Advertisement

Simulation and Optimization of Aircraft Assembly Process Using Supercomputer Technologies

  • Tatiana PogarskaiaEmail author
  • Maria Churilova
  • Margarita Petukhova
  • Evgeniy Petukhov
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 965)

Abstract

Airframe assembly is mainly based on the riveting of large-scale aircraft parts, and manufacturers are highly concerned about acceleration of this process. Simulation of riveting emerges the necessity for contact problem solving in order to prevent the penetration of parts under the loads from fastening elements (fasteners). Specialized methodology is elaborated that allows reducing the dimension and transforming the original problem into quadratic programming one with input data provided by disposition of fasteners and initial gap field between considered parts.

While optimization of a manufacturing process the detailed analysis of the assembly has to be done. This leads to series of similar computations that differ only in input data sets provided by the variations of gap and fastener locations. Thus, task parallelism can be exploited, and the problem can be efficiently solved by means of supercomputer.

The paper is devoted to the cluster version of software complex developed for aircraft assembly simulation in the terms of the joint project between Peter the Great St.Petersburg Polytechnic University and Airbus SAS. The main features of the complex are described, and application cases are considered.

Keywords

Aircraft assembly Optimization Supercomputing Task parallelism Quadratic programming 

References

  1. 1.
    Liu, S.C., Hu, S.J.: Variation simulation for deformable sheet metal assemblies using finite element methods. ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng. 119(3), 368–374 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dahlström, S.: Variation simulation of sheet metal assemblies for geometrical quality: parameter modeling and analysis. Ph.D. thesis. Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, Sweden (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Marguet, B., Chevassus, N., Falgarone, H., Bourdet, P.: Geometrical behavior laws for computer aided tolerancing: AnaTole a tool for structural assembly tolerance analysis. In: 8th CIRP Seminar on Computer-Aided Tolerancing, Charlotte, pp. 124–131 (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Warmefjord, K., Söderberg, R., Lindau, B., Lindkvist, L., Lorin, S.: Joining in nonrigid variation simulation. Computer-aided Technologies, Intech (2016)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wang, H., Ding, X.: Identifying sources of variation in horizontal stabilizer assembly using finite element analysis and principal component analysis. Assembly Autom. 13(1), 86–96 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dimensional Control System (DCS) Homepage. http://www.3dcs.com. Accessed 21 May 2017
  7. 7.
    Dahlström, S., Lindkvist, L.: Variation simulation of sheet metal assemblies using the method of influence coefficients with contact modeling. J. Manuf. Sci. Eng. 129(3), 615–622 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Petukhova, M., Lupuleac, S., Shinder, Y., Smirnov, A., Yakunin, S., Bretagnol, B.: Numerical approach for airframe assembly simulation. J. Math. Ind. 4(8), 1–12 (2014)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lindau, B., Lorin, S., Lindkvist, L., Söderberg, R.: Efficient contact modeling in nonrigid variation simulation. J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng. 16(1), 011002 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yang, D., Qu, W., Ke, Y.: Evaluation of residual clearance after pre-joining and pre-joining scheme optimization in aircraft panel assembly. Assembly Autom. 36(4), 376–387 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wriggers, P.: Computational Contact Mechanics, 2nd edn. Springer, Berlin (2006).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-211-77298-0CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pedersen, P.: A direct analysis of elastic contact using super elements. Comput. Mech. 37(3), 221–231 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lupuleac, S., Petukhova, M., Shinder, J., Smirnov, A., et al.: Software complex for simulation of riveting process: concept and applications. In: SAE Technical Papers, 2016-01-2090 (2016)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lupuleac, S., Zaitseva, N., Petukhova, M., Shinder, J., et al.: Combination of experimental and computational approaches to A320 wing assembly. In: SAE Technical Papers, 2017-01-2085 (2017)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Goldfarb, D., Idnani, A.: A numerically stable dual method for solving strictly quadratic programs. Math. Program. 27(1), 1–33 (1983)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Powell, M.J.D.: On the quadratic programming algorithm of Goldfarb and Idnani. In: Cottle, R.W. (ed.) Mathematical Programming Essays in Honor of George B. Dantzig, Part II, Mathematical Programming Studies Book Series, vol. 25, pp. 46–61. Springer, Heidelberg (1985)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Stefanova, M., Yakunin, S., Petukhova, M., Lupuleac, S., Kokkolaras, M.: An interior-point method-based solver for simulation of aircraft parts riveting. Eng. Optim. 50(5), 781–796 (2017)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bertsekas, D.: Projected Newton methods for optimization problems with simple constraints. SIAM J. Control Optim. 20(2), 221–246 (1982)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Peter the Great St.Petersburg Polytechnic UniversitySaint PetersburgRussia

Personalised recommendations