Optimization approach under uncertainty in

preliminary design for mechanical engineering

Abderazzak Ziat Mohammed Sallaou Hamid Zaghar

Department of Mechanics and Department of Mechanics and Departement of Mechanical
Integrated Engineering (M2I) Integrated Engineering (M2I) Engineering
Moulay Ismail University, ENSAM Moulay Ismail University, ENSAM Mohamed Ben Abdellah University,
Meknes, Morocco Meknes, Morocco EST
ziatabderazzak@gmail.com msallaou@yahoo.com Fez, Morocco
hamid.zaghar@usmba.ac.ma
Abdelmajid Ait Taleb l
Department of Mechanics and
Integrated Engineering (M2I)
Moulay Ismail University, ENSAM
Meknes, Morocco
mjidait@gmail.com

Abstract—This work is a contribution to the integration of
the concepts of reliability and robustness in the design phase of
a product optimization, However, the lack of information and
the high degree of uncertainty during the early design phases
hinder the use of these tools. To overcome this problem, we have
proposed a structured approach based on the evaluation under
uncertainty of two main phases of the design process (conceptual
design and embodiment design).
Keywords—Preliminary design, optimization, Reliability,
Robustness, Uncertainty.
I. INTRODUCTION
In the context of the current competition, industrial
competitiveness depends not only on the mastery of essential
technologies but also on the strategy adopted and the
management of the overall design process. On the other hand,
new products put on the market are becoming more complex.
Part of this complexity comes from the fact that the functions
that systems must provide require the integration of several
components using different technologies. The designer must
integrate into his process all phases of the life cycle of the
system and its components. As a result, the integration of a
decision support tool integrating these factors is becoming
more and more of a major necessity.
The preliminary design stage is one of the important
phases in the product life cycle, about 75-80% of product
development cost is determined in this stage [1]. All decisions
taken have repercussions, whether beneficial or detrimental to
the product. The traditional decision-making process during
the early stages of design is mainly based on the nominal or
optimal values of deterministic specifications.
The integration of uncertainties into the design phase,
especially in the field of mechanical engineering, has been a
known need in recent years. This is necessary because of the
influence of uncertainties in variables and input parameters on
the objective functions and constraints of the problem.The
uncertainty assessment of solutions in this phase is recognized
as an essential and useful tool to guide the decision-making
process [2] .
The objective of this work is to propose a global approach
to uncertainty evaluation by integrating reliability and
robustness in the early design phases. The desired method
must be able to converge towards a stable , performant and
optimal solution. This method will therefore be a decision aid
for this type of optimization under uncertainty.
II. STATE OF THE ART
A. Uncertainties in product design
Uncertainty in design expresses the level of knowledge of
the technology, the variability of the physical parameters, the
properties of the materials used, and variations in the
manufacturing processes [3]. In the context of the preliminary
design, these sources of uncertainty can be classified in two
different types:
Random uncertainty reflects the inherent variation of the
physical system; this variation corresponds to the random
nature of the input parameters. Its modeling is usually difficult
and requires a lot of information. In most cases, such
information does not exist and designers generally make
assumptions about the characteristics of the mean, the
variances and possibly the correlation coefficients [3, 4].
The second type, epistemic uncertainty, reflects lack of
knowledge or incomplete information. This uncertainty is
reducible by understanding the design or obtaining data that
are more relevant. However, in practice, it is too expensive to
gather enough data to reduce uncertainty. These types of
uncertainty are modeled using intervals with a lower and
upper bound [3, 4].
B. Robust Analysis
Robustness analysis in the design phase aims to design a
product that is less sensitive to uncertainties rather than
removing the causes of these variations [5,6]. Several
definitions of robust design have been proposed in the
literature.
Laura Picheral [7] proposed a robust optimization
approach under preliminary design uncertainties. Links
between variability of performance and variability of design
parameters have been developed.

978-1-7281-4979-0/20/$31.00 ©2020 IEEE

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Glasgow. Downloaded on June 02,2020 at 15:07:25 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

Fig. 1: robust and optimal design
A robust design formulation consists in optimizing the
objective function, affected by uncertainties, with
deterministic constraints [3]. However, the expression of the
objective function is a weighting of two minimizations:
(minimize the mean of the initial objective function and
minimize its standard deviation). The existence of the
antagonism between the standard deviation (stability) of the
objective function and its mean (performance) is
demonstrated fig.1. An exploration and comparison of each
solution must be carried out in order to determine the best
compromise for the designer in terms of loss on the mean and
gain on the standard deviation [8, 9].
C. Reliability Analysis
The analysis and evaluation of Reliability in design
process is done using several methods present in the literature.
Indeed, these methods can be classified in two categories:
-Classical methods (FMEA, FTA, QFD, etc.) mainly
focuses on how to identify possible failures within a system at
the concept level with local failure analysis.
-Methods that take into account the dynamics of
continuous variables and essentially meet the limits of
classical methods. several works have been conducted:
Zhonghang [10] proposed a function failure analysis method
based on GO-FLOW methodology was introduced to improve
reliability of product in the stage of conceptual design. The
method is to provide designers with an analytical and
probabilistic tool to evaluate the result of conceptual design
from the opinion of reliability. Zaghar [11] also proposed an
approach for analyzing system reliability in process design
using Markov graphics and taking account of the information
from existing similar products and knowledge from domain
experts.
On the other hand, the reliability evaluation under
uncertainty that takes into account the uncertainties of the
physical parameters are increasingly used in engineering. It
allows realistic modeling and quantification of the effects of
uncertainties on the performance of a system through the
concept of probability of failure. Murat [12] has developed a
framework to enhance reliability-based decision during early
design, this work aims to evaluate design solutions with
uncertain quantitative parameters and link effectively the
whole main steps in the design process.
In another work, Talmor [13] proposed an approach to
calculating reliability under uncertainty based on the classical
FMEA method. This method calculates the lower and upper
reliabilities for each critical failure mode.
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Glasgow. Downloaded on June 02,2020 at 15:07:25 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
The reliability based design optimization (RBDO) consists
in minimizing (maximizing) the objective function under
probabilistic constraints. The objective function can be mass,
cost, yield etc. The form of the deterministic constraint is
changed into the probabilistic constraint.
III. PROPOSED APPROACH
We propose a global approach to the evaluation of the
reliability and the robustness under uncertainty in the
preliminary design phase fig.2. We will then describe the
existing process model, trying to identify the different phases,
their starting and ending points, as well as the action area of
the decision support approach.
The preliminary design phase of the process allows the
passage from functional to structural vision. The latter
includes two basic steps: concepts research phase that consists
to explore different solutions to lead to the choice, and the
embodiment design phase that allows the choice of
technologies, components, dimensions and architecture [14].
Need
Analysis
Conceptual Architectural
design analysis
Physical
Detailed
behaviors
Analysis design
Embodiment design
Preliminary design
Fig. 2: Systematic design process
A. Need analysis.
The functional specification of a product is a document
containing constraints or customer requirements that the
designer must meet when sizing the product. This
specification translates into equations and inequalities and
may or may not include one or more parameters to minimize
or maximize.
This phase consists of translating the design problem, into an
equivalent mathematical problem. It consists of defining in a
precise way:
• The function objective.
• The design parameters.
• The constraints functions.
The design parameters are factors that can influence
performance, they can be qualitative or quantitative,
continuous or discrete.
 This formulation containing constraints and one or more The objectives of the present reliability analysis are:
objectives can be transformed into robust and reliable problem
taking into account uncertainty in parameter design. Ь To allocate reliability targets (failure rates) to the
different parts of the product.
B. Conceptual design
Ь To validate or support the redefinition of the quantitative
The conceptual design phase fig.3 consists in looking for
reliability requirements if necessary.
possible concepts to satisfy the main function:
- Functional flows: We set up the input and output flows Ь To enable sizing for reliability.
by characterizing them from an energy point of view. C. Embodiment design.
- SCTO decomposition: The objective is to set up different 1) Architectural analysis.
classes of components at different levels. This decomposition This phase consists of preliminary definition of the
can identify the corresponding components after product architecture based on the choice of interactions
characterization of the intermediate functional flows. between the components. We propose to realize the functional
block diagrams with the elements of the first levels (units and
- Definition of components: After the definition of the
components) of the technical chart, and to represent there the
functional flows and the type of components, a search is made
flows between the elements of the product. This
for standard components carrying out the required functions
representation makes it possible to visualize the flows as well
or their design.
as the key elements making transit these flows, which makes
A reliability analysis is integrated to evaluate the it possible to define the interactions.
probability of failure of components or structures by
The implementation of the interaction components is
identifying their failure mode in which a performance value
linked to the possibilities offered by the various components
exceeds a specific design limit.
(C, T, O, Ref) and the flows that are linked to them. For the
The failure mode is called a limit state that indicates the definition of the configurations of a system, the interactions
margin of safety between resistance and load structures. In involving mechanical energy are very important and make it
addition, physical behaviors are not always integrated at this possible to configure the architecture of the system. They
stage of the design since existing validation calculation tools induce assembly constraints due to the rigidity of the
require advanced models in definition. components performing these interactions. This remark is
valid for most industrial systems. The other types of
interactions will be analyzed according to the flows involved,
the induced effects that are linked to them and the constraints
Functional Flux they induce [14].
2) Physical behaviors Analysis.
SCTO Decomposition The choice of a component and therefore the induced
effects and products associated with this choice make it
Components definition
possible to generate physical models related to the behavior of
the component. Taking into account certain induced effects
can lead to the integration of other components limiting their
No Routine Yes
design impact on the system Fig. 4.
problem
The physical models are structured in a knowledge
databases, they are adapted to the evaluation of the
performances of the different concepts (architectures and
components). The searched models link the objective function
Component Standard
design component
to the physical variables. We differentiate two types of
variables: design variables and auxiliary variables.
At the beginning of this phase, the designer has the
physical model and the functional specifications of the
Reliability Evaluation product to design. At this stage, we proceed to optimize the
objective function; it consists in coupling an optimization and
propagation of uncertainties in order to find a robust and
reliable solution to the design problem:
No
Does the SV
meet target ‫݂ߤ( ݎ݂ ݁ݏ݅݉݅݊݅ܯ‬, ߪ݂²)
reliability?
—†‡”…‘•–”ƒ‹– (‫ > )ܺ( ܩ‬0)  –”ƒ‰‡– (1)
‫ܷܺ  ܺ  ܺܮ‬
Yes
Š‹•ˆ‘”—Žƒ–‹‘(1) ‹•„ƒ•‡†‘…”‹–‡”‹ƒ‘ˆ”‡Ž‹ƒ„‹Ž‹–›
Proposed conceptual ƒ†”‘„—•–‡••ǣ
design
Fig. 3: Proposed approach for conceptual design phase The functions constraints are based on a reliability approach:
the probability that the stress is not satisfied ܲ (‫ >)ܺ( ܩ‬0) must
be less than the maximum permissible failure probability.

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Glasgow. Downloaded on June 02,2020 at 15:07:25 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Journal of Interactive Design and Manufacturing - Ijidem, vol. 5, no.
1, pp. 55-65, Feb, 2011.
Conceptual design
[3] N. Lelievre, P. Beaurepaire, C. Mattrand, N. Gayton, and A. Otsmane,
“On the consideration of uncertainty in design: optimization -
reliability - robustness,” Structural and Multidisciplinary
Architectural analysis Optimization, vol. 54, no. 6, pp. 1423-1437, Dec, 2016.
[4] P. Sebastian, and Y. Ledoux, “Decision support systems in preliminary
Physical behaviors design,” International Journal of Interactive Design and
Manufacturing - Ijidem, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 223-226, Nov, 2009.
Functional Flow
[5] B. Huang, and X. Du, “Analytical robustness assessment for robust
design,” Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, vol. 34, no. 2,
pp. 123-137, 2007.
[6] Z. Kang, “Robust design optimization of structures under
uncertainties,” 2005
Energy conservation YES Induced NO
effects [7] L. Picheral, “Contribution à la conception préliminaire robuste en
mastered ingéniérie de produit,” 2013.
Constraints
[8] O. Braydi, P. Lafon, and R. Younes, “On the formulation of
X, P Uncertain optimization problems under uncertainty in mechanical
design,” International Journal of Interactive Design and
Manufacturing - Ijidem, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 75-87, Mar, 2019.
[9] L. Picheral, K. Hadj-Hamou, G. Remy, and J. Bigeon, "Robust analysis
towards robust optimization in engineering design."
Models generation
[10] Z. Bai, X. Li, R. Tan, and B. Lian, "A function failure analysis method
for improving reliability of the product based on GO-FLOW
methodology," in 2008 IEEE International Conference on Industrial
Robustness and Engineering and Engineering Management, 2008: IEEE, pp. 550-555.
Reliability optimization [11] H. Zaghar, M. Sallaou, and A. Chaâba, “Preliminary design support by
integrating a reliability analysis for wind turbine,” Energy and Power
Engineering, vol. 4, no. 04, pp. 233, 2012.
[12] M. Mayda, and S. K. Choi, “A reliability-based design framework for
early stages of design process,” Journal of the Brazilian Society of
Reliable and robust Problem design Mechanical Sciences and Engineering, vol. 39, no. 6, pp. 2105-2120,
resolution Jun, 2017.
[13] M. Talmor og L. Teper, "System reliability estimation with failure
Fig. 4: Proposed approach for embodiment design phase. modes analysis applying bayesian approach-case study," i 2018 Annual
Reliability and Maintainability Symposium (RAMS), 2018, s. 1-6:
The robust formulation of the objective function ݂‫ ݎ‬concerns IEEE.
two variables: the mean ߤ݂ and the standard deviation ߪ݂ of [14] M. Sallaou, “Taxonomie des connaissances et exploitation en
conception préliminaire: application à un système éolien,” 2008.
the objective function.
Indeed, this step consists of finding a solution that is
preferably an optimal overall solution to the design problem.
This solution obtained is then analyzed to evaluate its
robustness and reliability using one or other of the uncertainty
propagation methods presented in the literature. If the overall
optimum does not meet the criteria of robustness, the designer
must look for another solution then analyze its robustness and
reliability.
IV. CONCLUSION
The optimization under uncertainty during early design is
a critical and useful tool to guide the decision-making process.
The work presented in this thesis aims to propose a new
approach for robust and reliable product design in a
preliminary design context. This structured approach is a
process of choosing design solutions or candidates in
accordance with their reliabilities and robustness subject to
existing uncertain conditions.
The next step in this work will be the use of this approach
on complex design issues and the development of an even
more generic design problem methodology. We envisage
work to apply this approach in the design of wind turbines in
the Moroccan context.
REFERENCES
[1] X. Zwingmann, “Modèle d’évaluation de la fiabilité et de la
maintenabilité au stade de la conception,” Strasbourg 1, 2005.
[2] G. Cabannes, N. Troussier, T. Gidel, and Z. Cherfi, “An uncertainty-
based approach to drive product preliminary design,” International

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Glasgow. Downloaded on June 02,2020 at 15:07:25 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.