Lightweight design method of anchor and mooring equipment winding drum device

Abstract

The invention relates to the field of ship deck mechanical design, and discloses a lightweight design method of an anchor and mooring equipment winding drum device, which comprises the following steps: S1, establishing a finite element model: establishing an initial three-dimensional model of the anchor and mooring equipment winding drum device, and carrying out regional division on the initial three-dimensional model to obtain a design domain and a non-design domain, applying a preset load condition and a boundary condition to the initial three-dimensional model so as to establish a finite element model; and S2, generating a conceptual configuration: based on the finite element model, carrying out topological optimization in the design domain to generate a material space distribution scheme representing an optimal force transmission path, and the scheme is the conceptual configuration. According to the method, the innovative structural configuration representing the optimal force transmission path is generated through the topological optimization technology, and the limitation of a traditional design method on structural innovation and optimization efficiency is systematically solved in combination with a parameterized multi-objective optimization process.

Description

TECHNICAL FIELD

[0001] The present application relates to the field of ship deck machinery design, in particular to a lightweight design method of an anchor winch drum device. BACKGROUND

[0002] The anchor winch is the core equipment for ship mooring and anchoring operation. Its drum device, as the key component directly bearing and transmitting the load of the cable or anchor chain, needs to have sufficient strength, stiffness and fatigue life to ensure the safety of operation. In the field of ship engineering, lightweight design of various equipment including the anchor winch drum has direct significance for reducing the self-weight of the ship, increasing the effective load, improving fuel economy and enhancing the stability of the ship.

[0003] The existing design method of the anchor winch drum device is usually based on experience and analogy. The designer determines the initial structure form and main dimensions of the drum according to the drawings of existing successful cases, relevant ship classification society specifications and empirical formulas. The structure produced by this method has a fixed form, for example, it is mostly a monolithic structure or a welded structure composed of a barrel wall, a web plate and a hub, and the web plate is often a simple plate or a reinforced plate with radial straight ribs.

[0004] In the above design process, finite element analysis is usually used as a checking tool. The designer first proposes a complete structure scheme, then establishes a finite element model and performs static analysis to verify whether the stress and deformation of the structure under the preset load are within the allowable range. If the analysis results do not meet the requirements, the designer will modify the structure locally based on the analysis results and personal experience, such as increasing the plate thickness or adding reinforcing ribs, and then repeat the finite element analysis until all the checking indicators meet the specifications.

[0005] However, such traditional design method has its inherent technical limitations. Since the starting point of the design highly depends on the existing and mature structure form, the topological configuration of the design result is difficult to break through the traditional framework, which limits the exploration of innovative structures with higher material distribution efficiency. In the traditional structure characterized by uniform thickness plates or regular ribbed plates, the load transmission path is not optimal, and the finite element analysis results often show significant uneven stress distribution, with very low stress level in some areas, indicating that the material in these areas is not effectively utilized.

[0006] At the same time, this design-checking cycle-based process is non-systematic in optimization. Each structural modification depends on the manual adjustment of the designer, the whole process is time-consuming, and the performance level of the final scheme is directly related to the designer's experience. This method lacks a mechanism to automatically seek the optimal load transmission path, and it is difficult to quantitatively and systematically trade off between multiple conflicting design objectives such as structure mass, fatigue performance and manufacturing cost, thus it is difficult to obtain a globally optimal design scheme. SUMMARY

[0007] In order to solve the problems of the prior art, the present application provides a lightweight design method for an anchor winch drum device, which solves the problems of the prior art that the design method for the anchor winch drum device relies on design experience and cannot systematically explore the optimal force transmission path, resulting in insufficient structural innovation, low material utilization rate, and difficulty in collaborative optimization of lightweight, performance, and cost.

[0008] In order to achieve the above-mentioned purpose, the present application is implemented by the following technical scheme: a lightweight design method for an anchor winch drum device, comprising the following steps: S1, establishing a finite element model: establishing an initial three-dimensional model of the anchor winch drum device, and performing regional division on the initial three-dimensional model to obtain a design domain and a non-design domain, and then applying a predetermined load condition and boundary condition to the initial three-dimensional model to establish a finite element model; S2, generating a conceptual configuration: based on the finite element model, topology optimization is performed in the design domain to generate a material space distribution scheme representing the optimal force transmission path, which is the conceptual configuration; S3, parameterized reconstruction: according to the conceptual configuration, geometric reconstruction is performed to generate an engineering model with manufacturability, and parameterized processing is performed on the engineering model to obtain a parameterized model with key geometric dimensions as design parameters; S4, optimization solution: taking the design parameters as optimization variables, optimization calculation is performed to obtain a set of optimal design parameters that satisfy the predetermined performance constraints; S5, determining the final design: according to the optimal design parameters, the final lightweight design of the anchor winch drum device is determined.

[0009] Preferably, in S1, before establishing the finite element model, the step of establishing a candidate material library is further included, and the candidate material library stores the mechanical property parameters of at least two materials.

[0010] Preferably, in S2, when performing the topology optimization, the predetermined manufacturing process constraints are taken as optimization constraint conditions.

[0011] Preferably, the manufacturing process constraints include at least one of casting draw constraints, minimum member size constraints, or additive manufacturing overhang angle constraints.

[0012] Preferably, in S2, the optimization objective of the topology optimization is to minimize the structure mass or volume, and the constraint condition is that the stress, strain, or displacement of the structure does not exceed its predetermined allowable value.

[0013] Preferably, the optimization calculation in S4 is multi-objective optimization calculation.

[0014] Preferably, the objective function vector of the multi-objective optimization calculation comprises at least two of the following: structural mass, structural fatigue life, manufacturing cost.

[0015] Preferably, in the S4, the result of the multi-objective optimization calculation is a PS1rS5to optimal solution set; and the step S5 specifically comprises: selecting a set of optimal design parameters from the PS1rS5to optimal solution set according to a preset trade-off criterion, to determine the final lightweight design.

[0016] Preferably, the S1 further comprises: repeating the steps S2 to S5 for each material in the candidate material library to obtain a final lightweight design corresponding to each material; comprehensively evaluating the final lightweight design of each material to determine a globally optimal material-structure integrated design.

[0017] Preferably, the method further comprises a verification step after the step S5, and the verification step is: performing finite element checking on the final lightweight design to verify whether it meets the preset specification requirements.

[0018] The application provides a lightweight design method of an anchor winch drum device. 1、The application generates a conceptual configuration of the anchor winch drum device by using a topology optimization technology, which can produce an innovative structure layout that breaks through the limitations of traditional design experience based on the identification of optimal force transmission paths according to mechanical principles. The resulting configuration accurately distributes materials in the most critical stress areas, laying a structural foundation for achieving significant lightweight of the device.

[0019] 2、The application parameterizes the conceptual configuration and combines it with subsequent detailed optimization algorithms to construct a systematic and automatically executable design optimization process. This process uses specific geometric design parameters as variables and replaces the manual trial and adjustment in traditional design with numerical iterative solutions, improving the accuracy and efficiency of the anchor winch drum device design process.

[0020] 3、The application uses multi-objective optimization technology to simultaneously handle multiple performance indicators such as structural mass, fatigue life, and manufacturing cost, which are mutually restrictive. This method generates a Pareto optimal solution set to quantitatively reveal the trade-off relationship between different performance objectives, providing a series of candidate solutions that have been fully evaluated for design decision-makers, so that they can make informed trade-offs and selections based on specific engineering requirements.

[0021] 4、The present application integrates the complete design link from the initial finite element modeling, conceptual design, detailed design to the final performance verification, forming a closed loop and logically coherent forward design method. This integrated process ensures that the innovative configuration generated from the topology optimization stage can be seamlessly converted into a final lightweight product scheme that meets all performance constraints and specification requirements and is manufacturable.

[0022] 5、The present application can introduce manufacturing process constraints in the optimization process, so that the generated lightweight structure has good manufacturability at the initial design stage. At the same time, the method supports repeated execution of the complete optimization process for different candidate materials, realizes the collaborative optimization of material selection and structure design, and can determine the comprehensive design scheme of the anchor winch drum device that is optimal in both material and geometric configuration dimensions. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS

[0023] Figure 1 The method steps of the present application. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0024] The technical solutions in the embodiments of the present application will be described clearly and completely below with reference to the drawings in the specification of the present application. Obviously, the described embodiments are only a part of the embodiments of the present application, rather than all the embodiments. Based on the embodiments in the present application, all other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art without creative labor fall within the scope of protection of the present application.

[0025] Please refer to the accompanying Figure 1 The embodiment of the present application provides a lightweight design method for an anchor winch drum device, comprising the following steps: S1, establishing a finite element model: establishing an initial three-dimensional model of the anchor winch drum device, and performing regional division on the initial three-dimensional model to obtain a design domain and a non-design domain, and then applying a preset load condition and boundary condition to the initial three-dimensional model to establish a finite element model; In the embodiment, the purpose of step S1 is to convert the physical entity of the anchor winch drum and its mechanical behavior under the preset working condition into a digital finite element model that can be numerically calculated. The model is the direct input object of all subsequent analysis and optimization steps.

[0026] This step first involves using three-dimensional computer-aided design (CAD) software to establish an initial three-dimensional solid model of the anchor winch drum device. To reduce the complexity and resource consumption of subsequent numerical calculations, the initial three-dimensional model can be appropriately cleaned up and simplified, for example, minor geometric features such as threads, small size chamfers, etc. that have little effect on the overall stiffness and strength distribution of the structure can be ignored.

[0027] After obtaining the simplified three-dimensional model, the model needs to be divided into regions to obtain the design domain and non-design domain.

[0028] The design domain refers to the geometric space that allows the algorithm to adjust the presence and distribution of material in the subsequent topology optimization step. It is usually set to the web, ribs and some non-functional wall areas of the drum.

[0029] The non-design domain is an area whose geometry must remain unchanged throughout the design process due to specific functional requirements or assembly relationships. This can include the inner bore of the wheel hub that mates with the main shaft, the flange connection surface for equipment mounting, the brake ring surface in frictional contact with the brake band, and the associated bolt holes.

[0030] The purpose of this area division operation is to ensure that the optimization process does not destroy the existing and necessary internal and external functional interfaces and assembly relationships of the device while seeking structural lightweighting.

[0031] As a preferred embodiment, this step may also include establishing a candidate material library. The library stores detailed mechanical performance parameters of at least two or more candidate materials in the form of a database. For each material in the library , its elastic modulus must be recorded , Poisson's ratio , material density , yield strength ,tensile strength , as well as the correlation coefficient of the SN curve (stress-life curve) that characterizes its fatigue resistance. The establishment of this material library aims to provide a data foundation for the performance comparison and optimization of different material solutions in subsequent processes, thereby supporting the integrated collaborative design of materials and structures.

[0032] Next, preset load cases and boundary conditions need to be applied to the model to simulate the actual working environment of the reel device.

[0033] The purpose of applying boundary conditions is to simulate the actual installation constraint state of the reel, for example, imposing fixed constraints on the inner surface of the hub or bearing constraints with specific degrees of freedom.

[0034] The definition of load cases is intended to simulate the most severe stress conditions that the drum may be subjected to during its entire life cycle. It is to include at least: the maximum mooring tension condition, which can be equivalent to the distributed pressure acting on the specific winding area on the outer surface of the drum wall; the maximum braking torque condition, which can be equivalent to the torsional load or tangential force acting on the surface of the brake ring; and the combined load conditions required by the relevant classification society rules.

[0035] After completing the above definitions, the geometric model, bearing the boundary conditions and load cases, undergoes finite element discretization, also known as meshing. This process divides the continuous geometry into a finite set of elements and nodes. Preferably, local mesh refinement is performed in areas of predicted stress concentration, such as structural roots and hole edges, to obtain more accurate stress calculations.

[0036] At this point, a complete finite element model has been established, and the static response problem of the device has been transformed into a solvable linear algebraic equation system: ; in, is the overall stiffness matrix of the structure formed by integrating the stiffness matrices of each unit, is the node displacement vector to be solved, is the equivalent load vector applied to the node. This set of equations and its related definitions constitute the final output of step S1 and serve as the direct input of step S2.

[0037] S2. Generate conceptual configuration: Based on the finite element model, perform topology optimization within the design domain to generate a material spatial distribution scheme that represents the optimal force transmission path. This scheme is the conceptual configuration. In this embodiment, step S2 follows the finite element model established in step S1. Its purpose is to automatically generate a material spatial distribution scheme representing the optimal force transmission path within a pre-defined design domain through numerical optimization methods. This scheme is defined as the conceptual configuration of the winding device and serves as the direct basis for subsequent structural design steps.

[0038] The core of this step is topology optimization. This calculation is a structural optimization method that uses the physical properties of each finite element divided in step S1 as variables and, through iterative calculations, seeks to achieve the optimal material distribution for specific performance indicators while satisfying all mechanical constraints.

[0039] To perform this calculation, a mathematical model for topology optimization must first be established. This model clearly defines the optimization objectives, design variables, and constraints.

[0040] In this embodiment, the design variable is the design domain Each finite element Relative density The relative density The value range is set to ,1 interval, where Indicates that the unit is a solid material, and when Approaching a very small positive lower limit , the material representing the unit is removed. This is to prevent the problem of singular stiffness matrix in numerical calculation. The relative density of all elements together constitutes the design variable vector .

[0041] The optimization objective function of this mathematical model is set to minimize the total mass of the structure. To ensure that the optimized structure can meet its usage requirements under all preset working conditions, the mathematical model also includes a series of constraints. These constraints include at least: Strength constraint, that is, any load case defined in step S1 is required Under this condition, any unit in the design domain von Mises equivalent stress The allowable stress of the material must not be exceeded .

[0042] Stiffness constraints, which require specific monitoring nodes on the structure Displacement Do not exceed its preset displacement limit .

[0043] In order to establish the relationship between the macroscopic mechanical properties of the unit and its microscopic relative density design variables, this embodiment adopts the solid isotropic material penalty model. According to this model, the unit Elastic modulus The relative density is obtained by the following function Building Relationships: ; in, is the elastic modulus of the solid material, is a very small elastic modulus value to avoid the stiffness matrix singularity, It is a penalty factor, which is usually greater than 1 (for example, 3). Its function is to impose a stiffness penalty on the units with intermediate density, thereby driving the design variables to converge to 0 or 1 during the optimization iteration process, so as to obtain a clear black and white topological structure that is easy to interpret in engineering.

[0044] As a preferred embodiment, to enhance the engineering manufacturability of the final solution, manufacturing process constraints can be further introduced into the above-mentioned mathematical model. Such constraints convert the expected manufacturing method restrictions into geometric constraints and apply them to the optimization model. For example, if a casting process is assumed, a draft direction constraint can be added to ensure that all surfaces of the optimized structure have a draft angle of not less than zero relative to the specified draft direction. If an additive manufacturing process is assumed, a minimum member size constraint can be added to avoid generating structural features that are too thin to be stably formed.

[0045] After the complete definition of the mathematical model above, the optimization algorithm is iterated to solve the problem. After the solving process is completed, the output result is the optimal distribution of relative density of all elements in the design domain. This scheme is usually visualized in the form of a three-dimensional density cloud map, in which the high-density area clearly outlines the most efficient force transmission path when the structure is under external load, and the low-density area identifies the redundant material that can be safely removed. This density cloud map is the conceptual configuration generated in this step.

[0046] The conceptual configuration is the optimal topological layout based on mechanical principles, but its geometric boundary is usually irregular and non-smooth, which cannot be directly used for engineering manufacturing. Therefore, the conceptual configuration will be used as the direct input of step S3 to provide the basis for the form of geometric reconstruction.

[0047] S3, parameterized reconstruction: geometric reconstruction is performed according to the conceptual configuration to generate an engineering model with manufacturability, and parameterized processing is performed on the engineering model to obtain a parameterized model with key geometric dimensions as design parameters; In this embodiment, step S3 takes the conceptual configuration generated in step S2 as input, and its purpose is to convert the topological information contained in the conceptual configuration, which is represented by the density of discrete elements, into an engineering model that is manufacturable, continuous and smooth, and whose key geometric dimensions can be parameterized and driven. The model is the direct object of the subsequent detailed optimization and solving step S4.

[0048] This step first involves the geometric and mechanical interpretation of the conceptual configuration output by step S2. This interpretation process includes: analyzing the density cloud map of the conceptual configuration in a three-dimensional visualization environment, identifying and extracting the continuous regions formed by high-density elements, such as relative density greater than a predetermined threshold, such as 0.5. These regions physically correspond to the main force transmission paths formed by the structure when it is under load. After identifying the force transmission paths, this step enters the geometric reconstruction phase. In this phase, three-dimensional computer-aided design software is used to create new geometric entities based on the identified force transmission paths. Specifically, mathematical tools such as non-uniform rational B-splines can be used to generate curves or surfaces that can fit or cover the force transmission paths. This process aims to convert the discrete topological form with jagged or irregular boundaries generated by topology optimization into an engineering geometric structure with continuous and smooth surfaces, such as curved rib plates with variable cross-section or variable thickness characteristics, biomimetic truss structures or shells. This reconstruction process also needs to meet the requirements of the predetermined manufacturing process, such as ensuring smooth transitions between surfaces to facilitate stress dispersion, or ensuring that the structure wall thickness is not lower than the lower limit of the forming process of a specific process.

[0049] After the reconstruction of the engineered geometry model, the core task of this step is to fully parameterize the model. This process refers to identifying and selecting a series of key geometric dimensions in the new model that have a significant impact on the overall quality, strength, stiffness, and other mechanical properties of the structure, and defining these dimensions as design parameters that can be independently driven and modified by the program.

[0050] These design parameters can include, but are not limited to: the thickness of the drum wall, the thickness of the rib plate, the number of rib plates, the distribution angle of the rib plates on the circumference, the transition fillet radius at the connection between structures, etc.

[0051] Each selected design parameter is assigned a variable name, such as By establishing a constraint relationship between these parameters and the geometric model in the CAD software, a fully parameterized model is established. In this model, modifying the value of any parameter will automatically trigger the corresponding update of the model geometry.

[0052] The final output of this step is a parameterized model defined by a set of design parameters, as well as the mathematical expression representing this set of parameters, i.e. the design variable vector ; Where, is a column vector containing independent design parameters.

[0053] This parameterized model and its associated design variable vector constitute the technical carrier for the transition from macro-topological layout to micro-size optimization. It converts a specific, static geometric configuration into a multi-dimensional design space that can be explored by optimization algorithms, and serves as a direct input for step S4 optimization solving.

[0054] S4, optimization solving: taking the design parameters as optimization variables, performing optimization calculation to obtain a set of optimal design parameters that meet the preset performance constraints; In this embodiment, step S4 takes the parameterized model and its associated design variable vector output by step S3 as input, and its purpose is to perform detailed size and shape optimization calculation to obtain a set of design parameter values that can satisfy all preset performance constraints and make one or more performance targets optimal.

[0055] This step takes the design variable vector defined in step S3, which is composed of key geometric dimensions, as optimization variables. The core of this step is to establish and solve an optimization mathematical model.

[0056] As a preferred embodiment, the optimization calculation is constructed as a multi-objective optimization problem, aiming to handle multiple conflicting performance objectives simultaneously. The multi-objective optimization mathematical model specifically includes the following parts: The objective function is defined as a vector , whose expression is: ; Each component in the vector represents an independent optimization sub-objective. In the present embodiment, these sub-objectives can include at least two of the following: (1) Minimization of structural mass. The objective function is directly calculated from the geometric dimensions of the parameterized model, i.e. .

[0057] (2) Maximization of structural fatigue life. Since maximization of fatigue life is equivalent to minimization of cumulative damage degree, the objective function can be set as minimization of total damage degree .

[0058] It can be calculated based on the Palmgren-Miner linear cumulative damage theory, whose expression is: ; wherein is the number of load cycles with stress amplitude σa,k in the pre-set load spectrum, is the allowable cycle number corresponding to the current design scheme under stress amplitude σa,k, which is determined by the S-N curve of the material selected in step S1.

[0059] (3) Minimization of manufacturing cost. The objective function can be constructed as a cost estimation function that comprehensively considers factors such as material usage and process complexity, .

[0060] The constraint conditions of the mathematical model aim to ensure that all optimization results are within the feasible region. These constraint conditions at least include the static strength constraints and stiffness constraints defined in step S1, such as . In addition, other performance constraints can be introduced as needed, such as dynamic performance constraints, requiring the first-order natural frequency of the structure to avoid the known external excitation frequency range , whose expression can be recorded as: ; After the above multi-objective optimization mathematical model is established, a multi-objective optimization algorithm is used to iteratively solve it. Preferably, an intelligent optimization algorithm such as a non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm II or a multi-objective particle swarm optimization algorithm can be used.

[0061] The solving process does not obtain a single optimal solution, but obtains a set composed of a plurality of optimal solutions, which is referred to as a Pareto optimal solution set. Any solution in the set has the following characteristics: without making any other objective function value worse, the value of the objective function of the solution cannot be individually improved.

[0062] Visualizing all solutions in the Pareto optimal solution set in the objective function space forms a Pareto frontier. The frontier intuitively shows the quantitative trade-off relationship between the objective functions.

[0063] The final output of this step is the Pareto optimal solution set or its corresponding Pareto frontier. The output provides a series of quantified candidate solutions with different performance preferences for the final scheme decision in step S5.

[0064] S5, determining the final design: determining the final lightweight design of the anchor winch drum device according to the optimal design parameters; In this embodiment, step S5 takes the Pareto optimal solution set output by step S4, and its purpose is to select a specific set of optimal design parameters from the solution set according to a predetermined decision criterion to determine the final lightweight design of the anchor winch drum device, and can include independent performance verification of the final design.

[0065] This step first involves decision-making and selection from the Pareto optimal solution set obtained in step S4. The selection process is achieved through a predetermined trade-off criterion. Specifically, an evaluation function or selection rule can be established according to the specific technical requirements of the project to locate a design point on the Pareto frontier that best meets the comprehensive requirements.

[0066] For example, the trade-off criterion can be a weighted summation method, which assigns a corresponding weight coefficient to each objective function such as mass, fatigue damage degree, and cost and aims to minimize the weighted sum to filter out a unique solution from the Pareto optimal solution set.

[0067] Alternatively, the criterion can be a target achievement method, that is, to seek the optimization of another objective such as mass on the premise of ensuring that one or more objectives such as fatigue life and cost are not worse than their set thresholds.

[0068] By applying the trade-off criterion, a unique set of optimal design parameter values can be determined from the Pareto optimal solution set Substitute these parameter values into the parameterized model established in step S3, and the final lightweight design of the anchor winch drum device with determined geometry can be generated.

[0069] As a preferred embodiment, when the candidate material library containing multiple materials is established in step S1, the method of the present application can support the integrated design decision of materials and structures. In this case, steps S2 to S4 need to be completely repeated for each material in the candidate material library, so as to generate a corresponding Pareto optimal solution set for each material.

[0070] In this step S5, the Pareto optimal solution sets of different materials need to be comprehensively evaluated and compared horizontally. For example, the minimum structural mass that can be achieved by different materials to achieve the same fatigue life target can be compared, or the maximum fatigue life that can be achieved under the same mass constraint. Through such comprehensive evaluation of cross-material schemes, the globally optimal material-structure integrated design scheme is finally determined.

[0071] As another preferred embodiment of the present application, after the final lightweight design is determined according to the optimal design parameters, the method can further include a verification step. This step aims to independently and accurately numerically check the final scheme to ensure that its performance meets the preset specification requirements.

[0072] Specifically, a new finite element model with higher grid density or higher order elements is established for the final lightweight design scheme, and a comprehensive performance analysis and calculation is performed. The calculation at least includes: Static analysis: Recalculate the stress and deformation distribution of the structure under each limit load condition defined in step S1, check whether the maximum stress is lower than the allowable stress of the material, and whether the maximum deformation is within the allowable range.

[0073] Modal analysis: Calculate the natural frequencies and corresponding modes of the final design to evaluate its dynamic characteristics and ensure that the natural frequencies of the key orders are staggered with the known ship or equipment excitation frequencies to avoid resonance risk.

[0074] Fatigue life analysis: According to the detailed service load spectrum, perform a comprehensive fatigue calculation on the verification model to evaluate whether the fatigue life of the key parts meets the design life requirement.

[0075] The results of all the above verification analysis are compared with the relevant clauses in the design specifications of the classification societies, such as CCS, ABS, DNV, etc., item by item, until it is confirmed that the final lightweight design scheme fully complies with the specifications in terms of strength, stiffness, stability and fatigue life, etc., and the design process is completed.

[0076] While embodiments of the application have been shown and described, it is to be understood that the embodiments described are merely divergences of the principles and spirit of the application and that numerous modifications, changes, substitutions, and alterations can be made thereto without departing from the spirit and scope of the application as defined by the appended claims and their equivalents.

Claims

1. A lightweight design method for an anchor winch drum device, characterized in that: The following steps are involved: S1. Establishing a finite element model: establishing an initial three-dimensional model of the windlass drum device, dividing the initial three-dimensional model into regions to obtain a design domain and a non-design domain, and then applying preset load conditions and boundary conditions to the initial three-dimensional model to establish a finite element model; S2. Generate a conceptual configuration: Based on the finite element model, perform topology optimization within the design domain to generate a material spatial distribution scheme representing an optimal force transmission path, the scheme being the conceptual configuration; S3. Parametric Reconstruction: Performing geometric reconstruction based on the conceptual configuration to generate an engineering model with manufacturability, and performing parameterization processing on the engineering model to obtain a parametric model with key geometric dimensions as design parameters; S4. Optimization solution: using the design parameters as optimization variables, performing optimization calculations to obtain a set of optimal design parameters that meet preset performance constraints; S5. Determine the final design: Determine the final lightweight design of the windlass drum device based on the optimal design parameters.

2. A lightweight design method for an anchor winch drum device according to claim 1, characterized in that: In said S1, before establishing said finite element model, a step of establishing a candidate material library is also included, wherein said candidate material library stores mechanical property parameters of at least two materials.

3. The lightweight design method for an anchor winch drum device according to claim 1, characterized in that: In S2, when performing the topology optimization, the preset manufacturing process constraints are used as optimization constraints.

4. A lightweight design method for an anchor winch drum device according to claim 3, characterized in that: The manufacturing process constraints include at least one of a casting draft constraint, a minimum member size constraint, or an additive manufacturing overhang angle constraint.

5. The lightweight design method for an anchor winch drum device according to claim 1, characterized in that: In S2, the optimization goal of the topology optimization is to minimize the mass or volume of the structure, and the constraint condition is that the stress, strain or displacement of the structure does not exceed its preset allowable value.

6. The lightweight design method for an anchor winch drum device according to claim 1, characterized in that: The optimization calculation in S4 is a multi-objective optimization calculation.

7. A lightweight design method for an anchor winch drum device according to claim 6, characterized in that: The objective function vector of the multi-objective optimization calculation includes at least two items of the following: structural quality, structural fatigue life, and manufacturing cost.

8. The lightweight design method for an anchor winch drum device according to claim 6, characterized in that: In said S4, the result of said multi-objective optimization calculation is a PS1rS5to optimal solution set; said step S5 is specifically: from said PS1rS5to optimal solution set, a set of optimal design parameters is selected according to a preset trade-off criterion to determine said final lightweight design.

9. The lightweight design method for an anchor winch drum device according to claim 2, characterized in that: Said S1 further comprises: Repeat steps S2 to S5 for each material in the candidate material library to obtain a final lightweight design corresponding to each material; The final lightweight design of each material is comprehensively evaluated to determine the globally optimal material-structure integrated design.

10. The lightweight design method for an anchor winch drum device according to claim 1, characterized in that: After step S5, the method further includes a verification step, wherein the verification step is: performing finite element verification on the final lightweight design to verify whether it meets preset specification requirements.

Images