Definition of "compliance" in structural optimization

[nikant]

Hello everyone!
I hope my question doesn't sound very silly but I am quite confused and I haven't been able to clear this out myself. In various textbooks and articles of structural optimization I have come across the term "minimum compliance" referring to optimizing the design for a structure for maximum stiffness. The problem is that in these texts the so called "compliance" variable is defined as C=F^TU , given in terms of energy (Force*Displacements) and it is getting directly associated with strain energy. I was under the impression that compliance is the inverse of stiffness and therefore it should be given in terms of Displacement/Force. Am I missing something basic here?
Any response would be really appreciated.

 

[BAretired]

I believe that the inverse of stiffness is flexibility.

BA

 

[nikant]

Thank you for your answer.
I am aware that the inverse of stiffness is termed "flexibility" and this is actually the term that I have been using for it.
The reason that I am confused about it is that when I searched for the definition of the term "compliance" I have found it being defined both as the inverse of stiffness (in general structural analysis and FEM textbooks) and as C=F^TU (in structural optimization textbooks). As I was not familiar with the term, it was confusing to find contradicting definitions.
In the end what is the usual meaning that is given to the term "compliance"?

 

[BAretired]

I have never used the term "compliance" in reference to structures, but "flexibility" and "compliance" are both mentioned in the following Wikipedia definition of stiffness. I am still trying to understand the difference between them but so far, without success. Maybe someone else can help.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stiffness#Compliance

BA

 

[nikant]

It doesn't appear to be a commonly used term it would seem. Thank you for your reply.