Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Design Optimization
Course Concept
today
16.810 (16.682)
Deliverables
Design Sketch v1 Drawing v1 Analysis output v1 Part v1 Experiment data v1
Hand sketching CAD design FEM analysis Produce Part 1 Test Optimization
today
Wednesday
Experiment data v2
Design Variables
16.810 (16.682)
Optimization Statement
16.810 (16.682)
Constraints
- Design requirements
Inequality constraints Equality constraints
16.810 (16.682)
Objective Function
- A criterion for best design (or goodness of a design)
Objective function
16.810 (16.682)
Design Variables
Parameters that are chosen to describe the design of a system Design variables are controlled by the designers
16.810 (16.682)
Design Variables
For computational design optimization, Objective function and constraints must be expressed as a function of design variables (or design vector X)
16.810 (16.682)
Optimization Statement
16.810 (16.682)
10
Optimization Procedure
Minimize f (x) Subject to g (x) 0 h( x) = 0
START
Improve Design
Change x
Computer Simulation
Converge ?
Y
END
16.810 (16.682)
11
Structural Optimization
Selecting the best structural design
16.810 (16.682)
12
Structural Optimization
2.
16.810 (16.682)
13
Size Optimization
Beams
minimize f (x) subject to g (x) 0 h(x) = 0
Design variables (x) x : thickness of each beam Number of design variables (ndv) ndv = 5
16.810 (16.682)
14
Size Optimization
- Shape Topology
are given
16.810 (16.682)
15
Shape Optimization
B-spline
minimize f (x) subject to g (x) 0 h(x) = 0
Design variables (x) x : control points of the B-spline (position of each control point) Number of design variables (ndv) ndv = 8
16.810 (16.682)
16
Shape Optimization
Fillet problem Hook problem Arm problem
16.810 (16.682)
17
Shape Optimization
Multiobjective & Multidisciplinary Shape Optimization
Objective function 1. Drag coefficient, Analysis 1. Computational Fluid Dynamics Analysis 2. Computational Electromagnetic Wave Field Analysis Obtain Pareto Front 2. Amplitude of backscattered wave
Raino A.E. Makinen et al., Multidisciplinary shape optimization in aerodynamics and electromagnetics using genetic algorithms, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids, Vol. 30, pp. 149-159, 1999
16.810 (16.682)
18
Topology Optimization
Cells
minimize f (x) subject to g (x) 0 h(x) = 0
Design variables (x) x : density of each cell Number of design variables (ndv) ndv = 27
16.810 (16.682)
19
Topology Optimization
Short Cantilever problem
Initial
Optimized
16.810 (16.682)
20
Topology Optimization
16.810 (16.682)
21
Topology Optimization
Bridge problem
Obj = 4.16105
Distributed loading
Minimize Subject to
F i z i d ,
Obj = 3.29105
( x ) d M o ,
0 ( x) 1
Obj = 2.88105
16.810 (16.682)
Obj = 2.73105
22
Topology Optimization
DongJak Bridge in Seoul, Korea
16.810 (16.682)
23
Structural Optimization
What determines the type of structural optimization?
16.810 (16.682)
24
Optimum Solution
Graphical Representation
f(x) f(x): displacement x: design variable
16.810 (16.682)
25
Optimization Methods
Gradient-based methods
Heuristic methods
16.810 (16.682)
26
Gradient-based Methods
f(x)
You do not know this function before optimization
Stop!
x
No active constraints
16.810 (16.682)
27
Gradient-based Methods
16.810 (16.682)
28
Local optimum
Local optimum
Global optimum
No active constraints
16.810 (16.682)
29
Heuristic Methods
A Heuristic is simply a rule of thumb that hopefully will find a good answer. Why use a Heuristic?
Heuristics are typically used to solve complex optimization problems that are difficult to solve to optimality.
Heuristics are good at dealing with local optima without getting stuck in them while searching for the global optimum.
Schulz, A.S., Metaheuristics, 15.057 Systems Optimization Course Notes, MIT, 1999.
16.810 (16.682)
30
Genetic Algorithm
Principle by Charles Darwin - Natural Selection
16.810 (16.682)
31
Heuristic Methods
Heuristics Often Incorporate Randomization 3 Most Common Heuristic Techniques
Genetic Algorithms Simulated Annealing Tabu Search
16.810 (16.682)
32
Optimization Software
- iSIGHT - DOT - Matlab (fmincon)
16.810 (16.682)
33
Design domain
16.810 (16.682)
34
Optimization results
16.810 (16.682)
35
MDO
16.810 (16.682)
36
OTA
Requirement: Jz,2=5 m
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 Centroid X [m]
Goal: Find a balanced system design, where the flexible structure, the optics and the control systems work together to achieve a desired pointing performance, given various constraints
16.810 (16.682)
37
Shown to Same Scale Approx. 480 passengers each Approx. 8,700 nm range each
Operators Empty Weight Maximum Takeoff Weight Goal: Find a design for a family of blended wing aircraft that will combine aerodynamics, structures, propulsion and controls such that a competitive system emerges - as measured by a set of operator metrics. Total Sea-Level Static Thrust Fuel Burn per Seat
BWB A3XX-50R
19%
BWB A3XX-50R
18%
19%
32%
Boeing
16.810 (16.682)
38
Goal: High end vehicle shape optimization while improving car safety for fixed performance level and given geometric constraints
Reference: G. Lombardi, A. Vicere, H. Paap, G. Manacorda, Optimized Aerodynamic Design for High Performance Cars, AIAA-984789, MAO Conference, St. Louis, 1998
16.810 (16.682)
39
16.810 (16.682)
40
16.810 (16.682)
41
16.810 (16.682)
42
Genetic Algorithm
Do you want to learn more about GA? Take part in this GA game experiment!
16.810 (16.682)
43
Baseline Design
Performance Natural frequency analysis Design requirements
16.810 (16.682)
44
Baseline Design
Performance and cost
1 = 0.070 mm 2 = 0.011 mm
f = 245 Hz m = 0.224 lbs C = 5.16 $
16.810 (16.682) 45
Baseline Design
245 Hz 421 Hz
16.810 (16.682)
46
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
m m c c m 1, 2, f m m m c
16.810 (16.682)
47
Design Optimization
Topology optimization
Design domain
Shape optimization
16.810 (16.682)
48
Design Freedom
1 bar
= 2.50 mm
2 bars
= 0.80 mm
17 bars
= 0.63 mm
16.810 (16.682)
49
Design Freedom
1 bar
= 2.50 mm
2 bars
= 0.80 mm
17 bars
More design freedom (Better performance) More complex (More difficult to optimize)
= 0.63 mm
16.810 (16.682) 50
Cost [$]
2 bars
1 bar
1.5
2.5
Displacement [mm]
16.810 (16.682)
51
Company tour
Jan 26 (Monday) : 1 pm 4 pm
Testing
Jan 29 (Thursday) : 10 am 2 pm
GA Games
Jan 29 (Thursday) : 1 pm 5 pm
16.810 (16.682)
52
References
P. Y. Papalambros, Principles of optimal design, Cambridge University Press, 2000 O. de Weck and K. Willcox, Multidisciplinary System Design Optimization, MIT lecture note, 2003 M. O. Bendsoe and N. Kikuchi, Generating optimal topologies in structural design using a homogenization method, comp. Meth. Appl. Mech. Engng, Vol. 71, pp. 197-224, 1988 Raino A.E. Makinen et al., Multidisciplinary shape optimization in aerodynamics and electromagnetics using genetic algorithms, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids, Vol. 30, pp. 149-159, 1999 Il Yong Kim and Byung Man Kwak, Design space optimization using a numerical design continuation method, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, Vol. 53, Issue 8, pp. 1979-2002, March 20, 2002.
16.810 (16.682)
53
Developed and maintained by Dmitri Tcherniak, Ole Sigmund, Thomas A. Poulsen and Thomas Buhl. Features: 1.2-D 2.Rectangular design domain 3.1000 design variables (1000 square elements) 4. Objective function: compliance (F) 5. Constraint: volume
16.810 (16.682)
54
16.810 (16.682)
55
16.810 (16.682)
56
16.810 (16.682)
57
http://www.topopt.dtu.dk
16.810 (16.682)
58