Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4rdrl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-27T07:28:53.219Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Efficient optimisation of large aircraft fuselage structures

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2016

W. J. Vankan ,
R. Maas  and
S. Grihon
W. J. Vankan*
Affiliation:
Aerospace Vehicles Division, National Aerospace Laboratory NLR, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
R. Maas
Affiliation:
Aerospace Vehicles Division, National Aerospace Laboratory NLR, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
S. Grihon
Affiliation:
Airbus, Toulouse, France
*
vankan@nlr.nl
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper presents an innovative optimisation method for aircraft fuselage structural design. Detailed local finite element analyses of panel buckling are further processed such that they can be applied as failure constraints in the global level optimisation. The high computational costs involved with the finite element analyses are limited by advanced use of surrogate modelling methods. This yields high flexibility and efficiency in the local level optimisation procedure and allows for efficient gradient based search methods as well as more costly direct search optimisations like genetic algorithms (GAs). The method is demonstrated on a composite fuselage barrel design case considering common structural sizing variables like thicknesses and stringer dimensions. Optimised barrel designs are obtained where the constraints that are derived from the panel buckling analyses are active. The total computational cost for the complete local and global level optimisation procedures is in the order of days on common-performance hardware.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 118 , Issue 1199 , January 2014 , pp. 31 - 52
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Kasapoglou, C. Design and Analysis of Composite Structures: With Applications to Aerospace Structures, 2010, Wiley.Google Scholar
2. Grihon, S., Krog, L. and Bassir, D. Numerical optimisation applied to structure sizing at AIRBUS: A multi-step process, Int J Simul Multidisci Des Optim, 2009, 3, pp 432–442.Google Scholar
3. Haftka, R.T. and Gürdal, Z. Elements of Structural Optimisation, 1992, Springer.Google Scholar
4. Sobieszczanski, J. and Loendorf, D. A mixed optimisation method for automated design of fuselage structures. J Aircr, 1972, 9, (12), pp 805–811.Google Scholar
5. Sobieszczanski-Sobieski, J., James, B. and Dovi, A. Structural optimization by multilevel decomposition, AIAA J, 1985, 3, pp 124–142.Google Scholar
6. Sobieszczanski-Sobieski, J., James, B. and Riley, M. Structural sizing by generalized, multilevel optimization, AIAA J, 1987, 25, pp 139–145.Google Scholar
7. Beers, M. and Vanderplaats, G. A linearization method for multilevel optimization, 1987, International Conference on Numerical Methods in Engineering: Theory and applications, Swansea, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.Google Scholar
8. Barthelemy, J.F.M. and Sobieszczanski-Sobieski, J. Optimum sensitivity derivatives of objective functions in nonlinear programming, Technical notes, 1983, AIAA.Google Scholar
9. Sobieszczanski-Sobieski, J. A step from hierarchic to non-hierarchic systems, 1988, Second NASA Air Force Symposium on recent advances in multidisciplinary analysis and optimization.Google Scholar
10. Sobieszczanski-Sobieski, J. Sensitivity of complex, internally coupled systems, AIAA J, 1990, 28, (1), pp 153–160.Google Scholar
11. Hutchison, M.G., Unger, E.R., Mason, W.H., Grossman, B. and Haftka, R.T. Variable-complexity aerodynamic optimization of a high-speed civil transport wing, J Aircr, 1994, 31, (1), pp 110–116.Google Scholar
12. Burgee, S., Giunta, A.A., Balabanov, V., Grossman, B., Mason, W.H., Narducci, R., Haftka, R.T. and Watson, L.T. A coarse-grained parallel variable-complexity multidisciplinary optimization paradigm, Int J High Performance Computing Applications, 1996, 10, (4), pp 269–299.Google Scholar
13. Shankar, J. Ribbens, C. Haftka, R. and Watson, L. Computational study of a non-hierarchical decomposition algorithm, Computational Optimization and Applications, 1993, 2, pp 273–293.Google Scholar
14. Renaud, J. and Gabriele, G. Approximation in non-hierarchic system optimization, AIAA J, 1994, 32, pp 198–205.Google Scholar
15. Rodríguez, J., Renaud, J. and Watson, L. Convergence of trust region augmented Lagrangian methods using variable fdelity approximation data, Structural Optimization, 1998, 15, pp 141–156.Google Scholar
16. Paiva, R.M., Carvalho, A.R.D., Crawford, C. and Suleman, A. Comparison of surrogate models in a multidisciplinary optimization framework for wing design, AIAA J, 2010, 48, (5), pp 995–1006.Google Scholar
17. Bettebghor, D. Optimisation Biniveau de Structures Aeronautiques Composites, 2011 PhD thesis, Doctorat de l’université de Toulouse, France,.Google Scholar
18. Colson, B., Bruyneel, M., Grihon, S., Jetteur, PH., Morelle, P. and Remouchamps, A. Composite panel optimization with nonlinear finite-element analysis and semi-analytical sensitivities, 2007, NAFEMS Seminar on Simulating Composite Materials and Structures, 6-7 November 2007, Bad-Kissingen, Germany.Google Scholar
19. Fleury, C., Bruyneel, M., Colson, B. and Remouchamps, A. Buckling optimization of composite stiffened panels: some important issues, 2010, Second ICEO, September 2010, Lisbon, Portugal.Google Scholar
20. Vankan, W.J., Lammen, W.F. and Maas, R. Meta-modeling and multi-objective optimization in aircraft design, Advances in Collaborative Civil Aeronautical Multidisciplinary Design Optimization, Ch 6, Kesseler, E. and Guenov, M. (Eds), 2010, AIAA, (NLR-TP-2009-718).Google Scholar
21. Simpson, T.W., Peplinski, J.P., Koch, P.N. and Allen, J.K. Metamodels for computer-based engineering design: survey and recommendations, Engineering with Computers, 2001, 17, pp 129–150, .Google Scholar
22. Bettebghor, D. and Bartoli, N. Approximation of the critical buckling factor for composite panels, Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 2012, 46, (4), pp 561–584.Google Scholar
23. MSC Software, MSC NASTRAN http://www.mscsoftware.com/products/cae-tools/msc-nastran.aspx (accessed 4-7-2012).Google Scholar
24. Dassault Systèmes Simulia, http://www.3ds.com/products/simulia/portfolio/abaqus/overview/ (accessed 4-7-2012).Google Scholar
25. The Mathworks, http://www.mathworks.nl/products/matlab/ (accessed 4-7-2012).Google Scholar