Metaheuristic Approaches to Solve a Complex Aircraft Performance Optimization Problem

The increasing demands for travelling comfort and reduction of carbon dioxide emissions have been considered substantially in the stage of conceptual aircraft design. However, the design of a modern aircraft is a multidisciplinary process, which requires the coordination of information from several specific disciplines, such as structures, aerodynamics, control, etc. To address this problem with adequate accuracy, the multidisciplinary analysis and optimization (MAO) method is usually applied as a systematic and robust approach to solve such complex design issues arising from industries. Since MAO method is tedious and computationally expensive, genetic programming (GP)-based metamodeling techniques incorporating MAO are proposed as an effective approach to minimize the wing stiffness of a large aircraft subject to aerodynamic, aeroelastic and stability constraints in the conceptual design phase. Based on the linear small-disturbance theory, the state-space equation is employed for stability analysis. In the process of multidisciplinary analysis, aeroelastic response simulations are performed using Nastran. To construct metamodels representing the responses of the interests with high accuracy as well as less computational burden, optimal Latin hypercube design of experiments (DoE) is applied to determine the optimized distribution of sampling points. Following that, parametric optimization is carried out on metamodels to obtain the optimal wing geometry shape, elastic axis positions and stiffness distribution, and then the solution is verified by finite element simulations. Finally, the superiority of the GP-based metamodel technique over genetic algorithm is demonstrated by multidisciplinary design optimization of a representative beam-frame wing structure in terms of accuracy and efficiency. The results also show that GP metamodel-based strategy for solving MAO problems can provide valuable insights to tailoring parameters for the effective design of a large aircraft in the conceptual phase.

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

[2]  Timothy R. Brooks,et al.  Benchmark Aerostructural Models for the Study of Transonic Aircraft Wings , 2018, AIAA Journal.

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

[4]  Luc Boullart,et al.  Genetic programming: principles and applications , 2001 .

[5]  Timothy W. Simpson,et al.  Multidisciplinary Robust Design Optimization of an Internal Combustion Engine , 2003 .

[6]  Zbigniew Michalewicz,et al.  Genetic Algorithms + Data Structures = Evolution Programs , 1996, Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

[7]  Timothy W. Simpson,et al.  On the Use of Statistics in Design and the Implications for Deterministic Computer Experiments , 1997 .

[8]  Tadej Tuma,et al.  Creation of Numerical Constants in Robust Gene Expression Programming , 2018, Entropy.

[9]  Sergio Ricci,et al.  PyPAD: a multidisciplinary framework for preliminary airframe design , 2016 .

[10]  Joaquim R. R. A. Martins,et al.  OpenMDAO: an open-source framework for multidisciplinary design, analysis, and optimization , 2019, Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization.

[11]  A. Manan,et al.  Optimization of aeroelastic composite structures using evolutionary algorithms , 2010 .

[12]  LinCheng-Jian,et al.  Optimization of printed circuit board component placement using an efficient hybrid genetic algorithm , 2016 .

[13]  Janez Puhan,et al.  Grammatical evolution as a hyper-heuristic to evolve deterministic real-valued optimization algorithms , 2018, Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines.

[14]  John R. Koza,et al.  Genetic programming - on the programming of computers by means of natural selection , 1993, Complex adaptive systems.

[15]  Ken Badcock,et al.  Transonic aeroelastic stability analysis using a kriging–based schur complement formulation , 2010 .

[16]  Ke-Shi Zhang,et al.  Coupled Aerodynamic/Structural Optimization of a Subsonic Transport Wing Using a Surrogate Model , 2008 .

[17]  John H. Holland,et al.  Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems: An Introductory Analysis with Applications to Biology, Control, and Artificial Intelligence , 1992 .

[18]  Yujun Zheng,et al.  A new particle swarm optimization algorithm for fuzzy optimization of armored vehicle scheme design , 2012, Applied Intelligence.

[19]  J. Box.  R.A. Fisher and the Design of Experiments, 1922–1926 , 1980 .

[20]  Cheng-Jian Lin,et al.  Optimization of printed circuit board component placement using an efficient hybrid genetic algorithm , 2016, Applied Intelligence.

[21]  Ramin Sedaghati,et al.  Accurate Stick Model Development for Static Analysis of Complex Aircraft Wing-Box Structures , 2009 .

[22]  Krzysztof Sapiecha,et al.  Speeding up global optimization with the help of intelligent supervisors , 2016, Applied Intelligence.

[23]  Boris Laschka,et al.  Calculation of the transonic dip of airfoils using viscous-inviscid aerodynamic interaction method , 2005 .

[24]  Masoud Monjezi,et al.  Genetic programing and non-linear multiple regression techniques to predict backbreak in blasting operation , 2015, Engineering with Computers.

[25]  Piotr Breitkopf,et al.  A bi-level meta-modeling approach for structural optimization using modified POD bases and Diffuse Approximation , 2013 .

[26]  Chao Yang,et al.  Integrated aerodynamics/structure/stability optimization of large aircraft in conceptual design , 2018 .

[27]  Franco Mastroddi,et al.  Analysis of Pareto frontiers for multidisciplinary design optimization of aircraft , 2013 .

[28]  V. Robin,et al.  A Gaussian surrogate model for residual stresses induced by orbital multi-pass TIG welding , 2017 .

[29]  Yaoyu Li,et al.  Wind farm multi-objective wake redirection for optimizing power production and loads , 2017 .

[30]  Christian Hühne,et al.  Detailed design of a lattice composite fuselage structure by a mixed optimization method , 2016 .

[31]  J. I.  The Design of Experiments , 1936, Nature.

[32]  Andy J. Keane,et al.  Engineering Design via Surrogate Modelling - A Practical Guide , 2008 .

[33]  Dorothea Heiss-Czedik,et al.  An Introduction to Genetic Algorithms. , 1997, Artificial Life.

[34]  Liang Feng,et al.  Gene Expression Programming: A Survey [Review Article] , 2017, IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine.

[35]  Amos H. C. Ng,et al.  Radial basis functions with a priori bias as surrogate models: A comparative study , 2018, Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell..

[36]  Chengen Wang,et al.  Insights from developing a multidisciplinary design and analysis environment , 2014, Comput. Ind..

[37]  Ehsan Sadrossadat,et al.  New empirical formulations for indirect estimation of peak-confined compressive strength and strain of circular RC columns using LGP method , 2018, Engineering with Computers.

[38]  Umberto Armani,et al.  Development of a hybrid genetic programming technique for computationally expensive optimisation problems , 2014 .

[39]  Clarence W. de Silva,et al.  Self-adjusting multidisciplinary design of hydraulic engine mount using bond graphs and inductive genetic programming , 2016, Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell..

[40]  Kai Cui,et al.  Response Surface Technique for Static Aeroelastic Optimization on a High-Aspect-Ratio Wing , 2009 .

[41]  G. Gary Wang,et al.  Review of Metamodeling Techniques in Support of Engineering Design Optimization , 2007, DAC 2006.

[42]  C. P. van Dam,et al.  Drag prediction at subsonic and transonic speeds using Euler methods , 1995 .

[43]  Xin Yao,et al.  Corner Sort for Pareto-Based Many-Objective Optimization , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics.