Obtaining minimum-drag shapes through surrogate-based global optimization: An application to the aerodynamic shape design of the landing gear master cylinder
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online December, 2018
Obtaining minimum-drag shapes through surrogate-based global optimization: An application to the aerodynamic shape design of the landing gear master cylinder
Nowadays, one of the priorities of the European Commission is to reduce the environmental impact of aviation through the advanced design of novel aircraft configurations. This is of utmost importance in order to decrease the environmental footprint of aviation and to reduce fuel consumption and make airlines more profitable. This implies that new methods and tools for aerodynamic shape optimization will have to be developed, allowing aircraft configurations that cannot be obtained with traditional strategies. This paper focuses on the application of enhanced methods in aerodynamic shape design optimization to enable advanced aircraft configurations. In particular, this work aims to demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed strategy to reach optimal configurations that are far away from its baseline geometry. For this purpose, evolutionary algorithms are combined with support vector machines and applied to the optimization of a baseline geometry for different flow conditions. In particular, the selected application is based on the shape optimization problem of the landing gear master cylinder. Results pointed out the feasibility of the mentioned strategy to enable novel configurations within an aerodynamic shape optimization process.
ACARE Advisory Council for Aeronautics Research in Europe. Aeronautics and air transport: beyond vision 2020 (towards 2050). Report, ACARE, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2011.
2.
Argüelles P, et al. European aeronautics: a vision for 2020. Report, ACARE, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2011.
3.
Jameson A, et al. Aerodynamic shape optimization techniques based on control theory. In: AIAA fluid dynamics conference, Albuquerque, USA, 15–18 June 1998, AIAA Paper 98-2538.
4.
MartinMJet al.Non-uniform rational B-splines-based aerodynamic shape design optimization with the DLR TAU code. J Aerosp2012; 226: 1225–1242.
5.
CastroCet al.A systematic continuous adjoint approach to viscous aerodynamic design on unstructured grids. AIAA Journal2007; 45: 2125–2139.
6.
ReutherJJet al.Constrained multipoint aerodynamic shape optimization using an adjoint formulation and parallel computers, Part 1. J Aircraft1999; 36: 51–60.
7.
Lyu Z, et al. Automatic differentiation adjoint of the Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes equations with a turbulence model. In: 43rd AIAA fluid dynamics conference and exhibit, San Diego, California, USA, 24–27 June 2013, AIAA2013-2581.
8.
DwightRPBrezillonJ. Efficient and robust algorithms for solution of the adjoint compressible Navier–Stokes equations with applications. Int J Numer Methods Fluids2009; 60: 365–389.
9.
MorrisAMAllenCBRendallTCS. Aerodynamic shape optimization of a modern transport wing using only planform variations. J Aerosp Eng2009; 223: 843–851.
10.
BrezillonJDwightRP. Applications of a discrete viscous adjoint method for aerodynamic shape optimization of 3D configurations. CEAS Aeronaut J2012; 3: 25–34.
11.
LianYOyamaALiouMS. Progress in design optimization using evolutionary algorithms for aerodynamic problems. Prog Aerosp Sci2010; 46: 199–223.
12.
JinYOlhoferMSendhoffB. A framework for evolutionary optimization with approximate fitness functions. IEEE Trans Evol Comput2002; 6: 481–494.
13.
JinY. A comprehensive survey of fitness approximation in evolutionary computation. Soft Comput J2005; 9: 3–12.
14.
Santos M, De Mattos B and Girard R. Aerodynamic coefficient prediction of airfoils using neural networks. In: 46th American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, AIAA conference, Reno, Nevada, 7–10 January, 2008, AIAA2008-887.
15.
AsoutiVGGiannakoglouKC. A grid-enabled asynchronous metamodel-assisted EA for aerodynamic optimization. Genet Program Evolvable Mach2009; 10: 373–389.
16.
SmoczekJSzpytkoJ. Evolutionary algorithm-based design of a fuzzy TBF predictive model and TSK fuzzy anti-sway crane control system. Eng Appl Artif Intell2014; 28: 190–200.
17.
KyoungK-jaeKK. Financial time series forecasting using support vector machines. Neurocomputing2003; 55: 307–319.
18.
Salcedo-SanzSet al.Accurate short-term wind speed prediction by exploiting diversity in input data using banks of artificial neural networks. Neurocomputing2009; 72: 1336–1341.
19.
SmolaASchölkopfBMüllerKR. The connection between regularization operators and support vector kernels. Neural Networks1998; 11: 637–649.
20.
ZarnaniAet al.Learning to predict ice accretion on electric power lines. Eng Appl Artif Intell2012; 25: 609–617.
21.
LiWYuJ. Predicting contact characteristics for helical gear using support vector machine. Neurocomputing2016; 174: 1156–1161.
22.
Leifsson L, Koziel S and Tesfahunegn Y. Aerodynamic design optimization: physics-based surrogate approaches for airfoil and wing design. In: AIAA SciTech, Maryland, USA, 13–17 January 2014, AIAA 2014-0572.
23.
Li C, Brezillon J and Görtz S. A framework for surrogate-based aerodynamic optimization. In: ODAS ONERA-DLR aero-space symposium, Toulouse, France, 9–11 Feb 2011.
24.
Koziel S and Leifsson L. Multi-level surrogate-based airfoil shape optimization. In: 51st AIAA aerospace sciences meeting including the new horizons forum and aerospace exposition, Grapevine (Dallas/Ft. Worth Region), Texas, 7–10 January 2013, AIAA2013-0778.
25.
Lukaczyk T, Palacios F and Alonso JJ. Active subspaces for shape optimization. In: AIAA SciTech, Maryland, USA, January 2014, AIAA-2014-1171.
26.
Iuliano E and Quagliarella D. Aerodynamic Shape Optimization via non-intrusive POD-based surrogate modelling. In: IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, Cancún, México, 20–23 June 2013.
27.
JahangirianAShahrokhiA. Aerodynamic shape optimization using efficient evolutionary algorithms and unstructured CFD solver. Comput Fluids2011; 46: 270–276.
28.
MaYet al.Hypersonic lifting body aerodynamic shape optimization based on the multiobjective evolutionary algorithm based on decomposition. J Aerosp2015; 229: 1246–1266.
29.
AndrésEet al.Efficient aerodynamic design through evolutionary programming and support vector regression algorithms. Expert Syst Appl2012; 39: 10700–10708.
30.
Andrés E, Carro-Calvo L and Salcedo-Sanz S. Fast aerodynamic coefficients prediction using SVMs for global shape optimization. In: ECCOMAS European congress on computational methods in applied sciences and engineering, Barcelona, Spain, 20–25 June 2014.
31.
AndrésEIulianoE. Application of surrogate-based global optimization to aerodynamic design, Switzerland: Springer Tracts in Mechanical Engineering, 2015.
32.
Chauhan D, Chandrashekarappa P and Duvigneau R. Wing shape optimization using FFD and twist parameterization. In: 12th Aerospace Society of India CFD Symposium, Bangalore, India, 11–12 Aug 2010.
Eiben A and Smith JE. Introduction to evolutionary computing. Natural Computing Series. 1st ed. Heidelberg, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 2003.
35.
Ortiz-GarcíaEGet al.Improving the training time of support vector regression algorithms through novel hyper-parameters search space reductions. Neurocomputing2009; 72: 3683–3691.
36.
DLR Institute of Aerodynamics and Flow Technology. Technical Documentation of the DLR TAU-Code, 2014.
37.
Gerhold T, et al. Calculation of complex three-dimensional configurations employing the DLR TAU-Code. In: 35th aerospace sciences meeting and exhibit, Reno, NV, USA, 6–9 January 1997, AIAA-97-0167.
