Fig.1

Topology optimization to achieve displacement control

Fig.2

Typical compliant mechanism design［7］

Fig.3

Optimized result and comparison of joint load distribution with joint loads constraint［103］

Fig.4

Optimization results of compliance and configuration under different output load ratio［105］

Fig.5

Results of dynamic topology optimization of multi-component conoid capsule［113］

Fig.6

Design of rotary-wing displacement minimization based on anti-resonance theory

Fig.7

Results of multi-scale collaborative optimization of composite materials［134］

Fig.8

The complex multi-component system

Fig.9

An illustrative diagram of engineering structure connection and MPC connection［15］

Fig.10

Topology and layout optimization design of typical multi-component structural system［146］

Fig.11

Front fuselage structure of C919

Fig.12

A schematic diagram for the shape preserving design problem［151］

Fig.13

A schematic diagram of displacement decomposition［151］

Fig.14

Comparison of the optimized designs of the cantilever beam ［150］

Fig.15

Comparison of enlarged local deformations of shape preserving design of cantilever beam［150］

Fig.16

Comparison of shape preserving design results of aircraft front fuselage［15］

Fig.17

Air inlet opening of J20

Fig.18

A schematic diagram of multi-point shape preserving design principle［150］

Fig.19

Comparison of shape preserving design results of aircraft inlet［150］

Fig.20

A schematic diagram of directional shape preserving

Fig.21

Comparison of directional shape preserving results of aircraft inlet［157］

Fig.22

Numerical isolation phenomenon［158］

Fig.23

Results of geometrically nonlinear shape preserving optimization under different shape preserving constraints［158］

Fig.24

Shape preserving results of cantilever under harmonic excitation［171］

Fig.25

Change of dynamic strain energy in a cycle of a slightly damped system

Fig.26

Comparison of dynamic shape preserving design under different constraint evaluation conditions［173］

Fig.27

An illustrative diagram of the improved dynamic artifical weak elements method［173］

Fig.28

Comparison of dynamic shape preserving design results of cantilever beam with void region［173］

Fig.29

Shape and position preserving design results［176］

Fig.30

Results of dynamic shape preserving optimization design of cantilever beam

Fig.31

Nephogram of average strain energy distribution in dynamic shape preserving region

Fig.32

Nephogram of power flow distribution in dynamic conformal region

Fig.33

Return capsule returns to atmosphere

Fig.34

Comparison of single material optimization design results with temperature change of 100 ℃［180］

Fig.35

Optimization results of shape preserving design of thermo-mechanical coupling structures［180］

Fig.36

Results of RCS local control optimization based on shape preserving idea［191］

Fig.37

Topology optimization of large-aperture mirror back support［196］

Fig.38

Results of topology optimization of multi-optical components based on local displacement control［197］

Fig.39

Shape preserving design result of mirror reflective face shape control

Fig.40

Multi-satellites components support topology and layout design results

Fig.41

Comparison of multi-component layout and structural shape preserving co-optimization［209］

Fig.42

Optimization results of thin-walled reinforced structures considering shape preserving constraints［213］

Fig.43

An illustrative diagram of cross-scale multi-function structure of aerospace vehicle

Fig.44

Optical path shape preserving design drawing of airborne stabilized sighting equipment