Simulation and Modelling PDF

Multidisciplinary System
Design Optimization (MSDO)
Lecture 3:
Modeling and Simulation
Prof. Olivier de Weck
1
Massachusetts Institute of Technology - Prof. de Weck and Prof. Willcox
MSDO Framework
today
Design Vector Simulation Model Objective Vector
x1 J1
Discipline A Discipline B
x2 J2
Discipline C
xn Jz
Coupling
Multiobjective
Optimization
Approximation
Optimization Algorithms Methods
Numerical Techniques Sensitivity

Tradespace (direct and penalty methods) Analysis
Exploration
(DOE) Heuristic Techniques Coupling
(SA,GA) Isoperformance
2 Special Techniques
Today’s Topics
Definitions of Modeling and Simulation
- physics-based modeling
- empirical modeling
Model/Simulation Development Process

- module identification
- module ordering: DSM’s and N2 diagrams
- module coding: fidelity and benchmarking
- model execution = simulation
Computational Issues
- coupling disparate CAE/CAD tools
3
Definitions
4
Definitions
Definition: Model (as used in this class)
A model is a mathematical object that has the ability
to predict the behavior of a real system under a set of
defined operating conditions and simplifying assumptions.
Definition: Simulation (as used in this class)

Simulation is the process of exercising a model for a
particular instantiation of the system and specific set
of inputs in order to predict the system response.
5
From the Reference
System
Experiment with Experiment with

Actual System Model of System
Physical Mathematical
Model Model
Analytical Simulation
Solution
Law & Kelton (2000), Simulation Modeling and Analysis 3rd ed., McGraw-Hill, Inc.
6
Additional Detail – Next Chart
The following chart Simulation/Model Factors:

includes additional • Real World Variability
detail to emphasize the • Reaction to Events
factors that differentiate
a model and a
simulation These relate back to the
purpose of the
sim/model
Models should not include all the details for all purposes
• They quickly become unwieldy & expensive
7
Analysis Methods
Purpose:
System Analysis/Design
Prediction
Training
Experiment with Experiment with
Actual System Model of System Testing
Entertainment
Physical Mathematical Experiencing

Model Model Visualizing
Analyzing
Analytical Numerical (Simulation)

Solution
Static Deterministic Continuous
vs vs vs
Law & Kelton (2000), Simulation Modeling and
Dynamic Stochastic Discrete
Analysis 3rd ed., McGraw-Hill, Inc. Visualization
8
 Modified by M.J. Steele with added detail Sensory Immersion
Model and Simulation
Development Process
9
Model Development Process
Start Process Define
Master Table
DSM
N2 Diagram
Objectives
Governing Define
Constraints
Equations Modules
Design Variables
Iterate to Improve Fidelity
Integrate Benchmark
Code Modules
Modules Sanity Check
Test Code
Ready For Use
10
Objectives, Constraints, Design
Variables
• Define Objectives J This is how we want system to behave
• Define Design Variables x Things about system we can change

• Define Constraints and Bounds g, h Must satisfy this
• Determine important fixed parameters p Fixed, outside our
control yet important
Influence Matrix
x1 … xn
+ influence
Ji + + o
o no
gj + o + influence
11
model relationships
Physics Based Modeling
• Start with governing equations

• Continuum Mechanics for physical systems
• Introduce Boundary Conditions
• Introduce Initial Conditions
• External forcing functions
• Discretize system
12
Governing Equations
Continuum (Structural) Mechanics
x xy xz
stress
S yx y yz tensor
zx zy y
F3
F1
F2 x
u
strain
x
-Equilibrium Equations Fi 0
-Constitutive equations x E x
-Compatibility equations x
dx' dx
dx
13
Example: Finite Element Model
Mx Cx Kx F
Geometry
Mass and
Connectivity
Inertia Matrix
Material
Properties Deflections,
Stress, Strain
Boundary Z
Conditions X
Y Natural
Loads Frequencies
Mode Shapes
Assumptions
Discretization
Time as Variable:
Static Steady State Transient
14
Empirical Modeling
• Derive a model, not from physics and first

principles, but from observation, i.e. data
• Usually leads to low order models
• Only valid under similar operating conditions
• Many cost models are of this nature
15
Example: Empirical Modeling
Engi ne Si z e v s . HP
In-line engine image removed due to copyright

400 restrictions. Animation can be found at
350 HowStuffWorks.com.
300
Hor s epower
250
200
… could do physics-
150 Based modeling of
100 this in-line 4 engine,
50
0
but instead do …
0. 0 2. 0 4. 0 6. 0
Engi ne Si z e ( Li t er s )
Linear Regression
HP ED
HP = 51.48*ED + 23.12
16
How to decompose a system
• What to do when system is new - no experience ?

• First define “black boxes” or modules based on:
disciplinary tradition, degree of coupling of governing
equations or availability of analysis software
• Crisply define inputs and outputs of each module
Ref: Rogers, J.L.: “A Knowledge-Based Tool for Multilevel Decomposition of

a Complex Design Problem”, NASA TP2903, 1989
17
Partitioning of Equations
-5 variables
E1 x1 x2 2 x3 2 0 -5 independent equations
E2 x2 3x5 9 0 -no degrees of freedom
E3 x1 x4 x5 x3 10 0
1. Solve x2,x5 from E2 and E4
E4 9 x5 3 x2 7 0 2. Solve x4 from E5
3. Solve x1 and x3 from E3 and E1
E5 x2 x5 x2 x4 x2 9 0
X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 X2 X5 X4 X1 X3
E1 1 1 1 E2 1 1
Module 1
E2 1 1 E4 1 1
E3 1 1 1 1 E5 1 1 1 Module 2
E4 1 1 E3 1 1 1 1
Module 3
E5 1 1 1 E1 1 1 1
Occurrence matrix showing the system of equations

Occurrence matrix for system of equations
partitioned into three subsets
18 Image by MIT OpenCourseWare.
Module Definition
What is a module in MSDO ?
A module in multidisciplinary system design optimization

is a finite group of tightly coupled mathematical relation-
ships who are under the responsibility of a particular
individual or organization, and where some variables
represent independent inputs while others are
dependent outputs. The module frequently appears as a
“black box” to other individuals or organizations .
x1 y1
... Module “A” ...
xn ym
19
Modules for Simulation
• A module within a simulation architecture may be defined
as a piece of computer code which:
– Performs a compact set of calculations.
– Contains a single entry point and exit point.
– May be tested in isolation.
• Attributes of a good modular unit within a simulation
architecture include:
– High internal coupling within the module
• All sub-functions within the module contribute to form a single primary
function.
– Low coupling between modules
• Minimize the number of variables that flow between modules.
– Minimization of feedback loops
• Data flow is processed sequentially from input to output.
20
Module Inputs and Outputs
Info fed to
Info coming
upstream
from upstream
(feedback)
(feed-forward)
Input
Output Output
Module i
Input
Info fed from Info fed to

downstream downstream
(feedback) (feed-forward)
21
Module Example
sensors
actuators pointing requirement
(e.g. CMGs) vehicle inertia matrix I
disturbance torques d
Output Attitude Output

Control
Input
power required
Example:
propellant amount
Spacecraft Design
22
The N2 Diagram
• An NxN matrix used to develop and organize interface information.

• Similar to a Design Structure Matrix (DSM)
• Each module within the simulation architecture is placed along the
diagonal.
• Provides a visual representation of the flow of information through the
simulation architecture.
• Helps to identify critical modules that have many inputs and outputs. The
fidelity of critical modules should be thoroughly tested and verified.
• Explicitly defines all inputs and outputs for macro-modules and modules.
• Allows for “plug and play”
– Independent testing
– Alternative modules easily analyzed
– Can increase overall model fidelity incrementally
23
Initial random sequencing
feedforward
Execution sequence goes

from upper left corner to
lower right corner
Problem: Each instance of

feedback requires an iteration
Initial, random arrangement of modules on the N-square matrix diagonal.
feedback Image by MIT OpenCourseWare.
24
Ordered sequence
The Need The Solution
Identify coupling between discipline or Automatic identification of subsystems
subsystems in a complex system. based on interdependence of design variable
and constraints.
Actuators
Sensors
Structures and materials
Dynamics
Controls
e.g. = output = mode shapes
Modules in the N-square matrix resequenced to reduce feedback.
Image by MIT OpenCourseWare.
Systematic permutation groups and

25 reduces number of feedback loops
TPF Example : Overview N2 Diagram
TMAS N-Squared Diagram
Design Const. Env. Apert. Spacecraft Payload and Bus Dynamics, Control, & Stability Deployment & GINA Systems Analysis Module
Vector Vector Module Conf. Module Module Operations
Module Module
Design Vector 1 2,3,4 2,4 1,2,3 2,3,4 2,3 1 2,3,4 2,3,4 1,2,3,4 3 1 1,2,3 1,2 2 2,3,4 1,2,3,4
Architecture Constants Vector 11 2 2,3 3 1,2 4 13,14 14,31 15,16 11,32-40 3 5 to 11 2,12 all
Environment 1 1,2,3
Aperture Configuration 1 1 1 1
Payload 3,4 1,2 1,2
Power 1,6 6,7 6,7 2,3
2,3,5,6 Thermal 1,4
4 Propulsion 3
6 Communications
1 to 5
8,10 6 Structure 6,10 3,4,5 6,9 6
Sub-Modules Truss Design 1,2 1
Design Vector State-Space Plant Model
1 1,2
Architecture Constants Vector Attitude Determination and Control
Environment Model Integration
3
Aperture Configuration Performance Assesment 1
Payload Orbit Transit1,2,3 4
Power Launch 2
Thermal Operations 2 1
Propulsion Capability 7,8,9
Communications Performance 4
Structure Cost 6
Truss Design
State-Space Plant Model
Inputs Cost Per Function
1
Adaptability
Attitude Determination and Control
Model Integration
Performance Assesment
Outputs m-file Outputs
Orbit Transit
Launch
Operations
Capability Inputs
Performance
Cost
Cost Per Function
Adaptability
26
Coding - Benchmarking
• Coding of modules can be done in parallel,

once the I/O structure has been decided
• Use “dummy” input data to exercise modules
in isolation
• Integrate modules step-by-step starting from
upper left corner in N2-Diagram
• Do end-to-end simulation test before release
• Benchmark (“validate”) simulation against
known cases (experimental data)
27
Recap
Start Process Define
Master Table
DSM
N2 Diagram
Objectives
Governing Define
Constraints
Equations Modules
Design Variables
Iterate to Improve Fidelity
Integrate Benchmark
Code Modules
Modules Sanity Check
Test Code
Ready For Use
28
Example
de Weck, O. L. and Chang D., ”Architecture Trade Methodology for LEO

Personal Communication Systems “, 20th International Communications Satellite
Systems Conference, Paper No. AIAA-2002-1866, Montréal, Québec, Canada,
May 12-15, 2002
29
Example: Communications Satellites
Design
(Input)
Vector
Simulator
Performance
Capacity
Cost
Can we quantify the conceptual system design

problem using modeling and simulation?
30
Design (Input) Vector X
• The design variables are:
Design Space
– Constellation Type: C Polar, Walker
Astro- – Orbital Altitude: h 500,1000,1500,2000 [km]
dynamics
– Minimum Elevation Angle: min 2.5,7.5,12.5 [deg]
– Satellite Transmit Power: Pt 200,400,800,1600,2400 [W]
Satellite – Antenna Size: Da 1.0,2.0,3.0 [m]
Design
– Multiple Access Scheme MA: MF-TDMA, MF-CDMA [-]
Network – Network Architecture: ISL yes, no [-]
C: 'walker'
h: 2000 This results in a 1440
X1440=
emin: 12.5000 full factorial, combinatorial
Pt: 2400
DA: 3 conceptual design space
MA: 'MFCD'
ISL: 0
31
Objective Vector (Output) J
Consider
• Performance (fixed)
– Data Rate per Channel: R=4.8 [kbps] Cs: 1.4885e+005
Clife: 1.0170e+011
– Bit-Error Rate: pb=10-3 J1440=
LCC: 6.7548e+009
– Link Fading Margin: 16 [dB] CPF: 6.6416e-002
• Capacity
– Cs: Number of simultaneous duplex channels
– Clife: Total throughput over life time [min]
• Cost
– Lifecycle cost of the system (LCC [$]), includes:
• Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E)
• Satellite Construction and Test
• Launch and Orbital Insertion
• Operations and Replenishment
– Cost per Function, CPF [$/min]
32
Multidisciplinary Simulator Structure
Input Constants
x p
Vector Vector
msat
h, min
msat Launch LV
Constellation Spacecraft Cost
Module
T, p nspot nGW
LCC
ISL Satellite Link
Rs Cs
Capacity
Network Budget
Pt , Da , MA
msat Satellite Mass nspot Number of spot beams Output

J
T Number of Satellites nGW Number of gateways Vector
p Number of orbital planes LV Launch vehicle selection
Note: Only partial input-output relationships shown
33
Governing Equations
Energy per bit Eb PG r G t
a) Physics-Based over noise ratio:
Models N0 kL space L add.Tsys.R
(Link Budget)
b) Empirical 0.51
Models msat 38 0.14 Pt mprop
(Spacecraft)
Scaling models
derived from
FCC database
34
Benchmarking
Benchmarking is the process of validating a model or simulation
by comparing the predicted response against reality.
Benchmarking Result 1: Simultaneous channels of the Benchmarking Result 2: Lifecycle cost

constellation
6.00
Lifecycle cost (billion $)

140,000
simultaneous channels
5.00
of the constellation
120,000
4.00
100,000
Number of
actual or planned
80,000 actual or planned 3.00
simulated
60,000 simulated 2.00
40,000
20,000 1.00
0 0.00
1 Iridium 2 Globalstar 1 Iridium 2 Globalstar
Iridium and Globalstar Iridium and Globalstar
Benchmarking Result 3: Satellite mass Benchmarking Result 4: Number of satellites in the constellation
1,400.0 70
Number of satellites in the
1,200.0
Satellite mass (kg)
60
1,000.0 50
constellation
800.0 actual or planned

40 actual or planned
600.0 simulated
30 simulated
400.0
200.0 20
0.0 10
Iridium Globalstar Orbcomm SkyBridge
1 2 3 4 0
Iridium Globalstar Orbcomm SkyBridge
1 2 3 4
Iridium , Globalstar, Orbcom m , and
SkyBridge Iridium , Globalstars, Orbcom m , and SkyBridge
35
Simulation Results
1
Lifecycle Cost [B$]
10 Iridium actual
Iridium simulated
Globalstar actual
Globalstar simulated Pareto
Front
0
10
3 4 5 6 7
10 10 10 10 10
Global Capacity Cs [# of duplex channels]

36
Simple Example
(Prep for Homework A1)
37
Example: Communications Satellite
Design of a geosynchronous communications satellite
Satellite
Earth
S ηA
Pbus
ηt
θ D A
Ground Main Lobe
Station Antenna Bus
Solar
Panel
r = 6378 [km]
Image by MIT OpenCourseWare.
Design problem (Define D.V., objectives, constraints):

How should antenna (D) and solar array (A) be sized for
a given orbital period (p) such that a data rate
requirement (R=Rreq) is met, while minimizing cost (C) ?
38
Comsat: Governing Equations
Objective: min C , Constraint: R>=Rreq
2
Communications:
D t
R Pt 2
[bps]
16S (link budget)
Power: Pt A AWo cos avg Pbus [W]

(power budget)
4 3/ 2
Orbits: p 1.66 10 S rE [min]
(orbital period)
Cost: C 2500 D 2
12000 A 1 +100 Pbus [$]
(cost budget)
Bus Engineering: Pbus 10 Pt [W]
39
Comsat: Master Table
D Antenna Diameter [m] design var.
A Solar Panel Area [m2] design var.
p Orbital Period [min] design var.
R Data Rate [bps] constraint
C Cost [$] objective
Pt Transmitter Power [W] dependent
Pbus Bus Power [W] dependent
a Sun incidence angle [deg] parameter
a,t, array/xmit efficiencies [%] parameter
S Orbital altitude [km] dependent
constant [-] parameter
Wo Solar constant [W/m2] parameter
40
ComSat Block Diagram
BLOCK DIAGRAM
Input
Vector D
x D Cost C
A
A
p
Power
Pt
Output C
Pbus Bus Vector R
p Orbits Comm R
S
41
Comsat N2 Diagram
In p D A D,A
Orbits S
Comm R
Pt Powe Pt
r
Pbus Bus Pbus
Cost C
Out
iterative block
42
Computational
Implementation
43
Computational Issues
• Computer technologies have been changing the
environment of engineering design - enabling MDO
• Hardware: Advances in processor speed, memory

and storage
• Software: Powerful disciplinary analysis and

simulation programs (e.g. Nastran, Fluent …)
• This also creates new difficulties: Most activities

involve stand-alone programs and many engineers
spend 50-80% of their time organizing data and
moving it back-and-forth between applications
Data must be shared between disciplines more easily
44
Coupling Disparate Tools
Case 2:
Case 1:
Between different applications
Within one application on
on the same computer
the same computer
“ ”
Application “ ” in A BB
in A B
E out
* * out
C D *
“ ”
E.g. MATLAB®, Excel, C++ “ ” E
C D
*
* Interface files
45
Implementation and Ownership (II)
Case 3: In a LAN or WAN environment
Owner A Design Team Site
Owner“ C
”
in Map out
A BB
#
# #
“ ”
“ ”
C D E
# Server Owner G
46 Owner B
Modeling-Simulation Environments
• Integrated Modeling & Simulation
– Write functions and integrate via Master script
– MATLAB, Mathematica® are popular environments
• ICEMaker
– Developed at Caltech/JPL
– linked spreadsheets (client server)
• DOME (MIT) - CO (Oculus)
– DOME based peer-peer system
– API’s into numerous Engineering applications
• FIPER (Simulia – Dassault Systems)
– Client-server enterprise system
– Targeted at the corporate environment
• PHX Model Center
– Phoenix Integration – Flagship Product
– Desktop Integration Environment
47
Lecture Summary
• Follow a logical model & simulation

development process, don’t forget
benchmarking
• Decomposition is crucial in order to facilitate
code integration and coupling
• N2/DSM Matrix is useful tool to organize data
• Minimize the number of feedback loops
48
N2 and DSM References
• Rogers, James L.: DeMAID/GA User's Guide - Design

Manager's Aid for Intelligent Decomposition with a Genetic
Algorithm, April 1996, NASA TM – 110241.
• Steward, D.V., 1981, Systems Analysis and Management:
Structure, Strategy, and Design, New York: Petrocelli.
• D.V. Steward. “Partitioning and Tearing Systems of Equations”,
SIAM Journal of Numerical Analysis. Ser.B, vol.2, no.2, 1965,
pp.345-365
• de Weck, O. L. and Chang D., ”Architecture Trade Methodology
for LEO Personal Communication Systems “, 20th International
Communications Satellite Systems Conference, Paper No.
AIAA-2002-1866, Montréal, Québec, Canada, May 12-15, 2002
• Ulrich, K.T., and S.D. Eppinger, 1995, Product Design and
Development , McGraw-Hill.
• The Design Structure Matrix Website, http://www.dsmweb.org/
49
MIT OpenCourseWare
http://ocw.mit.edu
ESD.77 / 16.888 Multidisciplinary System Design Optimization

Spring 2010
For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: http://ocw.mit.edu/terms.

Simulation and Modelling PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Simulation and Modelling PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Multidisciplinary System

Design Optimization (MSDO)

Prof. Olivier de Weck

Numerical Techniques Sensitivity

Model/Simulation Development Process

Definition: Simulation (as used in this class)

Experiment with Experiment with

The following chart Simulation/Model Factors:

Physical Mathematical Experiencing

Analytical Numerical (Simulation)

Iterate to Improve Fidelity

• Define Design Variables x Things about system we can change

• Start with governing equations

• Derive a model, not from physics and first

In-line engine image removed due to copyright

• What to do when system is new - no experience ?

Ref: Rogers, J.L.: “A Knowledge-Based Tool for Multilevel Decomposition of

Occurrence matrix showing the system of equations

What is a module in MSDO ?

A module in multidisciplinary system design optimization

Info fed from Info fed to

Output Attitude Output

• An NxN matrix used to develop and organize interface information.

Execution sequence goes

Problem: Each instance of

feedback Image by MIT OpenCourseWare.

Structures and materials

Modules in the N-square matrix resequenced to reduce feedback.

Image by MIT OpenCourseWare.

Systematic permutation groups and

• Coding of modules can be done in parallel,

Iterate to Improve Fidelity

de Weck, O. L. and Chang D., ”Architecture Trade Methodology for LEO

Can we quantify the conceptual system design

msat Satellite Mass nspot Number of spot beams Output

Benchmarking Result 1: Simultaneous channels of the Benchmarking Result 2: Lifecycle cost

Lifecycle cost (billion $)

800.0 actual or planned

Global Capacity Cs [# of duplex channels]

Image by MIT OpenCourseWare.

Design problem (Define D.V., objectives, constraints):

Power: Pt A AWo cos avg Pbus [W]

• Hardware: Advances in processor speed, memory

• Software: Powerful disciplinary analysis and

• This also creates new difficulties: Most activities

Owner A Design Team Site

• Follow a logical model & simulation

• Rogers, James L.: DeMAID/GA User's Guide - Design

ESD.77 / 16.888 Multidisciplinary System Design Optimization

You might also like