Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, (2021), 34(5): 386–398

Chinese Society of Aeronautics and Astronautics

& Beihang University
Chinese Journal of Aeronautics
cja@buaa.edu.cn
www.sciencedirect.com

Multi-scale design and optimization for solid-lattice

hybrid structures and their application to aerospace
vehicle components
Chuang WANG a, Jihong ZHU a,b,*, Manqiao WU c, Jie HOU a, Han ZHOU a,
Lu MENG a, Chenyang LI a, Weihong ZHANG a

a
State IJR Center of Aerospace Design and Additive Manufacturing, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi’an 710072, China
b
MIIT Lab of Metal Additive Manufacturing and Innovative Design, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi’an 710072, China
c
Science and Technology on Space Physics Laboratory, China Academy of Launch Vehicle Technology, Beijing 100076, China

Received 26 May 2020; revised 20 June 2020; accepted 17 July 2020

Available online 2 September 2020

KEYWORDS
Aerospace vehicle compo-
nents;
Lattice-based optimization;
Multi-scale;
Solid-lattice hybrid structure;
Topology optimization
Abstract By integrating topology optimization and lattice-based optimization, a novel multi-scale
design method is proposed to create solid-lattice hybrid structures and thus to improve the mechan-
ical performance as well as reduce the structural weight. To achieve this purpose, a two-step pro-
cedure is developed to design and optimize the innovative structures. Initially, the classical
topology optimization is utilized to find the optimal material layout and primary load carrying
paths. Afterwards, the solid-lattice hybrid structures are reconstructed using the finite element mesh
based modeling method. And lattice-based optimization is performed to obtain the optimal cross-
section area of the lattice structures. Finally, two typical aerospace structures are optimized to
demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed optimization framework. The numerical results are
quite encouraging since the solid-lattice hybrid structures obtained by the presented approach show
remarkably improved performance when compared with traditional designs.
Ó 2020 Chinese Society of Aeronautics and Astronautics. Production and hosting by Elsevier Ltd. This is
an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction

In the fields of aircraft and aerospace vehicle design, light-

weight and high-efficiency structures are the eternal pursuit
* Corresponding author. of engineers. Traditionally, size and shape optimizations are
E-mail address: jh.zhu@nwpu.edu.cn (J. ZHU). the main techniques and have been widely employed.1–3 With
Peer review under responsibility of Editorial Committee of CJA. the emergence and rapid development of topology optimiza-
tion, this revolutionary technology has already caught numer-
ous scholars’ attention and gained significant progress in both
fundamental research and practical application over the last
Production and hosting by Elsevier
several decades.4–8 Generally speaking, topology optimization
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cja.2020.08.015
1000-9361 Ó 2020 Chinese Society of Aeronautics and Astronautics. Production and hosting by Elsevier Ltd.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Multi-scale design and optimization for solid-lattice hybrid structures and their application
intends to find an optimal material layout in a given design
domain with prescribed boundary conditions and constraints.
Recently, widely used in many engineering fields,9–11 especially
in aircraft and aerospace field,12–15 topology optimization has
become a highly effective tool to create innovative designs
characterized by improved performance and reduced weights.
One of the most representative design cases can be found in
the study of Krog et al.,13 where the wing structure of Airbus
A380 was optimized using topology optimization. The final
leading-edge ribs design of Airbus A380 was obtained with a
significant weight loss while meeting all the design require-
ments. Additionally, Aage et al.16 reported a computational
morphogenesis tool to design the internal structure of a full-
scale airplane wing using topology optimization. Furthermore,
the literature survey17 has summarized and highlighted the
recent advances and applications of topology optimization in
designing aircraft and aerospace structures.
Apart from macroscopic structural design, recent signifi-
cant advance on multi-scale design methods enables research-
ers and engineers to consider microscopic structural topologies
when pursuing light-weight and high-performance structures.18
Generally, due to their flexible designability, multi-scale struc-
tures are used to enhance the structural performance, e.g., stiff-
ness,19 energy absorbability,20,21 shock resistance22 and heat
insulation.23–25 Especially from the perspective of lightweight
design, the principle function of lattice structures is able to
reduce weight while keeping the load bearing capability. Con-
sequently, the lattice-based multi-scale structures have been
extensively investigated in theory and widely used in engineer-
ing applications. Wu et al.26 presented a generalized approach
for the design of hierarchical lattice structures without assum-
ing scale separation to address the length ratio issue. Watts
et al.27 provided accurate surrogate models of the homoge-
nized linear elastic response of three-dimensional open truss
micro-architectures. Based on these surrogate models, they
solved a multi-scale compliance design problem with spatially
varying lattice structures. Besides, Wang et al.28 developed a
novel design method to obtain hierarchical structures with
non-uniform lattice microstructures based on Parameterized
Interpolation for Lattice Material (PILM) model. Tang et al.29
proposed an innovative design method for the creation of peri-
odic lattice structures by defining functional volume and func-
tional surface. In this work, an optimized aircraft engine
bracket is fabricated by additive manufacturing, which offers
an important basis for the wide application of additive manu-
facturing in the industry. Furthermore, Zhang et al.30 designed
a lightweight satellite structure based on lattice sandwich pan-
els. The whole satellite structure was manufactured by direct
metal laser melting using aluminum alloy AlSi10Mg. The ratio
of structure’s weight to satellite weight is much superior to the
traditional satellite structures.
Nevertheless, to our surprise, the stiffness of the lattice
structures mentioned above is generally worse than that of
solid structures with the same weight. To deal with the issue,
Dong et al.31 has made efforts to design the solid-lattice hybrid
structures for better mechanical performance. Inspired by this,
Dong et al.32 proposed a novel design method to optimize
solid-lattice hybrid structures by the Bidirectional Evolution-
ary Structural Optimization (BESO) method. Additionally,
He et al.33 performed topology and lattice optimization to
design a hip prosthesis for reducing stress shielding and meet-
ing fatigue requirements. The optimized solid-lattice design
387
reduced stress shielding by 50+% when compared with a con-
ventional generic implant. Boccini et al.11 explored a novel
approach to optimize a turbine disk by integrating topology
optimization and innovative lattice structure. The obtained
results clearly demonstrate the superior resonance perfor-
mance of the solid-lattice design over the traditional solid
design. Unexpectedly, despite being a heated topic in recent
years, the extraordinary potential of the solid-lattice hybrid
structures has not yet been extensively developed to study
aerospace vehicle components. Consequently, a systematic
and high-efficiency multi-scale design method is still in great
demand to enhance the design capability of aerospace vehicle
components for better performance and lighter weight.
Based on the above considerations, the multi-scale design
method for solid-lattice hybrid structures and their applica-
tions to aerospace vehicle components are herein explored.
The general goal of the presented method is to generate man-
ufacturable solid-lattice hybrid structures with better perfor-
mance while meeting all design requirements. To achieve this
purpose, a two-step procedure is carried out to design and
optimize solid-lattice hybrid structures by the combination of
topology optimization and lattice-based optimization. The
remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 pro-
vides a detailed description of the modeling and design method
for solid-lattice hybrid structures. Thereafter, the sensitivity
analysis is presented in Section 3. Two numerical examples
for aerospace vehicle components design are implemented in
Section 4, which is followed by the concluding remarks in
Section 5.
2. Modeling and design method for solid-lattice hybrid structures
In this work, the solid-lattice hybrid structures are obtained by
integrating topology optimization and lattice-based optimiza-
tion. This approach allows implementing a solution using the
two-step procedure (Fig. 1). Step 1: Perform a conventional
topology optimization based on solid isotropic material with
penalty (SIMP) model and then find the optimal material lay-
out. Afterwards, identify the primary load carrying paths
according to the high pseudo-density values and reconstruct
the solid part of a structure. Step 2: Build the relationships
between the element densities and lattice unit cells and then
create the lattice part according to the low pseudo-density val-
ues. Later on, carry out lattice-based optimization to obtain
the optimal cross-section area of the lattice structures under
prescribed boundary conditions and constraints. illustrates a
systematic design procedure for a solid-lattice hybrid rudder
structure. It should be mentioned that the selected case con-
tributes to understanding the main steps to carry out the pro-
cedure. The approach presented in this work is generic, and
therefore it can be implemented for any other structure.
2.1. Topology optimization based on SIMP model
As already mentioned in the introduction, topology optimiza-
tion is a powerful tool to obtain the optimal material layout
under the prescribed loading and boundary conditions at the
concept design stage, as shown in Fig. 2. As the most popular
method of topology optimization, the solid isotropic material
with penalization (SIMP) method is applied here due to its
simplicity and high efficiency in numerical implementation.
388
Fig. 1 Systematic procedure of proposed approach.
Fig. 2 Illustration of topology optimization design.
The density-based method usually treats the element density,
so-called pseudo-density, as the design variable in topology
optimization. The value of pseudo-density ranges from 0 to
1, with 0 describing a void element and 1 describing a solid ele-
ment. Although the pseudo-density can take values between 0
and 1, the intermediate density values have no proper physical
interpretations. To ensure good convergence to 0/1 designs, the
SIMP interpolation model works by penalizing exponentially
isotropic material in terms of pseudo-density variables with a
power law scheme
Pðgi Þ ¼ gpi
where gi are the so-called pseudo-density variables and p is the
penalty factor which is used to suppress the intermediate den-
sity values. P(gi) is the interpolation function.
Based on the above statement, the topology optimization of
continuum structures problem for minimizing compliance with
volume constraint can be formulated as follows:
find : g ¼ fg1 ; g2 ; g3 ;    ; gi ;    ; gn gT
min : C ¼ 12 FT U ¼ 12 UT KU
subject to : KU ¼ F
Pn  set as 3 in this paper.
gi vi ¼ V 6 V
i¼1
0 < gmin 6 gi 6 1; i ¼ 1; 2; 3;    ; n
C. WANG et al.
where gi denotes the pseudo-density of the i-th element and n is
the number of elements in the design domain. As the objective
function, C represents the overall compliance of the structure.
vi is the volume of the i-th element and V is the total volume of
the design domain with the upper bound r. In order to avoid
the numerical singularity, gmin is set as a small positive value
as the lower bound of the pseudo-density variable. Based on
the assumption of linear elasticity, the compliance minimiza-
tion problem meets the static equilibrium equation KU = F.
U and F denote the nodal displacement vector and the external
load vector, respectively. The global stiffness matrix K assem-
ð1Þ
bled by the element stiffness matrix ki can be written as
Xn n Z
X
K¼ ki ¼ BT Di BdX i ð3Þ
i¼1 i¼1 Xi
where B is the strain matrix, Di is the elastic matrix and Xi
denotes the domain of the i-th element. Using the SIMP
model, the elastic matrix Di of the i-th element can be
expressed as
Di ¼ Pðgi ÞDH ¼ gpi DH ð4Þ
ð2Þ
where p is the penalty factor of pseudo-density variable and is
Inevitably, the SIMP-based topology optimization method
encounters some numerical difficulties, e.g., checkerboard
pattern and mesh dependency. To suppress these numerical
Multi-scale design and optimization for solid-lattice hybrid structures and their application 389

instabilities, a so-called sensitivity filtering technique34 is
applied here by modifying the element sensitivities.
2.2. Lattice generation and lattice-based optimization
In this work, the finite element mesh based modeling
method35 is applied to generate lattice structures. The general
idea of modeling method is given briefly in this section
according to the process of lattice generation, as shown in
Fig. 3. Firstly, the given geometry, so-called ground struc-
ture, needs to be discretized into the finite element mesh.
The base mesh can provide the nodes and elements informa-
tion, e.g., node coordinates and connecting relationships of
elements. Then, the edges of elements are converted into
boundary bars by connecting the base points along the edges.
As a consequence, each element corresponds to a certain lat-
tice unit-cell (so-called primitive lattice cell). Afterwards, in
order to enhance the mechanical performance of primitive
lattice cell, an extra node (so-called derivative point) is intro-
duced to construct the derivative bars. As shown in Fig. 3,
the derivative bar is obtained by connecting the derivative
point and base point. For a general hexahedron element,
the derivative lattice cell is constructed by twelve boundary
bars and eight derivative bars. Table 1 illustrates the primi-
tive and derivative lattice cells for different element types.
Finally, the complete lattice structure is obtained by assem-
bling all the derivative lattice cells.
Additionally, this method allows to generate non-uniform
lattice structures by defining the relationships between the ele-
ment densities and derivative unit cells. Elements with different
pseudo-density values correspond to certain derivative lattice
cells formed by different bars. Generally speaking, the larger
the pseudo-density value, the bigger the diameters of corre-
sponding bars. Fig. 4 illustrates the generation process of
non-uniform lattice structures for an arc part.
In order to satisfy the mass constraints, lattice-based opti-
mization is subsequently performed to determine the optimal
cross-section area of the bar members in the lattice structures.
We can formulate the problems of size optimization of lattice
structures for minimizing compliance under mass constraint as
follows:
 T
find : A ¼ A1 ; A2 ; A3 ;    ; Aj ;    ; AN
P
N
min : C ¼ 12 UT KU ¼ 12 uTi ki ui
j¼1
subject to : KU ¼ F ð5Þ
PN 
W¼ qAj Lj 6 W
j ¼ 1
0 < Amin 6 Aj 6 Amax ; j ¼ 1; 2; 3;    ; N

Fig. 3 Illustration of modeling method for lattice generation.

Table 1 Illustration of primitive and derivative lattice cells for different element types.
Element type Tetrahedron Pentahedron Hexahedron Tri-prism

Element

Primitive cell

Derivative cell
390 C. WANG et al.

where Aj and Lj denote the cross-section area and length of the By substituting Eq. (10) back into Eq. (9), the sensitivity of
j-th bar member in the lattice structures, respectively; W is the the structural compliance with respect to the pseudo-density gi
total weight of all bar members; N is the number of beam ele- can be simplified as
ments in the design domain; q denotes the density of the mate-

rial; W represents the mass constraint; Amin and Amax are the @C p T p
¼ u ki ui ¼  Cei ð11Þ
lower and upper bounds of the design variables Aj, respec- @gi 2gi i gi
tively. For a 3D beam element in the local coordinate system,
its element stiffness matrix k can be written as where Cei is the compliance of the i-th element.

2 EA 3
L
0 0 0 0 0  EA
L
0 0 0 0 0
6 12EIz
0 0 0 6EIz
0  12EI 0 0 0 6EIz 7
6 7
z
L3 L2 L3 L2
6 7
6 12EIy
0
6EI
 L2 y 0 0 0
12EI
 L3 y 0
6EI
 L2 y 0 7
6 L3 7
6 7
6 GJ
0 0 0 0 0  GJ 0 0 7
6 L L 7
6 4EIy 6EIy 2EIy 7
6 0 0 0 0 0 7
6 L L2 L 7
6 4EIz
 6EI 2EIz 7
6 0 z
0 0 0 7
k¼6 L L2 L
7 ð6Þ
6 EA
0 0 0 0 0 7
6 L 7
6 12EIz
 6EIz 7
6 0 0 0 L2 7
6 L3
7
6 12EIy 6EIy
0 7
6 symmetry L3
0 L2 7
6 7
6 GJ
0 0 7
6 L 7
6 7
4 4EIy
L
0 5
4EIz
L

where E and G are the Young’s modulus and shear modulus, Similarly, the sensitivity of the structural compliance with
respectively; J is the torsional moment of inertia; Iy and Iz respect to the cross-section area variable Aj can be expressed as
are the cross-sectional moment of inertia in the xz-plane and @C 1 @K 1 @kj
xy-plane, respectively. ¼  UT U ¼  uTj uj ð12Þ
@Aj 2 @Aj 2 @Aj
3. Sensitivity analysis where the term @kj =@Aj can be easily derived from Eq. (6).
The sensitivities of the material volume V with respect to
To solve the optimization problems in Eqs.(2) and (5) using the pseudo-density gi can be expressed as
gradient-based optimization algorithms, it is an essential pre- @V
¼ vi ð13Þ
requisite to obtain the sensitivities of the objective functions @gi
with respect to the design variables.
Considering the overall compliance C, its first-order deriva-
tive to the pseudo-density gi can be expressed as
@C @U 1 T @K
¼ UT K þ U U ð7Þ
@gi @gi 2 @gi
Considering the equilibrium equation in Eq. (5), the differ-
entiation with respect to the pseudo-density gi can be written
as
@K @U @F
UþK ¼ ð8Þ
@gi @gi @gi
Assuming that F stands for design independent external
loads, we have @F=@gi ¼ 0. Substituting Eq. (8) back into
Eq. (7), we have
@C 1 @K
¼  UT U ð9Þ
@gi 2 @gi
Considering Eqs. (3) and (4), we have
@K X n
@kj @ki P0 ðgi Þ p
¼ ¼ ¼ ki ¼ ki ð10Þ
@gi j¼1
@gi @gi Pðgi Þ gi
Fig. 4 Illustration of non-uniform lattice structures generation.
Multi-scale design and optimization for solid-lattice hybrid structures and their application 391

Besides, the sensitivities of the structure weight with respect
to the cross-section area variable Aj can be expressed as
@W
¼ qLj ð14Þ
@Aj
Now, we have established mathematical formulations for
the multi-scale optimization problem and deduced sensitivity
formulas of the objective and constraint functions with respect
to the design variables. To facilitate the understanding of the
process of numerical implementation, the flowchart of the
multi-scale design method developed in this study is shown
in Fig. 5.
4. Numerical implementation
4.1. A payload adapter structure design for satellite
To verify the proposed problem statement and the two-step
optimization framework, the first numerical example consid-
ered here is a payload adapter structure, which plays an impor-
tant role in connecting the satellite and the launch vehicle. The
geometric features and dimensions of the payload adapter
structure are illustrated in Fig. 6. Additionally, the thickness
of the conical shell is 10 mm, and the thicknesses of the upper
circular ring and the lower circular ring are 8 mm and 5 mm,

Fig. 5 Flowchart of proposed multi-scale design method for solid-lattice hybrid structures.

Fig. 6 A payload adapter structure with load and boundary conditions and geometric dimensioning.
392 C. WANG et al.

ary conditions. To ensure that the final design meets weight

Table 2 Properties of selected aluminum alloy.
requirements, a mass constraint of 4.9 kg is introduced into
Material Aluminum alloy the size optimization problem. The iteration curves of the
Young’s modulus (E) 72.4 GPa objective function and mass constraint are plotted in Fig. 8.
Poisson’s ratio (m) 0.33 As illustrated in the figure, it takes 15 iterations to reach the
Density (q) 2800 kg/m3 convergence. Apparently, the total mass of the solid-lattice
hybrid payload adapter structure decreases sharply before
the first 4 iterations and then keeps declining slowly until it
converges to the mass constraint of 4.88 kg. What is notewor-
respectively. There are four bolt holes with diameter of 12 mm
thy is that it shaves 16% of the weight at the expense of only
on the upper circular ring and eight bolt holes with diameter of
6.1% of the structural stiffness after performing the lattice
8 mm on the lower circular ring. To save computational cost
optimization. The design and optimization process of solid-
and guarantee high-quality grid model, these tiny bolt holes
lattice hybrid payload adapter structure is illustrated in
are ignored during the process of establishing the finite element
Fig. 9 at length.
model. The bottom surface of the lower circular ring is
Afterwards, the rebuilt solid-lattice hybrid payload adapter
clamped, and two concentrated forces F1 = 16 kN and
structure is analyzed under prescribed load and boundary con-
F2 = 4 kN are respectively applied at the center of the upper
ditions by numerical simulation. Fig. 10 shows the global
circular ring along vertical and horizontal directions. It is
deformation and von-Mises stress distribution of the payload
assumed that a common aluminum alloy is used to manufac-
adapter structure. The maximum deformation of this structure
ture the payload adapter structure. The essential properties
occurs on the inner edge of the upper circular ring as expected
of the aluminum alloy are listed in Table 2.
with a maximum value of 0.205 mm. From an overall perspec-
Initially, the classical topology optimization is performed to
tive, the stress of the solid-lattice hybrid payload adapter struc-
obtain a light-weight and high-performance initial design
ture is distributed fairly uniformly. The maximum von-Mises
under a 30% volume fraction constraint. Fig. 7(a) shows the
stress is 66.71 MPa occurring in the interface between solid ele-
finite element model of the payload adapter structure, which
ments and beam elements. Besides, the high stress is also
is discretized into a mesh containing 9600 quadrilateral ele-
ments and 24240 hexahedron elements. The green part of the
model is defined as the design domain and the rest parts are
considered as the non-design domains. Afterwards, topology
optimization has been carried out to hunt for the optimal
material distribution. Fig. 7(b) illustrates the optimized results
obtained by topology optimization with a cyclic symmetry
constraint.
To further obtain a solid-lattice hybrid payload adapter
structure with better stiffness performance, the model is artifi-
cially divided into the solid part and lattice-infill part accord-
ing to the distribution of pseudo-density values. High
pseudo-density areas (gi  0.8) are kept as solid part and low
pseudo-density areas (gi < 0.8) are converted into lattice-
infill part. Note that the conversion process is not carried on
strictly according to pseudo-density values. We also consider
the effect of primary load carrying paths and make adjust-
ments to some extend in this design case. Later on, size opti-
mization is performed to obtain the optimal cross-section Fig. 8 Iteration curves of objective function and mass constraint
area of the lattice structures under prescribed load and bound- (of solid-lattice hybrid payload adapter structure).

Fig. 7 Topology optimization of payload adapter structure.

Multi-scale design and optimization for solid-lattice hybrid structures and their application 393

Fig. 9 Design and optimization process of solid-lattice hybrid payload adapter structure.

Fig. 10 Global deformation and von-Mises stress distribution of optimized solid-lattice hybrid payload adapter structure.

located on the bracing pieces of the payload adapter structure,
especially in the upper half part.
The solid-lattice hybrid payload adapter structure is further
simulated with modal analysis using finite element method.
Considering the actual working conditions, the modal analysis
is carried out with bottom surface clamped and top surface
connected with a satellite, whose weight is about 120 kg. Its
first three natural frequencies and vibration modes are pre-
sented in Fig. 11. It can be seen that the first three natural fre-
quencies are 86.6 Hz, 98.6 Hz and 158.9 Hz, respectively.

Fig 11 Vibration modes of optimized solid-lattice hybrid payload adapter structure.

394 C. WANG et al.

Apparently, the first two vibration modes of the structure are

transverse deformation patterns while the third vibration mode
is axial deformation pattern.
4.2. A rudder structure design for hypersonic vehicle
To further verify the effectiveness and superiority of the pro-
posed method, a typical trapezoidal rudder structure with a
single connecting shaft is taken as the second numerical exam-
ple. The geometric configuration and boundary dimensions of
the rudder structure are illustrated in Fig. 12. The rudder
structure is built by sweeping through the cross-section profiles
of the front-end face and the aft-end face. Due to the good
symmetry in geometric morphology, only half of the rudder
structure is considered as the design object. The base thickness
of the skin and the width of the frame around the rudder are
1 mm and 8 mm, respectively. The rest part of the rudder
structure is considered as the design domain. A uniformly dis-
tributed aerodynamic pressure p = 0.05 MPa is applied on the
surfaces of the rudder structure. The surface of the connecting
shaft is fixed as the boundary condition. It is assumed that
nickel-based high-temperature alloy is used to manufacture
the rudder structures. The material properties are posted in
Table 3.
To obtain a light-weight and high-performance initial
design, a classical topology optimization based on SIMP inter-
polation model is performed for minimizing compliance with a
30% volume fraction constraint. Fig. 13 illustrates the opti-
mized result, where the structural topology displays the distri-
bution of the tree-like branches. In order to transform
optimized result into practical engineering structure, a stan-
dard reconstruction procedure is carried out according to the
distribution of the tree-like branches, but tiny details are
ignored. The rebuilt solid rudder structure is shown in
Fig. 13. And its total weight is 2.226 kg.
Afterwards, the rebuilt solid rudder structure is analyzed
under the uniformly distributed aerodynamic pressure. The
Table 3 Properties of selected nickel-based high-temperature
alloy.
Material Nickel-based high-temperature alloy
Young’s modulus (E) 210 GPa
Poisson’s ratio (m) 0.3
Density (q) 8470 kg/m3
global deformation and von-Mises stress distribution of the
rudder structure are illustrated in Fig. 14. On the whole, the
deformation of the trailing edge is slightly larger than that of
the leading edge according to the displacement contour, and
the maximum displacement is 1.328 mm at the front tip of the
trailing edge. It clearly indicates the superior stiffness of the
leading-edge part over the trailing-edge part. Consequently, it
is essential to balance the stiffness of different regions in further
structural optimization. According to the stress contour, the
high stress is mainly located at the root of the rudder, and there
is less stress on the trailing edge. The maximum von-Mises
stress is 215.1 MPa near the connecting shaft.
The rebuilt solid rudder structure is further simulated with
modal analysis using finite element method. Its first three nat-
Fig. 13 Optimized result obtained by topology optimization and
rebuilt solid rudder structure.

Fig. 12 A trapezoidal rudder structure and its boundary dimensions.

Multi-scale design and optimization for solid-lattice hybrid structures and their application 395

Fig. 14 Global deformation (scale factor is 50) and von-Mises stress distribution of optimized solid rudder structure.

Fig. 15 Vibration modes of optimized solid rudder structure.

ural frequencies and vibration modes are presented in Fig. 15.
It can be seen that the first three natural frequencies are
253.8 Hz, 345.8 Hz and 492.2 Hz, respectively. Additionally,
the first two vibration modes are out-plane bending deforma-
tion patterns while the third vibration mode is in-plane bend-
ing deformation pattern.
Furthermore, to obtain a solid-lattice hybrid rudder struc-
ture with better stiffness performance, the proposed multi-
scale design method is implemented with the same loads and
boundary conditions. The design and optimization process of
the solid-lattice hybrid rudder structure is systematically illus-
trated in Fig. 16. Initially, we identify the primary load carry-
ing paths according to the topologically optimized results
shown in Fig. 13 and reconstruct the core structures using fine
ribs. The skin, the frame and the ribs of the rudder structure
are defined as the non-design domain and the rest part is
defined as the design domain. And then a classical density-
based topology optimization is carried out to find the optimal

Fig. 16 Design and optimization process of solid-lattice hybrid rudder structure.

396
Fig. 17 Iteration curves of objective function and mass con-
straint (of solid-lattice hybrid rudder structure).
material layout. Afterwards, the elements of design domain are
converted into the lattice structures according to the distribu-
tion of pseudo-density values. Later on, size optimization is
performed to obtain the optimal cross-section area of the lat-
tice structures under prescribed load and boundary conditions.
To ensure that the final design has identical material volume
with the solid rudder structure, a mass constraint is introduced
into the size optimization problem. The iteration curves of the
objective function and mass constraint are plotted in Fig. 17.
As illustrated in the figure, it takes 16 iterations to reach the
convergence. Apparently, the global structural compliance
decreases sharply before the first 5 iterations and then keeps
declining slowly until it converges to 600.74 mJ. Therefore,
the stiffness of the rudder structure is enhanced to some extend
Fig. 18 Global deformation (scale factor is 50) and von-Mises stress distribution of optimized solid-lattice hybrid rudder structure.
C. WANG et al.
after lattice optimization. The final solid-lattice hybrid rudder
structure is shown in Fig. 16.
Then the optimized solid-lattice hybrid rudder structure is
analyzed under the uniformly distributed aerodynamic pres-
sure. Fig. 18 shows the global deformation and von-Mises
stress distribution of the rudder structure. The maximum
deformation of this structure occurs at the front tip of the trail-
ing edge as expected with a maximum value of 1.058 mm.
From an overall perspective, the deformation of the trailing
edge is slightly larger than that of the leading edge according
to the displacement contour. As with the solid rudder struc-
ture, the high stress is also mainly located at the root of the
rudder, and there is less stress on the trailing and leading
edges. The maximum von-Mises stress is 212.7 MPa occurring
on the connecting shaft, which is due to the stress concentra-
tion caused by the sharp corner. Nevertheless, the stress in
the lattice structure region is distributed fairly uniformly.
Similar as the solid rudder structure, the optimized solid-
lattice hybrid rudder structure is further simulated with modal
analysis using finite element method. Its first three natural fre-
quencies and vibration modes are presented in Fig. 19. It can
be seen that the first three natural frequencies are 291.4 Hz,
386.4 Hz and 511.4 Hz, respectively. Different from the solid
rudder structure, the first three vibration modes of the solid-
lattice hybrid rudder structure are all out-plane bending defor-
mation patterns.
To have a clearer comparison, three typical designs for the
rudder structure and their performance are listed in Table 4.
Obviously, the solid-lattice hybrid design has almost identical
material volume with the solid design and the lattice design.
However, the maximum deformation of the solid-lattice hybrid
design is only 1.058 mm, which is 20.3% lower than the solid
design and 55.5% lower than the lattice design. The smaller
Multi-scale design and optimization for solid-lattice hybrid structures and their application
Fig. 19 Vibration modes of optimized solid-lattice hybrid rudder structure.
Table 4 Comparison of three different designs for rudder structure.
Maximum deformation (mm) 1.328
Maximum von-Mises stress (MPa) 215.1
First-order modal frequency (Hz) 253.8
Total mass (kg) 2.226
deformation value indicates the more superior stiffness of the
structure. The maximum von-Mises stress in the solid-lattice
design is subequal to the solid design, while it is 53.6% lower
than the lattice design. Meanwhile, the solid-lattice hybrid
design has the highest first-order modal frequency, approxi-
mately 14.8% and 49.8% higher than the solid design and lat-
tice design, respectively. The significant improvements in the
stiffness and first-order modal frequency clearly demonstrate
the validity of the proposed multi-scale design method for
solid-lattice hybrid structures.
5. Conclusions
This paper presented a new multi-scale design approach for the
solid-lattice hybrid structures by integrating topology opti-
mization and lattice-based optimization. The innovative
solid-lattice hybrid designs with better performance were
obtained by a normalized two-step procedure in this study.
Moreover, two practical examples were presented to demon-
strate the validity and advantages of the proposed method.
Compared with the pure solid design and pure lattice design,
the performance of the solid-lattice hybrid design was signifi-
cantly improved. The maximum deformation of the solid-
lattice hybrid design is approximately 20.3% lower than that
of the solid design and 55.5% lower than that of the lattice
design. Meanwhile, the solid-lattice hybrid design has the high-
est first-order modal frequency, approximately 14.8% and
49.8% higher than the solid design and lattice design, respec-
tively. The experimental results confirm beyond question that
the solid-lattice hybrid design can significantly improve the
stiffness and natural frequency compared with the pure solid
design or pure lattice design.
Generally, structural designers carry out size optimization
or topology optimization to improve the structural perfor-
mance or reduce the structural weight at best. Furthermore,
397
2.377 1.058
458.4 212.7
194.5 291.4
2.224 2.227
as a means of significant performance enhancement, the pro-
posed multi-scale design method for solid-lattice hybrid struc-
tures is expected to provide new opportunities for the
development of next-generation light-weight and high-
performance aerospace vehicle components.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing
financial interests or personal relationships that could have
appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
This work is supported by National Key Research and Devel-
opment Program (No. 2017YFB1102800), Key Project of
NSFC (Nos. 51790171 and 51761145111) and NSFC for
Excellent Young Scholars (No. 11722219).
References
1. Wang B, Hao P, Li G, et al. Two-stage size-layout optimization of
axially compressed stiffened panels. Struct Multidiscip Optim
2014;50:313–27.
2. Hansen LU, Horst P. Multilevel optimization in aircraft structural
design evaluation. Comput Struct 2008;86(1–2):104–18.
3. Chintapalli S, Elsayed MSA, Sedaghati R, et al. The development
of a preliminary structural design optimization method of an
aircraft wing-box skin-stringer panels. Aerosp Sci Technol 2010;14
(3):188–98.
4. Bendsoe MP, Kikuchi N. Generating optimal topologies in
structural design using a homogenization method. Comput Meth-
ods Appl Mech Eng 1988;71:197–224.
5. Rozvany GIN. Aims, scope, methods, history and unified termi-
nology of computer-aided topology optimization in structural
mechanics. Struct Multidiscip Optim 2001;21(2):90–108.
398
6. Xie YM, Steven GP. A simple evolutionary procedure for
structural optimization. Compurers Struct 1993;49(5):885–96.
7. Guo X, Zhang WS, Zhong WL. Doing topology optimization
explicitly and geometrically—a new moving morphable compo-
nents based framework. J Appl Mech 2014;81(8):81009.
8. Sigmund O, Maute K. Topology optimization approaches: a
comparative review. Struct Multidiscip Optim 2013;48
(6):1031–55.
9. Yıldız AR, Kılıçarpa UA, Demirci E, et al. Topography and
topology optimization of diesel engine components for light-
weight design in the automotive industry. Mater Test 2019;61
(1):27–34.
10. Dbouk T. A review about the engineering design of optimal heat
transfer systems using topology optimization. Appl Therm Eng
2017;112:841–54.
11. Boccini E, Furferi R, Governi L, et al. Toward the integration of
lattice structure-based topology optimization and additive manu-
facturing for the design of turbomachinery components. Adv Mech
Eng 2019;11(8):1–14.
12. Remouchamps A, Bruyneel M, Fleury C, et al. Application of a bi-
level scheme including topology optimization to the design of an
aircraft pylon. Struct Multidiscip Optim 2011;44(6):739–50.
13. Krog L, Tucker A, Rollema G. Application of topology, sizing
and shape optimization methods to optimal design of aircraft
componentsProc. 3rd Altair UK HyperWorks Users Conf.. p. 1–12.
14. Kang Z, Wang XM, Wang R. Topology optimization of space
vehicle structures considering attitude control effort. Finite Elem
Anal Des 2009;45(6–7):431–8.
15. Cao YF, Gu XJ, Zhu JH, et al. Precise output loads control of
load-diffusion components with topology optimization. Chin J
Aeronaut 2019;33(3):933–46.
16. Aage N, Andreassen E, Lazarov BS, et al. Giga-voxel computa-
tional morphogenesis for structural design. Nature 2017;550
(7674):84–6. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature23911.
17. Zhu JH, Zhang WH, Xia L. Topology optimization in aircraft and
aerospace structures design. Arch Comput Methods Eng
2016;595–622.
18. Wang C, Zhu JH, Zhang WH, et al. Concurrent topology
optimization design of structures and non-uniform parameterized
lattice microstructures. Struct Multidiscip Optim 2018;58(1):35–50.
19. Xia L, Breitkopf P. Multiscale structural topology optimization
with an approximate constitutive model for local material
microstructure. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 2015;286:147–67.
20. Meng L, Shi JX, Yang C, et al. An emerging class of hyperbolic
lattice exhibiting tunable elastic properties and impact absorption
through chiral twisting. Extrem Mech Lett 2020;40 100869.
21. Chen Q, Zhang XM, Zhu BL. Design of buckling-induced
mechanical metamaterials for energy absorption using topology
optimization. Struct Multidiscip Optim 2018;58(4):1395–410.
C. WANG et al.
22. Elnasri I, Pattofatto S, Zhao H, et al. Shock enhancement of
cellular structures under impact loading: Part I Experiments. J
Mech Phys Solids 2007;55(12):2652–71.
23. Cheng L, Liu JK, Liang X, et al. Coupling lattice structure
topology optimization with design-dependent feature evolution for
additive manufactured heat conduction design. Methods, Comput
Mech, Appl 2018;332:408–39.
24. Zhou H, Zhang XY, Zeng HZ, et al. Lightweight structure of a
phase-change thermal controller based on lattice cells manufac-
tured by SLM. Chin J Aeronaut 2019;32(7):1727–32.
25. Hou C, Yang GM, Wan XP, et al. Study of thermo-fluidic
characteristics for geometric-anisotropy Kagome truss-cored lat-
tice. Chin J Aeronaut 2019;32(7):1635–45.
26. Wu ZJ, Xia L, Wang ST, et al. Topology optimization of
hierarchical lattice structures with substructuring. Comput Meth-
ods Appl Mech Eng 2018;345:602–17.
27. Watts S, Arrighi W, Kudo J, et al. Simple, accurate surrogate
models of the elastic response of three-dimensional open truss
micro-architectures with applications to multiscale topology
design. Struct Multidiscip Optim 2019;61(4):1759–62.
28. Wang C, Gu XJ, Zhu JH, et al. Concurrent design of hierarchical
structures with three-dimensional parameterized lattice
microstructures for additive manufacturing. Struct Multidiscip
Optim 2020;61(3):869–94.
29. Tang YL, Kurtz A, Zhao YF. Computer-aided design bidirec-
tional evolutionary structural optimization (BESO) based design
method for lattice structure to be fabricated by additive. Comput
Des 2015;69:91–101.
30. Zhang XY, Zhou H, Shi WH, et al. Vibration tests of 3D printed
satellite structure made of lattice sandwich panels. AIAA J 2018;56
(10):1–5.
31. Dong GY, Tang YL, Zhao YF. Simulation of elastic properties of
solid-lattice hybrid structures fabricated by additive manufactur-
ing. Procedia Manuf 2017;10:760–70.
32. Dong GY, Tang YL, Li DW, et al. Design and optimization of
solid lattice hybrid structures fabricated by additive manufactur-
ing. Addit Manuf 2020;33 101116.
33. He YH, Durocher D, Burkhalter D, et al. Solid-Lattice Hip
Prosthesis Design: Applying Topology and Lattice Optimization
to Reduce Stress Shielding From Hip Implants. 2018 Des Med
Devices Conf Am Soc Mech Eng Digit Collect; Minneapolis,
Minnesota, USA; 2018. p. 1–5.
34. Sigmund O, Petersson J. Numerical instabilities in topology
optimization: a survey on procedures dealing with checkerboards,
mesh-dependencies and local minima. Struct Optim 1998;16
(1):68–75.
35. Chen WJ, Zheng XN, Liu ST. Finite-element-mesh based method
for modeling and optimization of lattice structures for additive
manufacturing. Materials (Basel) 2018;11(11):2073.