Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization

, Volume 29, Issue 1, pp 50–60 | Cite as

Multi-objective robust optimization using a sensitivity region concept

Research Paper

Abstract

In multi-objective design optimization, it is quite desirable to obtain solutions that are “multi-objectively” optimum and insensitive to uncontrollable (noisy) parameter variations. We call such solutions robust Pareto solutions. In this paper we present a method to measure the multi-objective sensitivity of a design alternative, and an approach to use such a measure to obtain multi-objectively robust Pareto optimum solutions. Our sensitivity measure does not require a presumed probability distribution of uncontrollable parameters and does not utilize gradient information; therefore, it is applicable to multi-objective optimization problems that have non-differentiable and/or discontinuous objective functions, and also to problems with large parameter variations. As a demonstration, we apply our robust optimization method to an engineering example, the design of a vibrating platform. We show that the solutions obtained for this example are indeed robust.

Keywords

multiple objectives robust optimization sensitivity analysis  

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Badhrinath, K.; Rao, J.R. 1994: Bi-Level Models for Optimum Designs which are Insensitive to Perturbations in Variables and Parameters. Adv Des Autom69(2), 15–23Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Branke, J. 2001: Reducing the Sampling Variance when Searching for Robust Solutions. Proc. of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conf., July 7–11, San Francisco, CA, 235–242Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chen, W.; Wiecek, M.M.; Zhang, J. 1999: Quality Utility – A Compromise Programming Approach to Robust Design. Trans ASME, J Mech Des121, 179–187Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Coello Coello, C.A.; Van Veldhuizen, D.A.; Lamont, G.B. 2002: Evolutionary Algorithms for Solving Multi-Objective Problems. Boston: Kluwer AcademicGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Deb, K. 2001: Multi-Objective Optimization using Evolutionary Algorithms. New York: WileyGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Du, X.; Chen, W. 2000: Towards a Better Understanding of Modeling Feasibility Robustness in Engineering Design. Trans. of the ASME, J Mech Des122, 385–394Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Elsayed, E.A.; Chen, A. 1993: Optimal Levels of Process Parameters for Products with Multiple Characteristics. Int J Prod Res31(5), 1117–1132Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fonseca, C.M.; Fleming, P.J. 1993: Genetic Algorithms for Multiobjective Optimization: Formulation, Discussion, and Generalization. Proc. of the 5th Int. Conf. on Genetic Algorithms, July 17–21, Urbana-Champaign, IL, 416–423Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gunawan, S.; Azarm, S. 2004: Non-gradient Based Parameter Sensitivity Estimation for Single Objective Robust Design Optimization. Trans ASME, J Mech Des126(3), 395–402Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kunjur, A.; Krishnamurty, S. 1997: A Robust Multi-Criteria Optimization Approach. Mech Mach Theory32(7), 797–810Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kurapati, A.; Azarm, S.; Wu, J. 2002: Constraint Handling Improvements for Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithms. Struct Multidisc Optim23(3), 204–213Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Miettinen, K.M. 1999: Nonlinear Multiobjective Optimization. Boston: Kluwer AcademicGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Narayanan, S.; Azarm, S. 1999: On Improving Multiobjective Genetic Algorithms for Design Optimization. Struct Optim18, 146–155Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Parkinson, A.; Sorensen, C.; Pourhassan, N. 1993: A General Approach to Robust Optimal Design. Trans. of the ASME, J Mech Des115, 74–80Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pignatiello, J.J. 1993: Strategies for Robust Multi Response Quality Engineering. IIE Trans25(3), 5–14Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sundaresan, S.; Ishii, K.; Houser, D. 1992: Design Optimization for Robustness Using Performance Simulation Program. Eng Optim20, 163–178Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Taguchi, G. 1978: Performance Analysis Design. Int J Prod Res16, 521–530Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tsui, K.L. 1999: Robust Design Optimization for Multiple Characteristic Problems. Int J Prod Res37(2), 433–445Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yu, J.C.; Ishii, K. 1998: Design for Robustness Based on Manufacturing Variation Patterns. Trans ASME, J Mech Des120, 196–202Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zhu, J.; Ting, K.L. 2001: Performance Distribution Analysis and Robust Design. Trans. of the ASME, J Mech Des123, 11–17Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of MarylandMarylandUSA

Personalised recommendations