Advertisement

Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization

, Volume 59, Issue 4, pp 1199–1219 | Cite as

A gradient-based uncertainty optimization framework utilizing dimensional adaptive polynomial chaos expansion

  • Hai Fang
  • Chunlin GongEmail author
  • Hua Su
  • Yunwei Zhang
  • Chunna Li
  • Andrea Da Ronch
Research Paper
  • 165 Downloads

Abstract

To improve the efficiency of solving uncertainty design optimization problems, a gradient-based optimization framework is herein proposed, which combines the dimension adaptive polynomial chaos expansion (PCE) and sensitivity analysis. The dimensional adaptive PCE is used to quantify the quantities of interest (e.g., reliability, robustness metrics) and the sensitivity. The dimensional adaptive property is inherited from the dimension adaptive sparse grid, which is used to evaluate the PCE coefficients. Robustness metrics, referred to as statistical moments, and their gradients with respect to design variables are easily derived from the PCE, whereas the evaluation of the reliability and its gradient require integrations. To quantify the reliability, the framework uses the Heaviside step function to eliminate the failure domain and calculates the integration by Monte Carlo simulation with the function replaced by PCE. The PCE is further combined with Taylor’s expansion and the finite difference to compute the reliability sensitivity. Since the design vector may affect the sample set determined by dimension adaptive sparse grid, the update of the sample set is controlled by the norm variations of the design vector. The optimization framework is formed by combining reliability, robustness quantification and sensitivity analysis, and the optimization module. The accuracy and efficiency of the reliability quantification, as well as the reliability sensitivity, are verified through a mathematical example, a system of springs, and a cantilever beam. The effectiveness of the framework in solving optimization problems is validated by multiple limit states example, a truss optimization example, an airfoil optimization example, and an ONERA M6 wing optimization problem. The results demonstrate that the framework can obtain accurate solutions at the expense of a manageable computational cost.

Keywords

Polynomial chaos expansion Dimensional adaptive sparse grid Reliability Reliability sensitivity 

Notes

Funding information

The present work was partially supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (Grant no. G2016KY0302), the National Defense Fundamental Research Funds of China (Grant no. JCKY2016204B102), China Civil Aerospace Program (Grant no. D010403), and the Natural National Science Foundation of China (Grant no. 51505385, 11502209).

References

  1. Ahammed M, Melchers RE (2006) Gradient and parameter sensitivity estimation for systems evaluated using Monte Carlo analysis. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 91:594–601.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2005.04.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Au SK (2005) Reliability-based design sensitivity by efficient simulation. Comput Struct 83:1048–1061.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2004.11.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beyer HG, Sendhoff B (2007) Robust optimization - a comprehensive survey. Comput Method Appl M 196:3190–3218.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2007.03.003 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Bungartz HJ, Dirnstorfer S (2003) Multivariate quadrature on adaptive sparse grids. Computing 71:89–114.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00607-003-0016-4 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Ching JY, Hsieh YH (2007) Local estimation of failure probability function and its confidence interval with maximum entropy principle. Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics 22:39–49.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.probengmech.2006.05.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Da Ronch A, Ghoreyshi M, Badcock KJ (2011) On the generation of flight dynamics aerodynamic tables by computational fluid dynamics. Prog Aerosp Sci 47:597–620.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paerosci.2011.09.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ditlevsen O, Bjerager P (1989) Plastic reliability-analysis by directional simulation. J Eng Mech-Asce 115:1347–1362.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(Asce)0733-9399(1989)115:6(1347) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Du X, Chen W (2004) Sequential optimization and reliability assessment method for efficient probabilistic design. J Mech Design 126:225.  https://doi.org/10.1115/1.1649968 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Du S, Guo J, Zhao Z, Zeng S (2014) Non-intrusive polynomial chaos based mechanism reliability sensitivity analysis. In: 2014 prognostics and system health management conference (PHM-2014 Hunan), 24–27 Aug. 2014 2014. pp 515–519.  https://doi.org/10.1109/PHM.2014.6988226
  10. Duan NQ (2006) Optimize Truss by FSD and SLP. https://ww2.mathworks.cn/matlabcentral/fileexchange/12401-optimize-truss-by-fsd-and-slp (online available)
  11. Economon TD, Palacios F, Copeland SR, Lukaczyk TW, Alonso JJ (2016) SU2: an open-source suite for multiphysics simulation and design. AIAA J 54:828–846.  https://doi.org/10.2514/1.J053813 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Eldred M, Burkardt J (2009) Comparison of non-intrusive polynomial chaos and stochastic collocation methods for uncertainty quantification. In: 47th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including The New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition. Aerospace Sciences Meetings. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.  https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2009-976
  13. Eldred MS, Agarwal H, Perez VM, Wojtkiewicz SF, Renaud JE (2007) Investigation of reliability method formulations in DAKOTA/UQ. Struct Infrastruct E 3:199–213.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15732470500254618 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Enevoldsen I, Sørensen JD (1993) Reliability-based optimization of series systems of parallel systems. J Struct Eng 119:1069–1084.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9445(1993)119:4(1069) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Garcke J, Griebel M, Thess M (2001) Data mining with sparse grids. Computing 67:225–253.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s006070170007 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. Gerstner T, Griebel M (2003) Dimension adaptive tensor product quadrature. Computing 71:65–87.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00607-003-0015-5 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. Hohenbichler M, Rackwitz R (1986) Sensitivity and importance measures in structural reliability. Civ Eng Syst 3:203–209.  https://doi.org/10.1080/02630258608970445 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hu XZ, Chen XQ, Parks GT, Yao W (2016) Review of improved Monte Carlo methods in uncertainty-based design optimization for aerospace vehicles. Prog Aerosp Sci 86:20–27.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paerosci.2016.07.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jensen HA, Mayorga F, Valdebenito MA (2015) Reliability sensitivity estimation of nonlinear structural systems under stochastic excitation: a simulation-based approach. Comput Method Appl M 289:1–23.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2015.01.012 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. Karamchandani A, Cornell CA (1992) Sensitivity estimation within first and second order reliability methods. Struct Saf 11:95–107.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-4730(92)90002-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Keshavarzzadeh V, Meidani H, Tortorelli DA (2016) Gradient based design optimization under uncertainty via stochastic expansion methods. Comput Method Appl M 306:47–76.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2016.03.046 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Keshavarzzadeh V, Fernandez F, Tortorelli DA (2017) Topology optimization under uncertainty via non-intrusive polynomial chaos expansion. Comput Method Appl M 318:120–147.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2017.01.019 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Keshtegar B, Hao P (2016) A hybrid loop approach using the sufficient descent condition for accurate, robust, and efficient reliability-based design optimization. J Mech Design 138:121401–121411.  https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4034173 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Keshtegar B, Hao P (2017) A hybrid self-adjusted mean value method for reliability-based design optimization using sufficient descent condition. Appl Math Model 41:257–270.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2016.08.031 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Keshtegar B, Hao P (2018) Enhanced single-loop method for efficient reliability-based design optimization with complex constraints. Struct Multidiscip O 57:1731–1747.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-017-1842-x MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Klimke WA (2006) Uncertainty modeling using fuzzy arithmetic and sparse grids. PhD thesis, Institut für Angewandte Analysis und Numerische Simulation Universität StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  27. Kwak BM, Lee TW (1987) Sensitivity analysis for reliability-based optimization using an Afosm method. Comput Struct 27:399–406.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-7949(87)90064-2 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. Lelievre N, Beaurepaire P, Mattrand C, Gayton N, Otsmane A (2016) On the consideration of uncertainty in design: optimization - reliability - robustness. Struct Multidiscip O 54:1423–1437.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-016-1556-5 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Li J (2016) Probability density evolution method: background, significance and recent developments. Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics 44:111–117.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.probengmech.2015.09.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lopez RH, Beck AT (2012) Reliability-based design optimization strategies based on FORM: a review. J Braz Soc Mech Sci 34:506–514.  https://doi.org/10.1590/S1678-58782012000400012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Melchers RE, Ahammed M (2004) A fast approximate method for parameter sensitivity estimation in Monte Carlo structural reliability. Comput Struct 82:55–61.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2003.08.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Meng Z, Li G, Wang BP, Hao P (2015) A hybrid chaos control approach of the performance measure functions for reliability-based design optimization. Comput Struct 146:32–43.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2014.08.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Meng Z, Zhou HL, Li G, Yang DX (2016) A decoupled approach for non-probabilistic reliability-based design optimization. Comput Struct 175:65–73.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2016.06.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Meza JC, Oliva RA, Hough PD, Williams PJ (2007) OPT++: an object-oriented toolkit for nonlinear optimization. Acm T Math Software 33:12.  https://doi.org/10.1145/1236463.1236467 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Padulo M, Campobasso MS, Guenov MD (2011) Novel uncertainty propagation method for robust aerodynamic design. AIAA J 49:530–543.  https://doi.org/10.2514/1.J050448 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Palacios F (2013) Problem workshop II: design and optimization using SU2. https://su2code.github.io/documents/Design_and_Optimization_Using_SU2.pdf (online available)
  37. Papadimitriou DI, Papadimitriou C (2016) Aerodynamic shape optimization for minimum robust drag and lift reliability constraint. Aerosp Sci Technol 55:24–33.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2016.05.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Park C, Kim NH, Haftka RT (2015) The effect of ignoring dependence between failure modes on evaluating system reliability. Struct Multidiscip O 52:251–268.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-015-1239-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rackwitz R (2001) Reliability analysis—a review and some perspectives. Struct Saf 23:365–395.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0167-4730(02)00009-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Royset JO, Polak E (2004) Reliability-based optimal design using sample average approximations. Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics 19:331–343.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.probengmech.2004.03.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schillings C (2010) Optimal aerodynamic design under uncertainties. PhD thesis, Universität TrierGoogle Scholar
  42. Schillings C, Schulz V (2015) On the influence of robustness measures on shape optimization with stochastic uncertainties. Optim Eng 16:347–386.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11081-014-9251-0 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  43. Smoljak SA (1963) Quadrature and interpolation formulas for tensor products of certain classes of functions. Dokl Akad Nauk SSSR 148:1042–1045 http://www.mathnet.ru/php/archive.phtml?wshow=paper&jrnid=dan&paperid=27586&option_lang=eng (online available) MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  44. Taflanidis AA, Jia GF (2011) A simulation-based framework for risk assessment and probabilistic sensitivity analysis of base-isolated structures. Earthq Eng Struct D 40:1629–1651.  https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.1113 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Torii AJ, Lopez RH, Miguel LFF (2017) A gradient-based polynomial chaos approach for risk and reliability-based design optimization. J Braz Soc Mech Sci 39:2905–2915.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40430-017-0815-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Valdebenito MA, Jensen HA, Hernandez HB, Mehrez L (2018) Sensitivity estimation of failure probability applying line sampling. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 171:99–111.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2017.11.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Verma AK, Ajit S, Karanki DR (2016) Reliability and safety engineering. Springer London, London.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-6269-8 Google Scholar
  48. Wang HY, Kim NH, Kim YJ (2006) Safety envelope for load tolerance and its application to fatigue reliability design. J Mech Design 128:919–927.  https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2204971 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wu YT (1994) Computational methods for efficient structural reliability and reliability sensitivity analysis. AIAA J 32:1717–1723.  https://doi.org/10.2514/3.12164 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  50. Wu XJ, Zhang WW, Song SF (2018) Robust aerodynamic shape design based on an adaptive stochastic optimization framework. Struct Multidiscip O 57:639–651.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-017-1766-5 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Xiu D, Karniadakis GE (2002) The Wiener--Askey polynomial chaos for stochastic differential equations. SIAM J Sci Comput 24:619–644.  https://doi.org/10.1137/s1064827501387826 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  52. Yanfang Z, Yanlin Z, Yimin Z (2011) Reliability sensitivity based on first-order reliability method. vol 225.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0954406211405938
  53. Yang DX, Liu LB (2014) Reliability analysis of structures with complex limit state functions using probability density evolution method. Struct Multidiscip O 50:275–286.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-014-1048-4 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Yang G, Da Ronch A, Drofelnik J, Xie Z-T (2018) Sensitivity assessment of optimal solution in aerodynamic design optimisation using SU2. Aerosp Sci Technol 81:362–374.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2018.08.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Yao W, Chen XQ, Luo WC, van Tooren M, Guo J (2011) Review of uncertainty-based multidisciplinary design optimization methods for aerospace vehicles. Prog Aerosp Sci 47:450–479.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paerosci.2011.05.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Yi P, Cheng GD, Jiang L (2008) A sequential approximate programming strategy for performance-measure-based probabilistic structural design optimization. Struct Saf 30:91–109.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strusafe.2006.08.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Youn BD, Choi KK, Du L (2005) Enriched performance measure approach for reliability-based design optimization. AIAA J 43:874–884.  https://doi.org/10.2514/1.6648 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Zhang T (2018) Reliability-based robust optimal design of structures with variable cross-section. vol 55.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6553-8_111
  59. Zhang T, Zhang Y (2016) A new model for reliability design and reliability sensitivity analysis of a hydraulic piston pump. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part O: Journal of Risk and Reliability 231:11–24.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1748006x16681713 Google Scholar
  60. Zhao W, Liu JK, Ye JJ (2011) A new method for parameter sensitivity estimation in structural reliability analysis. Appl Math Comput 217:5298–5306.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2010.11.053 MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Shaanxi Aerospace Flight Vehicle Design Key Laboratory, School of AstronauticsNorthwestern Polytechnical UniversityXi’anChina
  2. 2.University of SouthamptonSouthamptonUK

Personalised recommendations