Shape-Preserving Response Prediction for Engineering Design Optimization

Contemporary engineering design relies heavily on computer simulations. The structures and systems considered in many engineering disciplines are far too complex to be described accurately using simple theoretical models; using simulations is often the only way to adequately assess the performance of the design. Unfortunately, high-fidelity simulations are computationally expensive so that their use in an automated design process based on conventional optimization algorithms is often prohibitive. Despite the availability of faster computers and more efficient simulation software: growing demand for improved accuracy and the need to evaluate larger and larger systems effectively diminishes the benefits of this increase in computing power. One of the most promising ways of alleviating these problems are surrogate-based optimization (SBO) techniques which are capable of reducing the number of expensive objective function evaluations in a simulation-driven design process. In SBO, the direct optimization of the expensive model is replaced by iterative updating and re-optimization of its cheap surrogate model. Among proven SBO techniques, the methods exploiting physics-based low-fidelity models are probably the most efficient. This is because the knowledge about the system of interest embedded in the low-fidelity model allows constructing the surrogate model that has good generalization capability at a cost of just a few evaluations of the original model. In this paper, we review one of the most recent techniques of this kind, the so-called shape-preserving response prediction (SPRP). We discuss the formulation of SPRP, its limitations and generalizations, and, most importantly, demonstrate its applications to solve design problems in various engineering areas, including microwave engineering, antenna design, and aerodynamic shape optimization.

[1]  Natalia K. Nikolova,et al.  Sensitivity analysis of the scattering parameters of microwave filters using the adjoint network method , 2006 .

[2]  J.E. Rayas-Sanchez,et al.  EM-based optimization of microwave circuits using artificial neural networks: the state-of-the-art , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques.

[3]  Nicholas I. M. Gould,et al.  Trust Region Methods , 2000, MOS-SIAM Series on Optimization.

[4]  James C. Rautio Perfectly calibrated internal ports in EM analysis of planar circuits , 2008, 2008 IEEE MTT-S International Microwave Symposium Digest.

[5]  S Koziel,et al.  Robust Trust-Region Space-Mapping Algorithms for Microwave Design Optimization , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques.

[6]  J.W. Bandler,et al.  Space mapping: the state of the art , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques.

[7]  John W. Bandler,et al.  The state of the art of microwave CAD: EM-based optimization and modeling , 2010 .

[8]  Andy J. Keane,et al.  Recent advances in surrogate-based optimization , 2009 .

[9]  Slawomir Koziel,et al.  Rapid antenna design optimization using shape-preserving response prediction , 2012 .

[10]  P. W. Hemker,et al.  Space Mapping and Defect Correction , 2005 .

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

[12]  Katya Scheinberg,et al.  Introduction to derivative-free optimization , 2010, Math. Comput..

[13]  Leifur Þ. Leifsson,et al.  Transonic Airfoil Shape Optimization Using Variable- Resolution Models and Pressure Distribution Alignment , 2011 .

[14]  N. M. Alexandrov,et al.  A trust-region framework for managing the use of approximation models in optimization , 1997 .

[15]  Zhewang Ma,et al.  A microstrip dual‐band bandpass filter with reduced size and improved stopband characteristics , 2008 .