Abstract
Adjoint shape optimization has enabled physics-based optimal designs for aerodynamic surfaces. Additive manufacturing (AM) makes it possible to manufacture complex shapes. However, there has been a gap between optimal and manufacturable surfaces due to the inherent limitations of commercial computational fluid dynamics (CFD) codes to implement geometric constraints during adjoint computation. In such cases, the design sensitivities are exported and used to perform constrained shape modifications using parametric information stored in computer aided design (CAD) files to satisfy manufacturability constraints. However, modifying the design using adjoint methods in CFD solvers and performing constrained shape modification in CAD can lead to inconsistencies due to different shape parameterization schemes. This paper describes a method to enable the simultaneous optimization of the fluid domain and impose AM manufacturability constraints, resolving one of the key issues of geometry definition for isogeometric analysis. Similar to a grid convergence study, the proposed method verifies the consistencies between shape parameterization techniques present within commercial CAD and CFD software during mesh movement as a part of the adjoint shape optimization routine. By identifying the appropriate parameters essential to a shape optimization study, the error metric between the different parameterization techniques converges to demonstrate sufficient consistencies for justifiable exchange of data between CAD and CFD. This method provides justification for the use of multi-physics guided adjoint design sensitivities computed in CFD software to perform shape modifications in CAD to incorporate AM manufacturability constraints during the shape optimization loop such that optimal designs are also additively manufacturable.
