A graph theoretic approach to problem formulation for multidisciplinary design analysis and optimization

The formulation of multidisciplinary design, analysis, and optimization (MDAO) problems has become increasingly complex as the number of analysis tools and design variables included in typical studies has grown. This growth in the scale and scope of MDAO problems has been motivated by the need to incorporate additional disciplines and to expand the parametric design space to enable the exploration of unconventional design concepts. In this context, given a large set of disciplinary analysis tools, the problem of determining a feasible data flow between tools to produce a specified set of system-level outputs is combinatorially challenging. The difficulty is compounded in multi-fidelity problems, which are of increasing interest to the MDAO community. In this paper, we propose an approach for addressing this problem based on the formalism of graph theory. The approach begins by constructing the maximal connectivity graph (MCG) describing all possible interconnections between a set of analysis tools. Graph operations are then conducted to reduce the MCG to a fundamental problem graph (FPG) that describes the connectivity of analysis tools needed to solve a specified system-level design problem. The FPG does not predispose a particular solution procedure; any relevant MDO solution architecture could be selected to implement the optimization. Finally, the solution architecture can be represented in a problem solution graph (PSG). The graph approach is applied to an example problem based on a commercial aircraft MDAO study.

[1]  T Haftka Raphael,et al.  Multidisciplinary aerospace design optimization: survey of recent developments , 1996 .

[2]  Kenneth T. Moore,et al.  Standard Platform for Benchmarking Multidisciplinary Design Analysis and Optimization Architectures , 2013 .

[3]  Harold N. Gabow,et al.  Scaling algorithms for network problems , 1983, 24th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (sfcs 1983).

[4]  Donald B. Johnson,et al.  Finding All the Elementary Circuits of a Directed Graph , 1975, SIAM J. Comput..

[5]  Panos Y. Papalambros,et al.  A Hypergraph Framework for Optimal Model-Based Decomposition of Design Problems , 1997, Comput. Optim. Appl..

[6]  Joaquim R. R. A. Martins,et al.  Extensions to the design structure matrix for the description of multidisciplinary design, analysis, and optimization processes , 2012, Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization.

[7]  Panos Y. Papalambros,et al.  General framework for decomposition analysis in optimal design , 1993 .

[8]  Joaquim R. R. A. Martins,et al.  Multidisciplinary design optimization: A survey of architectures , 2013 .

[9]  Frank Harary,et al.  Graph Theory , 2016 .

[10]  Maurice Eggen,et al.  A transition to advanced mathematics , 1983 .

[11]  Karen Willcox,et al.  A Provably Convergent Multifidelity Optimization Algorithm not Requiring High-Fidelity Derivatives , 2010 .

[12]  Joaquim R. R. A. Martins,et al.  Benchmarking multidisciplinary design optimization algorithms , 2010 .

[13]  Ilan Kroo,et al.  Aircraft optimization for minimal environmental impact , 2002 .

[14]  Christina Bloebaum,et al.  Integrating a Genetic Algorithm Into a Knowledge-Based System for Ordering Complex Design Processes , 1996 .

[15]  Martin Spieck,et al.  State-of-the-Art and Future Trends in Multidisciplinary Design Optimization , 2007 .

[16]  Jacobus E. Rooda,et al.  A specification language for problem partitioning in decomposition-based design optimization , 2010 .

[17]  Joaquim R. R. A. Martins,et al.  Graph Partitioning-Based Coordination Methods for Large-Scale Multidisciplinary Design Optimization Problems , 2012 .

[18]  Robert Michael Lewis,et al.  Reconfigurability in MDO Problem Synthesis. Part 1 , 2004 .

[19]  John E. Dennis,et al.  Problem Formulation for Multidisciplinary Optimization , 1994, SIAM J. Optim..

[20]  John Doherty,et al.  MDO-Based Concept Modelling and the Impact of Fuel Systems on Wing Design , 2009 .

[21]  D. V. Steward,et al.  The design structure system: A method for managing the design of complex systems , 1981, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management.

[22]  Petter Krus,et al.  Optimal Conceptual Design of Aircraft Fuel Transfer Systems , 2006 .

[23]  P. A. Newman,et al.  Approximation and Model Management in Aerodynamic Optimization with Variable-Fidelity Models , 2001 .

[24]  John E. Renaud,et al.  Response surface based, concurrent subspace optimization for multidisciplinary system design , 1996 .

[25]  Panos Y. Papalambros,et al.  Optimal Partitioning and Coordination Decisions in Decomposition-Based Design , 2007, DAC 2007.

[26]  Dimitri N. Mavris,et al.  Aircraft Geometry Design and Optimization for Sonic Boom Reduction , 2007 .

[27]  Kenneth T. Moore,et al.  A Standard Platform for Testing and Comparison of MDAO Architectures , 2012 .

[28]  R. A. Miller,et al.  Sequential kriging optimization using multiple-fidelity evaluations , 2006 .