Learning Forum

[Keirou]

As you can see in the picture, I set the response constraint as global stress at 396.98MPa, half of the original one.

[1shan]

,nYour stress constraint should be higher than that your original one right? When you remove material the stress increases. Have you inserted a value that is half or twice of that obtained in static structural?nRegards,nIshan.n n

[Keirou]

Yes, the above settings is half of the stress value in my upstream static structural system. And for my recent experiment, I set the stress respond 1/4 of the upstream system stress, and got a satisfactory optimization. So for the question above, I think that is my settings' problem. And at that time, I didn't know that the lattice optimization result couldn't be seen until a re-design in SpaceClaim. So the question comes to:nwhy the value of global stress line when it is in iteration 1 ( initial value) in the picture of Objective & Global Stress Response Convergence is lower than the value I got in my upstream result? Are they different concept? If so, what's the difference between them?nAs you mentioned material, I've made a assignment of my geometry with individually defined material. And then I didn't do anything about it. So it needs to re-assignment after optimization?n Sorry for asking so many questions. Best wishes.n