KSME International Journal

, Volume 15, Issue 7, pp 876–888 | Cite as

Efficient approximation method for constructing quadratic response surface model

Materials & Fracture · Solids & Structures · Dynamics & Control · Production & Design


For a large scaled optimization based on response surface methods, an efficient quadratic approximation method is presented in the context of the trust region model management strategy. If the number of design variables inn, the proposed method requires only 2n+1 design points for one approximation, which are a center point and two additional axial points within a systematically adjusted trust region. These design points are used to uniquely determine the main effect terms such as the linear and quadratic regression coefficients. A quasi-Newton formula then uses these linear and quadratic coefficients to progressively update the two-factor interaction effect terms as the sequential approximate optimization progresses. In order to show the numerical performance of the proposed method, a typical unconstrained optimization problem and two dynamic response optimization problems with multiple objective are solved. Finally, their optimization results compared with those of the central composite designs (CCD) or the over-determined D-optimality criterion show that the proposed method gives more efficient results than others.

Key Words

Efficient Quadratic Approximation Response Surface Trust Region Approximate Optimization 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alexandrov, N., 1996, “Robustness Properties of a Trust Region Frame Work for Managing Approximations in Engineering Optimization,”Proceedings of the 6 th AIAA/NASA/USAF Multidisciplinary Analysis & Optimization Symposium, AIAA 96-4102-CP, Bellevue, Washington, September 7–9, pp. 1056–1059.Google Scholar
  2. Bloebaum, C. L., Hong, W. and Peck, A., 1994, “Improved Move Limit Strategy for Approximate Optimization,”Proceedings of the 5 th AIAA/USAF/NASA/ISSMO Symposium, AIAA 94-4337-CP, Panama City, Florida, September 7–9, pp. 843–850.Google Scholar
  3. Box, G. E. and Draper, N. R., 1987,Empirical Model Building and Response Surfaces, John Wiley, New York.MATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Box, M. J. and Draper, N. R., 1971, “Factorial Designs, the |XX| Criterion, and Some Related Matters,”Technometrics, Vol. 13, No. 4, pp. 731–742.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carpenter, W. C., 1993, “Effect of Design Selection on Response Surface Performance,”Contractor Report 4520, NASA, June.Google Scholar
  6. Celis, M. R., Dennis, J. E. and Tapia, R. A., 1985, “A Trust Region Strategy for Nonlinear Equality Constrained Optimization,”Numerical optimization 1984 (Boggs PT, Byrd RH and Schnabel RB. Eds), SIAM, Philadelpia, pp. 71–88.Google Scholar
  7. Corana, et al., 1987, “Minimizing Multimodal Functions of Continuous Variables with the Simulated Annealing Algorithm,”ACM Transaction on Mathematical Sofware, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 262–280.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. Dennis, J. E. and Torczon, T., 1996, “Approximation Model Management for Optimization,”Proceedings of the 6 th AIAA/NASA/USAF Multidisciplinary Analysis & Optimization Symposium, AIAA 96-4046, Bellevue, Washington, September 7–9, pp. 1044–1046.Google Scholar
  9. Fletcher, R., 1972, “An Algorithm for Solving Linearly Constrained Optimization Problems,”Math. Prog., Vol. 2, pp. 133–165.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. Fletcher, R., 1987,Practical Method of Optimization, John Wiley & Sons: Chichester.Google Scholar
  11. Grandhi, R. V., Haftka, R. T. and Watson, L. T., 1986, “Design-Oriented identification of Critical Times in Transient Response,”AIAA Journal, Vol. 24, No. 4, pp. 649–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Haim, D., Giunta, A. A., Holzwarth, M. M., Mason, W. H., Watson, L. T. and Haftka, R. T., 1999, “Comparison of optimization Software Packages for an Aircraft Multidisciplinary Design Optimization problem,”Design Optimization: international Journal for product & Process Improvement, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 9–23.Google Scholar
  13. Haug, E. J. and Arora, J. S., 1979,Applied optimal Design, Wiley-Interscience, New York, pp. 341–352.Google Scholar
  14. Nelson, II. S. A. and Papalambros, P. Y., 1999, “The Use of Trust Region Algorithms to Exploit Discrepancies in Function Computation Time Within Optimization Models,”ASME Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol. 121, pp. 552–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Osyzka, A., 1984,Multicriterion optimization in Engineering with Fortran programs. Ellis Horwood: Chichester, pp. 31–39.Google Scholar
  16. Powell, M. J. D., 1975, “Convergence Properties of a Class of Minimization Algorithms,”Nonlinear Programming 2 (Mangasarian OL, Meyer RR and Robinson SM Eds), Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  17. Powell, M. J. D., 1978, “A Fast Algorithm for Nonlinearly Constrained Optimization Calculations,”Numerical Analysis Proceedings Dundee 1977 (Watson GA. Eds), Springer-Verlag: Berlin, pp. 144–157.Google Scholar
  18. Rodriguez, J. F., Renaud, J. E. and Watson, L. T., 1988, “Trust Region Augmented Lagrangian methods for Sequential Response Surface Approximation and Optimization,”ASME Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol. 120, pp. 58–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Unal, R., Lepsch, R. A. and McMilin, M. L., 1988, “Response Surface Model Building and Multidisciplinary Optimization Using D-Optimal Designs,”Proceedings of the 7 th AIAA/USAF/NASA/ISSMO Symposium on Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization, AIAA-98-4759, St. Louis, Missouri, September 2–4, pp. 405–411.Google Scholar
  20. Wujek, B., Renaud, J. E., Batill, S. M. and Brockman, J. B., 1996, “Concurrent Subspace Optimization Using Design Variable Sharing in a Distributed Computing Environment,”Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications (CERA), Technomic Publishing Company Inc: December.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Korean Society of Mechanical Engineers (KSME) 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical Design and Production EngineeringHanyang UniversitySeoulKorea
  2. 2.BK21 Division for Research and Education in Mechanical EngineeringHanyang UniversitySeoulKorea
  3. 3.Center of Innovative Design Optimization TechnologyHanyang UniversitySeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations