Launch Vehicle Design and Optimization Methods and Priority for the Advanced Engineering Environment

NASA's Advanced Engineering Environment (AEE) is a research and development program that will improve collaboration among design engineers for launch vehicle conceptual design and provide the infrastructure (methods and framework) necessary to enable that environment. In this paper, three major technical challenges facing the AEE program are identified, and three specific design problems are selected to demonstrate how advanced methods can improve current design activities. References are made to studies that demonstrate these design problems and methods, and these studies will provide the detailed information and check cases to support incorporation of these methods into the AEE. This paper provides background and terminology for discussing the launch vehicle conceptual design problem so that the diverse AEE user community can participate in prioritizing the AEE development effort.

[1]  André I. Khuri,et al.  Response surface methodology , 2010 .

[2]  J. Heinbockel,et al.  Ionizing Radiation: Multifunctionality and MDO Processes , 2002 .

[3]  Dennis E. Smith,et al.  NASA 2nd Generation RLV Program Introduction, Status and Future Plans , 2002 .

[4]  Walter E. Hammond,et al.  Design Methodologies for Space Transportation Systems , 2001 .

[5]  Arthur C. Taylor,et al.  Approach for uncertainty propagation and robust design in CFD using sensitivity derivatives , 2001 .

[6]  Robert S. Ryan,et al.  Launch Vehicle Design Process: Characterization, Technical Integration, and Lessons Learned , 2001 .

[7]  Roger A. Lepsch,et al.  Approximation Model Building for Reliability & Maintainability Characteristics of Reusable Launch Vehicles , 2000 .

[8]  W. K. Anderson,et al.  A step-size independent approach for multidisciplinary sensitivity analysis and design optimization , 1999 .

[9]  John R. Olds,et al.  Multidisciplinary Conceptual Design Optimization of Space Transportation Systems , 1999 .

[10]  Walter E. Hammond.  Space Transportation: A Systems Approach to Analysis and Design , 1999 .

[11]  Kemper Lewis,et al.  Robust Design Approach for Achieving Flexibility in Multidisciplinary Design , 1999 .

[12]  Roger A. Lepsch,et al.  Response Surface Model Building and Multidisciplinary Optimization Using D-Optimal Designs , 1998 .

[13]  Natalia Alexandrov,et al.  Multidisciplinary design optimization : state of the art , 1997 .

[14]  Douglas O. Stanley,et al.  Approximation model building and multidisciplinary design optimization using response surface methods , 1996 .

[15]  Richard W. Powell,et al.  Determination of optimal launch vehicle technology investment strategies during conceptual design , 1996 .

[16]  R. W. Monroe,et al.  2323. Risk Analysis of Weight Estimates for a Launch Vehicle , 1996 .

[17]  Ilan Kroo,et al.  Development and Application of the Collaborative Optimization Architecture in a Multidisciplinary Design Environment , 1995 .

[18]  Douglas O. Stanley,et al.  Comparison of two multidisciplinary optimization strategies for launch-vehicle design , 1995 .

[19]  Douglas O. Stanley,et al.  Dual-fuel propulsion in single-stage Advanced Manned Launch System Vehicle , 1995 .

[20]  John R. Olds,et al.  Results of a Rocket-Based Combined-Cycle SSTO Design Using Parametric; MDO Methods , 1994 .

[21]  Douglas O. Stanley,et al.  Aerodynamic configuration design using response surface methodology analysis , 1993 .

[22]  Douglas O. Stanley,et al.  Application of dual-fuel propulsion to a single stage AMLS vehicle , 1993 .

[23]  Lawrence F. Rowell.  Design challenges for tomorrow's manned launch systems , 1993 .

[24]  Douglas O. Stanley,et al.  Rocket-powered single-stage vehicle configuration selection and design , 1993 .

[25]  George E. P. Box,et al.  Empirical Model‐Building and Response Surfaces , 1988 .