Adjoint-assisted Pareto front tracing in aerodynamic and conjugate heat transfer shape optimization

Abstract In this paper, a prediction-correction algorithm, built on the method proposed in [1], uses the adjoint method to trace the Pareto front. The method is initialized by a point on the Pareto front obtained by considering one of the objectives only. During the prediction and correction steps, different systems of equations are derived and solved by treating the Karush-Kuhn-Tucker (KKT) optimality conditions in two different ways. The computation of second derivatives of the objective functions (Hessian matrix) which appear in the equations solved to update the design variables is avoided. Instead, two approaches are used: (a) the computation of Hessian-vector products driving a Krylov subspace solver and (b) the approximations of the Hessian via Quasi-Newton methods. Three different variants of the prediction-correction method are developed, applied to 2D aerodynamic shape optimization problems with geometrical constraints and compared in terms of computational cost. It is shown that the inclusion of the prediction step in the algorithm and the use of Quasi-Newton methods with Hessian approximations in both steps has the lowest computational cost. This method is, then, used to compute the Pareto front in a 3D conjugate heat transfer shape optimization problem, with the total pressure losses and max. solid temperature as the two contradicting objectives.

[1]  Jörg Fliege,et al.  Steepest descent methods for multicriteria optimization , 2000, Math. Methods Oper. Res..

[2]  John E. Dennis,et al.  Normal-Boundary Intersection: A New Method for Generating the Pareto Surface in Nonlinear Multicriteria Optimization Problems , 1998, SIAM J. Optim..

[3]  A. A. Schy,et al.  Tradeoff studies in multiobjective insensitive design of airplane control systems , 1983 .

[4]  K. Giannakoglou,et al.  Continuous Adjoint Methods for Turbulent Flows, Applied to Shape and Topology Optimization: Industrial Applications , 2016 .

[5]  R. Dwight,et al.  Numerical sensitivity analysis for aerodynamic optimization: A survey of approaches , 2010 .

[7]  Kyriakos C. Giannakoglou,et al.  A Continuous Adjoint Method for the Minimization of Losses in Cascade Viscous Flows , 2006 .

[9]  P. Spalart A One-Equation Turbulence Model for Aerodynamic Flows , 1992 .

[10]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II , 2002, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[11]  S. Shankaran,et al.  Efficient Gradient-Based Algorithms for the Construction of Pareto Fronts , 2011 .

[12]  O. Pironneau On optimum profiles in Stokes flow , 1973, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[13]  K. Giannakoglou,et al.  The continuous adjoint method for shape optimization in Conjugate Heat Transfer problems with turbulent incompressible flows , 2018, Applied Thermal Engineering.

[14]  W. K. Anderson,et al.  Aerodynamic design optimization on unstructured grids with a continuous adjoint formulation , 1997 .

[15]  K. Giannakoglou,et al.  Aerodynamic design using the truncated Newton algorithm and the continuous adjoint approach , 2012 .

[16]  Stephen J. Wright,et al.  Numerical Optimization , 2018, Fundamental Statistical Inference.

[17]  Kyriakos C. Giannakoglou,et al.  A PCA-assisted hybrid algorithm combining EAs and adjoint methods for CFD-based optimization , 2018, Appl. Soft Comput..

[18]  Kyriakos C. Giannakoglou,et al.  Gradient-based Pareto front approximation applied to turbomachinery shape optimization , 2019, Engineering with Computers.

[19]  Kyriakos C. Giannakoglou,et al.  Direct, adjoint and mixed approaches for the computation of Hessian in airfoil design problems , 2008 .

[20]  I. Y. Kim,et al.  Adaptive weighted-sum method for bi-objective optimization: Pareto front generation , 2005 .

[21]  Kyriakos C. Giannakoglou,et al.  Noise reduction in car aerodynamics using a surrogate objective function and the continuous adjoint method with wall functions , 2015 .

[22]  D. Spalding,et al.  A calculation procedure for heat, mass and momentum transfer in three-dimensional parabolic flows , 1972 .

[23]  Yacov Y. Haimes,et al.  Approach to performance and sensitivity multiobjective optimization: The goal attainment method , 1975 .

[24]  A. A. Schy,et al.  Multiobjective insensitive design of airplane control systems with uncertain parameters , 1981 .

[25]  Y. Saad,et al.  GMRES: a generalized minimal residual algorithm for solving nonsymmetric linear systems , 1986 .

[26]  Paul G. Tucker,et al.  Differential equation-based wall distance computation for DES and RANS , 2003 .

[27]  Kyriakos C. Giannakoglou,et al.  Continuous adjoint approach to the Spalart–Allmaras turbulence model for incompressible flows , 2009 .

[28]  Antony Jameson,et al.  Aerodynamic design via control theory , 1988, J. Sci. Comput..

[29]  T. Pulliam,et al.  A comparative evaluation of genetic and gradient-based algorithms applied to aerodynamic optimization , 2008 .

[30]  M. Giles,et al.  Adjoint equations in CFD: duality, boundary conditions and solution behaviour , 1997 .

[31]  J. Dennis,et al.  A closer look at drawbacks of minimizing weighted sums of objectives for Pareto set generation in multicriteria optimization problems , 1997 .

[32]  Peter J. Fleming,et al.  An Overview of Evolutionary Algorithms in Multiobjective Optimization , 1995, Evolutionary Computation.