STRUCTURAL OPTIMIZATION ALGORITHM FOR VEHICLE SUSPENSIONS

Marc J. Richard1, Mohamed Bouazara2, Laouhari Khadir2, Guoqiang Q. Cai3

1

Departement de genie mecanique, Universite Laval, Quebec, QC, Canada

Departement des sciences appliquees, Universite du Quebec a` Chicoutimi, Chicoutimi, QC, Canada
3
Department of Ocean and Mechanical Engineering, Florida Atlantic University,Boca Raton, FL, USA
E-mail: marc.richard@gmc.ulaval.ca
2

Received March 2009, Accepted December 2010

No. 09-CSME-19, E.I.C. Accession 3105

ABSTRACT
Stringent tolerances on mechanical components have created increasingly severe demands on the
quality of new mechanical designs. The mathematical models used to analyze the various types of
mechanical systems these days need to incorporate an optimization algorithm capable of minimizing
the levels of vibrations coming from varied sources. The suggested method is based on the parallel
combination of three methods; the Rayleigh-Ritz approach (to determine the first eigenfrequencies)
which is incorporated into an efficient multicriterion optimization process based on the ESO
(Evolutionary Structural Optimization) method and the finite element software ABAQUS. The
analytical resolution and the numerical calculations of the mechanical component are, finally,
validated by an experimental set-up which exploits a frequency analyser, acceleration sensors and an
excitation hammer. The effectiveness of this approach is also demonstrated in the analysis of an
upper car suspension arm. By gradually removing material from the initial car suspension design, the
frequency of the component can be controlled in order to optimize the structural constraints.
Keywords: optimization; structures; algorithm; vehicles.

ALGORITHME DOPTIMISATION DE STRUCTURES POUR SUSPENSIONS DE

VEHICULES

RESUME
Des tolerances rigoureuses sur les composantes mecaniques ont cree une demande de plus en
plus grande sur la qualite de nouvelles conceptions mecaniques. Les mode`les mathematiques qui
analysent les divers types de syste`mes mecaniques, de nos jours, doivent incorporer un
algorithme doptimisation capable de reduire au minimum les niveaux de vibrations provenant
de sources diverses. La methode suggeree est basee sur la combinaison en paralle`le de trois
methodes; lapproche de Rayleigh-Ritz (afin de determiner les premie`res frequences propres)
qui est incorpore dans un processus pouvant optimiser plusieurs crite`res simultanement base sur
la methode ESO (optimisation structurelle evolutionnaire) et le logiciel delements finis
ABAQUS. La resolution analytique et les calculs numeriques de la composante mecanique sont,
finalement, valides par une installation experimentale qui exploite un analyseur de frequence,
des capteurs dacceleration ainsi quun marteau dexcitation. Lefficacite de cette approche est
aussi demontree en analysant un bras de suspension superieur dune automobile. En retirant
progressivement de la matie`re sur la pie`ce de suspension initiale de la voiture, la frequence de la
pie`ce mecanique peut etre controlee afin doptimiser les contraintes structurelles.
Mots-cles : optimisation; structures; algorithme; vehicules.
Transactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2011

1. INTRODUCTION
The vibration of mechanical systems has been a major concern for scientists and engineers for
several centuries. During this time, almost all new mechanical design required some kind of
vibration study. In particular, the vibration of vehicles caused by the irregularities of the road is
a current field which interests several researchers [14]. The study of aluminum is used, in order
to qualify their reliability and their mechanical resistance [57]. In this paper, the optimization
of suspension parts of an automobile is investigated in order to detect and correct vibrational
phenomena such as resonance [811]. Moreover, after review of several papers, vibrations are
characterized by several frequency bands in the field of suspension design for vehicles [1215].
The vibrations of very low frequency (0 to 2 Hz) appear during air and terrestrial displacement.
On the other hand, low frequency vibrations (2 to 20 Hz) appear especially in the terrestrial
vehicles and high frequency vibrations (20 to 100 Hz) appear in vibrating or rotary machines
(pneumatic tools, sanding machines, etc).
The objective of this paper consists of optimizing the mechanical properties of automobile
suspension components by reducing its weight and attempting to eliminate vibration
phenomena such as resonance. A structural design methodology has been outlined by
combining the following four critical steps in the design process: (1) calculation of the first
frequencies of the component to be optimized by implementing an analytical model based on
Rayleigh-Ritz method (in a MATLAB software); (2) performing numerical simulations and
finite element analysis with the software ABAQUS; (3) conceive a simple experimental
validation procedure and (4) implement an efficient multicriterion optimization process for
stiffness and frequency using the Evolutionary Structural Optimization (ESO) method.
Structural optimization has been a topic of interest for over 100 years. The history of shape
and topology optimization of discrete structural systems can be categorized into three periods.
First, the initial period during which Maxwell [16] and Mitchell [17] made their pioneering
studies. Although the study of Mitchell was important in view of theoretical background, the
techniques developed, at that time, applied only to limited types of discrete structures.
Following these initial works, the structural topology optimization fell relatively dormant for
many decades.
The second period occurred during the 1960s and 1970s where the interest in structural
optimization was re-kindled with the advent of new computing technologies. During this
period, some theoretical results for general optimization methods were presented, and
considerable analytical work was done on component optimization. Meanwhile, some methods
for discrete shape optimization were exercised on very small validation problems due to
computing restrictions. Schmit and Farshi [18] were among the first to offer a comprehensive
statement of the use of programming techniques to solve the non-linear problem of designing
elastic structures under a multiplicity of loading conditions. They recognized that this form of
defining design problems was needed to find the minimum weight of structures where finite
element (FE) analysis was exploited to calculate the needed responses. Then, Oda [19] is
probably the first published study that may be considered a fully algorithmic approach. The
study treated two-dimensional cases and the optimum shape was obtained after several
iterations on pre-selected FE. Oda and Yamazoki [20,21] published subsequent applications to
axis symmetric solids and problems including body forces. Umetani and Hirai [22] proposed an
algorithm called the growing-reforming procedure for the shape synthesis of structural beams
under multiple loads. The decade of the 1970s witnessed extensive research in structural
optimization, but very few practical applications.
Transactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2011

The third period, during the last 30 years, has been characterized by an extremely dramatic
growth in the development of high-speed computers. While theoretical work on structural
topology optimization has continued, numerical techniques have been further refined and
applied to more realistic structures. During this period, novel continuum structural topology
optimization methods were also introduced and studied quite extensively. Rodriguez and Seireg
[23] developed an algorithmic FE approach where a component was moulded to its optimal
shape following the philosophy of maximum utilization of the material.
Despite the significant effort directed towards structural optimization over the past three
decades, most techniques developed so far are restricted to shape optimization with fixed
topology. The search for a general method capable of performing shape and topology
optimization has been a great challenge. An important development in this field was proposed
by Bendsoe [2426] who introduced the homogenization method, where the structure was
represented by a model with micro voids and the objective consisted in seeking the optimal
porosity of the porous medium using an optimality criterion [27]. Essentially, this method [28
31] has proven to be successful in generating optimum topologies for continuum structures by
treating element densities as design variables.
Allaire [32,33] also proposed a numerical method of shape optimization based on the level set
method and shape differentiation. Initially, the level set method made possible only topology
changes since it could not solve the inherent problem of ill-posedness of shape optimization
which manifests itself in the frequent existence of local minima. The reason was that the level set
method could easily remove holes but could not create new holes in the middle of the structure.
However, this problem has been resolved recently [3436] which makes the resulting optimal
design largely independent of the initial guess.
Mattheck and Burkhardt [37] introduced an optimization approach based on biological
growth. This method utilizes the growth of the finite elements to reduce localized high stresses.
Many more optimization methods exist based, for example, on the genetic algorithm [38],
topometry [39] and penalty functions [40].
One optimization method, however, that is currently receiving some interest because of its
simplicity and effectiveness is the evolutionary structural optimisation (ESO) method [4144].
The simple concept behind ESO consists in progressively removing inefficient material from a
structure such that the residual shape of the structure evolves towards an optimum. This
approach inspired other researchers such as Akin [45] and Kim [46] to publish enhanced ESO
procedures. Recently, Huang, Zuo and Xie [47] proposed a new bi-directional evolutionary
structural optimization (BESO) method combine with optimality criteria for topology
frequency optimization problems. In all of these iterative methods, a FE analysis is carried
out while the stress distribution throughout the structure is found. Then, the material not
effectively used can be eliminated from the structure using some specific criterion. Another
software based on finite elements for structural analysis is OptiStruct from Altair [48].
OptiStructs topology, topography, shape and size optimization capabilities can be used to
design and optimize structures to reduce weight and tune performance of mechanical systems.

2. DYNAMIC MODEL
The initial step in the structural design of mechanical components is to establish the
frequency characteristics of the system to be studied. Key characteristics include the resonant
frequencies of the structure and the vibratory displacements of the system. These characteristics
will typically be determined through a combination of experimental testing, analytical
Transactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2011

calculations and FEA. Additional concerns include the environmental conditions under which
the structure must operate. Geometric constraints, which may limit the location or size of the
mechanical component, must also be considered. The analytical model was developed using the
Rayleigh-Ritz method [49] for the free embedded aluminum plate of Fig. 1 to determine the first
eigenfrequencies of this continuous system. The Rayleigh-Ritz method can be considered an
extension of Rayleighs method [50]. It is based on the premise that a closer approximation to
the exact natural modes can be obtained by superposing a number of assumed functions than by
using a single assumed function, as in Rayleighs method. The Rayleigh-Ritz method is an
energy method that can be used to approximate natural frequencies, mode shapes, and forced
responses of continuous systems. Let w1 ,w2 ,:::,wn be a set of n linearly independent functions
satisfying at least the systems geometric boundary conditions.
For free vibrations problems an approximation to the mode shape is of the form


2k{1p
Y x~
ai wi x with wi ~ 1{cos
x
2L
i~1
n
X

where we will need to determine the coefficient a1,, an and wi represents n linearly independent
functions which satisfy all the boundary conditions.
In the Rayleigh-Ritz method, the dynamic behaviour of the structure is represented by the
following general eigenvalue equations:
n 
X


Kij {v2i Mij aj ~0

i~1,2    ,n

j~1

Equation (2) is the well-known Galerkin equation which will be exploited in our structural
optimization algorithm for the removal of inefficient material. Hence, the eigenvalue problem
for a structure is viewed as a discrete system of n degrees of freedom:

Fig. 1. Free embedded trapezoidal aluminum plate. (b5100 mm, bo 5189 mm, L5180 mm,
h56.26 mm).
Transactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2011


K{v2n M fan g~f0g

where K and M are the stiffness and mass matrices of order n|n, respectively. The nth natural
frequency is represented by vn and fan g is the eigenvector corresponding to vn . The problem then
consists in choosing a generating function Y x judiciously as was defined previously in Eq. (1).
Finally, for a complete solution, the determinant of the coefficient matrix of the system of
equations represented by Eq. (3) is set to zero, resulting in an nth-order polynomial to solve for
v2 , which represents the natural frequencies. The solution of this eigenvalue problem generally
gives n natural frequencies v2i , i~1,2,:::,n and n eigenvectors,neach containing a set of
oTnumbers for

th

~ ~ a
a1 ,a2 ,:::,an . The i eigenvector corresponding to vi is A
.
a2    an
1

3. MODELING, SIMULATION AND EXPERIMENTAL VALIDATION

A trapezoidal uniform aluminum section was first analyzed to verify the thickness effect of this
material on the frequency response. The aluminum alloy 6061-T6-T651 had the following
properties: ultimate tensile strength of 310 MPa; tensile yield strength of 276 MPa; 12 %
lengthening on 5 cm specimen of 1.6 mm of thickness; shear strength of 207 MPa; Youngs
modulus of elasticity of 68.9 GPa; Poissons ratio of 0.33 and density of 2700 kg/m3. The first
three frequencies of the aluminum plate were calculated analytically by the Rayleigh-Ritz method
with the software MATLAB. A digital simulation with ABAQUS was also performed on this
trapezoidal aluminum plate. Finally, we also had a basic experimental set-up for validation
purposes. The loop connection for the three instruments is depicted in Fig. 2.
The experimental set-up was comprised of (1) a frequency analyser EDX-2000A-32, (2) BRUEL
& KJAER acceleration sensors and (3) a DYTRAN impulse excitation hammer. The results for the
first three modes are confined in table 1. We note that the approximate analytical method is only
valid for the first mode. Actually, the second and third modes of this trapezoidal plate are of little
interest since the operating frequencies of vehicles oscillate normally between 0 and 20 Hz. The large
discrepancy between the analytical method and the other two methods, for modes 2 and 3, are
largely attributed to the selection of the function wi to get a closer approximation for the first mode.

Fig. 2. Instruments connection loop.

Transactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2011

Table 1. Frequency response for the first three vibration modes.

4. BASIC OPTIMIZATION PROCESS

It has been known for years that a reliable sign of potential structural failure is excessive
stress. Ideally, the stress in every part of a structure should be as uniform as possible throughout
the component. This leads to a rejection criterion concept, based on a local stress level, where
low stressed material is assumed to be inefficient and will be identified for removal. By
gradually removing material with lower stress, the stress level in the new optimized design
become more and more uniform. The optimizing procedure is simple. The design domain is
divided into a fine mesh of finite elements which should be large enough to cover the area of the
optimum design. The von Mises stress has been one of the most frequently used criteria for
isotropic materials which provides an average measure of the entire stress. For plane stress
problems, the well-known von Mises stress can be calculated as
q
sVM ~ s2x zs2y {sx sy z3t2xy

where sx and sy are normal stresses in x and y directions, respectively, and txy is the shear
stress. At the end of each finite element analysis, a rejection condition must be applied:
sVM
el
RRi
sVM
max

where RRi represents the current rejection ratio. The stress level of each element is determined
by comparing the von Mises stress of each element sVM
el to the maximum von Mises stress of the
entire structure sVM
.
All
elements
which
satisfy
Eq.
(5) are extracted from the structure. The
max
cycle of finite element analysis and element removal is repeated using the same value of RRi
until a steady state is reached, which means that no more elements is being deleted at this
iteration. At this stage, an evolutionary rate (ER) can be added to the rejection ratio:
RRiz1 ~RRi zER

i~0,1,2,3:::

Once this increased rejection ratio is calculated, the cycle of finite element analysis and
element removal takes place again until a new steady state is reached.

5. SENSITIVITY NUMBERS FOR ELEMENT REMOVAL

The ESO procedure for the multicriteria optimization is entirely based on the evaluation of
sensitivity numbers for the stiffness and the frequency constraints. This is done exploiting a
Transactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2011

standard weighting approach where two criteria will be optimized simultaneously, namely, the
maximization of the first mode of natural frequency and the minimization of the mean
compliance of a structure (which is inversely proportional to stiffness). In other methods, to
identify the best solution for structural modifications, derivatives are often needed and, usually,
a sensitivity analysis for dynamic problems is complicated. However, it can be shown [44] that
the ESO method exploits a very simple sensitivity number to measure the effect of removing an
element on the structure.
Stiffness, along with frequency, is an important factor that needs to be taken into account in
the design of structures. It is well-known that in the finite element method, the static behavior of
a structure is given by
K fd g~fPg

where [K] is the global stiffness matrix and {d} and {P} are the global nodal displacement and
nodal load vectors, respectively. The inverse measure of the overall stiffness of a structure is
known as the mean compliance C and is defined as
1
C~ fPgT fd g
2

Minimizing the mean compliance maximizes the overall stiffness of a structure and the
stiffness constraint can be respected from CCall where Call is the prescribed limit for C [44].
From this comes the stiffness sensitivity number for problems with an overall stiffness
constraint [44]:
ai ~

1  i T i
 i 
K a
a
2

 

where ai is the displacement vector of the ith element and K i is the stiffness matrix of the ith
element. The quantity ai indicates the change in the strain energy as a result of removing the ith
element. To achieve the optimization objective through element removal, the element that has
the lowest value of ai is removed so that the increase in C is minimal.
Another important criterion is the optimization of the first mode of the natural frequency
since the response of a mechanical component to dynamic loading depends mostly on the first
few natural frequencies. It is well known that when the frequency of the dynamic loading is
close to one of the natural frequencies, excessive vibration occurs. To avoid these vibrations, it
is often necessary to shift the fundamental first frequency away from the frequency range of the
dynamic load.
The ESO method exploits the concept of a frequency sensitivity number to select and remove
the most inefficiently used material. This frequency sensitivity number controls the material
removal process by defining which element has the minimum contribution to the objective
function of the optimization problem. It has been shown in the preceeding section that the
dynamic behavior of the structure is represented by the general eigenvalue problem of Eq. (3).
To decide which element should be removed from the structure so that the frequency will be
shifted toward a desired value, it can be shown [44] that the frequency sensitivity number can be
derived from Eq. (3) as
Transactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2011

ain ~

1  i T  2 i
i
 i 
an
a
vn M { K
mn n

10

 
where Ki and Mi are the stiffness and mass matrix of the ith element and ain is the
eigenvector of the ith element.
if a four node plane stress

For example,

 element is generated by
the finite element analysis, Ki and Mi will be 8 6 8 matrices and ain will be a 8 6 1 vector.
This sensitivity number is an indicator of the change in v2n as a result of the removal of the ith
element. It is noted from equation (10) that the sensitivity number ain can be easily calculated at
the element level once the
Peigenvalue problem is available. By comparing Eq. (10) with Eq. (3),
it becomes obvious that elem ain ~0, namely, the summation of the sensitivity numbers over all
the elements is equal to zero. A maximum increase in the chosen frequency occurs as a result of
removing elements whose frequency sensitivity number is the highest and vice-versa. Removal
of those elements whose ain is close to zero results in little change [43].
At this point, a linear scaling is required on the frequency sensitivity number since the basis
on which they are optimized is different. This scaling must be done to alleviate the problem of
combining both sensitivity numbers (with the element removal based on the lowest and highest
sensitivity values). The frequency sensitivity number linear shift is obtained using the following
relationship:
   
 i new
old
old
an
z amax
~{ ain
n

11

 new
 old
and ain
is the new and old
sensitivity number, respectively, for the
where ain
 frequency

max old
ith element and the nth natural frequency, an
is the old maximum frequency sensitivity
number for the nth natural frequency. The shift imposed by Eq. (11) now allows the criteria to
be combined into a single weighted criterion:
P~

N
X

wj Rij

12

i~1

where P now represents a global multiple criteria objective function that determines element
.
i
removal for each element i, wj is the jth criteria weighting factor (with j~1, . . . ,N), Rij ~aj amax
j

is the ratio of the jth criteria sensitivity number aij for each element i to the maximum value to
, and N is the total number of criteria, in our case N52.
the jth criteria sensitivity number amax
j
By gradually removing the low stressed fractions, the stress distribution in the component becomes
increasingly uniform. The procedure for weighted multicriterion optimization based on ESO for
stiffness and natural frequency has been implemented into a methodical five step algorithm:
(1) Discretize the structure using a fine mesh of finite elements;
(2) Add load to structure, then, solve the static problem in Eq. (8) and generate the linear
static sensitivity number ai in Eq. (9);
(3) Remove load from structure, calculate the natural frequency sensitivity number ain using
the eigenvalue
 i newproblem in Eq. (10) and obtain the new natural frequency sensitivity
number an
using the linear scaling of Eq. (11);
(4) Combine all the criterion sensitivity numbers using Eq. (12) to obtain the multiple criteria
objective function P;
Transactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2011

(5) Remove elements that have the lowest values of P using the following rejection ratio:
PRRPmax

13

where Pmax is the maximum P that exists in the structure. Equation (13) can be viewed as
an iterative counter used to dampen or delay the element removal process. If the number of
elements that satisfy this constraint reach zero, without achieving the optimization
objective function, then the value of RR is increased to allow the material removing
process to proceed. Repeat steps 2 through 5 until an optimum is reached.
Great care must be applied when increasing the rejection ratio RR. To obtain the value of the
sensitivity number from the information of the previous eigenvalue solution, one must assume
that the eigenvector is approximately the same before and after the removal of that element.
The assumption that the mode shape does not change significantly in between iteration cycles
has been commonly used. Hence, in light of this assumption, one must limit the evolutionary
rate ER at very low increasing steps (typically 0.001).
This algorithm was exploited for the aluminum plate of the previous section with a vertical
load of 1200N applied on the x axis at the end of the plate and the weight factors (wf ~0:9 for
the frequency and ws ~0:1 for the stiffness). The first three vibration modes of the optimized
structure are tabulated in Table 2 and shown in Fig. 3. Table 2 shows the difference between the
first three frequencies and the total mass of the aluminum plate from its initial state to the
optimized state by maximizing the first frequency for a 17 % mass reduction. We noted that the
first frequency increases by almost 6 % while the material was deleted from each side of the
plate, and also removed from two rectangular holes located on the center line of the plate as
shown in Fig. 3.

6. EXAMPLE: RECTANGULAR ALUMINUM PLATE

To understand the basic principle underlying this method, let us examine a simple twodimensional structural optimization problem. Consider an elementary rectangular aluminum
plate (1506100 mm) attached with fixed support at two diagonal corners subjected to two
single horizontal loads of 100 N as depicted in Fig. 4. These are included for the linear static
stress analysis, but are removed for the frequency analysis. Four-noded linear quadrilateral
elements are used in this example. The two driving criteria are the minimization of the mean
compliance and the maximization of the first mode of natural frequency.
This example is based on a rectangular plate model that was used by Xie and Steven in their
study of ESO for dynamic problems [43]. The physical data for this example are identical to the
aluminum plate analyzed earlier. The design domain in Fig. 4 is divided into 45630 four node
plane stress elements of equal size. The thickness of the rectangular plate is 10 mm.
Table 2. First three frequencies between the initial and optimized plate.

Transactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2011

Fig. 3. First three mode frequencies of the optimized trapezoidal plate (material removed 17 %).

When the material removed is fixed at 30 %, Fig. 5 shows the optimal designs for different
weighting criteria of stiffness and natural frequency of the ESO iterations where 5(a)
ws ~1:0, wf ~0:0; 5(b) ws ~0:9, wf ~0:1; 5(c) ws ~0:7, wf ~0:3; 5(d) ws ~0:5, wf ~0:5; 5(e)
ws ~0:3, wf ~0:7; 5(f) ws ~0:2, wf ~0:8. In these evolutionary figures the dark areas represent
the remaining elements and the small dots represent the nodes of the initial finite element model.
Figure 5(a) shows the case where the structure has been designed completely for stiffness;
hence, the compliance is at its lowest possible value and, for a 30 % material removal from the
initial structure, the natural frequency of 2666.6 Hz for this topology is at its lowest. When the
weighting criteria are modified, for example, when the frequency weighting is increased and the
Transactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2011

10

Fig. 4. Initial design domain of rectangular plate under loading with fixed supports.

stiffness is decreased, an increase in the natural frequency and compliance can be noted which
means that the overall stiffness of the structure decreases.

7. AUTOMOBILE SUSPENSION ARM COMPONENT

Automotive industry requirements for quality, productivity and cost efficiency are at a level
where optimization of the design and manufacturing of a product must occur in the earliest
stages of conception. Car suspension systems present a special case because of their geometry
and the robust constraints placed on their design by the underbody of the car. Suspension
systems are submitted to many dynamic input loads. The induced vibrations are spread along
the axles and the forces are transmitted to the car body through the suspension. As these input
loads induce some structural vibration, it is necessary to define the best decoupling elements
that allow a reduction of the amplitude to meet acceptable target frequency values. Hence, the
optimum design of structures with stiffness and frequency constraints is of great importance,
particularly in the automotive and aeronautical industries.
Ideally, the stress in every part of a loaded structure should be uniform and, in our case, we want
to maintain the first frequency v1 as constant as possible. As defined previously, this concept leads
to a geometrical modification criterion in which low stressed fractions of a component are removed
as they add mass to the structure without significant contribution to its stiffness. When material is
removed from a structure, the frequencies of the structure will almost inevitably be changed to some
extent. In this case, an attempt is made to make as little change as possible for the first frequency
while the actual weight of the structure is being reduced. The solution procedure is the same as that
of the preceding section except that, in this case, we must define a new sensitivity number,
 i new  i  old  max old
an
~ an z an

14

where the elements having the smallest absolute values ain will be removed. The objective function
consists in minimizing the structural mass by removing material, element by element, by imposing
the weighting criteria wf ~0:9, ws ~0:1 for a 1 %, 2 % and 3 % material removal.
Transactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2011

11

Fig. 5. Optimal design of rectangular plate for a 30 % material removal and various weighting
between stiffness and natural frequency.

As mentioned earlier, to avoid severe vibration, it is often necessary to shift the first
frequency of a structure away from the frequency range of the dynamic loading. Hence, the
optimization process developed for the simple aluminum trapezoidal plate and the rectangular
plate will be applied to a higher aluminum suspension arm for an automobile as shown in Fig. 6.
The dynamic head of the upper arm suspension is schematized in Fig. 7. The value of the
vertical load is 3500 N and no rotation is considered on the higher knee caps (ring) around the
three axes since the algorithm is optimizing the upper component for the worst case scenario.
The optimization process developed in section 5 was applied to the suspension arm of Fig. 7.
With the multicriterion ESO method, the frequency of a structure can be maintained or shifted
towards a desired value by gradually removing material from the structure. At each iteration,
the eigenvalue problem of equation (3) is exploited and then a number of elements are removed
from the structure according to their sensitivity numbers ain . The design domain was divided
Transactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2011

12

Fig. 6. Automobile suspension upper arm.

into 3-dimensional elements for the finite element analysis. Using the procedure outlined in the
previous section after 600 iterations, the first frequency is maintained as close as possible to its
initial value (within 3 %). As a result the evolutionary history of the first frequency is obtained
and the corresponding new design of the upper suspension arm is given in Fig. 8.
The material was removed in three different stages. The first stage at a rejection ratio RR510 %,
the upper left finite element (FE) analysis of Fig. 8(a) represents the first stage of material removal
at 1 %. The second stage is shown in the upper right FE analysis of Fig. 8(b) with RR515 % for a
2 % material removal. Finally, the last FE analysis is shown in the bottom of Fig. 8(c) with a
RR520 % where 3 % of the material was removed. Note that, if the rejection ratio is not restricted
to a maximum value of material removed, the removal procedure can continue until the
component collapses.
At this stage, 3 % of the total material has been eliminated and the first frequency has been
decreased from 361 to 352 Hz with a rejection ratio of 20 %. In this analysis, only the first
frequency has been considered for optimization with a weighting factor of wf ~0:9. Note that
there is no control over what is happening to other frequencies during the optimization process.
The first frequency has been decreasing monotonically and the second and third frequencies

Fig. 7. Aluminum 6061-T6-T651 upper suspension arm.

Transactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2011

13

Fig. 8. Final process of optimization for the suspension arm. (a) Material removal 1 %, (b) Material
removal 2 %, (c) Material removal 3 %.

have dropped more rapidly. Sometimes, such behaviour is undesirable, and this procedure
could be extended to include multiple frequency constraints.

8. CONCLUSION
In this paper, we have demonstrated that a multiple criterion optimization algorithm based
on a weighting method can be introduced into the ESO method which can solve a wide range of
stiffness and frequency optimization problems. The location for element removal is determined
by weighted sensitivity numbers for each element. The sensitivity number for stiffness and
natural frequency can be easily calculated from finite element analysis. By gradually removing
material from the initial design, the frequency of a structure can be optimized (increased,
reduced or kept constant) while the stiffness of the structure is simultaneously controlled.
The aluminum alloy used to manufacture automobile parts allows a reduction of the car
mass. The results of the digital simulation for the aluminum trapezoidal plate show a small
increase in the frequencies while an 18 % total mass reduction was achieved, whereas the digital
simulation results for the upper suspension arm show a small reduction in the natural frequency
with a 3 % total mass reduction.
A multicriterion structural optimization design methodology has been developed which
eliminates most of the costly trial-and-error testing currently required. Automobile suspensions
Transactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2011

14

are highly nonlinear components whose frequency energy depends on a large number of
parameters whose effects may be confounded. This methodology includes design guidelines to
aid in the selection of proper material extraction. It is anticipated that these guidelines will be
refined, and possibly additional guidelines added, as additional structural analyses and
experimental testing is performed. The design methodology was used to optimize the design
of an automobile upper suspension component for a sample application consisting of an
aluminum structure. Ongoing research is in progress to optimize the thickness of elements by
shifting material from one element to another in order to achieve a generalized shape optimization. With the advance in composite and smart materials, new components in automotive
and aeronautical industries have received ever increasing attention from engineers who no
longer needs to restrict themselves to traditional designs.

Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the involvement of the Natural Science and Engineering
Research Council of Canada and the CQRDA (Centre quebecois de recherche et de
developpement de laluminium) for their financial support during this work. The authors
would also like to express their gratitude toward the referees for their valuable comments.

REFERENCES
1. Lin, Y. and Zhang, Y., Suspension optimization by a frequency domain equivalent optimal
control algorithm, Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 133, No. 2, pp. 239249, 1989.
2. Rakheja, S., Computer-Aided Dynamic Analysis and Optimal Design of Suspension Systems for
Off-road Tractors, Ph.D. Thesis, Concordia University, Montreal, 1985.
3. Hsiao, M.H., Haug, E.J. and Arora, J.S., A state space method for optimal vibration
isolators, ASME Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol. 101, pp. 309314, 1979.
4. Afimiwala, K.A. and Mayne, R.W., Optimum design of an impact absorber, ASME Journal
of Engineering for Industry, Vol. 96, pp. 124130, 1974.
5. Jiang, D.S., Lui, T.S. and Chen, L.H., Crack propagation behaviour of Aluminum Alloy
under resonant vibration, Department of materials Science and Engineering National Cheng
Kung University, Scripta Materialia, Vol. 36, No. 1, pp. 1520, 1997.
6. Sato, S., Enomoto, M. and Kato, R., Aluminium extrusions for suspension arms, Automotive
Engineering International, Vol. 106, No. 10, pp. 9699, 1998.
7. Cote, F. and Akiyoshi, M., Aluminum alloys for automobile applications, Proceedings of the
6th International Conference on Aluminum Alloys ICAA-6, pp. 2532, July, 1998.
8. Stansloski, M.J., Detection and Correction of Resonance in a Sheet Aluminum Winder Using
Vibration Signature and Finite Element Analysis, Masters Thesis, Mississippi State University,
May, 1996.
9. Malaktar, P., Nonlinear Vibrations of Beams and Plates, Ph.D. Thesis, Virginia Polytechnic
Institute and State University, July, 2003.
10. Stangier, S.D., Theoretical and Experimental Investigation of The Free Vibration of
Parallelogram Plates with Simply Supported and Clamped Boundary Conditions, Masters
Thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, August, 1997.
11. James, M.L., Smith, G.M., Wolford, J.C. and Whaley, P.W., Vibration of Mechanical and
Structural Systems: with Microcomputer Applications, Harpercollins College Div., 1994.

Transactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2011

15

12. Sanders, M.S. and McCormick, E.J., Human Factors in Engineering and Design, Editions
Octares Entreprises, 1993.
13. Griffin, M., Parsons, K. and Whitham, E., Vibration and comfort, application of experimental
results, Ergonomics, Vol. 25, pp. 721739, 1982.
14. Pinhas, B., Magic numbers in design of suspensions for passengers cars, Passenger Car
Conference, Tennessee, SAE paper No. 911921, pp. 5388, 1991.
15. Rakheja, S., Computer-Aided Analysis and Optimal Design of Suspension Systems for Off-road
Tractors, PhD Thesis, Concordia University, Canada, 1985.
16. Maxwell, J.C., The Scientific Papers, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1890.
17. Mitchell, A.G.M., The Limits of economy of material in frame structures, Philosophical
Magazine, Vol. 8, pp. 305316, 1904.
18. Schmit, L.A. and Farshi, B., Some approximation concepts for structural synthesis, AIAA
Journal, Vol. 12, pp. 692699, 1974.
19. Oda, J., On a technique to obtain an optimum strength shape by the finite element method,
Bulletin of the Japan Society of Mechanical Engineers, Vol. 20, pp. 160167, 1977.
20. Oda, J. and Yamasaki, K., On a technique to obtain an optimum strength shape of an
axisymmetric body by the finite element method, Bulletin of the Japan Society of Mechanical
Engineers, Vol. 20, pp. 15241532, 1977.
21. Oda, J. and Yamasaki, K., On a technique to obtain an optimum strength shape by the finite
element method: application to the problems under body force, Bulletin of the Japan Society of
Mechanical Engineers, Vol. 22, pp. 131140, 1979.
22. Umetani, Y. and Hirai, S., Shape optimization of beams subject to displacement restrictions on
the basis of the growing-reforming procedure, Bulletin of the Japan Society of Mechanical
Engineers, Vol. 21, pp. 11131119, 1978.
23. Rodriguez, J. and Seireg, A., Optimizing the shapes of structures via a rule-based computer
program, ASME Computers in Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 4, pp. 2029, 1985.
24. Bendsoe, M.P. and Kikuchi, N., Generating optimal topologies in structural design using a
homogenization method, Computer Methods Applied in Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 71,
pp. 197224, 1988.
25. Bendsoe, M.P. and Kikuchi, N., Topology and generalized layout optimization of elastic
structures, in Bendsoe, M.P. (Ed.), Topology Design of Structures, Kluwer Academic publisher,
Mota Soares, CA, 1993.
26. Bendsoe, M.P., Optimization of Structural Topology, Shape and Material, Springer, Heidelberg,
1995.
27. Rozvany, G.I.N., Structural Design via Optimality Criteria, Kluwer Academic Publishers,
Dordrecht, 1989.
28. Tenek, L.H. and Hagiwara, I., Static and vibrational shape and topology optimization using
homogenization and mathematical programming, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanical
Engineering, Vol. 109, pp. 143154, 1993.
29. Allaire, G., Jouve, F. and Maillot, H., Topology optimization for minimum stress design with the
homogenization method, Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, Vol. 28, pp. 8798, 2004.
30. Hassani, B. and Hinton, E., Homogenization and Structural Topology Optimization; Theory,
Practice and Software, Springer, ISBN: 3540762116, 1998.
31. Kang, Z., Zhang, C. and Cheng, G., Structural topology optimization considering mass
moment of inertia, 6th World Congress of Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, Rio de
Janeiro, Brazil, pp. 18, June, 2005.
32. Allaire, G., Jouve, F. and Toader, A.M., A level set method for shape optimization, Comptes
rendus de lAcademie des sciences Paris, serie I, Vol. 334, pp. 11251130, 2002.
Transactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2011

16

33. Allaire, G., Jouve, F. and Toader, A.M., Structural optimization using sensitivity analysis and
a level set method, Journal of Computational Physics, Vol. 194, No. 1, pp. 363393, 2004.
34. Allaire, G., Jouve, F., de Gournay, F. and Toader, A.M., Structural optimization using
topological and shape sensitivity via a level set method, Control and Cibernetics, Vol. 34,
pp. 5980, 2005.
35. Allaire, G. and Jouve, F., A level set method for vibration and multiple loads structural
optimization, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 194, pp. 32693290,
2005.
36. Chungang, Z., Zhenhua, X. and Han, D., Structural shape and topology optimization based
on level-set modelling and the element propagating method, Engineering Optimization, Vol. 41,
No. 6, pp. 537555, 2009.
37. Mattheck, C. and Burkhardt, S., A new method of structural shape optimization based on
biological growth, International Journal of Fatigue, Vol. 12, pp. 185190, 1990.
38. Nakanishi, Y., Representation of topology using homology groups and its application to
structural optimization, JSME International Journal, Series A, Solid Mechanics and Material
Engineering, Vol. 43, pp. 234241, 2000.
39. Leiva, J.P., Watson, B.C. and Kosaka, I., A comparative study of topology and topometry
structural optimization methods within the genesis software, LS-DYNA Anwenderforum,
Frankhenthal, DYNAmore GmbH, pp. 2332, 2007.
40. Kotucha, G. and Hacki, K., Numerical instabilities in structural optimization-analogy between
topology & shape design problem, GAMM Annual Meeting 2006, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 229231,
2006.
41. Xie, Y.M. and Steven, G.P., A simple evolutionary procedure for structural optimization,
Computers Structures, Vol. 49, pp. 885896, 1993.
42. Xie, Y.M. and Steven, G.P., Optimal design of multiple load case structures using an
evolutionary procedure, Engineering Computations, Vol. 11, pp. 295302, 1994.
43. Xie, Y.M. and Steven, G.P., Evolutionary Structural Optimization for Dynamic Problems,
Computers Structures, Vol. 58, No. 6, pp. 10671073, 1996.
44. Xie, Y.M. and Steven, G.P., Evolutionary Structural Optimisation, Springer-Verlag, ISBN 3540-76153-5, 1997.
45. Akin, J.E. and Arjona-Baez, J., Enhancing structural topology optimization, Engineering
Computations, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 663675, 2001.
46. Kim, S.R., Park, J.Y., Lee, W.G., Yu, J.S. and Han, S.Y., Reliability-based topology
optimization based on evolutionary structural optimization, World Academy of Science,
Engineering and Technology, Vol. 32, pp. 168172, 2007.
47. Huang, X., Zuo, Z.H. and Xie, Y.M., Evolutionary topology optimization of vibrating
continuum structures for natural frequencies, Computers and Structures, Vol. 88, No. 5,
pp. 357364, 2010.
48. Nosner, R.H., Structural Optimisation with Altair OptiStruct in Practise, Second Altair UK
Users Conference, http://tecosim.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Exposes/altair_opti-struct.pdf, consulted March, 2010.
49. Craver, W.L. and Egle, D.M., A method for selection of significant terms in the assumed
solution in a Rayleigh-Ritz analysis, Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 22, pp. 133142,
1972.
50. Temple, G. and Bickley, W.G., Rayleighs Principle and Its Application to Engineering, Dover,
New York, 1956.

Transactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2011

17