Challenges to overcome for routine usage of automatic optimisation in the propulsion industry

In industry, there is an ever-increasing requirement not only to design high performance new products but also to deliver them at lower cost and in shorter time. To meet these demanding engineering challenges, it is not sufficient to treat the different disciplines involved in a product design in isolation; rather they must be considered together as an integrated system that reflects the dependencies and interactions of the different disciplines. The design process must be automated to meet the stringent design time-lines. In spite of promising forays for over a decade, automatic design optimisation (ADO) and multidisciplinary optimisation (MDO) has not been widely adapted by the Turbomachinery design practitioners. This presentation will explore some of the technical and nontechnical barriers such as cultural and organisational issues that must be addressed if ADO/MDO is to be used routinely in industry. Some recent, successful application of automatic optimisation is also reported herein.

[1]  William N. Dawes,et al.  Building Blocks Towards VR-Based Flow Sculpting , 2005 .

[2]  Thomas W. Sederberg,et al.  Free-form deformation of solid geometric models , 1986, SIGGRAPH.

[3]  Shahrokh Shahpar,et al.  Full-Parametric Design System to Improve the Stage Efficiency of a High-Fidelity HP Turbine Configuration , 2008 .

[4]  Andy J. Keane,et al.  Computational Approaches for Aerospace Design: The Pursuit of Excellence , 2005 .

[5]  Eduardo Salas,et al.  Team Effectiveness in Complex Organizations: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives and Approaches , 2008 .

[6]  Bharat K. Soni,et al.  Mesh Generation , 2020, Handbook of Computational Geometry.

[7]  William N. Dawes,et al.  Application of Topology-Free Optimization to Manage Cooled Turbine Tip Heat Load , 2009 .

[8]  R. M. Hicks,et al.  Wing Design by Numerical Optimization , 1977 .

[9]  S. Robbins.  Essentials of Organizational Behavior , 1984 .

[10]  R. Westrum.  Cultures with Requisite Imagination , 1993 .

[11]  C. Allen,et al.  Unified fluid–structure interpolation and mesh motion using radial basis functions , 2008 .

[12]  John F. Dannenhoffer,et al.  Control of boundary representation topology in Multidisciplinary Analysis and Design , 2010 .

[13]  Malcolm I. G. Bloor,et al.  Using partial differential equations to generate free-form surfaces , 1990, Comput. Aided Des..

[14]  Luis Santos,et al.  Aerodynamic shape optimization using the adjoint method , 2007 .

[15]  Gary Belie.  Non-Technical Barriers to Multidisciplinary Optimization in the Aerospace Industry , 2002 .

[16]  J. Samareh.  Survey of Shape Parameterization Techniques for High-Fidelity Multidisciplinary Shape Optimization , 2001 .

[17]  S. G. Cohen,et al.  What Makes Teams Work: Group Effectiveness Research from the Shop Floor to the Executive Suite , 1997 .

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

[19]  H. Bijl,et al.  Mesh deformation based on radial basis function interpolation , 2007 .

[20]  Andy J. Keane,et al.  Concise Orthogonal Representation of Supercritical Airfoils , 2001 .

[21]  Olivier Bron,et al.  Fully Parametric High-Fidelity CFD Model for the Design Optimisation of the Cyclic Stagger Pattern of a Set of Fan Outlet Guide Vanes , 2009 .

[22]  Philip Lawrence,et al.  Planning in the Dark: Why Major Engineering Projects Fail to Achieve Key Goals , 2007, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

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