Multidisciplinary and multiobjective optimization: Comparison of several methods

Engineering design of complex systems is a decision making process that aims at choosing from among a set of options that implies an irrevocable allocation of resources. It is inherently a multidisciplinary and multi-objective process. The paper describes some classical multidisciplinary optimization (MDO) methods with their advantages and drawbacks. Some new approaches combining genetic algorithms (MOGA) and collaborative optimization (CO) are presented. They allow to: 1) increase the convergence rate when a design problem can be broken up regarding design variables, and 2) provide an optimal set of design variables in case of multi-level multi-objective design problem.

[1]  John E. Renaud,et al.  Multiobjective Collaborative Optimization , 1997 .

[2]  Vikrant Aute,et al.  A Genetic Algorithms Based Approach for Multidisciplinary Multiobjective Collaborative Optimization , 2006 .

[3]  Shapour Azarm,et al.  Multi-level Multi-objective Genetic Algorithm Using Entropy to Preserve Diversity , 2003, EMO.

[4]  Robert A. Wolf,et al.  Multiobjective collaborative optimization of systems of systems , 2005 .

[5]  R. Choudharya,et al.  Analytic target cascading in simulation-based building design , 2004 .

[6]  John E. Dennis,et al.  Problem formulations for systems of systems , 2005, 2005 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics.

[7]  Yuan Charles,et al.  Evaluation of Methods for Multidisciplinary Design Optimization (MDO), Part II , 2000 .

[8]  Fumio Harashima,et al.  IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics , 2000 .

[9]  Jaroslaw Sobieszczanski-Sobieski,et al.  Optimization of coupled systems : A critical overview of approaches , 1994 .

[10]  Panos Y. Papalambros,et al.  ON THE IMPACT OF COUPLING STRENGTH ON COMPLEX SYSTEM OPTIMIZATION FOR SINGLE-LEVEL FORMULATIONS , 2005, DAC 2005.

[11]  F. Bennis,et al.  Comparison of global and local treatment for coupling variables into multidisciplinary problems , 2006 .

[12]  A. Giassi,et al.  Multidisciplinary design optimisation and robust design approaches applied to concurrent design , 2004 .

[13]  J.,et al.  Problem Formulation forMultidisciplinary , 1993 .

[14]  Jaroslaw Sobieszczanski-Sobieski,et al.  Multidisciplinary design optimisation - some formal methods, framework requirements, and application to vehicle design , 2001 .

[15]  Terrance Carl Wagner,et al.  A general decomposition methodology for optimal system design. , 1993 .

[16]  Christina Bloebaum,et al.  A simulation-based comparison of multidisciplinary design optimization solution strategies using CASCADE , 2000 .

[17]  Xiaoyu Gu,et al.  Decision-Based Collaborative Optimization , 2002 .

[18]  Jeremy S. Agte,et al.  Bi-Level Integrated System Synthesis , 1998 .

[19]  Joseph Giesing,et al.  A summary of industry MDO applications and needs , 1998 .

[20]  Panos Y. Papalambros,et al.  On the Use of Analytical Target Cascading and Collaborative Optimization for Complex System Design , 2005 .

[21]  Sobieszczanski Jaroslaw,et al.  Bi-Level Integrated System Synthesis (BLISS) , 1998 .

[22]  Jasbir S. Arora,et al.  Survey of multi-objective optimization methods for engineering , 2004 .

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

[24]  Natalia Alexandrov,et al.  Comparative properties of collaborative optimization and other approaches to MDO , 1999 .

[25]  Ilan Kroo,et al.  Implementation and Performance Issues in Collaborative Optimization , 1996 .