Framework for Multifidelity Aeroelastic Vehicle Design Optimization

A multifidelity aeroelastic analysis has been implemented for design optimization of a lambda wing vehicle. The goal of the multifidelity, multidisciplinary approach is to capture the effects of nonlinear, coupled phenomena on vehicle performance at a cost amenable to conceptual and preliminary design. The goal of the optimization is to maximize range at a supersonic flight condition under constraints on trim, wing deformation, and structural stresses. The design variables include planform shape, material gauges, and cruise angle of attack. The low-fidelity model couples linear, finite-element structural analysis with linear panel aerodynamics. The high-fidelity model couples structural modes with Euler computational fluid dynamics. A single, unified geometric representation is central to the multifidelity, multidisciplinary process, ensuring compatibility between disciplines and fidelities. Finite differences are used to calculate coupled, aeroelastic gradients. Good sensitivities are obtained for the low-fidelity model. However, noise in the high-fidelity response is found to dominate some derivatives, and is an area for further work. The optimization is demonstrated using the low-fidelity simulation, motivating the use of multifidelity techniques to reduce the cost of high-fidelity optimization.

[1]  W. K. Anderson,et al.  An implicit upwind algorithm for computing turbulent flows on unstructured grids , 1994 .

[2]  Leo Wai-Tsun Ng,et al.  Multifidelity Uncertainty Propagation for Optimization Under Uncertainty , 2012 .

[3]  Shawn E. Gano,et al.  Hybrid Variable Fidelity Optimization by Using a Kriging-Based Scaling Function , 2005 .

[4]  Michael Love,et al.  Identification of Critical Flight Loads , 2003 .

[5]  Joaquim R. R. A. Martins,et al.  An adaptive approach to constraint aggregation using adjoint sensitivity analysis , 2007 .

[6]  Robert Lewis,et al.  A trust region framework for managing approximation models in engineering optimization , 1996 .

[7]  Wright Patterson,et al.  A Design Study Employing Aeroelastic Tailoring and an Active Aeroelastic Wing Design Approach on a Tailless Lambda Wing Configuration , 2014 .

[8]  R. N. Desmarais,et al.  Interpolation using surface splines. , 1972 .

[9]  Darcy L. Allison,et al.  Development of Installed Propulsion Performance Model for High-Performance Aircraft Conceptual Design , 2014 .

[10]  N. Weatherill,et al.  Unstructured grid generation using iterative point insertion and local reconnection , 1995 .

[11]  G. Kreisselmeier,et al.  SYSTEMATIC CONTROL DESIGN BY OPTIMIZING A VECTOR PERFORMANCE INDEX , 1979 .

[12]  Dean E. Bryson,et al.  Variable-Fidelity Surrogate Modeling of Lambda Wing Transonic Aerodynamic Performance , 2016 .

[13]  J. Nocedal,et al.  A Limited Memory Algorithm for Bound Constrained Optimization , 1995, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[14]  Stefan Görtz,et al.  Improving variable-fidelity surrogate modeling via gradient-enhanced kriging and a generalized hybrid bridge function , 2013 .

[15]  Ramana V. Grandhi,et al.  Bayesian Low-Fidelity Correction Approach to Multi-Fidelity Aerospace Design , 2017 .

[16]  David L. Marcum,et al.  Unstructured Grid Generation Using Automatic Point Insertion and Local Reconnection , 2002 .

[17]  Robert T. Biedron,et al.  Recent Enhancements To The FUN3D Flow Solver For Moving-Mesh Applications , 2009 .

[18]  Komahan Boopathy,et al.  Unified Framework for Training Point Selection and Error Estimation for Surrogate Models , 2015 .