Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Multiobjective optimization of an aircraft wing design with respect to structural and aeroelastic characteristics using neural network metamodel

  • Technical Paper
  • Published:
Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The multidisciplinary design optimization (MDO) is an important concept that focuses on bringing together disciplines involved with machine design. It is possible to use MDO in any stage of an aircraft design, that is in the conceptual, preliminary, or detailed design, as long as the numerical models are fitted to each of these stages. This work describes the development of a multidisciplinary design optimization applied to flexible aircraft wings, with respect to structural and aeroelastic characteristics. As tools for the aircraft designer, the numerical models must be fairly accurate and fast. Therefore, metamodels for the critical flutter speed prediction of aircraft wings were considered, thereby reducing significantly the computational cost of the optimization. For this purpose, artificial neural networks (NN) metamodeling is evaluated, based on their inherent properties in dealing with complex mappings. The NN metamodel is prepared using an aeroelastic code based on finite-element model coupled with linear potential aerodynamics. Results of the metamodel performance are presented, from where one can note that the NN is well suited for flutter prediction. Multiobjective optimization (MOO) using the genetic algorithm (GA) based on non-dominance approach is considered. The objectives were the maximization of critical flutter speed and minimization of structural mass. One case study is presented to evaluate the performance of the MOO, revealing that overall optimization process actually achieves the search for the Pareto frontier.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Anderson MB, Gebert GA (1996) Using pareto genetic algorithms for preliminary subsonic wing design. In: Proceedings of the 6th AIAA/USAF/NASA/ISSMO symposium on multidisciplinary analysis and optimization, Bellevue

  2. Antoine NE, Kroo IM (2005) Framework for aircraft conceptual design and environmental performance studies. AIAA J 43(10):2100–2109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bishop JA, Eastep FE, Striz AG, Venkayya VB (1998) Influence of model complexity and aeroelastic constraints on multidisciplinary optimization of wings. J Aircr 35(5):784–790

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Caixeta PR Jr, Marques FD (2009) Dynamic aeroelasticity constraints in multidisciplinary design optimization of flexible wings. In: Proceedings of the xiii international symposium on dynamic problems of mechanics—DINAME 2009, Angra dos Reis

  5. Caixeta PR Jr, Marques FD (2010) Neural network metamodel-based MDO for wing design considering aeroelastic constraints. In: 51st AIAA/ASME/ASCE/ AHS/ASC structures, structural dynamics, and materials conference, Orlando. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2010-2762

  6. Caixeta PR Jr, Marques FD (2011) Metamodeling studies for flutter prediction of wings. In: Proceedings of the XIV international symposium on dynamic problems of mechanics—DINAME 2011, Spo Sebastipo

  7. Cavagna L, Ricci S, Travaglini L (2011) NeoCASS: an integrated tool for structural sizing, aeroelastic analysis and MDO at conceptual design level. Prog Aerosp Sci 47(8):621–635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paerosci.2011.08.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Craig RR (1981) Structural dynamics. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  9. De Baets PWG (2004) A methodology for aeroelastic constraint analysis in a conceptual design environment. PhD thesis, School of Aerospace Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology

  10. Deb K (2001) Multi-objective optimization using evolutionary algorithms. Wiley, Chichester

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Deb K, Agrawal S, Pratap A, Meyarivan T (2000) A fast elitist non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm for multi-objective optimization: Nsga-ii. Tech. rep., Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur—Kanpur Genetic Algorithms Laboratory (KanGAL), Kanpur, India, technical Report 200001

  12. Goldberg DE (1989) Genetic algorithms in search, optimization, and machine learning. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company Inc., New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Hagan MT, Demuth HB, Beale MH (1996) Neural network design. PWS Publishing Co., Boston

    Google Scholar 

  14. Haykin S (1999) Neural networks: a comprehensive foundation. Prentice-Hall Inc, Upper Saddle River

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Hodges DH, Pierce GA (2002) Introduction to structural dynamics and aeroelasticity. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  16. Janardhan S, Grandhi RV (2004) Multidisciplinary optimization of an aircraft wing/tip store configuration in the transonic regime. Eng Optim 36(4):473–490

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kapania RK, Chun S (2004) Preliminary design of a structural wing box under a twist constraint part i. J Aircr 41(5):1230–1239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Liu JL (2005) Intelligent genetic algorithm and its application to aerodynamic optimization of airplanes. AIAA J 43(3):530–538

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Long T, Liu L (2012) Comprehensive study of typical metamodel methods applied in aircraft multidisciplinary design optimization. Appl Mech Mater 110:3031–3039. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.110-116.3031

    Google Scholar 

  20. Marler RT, Arora JS (2004) Survey of multi-objective optimization methods for engineering. Struct Multidisc Optim 26:369–395

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Mastroddi F, Tozzi M, Capannolo V (2011) On the use of geometry design variables in the MDO analysis of wing structures with aeroelastic constraints on stability and response. Aerosp Sci Technol 15(3):196–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2010.11.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. McKay MD, Beckman RJ, Conover WJ (1979) A comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code. Technometrics 21(2):239–245. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1268522

  23. Mullur AA, Messac A (2006) Metamodeling using extended radial basis functions: a comparative approach. Eng Comput 21(3):203–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Österheld CM, Heinze W, Horst P (2000) Influence of aeroelastic effects on preliminary aircraft design. In: Proceedings of the ICAS 2000 congress, pp 146.1–146.10

  25. Pineda LE, Fregly BJ, Haftka RT, Queipo NV (2010) Estimating training data boundaries in surrogate-based modeling. Struct Multidiscip Optim 42(6):811–821

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Raymer DP (2002) Enhancing aircraft conceptual design using multidisciplinary optimization. PhD thesis, Department of Aeronautics, Royal Institute of Technology

  27. Secco NR, Mattos BS (2017) Artificial neural networks to predict aerodynamic coefficients of transport airplanes. Aircr Eng Aerosp Technol 89(2):211–230. https://doi.org/10.1108/AEAT-05-2014-0069

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Sobieszczanski-Sobieski J, Haftka RT (1997) Multidisciplinary aerospace design optimization: survey of recent developments. Struct Optim 14(1):1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01197554

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Viana FAC, Steffen V Jr, Butkewitsch S, Leal MF (2009) Optimization of aircraft structural components by using nature-inspired algorithms and multi-fidelity approximations. J Glob Optim 45(3):427–449

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Wang GG, Shan S (2007) Review of metamodeling techniques in support of engineering design optimization. J Mech Des 129(4):370–380. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2429697

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the financial support of the Brazilian Research Agencies, CNPq and FAPEMIG, for funding this present research work through the INCT-EIE (National Institute of Science and Technology in Smart Structures in Engineering), Grants #574001/2008-5 and #307658/2016-3.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. São Carlos School of Engineering, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil

    P. R. Caixeta Jr. & F. D. Marques

Authors
  1. P. R. Caixeta Jr.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. F. D. Marques
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to F. D. Marques.

Additional information

Technical Editor: André Cavalieri.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Caixeta, P.R., Marques, F.D. Multiobjective optimization of an aircraft wing design with respect to structural and aeroelastic characteristics using neural network metamodel. J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. 40, 17 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40430-017-0958-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40430-017-0958-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation