Structural Optimization 5, 100-107 (1992)
Structu Optimization
Optimum design of plate structures with multiple frequency
constraints
R . V . G r a n d h i a n d G. B h a r a t r a m
Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering, Wright State University, Dayton, Ohio, USA
V.B. V e n k a y y a
Flight Dynamics Directorate, Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, USA
Abstract The objective of this work is to demonstrate the
generalized compound scaling algorithm in the design of plate
structures with frequency constraints. The robustness of the algo-
rithm is demonstrated on large scale problems using scaling tech-
nique alone. This paper presents the optimization algorithm, nu-
merical results and discussions. Design histories and the first few
frequencies at the initial and optimum condition are also included.
1 Introduction
Plate elements play an important role in built-up structures
used in aerospace, automotive and civil engineering appli-
cations. Dynamic characteristics of these structures can be
improved by placing the natural frequencies of the system
in selected ranges. The objective of this research work is to
optimize !arge scale plate structures with multiple frequency
constraints. A large number of publications on structural
optimization with frequency constraints is available. A very
limited number of researchers has considered plate bending
problems due to the complexity of the element formulation,
computational requirements, and non-uniqueness of optimum
solutions.
In this paper, the optimum design of plate structures
with multiple frequency constraints is considered. Haftka
and Prasad (1981) surveyed the previous work done on struc-
tural optimization of plate bending elements. The authors
observed that the design of plates subject to frequency con-
straints can be specifically tailored to the problem at hand.
This can be achieved by using variational principles or can be
formulated using general mathematical programming tech-
niques and finite element analysis. Selected publications of
the previous work on frequency optimization are discussed
below.
Historically, the first investigations (DeSilva 1972; Olhoff
1974; Seiranyan 1978) were concerned with the optimal de-
sign of a circular plate with a constraint on the fundamental
frequency of vibration and assumed the corresponding mode
to be symmetric. Armand (1971) addressed the problem of a
shear plate that had no bending rigidity for normal loads, and
analytically obtained the minimum weight design of a simply
supported, rectangular shear plate with a prescribed funda-
mental frequency of free vibration. He extended the classi-
cal methods of optimal control theory to a two-dimensional
0 Springer-Verla 8 1992
structural optimization problem in order to derive the neces-
sary conditions for an extremum.
The optimal design of structures with a natural frequency
constraint was developed by Haug et al. (1972) for a simply
supported, square plate using the generalized steepest de-
scent method. The problem was solved using a collocation
technique wherein only a finite number of structural elements
were used and sensitivities were evaluated by using finite dif-
ference techniques. The same authors (1975) optimized a
simply supported square plate using a continuous formulation
approach. In the continuum problem, equations governing
stress, displacement and vibration consisted of a boundary
value problem of ordinary differential equations and ellip-
tic partial differential equations. A steepest descent method
for the boundary-value state equations was developed. The
authors concluded that the continuous optimal design ap-
proach was not directly applicable to large-scale structures
with many numbers. It does, however, have features that
make it attractive for the design of special purpose elements
or for the solution of an initial model of a large-scale struc-
tures, prior to fine discretization for a detailed design.
Kamat (1973) optimized thin rectangular plates for op-
timum fundamental frequency using the finite element ap-
proach. The results obtained suggested the non-uniqueness
of solutions, and provided an explanation of the difficulty in
determining a true global optimum. Foley (1978) optimized
a simply supported, square plate for minimum weight with a
fixed fundamental frequency of free vibration. The plate was
optimized using the e method. The basic idea of this method
was to replace the differential equation modeling the system
with a penalty function, thus transforming the original dy-
namic problem into a nondynamic one. Most of the work de-
scribed above was done using the optimal control approach
or the continuous distribution approach. Recently, Leal and
Mota Soares (1989) optimized plates subject to static, dy-
namic and stability constraints using mixed finite elements.
The authors used the ADS (Automated Design Synthesis)
program for optimization and discussed the advantages and
disadvantages of mixed elements in design optimization of
plates.
Recent work done by Grandhi el al. (1991) studied the
optimum design of plate structures with stress and displace-
ment constraints using the generalized compound scaling al-

gorithm. As an extension to the work done by the above
authors, multiple frequency optimization, using the general-
ized compound scaling algorithm for reaching the optimum, is
presented in this paper. Multiple frequencies were considered
with and without non-structural masses on the structure. De-
tails of the finite element formulation, optimization algorithm
and numerical results are presented. The computational ef-
fort involved in the optimzation part of these problems was
minimal.
2 F E M f o r m u l a t i o n a n d sensitivity analysis
A four-noded, bilinear displacement element based on the
Mindlin theory of plates was used for modeling the struc-
tures. Such elements exhibit good accuracy for plates when
reduced numerical integration is used to evaluate the element
matrices. However, the resulting matrices are rank-deficient,
since bilinear contributions to the displacement field are not
captured by the single-point integration. This results in spu-
rious singular modes which need to be controlled to achieve
reliable element behaviour. A low order quadrature is desir-
able for two reasons. First, since the expense of generating a
stiffness matrix K or mass matrix M by numerical integra-
tion is proportional to the number of sampling points, fewer
sampling points mean lower cost. Second, a low order rule
tends to soften an element, thus countering the overly stiff be-
haviour associated with an assumed displacement field. Soft-
ening comes as certain higher-order polynomial terms vanish
at the Gaussian integration points of a low-order rule, so that
these terms make no contribution to the strain energy.
The element considered here has twenty degrees of free-
dom, three translation and two rotational motions per node.
The stiffnesss matrix consists of three components: mem-
brane, bending and shear. The membrane and shear com-
ponents of the stiffness matrix vary linearly with the plate
thickness, while the bending component has a cubic relation
with thickness. Belytschko and Tsay (1983) developed a sta-
bilization procedure for controlling the kinematic modes of
the four-noded bilinear element when single-point quadra-
ture is used. In order to control the kinematic modes, the
authors defined generalized strains which are activated by
these modes, but vanish in rigid body motions. Also associ-
ated with these generalized strains are generalized stiffnesses
determined through numerical experiments. By using a scal-
ing law, the stabilization parameters were defined so that
they would not adversely affect the element's performance.
The stabilization scheme outlined by the above authors is
effective for static problems in which the anti-hourglass stiff-
ness may be adjusted freely to produce stable element be-
haviour. In dynamics, however, low-energy deformation pat-
terns, consisting mainly of hourglass motions, represent likely
modes of low frequency oscillation which result in anomalous
behaviour in some relatively low-frequency modes, and may
be traced directly to the effect of the stabilization opera-
tor. This difficulty was corrected by Brockman (1987) by us-
ing appropriate mass characteristics for the bilinear Mindlin
plate element with hourglass stabilization. The purpose of
this formulation was to associate the proper kinetic energy
with those motions for which the element correctly repre-
sents the strain energy, and to eliminate the kinetic energy
i01
linked to the spurious modes. This procedure is implemented
by formulating the mass matrix for the bilinear Mindlin plate
element using a one-point integration for the inplane motions,
and the projection method for the transverse displacements
and rotations using 2 × 2 quadrature. This projection method
suppresses hourglassing kinetic energies, but allows a correct
evaluation of the kinetic energy for all constant strain and
rigid body motions by using a modified kinetic energy based
on the purely linear part of the velocity field. The algorithm
used in this work is taken from Brockman et al. (1989). It
should be noted that the mass matrix, M, includes the effect
of non-structural mass distribution.
Eigenvalue sensitivities with respect to the thickness of
an element are computed using the following equation:
KUj - w2 MUj = O, (8)
where w2 is the eigenvalue of the j-th mode of the structure,
and Uj is the corresponding eigenvector. Differentiating (8)
with respect to the design variable, the thickness parameter
leads to the frequency sensitivity expression as follows for the
j-th mode of vibration:
Nel
wj - - 2wjmj e=l
The denominator is a scalar multiple of the generalized
mass for mode j, which is given by mj = UT MUj. The
product K I U is simple to calculate when the sensitivity pa-
rameter is the thickness, since only the elasticity matrix is
affected. Hence -~ = D I BU and
K' U = [ BTNJI d r , (10)
V
where B is the strain displacement matrix, D is the elastic-
ity matrix, J is the Jacobian, and V is the volume of the
element. The product in (10) is analogous to the usual pro-
cess of stress recovery, so that the calculation of K I U for the
element resembles an evaluation of the internal nodal forces;
M t U is evaluated using the information
M =/RNNTIj[ dV, (11)
V
where R (rotary inertia coupling) is a function of the element
density and thickness, and N is the shape functions matrix.
Thus for the mass matrix sensitivity, when the design variable
is the thickness, only the parameter R is differentiated at the
element level.
2.1 Optimization problem
The problem of minimizing the weight of a structure subject
to multiple constraints can be posed as
minimize W = W(Xl, x 2 , . . . , z n ) , (12)
subject to the constraints
gj(x 1, x 2 , . . . , X n ) < ~ j j=l, 2,...,p, (13a)
gj(xl, x 2 , . . . , X n ) = ~ j j=p+ l,..., m, (135)
and the side bounds on the design variable as
xi>_x.!/) , i = 1 , 2 , . . . , n , (14)
where W is the weight of the structure, n is the number of
design variables and m is the total number of constraints.
 102

The constraints are the limits on the frequencies. The design 1

variables are the finite element thicknesses.
3 Optimization algorithm
The optimization problem is solved by using a generalized
compound scaling algorithm. The basic idea of any scaling
algorithm is to derive a set of scale factors for the variables
such that the design can be brought to the constraint surface
in one or more steps from anywhere in the n-dimensional de-
sign space by multiplying the current values of the variables
and the scale factors. In the generalized compound scaling
flF PiN < #jP, (195)
where j = s + 1 and fig min is the smallest fl value from the
s constraint set. To scale down the objective function, if the
design is on the constraint surface, a value of approximately
0.8 is assigned to flF. Combining t h e / 3 values for the con-
straint and the objective function, s + 1 flj's are computed.
The next step is to calculate the scale factors. Scale fac-
tors A depend on the values of the parameters and target
response ratios of the function characteristics. The proce-
dure is as follows:
!

algorithm (GCS), the objective function is treated as an ad- AjN = (-~j) ~jN , PjN > , (20)
ditional constraint, as both the constraints and the objective
or
function are functions of the same variables (Venkayya 1991). 1
However, the difficulty in this is that the constraints have a Ajp = (flj)vJP , #jN < #jP" (21)
target to satisfy and the objective function does not. Hence The following conditions are used in constructing the scale
to make the objective function look like a constraint, pseudo factors matrix:
target values for the objective function are generated so that
it can be treated as an additional constraint which intersects
Aij = AjN Pij < 0 t
Aij = 1.0 Pij <- 0 , ttjN >- #JP' (22a)
other constraints. The details of the GCS algorithm are pre-
or
sented below.
Two parameters,/3 and p, play a key role in the general- Aij = ~jP Pij > 0 t
Aij = 1.0 #ij <- 0 ~ # j g < #jR. (225)
ized compound scaling. First fl parameters are computed for
all the constraints using the following expression: This formulation results in s + 1 possible scale factors for
each variable. The strategy in compound sealing is to select
flgj = gJ = target response ratio. (15) a mix of the scale factors from various columns of the scale
gj
factor table with the object of approaching the intersection
After arranging the constraints with/?'s in the ascending or- points of the constraints. The relevant scale factors are deter-
der, the constraints with the lowest/3 values being the most mined with the help of a scale factor assignment procedure.
critical are selected for the active constraints set (about 10 The scale factors assignment table is computed as follows:
to 15) and denoted by s.
t i j = Nijxi
zj + #jN Pij < 0 }
Next, the function characteristics parameter p is com-
puted for each of the selected s constraints and the objective tij = 0 Pij >--0 PiN >--PiP, (23a)
function. The tt parameter consists of two parts based on the or

sign of the individual terms in the summation.

For all negative Itij terms
'iJ=l
tij -= 0
zj -i-#jp #ij > 0
Pij <--0
} PjN < #jP. (23b)
n
The values of the entries in the scale factor assignment
PiN = - E p i j , J=l, 2,..., s+l. (16)
table vary from zero to one. Now all the information is avail-
i=1
able for the selection of an appropriate scale factor for each
For all positive #ij terms
variable from the list of s + 1 scale factors. The appropri-
n
ate scale factor for the i-th variable is selected based on the
PiP = E p i j , J =1, 2,..., s+l, (17) following principles:
i=1
(i) from the scale factor assignment matrix select the largest
where
entry in the i-th row.
# i j - Nijxi , J = 1 , 2 , . . . , s + l , (18) For example: if tij is the largest entry in the scale factor
zj assignment matrix, then the appropriate scale factor for
where zj is a vector which consists of the s selected con- the i-th variable is the Aij from the scale factor matrix;
straints and the objective function F ; Nij is the ordered gra- (ii) if there is more than one entry equal to the largest entry
dient matrix corresponding to the selected active constraint in that row, then the appropriate scale factor corresponds
set s in the order of their/3 values which are sorted in the to the smallest flj of the equal entries. Now this process of
ascending order. The last column in the gradient matrix con- selecting the appropriate scale factor is applied for all the
tains the derivatives of the objective function with respect to variables. The selected scale factor for the i-th variable is
the design variables. denoted by r i. The scaled variables for x i are computed
To make the objective function look like a constraint, a by
pseudo target for the objective function is generated in terms
ew = °la , i = 1, 2, ... ,,.
of the flF values. When the design is away from the con-
straint surface then The compound scaling algorithm simply drives the design
to the intersection of the constraints, if such an intersection
" flF -- 1 + fig rain
2 , PjN ~ I~je, (19a) exists.
 103

4 Numerical results a n d discussions

4.1 Example 1: simply supported, square plate

A square plate simply supported at the edges, with dimen-
sions 10 in × 10 in, was optimized for minimum weight
(Fig. la). The material properties are Young's modulus
E = 30 x 106 psi, Poisson's ratio ~ = 0.3 and mass density
P m = 7.43 x 1a-041bs2
,, i n T ' This problem was solved earlier by
Haug et al. (1972, 1975) and it was modeled with 25 quadri-
lateral plate finite elements. Double symmetry of the plate
was observed about the central axes and hence only a quar-
ter model was considered. Each element was controlled by an
independent design variable. The objective was to minimize
the structural weight such that the fundamental frequency
(a)
rad A uniform plate with thickness equal to 0.1
w1 > 1375.0 s--~-.
in and w1=1208.9 s-~ rad was taken as the initial design, which
resulted in an initial weight of 0.7175 lb, and a design that •1 .1 .1 .137 .137
was in the infeasible region. The lower bound on the design
variables was 0.1 in. The optimum after 16 iterations was
0.7676 lb compared to that of 0.7736 lb, stated by Haug et .1 .1 .1 .137 .137
al. (1972). The distribution of the design variables obtained
followed the same pattern as given in the above reference.
.1 .1 .1 .1 .1
The frequency constraint was active at the optimum. The
distribution of the variables is shown in Fig. lb. The same
plate was optimized with the addition of a total of 1.0 lb .lOg .101 .1 .1 .1
non-structural mass added to the structure at the free nodes.
The addition of non-structur al mass considerably reduced the
• 107 Ii . 1 0 9 .1 .1 .1
natural frequencies of the plate resulting in wI = 689.6s-tad ~
and initial weight of 1.7175 lb for a uniform plate with t =
(b)
0.1 in. The lower bound on the frequency constraint was
tad The same lower bounds on the design variables
700.0s--~-.
were used. The optimum was reached in four iterations and .1 .1 .1 .101 .1
the optimum weight was 1.7215 lb. Adding non-structural
mass greatly improved the convergence rate. The distribu-
tion of the variables is shown in Fig. lc. The iteration history .1 .1 .1 .101 .101
of the feasible designs is shown in Fig. 2. The frequency con-
straint was active at the optimum• Absolute symmetry of
.101 .101 .1 .1 .1
the design variables about the diagonal of the quarter model
was observed at the optimum in both cases.
.101 .101 .101 .1 •1
Table 1. Initial and final design frequencies (rad/sec) for the plate
supported along four diagonal points
.101 .101 .101 .1 .1
Frequency Initial Wl -> 4000. Wl k 4000.
limit design w2 -> 6000.
(c)
Wl 3997.14 4000.05 4320.09
w2 5965.90 4093.50 6000.04
w3 9936.45 6185.93 6114.96 A Support Point

w4 13360.17 7500.82 8969.80 Fig. 1. Simply supported, square plate

w5 25417.31 9057.40 10148.14
Weight lb 12.34 10.38 11.52 however, because of the overhang, a complex saddle deforma-
tion pattern forms around the support points. The material
properties are Young's modulus E = 28 x 106 psi, Poisson's
4.2 Example 2: plate supported along four diagonal points ratio ~, = 0.3 and mass density, Pm = 7.71 x 10 -041bs2
in4 •
The second problem was a rectangular steel plate of 10 in x The finite element model consists of 49 elements, as only
12 in (Fig. 3) supported at four points on the diagonals. As one-quarter of the plate is actually modeled due to symme-
mentioned in the paper by Prasad and Haftka (1979), free vi- try. The diagonal support point is assumed to be located
brating analysis of a plate resting on four symmetric points on at two fifths of the distance between the plate's corner and
the diagonal has received considerable attention during the its center. A total of 6 lb of non-structural mass was added
last two decades. The problem is simple enough to analyse, to the structure. The lower bound on the design variable
104

//
L.
I-
10° _ ~

64
43 49
56

O 39
48

/k 40
OlD
25
32

24

Iteration no.
Fig. 2. Simply supported plate design iteration history
was 0.02 in. The initial design started from a feasible point
and had a weight of 12.34 lb when all the design variable
thicknesses were at 0.71 in. The structural weight was min-
imized such that the fundamental and second frequencies
were constrained. Tables 1 and 2 present the results ob-
tained under different constraint conditions. The first case
was with ~1 -> 4000"0~cd and the second case was with
tad Table 1 gives the first five
Wl >- 4000,0, Ws >_ 6000,0s-~.
frequencies at the initial and optimum designs. Figures 4a
and b give the mode shapes corresponding to the first and
second frequencies. As can be seen from Table 1, when the
plate is optimized for case 1 the second natural frequency
comes very close to the first frequency and all the other freM
quencies are also much lower than the initial design values.
For the second case the second and third frequencies come
closer to the optimum, but the fourth and fifth frequencies
move away to give a higher weight than the first case. Table
2 consists of all the design variables at the optimum. The
iteration history for the second case is shown in Fig. 5. For
that case it took 34 iterations to reach the optimal solution.
The first case took 27 iterations to reach the optimum.
In the first case, none of the elements reached the lower
bound and the frequency constraint was active. In the second
case, one element (number 25) near the point support of the
quarter plate went to the lower bound. The second constraint
16
Z
1 8
Mesh 7 X 7
X ElementNo.
X GridPointNumber
"-~-~ SupportPoint
Fig. 3. Plate supported along four diagonal points
was active at the optimum. In both cases, elements near the
support point and the lower left corner were thicker than
the rest of the elements. As previously noted by Haftka ahd
Prasad (1981), optimum designs have discontinuous thickness
distributions.
4.3 Example 3: square plate with internal and edge supporls
The third problem was a square plate with dimensions 12 in ×
12 in (Fig. 6). The plate is supported along its edges and also
at internal locations to represent a platform structure with
several internal supports (total 88 simply supported nodes
out of 169 nodes ). The plate can be considered to have been
made up of nine blocks. The material properties are those
of aluminium, Young's modulus E = 107 psi, Poisson's ratio
u = 0 3 and mass density Pm = 2.587x 1vn-041bs2 in 4 • The plate
was modeled with 144 elements as a complete plate because of
the inherent properties of the plate. The first mode shape of
the plate has a quarter symmetry. The second and the third
modes have diagonal skewed symmetry and the fourth mode
has a diagonal symmetry. Figures 7a and b give the mode
shapes corresponding to the first and second natural frequen-
cies. A total of 24 lb of non-structural mass was added to

, ( ~ i ! .~ftt
(a) Mode 1
-~ -.
(b) Mode 2
Fig. 4. Plate on four diagonal supports: quarter model
the structure at all the free nodes. At the initial design,
M1 the variables were taken as 1.0 in, which resulted in an
inital weight of 38.4 lb. The plate was optimized for mini-
mum weight subjected to fundamental and second frequency
constraints. A minimum gauge value of 0.1 in was imposed
on all the design variables. Table 3 presents the results ob-
tained under the follwing two different conditions. The first
case was with w 1 _> 32000.0 tad
s~~ and the second one was with
Wl -> 32000.0, w2 _> 35000.0s-tad
~ . The initial design was the
infeasible region. Table 3 gives the first three frequencies at
the initial and optimum designs. The iteration history for the
second case is shown in Fig. 8 and the thickness distributions
at the optimum is shown in Fig. 9. Quarter model symmetry
was realized at the optimal design for the first case. For the
second case both the eigenvalues were active at the optimum
and a skewed diagonal symmetry was realized. No elements
were at their lower bounds and the constraints were active in
both of the cases. In general, elements at the center of each
block were thicker than the others.
5 Conclusions
In this paper, the minmum weight design of structures with
single and multiple frequency constraints were obtained us-
ing the generalized compound scaling algorithm. Structures
with and without concentrated mass were considered. It was
105
Ol
,4-
t~
13
N.
T
o J ,
Iteration no.
Fig. 5. Plate on four diagonal supports: design iteration history
observed that structures with concentrated mass reached the
optimum much faster than those without. The number of
design variables considered was considerably large. The al-
gorithm proved to be extremely stable in giving'the optimum.
The optimum thickness distributions realized in this work fol-
low the trends discussed by previous researchers (Rozvany el
al. 1982). In general, solving the complete optimization prob-
lem for finding the optimum solution involves finite element
analysis of the structure, sensitivity calculation of objective
and constraints with respect to design variables, construction
of function approximations, move limits, calculation of search
direction, and iterative optimization methods. One major
point to be noted with the GCS algorithm was its minimal
computational effort involved in calculating the scale factors
and the assignment table needed for resizing the structure.
This simplicity results in substantial savings in solving very
large scale problemswith hundreds of design variables.
Acknowledgements
This research work was supported by the U.S. Air Force through
the contract, F33615-88-C-3204. The authors acknowledge Dr.
R.A. Brockman, University of Dayton Research Institute, for pro-
viding the PROTEC computer program.
106

Table 2. Optimum distribution of design variables (inch) for Ex-

ample 2
Element no. Case 1 Case 2
1 0.7597 1.4542
2 0.7597 1.2145
3 0.9177 1.8974
4 0.9177 0.2956
5 0.7317 0.2956
6 0.2187 0.3678 T
1-
. . . . . . . . . -T
7 0.2187 0.2956
169
8 0.7597 1.1639 157 14,

9 0.7597 1.0762
10 0.7597 1.3714
11 0.9177 1.6859
117
12 0.7818 0.8678
13 0.2985 0.0551
14 0.0772 0.0496
15 0.7597 0.9720 ~5
16 0.6319 1.2512
17 0.9177 1.0828
18 0.4819 0.9721
1 1213
19 1.0805 1.0469
20 0.4551 0.3449
21 0.2111 0.2881 Mesh 12 x 12 x Element Number
22 0.7029 0.8197 X Grid Point Number
23 0.0762 0.1701
24 0.7923 1.2935 ~-. ~ Support Point

25 0.4494 0.0200 Fig. 6. Square plate with internal and edge supports
26 0.7658 0.4125
27 0.4494 0.3391
28 0.3596 0.3391
29 0.4663 0.2181
30 0.5048 0.2106
31 0.3490 1.2450
32 0.5244 0.4150
33 0.3486 0.4658
34 0.4542 0.4047
35 0.4494 0.2805
36 0.3252 0.1640
37 0.3577 0.4648
38 0.3577 0.4864
39 0.3577 0.3502
40 0.0719 0.3481
41 0.3486 0.3481
42 0.3486 0.1306
43 0.1551 0.4062
44 0.1324 0.3575
45 0.1596 0.3575 Fig. 7a. Square plate with internal and edge supports - mode 1
46 0.1525 0.3481
47 0.1183 0.3481 Num. Mech. Eng. 19, 405-419
48 0.1525 0.1306 Brockman, R.A.; Lung F.Y.; Braisted, W.R. 1989: Probabilistic
49 0.1908 0.1306 finite element analysis of dynamic structural response. Wright
Weight 10.38 11.52 Patterson Air Force Base, Technical Report, A F W A L - T R - 8 8 - 2 1 4 9
DeSilva, B.M.E. 1972: Optimal vibrational modes of a disc. J.
References Sound and Vibration 21, 19-34
Armand, J.L. 1971: Minimum-mass design of plate-like structures Foley, M.H. 1978: A minimum mass square plate with fixed fun-
for specified fundamental frequency. A I A A J. 9, 1739-1745 damental frequency of free vibration. A I A A J. 16, 1001-1004
Belytschko, T.; Tsay, C.S. 1983: A stabilization procedure for Grandhi, R.V., Venugopal, N.S.; Venkayya, V.B. 1991: Optimality
quadrilateral plate element with one-point quadrature. Int. J. criteria method for minimum weight design plate structures. Proc.
 107

/ ~
/ ~
/ ~
/ ~
/-... ~

FI 7b S ate with internal and edge supports mode 2 ~--"

Fig. 9. Square plate with internal and edge supports optimal

thickness distributions
Table 3. Initial and final design frequencies (rad/sec) for Example
I \' 3
Frequency Initial w 1 > 4000. w 1 > 4000.
limit design w 2 > 6000.
Wl 29819.51 32004.89 31859.63

°:t/
.:;-
"
5
8
w2
w3
w4
31223.18
31236.52
32643.12
33139.19
33794.93
35690.56
34911.81
34937.44
35553.03
w5 33183.64 36510.08 36904.28
Weight lb 38.4 40.53 41.06

Int. J. Num. Methods Eng. 9, 649-667

0 ! 2 3 4 6 6 7
Iteration no.
Fig. 8. Plate with internal and edge supports design iteration
history
32nd A I A A / A S M E / A S C E / A H S / A S C Struct., Struct. Dynamics
and Material Conf. (held in Baltimore, MD), Part 1, AIAA-91-
0923, 213-226
ttaftka, R.T.; Prasad, P. 1981: Optimum structural design with
plate bending elements - a survey. A I A A J. 19, 517-522
Haug, E.J., Jr.; Pan, K.C.; Streeter, T.D. 1972: A computational
method for optimal structural design: I. Piecewise uniform struc-
tures. Int. J. Num. Methods Eng. 5, 171-184
Hang, E.J., Jr.; Pan, K.C.; Streeter, T.D. 1975: A computational
method for optimal structural design: II. Continuous problems.
Kamat, M.P. 1973: Optimal fundamental frequencies of thin rect- "
angular plates. Recent Advances in Eng. 9, 101-108
Lea], R.P.; Mota Soares, C.A. 1989: Mixed elementsin the optimal
design of plates. Struct. Optim. 1,127-136
Olhoff, N. 1974: Optimal design of vibrating circular plates. Int.
J. Solids Struct. 6, 139-156
Prasad, B.; Haftka, R.T. 1979: Optimum structural design with
plate bending finite elements. A S C E J. Struct. Div. 105, 2367-
2382
Rozvany, G.I.N.; Olhoff, N.; Cheng, K.T.; Taylor, J.E. 1982: On
the solid plate paradox in structural optimization. J. Struct.
Mech. 10, 1-32
Seiranyan, A.P. 1978: A study of an extremum in the optimal
problem of a vibrating circular plate. Mech. Solids 13, 99-194
Venkayya, V.B. 1991: Design optimization in dynamic environ-
ment. Int. Conf. on Recent Advances in Struct. Dynamics (held
in Southhampton, England, July)
Received Sept. 2, 1991
Revised manuscript received May 19, 1992