape optimization purposes (see item 4 below) the optimization data input file
requires the following information starting with:
3-15
*SYMPLanes
The *SYMPL line is followed by the definition of each of the symmetry and antisymmetry planes. For each such plane, one line containing the values of
NCODE, X0, Y0, Z0, VX0, VY0, VZ0
$
should be supplied, where
NCODE
X0, Y0, Z0
VX0, VY0, VZ0
label for type of plane

SYMM for symmetry plane
ANTI for anti-symmetry plane
coordinates of a point on the plane under consideration
the X, Y, and Z components of a vector which is normal to the plane under consideration
The following items should be noted in relation to the *SYMP data group:
1. Although the user has entered the symmetry and/or anti-symmetry boundary
condition information in the optimization data input file, the related boundary
conditions should still be entered in the NISA II analysis data input file.
2. All nodes on the symmetry or anti-symmetry planes should have the appropriate boundary conditions for accurate analysis results. (Versions of SHAPE
before 90.0 may fail with a "hinge node or hinge edge" message if not all
boundary conditions are supplied at the symmetry or anti-symmetry planes).
This may be missed especially after DIVELM is used to generate tetrahedra
from a brick model. The newly created midsurface nodes remain without
boundary conditions unless these are supplied by the user afterwards. (See also
Sections 3.1 last paragraph and 3.2.1 1 SYMTOlerance.)
3. All nodes lying on a given symmetry or anti-symmetry plane should be within
a given absolute tolerance of each other in the direction normal to the plane.
The default for this tolerance is 1 x 10-5. The user may change this tolerance by
use of the TOLERance command defined in section 3.2.1 1. If this tolerance is
not satisfied by the nodes on the symmetry planes, the program may fail with a
fatal "hinge node or hinge edge" message.
3-16
Data Input Files
4. This data group is not necessary for sensitivity analysis runs and will be
ignored in such cases.
3.2.4
Stress Response Quantities or Constraints

Both stress constraints for shape optimization or stress response quantities for
sensitivity analysis purposes may be specified in this data block. The only
difference is that the limiting values may be omitted for the case of sensitivity
analysis. Thus, reference is made only to stress constraints for the rest of this
section, with the understanding that the information applies to stress response
quantities as well, except where it is specifically related to shape optimization.
Stress constraints can be prescribed for a variety of element stress values, namely
the three normal stress and the three shear stress components, the maximum
principal stress, the maximum shear stress, the octahedral shear stress and the von
Mises stress. Elements may be sorted into groups to enable the user to prescribe
stress constraints separately for each group. Also an element may appear in more
than one group.
It may be that the intended stress limits for the constraints are based on the
anticipated smoothed stress distribution, i.e. averaged nodal stresses. However, it
should be noted that the present version of SHAPE accepts stress constraints only
on the element stresses (stress averaging is still available for analysis with no
optimization). Since the maximum element stresses would be higher than the
maximum averaged nodal stress, applying these intended stress limits to the
element stresses may be conservative especially in regions of high stress gradient.
In this case, it may be more realistic to specify higher limits for the element stresses
in such regions, based on an analysis and a good understanding of the initial
design. The optimization process may reduce the level of stress in these elements,
in which case the shape optimization may be restarted with a later design under
lower allowable values for stresses.
If the above procedure is not acceptable and the initial design is not feasible, then
the design should be changed so that one starts out with a feasible design.
Feasibility of the design is not important when running only sensitivity analysis.
For all elements, the stress constraints are taken as limits on the stresses at element
centroid (see also Section 3.1, item d). For shells, the program internally relates
3-17
such a constraint to the maximum of the stresses computed at the top, middle or
bottom fibers at this location. It should also be noted that the stress components for
shells are evaluated with respect to the element coordinate system. Thus x , y ,
and xy xy are the in-plane stresses in the case of shell structures.
For the accessory elements, stress constraints are currently inactive. Any such
constraint will be ignored by the program, but will not cause an error.
The stress constraints information starts with
*CNSTRess
For each group of elements, the first line contains the values of
NEL1, NEL2, NELINC, ICTYP, NUMB, LC1, LC2, LCINC, ILINES
$
where
NEL1
NEL2
NELINC
ICTYP
NUMB
:
:
LC1
LC2
LCINC
Starting element number or a negative integer. If NEL1 is

negative, this line is followed by ILINES lines of input
with up to ten numbers per line for individual definition of
the elements in the group.
Ending element number (NEL2 NEL1, but arbitrary if
NEL1 is negative)
Increment in element number (arbitrary if NEL1 is negative or if NEL1 = NEL2)
Enter 1 always for element stress constraints
Number of stress constraint types to be specified for this
group
Starting load case ID number for which the group is
defined (enter zero if group is defined for all load cases)
Ending load case ID number for which the group is defined
(LC2 LC1, but arbitrary if LC1 = 0)
Increment in load case ID number (arbitrary if LC1 = 0 or
if
LC1 = LC2)
3-18
Data Input Files
ILINES
Used only when NEL1 is negative, to specify the number

of lines of input for individual specification of element
numbers, with up to ten numbers entered per line.
If NEL1 is negative, insert ILINES lines of input with up to ten element numbers
per line. Blank or zero entries are allowable in this list and will be skipped by the
program.
Next, there is NUMB lines of input required, each line specifying one stress type
and the corresponding limiting value
CTYPE, RLIMIT
where
CTYPE : stress type
The following applicable labels for stress type may be used in any
combination:
SXX
SX+
SX-
The three normal components of stress
SYY
SY+
SY-
(a) limit applies to absolute value if no

sign
SZZ
SZ+
SZ-
(b) limit applies only to positive values

if sign is +
(c) limit applies only to negative values
if sign is -
SXY (or SYX)
SYZ (or SZY)
SZX (or SXZ)
PSM
maximum principal stress in terms of

absolute value
The three shearing components of stress
PS1
P1+
P1-
The three principal stresses
PS2
P2+
P2-
(a) limit applies to absolute value if no

sign
3-19
PS3
(b) limit applies only to positive values

if sign is +
(c) limit applies only to negative values

if sign is -
MSH
maximum shear stress
OSH
octahedral shear stress
VMS
von Mises stress
RLIMIT
P3+
P3-
limiting absolute value on the stress

- needed with the sensitivity analysis option only if the
response quantities are to be sorted before
output (see Section 3.2.1.2, SORTR command).
- RLIMIT is always entered as positive.The program
automatically converts it to a negative bound where
applicable.
This input is followed by the next group of stress constraints if any.
3.2.5
Displacement Response Quantities or Constraints

As in Section 3.2.4, the only difference between the specification of displacement
response quantities and constraints is the option of leaving out the limiting values
for displacement response quantities. Thus, the below information on displacement
constraints applies equally well to the case when this data block is used to describe
displacement response quantities for which sensitivity analysis is requested.
Constraints can be prescribed on the six global(*) displacement components of a
node, or on the resultant displacements. Linear combinations of the three
translational components or the three rotational components can be used to define
constraints on displacements along directions specified in this manner.
Displacement constraints can also be specified on the relative displacements of
pairs of nodes along specified directions. Nodes may be sorted into groups to
enable the user to prescribe displacement constraints separately for each group.
Also, it should be noted that a node may appear in more than one group.
3-20
Data Input Files
Stiffness constraints may also be posed as displacement constraints through

appropriate conversion (see Section 3.2.6, Stiffness Constraints).
The displacement constraints information starts with
*CNDISplacement
For each group of nodes, the first line contains the values of
ND1, ND2, NDINC, ICTYP, NUMB, LC1, LC2, LCINC, ILINES
$
where
ND1
Starting node number or a negative integer. If ND1 is

negative, this line is followed by ILINES lines of input
with up to ten numbers per line for individual
definition of the nodes in the group. (For relative
displacement constraint definition, the set of nodes
should contain only two nodes. Alternatively, these two
nodes can be given as ND1 and ND2.)
ND2
Ending node number (ND2 > ND1, but arbitrary if

ND1 is negative)
NDINC
Increment in node number (arbitrary if ND1 is negative

or if ND1 = ND2)
ICTYP
1 for regular constraint on a single displacement component or on a resultant displacement.
0 for linear combination of displacement components.
-1 for relative displacement constraint between ND1

and ND2, or, if ND1 is negative, between the two
nodes listed in the next line of input.
3-21
-2 for constraint on the relative displacement between

ND1 and ND2 along a prescribed direction other than
X, Y, or Z (using linear combination). If ND1 is
negative, the two nodes will be read off the next line of
input.
NUMB
Number of types of displacement constraints to be

specified for this group
LC1
Starting load case ID number for which this group is

defined (enter zero if group is defined for all load cases)
LC2
Ending load case ID number for which this group is

defined (LC2 > LC1, but arbitrary if LC1 = 0)
LCINC
Increment in load case ID number (arbitrary if LC1 = 0

or if LC1 = LC2)
ILINES
Used only when ND1 is negative, to specify the number

of lines of input for individual specification of node
If ND1 is negative, insert ILINES lines of input with up to ten node numbers per
line. Blank or zero entries are allowable in this list and will be skipped by the
program.
Next, there is NUMB lines of input required, each line specifying a displacement
constraint type, the corresponding limiting value and the three direction cosines (in
the case of linear combination):
CTYPE, RLIMIT, DRCOS1, DRCOS2, DRCOS3
3-22
Data Input Files
where:
CTYPE
displacement type
The following applicable labels may be used in any combination

UXX
UX+
UX:
The six translational (U)
and rotational (R) components
UYY
UY+
UY:
of displacement
UZZ
UZ+
UZ:
a) limit applies to absolute
value if no sign
RXX
RX+
RX:
b) limit applies only to +
values if sign is +
RYY
RY+
RY:
c) limit applies only to - values if sign is RZZ
RZ+
RZ:
(also see footnote on page
3.15)
RSU
RLIMIT
DRCOS1
DRCOS2
DRCOS3
:
:
:
:
resultant of translational
components
RSR
:
resultant of rotational components
UUU
:
linear combination of translational components
RRR
:
linear combination of rotational components
limiting absolute value on the displacement
constants (direction cosines)
to be used to compute
the linear combination
This input is followed by the next group of displacement constraints if any.
3.2.6 Stiffness Constraints

These constraints which impose lower limits on stiffness (measurable in terms of
load per unit displacement) can be applied by first converting them to upper limits
on flexibility (i.e. displacement per unit load). For input into the program, an
additional load case has to be specified for each such flexibility constraint. Each
one of these load cases will describe the unit load associated with the related
flexibility constraint. This will then allow the user to pose the original stiffness
constraint as a displacement constraint for that particular load case.
3-23
For example, if a cantilever is asked to have a minimum stiffness of K with respect

to its tip deflection in a given direction, this will correspond to a maximum
allowable flexibility of 1/K. Thus, the optimization problem can be posed by
creating a load case with a unit load applied at the tip in the appropriate direction,
and by constraining the displacement under the load to a maximum allowable value
of 1/K.
3.2.7
Fabricational Constraints
In most practical situations, certain parts of the design are prescribed (frozen) due
to considerations associated with manufacturing, loading, and connections.
Specifying these regions for the initial design prevents the program from making
shape modifications within these regions, and allows it to take into consideration
the effects of freezing these regions. In addition:
-
Supported and loaded regions where the supports and/or the loads are
required to be kept should be frozen. The frozen supports should be sufficient to insure stability. While this may not always be necessary, the
approximate nature of the solution algorithm may cause failure otherwise, due to removal of elements at supports needed for stability. In the
case of symmetry boundary conditions, it is not necessary to freeze these
regions if *SYMPL data is given, since SHAPE will disallow total separation along symmetry (or anti-symmetry) planes.
In the case of body force loading, any elements with slave degrees of
freedom should be frozen.
Any accessory elements are automatically frozen by the program. However, the user should ensure that these remain stable by freezing, if necessary, a sufficient number of finite elements at nodes the accessory
elements connect to.
The fabricational constraints data group is not needed for the sensitivity analysis
only option. However, Section 3.2.10, which may be needed for sensitivity
analysis, uses almost exactly the same form of input.
The fabricational constraints information starts with
*CNFABricational
3-24
Data Input Files
There are two ways of specifying the fabricational constraints and these can be
used in combination.
(i)
description of elements associated with frozen regions of the design.
(ii)
description of nodes that will cause the program to freeze the elements
common to these nodes.
This information can be grouped into subgroups. For each subgroup, a line should
contain the values of
NCODE, LND1, LND2, LNDINC, ILINES
$
where
NCODE
LND1
LND2
ILINES
ELEMent
if the subgroup is a group of element ID numbers.

NODE
if the subgroup is a group of node ID numbers.
MATErial if the subgroup is a group of material ID numbers.
Starting element or node number, or a negative integer. If
LND1 is
negative, this line is followed by ILINES lines
of input with up to ten
numbers per line for individual definition of the elements or nodes in the subgroup.
Ending element or node number ( LND2 LND1, but arbitrary if LND1 is negative).
Used only when LND1 is negative, to specify the number of
lines of input for individual specification of element or node
If LND1 is negative, insert ILINES lines of input with up to ten element or node
numbers per line. Blank or zero entries are allowable in this list and will be skipped
by the program.
This input is followed by the next subgroup starting with ELEMent, NODE, or
MATErial, if any.
3-25
3.2.8
Variable Linking (Element Linking)

Two different and separate types of variable linking are offered by the program.
With either, elements that are grouped together can only be removed together. It is
important that the difference between the two be well understood for efficient use.
One type of linking involves grouping of elements based on the users judgement.
For example, the user may wish the program to remove material only layer by layer
and/or in strips. Then this is how the elements should be grouped. This type of
grouping will be called "direct variable linking" herein, and is controlled by the
*LINKVariables data block (Section 3.2.8 1).
The other type of linking may be used for enforcing symmetry under certain
conditions. This grouping will be called "constrained symmetry" and is controlled
by the *CNSYMmetry data block (Section 3.2.8 2). Most commonly, such
grouping would be used for structures required to remain symmetrical under
unsymmetrical loading. Thus, elements symmetrically situated with respect to each
other would be grouped together to enforce symmetry. For cases of multiple planes
of symmetry, such as for a disk loaded only in one sector, but asked to retain its
symmetry, there really is no simple alternative. For a single plane of symmetry, one
can reverse the loading and create another load case to impose the symmetry.
However, using constrained symmetry prevents such an artificial increase in the
number of load cases as well as in the related number of constraints.
While there are similarities between the use of direct variable linking and
constrained symmetry, it should be noted that they represent both theoretically and
practically different concepts. Within the context of SHAPE, the only cases where
direct variable linking can be used in lieu of constrained symmetry are when all
elements along all symmetry planes of such shapes are frozen.
The *CNSYM data block for constrained symmetry should not be confused with
the *SYMPlanes (symmetry planes) data block. The *SYMPlanes data block is
used for cases of total symmetry or anti-symmetry where only part of the structure
is to be treated because symmetry or anti-symmetry boundary conditions are to be
used at the symmetry boundaries (i. e. symmetry does not need to be enforced since
it is implicit to the model).
3-26
Data Input Files
It is also important to note that frozen elements should not be used in variable
linking data.
The input for variable linking is described in the following two subsections.
3.2.8 1 Direct Variable Linking

The first line of this data block is *LINKVariables.
The rest of the data can be entered in one or a combination of three possible ways.
The first of the three ways of input is based on simply incrementing or listing the
numbers of the elements in each group.
The second and third ways of input are based on defining a master element for each
group of elements. This selection is arbitrary. The rest of the elements in each
group are then termed to be slave elements. It is hoped that simpler input will be
available with later versions.
Way 1
The first line of a sub-block for this way of input contains the values of
NWAY, NEL1, NEL2, NELINC, ILINES
where
NWAY
NEL1
:
:
NEL2
NELINC
ILINES
WAY1 for way number 1

Starting element number or a negative integer. If NEL2 is negative, this line is followed by ILINES of input with up to ten
numbers per line for individual definition of the elements in
the group.
Ending element number (NEL2 > NEL1, but arbitrary if
NEL1 is negative)
Increment in element number (arbitrary if NEL1 is negative or
if
NEL1 = NEL2)
Used only when NEL1 is negative, to specify the number of
lines or input for individual specification of element numbers,
with up to ten numbers entered per line.
3-27
If NEL1 is negative, insert ILINES of input with up to ten element or node

numbers per line. Blank or zero entries are allowable in this list and will be skipped
by the program.
This input is followed by the next sub-block of variable linking information
(starting with the value of NWAY), if any.
The following is an example for this way of data input.
Example:
Assume that elements 4 through 9 form a linked group of elements, then
WAY1
WAY1
-1
or
4
are both valid.

Way 2
The representative line of data for this way of input contains the values of
NWAY, LMAS1, LMAS2, INCM, LSLV1, LSLV2, INCS
where
NWAY
WAY2 for way number 2
LMAS1
Starting element number for the incremented list of master elements.
LMAS2
Ending element number for the incremented list of master elements (LMAS2 LMAS1)
INCM
The increment (positive integer) for the list of master

elements.
3-28
Data Input Files
LSLV1
Starting element number for the incremented list of

slave elements.
LSLV2
Ending element number for the incremented list of slave

elements.
INCS
The increment (positive integer) for the list of slave elements.
If there is more than one slave element for each master element and similar
incrementation can be done for the others, then the above type of input can be
requested as many times as necessary by repeating the master elements, but
changing the slave elements every time. This form of input is useful when there are
many separate groups of linked elements, but there are only a few elements in each
group.
Obviously, master elements that have different incrementation (and related slave
elements) can be given on additional lines. It should noted that, for example
LMAS1 and LSLV1 are linked together, but not LMAS1 and LSLV2, i. e. there is a
one to one correspondence in linking.
Example:
Assume that elements 4 through 7, 12 through 15, 20 through 23, and 28 through
31 form four separate linked groups. Then the data can be given as;
WAY2
28
29
WAY2
28
30
WAY2
28
31
WAY1
WAY1
12
15
WAY1
20
23
WAY1
28
31
or alternatively as
3-29
Way 3
This way of input is useful if a single incrementation of element numbers is not
possible and a list form is desirable.
The first line contains the values of
NWAY, ILINES, NSETS
where
NWAY
WAY3 for way number 3.
ILINES
The number of lines of input for the master elements list,

with up to 10 entries per line. (see also NSETS below)
NSETS
The number of sets of slave elements, each set given in

ILINES lines of input.
This line is followed by (1+NSETS) * ILINES lines of input for this sub-block.
An example of this way of input is given on the next page.
Example:
For the previous example given for WAY2, the input data can be arranged as
WAY3
12
20
28
master elements list
13
21
29
14
22
30
15
23
31
3 sets of slave elements
3-30
Data Input Files
It should be noted again that while, for example, 12 through 15 are linked together,
element 6 is in a different linked group together with 4, 5, and 7.
3.2.8 2 Constrained Symmetry

The first line of this data block is
*CNSYMmetry
The rest of the data is entered in exactly the same manner as for direct variable
linking
(See Section 3.2.8 1).
Example:
Say a finite element model with 1000 elements (with highest element number
1500) has symmetry such that elements numbered 1 to 500 are on one side of the
symmetry plane, and 502 to 1500 (with increments of 2) are on the other side. Also
element 1 is symmetrical with element 502 and so forth. Then the data block will
look like
*CNSYM
WAY2
3.2.9
500
502
1500
Material Unit Costs

This data block is necessary when the user wishes to minimize the total material
cost. For each material used in the finite element model, the user has a choice of
specifying the unit cost either in terms of unit volume or in terms of unit mass.
The unit costs information starts with
*MCOSTs
For each material used in the model, the user should now enter one line of data
containing the values for:
3-31
MATID, UNTCST, CBASIS

where
MATID
UNTCST
CBASIS
:
:
The material ID number specified in the *MATERIAL data

group of the NISA II data input file.
The unit cost of the material as a positive real number.
MASS
if the unit cost is per unit mass
VOLUme
if the unit cost is per unit volume
One such line is entered for each element, for as many lines as are necessary.
It should be noted that, for each element for which the cost is given in terms of unit
mass, the material mass density should be entered in the *MATERIAL data group
of the NISA II data input file.
3.2.10 Regions for Sensitivity Information

This data block is needed only if the user requests sensitivity analysis results and
the lists are to be output into the ASCII output file and if only the contributions
from the elements defined in this data block are to be included in the lists. Thus this
data group is activated only when
(and)
(and)
SENSI
LISTS
LISTL
=
=
=
TOTal
ON
REGions
(or)
(or)
DERivative
ALL
(or)
(or)
BOTh
positive integer
(see Section 3.2.1 2 for the above commands).

This data block starts with
*SREGIons
The rest of the data is defined in exactly the same manner as for fabricational
constraints (see Section 3.2.7).
3-32
Data Input Files
3.2.11 Ending the Optimization Data Input File

The optimization data input file ends with:
*ENDDAta
3-33
Batch File
3.3
Batch File
In the interactive mode, the program will prompt the user for the necessary
information regarding the files to be opened. In the batch mode, the related
information should be entered as below:
LINE
1
SHAPE
optimization
data input file
name
NISA II data
input file name
output file
name
COMMENTS
(or RUN SHAPE, or similar command as
appropriate)
Enter name or pathname, as necessary, of file
described under Section 3.2. NONE or just a
blank line should be entered if only a linear
static analysis is required to generate post-processing files for a given design.
Enter name or pathname, as necessary, of file
described under Section 3.1.
Enter a name or pathname, as necessary, for the
file that will contain analysis results such as
stresses and displacements for the initial design
only (see next section). Any existing file with
the same full pathname and name will be overwritten without warning. If this is not desirable,
the user should take the necessary precautions
before submitting the job. The only exception is
when the name in item 4 is the same as that for
one of the input files (item 2 or 3). In this case
the program will stop with an error message
(This protection may not be available or necessary on some computers).
The scratch file code used with versions of SHAPE before 90.0 is no longer
needed.
Due to the number and variety of files generated by SHAPE (see Section 4, Output
Files), it is strongly advisable to assign a separate subdirectory (data set) for each
job to be run.
3-34
Chapter
4
Output Files
SHAPE creates several different output files:
1.
A NISA II type output file with the results for the initial design, and,
when applicable, sensitivity analysis only (if the user is not interested in
these results, their output may be suppressed, thus decreasing the size of
this file). SHAPE version number and the latest update date will be
found in this file and in the SHAPE.OUT file (see item 5 below).
2.
A NISA II data input file for each improvement in design

(NISA2FILE$iteration number)(*). Currently only the following executive commands and bulk data are written into this file:
ANALYSIS
(=STATIC)
ELEMENT
(=OFF)
NODE
(=OFF)
RESEQUENCE
(=OFF)
*TITLE
*ELTYPE
*RCTABLE
*ELEMENT
(any *E1 data in original input gets converted to *ELEMENT format)
*RIGLINK
*NODES
*MATERIAL
4-1
*MPCEQN
*CPDISP
*LDCASE
*LDCOMB
(*) These
names may differ slightly for various computers.

See also file names in items 3 and 4. No such files are generated for iterations where a design improvement is not
noted by the program.
*LCSYSTEM
(any *G2 data in original input gets converted to *LCSYS format)
*LCTITLE
*SPDISP
*BODYFORCE
*PRESSURE
*CFORCE
*NDTEMPER
(currently not otherwise supported by

SHAPE)
*PRINTCNTL
(with DISP, -1 always)
*ENDDATA
The user may need to add other necessary data or may want to modify the
above for any restarts (see item ii below). For example, it may be advantageous to reset RESEQUENCE to ON if it was beneficial for the original optimization run.
3.
If requested by the user, a boundary smoothed NISA II data input file for
each improvement indesign (NS2SMOOTH$iterationnumber). (These
files usually are not suitable for analysis as some elements on the boundary may show extensive distortion, but are meant only as a help for
visual purposes). Alternatively, the smoothed files may be generated
later for selected designs (see Section 3.2.1 1, Shape Optimization Commands).
4.
An optimization data input file for each improvement in design.

(OPTFILE$iterationnumber).
4-2
Output Files
5.
A summary file to trace the designs for each iteration after execution has
ended (SHAPE.OUT). At the end of the file the results are tabulated up
to 500 iterations.
6.
A log file to trace solution stages during execution.
7.
Post-processing files 26 and 27 (see NISA II Users Manual), which

should not be saved except for the case when SHAPE is used only for
analysis, or for evaluation of initial design with LIMIT = 0 (see Section
3.2.1 Control Data), or for sensitivity analysis.
Files listed in the above items 2, 3, and 4 are output to enable the user
(i)
to look at generated redesigns while the program is still executing. (On

most computers, each file 2, 3, and 4 above is closed as soon as its output is completed).
(ii)
to restart the program with a selected redesign if required (see item 2

above).
(iii)
to perform any required post-processing. For this, a fresh analysis using

SHAPE with the appropriate NISA II data input file is required as
SHAPE does not provide post-processing files for each redesign during
optimization. To prevent SHAPE from entering the optimization stage,
the optimization data input file name should be entered as NONE (or a
blank line). (See Section 3.3, Batch File)
(iv)
To use the redesign as a guideline to an application design which may

be re-modeled and re-analyzed or re-optimized.
Perusal of the summary file, SHAPE.OUT (see item 5 above), will indicate to the
user which redesigns were deemed to be superior to the others by the program.
These designs are indicated by an asterisk in the summary table. The quality of
such superior designs should increase as execution progresses, if the finite element
mesh is sufficiently fine. In case the modifications are so large that the finite
element mesh becomes inferior in some regions, some deterioration of the results
may be expected.
4-3
4-4
Appendix
A
Users Manual for DIVELM
DIVELM is a user friendly program for converting NISA II data input files that
contain brick or wedge solid elements into NISA II data input files where these
elements have been divided into tetrahedron elements. Any other type of finite
elements in the original file are kept as they were in the original model. However,
it is essential to note that this version of SHAPE will accept only tetrahedra, rigid
elements, and accessory elements (see Section 3.1) for the shape optimization of
solid structures.
DIVELM divides the bricks and wedges in the following manner:
8 noded brick
(NKTP = 4, NORDR = 1)
----
24 tetrahedra
20 noded brick
----
40 tetrahedra
6 noded wedge
----
14 tetrahedra
15 noded wedge
----
26 tetrahedra
The manner of division insures that there is no bias in any direction with regard to
how the tetrahedra are generated. Since, the quality of the generated tetrahedron
elements depends on the quality of the original brick and wedge elements, good
aspect ratios and distortion indices for the original elements are strongly
advisable.
If wavefront optimization is not prevented in the original data input file, it is then
performed by DIVELM on the brick model before the tetrahedron model is
generated. This has the effect of keeping the tetrahedron model wavefront at a low
value without having to optimize the wavefront for the tetrahedron model, which
A-1
will be much larger than the brick model. In fact, experience indicates that
performing wavefront optimization within DIVELM is currently the best option
available for solids.
DIVELM will reassign nodal forces and supports to the new numbers of the old
nodes, and will also redistribute pressure loads on the surfaces of the new elements
generated. The program can redistribute linearly varying pressure load for 6 and 8noded solids, and constant pressure load for 15 and 20-noded solids. It will not
redistribute nodal forces and supports to any newly generated nodes (say, at the
midpoint of a surface, the four corner nodes of which are loaded), and it is up to the
user to do this, if necessary. To facilitate such editing on the part of the user,
DIVELM will, upon request, create detailed information relating the old and the
new files. This information is compiled in three separate files:
1.
CELM.DAT
2.
CNOD.DAT
3.
CMIDNOD.DAT
For each old element, file lists the numbers of the

new elements the old element is divided into.
For each old active node, the old sequence and
node numbers and the corresponding new node
number are listed. However, it should be noted that
the sequence number corresponds to that obtained
after inactive nodes are eliminated from the list and
therefore does not necessarily correspond to the
sequence in the original input file.
Division of bricks and wedges into tetrahedra
requires the creation of mid-surface and mid-element nodes. For each (new) mid-surface node, the
number of this node is listed together with the new
numbers of the old nodes at the corners of that surface. Each (new) mid-element node, similarly is
listed together with the numbers of the newly created mid-surface nodes for that element.
This data would also be helpful to the user in preparing the optimization data input
file for the problem.
A-2
Only the following executive command and bulk data are created in the converted
file:
ANALYSIS
(= STATIC)
*TITLE
*ELTYPE
*RCTABLE
*MATERIAL
*E1
(any *ELEMENT data group gets converted to

*E1 data group)
*RIGLINK
*NODES
*MPCEQN
*LDCASE
*LDCOMB
*LCSYSTEM
(any *G2 data gets converted to *LCSYS data

group)
*LCTITLE
*SPDISP
*BODYFORCE
*PRESSURE
*CFORCE
*NDTEMPER
(currently not otherwise supported by SHAPE)
*POSTCNTL
*ENDDATA
It should be noted that, since no analysis is done, DIVELM does not support the
postprocessing file 27. However, requesting this file to be saved will not affect the
job, except for the issuance of an error message at the end. If it is requested that the
geometry file 26 be saved, this will pertain to the input (brick) model, not the
output (tetrahedron) model.
A-3
In the interactive mode, DIVELM will prompt the user for all necessary
information. In the batch mode, the same information should be contained in the
batch file as below (defaults are shown in square brackets):
LINE
1
2
3
4
5
DIVELM
input file name
output file name
[nisa2. out]
converted file name
[nisa2tet.std]
Y/N
[N]
COMMENTS
(or RUN DIVELM, or similar command as
appropriate)
NISA II data input file to be converted
NISA II output file that echoes the input data
(no analysis is done.)
NISA II data input file with the tetrahedron
elements
Y : program will create___ .DAT files
N : program will not create__ .DAT files
A-4
Appendix
B
Example Problems
The problems presented herein have been designed to familiarize the user with the
preparation of the SHAPE (optimization) data input file. The preparation of the
NISA II data input file, which describes the finite element model, is beyond the
scope of this manual, and the user should refer to the NISA II Users Manual for
this purpose (see also Section 3.1 in this manual).
To save space, and to simplify duplication of the NISA II data input files by the
user, the example problems have been selected so as to have uniform initial finite
element meshes. This allows the use of the NISA II internal mesh generation
capability, reducing considerably the size of the data input file. Consistent units
have been used throughout, since SHAPE does not do any conversion of units.
Example problems 8 and 9 were added with the SHAPE 90.0 manual. Example
problem 10 has been added with this (91.0) version of the manual.
As in any nonlinear problem, it is difficult to judge the amount of CPU time
required to run a given job. However, it is possible to make judgements on relative
speeds based on the following:
-
Assuming the same number of iterations to convergence, a problem with

a larger number of finite elements will take longer to solve than a problem with a smaller number of the same type of finite elements.
In the case of stress constrained optimization, observations indicate that

convergence takes more time when the stress distribution is more
uniform. This is basically due to the higher number of active constraints
B-1
that should be considered in the optimality criteria expressions and the

higher number of re-analyses required during active set updating.
-
Problems where shape optimization is allowed to take place only on the

initial
boundaries (BOUND = ON) will generally take longer to converge than the cases where new boundaries are allowed to form (BOUND
= OFF).
In problems where the cross-coupling among elements is weak (as in cantilevers)

and where only stress constraints have been prescribed, zero or very small
sensitivity coefficients may adversely affect the speed and quality of the solution.
Until the user gains familiarity with the program, it may be wise to impose time
limits on the jobs to be run. To help as a guide, the CPU times required for the
example problems are given with each example. All CPU times are for the current
version of the program on an ELXSI 6400 system using a "MOD2" CPU running at
8 VAX mips.
The example problems are presented in the following format:
Title
Problem Statement
Description of the physical problem with the

loading, boundary conditions and the design
constraints.
Numerical
Model
Description of the finite element model and the

application of the design constraints.
Results
Figures
NISA II Data Input File
SHAPE (optimization) Data Input File (except for Problem 9)
Any other files related to the problem or to output
The given example problems may obviously be varied by the user to test different
facilities of the program.
B-2
Example Problems
Example Problem No. 1ESimply supported Panel in Plane StressXAMPLE PROBLEM

1
B.1 Simply Supported Panel in Plane Stress

Title:
Simply supported panel in plane stress
Problem Statement:
The panel shown in Figure B.1-1 is loaded in plane in the middle by a force P
applied in the downwards (-Y) direction. The two simple supports at the ends
restrict translation in the X and Y directions. For the given single load case, the
structure is to be optimized for minimum material volume, with constraints on the
von Mises equivalent stress everywhere in the system as well as a constraint on the
Y-direction translation at the point of loading.
The default shape optimization options are to be used, allowing shape changes to
take place anywhere in the system (BOUND = OFF), also allowing possible breaks
(BREAK = ON).
Using consistent units, the constants for the problem are:
Lx
160.0
Ly
80.0
1.5
3.0E4
0.3
30.0
von Mises
30.0
uy
0.3 ( at the point of loading)
B-3
Simply Supported Panel in Plane Stress
Numerical Models:
1. Quarter Model: Due to the symmetry and anti-symmetry conditions, only the
upper right hand quarter of the system is modeled as in Figure B.1-2. The
coordinates are selected such that the symmetry plane is the Y-Z plane and the
anti-symmetry plane is the X-Z plane. The model has 512 constant strain, triangular plane stress elements and 281 nodes.
While there are no prescribed fabricational constraints for the problem, it is the
correct procedure to freeze regions where the loads and supports are to be kept.
Accordingly, the elements connected to the loaded node (node 1) and to the pin
supported node (node 33) are frozen. The von Mises stress constraint is applied
to all of the 512 elements in the model, and the displacement constraint is
applied to node 1. The limiting values are intentionally chosen high for this
problem, to see how much improvement can be obtained with the given finite
element model.
2. Half Model & Full Model: To test the consistency of the program with
implicit symmetry, the right half of the plate was modeled with 1024 elements
and the full plate was modeled with 2048 elements. The relevant input files are
also given herein after those for the quarter model. The results for both models
are exactly the same as those obtained for the quarter model.
Results:
Process terminated at
Iteration 64 (design step 15)
Best design found at
Reason for termination
Best design found in the previous design step

could not be improved upon during start of new
design step, since only one layer of finite elements is left in the mesh. Any kinks are
probably due to lack of sufficient number of elements in the final stages. The high value of the
final factor to the constraint surface indicates that
much more improvement can be obtained after
smoothing out the shape and remodeling with
smaller elements.
B-4
Example Problems
Initial material volume (full panel)
= 19200.0
Final material volume (full panel, unsmoothed shape) = 2962.5 (Version 88.8:
3037.5)
Percent decrease in volume
= 84.57%
Required CPU time (to termination)
= 216 seconds
(half model: 546 sec.;
full model: 1836 sec.)
Initial factor to constraint surface
= 14.281
Final factor to constraint surface
= 6.140
The change in volume vs. design step number is plotted in Figure B.1-3. The finite
element mesh and the smoothed shape for the final design are given in Figures B.14 and B.1-5, respectively. These figures are obtained by reflecting the quarter panel
finite element mesh about the symmetry and anti-symmetry planes using
DISPLAY.
Figure B.1-1 Panel and loading of example problem 1
B-5
Figure B.1-2 Finite element model of quarter panel for example problem 1
B-6
Example Problems
Figure B.1-3 Optimization progress (most efficient design vs. design step) for
example problem 1
B-7
Figure B.1-4 Finite element mesh of final design for example problem 1
B-8
Example Problems
Figure B.1-5 Smoothed Shape of Final Design for example problem 1

*******************************************************************
*****************
**
**
**
SIMPLY SUPPORTED PANEL IN PLANE STRESS
**
**
PANEL DIMENSIONS : 160.0 X 80.0 X 1.5
**
**
(SHAPE/NISA INPUT FILE FOR QUARTER PANEL MODEL)
**
**
**
**
MODELED QUARTER HAS : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF ELEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . = 512
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF NODES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . = 281
**
**
LARGEST NODE NUMBER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .= 561
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF DEGREES OF FREEDOM . . . = 562
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF UNCONSTRAINED DOFS . . .= 536
**
**
**
*******************************************************************
*****************
B-9
ANALYSIS = STATIC
RESEQUENCE = ON
ELEMENT = OFF
NODE = OFF
*TITLE
SIMPLY SUPPORTED PANEL IN PLANE STRESS (UPPER RIGHT QUARTER F/E MODEL)
*ELTYPE
1,1,10
*RCTABLE
1, 3
.150E+01//
*ELEMENT
0,0,0,0,0,-8,66,16,64
1,1,1,1,0,16,2,1,1
1,3,35
0,0,0,0,0,-8,66,16,64
17,1,1,1,0,16,2,1,1
3,69,35
0,0,0,0,0,-8,66,16,64
33,1,1,1,0,16,2,1,1
67,35,69
0,0,0,0,0,-8,66,16,64
49,1,1,1,0,16,2,1,1
67,1,35
*NODES
-33,0,33,17,0,2.5,0
1,0,0,0,0.,0.,0.
33,0,1,0,80.0,0.0,0.0
*MATERIAL
EX ,1,0, .30000E+05
NUXY,1,0, .30000E+00
*LDCASE
B-10
Example Problems
0, 0, 1, 0,-1, 0
*LCTITLE
CONCENTRATED NODAL FORCE AT THE CENTER OF THE PANEL
*SPDISP
** PINNED SUPPORT CONDITION
33,UX,0.0, , ,UY
** SYMMETRY BOUNDARY CONDITION
1,UX,0.0,529,66
** ANTI-SYMMETRY BOUNDARY CONDITION
3,UX,0.0, 31, 2
*CFORCE
** LOAD AT THE CENTER OF THE PANEL
1,FY,-7.5
*PRINT
DISP,-1
*ENDDATA
******************************************************************
*******************
**
**
**
**
(SHAPE/OPTIMIZATION INPUT FILE FOR QUARTER PANEL)
**
**
**
**
THE SHAPE OF THE SIMPLY SUPPORTED PANEL IS TO BE OPTIMIZED WITH **
**
STRESS CONSTRAINTS ON ALL THE ELEMENTS AND A DISPLACEMENT
**
**
CONSTRAINT AT THE LOADED NODE (CENTER OF PANEL).
**
**
**
MATERIAL MAY BE REMOVED FROM ANYWHERE EXCEPT THE FROZEN

**
REGIONS:
BOUND = OFF (DEFAULT)
**
BREAKS ARE ALLOWED: BREAK = ON (DEFAULT)
**
MAXIMUM NUMBER OF ITERATIONS ALLOWED IS 100.
**
**
**
**
**
**
******************************************************************
*******************
LIMIT = 100
*TITLE
SIMPLY SUPPORTED PANEL IN PLANE STRESS (QUARTER PANEL MODEL)
*********************************************************************************
****
B-11
ONE SYMMETRY PLANE AND ONE ANTI-SYMMETRY PLANE IN THE MODEL **

**
******************************************************************
*******************
*SYMPLANE
SYMMETRY
ANTI-SYMM
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
******************************************************************
*******************
VON-MISES
STRESS
LIMIT
OF 30.0 UNITS IS PRESCRIBED FOR ALL OF
**
**
THE 512 ELEMENTS PRESENT IN THE ORIGINAL DESIGN MODEL
**
**
******************************************************************
*******************
*CNSTRESS
1 512 1 1 1 1 1 1
VMS 30.
*********************************************************************************
****
THE ABSOLUTE VALUE OF Y-DIRECTION TRANSLATION AT THE CENTER
**
**
OF
THE
PANEL
IS
LIMITED
TO
A
MAXIMUM
OF
0.3
UNITS.
**
**
*********************************************************************************
****
*CNDISPLACEMENT
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
UYY 0.3
*********************************************************************************
****
THE LOADED NODE (NODE 1), AND THE NODE AT THE PIN SUPPORT (NODE
**
**
33)
ARE FROZEN, RESULTING IN THE CONNECTED ELEMENTS BEING FROZEN. **
**
*********************************************************************************
****
*CNFABRICATIONAL
NODE 1 33 32
*ENDDATA
******************************************************************
*******************
**
END OF OPTIMIZATION DATA INPUT
**
******************************************************************
*******************
*****************************************************************
********************
B-12
Example Problems
**
**
**
**
**
**
(SHAPE/NISA INPUT FILE FOR HALF PANEL MODEL)
**
**
**
**
MODELED HALF HAS : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
**
**
TOTAL
NUMBER
OF
ELEMENTS
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
=
1024
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF NODES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . = 545
**
**
LARGEST NODE NUMBER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . = 1089
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF DEGREES OF FREEDOM . . .= 1090
**
**
TOTAL
NUMBER
OF
UNCONSTRAINED
DOFS
.
.
=
1071
**
**
**
**
*****************************************************************
********************
B-13
ANALYSIS = STATIC
RESEQUENCE = ON
ELEMENT = OFF
NODE
= OFF
*TITLE
SIMPLY SUPPORTED PANEL IN PLANE STRESS (RIGHT HALF F/E
MODEL)
*ELTYPE
1,1,10
*RCTABLE
1, 3
.150E+01//
*ELEMENT
0,0,0,0,0,-16,66,16,64
1,1,1,1,0,16,2,1,1
1,3,35
0,0,0,0,0,-16,66,16,64
17,1,1,1,0,16,2,1,1
3,69,35
0,0,0,0,0,-16,66,16,64
33,1,1,1,0,16,2,1,1
67,35,69
0,0,0,0,0,-16,66,16,64
49,1,1,1,0,16,2,1,1
67,1,35
*NODES
-33,0,33,33,0,2.5,0
1,0,0,0,0.,-40.,0.
33,0,1,0,80.0,-40.0,0.0
*MATERIAL
EX ,1,0, .30000E+05
NUXY,1,0, .30000E+00
*LDCASE
0, 0, 1, 0,-1, 0
*LCTITLE
B-14
Example Problems

*SPDISP
** PINNED SUPPORT CONDITION
561,UX,0.0, , ,UY
** SYMMETRY BOUNDARY CONDITION
1,UX,0.0,1057,66
*CFORCE
529,FY,-15.0
*PRINT
DISP,-1
*ENDDATA
******************************************************************
*******************
**
**
** SIMPLY SUPPORTED PANEL IN PLANE STRESS
**
** (SHAPE/OPTIMIZATION INPUT FILE FOR HALF PANEL MODEL)
**
**
**
** THE SHAPE OF THE SIMPLY SUPPORTED PANEL IS TO BE OPTIMIZED WITH **
** STRESS CONSTRAINTS ON ALL THE ELEMENTS AND A DISPLACEMENT
**
**
** CONSTRAINT AT THE LOADED NODE (CENTER OF PANEL).
** MATERIAL MAY BE REMOVED FROM ANYWHERE EXCEPT THE FROZEN REGIONS: **
**
**
**
** BREAKS ARE ALLOWED: BREAK = ON (DEFAULT)
**
** MAXIMUM NUMBER OF ITERATIONS ALLOWED IS 100.
**
**
*********************************************************************************
****
LIMIT = 100
*TITLE
SIMPLY SUPPORTED PANEL IN PLANE STRESS (HALF PANEL MODEL)
*********************************************************************************
****
**
THERE IS ONE SYMMETRY PLANE IN THE MODEL
**
B-15
*********************************************************************************
****
*SYMPLANE
SYMMETRY
0.0
0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0
*********************************************************************************
****
**
VON-MISES STRESS LIMIT OF 30.0 UNITS IS PRESCRIBED FOR ALL OF THE **
**
THE 1024 ELEMENTS PRESENT IN THE ORIGINAL DESIGN MODEL.
**
*********************************************************************************
****
*CNSTRESS
1 1024 1 1 1 1 1 1
VMS 30.
*********************************************************************************
****
**
**
**
OF THE PANEL IS LIMITED TO A MAXIMUM OF 0.3 UNITS.
**
*********************************************************************************
****
*CNDISPLACEMENT
529 529 1 1 1 1 1 1
UYY 0.3
*********************************************************************************
****
THE LOADED NODE (NODE 529), AND THE NODE AT THE PIN SUPPORT
**
**
(NODE 561)
**
ARE FROZEN, RESULTING IN THE CONNECTED ELEMENTS BEING FROZEN. **
*********************************************************************************
****
*CNFABRICATIONAL
NODE 529 561 32
*ENDDATA
*********************************************************************************
****
**
**
******************************************************************
*******************
B-16
Example Problems
**********************************************************************************
***
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
(SHAPE/NISA INPUT FILE FOR FULL MODEL)
**
**
**
**
FULL PLATE MODEL HAS : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
**
**
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF ACTIVE NODES . . . . . . . . . .= 1073
**
**
LARGEST NODE NUMBER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . = 2145
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID DOFS IN MODEL . . .= 2146
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF UNCONSTRAINED DOFS . . = 2142
**
**
**************************************************************
**
***********************
B-17
ANALYSIS = STATIC
RESEQUENCE = ON
ELEMENT = OFF
NODE = OFF
*TITLE
SIMPLY SUPPORTED PANEL IN PLANE STRESS (FULL PANEL F/E MODEL)
*ELTYPE
1,1,10
*RCTABLE
1, 3
.150E+01//
*ELEMENT
0,0,0,0,0,-16,130,32,128
1,1,1,1,0,32,2,1,1
1,3,67
0,0,0,0,0,-16,130,32,128
33,1,1,1,0,32,2,1,1
3,133,67
0,0,0,0,0,-16,130,32,128
65,1,1,1,0,32,2,1,1
131,67,133
0,0,0,0,0,-16,130,32,128
97,1,1,1,0,32,2,1,1
131,1,67
*NODES
-65,0,65,33,0,2.5,0
1,0,0,0,-80.,-40.,0.
65,0,1,0, 80.,-40.,0.
*MATERIAL
EX ,1,0, .30000E+05
B-18
Example Problems
NUXY,1,0, .30000E+00
*LDCASE
0, 0, 1, 0,-1, 0
*LCTITLE
*SPDISP
** PINNED SUPPORT CONDITIONS
1041,UX,0.0, , ,UY
1105,UX,0.0, , ,UY
*CFORCE
1073,FY,-30.0
*PRINT
DISP,-1
*ENDDATA
*******************************************************************
******************
**
**
**
**
**
(SHAPE/OPTIMIZATION INPUT FILE FOR FULL MODEL)
**
**
**
**
THE SHAPE OF THE SIMPLY SUPPORTED PANEL IS TO BE OPTIMIZED WITH
**
**
STRESS CONSTRAINTS ON ALL THE ELEMENTS AND A DISPLACEMENT
**
**
CONSTRAINT AT THE LOADED NODE (CENTER OF PANEL).
**
REGIONS:
**
**
**
**
B-19
**
**
**
**
***********************************************************************************
**
LIMIT = 100
*TITLE
SIMPLY SUPPORTED PANEL IN PLANE STRESS (FULL PANEL MODEL)
***********************************************************************************
**
**
VON-MISES STRESS LIMIT OF 30.0 UNITS IS PRESCRIBED FOR ALL OF
**
**
**
***********************************************************************************
**
*CNSTRESS
1 2048 1 1 1 1 1 1
VMS 30.
***********************************************************************************
**
**
**
**
OF THE PANEL IS LIMITED TO A MAXIMUM OF 0.3 UNITS.
**
***********************************************************************************
**
*CNDISPLACEMENT
1073 1073 1 1 1 1 1 1
UYY 0.3
***********************************************************************************
**
**
THE NODES AT THE PIN SUPPORTS(1041,1105), AND THE LOADED NODE(1073) **
**
ARE FROZEN, RESULTING IN THE CONNECTED ELEMENTS BEING FROZEN.
**
***********************************************************************************
**
*CNFABRICATIONAL
NODE 1041 1105 32
*ENDDATA
***********************************************************************************
**
**
**
*******************************************************************
******************
B-20
Example Problems
Example Problem No. 2 EXAMPLE PROBLEM 2
B.2 Cantilever panel in plane stress with two load cases

Title:
Cantilever panel in plane stress with two load cases
Problem Statement:
Two separate load cases act on the panel shown in Figure B.2-1. One load case is
the self-weight of the system under which the tip mid-height translation in the Ydirection may be critical, and the other load case is the distributed load acting as
shown in the figure, for which the von Mises equivalent stresses may be critical.
The left edge is fixed against translation in the X and Y directions.
The panel is to be optimized for minimum material volume, with the shape
variation limited only to the original boundaries (BOUND = ON) and no breaks
allowed (BREAK = OFF).
Lx
160.0
Ly
80.0
1.0
1.0 10
0.3
weight density
0.098
acceleration factor
1.0
12500.0
0.002
(first load case; mid-height of
right edge)
uy
B-21
(per unit area)
von Mises
14000.0
(second load case)
Numerical Model:
While the body force loading is an anti-symmetrical problem and the distributed
force loading is a symmetrical problem, the full structure needs to be modeled
(Figure B.2-2) since the boundary conditions have to remain the same for all load
cases with this version of SHAPE. The model has 2048 constant strain, triangular
plane stress elements and 1073 nodes.
One rectangular layer of elements is frozen at the supported left edge. Also the
eight elements in the two squares under the distributed load of load case 2 are
frozen. The displacement constraint of load case 1 is applied to the node at midheight of the right hand side edge (node 1105). The von Mises stress constraint of
load case 2 is applied to all of the 2048 elements in the model.
Results:
The most efficient design found in the previous

design step could not be improved upon during
the intermediate design process. It is highly
probable that the final shape is within close
proximity of the global optimum, within the
limitations of the remaining finite element
mesh. It should be noted that the most efficient
designs of design steps 13 and 14 are very close
to the optimum design, obtained in iteration 110
(design step 13). The solution at iteration 111 is
also interesting in that it is of higher quality than
the most efficient design of step 14, although of
the same material volume.
Initial material volume
12800.0
Final material volume (unsmoothed shape)
5537.5
B-22
Example Problems
56.74%
1985 seconds
1.074
1.003
element mesh and the smoothed shape for the final design are given in Figures B.24 and B.2-5 respectively.
Figure B.2-1 Cantilever panel and load case 2 of example problem 2
B-23
Figure B.2-2 Finite element model of cantilever for example problem 2
B-24
Example Problems
example problem 2
B-25
B-26
Example Problems
Figure B.2-5 Smoothed shape of final design for example problem 2

*****************************************************************
********************
**
**
CANTILEVER PANEL IN PLANE STRESS
**
**
**
**
(SHAPE/NISA INPUT FILE)
**
**
**
**
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF NODES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . = 1073
**
**
LARGEST NODE NUMBER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . = 2145
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF DEGREES OF FREEDOM . . = 2146
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF UNCONSTRAINED DOFS . . .= 2112
**
**
*****************************************************************
********************
B-27
ANALYSIS = STATIC
RESEQUENCE = OFF
ELEMENT = OFF
NODE = OFF
*TITLE
CANTILEVER PANEL IN PLANE STRESS (TWO LOAD CASES)
*ELTYPE
1,1,10
*RCTABLE
1, 3
1.0//
*ELEMENT
0,0,0,0,0,-16,130,128,4
1,1,1,1,0,32,2,4,64
1, 3, 67
2,1,1,1,0
131, 1, 67
3,1,1,1,0
131, 67,133
4,1,1,1,0
3,133, 67
*NODES
-65,0,65,33,0,2.5,0
1,0,0,0, 0.0,0.0,0.0
65,0,1,0,160.0,0.0,0.0
*MATERIAL
EX, 1, 0, 10.0E+06
NUXY, 1, 0, 0.3
DENS, 1, 0, 0.098
*LDCASE = 1
0, 0, 1, 0,-1, 0
*LCTITLE
PANEL UNDER SELF WEIGHT
B-28
Example Problems
*SPDISP
1,UX,0.0,2081,130,UY
*BODYFORCE
0,0,0,0,-1.0,0
*PRINT
DISP,-1
*LDCASE = 2
0, 0, 1, 0,-1, 0
*LCTITLE
NORMAL DISTRIBUTED LOAD ACTING AT THE CENTER OF THE FREE
END
*PRESSURE
2016,,, 1,,,12500.0
2020,,, 1,,,12500.0
*PRINT = 1
*ENDDATA
*******************************************************************
******************
**
**
** CANTILEVER PANEL IN PLANE STRESS
**
(SHAPE/OPTIMIZATION INPUT FILE)
**
**
**
**
THE SHAPE OF THE CANTILEVER PANEL IS TO BE OPTIMIZED WITH
**
**
A DISPLACEMENT CONSTRAINT FOR THE FIRST LOAD CASE AND STRESS
**
**
CONSTRAINTS ON ALL THE ELEMENTS FOR THE SECOND LOAD CASE.5
**
**
MATERIAL MAY BE REMOVED ONLY FROM EXISTING BOUNDARIES:
**
**
BOUND = ON
**
**
BREAKS ARE NOT ALLOWED: BREAK = OFF
**
**
MAXIMUM NUMBER OF ITERATIONS ALLOWED IS 200
**
**
*************************************************************
**
**
**************
B-29
LIMIT = 200
BOUNDARY = ON
BREAK = OFF
*TITLE
CANTILEVER PANEL IN PLANE STRESS.TWO LOAD CASES-STRESS & DISPL. CONSTRAINTS
*****************************************************************************
**ABSOLUTE VALUE OF THE Y-DIRECTION TRANSLATION(FOR FIRST LOAD CASE)
** AT MID-HEIGHT OF THE FREE END OF THE CANTILEVER IS LIMITED TO A
**
** MAXIMUM OF 0.002 UNITS.
**
***************************************************************************
*CNDISPLACEMENT
1105 1105 1 1 1 1 1 1
UYY 0.002
**********************************************************************************
***
* VON-MISES STRESS LIMIT OF 14000.0 UNITS (FOR THE SECOND LOAD CASE)
**
** IS PRESCRIBED FOR ALL OF THE 2048 ELEMENTS PRESENT IN THE ORIGINAL
**
** DESIGN.
**
***************************************************************************
*CNSTRESS
1 2048 1 1 1 2 2 1
VMS 14000.0
****************************************************************************
* ONE RECTANGULAR LAYER OF ELEMENTS FROZEN AT THE FIXED SUPPORT (1-68). **
** ALSO EIGHT ELEMENTS UNDER THE PRESSURE LOAD (2013-2020) ARE FROZEN. **
***************************************************************************
*CNFABRICATIONAL
ELEMENT 1
64
1
ELEMENT 2013 2020 1
*ENDDATA
*****************************************************************************
END OF OPTIMIZATION DATA INPUT **
***************************************************************************
B-30
Example Problems
Example Problem No. 3
B.3 Square panel in plane stress with displacement constraints

Title:
Square panel in plane stress with displacement constraints
Problem Statement:
This example problem is included mainly to illustrate the application of the relative
displacement constraint type. The panel shown in Figure B.3-1 is subjected to two
load cases applied such that the final design is expected to be skew-symmetric
about the two diagonals. The pin supports at the upper left hand and lower right
hand corners prevent translations in the X and Y directions.
For illustration purposes, the stresses are assumed not to be critical for any
resulting design. The only constraints are those on the X and Y direction
translations of the unsupported corner nodes and on the relative displacement of
these corners along the direction of the diagonal (based on the undeformed shape)
passing through these corners.
The panel is to be optimized for minimum material volume. The default shape
optimization options are to be used, allowing shape changes to take place anywhere
in the system (BOUND = OFF), also allowing possible breaks (BREAK = ON).
Lx
10.0
Ly
10.0
0.1
1.0 10
0.3
P1
600.0
B-31
P2
250.0
uX
0.015 (two unsupported corners)
uy
0.015 (two unsupported corners)
u relative
0.005 (between two unsupported corners, along

direction of diagonal)
Numerical Model:
Since each load case, separately, is unsymmetrical, the entire panel is modeled, as
shown in Figure B.3-2. The model has 1600 constant strain, triangular plane stress
elements and 841 nodes.
The four elements at each corner square are frozen, by freezing the nodes common
to each set of four elements, to account for the supported and loaded regions. The
displacement constraints are applied at the lower left hand corner node (node 1)
and the upper right hand corner node (node 1681).
Results:

the intermediate design process. It is highly probable that the final shape is within close proximity
of the global optimum, within the limitations of
the remaining finite element mesh.
Initial material volume
10.0
Final material volume (unsmoothed shape)
3.075
88.8: 3.363)
69.25%
1628 seconds
B-32
(Version
Example Problems
1.859
1.006
element mesh and the smoothed shape for the final design are given in Figures B.34 and B.3-5 respectively.
Figure B.3-1 Panel and the two load cases of example problem 3
B-33
Figure B.3-2 Finite Element Model of Panel for example problem 3
B-34
Example Problems
Figure B.3-3 Optimization Progress (most efficient design vs. design step) for
example problem 3
B-35
Figure B.3-4 Finite Element Mesh of Final Design for example problem 3
B-36
Example Problems
Figure B.3-5 Smoothed Shape of Final Design for example problem 3

*******************************************************************
*****************
**
**
SQUARE
PANEL
IN
PLANE
STRESS
WITH
DISPL.
CONSTRAINTS
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF ELEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . = 1600
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF NODES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . = 841
**
**
LARGEST NODE NUMBER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . = 1681
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF DEGREES OF FREEDOM . . . . = 1682
**
**
TOTAL
NUMBER
OF
UNCONSTRAINED
DOFS
.
.
.
.=
1678
**
**
*************************************************************
**
**
**************************
B-37
ANALYSIS = STATIC
RESEQUENCE = OFF
ELEMENT
= OFF
NODE
= OFF
*TITLE
SQUARE PANEL IN PLANE STRESS WITH DISPLACEMENT CONSTRAINTS
*ELTYPE
1,1,10
*RCTABLE
1, 3
0.1//
*ELEMENT
0,0,0,0,0,-20,82,80,80
1,1,1,1,0,20,2,4,4
1, 3,43
2,1,1,1,0
83, 1,43
3,1,1,1,0
83,43,85
4,1,1,1,0
3,85,43
*NODES
-41,0,41,41,0.0,0.25,0.0
1,0,0,0, 0.0,0.0,0.0
41,0,1,0,10.0,0.0,0.0
*MATERIAL
EX, 1, 0, 10.0E+06
NUXY, 1, 0, 0.3
*LDCASE = 1
0, 0, 0, 0,-1, 0
*SPDISP
41,UX,0.0,1641,1600,UY
*CFORCE
1,FY, -600.0
B-38
Example Problems
1681,FX, 250.0
1681,FY, 250.0
*PRINT
DISP,-1
*LDCASE = 2
0, 0, 0, 0,-1, 0
*CFORCE
1681,FY, 600.0
1,FX, -250.0
1,FY, -250.0
*PRINT=1
*ENDDATA
*****************************************************************
********************
**
**
** SQUARE PANEL IN PLANE STRESS WITH DISPL. CONSTRAINTS
**
**
** (SHAPE/OPTIMIZATION INPUT FILE)
**
**
** THE SHAPE OF THE SQUARE PANEL ACTED UPON BY TWO SEPARATE LOAD **
** CASES IS TO BE OPTIMIZED FOR A RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT CONSTRAINT **
** DEFINED BETWEEN THE TWO UNSUPPORTED CORNER NODES, AND FOR **
** CONSTRAINTS ON THE X AND Y TRANSLATIONS OF THESE TWO NODES. **
** REGIONS:
**

**
**
**
** BREAKS ARE ALLOWED: BREAK = ON (DEFAULT)
**
** MAXIMUM NUMBER OF ITERATIONS ALLOWED IS 300.
**
**
*****************************************************************
********************
LIMIT = 300
*TITLE
SQUARE PANEL IN PLANE-STRESS WITH DISPLACEMENT CONSTRAINTS
*****************************************************************
********************
THE ABSOLUTE VALUES OF THE X- AND Y-DIRECTION TRANSLATIONS AT
**THE
B-39
**
TWO UNSUPPORTED CORNER NODES OF THE PANEL ARE LIMITED TO A MAX-
**IMUM
**
**
** VALUE OF 0.015 UNITS
** THE RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT BETWEEN THESE TWO NODES ALONG THE **
** DIAGONAL JOINING THE TWO NODES IS LIMITED TO A MAXIMUM VALUE OF **
** 0.005 UNITS.
**
**
** THESE CONSTRAINTS ARE SPECIFIED FOR BOTH LOAD CASES.
*****************************************************************
********************
*CNDISPLACEMENT
1 1681 1680 1 2 1 2 1
UYY 0.015
UXX 0.015
-1 0 0 -2 1 1 2 1 1
1 1681
UUU 0.005 .70710678 .70710678
*****************************************************************
********************
FOUR TRIANGULAR ELEMENTS AT EACH CORNER OF THE SQUARE PANEL
**
FROZEN BY FREEZING THE COMMON NODE (FOUR NODES FOR FOUR COR-
**
**ARE
**NERS).
*****************************************************************
********************
*CNFABRICATIONAL
NODE -1 0 0 1
43 81 1601 1639
*ENDDATA
*****************************************************************
********************
** END OF OPTIMIZATION DATA INPUT
**
*****************************************************************
********************
B-40
Example Problems
Example Problem No. 4EXAMPLE PROBLEM 4
B.4 Solid Cantilever with Tip Loading

Title:
Solid cantilever with tip loading
Problem Statement:
The prismatic solid cantilever shown in Figure B.4-1 is supported everywhere on
the left end surface, and is loaded at mid-height at the right end. The total load of
7P is divided into 7 equally spaced point loads. For the given single load case, the
structure is to be optimized for minimum material volume, with constraints on the
von Mises equivalent stress everywhere in the system.
take place anywhere in the system (BOUND = OFF), also allowing possible breaks
(BREAK = ON).
Lx
16.0
Ly
16.0
Lz
3.0
3.0x10 4
0.3
2.0
von Mises
10.0
B-41
Solid Cantilever with Tip Loading
Numerical Model:
Due to the symmetry and anti-symmetry conditions, only the upper front quarter of
the system is modeled as shown by the hidden line plot of Figure B.4-2. The
coordinates are selected such that the symmetry plane is the X-Y plane and the
anti-symmetry plane is the X-Z plane. The model has 7680 constant strain,
tetrahedral solid elements and 2244 nodes.
One layer of elements in the form of a rectangular prism is frozen at the left end, by
freezing the supported nodes. Also, the elements connected to the loaded nodes are
frozen by freezing the loaded nodes. The von Mises stress constraint is applied to
all of the 7680 elements in the model.
Results:

the intermediate design process. It is highly
probable that the final shape is within close
proximity of the global optimum, within the
limitations of the remaining finite element mesh.
Initial material volume (full cantilever)
= 768.0
Final material volume (full cantilever, unsmoothed shape) = 119.4

(Version 88.8: 121.9)
= 84.45%
Required CPU time
= 13147 seconds
= 1.067
= 1.001
The change in volume vs. design step number is plotted in Figure B.4-3. Hidden
line plots of the finite element mesh and the smoothed shape for the full final
design are given in Figures B.4-4 and B.4-5 respectively. These figures are
B-42
Example Problems
obtained by reflecting the quarter beam finite element mesh about the symmetry
and anti-symmetry planes using DISPLAY.
Figure B.4-1 Solid cantilever and loading of example problem 4
B-43
Figure B.4-2 Finite element model of quarter of solid cantilever for example problem 4
B-44
Example Problems
example problem 4
B-45
B-46
Example Problems

B-47
*****************************************************************
********************
**
**
SOLID CANTILEVER WITH LOAD AT MID-LINE OF THE FREE END
**
**
CANTILEVER DIMENSIONS : 16.0 X 16.0 X 3.0
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF ELEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . .= 7680
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF NODES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .= 2244
**
**
LARGEST NODE NUMBER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .= 2244
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF DEGREES OF FREEDOM . . . .= 6732
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF UNCONSTRAINED DOFS . . . = 5856
**
**
**********************************************************
**
**
*******
B-48
Example Problems
ANALYSIS = STATIC
RESEQUENCE = OFF
ELEMENT = OFF
NODE
= OFF
*TITLE
*ELTYPE
1,4,20
*ELEMENT
0,0,0,0,0,-16,136,240,480
1,1,1,0,0, 8, 8, 30, 30
1, 5, 2, 69
2,1,1
2, 5, 6, 74
3,1,1
69, 70, 74, 2
4,1,1
69, 74, 73, 5
5,1,1
2, 69, 5, 74
6,1,1
2, 6, 7, 74
7,1,1
2, 7, 3, 71
8,1,1
70, 71, 74, 2
9,1,1
71, 75, 74, 7
10,1,1
2, 74, 7, 71
11,1,1
3, 7, 4, 71
12,1,1
B-49
4, 7, 8, 76
13,1,1
71, 72, 76, 4
14,1,1
71, 76, 75, 7
15,1,1
4, 71, 7, 76
16,1,1
5, 9, 10, 77
17,1,1
5, 10, 6, 74
18,1,1
73, 74, 77, 5
19,1,1
74, 78, 77, 10
20,1,1
5, 77, 10, 74
21,1,1
6, 10, 7, 74
22,1,1
7, 10, 11, 79
23,1,1
74, 75, 79, 7
24,1,1
74, 79, 78, 10
25,1,1
7, 74, 10, 79
26,1,1
7, 11, 12, 79
27,1,1
7, 12, 8, 76
28,1,1
75, 76, 79, 7
29,1,1
76, 80, 79, 12
30,1,1
7, 79, 12, 76
0,0,0,0,0,-16,136,240,480
241,1,1,0,0, 8, 8, 30, 30
69, 73, 74,141
242,1,1
69, 74, 70,138
243,1,1
137,138,141, 69
244,1,1
138,142,141, 74
245,1,1
B-50
Example Problems
69,141, 74,138
246,1,1
70, 74, 71,138
247,1,1
71, 74, 75,143
248,1,1
138,139,143, 71
249,1,1
138,143,142, 74
250,1,1
71,138, 74,143
251,1,1
71, 75, 76,143
252,1,1
71, 76, 72,140
253,1,1
139,140,143, 71
254,1,1
140,144,143, 76
255,1,1
71,143, 76,140
256,1,1
73, 77, 74,141
257,1,1
74, 77, 78,146
258,1,1
141,142,146, 74
259,1,1
141,146,145, 77
260,1,1
74,141, 77,146
261,1,1
74, 78, 79,146
262,1,1
74, 79, 75,143
263,1,1
142,143,146, 74
264,1,1
143,147,146, 79
265,1,1
74,146, 79,143
266,1,1
75, 79, 76,143
267,1,1
76, 79, 80,148
268,1,1
143,144,148, 76
B-51
269,1,1
143,148,147, 79
270,1,1
76,143, 79,148
*NODES
-68,0,17,33,0.5,0.0,0.0
1,0, 0, 0,0.0,0.0,0.0
65,0, 4, 0,0.0,8.0,0.0
-68,0,17,33,0.5,0.0,0.0
2,0, 0, 0,0.0,0.0,0.5
66,0, 4, 0,0.0,8.0,0.5
-68,0,17,33,0.5,0.0,0.0
3,0, 0, 0,0.0,0.0,1.0
67,0, 4, 0,0.0,8.0,1.0
-68,0,17,33,0.5,0.0,0.0
4,0, 0, 0,0.0,0.0,1.5
68,0, 4, 0,0.0,8.0,1.5
*MATERIAL
EX ,1,0, .30000E+05
NUXY,1,0, .30000E+00
*LDCASE
0, 0, 1, 0,-1, 0
*LCTITLE
LOAD AT MID-LINE OF THE FREE END OF CANTILEVER
*SPDISP
** FIXED SUPPORT CONDITION AT X=0.0
1,UX,0.0, 68, 1,UY,UZ
** SYMMETRY BOUNDARY CONDITION AT Z=0.0
69,UZ,0.0,2241, 4
** ANTI-SYMMETRY BOUDARY CONDITION AT Y=0.0
69,UX,0.0,2177,68
70,UX,0.0,2178,68
71,UX,0.0,2179,68
72,UX,0.0,2180,68
*CFORCE
** LOAD AT X=16.0 AND Y=0.0
2177,FY,-0.5
2178,FY,-1.0
2179,FY,-1.0
2180,FY,-1.0
*PRINT
DISP,-1
*ENDDATA
B-52
Example Problems
******************************************************************
*******************
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
THE SHAPE OF THE SOLID CANTILEVER LOADED AT THE TIP IS TO BE
**
**
OPTIMIZED WITH STRESS CONSTRAINTS ON ALL THE ELEMENTS.
**
**
MATERIAL CAN BE REMOVED FROM ANYWHERE EXCEPT THE FROZEN
** REGIONS:
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
*********************************************************************************
****
LIMIT = 400
*TITLE
SOLID CANTILEVER LOADED AT THE TIP. STRESS CONSTRAINTS ONLY
*********************************************************************************
****
**
ONE SYMMETRY PLANE AND ONE ANTI-SYMMETRY PLANE IN THE MODEL **
*********************************************************************************
****
**
*SYMPLANE
SYMMETRY
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
ANTI-SYMM
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
0.0
*********************************************************************************
****
**
**
**
THE 7680 ELEMENTS PRESENT IN THE MODEL
**
B-53
*********************************************************************************
*****
*CNSTRESS
1 7680 1 1 1 1 1 1
VMS 10
*********************************************************************************
****
**
**
**
ALL OF THE NODES THAT HAVE FIXED SUPPORT CONDITIONS ARE FROZEN.**
THUS ONE PRISMATIC LAYER OF ELEMENTS IS FROZEN AT THE FIXED SUP-
** PORT.
SIMILARLY, ALL LOADED NODES ARE ALSO FROZEN :
**
1 TO 68 : SUPPORTED NODES ; 2177 TO 2180 : LOADED NODES
**
**
**
**
*********************************************************************************
****
*CNFABRICATIONAL
NODE 1 68 1
NODE 2177 2180 1
*ENDDATA
*********************************************************************************
****
**
**
*********************************************************************************
****
B-54
Example Problems
B.5 Solid Cantilever Under two Load Cases

Title:
Solid cantilever under two load cases
Problem Statement:
The solid cantilever shown in Figure B.5-1 is to be optimized for minimum
material volume under the application of two separate load cases. The first load
case is a uniformly distributed load q1 per unit area on the entire top surface of the
cantilever. The second load case is a uniformly distributed load q2 per unit area,
acting on the right hand side surface of the cantilever towards the supported end,
but only within the cross-hatched region shown in Figure B.5-1a The entire left
hand side surface is supported against translation in the X, Y, and Z directions.
Constraints are on the von Mises equivalent stress everywhere in the system, with
different allowable values for the two load cases.
Shape variation is to be limited only to the original boundaries (BOUND = ON)
with possible breaks allowed (BREAK = ON, default).
Lx
16.0
Ly
8.0
Lz
3.0
3.0 10
0.3
q1
1.0
q2
20.0
B-55
Solid Cantilever Under two Load Cases
von Mises
20.0 (first load case)
von Mises
16.0 (second load case)
Numerical Model:
Due to the symmetry of the structure, only the front half of the system is modeled
as shown by the hidden line plot of Figure B.5-2. The coordinates are selected such
that the symmetry plane is the X-Y plane. The model has 7680 constant strain,
tetrahedral solid elements, and 2244 nodes.
One prismatic layer of elements is frozen at the supported surface. Similarly, one
prismatic layer is frozen at the top surface due to the loading q1 and one prismatic
layer is frozen at the right hand side surface only in the region under the load q2.
The von Mises stress constraints for load cases 1 and 2 are applied to all of the
7680 elements in the model.
Results:

design step could not be improved upon during the
intermediate design process. It is highly probable
that the final shape is within close proximity of the
global optimum, within the limitations of the
remaining finite element mesh.
Initial material volume (full cantilever)
= 384.0
Final material volume (full cantilever, unsmoothed shape) =
140.04
(Version
88.8: 144.7)
= 63.53%
Required CPU time
= 21089 seconds
= 1.131
B-56
Example Problems
= 1.038
The change in volume vs. design step number is plotted in Figure B.5-3. Hidden
line plots of the finite element mesh and the smoothed shape for the full final
design are given in Figures B.5-4 and B.5-5 respectively. It should be noted that
specifying design variation only on the original boundaries does not prevent the
formation of through holes (cutouts) created due to merging of the original
boundary surfaces. These figures are obtained by reflecting the half beam model
about the symmetry plane using DISPLAY.
Figure B.5-1 Solid cantilever of example problem 5
B-57
Figure B.5-1a Loaded region (right surface) for load case 2
B-58
Example Problems
Figure B.5-2 Finite element model of half of solid cantilever f

or example problem 5
B-59
example problem 5
B-60
Example Problems
B-61
B-62
Example Problems
Figure B.5-6
******************************************************************
*******************
**
**
SOLID CANTILEVER UNDER TWO LOAD CASES
**
**
CANTILEVER DIMENSIONS : 16.0 X 8.0 X 3.0
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF ELEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . =7680
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF NODES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . =2244
**
**
LARGEST NODE NUMBER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . =2244
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF DEGREES OF FREEDOM . . . . =6732
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF UNCONSTRAINED DOFS . . . .=5856
**
**
************************************************************
**
**
*************************
B-63
ANALYSIS = STATIC
RESEQUENCE = OFF
ELEMENT = OFF
NODE
= OFF
*TITLE
SOLID CANTILEVER
*ELTYPE
1,4,20
*ELEMENT
0,0,0,0,0,-16,136,240,480
1,1,1,0,0, 8, 8, 30, 30
1, 5, 2, 69
2,1,1
2, 5, 6, 74
3,1,1
69, 70, 74, 2
4,1,1
69, 74, 73, 5
5,1,1
2, 69, 5, 74
6,1,1
2, 6, 7, 74
7,1,1
2, 7, 3, 71
8,1,1
70, 71, 74, 2
9,1,1
71, 75, 74, 7
10,1,1
2, 74, 7, 71
11,1,1
3, 7, 4, 71
12,1,1
B-64
Example Problems
4, 7, 8, 76
13,1,1
71, 72, 76, 4
14,1,1
71, 76, 75, 7
15,1,1
4, 71, 7, 76
16,1,1
5, 9, 10, 77
17,1,1
5, 10, 6, 74
18,1,1
73, 74, 77, 5
19,1,1
74, 78, 77, 10
20,1,1
5, 77, 10, 74
21,1,1
6, 10, 7, 74
22,1,1
7, 10, 11, 79
23,1,1
74, 75, 79, 7
24,1,1
74, 79, 78, 10
25,1,1
7, 74, 10, 79
26,1,1
7, 11, 12, 79
27,1,1
7, 12, 8, 76
28,1,1
75, 76, 79, 7
29,1,1
76, 80, 79, 12
30,1,1
7, 79, 12, 76
0,0,0,0,0,-16,136,240,480
241,1,1,0,0, 8, 8, 30, 30
69, 73, 74,141
242,1,1
69, 74, 70,138
243,1,1
137,138,141, 69
244,1,1
138,142,141, 74
245,1,1
69,141, 74,138
B-65
246,1,1
70, 74, 71,138
247,1,1
71, 74, 75,143
248,1,1
138,139,143, 71
249,1,1
138,143,142, 74
250,1,1
71,138, 74,143
251,1,1
71, 75, 76,143
252,1,1
71, 76, 72,140
253,1,1
139,140,143, 71
254,1,1
140,144,143, 76
255,1,1
71,143, 76,140
256,1,1
73, 77, 74,141
257,1,1
74, 77, 78,146
258,1,1
141,142,146, 74
259,1,1
141,146,145, 77
260,1,1
74,141, 77,146
261,1,1
74, 78, 79,146
262,1,1
74, 79, 75,143
263,1,1
142,143,146, 74
264,1,1
143,147,146, 79
265,1,1
74,146, 79,143
266,1,1
75, 79, 76,143
267,1,1
76, 79, 80,148
268,1,1
143,144,148, 76
269,1,1
143,148,147, 79
B-66
Example Problems
270,1,1
76,143, 79,148
*NODES
-68,0,17,33,0.5,0.0,0.0
1,0, 0, 0,0.0,0.0,0.0
65,0, 4, 0,0.0,8.0,0.0
-68,0,17,33,0.5,0.0,0.0
2,0, 0, 0,0.0,0.0,0.5
66,0, 4, 0,0.0,8.0,0.5
-68,0,17,33,0.5,0.0,0.0
3,0, 0, 0,0.0,0.0,1.0
67,0, 4, 0,0.0,8.0,1.0
-68,0,17,33,0.5,0.0,0.0
4,0, 0, 0,0.0,0.0,1.5
68,0, 4, 0,0.0,8.0,1.5
*MATERIAL
EX ,1,0, .30000E+05
NUXY,1,0, .30000E+00
*LDCASE = 1
0, 0, 1, 0,-1, 0
*LCTITLE
PRESSURE LOAD ON THE TOP SURFACE OF THE CANTILEVER BEAM
*SPDISP
** FIXED SUPPORT CONDITION AT X=0.0
1,UX,0.0, 68, 1,UY,UZ
** SYMMETRY BOUNDARY CONDITION AT Z=0.0
69,UZ,0.0,2241, 4
*PRESSURE
226,7426,480, 3,,,1.0
232,7432,480, 3,,,1.0
236,7436,480, 3,,,1.0
467,7667,480, 3,,,1.0
471,7671,480, 3,,,1.0
477,7677,480, 3,,,1.0
229,7669,240, 3,,,1.0
234,7674,240, 3,,,1.0
239,7679,240, 3,,,1.0
*PRINT
DISP,-1
*LDCASE = 2
0, 0, 1, 0,-1, 0
*LCTITLE
NORMAL PRESSURE LOAD AT THE FREE END OF THE CANTILEVER BEAM
*PRESSURE
7533,7578, 15, 1,,,20.0
7534,7579, 15, 1,,,20.0
*PRINT = 1
*ENDDATA
B-67
*******************************************************************
******************
**
**
SOLID CANTILEVER UNDER TWO LOAD CASES
**
**
**
**
**
**
THE SHAPE OF THE SOLID CANTILEVER UNDER DISTRIBUTED LOADS (TWO
**
** LOAD
CASES) IS TO BE OPTIMIZED WITH STRESS CONSTRAINTS ON ALL ELEMENTS.**
**
MATERIAL CAN BE REMOVED FROM THE EXISTING BOUNDARIES ONLY:
**
**
BOUND = ON
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
***********************************************************************************
**
LIMIT = 300
BOUND = ON
*TITLE
SOLID CANTILEVER UNDER TWO LOAD CASES WITH STRESS CONSTRAINTS
***********************************************************************************
**
**
THERE IS ONE SYMMETRY PLANE IN THE MODEL
**
***********************************************************************************
**
*SYMPLANE
SYMMETRY
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0
1.0
***********************************************************************************
**
**
VON-MISES STRESS LIMITS OF 20.0 UNITS FOR THE FIRST LOAD CASE AND **
**
16.0 UNITS FOR THE SECOND LOAD CASE ARE PRESCRIBED FOR ALL OF THE **
**
7680 ELEMENTS PRESENT IN THE MODEL.
**
B-68
Example Problems
***********************************************************************************
**
*CNSTRESS
1 7680 1 1 1 1 1 1
VMS 20.
1 7680 1 1 1 2 2 1
VMS 16.
***********************************************************************************
**
**
ALL OF THE NODES THAT HAVE FIXED SUPPORT CONDITIONS ARE FROZEN. **
THUS ONE PRISMATIC LAYER OF ELEMENTS IS FROZEN AT THE FIXED SUP**
**
PORT:
**
1 TO 68 : SUPPORTED NODES.
**
**
SIMILARLY, ONE PRISMATIC LAYER OF ELEMENTS UNDER THE DISTRIBUTED **
**
LOAD OF THE FIRST LOAD CASE IS FROZEN.
**
20 TETRAHEDRON ELEMENTS UNDER THE DISTRIBUTED LOAD OF THE SEC**
**
OND
**
LOAD CASE ARE ALSO FROZEN.
**
***********************************************************************************
**
*CNFABRICATIONAL
NODE
1 68 1
NODE 133 2241 68
NODE 134 2242 68
NODE 135 2243 68
NODE 136 2244 68
ELEMENT 7531 7535 1
ELEMENT 7546 7550 1
ELEMENT 7561 7565 1
ELEMENT 7576 7580 1
*ENDDATA
***********************************************************************************
**
**
**
*******************************************************************
******************
B-69
Plate in Bending with Displacement Constraint
B.6 Plate in Bending with Displacement Constraint

Title:
Plate in bending with displacement constraint
Problem Statement:
The initially square plate shown in Figure B.6-1 is loaded in the direction normal to
its plane (Z-direction) by a force P applied at the center of the plate. All the edges
are simply supported. For purposes of first order analysis this may be interpreted as
allowing the rotation about the edge line as the only non-zero displacement
component at an edge. The structure is to be optimized for minimum material
volume with a constraint on the displacement of the centroid along the direction of
the load P, and with a minimum support requirement of supports at the four
corners.
take place anywhere in the system (BOUND=OFF), also allowing possible breaks
(BREAK=ON).
Lx
20.0
Ly
20.0
0.01
1.7472 10
0.3
0.04
0.2 (at the point of loading)
uz
B-70
Example Problems
Numerical Model:
1. Quarter Model: Due to the symmetry of the plate, only the upper right quarter
of the plate is modeled as in Figure B.6-2. The in-plane axes X and Y being
taken as parallel to the edges, with the origin at the center of the full plate, the
symmetry planes are then the X-Z plane and the Y-Z plane. Although there is
additional symmetry about the diagonals, the problem was originally modeled
in this manner since older versions of SHAPE did not support the use of
rotated local displacement coordinate systems. The quarter model has 1600
three-noded triangular thin shell elements and 841 nodes.
To satisfy the minimum support requirement, the upper right corner node of the
quarter model is frozen. The loaded node is also frozen to preserve the applied
load. As a result those elements connected to these nodes are frozen. The
displacement constraint is applied to the loaded node (node 1)
2. One-eighth Model: With the use of rotated local displacement coordinate systems in SHAPE it is possible to treat only one-eighth of the plate. In this particular case, the *G2 group of input (supported by this Version 91.0) is needed
because of the use of second order mesh generation. This model has 800 shell
elements and 441 nodes. The relevant input files are given after those for the
quarter model. The results are exactly the same as those obtained for the quarter model.
Results:
The optimality criteria solution at the beginning

of design step 3 gave back the most efficient
design (iteration 36) of design step 2. The lightest
design in design step 2 is that obtained in iteration 34. (Restarts from iterations 34 or 35 did not
achieve any improvement.)
Initial material volume (full plate)
= 4.00
Final material volume (full plate, unsmoothed shape) = 2.07
B-71
= 48.25%
892 seconds (one= eighth model: 566

seconds)
= 1.725
= 1.003
element mesh and the smoothed shape for the final design are given in Figures B.64 and B.6-5 respectively. These figures are obtained by reflecting the quarter plate
finite element mesh about the two symmetry planes using DISPLAY.
Figure B.6-1 Simply supported plate of example problem 6
B-72
Example Problems
Figure B.6-2 Finite element model of quarter plate of example 6
B-73
example problem 6
B-74
Example Problems
B-75

*****************************************************************
**
**
PLATE
IN
BENDING
(LOADED
DOWNWARDS
AT
MIDDLE)
**
**
PLATE DIMENSIONS : 20.0 X 20.0 X 0.01
**
**
**
**
**
**
MODELED
QUARTER
HAS
:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF ELEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . =1600
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF NODES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . =841
**
**
LARGEST NODE NUMBER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . =1681
**
**
TOTAL
NUMBER
OF
DEGREES
OF
FREEDOM
.
.
.
.
=5046
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF UNCONSTRAINED DOFS . . . .= 4760
**
**
**
******************************************************* **
B-76
Example Problems
ANALYSIS = STATIC
RESEQUENCE = OFF
ELEMENT = OFF
NODE
= OFF
*TITLE
PLATE IN BENDING WITH DISPLACEMENT CONSTRAINT
*ELTYPE
1,40,10
*RCTABLE
1, 3
0.01//
*ELEMENT
0,0,0,0,0,-20,82,80,80
1,1,1,1,0,20,2,4,4
1, 3,43
2,1,1,1,0
83, 1,43
3,1,1,1,0
83,43,85
4,1,1,1,0
3,85,43
*NODES
-41,0,41,41,0.0,0.25,0.0
1,0,0,0, 0.0,0.0,0.0
41,0,1,0,10.0,0.0,0.0
*MATERIAL
EX,1,0,1.7472 E7
NUXY,1,0,0.3
*LDCASE = 1
0, 0, 0, 0,-1, 0
*SPDISP
41,UXYZ,0.0,1681,82,ROTX,ROTZ
1641,UXYZ,0.0,1679,2,ROTY,ROTZ
B-77
1681,ROTY,0.0
1,UY,0.0,39,2,ROTX
1,UX,0.0,1559,82,ROTY
*CFORCE
1,FZ,1.E-2
*PRINTCNTL
DISP,-1
ELSE,0
ELFO,0
*ENDDATA
*******************************************************************
******************
**
**
PLATE IN BENDING (LOADED DOWNWARDS AT MIDDLE)
**
**
**
**
**
**
THE SHAPE OF THE SIMPLY SUPPORTED SQUARE PLATE IS TO BE OPTIMIZED **
**
FOR A DISPLACEMENT CONSTRAINT ON THE OUT-OF-PLANE TRANSLATION
** AT
THE CENTER OF THE PLATE (I.E. UNDER THE LOAD).
**
**

REGIONS:
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
********************************************************************
***************
LIMIT = 100
*TITLE
PLATE IN BENDING WITH DISPLACEMENT CONSTRAINT
*******************************************************************
****************
THERE ARE TWO SYMMETRY PLANES
**
**
B-78
Example Problems
***********************************************************************************
*SYMPLANE
SYMMETRY
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
SYMMETRY
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
0.0
***********************************************************************************
THE ABSOLUTE VALUE OF Z-DIRECTION TRANSLATION AT THE LOADED
**
**
NODE
**
(NODE 1) OF THE PLATE IS LIMITED TO A MAXIMUM OF 0.2 UNITS.
**
***********************************************************************************
*CNDISPLACEMENT
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
UZZ 0.2
***********************************************************************************
THE CENTER NODE AND THE CORNER NODE ARE FROZEN TO PRESERVE THE
**
**
LOAD
** AND TO SATISFY THE MINIMUM SUPPORT REQUIREMENT.
**
***********************************************************************************
*CNFABRICATIONAL
NODE -1 0 0 1
1 1681
*ENDDATA
***********************************************************************************
**
**
*******************************************************************
****************
********************************************************************
**
**
SQUARE PLATE IN BENDING (LOADED DOWNWARDS AT MIDDLE)
**
**
PLATE DIMENSIONS : 20.0 X 20.0 X 0.01
**
**
**
**
**
**
ONE-EIGHTH MODEL
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
B-79

**
**
**
**
** *************************************************************** **
ANALYSIS = STATIC
RESEQUENCE = OFF
ELEMENT = OFF
NODE
= OFF
*TITLE
EIGHTH OF SQUARE PLATE IN BENDING (LOADED DOWNWARDS AT MIDDLE)
*ELTYPE
1,40,10
*RCTABLE
1, 3
0.01//
*ELEMENT
**
0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -4,420,10,50
1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 5, 84, 2, 2
1,3,43
2,1,1,1,0
43,3,85
**
0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -4,420,16,50
11, 1, 1, 1, 0, 4, 84, 4, 4
3,45,85
12,1,1,1,0
85,45,87
13,1,1,1,0
3, 5,45
14,1,1,1,0
45, 5,87
**
0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -4,420,12,50
27, 1, 1, 1, 0, 3, 84, 4, 4
B-80
Example Problems
5,47,87
28,1,1,1,0
87,47,89
29,1,1,1,0
5, 7,47
30,1,1,1,0
47, 7,89
**
0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -4,420,8,50
39, 1, 1, 1, 0, 2, 84, 4, 4
7,49,89
40,1,1,1,0
89,49,91
41,1,1,1,0
7, 9,49
42,1,1,1,0
49, 9,91
**
0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -4,420,4,50
47, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1, 84, 4, 4
9,51,91
48,1,1,1,0
91,51,93
49,1,1,1,0
9,11,51
50,1,1,1,0
51,11,93
**
0, 0, 0, 0, 0,-10, 82,40,40
201, 1, 1, 1, 0, 10, 2, 4, 4
21,23,63
202,1,1,1,0
103 , 21,63
203,1,1,1,0
105, 103,63
204,1,1,1,0
23 , 105,63
**
0, 0, 0, 0, 0,-5, 82,20,20
601, 1, 1, 1, 0, 5, 2, 4, 4
11,13,53
602,1,1,1,0
93 , 11,53
603,1,1,1,0
95, 93,53
604,1,1,1,0
13 , 95,53
B-81
**
0, 0, 0, 0, 0,-5, 82,20,20
701, 1, 1, 1, 0, 5, 2, 4, 4
851,853,893
702,1,1,1,0
933 , 851,893
703,1,1,1,0
935, 933,893
704,1,1,1,0
853 , 935,893
*NODES
-41,0,41,41,0.0,0.25,0.0
1,0,0,0, 0.0,0.0,0.0
41,0,1,0,10.0,0.0,0.0
** *G2 DATA GROUP USED TO ENABLE 2ND LEVEL NODE GENERATION
*G2
1,0,0,0,0,45.0
1681,42,0,0,0,45.0
*MATERIAL
EX,1,0,1.7472E7
NUXY,1,0,0.3
*LDCASE = 1
0, 0, 0, 0,-1, 0
*SPDISP
41,UXYZ,0.0,1599,82,ROTX,ROTZ
3,UY,0.0,39,2,ROTX
** FOLLOWING NODES HAVE ROTATED LOCAL DISPLACEMENT COORDINATE SYSTEMS
1,UX,0.0,,,ROTY
1,UY,0.0,1639,42,ROTX,ROTZ
1681,ALL,0.0
*CFORCE
1,FZ,5.0E-3
*PRINTCNTL
DISP,-1
ELSE,0
ELFO,0
*ENDDATA
B-82
Example Problems
******************************************************************
*******************
**
**
SQUARE PLATE IN BENDING (LOADED DOWNWARDS AT MIDDLE)
**
**
**
**
**
**
ONE-EIGHTH
MODEL
**
**
**
**
THE SHAPE OF THE SIMPLY SUPPORTED SQUARE PLATE IS TO BE OPTIMIZED
**
**
FOR A DISPLACEMENT CONSTRAINT ON THE OUT-OF-PLANE TRANSLATION AT
**
**
THE
CENTER
OF
THE
PLATE
(I.E.
UNDER
THE
LOAD).
**
**
MATERIAL MAY BE REMOVED FROM ANYWHERE EXCEPT THE FROZEN REGIONS:
**
**
**
**
**
**
MAXIMUM
NUMBER
OF
ITERATIONS
ALLOWED
IS
100.
**
**
**
**
*********************************************************************************
****
LIMIT = 100
*TITLE
FLAT PLATE LOADED AT CENTER, W/ LIMIT ON OUT-OF-PLANE TRANSLATION AT
CENTER
*********************************************************************************
****
**
**
*********************************************************************************
****
*SYMPLANE
SYMMETRY
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
0.0
SYMMETRY
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
1.0
0.0
*********************************************************************************
****
THE ABSOLUTE VALUE OF Z-DIRECTION TRANSLATION AT THE LOADED
**
**
NODE
**
(NODE 1) OF THE PLATE IS LIMITED TO A MAXIMUM OF 0.2 UNITS.
**
B-83
******************************************************************
*******************
*CNDISPLACEMENT
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
UZZ 0.2
********************************************************************
*****************
**
THE CENTER NODE AND THE CORNER NODE ARE FROZEN TO PRESERVE THE
**
LOAD
AND TO SATISFY THE MINIMUM SUPPORT REQUIREMENT.
**
**
******************************************************************
*******************
*CNFABRICATIONAL
NODE -1 0 0 1
1 1681
*ENDDATA
******************************************************************
*******************
**
**
******************************************************************
*******************
B-84
Example Problems
B.7 Panel with Uniform Edge Loads

Title:
Panel with uniform edge loads
Problem Statement:
The initially rectangular panel shown in Figure B.7-1 is under uniform tension due
to the uniformly distributed in-plane loads q acting on the two opposite shorter
edges. For the given single load case, the structure is to be optimized for minimum
material volume with constraints on the von Mises equivalent stress everywhere in
the system.
take place anywhere in the system (BOUND=OFF), also allowing possible breaks
(BREAK=ON).
Lx
120.0
Ly
200.0
0.25
3.0 10
0.3
200.0
von Mises
500.0
B-85
Panel with Uniform Edge Loads
Numerical Model:
Due to the double symmetry of the panel, only the upper right hand quarter is
modeled as in Figure B.7-2. The origin of the in-plane Cartesian coordinate axes X
and Y is placed at the node corresponding to the center of the full panel. The model
has 240 constant strain, triangular plane stress elements and 137 nodes.
To preserve the loads, the rectangular row of 24 elements at the loaded edge is
frozen. The symmetry boundary conditions of the quarter panel model are
sufficient for stability. For this problem, there is no need to freeze any supported
nodes or regions since SHAPE automatically checks for and disallows total
separation along symmetry planes. This also prevents biasing of the solution due to
the random freezing of some supports at the symmetry boundaries. The von Mises
stress constraint is applied to all of the 240 elements in model.
Results:

Initial material volume (full panel)
6000.0
Final material volume (full panel, unsmoothed shape)
4000.0
33.33%
252 seconds
2.500
1.032
element mesh and the smoothed shape for the final design are given in Figures B.7B-86
Example Problems
4 and B.7-5 respectively. These figures are obtained by reflecting the finite element
mesh for the quarter panel about the two symmetry planes using DISPLAY.
Figure B.7-1 Panel in tension of example problem 7
B-87
Figure B.7-2 Finite element model of quarter panel for example problem 7
B-88
Example Problems
example problem 7
B-89
B-90
Example Problems

******************************************************************
*******************
**
**
PANEL WITH UNIFORM EDGE LOADS
**
**
PANEL DIMENSIONS : 120.0 X 200.0. X 0.25
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
***********************************************************
**
**
******************
B-91
ANALYSIS = STATIC
RESEQUENCE = OFF
ELEMENT = OFF
NODE
= OFF
*TITLE
PANEL WITH UNIFORM EDGE LOADS
*ELTYPE
1,1,10
*RCTABLE
1, 3
.25//
*ELEMENT
0,0,0,0,0,-10,26,24,24
1,1,1,1,0,6,2,4,4
1, 3,15
2,1,1,1,0
27, 1,15
3,1,1,1,0
27,15,29
4,1,1,1,0
3,29,15
*NODES
-13,0,13,21,0,5.0,0
1,0,0,0,0.,0.,0.
13,0,1,0,60.0,0.0,0.0
*MATERIAL
EX ,1,0, .30000E+05
NUXY,1,0, .30000E+00
*LDCASE
0, 0, 1, 0,-1, 0
*LCTITLE
UNIFORM TENSILE (PRESSURE) FORCE
B-92
Example Problems
*SPDISP
1,UY,0.0, 13, 2
1,UX,0.0,261,26
*PRESSURE
219,239,4, 3,,,-200.0
*PRINT
DISP,-1
*ENDDATA
******************************************************************
*******************
**
**
** PANEL WITH UNIFORM EDGE LOADS
**
** (SHAPE/OPTIMIZATION INPUT FILE)
**
**
**
THE SHAPE OF THE PANEL IS TO BE OPTIMIZED WITH STRESS CON-
**
ON ALL THE ELEMENTS, FOR THE GIVEN UNIFORM LOADS ON THE TWO
**
** STRAINTS
** SHORTER
** EDGES.
**
**
**
**
**
**

REGIONS:
**
**
**
**
**
*********************************************************************************
****
LIMIT = 300
*TITLE
PLATE WITH UNIFORM EDGE LOADS WITH STRESS CONSTRAINTS
*********************************************************************************
****
**
**
B-93
******************************************************************
*******************
*SYMPLANE
SYMMETRY
SYMMETRY
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
******************************************************************
*******************
**
**
**
**
*********************************************************************************
****
*CNSTRESS
1 240 1 1 1 1 1 1
VMS 500.0
*********************************************************************************
****
ONE RECTANGULAR LAYER OF ELEMENTS IS FROZEN AT THE LOADED
**
**
EDGE OF
**
THE QUARTER MODEL IN ORDER TO PRESERVE THE LOADS.
**
*********************************************************************************
****
*CNFABRICATIONAL
ELEMENT 217 240 1
*ENDDATA
*********************************************************************************
****
**
**
******************************************************************
*******************
B-94
Example Problems
B.8 Rectangular Panel with OpeningResponse Sensitivity Analysis

Title:
Rectangular panel with openingresponse sensitivity analysis
Problem Statement:
This example is to illustrate the response sensitivity analysis facility and user
interface in SHAPE. The rectangular panel shown in Figure B.8-1 is subject to
three load cases. The first load case has uniformly distributed tensile loads on top
and bottom boundaries, the second one has uniformly distributed compressive
loads on the two side boundaries. The last load case is a combination of the first
two (0.5 x first case + 1.0 x second case). The first two loading conditions are
shown in Figure B.8-1.
For each load case, the following response quantities are considered for shape
sensitivity analysis:
1)
Magnitude of the Y direction translation ( u y ) at
2)
point Q
Magnitude of the X direction translation ( u x ) at
3)
The von Mises equivalent stress
point R
(limiting value =
0.01)
(limiting value =
0.01)
(limiting value =
10000)
The limiting values are useful for sorting the response quantities in degree of
criticalness.
Lx
24.0
Ly
16.0
B-95
Rectangular Panel with Opening--Response Sensitivity Analysis
16.0
8.0
0.2
1.0 10
0.3
400.0
It is required to output, both into the ASCII output file and into the post-processing
file, the element contributions and the partial derivatives to be obtained from
sensitivity analysis of the most critical 20 response quantities. The default length is
sufficient for the ASCII lists.
Numerical Model:
Due to symmetry of the initial geometry and the loading conditions it may be
assumed that all shape changes will be doubly symmetrical. In other words, no
distinction is made between an element (or node) and any one of its symmetrical
counterparts. Thus only the upper right hand quarter of the structure is modeled as
shown in Figure B.8-2. This has the effect of summing the generally unequal
sensitivity coefficients from each of a set of four symmetrical elements into a
single element. If separate sensitivities were required, then one would have to
model the entire panel. The coodinates are selected such that the symmetry planes
are the X-Z and the Y-Z planes.
The quarter model has 1024 triangular plane stress elements and 553 nodes.
Fabricational constraints are not necessary for sensitivity analysis runs and
therefore none are imposed. The displacement constraints are defined at nodes
1569 (point Q) and 49 (point R). The stress constraint is defined for each of the
1024 elements in the model.
Results:
Required CPU time
= 53 seconds
Most critical three response quantities =
1) uy at point Q (node 1569) for load case 1
B-96
Example Problems
2) von Mises equivalent stress in element 226 for load

case 1
3) uy at point Q (node 1569) for load case 3
The contours for the nodal averaged values of the element contributions bij (see
Equation 2.1) for the most critical three response quantities are shown in Figures
B.8-3-B.8-5. In Figure B.8-2, the locations of element 226 and nodes 49 and 1569
are indicated by arrows.
Figure B.8-1 Rectangular panel with opening and the first two load cases of example problem 8
B-97
Figure B.8-2 Finite element model of rectangular panel for example problem 8
B-98
Example Problems
Figure B.8-3 Element contributions to uy at node 1569 (load case 1)
Figure B.8-4 Element contributions to von Mises stress

in element 226 (load case 1)
B-99
Figure B.8-5 Element contributions to uy at node 1569 (load case 3)
*****************************************************************
********************
**
**
PANEL WITH OPENING AND THREE LOAD CASES
**
**
PANEL OUTER DIMENSIONS : 24.0 X 16.0 X 0.2
PANEL INNER DIMENSIONS : 16.0 X 8.0 X 0.2
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
*****************************************************************
********************
B-100
Example Problems
ANALYSIS = STATIC
FILE = PANEL
SAVE = 26,27
RESEQ = OFF
*TITLE
RECTANGULAR PANEL WITH AN OPENING AND THREE LOAD CASES
*ELTYPE
1, 1, 10
*RCTABLE
1,3
0.2//
*NODE
-49, 0, 49, 33, 0.0, 0.25, 0.0
1, 0, 0, 0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0
49, 0, 1, 0, 12.0, 0.0, 0.0
*ELEMENT
0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -8, 98, 32, 32
1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 8, 2, 4, 4
33, 35, 83
2, 1, 1, 1, 0
131, 33, 83
3, 1, 1, 1, 0
133, 131, 83
4, 1, 1, 1, 0
35, 133, 83
0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -8, 98, 96, 96
257, 1, 1, 1, 0, 24, 2, 4, 4
785, 787, 835
258, 1, 1, 1, 0
B-101
883, 785, 835

259, 1, 1, 1, 0
885, 883, 835
260, 1, 1, 1, 0
787, 885, 835
*MATERIAL
EX, 1, 0, 10.0E+06
NUXY, 1, 0, 0.3
*LDCASE, ID=1
0, 0, 1, 0, 2, 0
*SPDISP
33, UY, 0.0, 49, 2
785, UX, 0.0, 1569, 98
*PRESSURE
931, 1023, 4, 1, 0,,-400.0
*LDCASE, ID=2
0, 0, 1, 0, 2, 0
*PRESSURE
32, 256, 32, 1, 0,, 400.0
352, 1024, 96, 1, 0,, 400.0
*LDCOMB,ID=3
1, 1
1, 0.5, 2, 1.0
*LCTITLE
LOAD CASE 3; COMBINATION OF LC#1 & LC#2
*ENDDATA
*****************************************************************
********************
**
**
RECTANGULAR PANEL WITH AN OPENING, SUBJECT TO THREE LOAD
**
RESPONSE SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS INPUT DATA; (QUARTER PANEL
**
** CASES
** MODEL)
**
THE SENSITIVITY INFORMATION FOR THE MOST CRITICAL 20
**
RESPONSE QUANTITIES IS TO BE BOTH LISTED INTO THE OUTPUT
**
B-102
**
**
**
Example Problems
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
FILE, AND SAVED IN THE POST-PROCESSING FILE FOR PLOTS.

BOTH THE ELEMENT CONTRIBUTIONS AND THE APPROXIMATE PARTIAL
DERIVATIVES ARE TO BE OUTPUT. THE LISTS IN THE OUTPUT FILE
ARE TO BE SORTED IN DECREASING ALGEBRAIC VALUE FOR THE ELEMENT
CONTRIBUTIONS, AND IN INCREASING ALGEBRAIC VALUE FOR THE
DERIVATIVES. THE LISTS ARE LIMITED TO THE DEFAULT LENGTH OF
100 ENTRIES EACH.
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
*******************************************************************************
******
SENSItivity information=both
LISTSensitivities=20
SORTResponsequa=on
SAVESensitivities=20
SORTLists=on, reverse
*TITLE
RECTANGULAR PANEL WITH AN OPENING AND 3 LOAD CASES (QUARTER PANEL
MODEL)
*******************************************************************************
******
**
ABSOLUTE VALUES OF UYY AT NODE 1569 AND UXX AT NODE 49
**
*******************************************************************************
******
*CNDISPLACEMENT
1569 1569 1 1 1 1 3 1
UYY 1.0D-2
49 49 1 1 1 1 3 1
UXX 1.0D-2
*******************************************************************************
******
VON-MISES STRESS LIMIT OF 10000.0 UNITS IS PRESCRIBED

**
FOR ALL
**
1024 ELEMENTS PRESENT IN THE FINITE ELEMENT MODEL **
*****************************************************************
********************
*CNSTRESS
1 1024 1 1 1 1 3 1
VMS 10000.
*****************************************************************
********************
**
B-103
**
FOR SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS RUNS *CNFAB DATA BLOCK IS NOT NEEDED **

*******************************************************************************
******
*ENDDATA
*******************************************************************************
******
**
END OF SHAPE DESIGN SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS INPUT DATA
**
*******************************************************************************
******
B-104
Example Problems
B.9 DIVELM Example Problem

Title:
DIVELM example problem: Structure modeled with brick, wedge, and plate
elements
Problem Statement:
This example is to illustrate the application of the program DIVELM (see
Appendix A). The structure shown in Figure B.9-1 is subject to two load cases:
concentrated loads and nodal temperature loads for the first load case and
nonuniformly distributed pressure loads for the second one. The plate part on the
right is pin supported at the two corners of the right edge.
L
10.0
45
0.5
1.0 10
0.3
5.24 10
The values for the temperature and distributed loads are given in Figure B.9-1. The
7
reference temperature is 0. The coefficient of thermal expansion is 1 10 .
The structure is to be modeled with brick, wedge, and plate finite elements, after
which DIVELM is going to be employed to break the brick and wedge elements
into tetrahedra. Since the intention is to illustrate the brick/wedge to tetrahedra
conversion, a very simple initial finite element model is sufficient.
B-105
DIVELM Example Problem
Numerical Model:
The structure is modeled using two 8-noded bricks, one 6-noded wedge, and one 4noded plate element as shown in Figure B.9-2. The model has 16 nodes. Rotated
local displacement coordinate systems are defined at the two nodes between the
wedge and the plate, and are used for input data of the concentrated load of the first
load case and the displacement output for the corresponding nodes.
Results:
Required CPU time
= 1.6 seconds
DIVELM generates a new NISA II input data file with tetrahedron elements
modeling the solid parts. The new model is composed of 62 tetrahedra and 1 plate
element as shown in Figure B.9-3. The brick and wedge elements each generate 24
and 14 tetrahedron elements, respectively. The NISA II type input files for the
initial and final models are given on pages B.9-4 and B.9-6. These are followed by
the three optional data files (celm.dat; cnod.dat; cmidnod.dat) that relate the
elements and the nodes of the two finite element models (see Appendix A).
B-106
Example Problems
Figure B.9-1 Structure and two load cases of example problem 9
B-107
Figure B.9-2 Finite element model of structure for example problem 9
B-108
Example Problems
Figure B.9-3 New finite element model of structure for example problem 9
B-109
*****************************************************************
********************
DIVELM VERIFICATION PROBLEM
**
**
STRUCTURE OF BRICK, WEDGE, AND PLATE ELEMENTS
**
**
ELEMENTS
:
2 8-NODED BRICKS
**
**
1 6-NODED WEDGE
**
**
1 4-NODED PLATE
**
**
NO OF NODES
=
16
**
**
HIGHEST NODE NO. =
19
**
**
DIVELM WILL BE EMPLOYED TO CONVERT THE FINITE ELMENT MODEL
** INTO ONE
USING TETRAHEDRA FOR MODELING THE SOLID PARTS OF THE STRUC-
**
**
** TURE.
*********************************************************
***********************
B-110
Example Problems
ANALYSIS = STATIC
RESEQUENCE = LIST
ELEMENT = ON
NODE = ON
*TITLE
*ELTYPE
1, 4, 1
2, 4, 10
3, 20, 1
*RCTABLE
1, 4
0.5///
*LCSYS
3, , , 5, 2, 4
*NODES
1, , , ,
2, , , , 10
3, , , , , , 10
4, , , , 10, , 10
5, , , , 20, , 10, 3
6, , , , , , -10
7, , , , 10, , -10
9, , , , 30, , 10
11, , , , , 10
12, , , , 10, 10
13, , , , , 10, 10
14, , , , 10, 10, 10
15, , , , 20, 10, 10, 3
16, , , , , 10, -10
17, , , , 10, 10, -10
19, , , , 30, 10, 10
B-111
*ELEMENT
1, 1, 1, 0, 0
1, 3, 4, 2, 11, 13, 14, 12,
2, 1, 2, 0, 0
2, 4, 5, 12, 14, 15,
4, 1, 1, 0, 0
1, 2, 7, 6, 11, 12, 17, 16
7, 1, 3, 1, 0
5, 9, 19, 15
*MATERIAL
EX ,1,0, .10000E+08
NUXY,1,0, .30000E+00
ALPX,1,0, .10000E-06
ALPY,1,0, .10000E-06
ALPZ,1,0, .10000E-06
*LDCASE
0,1,1,0,-1,0,0, .0E+00, .0E+00
*LCTITLE
LC#1 CONCENTRATED FORCE
*SPDISP
1,UXYZ , .00000E+00,11,10
3,UXYZ , .00000E+00,13,10
6,UXYZ , .00000E+00,16,10
9,UXYZ , .00000E+00,19,10
*CFORCE
5,FY, -5.240E+03,15,10
*NDTEMPER
5, TEMP, 12.0
7, TEMP, 13.0
15, TEMP, 15.0
*PRINTCNTL
DISP,-1
*LDCASE
0,1,1,0,-1,0,0, .0E+00, .0E+00
*LCTITLE
LC#2 PRESSURE
*PRESSURE
1,,,4,1
100,80,70,90
2,,,4,1
80,10,0,70
7,,,2,1
10,40,30,0
*ENDDATA
B-112
Example Problems
ANALYSIS = STATIC
*TITLE
*ELTYPE
3, 20, 1
4, 4, 20
*RCTABLE
1,
4
5.000E-01, 5.000E-01, 5.000E-01, 5.000E-01,
*MATERIAL
EX , 1,0, 1.00000E+07, .00000E+00, .00000E+00, .00000E+00, .00000E+00
NUXY, 1,0, 3.00000E-01, .00000E+00, .00000E+00, .00000E+00, .00000E+00
ALPX , 1,0, 1.00000E-07, .00000E+00, .00000E+00, .00000E+00, .00000E+00
ALPY , 1,0, 1.00000E-07, .00000E+00, .00000E+00, .00000E+00, .00000E+00
ALPZ , 1,0, 1.00000E-07, .00000E+00, .00000E+00, .00000E+00, .00000E+00
*E1
1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 3, 1,,,, 0
2, 5, 6, 1, 12, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
3, 4, 8, 7, 12, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
4, 7, 8, 9, 12, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
5, 8, 6, 9, 12, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
6, 6, 5, 9, 12, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
7, 5, 7, 9, 12, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
8, 8, 4, 10, 12, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
9, 4, 1, 10, 12, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
10, 1, 6, 10, 12, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
11, 6, 8, 10, 12, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
12, 4, 7, 11, 12, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
13, 7, 5, 11, 12, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
14, 5, 1, 11, 12, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
15, 1, 4, 11, 12, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
16, 13, 14, 17, 22, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
17, 14, 6, 17, 22, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
18, 6, 5, 17, 22, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
19, 5, 13, 17, 22, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
20, 7, 8, 18, 22, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
21, 8, 16, 18, 22, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
22, 16, 15, 18, 22, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
23, 15, 7, 18, 22, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
24, 15, 16, 19, 22, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
25, 16, 14, 19, 22, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
26, 14, 13, 19, 22, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
27, 13, 15, 19, 22, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
28, 16, 8, 20, 22, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
29, 8, 6, 20, 22, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
30, 6, 14, 20, 22, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
B-113
31, 14, 16, 20, 22, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0

32, 8, 7, 9, 22, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
33, 7, 5, 9, 22, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
34, 5, 6, 9, 22, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
35, 6, 8, 9, 22, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
36, 7, 15, 21, 22, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
37, 15, 13, 21, 22, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
38, 13, 5, 21, 22, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
39, 5, 7, 21, 22, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
40, 13, 5, 27, 32, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
41, 5, 23, 27, 32, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
42, 23, 24, 27, 32, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
43, 24, 13, 27, 32, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 0,,,, 0
44, 26, 25, 28, 32, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
45, 25, 7, 28, 32, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
46, 7, 15, 28, 32, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
47, 15, 26, 28, 32, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
48, 15, 7, 21, 32, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
49, 7, 5, 21, 32, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
50, 5, 13, 21, 32, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
51, 13, 15, 21, 32, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
52, 7, 25, 29, 32, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
53, 25, 23, 29, 32, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
54, 23, 5, 29, 32, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
55, 5, 7, 29, 32, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
56, 25, 26, 30, 32, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
57, 26, 24, 30, 32, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
58, 24, 23, 30, 32, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
59, 23, 25, 30, 32, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
60, 26, 15, 31, 32, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
61, 15, 13, 31, 32, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
62, 13, 24, 31, 32, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
63, 24, 26, 31, 32, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 0,,,, 0
*LCSYS
3, 0, 3, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, -.70710678, .00000000, -.70710678
$, -.70710678, .00000000, .70710678
*NODES
1, $, 2.00000E+01, .00000E+00, 1.00000E+01, 3
2, $, 3.00000E+01, .00000E+00, 1.00000E+01, 0
3, $, 3.00000E+01, 1.00000E+01, 1.00000E+01, 0
4, $, 2.00000E+01, 1.00000E+01, 1.00000E+01, 3
5, $, 1.00000E+01, .00000E+00,
.00000E+00, 0
6, $, 1.00000E+01, .00000E+00, 1.00000E+01, 0
7, $, 1.00000E+01, 1.00000E+01, .00000E+00, 0
8, $, 1.00000E+01, 1.00000E+01, 1.00000E+01, 0
9, $, 1.00000E+01, 5.00000E+00, 5.00000E+00, 0
B-114
Example Problems
10, $, 1.50000E+01, 5.00000E+00, 1.00000E+01,

11, $, 1.50000E+01, 5.00000E+00, 5.00000E+00,
12, $, 1.33333E+01, 5.00000E+00, 6.66667E+00,
13, $, .00000E+00,
.00000E+00,
.00000E+00,
14, $, .00000E+00,
.00000E+00, 1.00000E+01,
15, $, .00000E+00, 1.00000E+01,
.00000E+00,
16, $, .00000E+00, 1.00000E+01, 1.00000E+01,
17, $, 5.00000E+00, .00000E+00, 5.00000E+00,
18, $, 5.00000E+00, 1.00000E+01, 5.00000E+00,
19, $, .00000E+00, 5.00000E+00, 5.00000E+00,
20, $, 5.00000E+00, 5.00000E+00, 1.00000E+01,
21, $, 5.00000E+00, 5.00000E+00,
.00000E+00,
22, $, 5.00000E+00, 5.00000E+00, 5.00000E+00,
23, $, 1.00000E+01, .00000E+00, -1.00000E+01,
24, $, .00000E+00, .00000E+00, -1.00000E+01,
25, $, 1.00000E+01, 1.00000E+01, -1.00000E+01,
26, $, .00000E+00, 1.00000E+01, -1.00000E+01,
27, $, 5.00000E+00, .00000E+00, -5.00000E+00,
28, $, 5.00000E+00, 1.00000E+01, -5.00000E+00,
29, $, 1.00000E+01, 5.00000E+00, -5.00000E+00,
30, $, 5.00000E+00, 5.00000E+00, -1.00000E+01,
31, $, .00000E+00, 5.00000E+00, -5.00000E+00,
32, $, 5.00000E+00, 5.00000E+00, -5.00000E+00,
*LDCASE, ID = 1
0, 1, 1, 0, -1, 0, 0, .0E+00, .0E+00
*LCTITLE
LC#1 CONCENTRATED FORCE
*SPDISP
13, UX , .00000E+00, $
13, UY , .00000E+00, $
13, UZ , .00000E+00, $
15, UX , .00000E+00, $
15, UY , .00000E+00, $
15, UZ , .00000E+00, $
14, UX , .00000E+00, $
14, UY , .00000E+00, $
14, UZ , .00000E+00, $
16, UX , .00000E+00, $
16, UY , .00000E+00, $
16, UZ , .00000E+00, $
24, UX , .00000E+00, $
24, UY , .00000E+00, $
24, UZ , .00000E+00, $
26, UX , .00000E+00, $
26, UY , .00000E+00, $
26, UZ , .00000E+00, $
B-115
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2, UX , .00000E+00, $
2, UY , .00000E+00, $
2, UZ , .00000E+00, $
3, UX , .00000E+00, $
3, UY , .00000E+00, $
3, UZ , .00000E+00, $
*CFORCE
1, FY, -5.24000E+03 ,,, 1
4, FY, -5.24000E+03 ,,, 1
*NDTEMPER
1, TEMP, 1.20000E+01
23, TEMP, 1.30000E+01
4, TEMP, 1.50000E+01
*LDCASE, ID = 2
0, 1, 1, 0, -1, 0, 0, .0E+00, .0E+00
*LCTITLE
LC#2 PRESSURE
*PRESSURE
28,,, 1, 1, 1
9.000E+01, 7.000E+01, 8.500E+01,
29,,, 1, 1, 1
7.000E+01, 8.000E+01, 8.500E+01,
30,,, 1, 1, 1
8.000E+01, 1.000E+02, 8.500E+01,
31,,, 1, 1, 1
1.000E+02, 9.000E+01, 8.500E+01,
8,,, 1, 1, 1
7.000E+01, .000E+00, 4.000E+01,
9,,, 1, 1, 1
.000E+00, 1.000E+01, 4.000E+01,
10,,, 1, 1, 1
1.000E+01, 8.000E+01, 4.000E+01,
11,,, 1, 1, 1
8.000E+01, 7.000E+01, 4.000E+01,
1,,, 2, 1, 1
1.000E+01, 4.000E+01, 3.000E+01, .000E+00,
*ENDDATA
B-116
Example Problems
File celm.dat for Resulting Model of Example Problem 9

OLD ELEMENT
NUMBER
7
2
NEW ELEMENTS GENERATED

1
2
3
4
7
8
9
12
13
14
16
17
18
21
22
23
26
27
28
31
32
33
36
37
38
40
41
42
45
46
47
50
51
52
55
56
57
60
61
62
B-117
5
10
15
19
24
29
34
39
43
48
53
58
63
6
11
20
25
30
35
44
49
54
59
File cnod.dat for Resulting Model of Example Problem 9

OLD NODE SEQ.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
OLD NODE NO.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
19
B-118
NEW NODE NUMBER

13
5
14
6
1
24
23
2
15
7
16
8
4
26
25
3
Example Problems
File cmidnod.dat for Resulting Model of Example Problem 9

CREATED MID NODE NO.
9
10
11
12
17
18
19
20
9
21
22
27
28
21
29
30
31
32
NEW NO. OF NODES ON SAME FACE AS

CREATED NODE
5
6
8
7
6
1
4
8
1
5
7
4
9
10
11
13
14
6
5
15
16
8
7
13
14
16
15
14
6
8
16
6
5
7
8
5
13
15
7
17
18
19
20
9
21
13
5
23
24
15
7
25
26
13
5
7
15
5
23
25
7
23
24
26
25
24
13
15
26
27
28
21
29
30
31
B-119
Tunnel Cross-Section in Plane-strain
B.10 Tunnel Cross-Section in Plane-strain

Title
Tunnel cross-section in plane-strain
Problem Statement
The initial shape for a fictitious tunnel cross-section is as given in Figure B.10-1. It
is assumed that the only loading consists of a uniform normal pressure on the
outside perimeter of the structure, on the sides and on top. This normal pressure is
considered to be hydrostatic in nature and is to follow the changing boundary as the
structure is optimized The shape of this tunnel is to be optimized for minimum total
material cost, with a limit on the maximum absolute value of the principal stresses.
In this particular case, the limiting value is chosen such that the initial shape is
infeasible. This allows the illustration of certain features of the program. Also for
illustration purposes, the tunnel is assumed to be made of two different materials,
the upper middle part being of different material (material 2) than the rest of the
system (material 1). Further, the cost is to be given per unit mass for material 1 ,
and per unit volume for material 2. (It should be noted that weight can be used
instead of mass if the material density information in the NISA II data input file is
given in terms of weight. In such a case, acceleration or angular velocity values
should be adjusted accordingly for any gravitational or inertial loading. Here, the
self-weight of the structure is ignored for simplicity.)
At the bottom, a strip of height equal to 1/20th of the total height of the initial
cross-section is to be frozen in order to prevent biasing the support conditions. For
an actual design this strip would be considered to be part of the foundation and be
assigned properties accordingly. However here it is assumed to be of the same
properties as the rest of the structure. The bottom of the structure is supported
against translation in the X and Y directions.
B-120
Example Problems
The shape variation is to be limited only to the original boundaries (BOUND=ON).

Any breaks will be allowed (default). Using consistent units, the constants for the
problem are:
Lx
20.0
Ly
10.0
7.0
3.5
0.5
E 1 =E 2 =E
1.0 10
1 = 2 =
0.3
(mass density)1
2.0
(unit cost)1
0.5
per unit mass
(unit cost)2
1.0
per unit volume
10.0
(per unit area, but here thickness is unity)
principal stress
35.0
Numerical Model:
Due to the symmetry of the structure only the right half of the system is modeled as
shown in Figure B.10-2. The coordinates are selected such that the symmetry plane
is the Y-Z plane. The model has 1432 constant strain, triangular plane-strain
elements, and 764 active nodes. The first rectangular layer of elements at the
bottom is frozen to prevent biasing of the support conditions. The constraint on the
maximum absolute value of the principal stresses is applied to each of the 1432
elements.
B-121
Results:
Due to the infeasible initial shape, this job was run in two stages:
Stage 1
Started with the initial shape, this stage ended at the end of the first design step.
Iteration number 2 was found to be a substantial improvement to the initial design,
although it was still not feasible. SHAPE Version 91.0 does create input data files
for such improvements, however still stops at the end of the design step if no
feasible shape is found, since it cannot be ascertained that further material
reduction will lead to a feasible shape. In this particular case, restarting the job with
the results of iteration 2 does lead to a feasible and eventually optimum shape as is
illustrated in Stage 2.
The statistics for Stage 1 are as follows:
No feasible design could be found.
Initial material cost (full cross-section)
179.0
Final material cost (full unsmoothed cross-section)
174.876
2.30%
Required CPU time ( to termination)
113 seconds
0.79396
0.92569
The continuation of the job is described in Stage 2.
B-122
Example Problems
Stage 2
This stage was started with the files obtained at iteration number 2 of Stage 1. Only
two changes were made in these files before starting the job. The allowable number
of iterations was increased from 100 to 200, and resequencing of elements was
asked for (the RESEQUENCE = OFF line created by SHAPE in the NISA II data
input files is mainly to prevent resequencing for long tetrahedron files because this
would have already been done by DIVELM - see Appendix A).
Although this stage was also started with an infeasible shape, a feasible shape was
found at the end of design step 1, and the program went on to find an optimum
shape.

Initial material cost (full cross-section)
174.876 (from end of

Stage 1)
Final material cost (full unsmoothed cross-section)
84.0
51.97% (in Stage 2

only)
1086 seconds
0.92569 (from end of

Stage 1)
1.0006
The change in material cost vs. design step number is plotted in Figure B.10-3. The
finite element mesh and the smoothed shape for the final design are given in
B-123
Figures B.10-4 and B.10-5 respectively. These figures are obtained by reflecting
the half tunnel finite element mesh about the symmetry plane using DISPLAY.
Figure B.10-1 Tunnel cross-section of example problem 10
B-124
Example Problems
Figure B.10-2 Finite element model of half tunnel cross-section of example

problem 10
B-125
Figure B.10-3 Optimization progress(most efficient design vs.

design step) example problem 10
B-126
Example Problems
Figure B.10-4 Finite Element Mesh of Final Design for Example Problem 10
B-127
Figure B.10-5 Smoothed Shape of Final Design for Example Problem 10
*****************************************************************
********************
**
**
TUNNEL UNDER HYDROSTATIC PRESSURE (PLANE-STRAIN)
**
**
HALF MODEL DIMENSIONS : 10.0 X 10.0 (UNIT THICKNESS)
**
**
**
**
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF ELEMENTS ............................. = 1432
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF ACTIVE NODES........................= 764
**
**
LARGEST NODE NUMBER........................................ = 1681
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF DEGREES OF FREEDOM ..........= 1528
**
**
TOTAL NUMBER OF UNCONSTRAINED DOFS..........= 1471
**
**
*****************************************************************
********************
B-128
Example Problems
ANALYSIS = STATIC
ELEMENT = OFF
NODE
= OFF
*TITLE
TUNNEL UNDER HYDROSTATIC LOADING (PLANE-STRAIN)
*ELTYPE
1,2,10
*ELEMENT
**
1,1,1,0,0,7,2,1,4
1, 3,43
2,1,1,0,0,7,2,1,4
83, 1,43
3,1,1,0,0,7,2,1,4
83,43,85
4,1,1,0,0,7,2,1,4
3,85,43
**
0,0,0,0,0,-20,82,52,52
29,1,1,0,0,13,2,4,4
15,17,57
30,1,1,1,0
97,15,57
31,1,1,1,0
97,57,99
32,1,1,1,0
17,99,57
**
0,0,0,0,0,-13,82,28,28
1069,2,1,0,0, 7,2,4,4
575,577,617
1070,2,1,1,0
B-129
657,575,617
1071,2,1,1,0
657,617,659
1072,2,1,1,0
577,659,617
*NODES
-41,0,41,41,0.0,0.25,0.0
1,0,0,0, 0.0,0.0,0.0
41,0,1,0,10.0,0.0,0.0
*MATERIAL
EX,
1, 0, 1.0E+07
NUXY, 1, 0, 0.3
DENS, 1, 0, 2.0
EX,
2, 0, 1.0E+07
NUXY, 2, 0, 0.3
*LDCASE = 1
0, 0, 4, 0,-1, 0
*LCTITLE
HYDROSTATIC PRESSURE LOAD
*SPDISP
1,UX,0.0, 41, 2,UY
83,UX,0.0
575,UX,0.0,1641,82
*PRESSURE
80, 1068, 52, 1, 0, -1, 10.0
1019, 1067, 4, 3, 0, -1, 10.0
1407, 1431, 4, 3, 0, -1, 10.0
*PRINT
DISP,-1
*ENDDATA
B-130
Example Problems
******************************************************************
*******************
**
**
TUNNEL CROSS-SECTION IN PLANE-STRAIN
**
**
**
**
**
**
THE SHAPE OF THE TUNNEL CROSS-SECTION ACTED UPON BY UNIFORM **
**
HYDROSTATIC "FOLLOWER" PRESSURE ON THE OUTER TOP AND SIDE
**
**
PERIMETER IS TO BE OPTIMIZED FOR MINIMUM COST WITH LIMIT ON
**
**
THE MAXIMUM ABSOLUTE VALUE OF THE PRINCIPAL STRESS.
**
**
THE INITIAL SHAPE IS AN INFEASIBLE DESIGN.
**
**
MATERIAL MAY BE REMOVED ONLY ON BOUNDARIES:
**
**
BOUND = ON
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
*********************************************************************************
****
LIMIT = 200
MINIMIZE=COST
BOUND=ON
*TITLE
TUNNEL IN PLANE-STRAIN WITH "HYDROSTATIC" LOADING
*********************************************************************************
****
**
THE COST FOR MATERIAL 1 IS IN TERMS OF UNIT MASS
**
**
THE COST FOR MATERIAL 2 IS IN TERMS OF UNIT VOLUME
**
*********************************************************************************
****
*MCOSTS
1 0.5 MASS
2 1.0 VOLUME
*SYMPLANE
SYMMETRY
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
*********************************************************************************
****
**
THE STRESS CONSTRAINT IS ON THE MAXIMUM PRINCIPAL STRESS IN
**
**
TERMS OF ABSOLUTE VALUE (APPLIED TO EACH ELEMENT)
**
B-131
*********************************************************************************
****
*CNSTRESS
1 1432 1 1 1 1 1 1
PSM 35.0
*********************************************************************************
****
**
BOTTOM LINE OF ELEMENTS IS FROZEN TO PREVENT SUPPORT BIAS
**
*********************************************************************************
****
*CNFABRICATIONAL
ELEMENT 1 80 1
*ENDDATA
*********************************************************************************
****
**
**
******************************************************************
*******************
B-132

Nisa Pro Shape

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Nisa Pro Shape

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Disclaimer

NISA, DISPLAY III/IV, ENDURE, NISAOPT, FEAP, NISA/3D-FLUID, NISA/

3.2.11 Ending the Optimization Data Input File - - -3.33

3.3 Batch File - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3.34

Version 15.0 New Features

SECOPT is for the optimization of beam cross-sections.

STROPT is for the optimization of structures of fixed shape.

A wide selection of stress and displacement constraints with practically no

Specification of fabricational constraints, imposed by freezing certain parts of

A powerful optimization method based on Lagrange multipliers and optimality criteria.

The wavefront solution method for the equilibrium equations.

The wavefront minimization option.

The DISPLAY II or III pre- and post-processors.

Introduction to Version 91.0

the triangular plane-strain element (NISA II element type NKTP=2,

the triangular axisymmetric solid element (NISA II element type

total material mass: This will be based on material mass densities

the manufacturability of shapes to be obtained as a result of optimization.

the speed of solution.

Introduction to Version 91.0

Introduction to Version 90.0

Introduction to Version 90.0

displacements at nodes with rotated local displacement coordinate systems (**)

Introduction to Version 90.0

Introduction to Version 89.0

1. The algorithm has been improved substantially to reflect the theoretical

Introduction to Version 89.0

and the constraints being defined as

the Lagrangian can be set up as below:

where 0 is a vector of zero values.

At a given design, the optimality criteria expressions, supplemented by the

Theoretical Overview and Practical Considerations

Theoretical Overview and Practical Considerations

The general shape optimization mode (default)

The boundary shape optimization mode

For shape optimization or sensitivity analysis applications SHAPE requires

1.NISA II analysis data input file (Section 3.1)

NISA II Analysis Data Input File

NISA II Analysis Data Input File

Data Input Files

NISA II Analysis Data Input File

Data Input Files

Shape Optimization Data Input File

- symmetry information for partial models

- stress response or constraints specification

- displacement response or constraints

(Section 3.2.5, 3.2.6)

- stiffness constraints specification

- fabricational constraints specification

- variable linking data

- material unit costs data

- regions for sensitivity information

- end of data indicator

Shape Optimization Data Input File

There is no restriction on the length of each entry in a line. However,

Letters may be entered either in lower or upper case or in a mixture

A comma (,) or a blank should be entered between two successive entries

A slash (/) serves as a horizontal repetition character. For example, 2.5 //

Data Input Files

A comma before or after a tab character is optional. The available tab

3.2.1 1 Shape Optimization Commands

To specify the quantity to be minimized for an optimum design. When Minimize =

zero or positive integer

Shape Optimization Data Input File