This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Journal of Aeronautics
Chinese Journal of Aeronautics 23(2010) 670-676
Integration of Manufacturing Cost into Structural Optimization of Composite Wings
Yin Hailiana,b, Yu Xiongqingb,*
Research Institute of Unmanned Aircraft, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing 210016, China
Key Laboratory of Fundamental Science for National Defense—Advanced Design Technology of Flight Vehicle, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing 210016, China Received 17 December 2009; accepted 17 May 2010
Abstract The manufacturing cost is a significant factor that must be considered in the structural design of a composite wing. A multi-objective optimization method for the tradeoff between manufacturing cost and weight of composite wing structure is developed by integrating the manufacturing cost model into the traditional wing structural optimization. A two-level optimization method is proposed to carry out the tradeoff between manufacturing cost and weight, in which the design variables include both structural layout and dimensions and a cost model is incorporated into structural optimization. The manufacturing cost model for a composite wing and the detail procedure for solving this tradeoff problem are presented. The application of the method to the composite wing structural design of an unmanned aerial vehicle is illustrated to verify the method. The application indicates that the method is able to find the Pareto optimal set of minimum structural weight and manufacturing cost. Based on the Pareto optimal set, one can conduct the tradeoff between manufacturing cost and weight of wing structures. Keywords: wings; composite materials; costs; structure; optimization
1. Introduction1 Due to the superior property of composite material, it is evident that the use of composite materials in aircraft structures is increasing for both civil and military aviation industries. The range of application is extended from the secondary components to primary ones in aircraft structural design. The proportional quantity of the use of composite material has even reached more than 90% for some unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), which may be called all-composite aircraft. However, further application of composite materials has been restricted by the high costs of raw materials and labors due to intensive manufacturing process[2-3]. To take the cost, designers need tools that will enable them to trade cost against weight and to determine the cost implication in the design process[4-7]. The optimization has been a useful method for
structural design. But most of the optimization methods for composite structures focus primarily on the minimization of the structural weight without considering the manufacturing cost[9-10]. The aim of this article is to propose a structural optimization method that enables designers to obtain a more reasonable design by the tradeoff between manufacturing cost and weight of wing structure during preliminary design phase. Since the wing structural layout has a significant impact on the cost, the structural layout must be considered for this tradeoff. The unique features of this article are: 1) design variables include both structural layout and dimensions; 2) a cost model is incorporated into structural optimization. 2. Cost Estimation Model The manufacturing cost models can be generally classified into two categories: 1) parametric cost models (PCMs), and 2) manufacturing process cost models (MPCMs)[11-12]. The MPCMs are constructed according to the detailed estimations of the main categories of manufacturing cost such as raw material, and assembling and supporting labor hours. The cost drivers are analyzed at the manufacturing process level. Ac-
*Corresponding author. Tel.: +86-25-84892102.
E-mail address: firstname.lastname@example.org Foundation item: NUAA Research Funding (NJ2010006) 1000-9361/$ - see front matter © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi: 10.1016/S1000-9361(09)60269-7
the total manufacturing cost of composite wing CW consists of the total fabrication cost and the total material cost. The manufacturing process cost model is based on the first-order velocity model. The MPCMs are usually more accurate than the PCMs in the structural design of aircraft. According to this model. the total process of fabrication is divided into sub-operations. and Pm the material price per unit area. equipment and tools during fabrication is not taken into account in this article. The amount of the material being used is transformed into actual cost using the unit price of the material. τ0 the dynamic time constant. The above mentioned process-based cost estimation model can be used to estimate the cost of the component in the preliminary design phase of aircraft when the computer aided design (CAD) model is defined. s the scrapping rate. the manufacturing cost of the wing can be estimated through the above mentioned cost model.6 Yin Hailian et al. The function of wing structure is bearing the aerodynamic loads. tf the time of fabrication. Optimization Problem and Method The layout of a wing structure is depicted in Fig. The total fabrication cost of a composite wing is the sum of the fabrication costs of all parts. process selection and even material types on the cost and especially being suitable for new design and technology. where the values of parameters v0 and τ0 can be found in Ref. Once the manufacturing process is defined. the MPCMs have the advantages of recognizing the impacts of design changes. cm2 Area. The integration and approximation of Eq. and the assembling perimeter of wing. (4) The tradeoff between manufacturing cost and weight of wing structure can be stated as a multi-objective optimization problem as follows.312 2 0. that is i i CW = ∑ (Cp + Cm ) i =1 N (5) ) (1) i i where Cp and Cm are the fabrication cost of and the where v0 is the steady-state process velocity. The process velocity v can be equated to the first derivative of L with respect to t. ta the time of assembling.(1) lead to[14-15] t = ( L / v0 ) 2 + (2 Lτ 0 / v0 ) (2) Once the manufacturing process is defined. 3.071 78 Item Skin fabrication Spar fabrication Rib fabrication Wing assembling τ0/min 4. and are given in Table 1. . cm Materials used in the fabrication of a part consist of two types: consumables and part material. All the bending loads are carried by the spars.356 2. the sequence of processing and the time constants appropriate to a particular manufacturing facility can be imbedded automatically in the model. This character is given by the variable named L. spars and ribs. such as its surface area. and Pl the labor cost. the MPCM is used to estimate the cost of a composite wing. The process time leads to the fabrication cost when it is multiplied by the hourly rate of labor. (3) where Cp is the fabrication cost of a part. every sub-process time can be also determined in the model. length or volume.388 3 6. Each sub-operation is represented by a first-order velocity expression as follows: v = v0 (1 − e −t /τ 0 where Cm is the material cost of a part. the torsion loads are carried by the wing box which is constituted by the skin and the front and rear spar webs. cm2 Area. The cost of the wastage of machinery.987 7 Characteristic of design variable Area.833 3 9. In this article. If the number of parts is N. and t the process time.278 8 10.342 8 5. cm2 Assembling perimeter. The cost estimation formula is Cm = L(1 + s ) Pm Fig. and the shearing loads are carried by the front and rear spar webs. The process time t consists of the fabrication time and assembling time.No.1 Layout of wing structure. The material costs of all parts are summed up to get the total material cost of a composite wing. If the geometric features of wing structure such as part area or assembling perimeter are found. The design task is to determine the layout and dimensions of the wing structure through the tradeoff between manufacturing cost and weight. Table 1 Cost parameters for parts of composite wing v0/ (cm2·min−1) 13. The equation is as follows: Cp = (tf + ta ) Pl material cost of the ith part. which may be the fabrication areas of skin.1. In general. length or volume. respectively. the process time is driven by the major geometric character of a part. / Chinese Journal of Aeronautics 23(2010) 670-676 · 671 · cordingly.
and the design variables are the layout variables X1 at the system level.3 A flowchart for integration of cost model into structural optimization. By iteration between the layout optimization and dimension optimization and cost analysis. and skin are . including the thicknesses of the skin. the 3D CAD models of structure for different layouts can be generated. Design variables The layout variables of wing structure X1. The layout design variables are fixed parameters at this level. (2) Generating 3D CAD model Based on the parameters defined above. one can trade the cost against the weight of the wing structural design. and the sectional area of the bars. The problem can be decomposed into following two level optimization problems: 1) the layout optimization at system level.· 672 · Yin Hailian et al. the taper ratio. the sweep angle. the number of ribs. The constraints include the local stress or strain. Implementation Procedure Following the two-level optimization method proposed above. The parameters for structural layout are taken as the design variables and will be changed during layout optimization. its manufacturing cost can be obtained using the cost estimation model presented in Section 2. The parameters for the structural layout include the number of spars. and the locations of the front spar and the rear spar. optimal set for minimum weight and cost can be found through a multi-objective optimization algorithm. displacement constraints. the structural weight WS is fed back to the layout optimization level and the values of the structural dimensions X2 are transmitted to the cost analysis model.6 Objective Minimized structural weight WS and manufacturing cost CW. failure criteria and buckling criteria. and the airfoil. With this VB routine. and the design variables are the structural dimensions X2. a CAD model of the wing structure is automatically generated by the geometric model generator. At structural dimension optimization level. Fig. / Chinese Journal of Aeronautics 23(2010) 670-676 No.3. the Pareto (1) Parametric geometry definition A set of parameters. the number of ribs. and the locations of the front spar and the rear spar. The two-level approach is used to solve the tradeoff problem. Based on the Pareto optimum set. failure criteria and bucking criteria. ribs. as shown in Fig. The value of the cost CW is then fed back to the layout optimization level. The layout optimization is a multi-objective optimization problem in which the objective is to minimize both manufacturing cost and weight. the displacement of wing tip. Each step in this flowchart will be explained below. 4. Constrains The strength requirements. Given the values of the layout variables X1 and structural dimensions X2 of the wing.2. The geometric model generator is a Microsoft Visual Basic (VB) routine that has an interface with Computer Graphics Aided Three Dimensional Application (CATIA) software. which represent the external shape and the structural layout are defined. spar webs and rib webs. The parameters for the wing external shape definition are the area. the aspect ratio. a detail procedure for the integration of manufacturing cost into the wing structural optimization is shown as a flowchart and depicted in Fig.2 Two-level optimization method. 2) the structural dimensions optimization and the cost analysis at subsystem level. including the number of spars. When the structural dimension optimization is completed. Fig. in which the intersections of the spars. the objective is to minimize the weight of wing structure. and the structural dimensions X2.
4 A CAD model of a wing box. such as the non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm (NSGA-II). one can estimate the manufacturing cost of the wing using the cost estimation model mentioned in Section 2. / Chinese Journal of Aeronautics 23(2010) 670-676 · 673 · split automatically. and the assembling perimeter of the wing are needed. Fig.6 shows a geometric model for wing cost estimation.6 Yin Hailian et al. the geometric features such as the fabrication areas of skin. The geometry model of the wing box can be generated automatically by the model generator with the format of initial graphics exchange standard (IGES) which can be imported to the software MSC Patran/Nastran. and the structural deformation and bucking criteria.6 A geometric model for wing cost estimation. the front and rear edges of the wing are removed. the structural dimension optimization is carried out. An example of the CAD model of the wing structure generated by the geometric model generator is shown in Fig. and only the wing box is reserved. By use of the VB routine. An Application Example A structural design optimization for the composite wing of a UAV is used as an example to verify the applicability of the proposed method. (3) Generating finite element model By using Patran Command Language (PCL) of MSC Patran/Nastran software. The initial value of the structural dimensions.objective optimization problem can be solved by genetic algorithms. Its task is to find the dimensions of struc- . the values of the structural dimensions are transmitted to next step. the CAD model is to be imported to the software MSC Patran/Nastran. The Fig. During the structural layout optimization. (6) Layout optimization When the above steps are finished. Fig. the composite failure criterion (Tsai-Hill failure criterion) is also used as a constraint for composite wing design. the geometry mis-matching is avoided when the CAD model is imported to the software of the finite element method (FEM). 5. spars and ribs.e. In the finite element model of the wing structure. and the flanges of spars and ribs are modeled by rod elements.5. the skin. In addition. Fig. i. Based on the geometric features and the dimensions of structure.5 Finite element model of a wing box. the information of material. the manufacturing cost estimation. and the aerodynamic loads are defined using PCL in the finite element model. After the optimization. spar webs and rib webs are modeled by shell elements. and a finite element model for the wing box is generated automatically. The overall process is executed automatically. the structural dimension optimization and the cost analysis are repeated until the convergence is satisfied. An example of the finite element model of the wing structure generated by PCL is shown in Fig.1.4.7. The parameters for structural dimensions are the thickness of the skin. The task of structural layout optimization is to find the Pareto optimal set for the wing structural layouts with minimum weight and cost. The above mentioned procedure indicates that the common CAD model is provided to both structural dimension optimization and cost estimation. 5. The structural dimension optimization is implemented with software MSC Patran/Nastran. This multi. the thicknesses of the spar webs and the ribs. The initial dimensions of the structure are given based on the previous experience. Description of design problem The cruise Mach number of the UAV is 0. the values of weight and cost are computed for a layout design of wing structure. (4) Structural dimension optimization After the finite element model of the wing structure is generated. the struts are built at the intersections of the spar webs and rib webs. the degree of freedom (DOF) constraints. tural elements with minimum weight under the constraints of the allowable stress or strain of all materials. A VB-CATIA script is developed to extract those geometric features from the 3D CAD model of the wing structure. All the steps can be integrated using the software iSIGHT.No. (5) Cost estimation To estimate cost. and the sectional area of the bars.
25 0.10 0. ν12 the Poisson’s ration. The skins of leading and trailing edges are cemented into the wing box. and the sweep angle is 12°. / Chinese Journal of Aeronautics 23(2010) 670-676 No. The Carbon/Epoxy T300/5208 material is used for all parts of the composite wing. Table 3 Material properties of Carbon/Epoxy T300/5208 Property E1/GPa E2/GPa G12/GPa ν12 Value 185 10. which is based on the full potential equation.7.0. The thickness of the material is 0. Table 2 Variable Number of spars Number of ribs Location of front spar Location of rear spar Design variables of structural layout Initial value 2 12 0.· 674 · Yin Hailian et al. 0°. The wing structure is Fig. The labor rate is assumed as RMB 60 yuan per hour. The variables of the structural layout are listed in Table 2. The spacing of the ribs is uniform along span. and S is the shear strength. xi.1 mm for each layer. and is given in Table 3. the population size is set as 20. E2 the elastic modulus in the transverse direction. lower skin. The initial positions. Each section consists of the upper skin.I the invalidation coefficient. For the structural layout. Yt and Yc the tensile strength and the compressive strength in the transverse direction. Each section has four design variables describing the thickness of each ply orientation.76 Property Xt/MPa Xc/MPa Yt/MPa Yc/MPa S/MPa Value 1 500 1 500 40 246 68 divided into three sections along wing span. For this example. 5. The mechanical properties of the material are obtained from Ref. lower skin. Since the structural analysis which takes the buckling criterion into account is time-consuming. The material ply orientations are limited to −45°. Xt and Xc are the tensile strength and the compressive strength in the fiber direction.min the lower dimension value. the population size and the number of generations of NSGA-II are limited to the reasonable values so that the Pareto optimal set can be obtained within acceptable period of time.75 The aerodynamic load is computed by the computer program FLO22. respectively.I<1 (Tsai-Hill failure criterion) xi.7 Pareto optimal set for weight and cost. The number of the ribs ranges from ten to twenty. This design problem is solved by the procedure presented in Section 4. For the wing with 3 spars.3 7. xi the dimension variables. the aspect ratio is 10. 45°. The takeoff weight of the UAV is 1 580 kg. NSGA-II is employed to obtain the Pareto optimal set for minimum weight and cost. ρ /(g·cm−3) The design variables in dimension optimization are the thickness of skin and web. Results The Pareto optimal set for the minimum structural weight and manufacturing cost is obtained and shown in Fig. The formulation of the structural optimization is stated as follows. spar webs and rib webs) are identical for same section.5. the taper ratio is 0. The wing box is manufactured by the co-curing process. Where E1 is the elastic modulus in the fiber direction. The external shape of the wing is defined as follows: the area of the wing is 6. and the number of generations is 20. The market price of the material is RMB 700 yuan per square meter. The thicknesses of the parts (upper skin. spars and ribs.2.28 1. The scrapping rate is 0. .5. and 90°.5 m2. The operating overload factor is 3.0 in this example and the safety factor is 1.6 cruise altitude is 10 600 m. but are variable for different sections. G12 the longitudinal shear modulus.65 Lower value 2 10 0. The plies are symmetric for all parts. Find: numbers of the spars and ribs locations of the spars thicknesses of the skin thicknesses of the spar webs and rib webs sectional areas of the bars Minimize: structural weight and cost Be subject to: stress ≤ 450 MPa displacement of wing tip ≤5% of wing span λ ≥1 (buckling criterion) F.4 based on the previous experience when the first wing is fabricated.max (dimension constraint) where λ is the buckling coefficient. The total number of variables is 60 when the wing has two spars. At the layout optimization level.max the upper dimension value. and xi. F.15 0. ρ the weight density.17 0. two or three spars can be applied.min ≤ xi ≤ xi. the third spar is located at the middle between the front spar and rear spar. the lower and upper values for the front and rear spars are listed in Table 2.60 Upper value 3 20 0.
The weight is 16. AIAA-2007-1910. Aerodynamic/stealthy/structural mul-       Number Number Location of Location of Weight/ of ribs of spars front spar rear spar kg 11 10 10 11 10 11 11 11 3 2 2 2 3 3 2 3 0. Affordable design: a methodology to implement process-based manufacturing cost models into the traditional performancefocused multidisciplinary design optimization. Sergei L. Mabson G E.62 14.611 0 0. Nishiwaki S. 1996.240 5 0. Houl T D. Curran R.238 2 0. 3(3-4): 119-121. The front and rear spars are located at 24. Dillon G. Review of aerospace engineering cost modeling: the genetic causal approach.606 2 0. The challenge of reducing both airframe weight and manufacturing cost.65 13. 1994. The typical Pareto solutions obtained are listed in Table 4. Composites Manufacturing 1994. 5(4): 231-239. Izui K. Table 4 Typical Pareto solutions Cost/ (104yuan) 15.606 1 0. One can select the appropriate structural layout from the Pareto optimal set through the tradeoff between the weight and manufacturing cost of the wing structure. Price M. 14(1): 1-23.32 15. respectively. but will lead to weight growth. Progress in Aerospace Sciences 2004.83 17.604 5 0. Adarsh P. Design for manufacturing and assembly: a case study in cost reduction for composite wing tip structures. Bao H P.61 17.1%. All the steps can be integrated by using the software iSIGHT. 13(4): 321-330. one can find that the solution A has more spars and ribs.6 Yin Hailian et al. Journal of Aircraft 1999. Flynn B W. but its manufacturing cost is increased by 26.92 13. (3) The application of this method to the composite       . Raju J. 36(3): 9-14. 24(1): 1-12.27 15. Raghunathan S. Knowledge-based engineering system to estimate manufacturing cost for composite structures.79 kg and the cost is RMB 156 900 yuan. The solution B is the design with minimum cost. Curran R. Haftka T. (2) A detail procedure implementing the method is presented. Vanderplaats G N. Kelly D.238 6 0. Raghunathan S.10 19. Samareh J A. References  Du S Y.79     6. AIAA2000-4839.611 3 17. Journal of Aircraft 2005.19 20. et al.89 16.242 0 0. Raju J. 5(3): 214-226. Sobieszczanski-Sobieski J. Conclusions A method of integrating the manufacturing cost model into the traditional wing structural optimization for composite wing structure is developed and used to conduct tradeoff between manufacturing cost and weight. the tradeoff between manufacturing cost and weight can be carried out. Hu T Y. The weight is 21. Integrating aircraft cost modeling into conceptual design. Gutowski T G. 36(1): 11-20.242 0 0. / Chinese Journal of Aeronautics 23(2010) 670-676 · 675 · The solution A is the structural design with minimum weight. The use of COSTADE in developing composite commercial aircraft fuselage structures. but will result in higher cost. Advanded composite materials and aerospace engineering.17 kg and the cost is RMB 139 100 yuan. The practical technique is that the structural analysis model and cost analysis model are automatically generated from a common parametric wing CAD model. Structural design optimization status and direction.240 5 0. Choi J W.51 19.13% of the local chords. which consists of 3 spars and 11 ribs. in which different structural layouts are corresponding to different weights and costs. A knowledge-based engineering tool to estimate cost and weight of composite aerospace structures at the conceptual stage of the design process. et al.61% of the local chords.20% and 61. 79(5): 459-468. The key points are summarized as follows.92 14.22 15. Dean E B. Kelly D. AIAA-1994-1492. Air & Space Europe 2001. and its weight is reduced by 11. Rohan M R. 2000.610 8 0. Yu X Q. respectively. Hawke T. Llcewicz L B. AIAA-1996-1620.240 9 0. SAMPE Journal 2000.02 20.606 2 0. Both layout and dimensions of wing structure are taken as design variables. Multidisciplinary aerospace design optimization: survey of recent developments. Akhilesh J. 2007. Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering 2005. Development of a theoretical cost model for advanced composite fabrication. Hinrichsen J. Satiou K. Toward manufacturing and cost consideration in multidisciplinary aircraft design. 42(6): 1396-1402. et al. Structure and Multidisciplinary Optimization 1997. Acta Materiae Compositae Sinica 2007. Choi J W. Cost-based design optimization of a structure using a genetic algorithm. which consists of 2 spars and 10 ribs.34%. Bautista C. In other hand. Based on the Pareto optimal set. with less spars and ribs can reduce the cost of the wing structure.69 wing structure of a UAV manifested that the method is able to find the Pareto optimal set of minimum structural weight and manufacturing cost. Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology 2007. The front spar and rear spar are located at 23.606 8 0. Comparing the solution A with solution B.243 0 0. Concurrent Engineering 2005. A survey of structural optimization in mechanical product development. [in Chinese] Swanstrom F. The comparison implies that with more spars and ribs can reduce the weight for a composite wing structure with this manufacturing process. 33(7): 913-934.86% and 60. Bader M G. Composites: Part A 2002. 40(8): 487-534. Selection of composite materials and manufacturing routes for cost-effective performance.No. (1) The two-level optimization method for the tradeoff between manufacturing cost and weight of composite wing structure is proposed. Price M.
he received M. Currently he is a professor and head of the Institute of Aircraft Design Technology in NUAA. Harbin Institute of Technology in 2004. and currently is a Ph. Interdigitation for effective design space exploration using iSIGHT. Jameson A. Her main research interest is multidisciplinary design optimization in aircraft design. From 1997 to 1998. NASA TM X-73996. she received M.D. E-mail: yxq@nuaa. Raphael T. Koch P N. AIAA-1998-4854. Composite wing structural optimization using genetic algorithms and response surfaces. and has published about 50 papers and one book. USA. 22(4): 380-386. Journal of Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization 2002. A fast and elitist multi-objective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. Caughey D. and his current research interest is multidisciplinary design optimization in aircraft design and the uncertainty-based optimization for aircraft conceptual and preliminary design.6      tidisciplinary design optimization of unmanned combat air vehicle. and Ph.· 676 · Yin Hailian et al. Mehmet A. et al. 26(4): 176-180.S. respectively. Acta Materiae Compositae Sinica 2009. Boyang L.cn Biographies: Yin Hailian Born in 1979. [in Chinese] Yin H L. dissertations.edu. USA.S. 1976. he was a visiting professor of University of Missouri-Rolla. the structure design and strength analysis of unmanned aircraft. 23(2): 111-126. 6(2): 182-197. degrees in Aircraft Engineering from Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics (NUAA). Powell D. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 2002. in 1988 and 1999. [in Chinese] Deb K.edu. Pratap A. Yu X Q.D. et al. In 2004. / Chinese Journal of Aeronautics 23(2010) 670-676 No. degree from . E-mail: yinhailian@nuaa. 1998. He worked on the field of aircraft conceptual and preliminary design for more 12 years. Newman P.cn Yu Xiongqing Born in 1965. Agarwal S.D. Rapid cost estimation for composite wings based on CAD model. A brief description of the Jameson-Caughey NYU transonic swept-wing computer program—FLO22. Evans J P. He has directed four Ph. candidate at Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics (NUAA). Chinese Journal of Aeronautics 2009. he was a visiting scholar of University of Notre Dame.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?