Robust Optimization with Tchebysheff Decomposition for Mars Entry Probe Design

Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 288)

Abstract

An evidence based robust design optimization method with Tchebycheff decomposition is proposed for micro Mars probe design under epistemic uncertainty. Super-formula based super-ellipse is used for the probe geometric configuration instead of the conventional sphere-cone configuration. Evidence based multi-objective optimization(MOO) method is used to optimally design the probe. The MOO problem is casted into a set of scalar optimization problems with Tchebycheff decomposition. Individuals are grouped with an adaptive clustering algorithm. In each cluster,individuals are analyzed with Proper Orthogonal Decomposition(POD) technique, and sorted by the ”energy” levels occupied by the components. A new population is produced by projecting the cluster centroid to the principal component vectors, modeling the distribution and reproducing new individuals. A strategy similar to steepest descend method in single-objective optimization is implemented for reproducing the new population, pushing forward the front to the true Pareto front. Performance and efficiency of the new algorithm are tested on a set of standard benchmark test problems. To reduce computational cost of evidence computation, an Evolutionary Binary Tree (EBT) algorithm and response surface model is employed. Finally, numerical simulation of a Mars micro probe heat shield design with the proposed optimization algorithm is presented.

Keywords

robust optimization Tchebysheff decomposition Mars entry probe 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Mitcheltree, R., Moss, J., Cheatwood, F., Greene, F., Braun, R.: Aerodynamics of the mars microprobe entry vehicles. Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets 36(3), 392–398 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wright, M.J., Tang, C.Y., Edquist, K.T., Hollis, B.R., Krasa, P., Campbell, C.A.: A review of aerothermal modeling for mars entry missions. AIAA Paper 443, 4–7 (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Johnson, J.E., Starkey, R.P., Lewis, M.J.: Aerodynamic stability of reentry heat shield shapes for a crew exploration vehicle. Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets 43(4), 721–730 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vasile, M.: Robust mission design through evidence theory and multiagent collaborative search. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1065(1), 152–173 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Vasile, M.L.: A behavioral-based meta-heuristic for robust global trajectory optimization. In: IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, CEC 2007, pp. 2056–2063. IEEE (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zuiani, F., Vasile, M., Gibbings, A.: Evidence-based robust design of deflection actions for near earth objects. Celestial Mechanics and Dynamical Astronomy 114(1-2), 107–136 (2012)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Vasile, M., MInisci, E., Wijnands, Q.: Approximated computation of belief functions for robust design optimization. In: 14th AIAA Non-Deterministic Approaches Conference (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Johnson, J.E., Starkey, R.P., Lewis, M.J.: Aerothermodynamic optimization of reentry heat shield shapes for a crew exploration vehicle. Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets 44(4), 849–859 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Anderson, J.D.: Hypersonic and high temperature gas dynamics. Aiaa (2000)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Reagan, F.J., Anandakrishnan, S.M.: Dynamics of atmospheric re-entry. Aiaa (1993)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zhang, Q., Li, H.: Moea/d: A multiobjective evolutionary algorithm based on decomposition. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 11(6), 712–731 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zuiani, F., Vasile, M.: Multi agent collaborative search based on tchebycheff decomposition. In: Computational Optimization and Applications, pp. 1–20 (2013)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zhang, Q., Liu, W., Tsang, E., Virginas, B.: Expensive multiobjective optimization by moea/d with gaussian process model. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 14(3), 456–474 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Frey, B.J., Dueck, D.: Clustering by passing messages between data points. Science 315(5814), 972–976 (2007)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Deb, K., Pratap, A., Agarwal, S., Meyarivan, T.: A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: Nsga-ii. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 6(2), 182–197 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Deb, K., Gupta, S., Daum, D., Branke, J., Mall, A.K., Padmanabhan, D.: Reliability-based optimization using evolutionary algorithms. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 13(5), 1054–1074 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mittal, S., Deb, K.: Optimal strategies of the iterated prisoner’s dilemma problem for multiple conflicting objectives. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 13(3), 554–565 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Squire, T.H., Milos, F.S., Hartlieb, G.C.: Aerospace materials property database (tpsx). Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets 46(3), 733–736 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Astronautic DynamicsXi’an Satellite Control CenterXi’anChina
  2. 2.Xi’an Jiaotong UniversityXi’anChina

Personalised recommendations