Fast reconstruction of aerodynamic shapes using evolutionary algorithms and virtual nash strategies in a CFD design environment

This paper compares the performances of two different optimisation techniques for solving inverse problems; the first one deals with the Hierarchical Asynchronous Parallel Evolutionary Algorithms software (HAPEA) and the second is implemented with a game strategy named Nash-EA. The HAPEA software is based on a hierarchical topology and asynchronous parallel computation. The Nash-EA methodology is introduced as a distributed virtual game and consists of splitting the wing design variables - aerofoil sections - supervised by players optimising their own strategy. The HAPEA and Nash-EA software methodologies are applied to a single objective aerodynamic ONERA M6 wing reconstruction. Numerical results from the two approaches are compared in terms of the quality of model and computational expense and demonstrate the superiority of the distributed Nash-EA methodology in a parallel environment for a similar design quality.

[1]  N. Hansen,et al.  Convergence Properties of Evolution Strategies with the Derandomized Covariance Matrix Adaptation: T , 1997 .

[2]  A. Vicini,et al.  A Multiobjective Approach to Transonic Wing Design by Means of Genetic Algorithms , 2000 .

[3]  Viktoria Schmitt,et al.  Pressure distributions on the ONERA M6 wing at transonic Mach numbers , 1979 .

[4]  Jacques Periaux,et al.  Advances in Hierarchical, Parallel Evolutionary Algorithms for Aerodynamic Shape Optimisation , 2002 .

[5]  Jacques Periaux,et al.  Multi-objective robust design optimisation of transonic civil transport using an evolutionary approach with uncertainty , 2007 .

[6]  G. G. Stokes.  "J." , 1890, The New Yale Book of Quotations.

[7]  P. A. Henne,et al.  Applied Computational Aerodynamics , 1990 .

[8]  Jacques Periaux,et al.  MOO Methods for Multidisciplinary Design Using Parallel Evolutionary Algorithms, Game Theory and Hierarchical Topology: Theoretical, numerical and practical aspects , 2006 .

[9]  Antony Jameson,et al.  A brief description of the Jameson-Caughey NYU transonic swept-wing computer program: FLO 22 , 1976 .

[10]  J. Periaux,et al.  Multi-point optimization using GAs and Nash/Stackelberg games for high lift multi-airfoil design in aerodynamics , 2001, Proceedings of the 2001 Congress on Evolutionary Computation (IEEE Cat. No.01TH8546).

[11]  Daisuke Sasaki,et al.  Multiobjective evolutionary computation for supersonic wing-shape optimization , 2000, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[12]  Jack Dongarra,et al.  PVM: Parallel virtual machine: a users' guide and tutorial for networked parallel computing , 1995 .

[13]  Zbigniew Michalewicz,et al.  Genetic Algorithms + Data Structures = Evolution Programs , 1992, Artificial Intelligence.

[14]  K. Srinivas,et al.  Aerodynamic/RCS shape optimisation of unmanned aerial vehicles using hierarchical asynchronous parallel evolutionary algorithms , 2006 .

[15]  Petros Koumoutsakos,et al.  Reducing the Time Complexity of the Derandomized Evolution Strategy with Covariance Matrix Adaptation (CMA-ES) , 2003, Evolutionary Computation.

[16]  M. Sefrioui,et al.  Nash genetic algorithms: examples and applications , 2000, Proceedings of the 2000 Congress on Evolutionary Computation. CEC00 (Cat. No.00TH8512).

[17]  Michael de la Maza,et al.  Book review: Genetic Algorithms + Data Structures = Evolution Programs by Zbigniew Michalewicz (Springer-Verlag, 1992) , 1993 .

[18]  Luis Felipe Gonzalez.  Robust evolutionary methods for multi-objective and multdisciplinary design optimisation in aeronautics , 2005 .

[19]  I. H. Abbott,et al.  Theory of Wing Sections , 1959 .