Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-684bc48f8b-2l47r Total loading time: 0.924 Render date: 2021-04-12T02:00:20.522Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true }

Article contents

A dynamic design approach using the Kalman filter for uncertainty management

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 May 2017

Elham Keshavarzi
Affiliation:
Mechanical, Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, USA
Matthew McIntire
Affiliation:
Mechanical, Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, USA
Christopher Hoyle
Affiliation:
Mechanical, Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, USA
Corresponding
E-mail address:

Abstract

It is desirable for complex engineered systems to be resilient to various sources of uncertainty throughout their life cycle. Such systems are high in cost and complexity, and often incorporate highly sophisticated materials, components, design, and other technologies. There are many uncertainties such systems will face throughout their life cycles due to changes in internal and external conditions, or states of interest, to the designer, such as technology readiness, market conditions, or system health. These states of interest affect the success of the system design with respect to the main objectives and application of the system, and are generally uncertain over the life cycle of the system. To address such uncertainties, we propose a resilient design approach for engineering systems. We utilize a Kalman filter approach to model the uncertain future states of interest. Then, based upon the modeled states, the optimal change in the design of the system is achieved to respond to the new states. This resilient method is applicable in systems when the ability to change is embedded in the system design. A design framework is proposed encompassing a set of definitions, metrics, and methodologies. A case study of a communication satellite system is presented to illustrate the features of the approach.

Type
Special Issue Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

References

Agarwal, H., Renaud, J.E., Preston, E.L., & Padmanabhan, D. (2004). Uncertainty quantification using evidence theory in multidisciplinary design optimization. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 85(1), 281294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Antonsson, E.K., & Otto, K.N. (1995). Imprecision in engineering design. Journal of Vibration and Acoustics 117(B), 2532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Antonsson, E.K., & Otto, K.N. (1997). Improving engineering design with fuzzy sets. In Fuzzy Information Engineering: A Guided Tour of Applications (Dubois, D., Prade, H., & Yager, R.R., Eds.), pp. 635654. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Aughenbaugh, J.M., & Paredis, C.J. (2006). The value of using imprecise probabilities in engineering design. Journal of Mechanical Design 128(4), 969979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bae, H.R., Grandhi, R.V., & Canfield, R.A. (2004). Epistemic uncertainty quantification techniques including evidence theory for large-scale structures. Computers & Structures 82(13), 11011112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belbruno, E.A., & Miller, J.K. (1993). Sun-perturbed Earth-to-Moon transfers with ballistic capture. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics 16(4), 770775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carvalho, A., & Puterman, M. (2004). How should a manager set prices when the demand function is unknown. Unpublished manuscript, University of British Columbia, Vancouver.Google Scholar
Chen, W., Hoyle, C., & Wassenaar, H.J. (2013 a). Decision-Based Design: Integrating Consumer Preferences Into Engineering Design. London: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, W., Hoyle, C., & Wassenaar, H.J. (2013 b). Decision-based design: an approach for enterprise-driven engineering design. In Decision-Based Design: Integrating Consumer Preferences Into Engineering Design, pp. 311. London: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, W., Hoyle, C., & Wassenaar, H.J. (2013 c). Decision theory in engineering design. In Decision-Based Design: Integrating Consumer Preferences Into Engineering Design, pp. 1334. London: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, W., Hoyle, C., & Wassenaar, H.J. (2013 d). Multilevel optimization for decision-based design. In Decision-Based Design: Integrating Consumer Preferences Into Engineering Design, pp. 319337. London: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, X., Park, E.J., & Xiu, D. (2013). A flexible numerical approach for quantification of epistemic uncertainty. Journal of Computational Physics 240, 211224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dai, Z., Scott, M.J., & Mourelatos, Z.P. (2003). Incorporating epistemic uncertainty in robust design. Proc. ASME 2003 Int. Design Engineering Technical Conf. Computers and Information in Engineering Conf., pp. 85–95. New York: ASME.Google Scholar
DeLaurentis, D.A., & Mavris, D.N. (2000). Uncertainty modeling and management in multidisciplinary analysis and synthesis. Proc. 38th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Paper No. AIAA-2000–422, Reno, NV, January 10–13.Google Scholar
de Weck, O., & Chang, D. (2002). Architecture trade methodology for LEO personal communication systems. Proc. AIAA 20th Int. Communication Satellite Systems Conf., Montreal, May 12–15.Google Scholar
de Weck, O., Eckhart, C.M., & John, C.P. (2007). A classification of uncertainty for early product and system design. Proc. 16th Int. Conf. Engineering Design (ICED'07), pp. 28–31, Paris, August.Google Scholar
de Weck, O.L., Neufville, R.D., & Chaize, M. (2004). Staged deployment of communications satellite constellations in low earth orbit. Journal of Aerospace Computing, Information, and Communication 1(3), 119136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Weck, O.L., Scialom, U., & Siddiqi, A. (2008). Optimal reconfiguration of satellite constellations with the auction algorithm. Acta Astronautica 62(2), 112130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fowlkes, W.Y., & Creveling, C.M. (1995). Engineering Methods for Robust Product Design. Boston: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Helton, J.C. (1997). Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis in the presence of stochastic and subjective uncertainty. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation 57(1–4), 376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herzig, S.J., & Paredis, C.J. (2014). Bayesian reasoning over models. Proc. MoDeVVa, pp. 6978.Google Scholar
Hofer, E., Kloos, M., Krzykacz-Hausmann, B., Peschke, J., & Woltereck, M. (2002). An approximate epistemic uncertainty analysis approach in the presence of epistemic and aleatory uncertainties. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 77(3), 229238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hollnagel, E., Woods, D.D., & Leveson, N. (2007). Resilience Engineering: Concepts and Precepts. Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Igusa, T., Buonopane, S.G., & Ellingwood, B.R. (2002). Bayesian analysis of uncertainty for structural engineering applications. Structural Safety 24(2), 165186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobs, O.L.R. (1974). Introduction to Control Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Julier, S.J., & Uhlmann, J.K. (1997). New extension of the Kalman filter to nonlinear systems. Proc. AeroSense ‘97, pp. 182–193. Bellingham, WA: International Society for Optics and Photonics.Google Scholar
Kalman, R.E. (1960). A new approach to linear filtering and prediction problems. Journal of Fluids Engineering 82(1), 3545.Google Scholar
Keshavarzi, E., McIntire, M., & Hoyle, C. (2015). Dynamic design using the Kalman filter for flexible systems with epistemic uncertainty. Proc. ASME 2015 Int. Design Engineering Technical Conf., Computers and Information in Engineering Conf. New York: ASME.Google Scholar
Kleeman, L. (1996). Understanding and applying Kalman filtering. Proc. 2nd Workshop on Perceptive Systems. Curtin University of Technology, Perth, January 25–26.Google Scholar
Lamassoure, E., Saleh, J.H., & Hastings, D.E. (2002). Space systems flexibility provided by on-orbit servicing: Part 2. Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets 39(4), 561570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lutz, E., Werner, M., & Jahn, A. (2012). Satellite Systems for Personal and Broadband Communications. London: Springer.Google Scholar
Mark, G.T. (2005). Incorporating flexibility into system design: a novel framework and illustrated developments. PhD Thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Maybeck, P.S. (1982). Stochastic Models, Estimation, and Control, Vol. 3. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Minoli, D. (2015). Innovations in Satellite Communication and Satellite Technology. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oberkampf, W.L., Helton, J.C., & Sentz, K. (2001). Mathematical representation of uncertainty. Proc. 19th AIAA Non-Deterministic Approaches Forum, Paper No. 2001-1645, pp. 16–19, Anaheim, CA.Google Scholar
Penmetsa, R.C., & Grandhi, R.V. (2002). Efficient estimation of structural reliability for problems with uncertain intervals. Computers & Structures 80(12), 11031112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pratt, S.R., Raines, R., Fossa, C.E. Jr., & Temple, M. (1999). An operational and performance overview of the IRIDIUM low earth orbit satellite system. IEEE Communications Surveys 2(2), 210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rauwolf, G.A., & Coverstone-Carroll, V.L. (1996). Near-optimal low-thrust orbit transfers generated by a genetic algorithm. Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets 33(6), 859862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richharia, M. (1995). Satellite Communications Systems—Design Principles. New York: McGraw-Hill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rieger, C. (2009). Resilient control systems: a basis for next-generation secure architectures. INSIGHT 12(2), 2022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saleh, J.H. (2001). Weaving time into system architecture: new perspectives on flexibility, spacecraft design lifetime, and on-orbit servicing. PhD Thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Saleh, J.H., Lamassoure, E., & Hastings, D.E. (2002). Space systems flexibility provided by on-orbit servicing: Part 1. Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets 39(4), 551560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saleh, J.H., Mark, G., & Jordan, N.C. (2009). Flexibility: a multi-disciplinary literature review and a research agenda for designing flexible engineering systems. Journal of Engineering Design 20(3), 307323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shafer, G. (1976). A Mathematical Theory of Evidence, Vol. 1. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Siddiqi, A. (2006). Reconfigurability in space systems: architecting framework and case studies. PhD Thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Siddiqi, A., & de Weck, O.L. (2008). Modeling methods and conceptual design principles for reconfigurable systems. Journal of Mechanical Design 130(10), 101102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorenson, H.W. (1970). Least-squares estimation: from Gauss to Kalman. IEEE Spectrum 7(7), 6368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suh, E.S., de Weck, O., Kim, I.Y., & Chang, D. (2007). Flexible platform component design under uncertainty. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing 18(1), 115126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suh, N.P. (1998). Axiomatic design theory for systems. Research in Engineering Design 10(4), 189209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thunnissen, D.P. (2005). Propagating and mitigating uncertainty in the design of complex multidisciplinary systems. PhD Thesis. California Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Wan, E., & Van Der Merwe, R. (2000). The unscented Kalman filter for nonlinear estimation. Proc. Adaptive Systems for Signal Processing, Communications, and Control Symp. 2000, AS-SPCC, pp. 153–158. Lake Louise, Alberta, Canada: IEEE.Google Scholar
Welch, G., & Bishop, G. (2006). An Introduction to the Kalman Filter. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Wertz, J.R. (Ed.) (2012). Spacecraft Attitude Determination and Control, Vol. 73. London: Springer.Google Scholar
Wertz, J.R., Everett, D.F., & Puschell, J.J. (Eds.) (2011). Space Mission Engineering: The New SMAD. Portland, OR: Microcosm Press.Google Scholar
Wood, K.L., Otto, K.N., & Antonsson, E.K. (1992). Engineering design calculations with fuzzy parameters. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 52(1), 120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Youn, B.D., Choi, K.K., Du, L., & Gorsich, D. (2007). Integration of possibility-based optimization and robust design for epistemic uncertainty. Journal of Mechanical Design 129(8), 876882.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zadeh, L.A. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information and Control 8(3), 338353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 21
Total number of PDF views: 69 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 04th May 2017 - 12th April 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

A dynamic design approach using the Kalman filter for uncertainty management
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

A dynamic design approach using the Kalman filter for uncertainty management
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

A dynamic design approach using the Kalman filter for uncertainty management
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *