Multi-point aerodynamic shape optimization of cars based on continuous adjoint

This article presents a continuous adjoint-enabled, gradient-based optimization tool for multi-point, multi-objective industrial optimization problems and its application to the shape optimization of a concept car. Apart from the adjoint to the incompressible Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes equations, the adjoint to the Spalart–Allmaras turbulence model equation is also solved, in order to support the optimization with accurate gradients. Part of the mathematical development related to the sensitivity derivative terms resulting from the differentiation of the Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) variant of the Spalart–Allmaras model when using an adjoint formulation consisting of field integrals is presented for the first time in the literature. In the industrial application, two operating points are considered, corresponding to two flow velocity angles with respect to the car symmetry plane, with a different objective (drag and yaw moment coefficients) for each of them. With the aforesaid targets, the Pareto front of optimal solutions is computed and discussed. Each point on this front is computed by minimizing a single objective function, resulting from the linear combination of the objective functions defined on the different operating points, using appropriate weights. Finally, some of the Pareto front members are re-evaluated using delayed detached eddy simulation (DDEs). The overall optimization tool is developed in the open-source CFD toolbox OpenFOAM.

[1]  Gunther Ramm,et al.  Some salient features of the time - averaged ground vehicle wake , 1984 .

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

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

[4]  N. Frink Assessment of an Unstructured-Grid Method for Predicting 3-D Turbulent Viscous Flows , 1996 .

[5]  Les A. Piegl,et al.  The NURBS Book , 1995, Monographs in Visual Communication.

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

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

[8]  P. Spalart,et al.  A New Version of Detached-eddy Simulation, Resistant to Ambiguous Grid Densities , 2006 .

[9]  Kyriakos C. Giannakoglou,et al.  A continuous adjoint method with objective function derivatives based on boundary integrals, for inviscid and viscous flows , 2007 .

[10]  Qiqi Wang,et al.  Minimal Repetition Dynamic Checkpointing Algorithm for Unsteady Adjoint Calculation , 2009, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

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

[12]  Li He,et al.  Adjoint Aerodynamic Design Optimization for Blades in Multistage Turbomachines—Part II: Validation and Application , 2010 .

[13]  Christof Hinterberger,et al.  Automatic Geometry Optimization of Exhaust Systems Based on Sensitivities Computed by a Continuous Adjoint CFD Method in OpenFOAM , 2010 .

[14]  C. Othmer,et al.  Multi-Objective Adjoint Optimization of Intake Port Geometry , 2012 .

[15]  Yasushi Noguchi,et al.  Development of CFD Shape Optimization Technology using the Adjoint Method and its Application to Engine Intake Port Design , 2013 .

[16]  V. Schulz,et al.  Three-Dimensional Large-Scale Aerodynamic Shape Optimization Based on Shape Calculus , 2013 .

[17]  Tom Verstraete,et al.  Multidisciplinary Optimization of a Turbocharger Radial Turbine , 2012 .

[18]  Carsten Othmer,et al.  Adjoint methods for car aerodynamics , 2014, Journal of Mathematics in Industry.

[19]  Kai-Uwe Bletzinger,et al.  The Vertex Morphing method for node-based shape optimization , 2014 .

[20]  Kyriakos C. Giannakoglou,et al.  On the proper treatment of grid sensitivities in continuous adjoint methods for shape optimization , 2015, J. Comput. Phys..

[21]  J. Martins,et al.  Multipoint Aerodynamic Shape Optimization Investigations of the Common Research Model Wing , 2015 .

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

[23]  Thomas Blacha,et al.  Application of the Adjoint Method for Vehicle Aerodynamic Optimization , 2016 .

[24]  Yasushi Noguchi,et al.  Development of CFD Inverse Analysis Technology Using the Transient Adjoint Method and Its Application to Engine In-Cylinder Flow , 2016 .

[25]  Kyriakos C. Giannakoglou,et al.  Defroster nozzle shape optimization using the continuous adjoint method , 2016 .

[26]  Kenneth Karbon,et al.  Adjoint-Driven Aerodynamic Shape Optimization Based on a Combination of Steady State and Transient Flow Solutions , 2016 .

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

[28]  Alistair Revell,et al.  Assessment of RANS and DES methods for realistic automotive models , 2016 .

[29]  Carsten Weber,et al.  CFD Topology and Shape Optimization for Port Development of Integrated Exhaust Manifolds , 2017 .

[30]  Kai-Uwe Bletzinger,et al.  A consistent formulation for imposing packaging constraints in shape optimization using Vertex Morphing parametrization , 2017 .

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

[32]  Joaquim R. R. A. Martins,et al.  An aerodynamic design optimization framework using a discrete adjoint approach with OpenFOAM , 2018 .

[33]  Min Xu,et al.  Multi-Objective Adjoint Optimization of Flow-Bench Port Geometry , 2018 .