Advertisement

An adaptive approach to constraint aggregation using adjoint sensitivity analysis

  • Nicholas M. K. Poon
  • Joaquim R. R. A. MartinsEmail author
Research Paper

Abstract

Constraint aggregation is the key for efficient structural optimization when using a gradient-based optimizer and an adjoint method for sensitivity analysis. We explore different methods of constraint aggregation for numerical optimization. We analyze existing approaches, such as considering all constraints individually, taking the maximum of the constraints and using the Kreisselmeier–Steinhauser (KS) function. A new adaptive approach based on the KS function is proposed that updates the aggregation parameter by taking into account the constraint sensitivity. This adaptive approach is shown to significantly increase the accuracy of the results without additional computational cost especially when a large number of constraints are active at the optimum. The characteristics of each aggregation method and the performance of the proposed adaptive approach are shown by solving a wing structure weight minimization problem.

Keywords

Constraint aggregation Constraint handling Adjoint sensitivity analysis Kreisselmeier–Steinhauser function Adaptive constraint aggregation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Akgün MA, Haftka RT, Wu KC, Walsh JL (1999) Sensitivity of lumped constraints using the adjoint method. In: Proceedings of the 40th structures, structural dynamics and materials conference, St. Louis, Missouri AIAA Paper 99–1314Google Scholar
  2. Akgün MA, Haftka RT, Wu KC, Walsh JL, Garcelon JH (2001) Efficient structural optimization for multiple load cases using adjoint sensitivities. AIAA J 39(3):511–516Google Scholar
  3. Alonso JJ, LeGresley P, van der Weide E, Martins JRRA, Reuther JJ (2004) pyMDO: a framework for high-fidelity multi-disciplinary optimization. AIAA Paper 2004–4480Google Scholar
  4. Anderson WK, Bonhaus DL (1997) Aerodynamic design on unstructured grids for turbulent. NASA TM-112867, NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia 23681-0001Google Scholar
  5. Gill PE, Murray W, Saunders MA (2002) SNOPT: an SQP algorithm for large-scale constrained optimization. SIAM J Optim 12(4):979–1006zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. Haftka RT, Gürdal Z (1993) Elements of structural optimization, 3rd edn. Kluwer, Boston, MAGoogle Scholar
  7. Haug EJ, Feng TT (1978) Optimal design of dynamically loaded continuous structures. Int J Numer Methods Eng 12(2):299–317zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. Kreisselmeier G, Steinhauser R (1979) Systematic control design by optimizing a vector performance index. In: International Federation of Active Controls Symposium on Computer-Aided Design of Control Systems, Zurich, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  9. Martins JRRA, Sturdza P, Alonso JJ (2003) The complex-step derivative approximation. ACM Trans Math Softw 29(3):245–262. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/838250.838251 Google Scholar
  10. Martins JRRA, Alonso JJ, Reuther JJ (2004) High-fidelity aerostructural design optimization of a supersonic business jet. J Aircr 41(3):523–530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Martins JRRA, Alonso JJ, Reuther JJ (2005) A coupled-adjoint sensitivity analysis method for high-fidelity aero-structural design. Optim Eng 6(1):33–62. http://www.kluweronline.com/issn/1389-4420/contents zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Qin J, Nguyen DT (1994) Generalized exponential penalty function for nonlinear programming. Comput Struct 50(4):509–513zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. Raspanti C, Bandoni J, Biegler L (2000) New strategies for flexibility analysis and design under uncertainty. Comput Chem Eng 24(2000):2193–2209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Rooney WC, Biegler LT (2002) Optimal process design with model parameter uncertainty and process variability. Technical report, Department of Chemical Engineering, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PAGoogle Scholar
  15. Stettner M, Schrage DP (1992) An approach to tiltrotor wing aeroservoelastic optimization. In: 4th AIAA/USAF/NASA/OAI symposium on multidisciplinary analysis and optimization, Cleveland, Ohio. http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/stettner92approach.html
  16. Wrenn GA (1989) An indirect method for numerical optimization using the Kreisselmeier–Steinhauser function. Technical report CR-4220, NASAGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicholas M. K. Poon
    • 1
  • Joaquim R. R. A. Martins
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.University of Toronto Institute for Aerospace StudiesTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations