Skip to main content
Log in

Design space dimensionality reduction through physics-based geometry re-parameterization

  • Published:
Optimization and Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The effective control of the extent of the design space is the sine qua non of successful geometry-based optimization. Generous bounds run the risk of including physically and/or geometrically nonsensical regions, where much search time may be wasted, while excessively strict bounds will often exclude potentially promising regions. A related ogre is the pernicious increase in the number of design variables, driven by a desire for geometry flexibility—this can, once again, make design search a prohibitively time-consuming exercise. Here we discuss an instance-based alternative, where the design space is defined in terms of a set of representative bases (design instances), which are then transformed, via a concise, parametric mapping into a new, generic geometry. We demonstrate this approach via the specific example of the design of supercritical wing sections. We construct the mapping on the generic template of the Kulfan class-shape function transformation and we show how patterns in the coefficients of this transformation can be exploited to capture, within the parametric mapping, some of the physics of the design problem.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We reviewed some possible schemes for such local improvement in Sóbester (2009a)—one example is the already mentioned mesh-based formulation of Jameson (1988) designed specifically for local optimization guided by adjoint flow solutions.

  2. See Vanderplaats (1979, 1984); Collins and Saunders (1997) for further instances of parameterisation using basis airfoils.

  3. So called because the terms of the series add up to one, regardless of the order n BP.

  4. Latin hypercubes have uniform projections onto all axes and are therefore ideal for correlation studies.

  5. We stress the word ‘significant’ here for a good reason—in the process of tailoring the SC(2) airfoils small shape alterations were necessary in some cases to obtain the desired pressure profiles (in particular shock locations) and drag rise Mach numbers, but, for practical purposes, we can assume that the two major factors with consistently significant impact were t/c and the desired c l .

  6. We choose to define as ‘preliminary’ the first phase of the design process that is centered around a geometry.

References

  • Collins L, Saunders D (1997) Profile: Airfoil geometry manipulation and display. Contractor Report 177332, NASA

  • Forrester AIJ, Sóbester A, Keane AJ (2008) Engineering design via surrogate modelling. Wiley, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Harris CD (1990) NASA supercritical airfoils—a matrix of family-related airfoils. Technical Paper 2969, NASA

  • Jameson A (1988) Aerodynamic design via control theory. J Sci Comput 3(3):233–260

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kulfan BM (2006) “Fundamental” parametric geometry representations for aircraft component shapes. AIAA 2006-6948, pp 1–45

  • Kulfan BM (2008) Universal parametric geometry representation method. J Aircr 45(1):142–158. doi:10.2514/1.29958

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kulfan BM, Bussoletti JE (2006) “Fundamental” parametric geometry representations for aircraft component shapes. AIAA 2006-6948

  • Mason W (2009) Configuration aerodynamics. Lecture notes, Virginia Tech University

  • Robinson GM, Keane AJ (2001) Concise orthogonal representation of supercritical airfoils. J Aircr 38:580–583

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rozvany GIN (2009) A critical review of established methods of structural topology optimization. Struct Multidiscip Optim 37:217–237

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Sóbester A (2009a) Concise airfoil representation via case-based knowledge capture. AIAA J 47(5):1209–1218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sóbester A (2009b) Exploiting patterns in the Kulfan transformations of supercritical airfoils. In: 9th AIAA aviation technology, integration, and operations conference, Hilton Head, SC

    Google Scholar 

  • Vanderplaats GN (1979) Efficient algorithm for numerical optimization. J Aircr 16(12):842–847

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanderplaats GN (1984) Numerical optimization techniques for engineering design: with applications. McGraw-Hill, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Whitcomb RT (1974) Review of NASA supercritical airfoils. In: The ninth congress of the international council of the aeronautical sciences ICAS 74-10

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitcomb RT, Clark LR (1965) An airfoil shape for efficient flight at supercritical mach numbers. Technical Report TM X-1109, NASA

Download references

Acknowledgements

The first author’s work has been supported by the Royal Academy of Engineering and the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council through their Research Fellowship scheme.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to András Sóbester.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sóbester, A., Powell, S. Design space dimensionality reduction through physics-based geometry re-parameterization. Optim Eng 14, 37–59 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11081-012-9189-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11081-012-9189-z

Keywords

Navigation