Abstract
Systems design is concerned with breaking down large and complex problems on the system level into smaller and simpler problems on a component level. This can be accomplished by decomposing quantitative system requirements into requirements for each component. These new requirements can be expressed by component solution spaces, i.e., regions of permissible component design variables. They serve as design goals for component development and support decisions regarding component design. Component solution spaces should be chosen such that components can be designed independently of each other. This is the case when satisfying all component requirements implies satisfying the higher level system requirements. In addition, component solution spaces should be as large as possible to provide maximum flexibility for component design, and to encompass uncertainty. Motivated by related work, their shapes can be predefined as boxes, i.e., multi-dimensional intervals, which enables a simple visual and numerical representation. Unfortunately, this will make solution spaces small and associated requirements unnecessarily restrictive. In a new approach, the shapes of component solution spaces are also optimized to further enlarge their size. This is accomplished by decomposing the system performance function as a sum of predefined component performance functions and optimizing their individual contribution. For both the old and new approach, optimization schemes are presented which focus on linear system performance functions. Their effectiveness is demonstrated for a crash design problem.
![](http://media.springernature.com/m312/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1007%2Fs00158-019-02456-8/MediaObjects/158_2019_2456_Fig1_HTML.png)
![](http://media.springernature.com/m312/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1007%2Fs00158-019-02456-8/MediaObjects/158_2019_2456_Fig2_HTML.png)
![](http://media.springernature.com/m312/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1007%2Fs00158-019-02456-8/MediaObjects/158_2019_2456_Fig3_HTML.png)
![](http://media.springernature.com/m312/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1007%2Fs00158-019-02456-8/MediaObjects/158_2019_2456_Fig4_HTML.png)
![](http://media.springernature.com/m312/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1007%2Fs00158-019-02456-8/MediaObjects/158_2019_2456_Fig5_HTML.png)
![](http://media.springernature.com/m312/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1007%2Fs00158-019-02456-8/MediaObjects/158_2019_2456_Fig6_HTML.png)
![](http://media.springernature.com/m312/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1007%2Fs00158-019-02456-8/MediaObjects/158_2019_2456_Fig7_HTML.png)
![](http://media.springernature.com/m312/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1007%2Fs00158-019-02456-8/MediaObjects/158_2019_2456_Fig8_HTML.png)
![](http://media.springernature.com/m312/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1007%2Fs00158-019-02456-8/MediaObjects/158_2019_2456_Fig9_HTML.png)
![](http://media.springernature.com/m312/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1007%2Fs00158-019-02456-8/MediaObjects/158_2019_2456_Fig10_HTML.png)
![](http://media.springernature.com/m312/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1007%2Fs00158-019-02456-8/MediaObjects/158_2019_2456_Fig11_HTML.png)
Similar content being viewed by others
Change history
12 May 2020
The original version of this article unfortunately contains mistakes introduced during the publishing process.
References
Avriel M, Rijckaert MJ, Wilde DJ (1973) Optimization and design: International summer school on the impact of optimization theory on technological design, Katholieke Universiteit te Leuven, 1971. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs
Bemporad A, Filippi C, Torrisi FD (2004) Inner and outer approximations of polytopes using boxes. Comput Geom 27(2):151–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-7721(03)00048-8
Beyer H-G, Sendhoff B (2007) Robust optimization – a comprehensive survey. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 196(33-34):3190–3218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2007.03.003
Büeler B, Enge A, Fukuda K (2000) Exact volume computation for polytopes: a practical study. In: Kalai G, Ziegler GM (eds) Polytopes, DMV Seminar. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-0348-8438-9_6. Birkhäuser, Basel, pp 131–154
Daub M (2017) Konvexe Optimierung am Beispiel volumenmaximaler einbeschriebener Rechtecksmengen (Convex optimization at the example of maximum-volume rectangle sets). Master thesis, Universität Konstanz, Germany, http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bsz:352-0-420923
Erschen S (2018) Optimal decomposition of high-dimensional solution spaces for chassis design. Ph.D. thesis, Technische Universität München, Germany
Evans M, Swartz T (2000) Approximating integrals via Monte Carlo and deterministic methods, Oxford statistical science series, vol 20. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Fender J (2013) Solution spaces for vehicle crash design. Ph.D. thesis, Technische Universität München, Germany
Fender J, Duddeck F, Zimmermann M (2016) Direct computation of solution spaces. Struct Multidiscip Optim 55(5):1787–1796. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-016-1615-y
Götz M, Liebscher M, Graf W (2012) Efficient detection of permissible design spaces in an early design stage. Proceedings of the 11th LS-DYNA Forum, Ulm, Germany. https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.2057.9202
Graf W, Götz M, Kaliske M (2018) Computing permissible design spaces under consideration of functional responses. Adv Eng Softw 117:95–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2017.05.015
Graff L, Harbrecht H, Zimmermann M (2016) On the computation of solution spaces in high dimensions. Struct Multidiscip Optim 54(4):811–829. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-016-1454-x
Harwood SM, Barton PI (2017) How to solve a design centering problem. Math Methods Oper Res 86 (1):215–254. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00186-017-0591-3
Hendrix EM, Mecking CJ, Hendriks TH (1996) Finding robust solutions for product design problems. Eur J Oper Res 92(1):28–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(95)00082-8
Lange VA, Fender J, Song L, Duddeck F (2019) Early phase modeling of frontal impacts for crashworthiness: from lumped mass–spring models to deformation space models. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part D: J Autom Eng 233 (12):3000–3015. https://doi.org/10.1177/0954407018814034
Lasserre JB (1983) An analytical expression and an algorithm for the volume of a convex polyhedron inr n. J Optim Theory Appl 39(3):363–377. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00934543
Milanese M, Norton J, Piet-Lahanier H, Walter E. (eds) (1996) Bounding approaches for system identification. Springer Science+Business Media, New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-9545-5
Parkinson A, Sorensen C, Pourhassan N (1993) A general approach for robust optimal design. J Mech Des 115(1):74. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2919328
Zimmermann M, von Hoessle JE (2013) Computing solution spaces for robust design. Int J Numer Methods Eng 94(3):290–307. https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.4450
Zimmermann M, Königs S., Niemeyer C, Fender J, Zeherbauer C, Vitale R, Wahle M (2017) On the design of large systems subject to uncertainty. J Eng Des 28(4):233–254. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544828.2017.1303664
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the SPP 1886 “Polymorphic uncertainty modeling for the numerical design of structures” of the German Research Foundation, DFG.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Communicated by:Responsible Editor: Somanath Nagendra
Replication of results
All results can be reproduced by using the equations and values presented in this work.
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Daub, M., Duddeck, F. & Zimmermann, M. Optimizing component solution spaces for systems design. Struct Multidisc Optim 61, 2097–2109 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-019-02456-8
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-019-02456-8