Research Papers: Design Automation

Topology Optimization of Fixed-Geometry Fluid Diodes

[+] Author and Article Information
Sen Lin

Department of Civil Engineering,
Johns Hopkins University,
Baltimore, MD 21218
e-mail: slin@jhu.edu

Longyu Zhao

Department of Materials Science
and Engineering,
Johns Hopkins University,
Baltimore, MD 21218

James K. Guest

Associate Professor
Department of Civil Engineering,
Johns Hopkins University,
Baltimore, MD 21218

Timothy P. Weihs

Department of Materials Science
and Engineering,
Johns Hopkins University,
Baltimore, MD 21218

Zhenyu Liu

Changchun Institute of Optics,
Fine Mechanics and Physics,
Chinese Academy of Sciences,
Changchun, Jilin 130033, China

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Design Automation Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF MECHANICAL DESIGN. Manuscript received November 10, 2014; final manuscript received March 25, 2015; published online June 8, 2015. Assoc. Editor: Kazuhiro Saitou.

J. Mech. Des 137(8), 081402 (Aug 01, 2015) (8 pages) Paper No: MD-14-1730; doi: 10.1115/1.4030297 History: Received November 10, 2014; Revised March 25, 2015; Online June 08, 2015

This paper proposes using topology optimization to design fixed-geometry fluid diodes that allow easy passage of fluid flowing in one direction while inhibiting flow in the reverse direction. Fixed-geometry diodes do not use movable mechanical parts or deformations, but rather utilize inertial forces of the fluid to achieve this flow behavior. Diode performance is measured by diodicity, defined as the ratio of pressure drop of reverse flow and forward flow, or equivalently the ratio of dissipation of reverse and forward flow. Diodicity can then be maximized by minimizing forward dissipation while maximizing reverse dissipation. While significant research has been conducted in topology optimization of fluids for minimizing dissipation, maximizing dissipation introduces challenges in the form of small, mesh dependent flow channels and that artificial flow in solid region becomes (numerically) desirable. These challenges are circumvented herein using projection methods for controlling the minimum length scale of channels and by introducing an additional penalty term on flow through intermediate porosities. Several solutions are presented, one of which is fabricated by 3D printing and experimentally tested to demonstrate the diodelike behavior.

Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Sochol, R. D., Glick, C. C., Lee, K. Y., Brubaker, T., Lu, A., Wah, M., Gao, S., Hicks, E., Wolf, K. T., Iwai, K., Lee, L. P., and Lin, L., 2013, “Single-Layer “domino” Diodes Via Optofluidic Lithography for Ultra-Low Reynolds Number Applications,” 2013 IEEE 26th International Conference on Micro Electro Mechanical Systems (MEMS), IEEE, pp. 153–156.
Tesla, N., 1920, Valvular Conduit, Feb. 3, U.S. Patent No. 1,329,559.
Thompson, S., Ma, H., and Wilson, C., 2011, “Investigation of a Flat-Plate Oscillating Heat Pipe With Tesla-Type Check Valves,” Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci., 35(7), pp. 1265–1273. [CrossRef]
Forster, F. K., Bardell, R. L., Afromowitz, M. A., Sharma, N. R., and Blanchard, A., 1995, “Design, Fabrication and Testing of Fixed-Valve Micro-Pumps,” The ASME Fluid Engineering Division, Vol. 234, pp. 39–44. http://faculty.washington.edu/forster/forsterpubs/forster95.pdf
Morganti, E., and Pignatel, G., 2005, “Microfluidics for the Treatment of the Hydrocephalus,” Proceedings of International Conference on Sensing Technology, Palmerston North.
Stemme, E., and Stemme, G., 1993, “A Valveless Diffuser/Nozzle-Based Fluid Pump,” Sens. Actuators, A, 39(2), pp. 159–167. [CrossRef]
Andersson, H., van der Wijngaart, W., Nilsson, P., Enoksson, P., and Stemme, G., 2001, “A Valve-Less Diffuser Micropump for Microfluidic Analytical Systems,” Sens. Actuators, B, 72(3), pp. 259–265. [CrossRef]
Olsson, A., Enoksson, P., Stemme, G., and Stemme, E., 1997, “Micromachined Flat-Walled Valveless Diffuser Pumps,” J. Microelectromech. Syst., 6(2), pp. 161–166. [CrossRef]
Bardell, R. L., 2000, “The Diodicity Mechanism of Tesla-Type No-Moving-Parts Valves,” Ph.D. thesis, University of Washington, Seattle.
Gamboa, A. R., Morris, C. J., and Forster, F. K., 2005, “Improvements in Fixed-Valve Micropump Performance Through Shape Optimization of Valves,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 127(2), pp. 339–347. [CrossRef]
Clabuk, H., and Modi, V., 1992, “Optimum Plane Diffusers in Laminar Flow,” J. Fluid Mech., 237, pp. 373–393. [CrossRef]
Madsen, J., Olhoff, N., and Condra, T., 2000, “Optimization of Straight, Two-Dimensional Diffusers by Wall Contouring and Guide Vane Insertion,” Proceedings of the 3rd World Congress of Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, WCSMO-3, May 17–21, 1999, State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo.
Liu, Z., Deng, Y., Lin, S., and Xuan, M., 2012, “Optimization of Micro Venturi Diode in Steady Flow at Low Reynolds Number,” Eng. Optim., 44(11), pp. 1389–1404. [CrossRef]
Borrvall, T., and Petersson, J., 2003, “Topology Optimization of Fluids in Stokes Flow,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids, 41(1), pp. 77–107. [CrossRef]
Guest, J. K., and Prévost, J. H., 2006, “Topology Optimization of Creeping Fluid Flows Using a Darcy–Stokes Finite Element,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., 66(3), pp. 461–484. [CrossRef]
Wiker, N., Klarbring, A., and Borrvall, T., 2007, “Topology Optimization of Regions of Darcy and Stokes Flow,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., 69(7), pp. 1374–1404. [CrossRef]
Challis, V. J., and Guest, J. K., 2009, “Level Set Topology Optimization of Fluids in Stokes Flow,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., 79(10), pp. 1284–1308. [CrossRef]
Evgrafov, A., 2006, “Topology Optimization of Slightly Compressible Fluids,” ZAMM-J. Appl. Math. Mech./Z. Angew. Math. Mech., 86(1), pp. 46–62. [CrossRef]
Gersborg-Hansen, A., Sigmund, O., and Haber, R. B., 2005, “Topology Optimization of Channel Flow Problems,” Struct. Multidiscip. Optim., 30(3), pp. 181–192. [CrossRef]
Olesen, L. H., Okkels, F., and Bruus, H., 2006, “A High-Level Programming-Language Implementation of Topology Optimization Applied to Steady-State Navier–Stokes Flow,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., 65(7), pp. 975–1001. [CrossRef]
Duan, X.-B., Ma, Y.-C., and Zhang, R., 2008, “Shape-Topology Optimization for Navier–Stokes Problem Using Variational Level Set Method,” J. Comput. Appl. Math., 222(2), pp. 487–499. [CrossRef]
Zhou, S., and Li, Q., 2008, “A Variational Level Set Method for the Topology Optimization of Steady-State Navier–Stokes Flow,” J. Comput. Phys., 227(24), pp. 10178–10195. [CrossRef]
Kreissl, S., and Maute, K., 2012, “Levelset Based Fluid Topology Optimization Using the Extended Finite Element Method,” Struct. Multidiscip. Optim., 46(3), pp. 311–326. [CrossRef]
Pingen, G., 2008, “Optimal Design for Fluidic Systems: Topology and Shape Optimization With the Lattice Boltzmann Method,” Ph.D. thesis, University of Colorado, Boulder.
Pingen, G., Evgrafov, A., and Maute, K., 2008, “A Parallel Schur Complement Solver for the Solution of the Adjoint Steady-State Lattice Boltzmann Equations: Application to Design Optimisation,” Int. J. Comput. Fluid Dyn., 22(7), pp. 457–464. [CrossRef]
Elman, H., Silvester, D., and Wathen, A., 2014, Finite Elements and Fast Iterative Solvers: With Applications in Incompressible Fluid Dynamics, Oxford University.
Kreissl, S., and Maute, K., 2012, “Levelset Based Fluid Topology Optimization Using the Extended Finite Element Method,” Struct. Multidiscip. Optim., 46(3), pp. 311–326. [CrossRef]
Sigmund, O., and Petersson, J., 1998, “Numerical Instabilities in Topology Optimization: A Survey on Procedures Dealing With Checkerboards, Mesh-Dependencies and Local Minima,” Struct. Optim., 16(1), pp. 68–75. [CrossRef]
Guest, J. K., Prévost, J., and Belytschko, T., 2004, “Achieving Minimum Length Scale in Topology Optimization Using Nodal Design Variables and Projection Functions,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., 61(2), pp. 238–254. [CrossRef]
Sigmund, O., 2007, “Morphology-Based Black and White Filters for Topology Optimization,” Struct. Multidiscip. Optim., 33(4–5), pp. 401–424. [CrossRef]
Guest, J. K., 2009, “Topology Optimization With Multiple Phase Projection,” Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 199(1), pp. 123–135. [CrossRef]
Sigmund, O., 1997, “On the Design of Compliant Mechanisms Using Topology Optimization,” J. Struct. Mech., 25(4), pp. 493–524.
Guest, J. K., Asadpoure, A., and Ha, S.-H., 2011, “Eliminating Beta-Continuation From Heaviside Projection and Density Filter Algorithms,” Struct. Multidiscip. Optim., 44, pp. 443–453. [CrossRef]
Svanberg, K., 1987, “The Method of Moving Asymptotes—A New Method for Structural Optimization,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., 24, pp. 359–373. [CrossRef]
Sigmund, O., 2009, “Manufacturing Tolerant Topology Optimization,” Acta Mech. Sin., 25(2), pp. 227–239. [CrossRef]
Guest, J. K., and Igusa, T., 2008, “Structural Optimization Under Uncertain Loads and Nodal Locations,” Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 198(1), pp. 116–124. [CrossRef]
Asadpoure, A., Tootkaboni, M., and Guest, J. K., 2011, “Robust Topology Optimization of Structures With Uncertainties in Stiffness–Application to Truss Structures,” Comput. Struct., 89(11), pp. 1131–1141. [CrossRef]
Schevenels, M., Lazarov, B. S., and Sigmund, O., 2011, “Robust Topology Optimization Accounting for Spatially Varying Manufacturing Errors,” Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 200(49), pp. 3613–3627. [CrossRef]
Wang, F., Jensen, J. S., and Sigmund, O., 2011, “Robust Topology Optimization of Photonic Crystal Waveguides With Tailored Dispersion Properties,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. B, 28(3), pp. 387–397. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Demonstration of the control volume Ω, shown as dashed line

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Streamline of original Tesla valve (Re = 300): (a) forward flow and (b) reverse flow

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Fixed-geometry fluid diodes with flat-walled structures: (a) Tesla valve and (b) diffuser

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Reproduction of the Tesla valve created using topology optimization (Re = 100; Da = 4.4 × 10–7; WF = 0; Rmin = 0.25 L). The white circle shows projection diameter and the red lines represents streamlines of reverse flow. (a) Pentagon design domain with inclined inlet and outlet. (b) Optimization result using projection method on fluid phase. (c) Demonstration of mesh independency of projection method. Projection radius: L/5; mesh size: L/6 (left) and L/20 (right).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Demonstration of the rectangular design domain

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Optimization results for different aspect ratio (Re = 300, Da = 3 × 10−5, W = 0.1). (a) Aspect ratio 2:3; (b) aspect ratio 4:3; and (c) aspect ratio 9:3.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Fabricated fluid diode specimen. (a) Geometry for 3D printing (b) 3D representation of the void (fluid) space for the experiment, with locations of pressure measurement marked as red.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Streamlines of the optimized fluid diode shown in Fig. 6(c) (Re = 300, Da = 3 × 10−5, aspect ratio = 9:3). (a) Forward flow and (b) reverse flow.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Comparison of diodicity of channel-like diode and published works (simulation result)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Optimization result with expanding channel (Re = 300, Da = 3 × 10−5, W = 0.1, aspect ratio 4:3). (a) Design domain and (b) optimization result.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Streamlines of optimized diffuser-type diode (Re = 300, Da = 3 × 10−5). (a) Forward flow and (b) reverse flow.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Diodicity versus Reynolds number calculated via interpolation of experimental measurements (red curve) and computational simulations for the three-dimensional extruded sample with distanced pressure measurement locations (blue curve). The experimental error bars represent the combination of variation from three experimental trials and the accuracy of the instruments.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Demonstration of the impact of fabrication errors at Re = 300. Small perturbations in channel sizes lead to loss in diodicity, with smaller channel sizes (over deposition of 3D printed material) leading to a 50% loss in diodicity. (a) Dilation, Di = 7.41; (b) Original, Di = 8.87; (c) Erosion, Di = 4.24.



Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In