3D-Duct Design

Scientific Programmes Committee

Centre for Aerospace Systems Design & Engineering

K. Sudhakar
Department of Aerospace Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology, Mumbai
http://www.casde.iitb.ac.in/MDO/3d-duct/
July 5, 2003
 Design Optimization / MDO
So far . . .
• Airborne Early Warning System (M Tech)
– Complex system, simple models.
• Maneuver Load Control (M Tech)
– Existing system, database driven
• Hypersonic Launch Vehicle (Ph D)
– New system, simple models, system analysis
• WingOpt Wing Design (4 x M Tech)
– Simple models
– Intermediate level models
– FEM + VLM
 3D-Duct Optimization

• Joint exercise - CASDE + ADA

• First attempt at CFD based optimization
– Literature
– Techniques to inject CFD into optimization
• About the design Problem
– Capturing of design problem
– Parametrization
– Capturing designers thumb rules & heuristics to trim
design space.
 Optimization
Minimise f ( x ) x ∈ ℜn
Subject to;
h (x) = 0 h ∈ ℜm
g (x) ≤ 0 g ∈ ℜk

Feasible designs = S ⊂ ℜn

• How to reduce CFD analysis requirements?

• If gradient based optimization is used; how to
evaluate derivatives?
 Gradient Based

Gradient of
functions
Required!
 ∂f 
X2   ∂x 
 ∂f1 
 

 ∂x 2 
∇f (x) =
 
  
 
 ∂f 
X1
 ∂x n 
 3-D Duct Design
Design Problem in Brief

• Pressure
Recovery?
• Distortion?
• Swirl?
Entry Exit
Location and shape known

Geometry of duct from Entry to Exit ?

Parametrization of 3D-Ducts
 3D-Duct Design Using
High Fidelity Analysis
X2-MAX

?
X2-MIN
X1-MIN X1-MAX

Domain for search using high fidelity code is large

 3D-Duct Design Using
High Fidelity Analysis
X2-MAX
 Low Fidelity Design Criteria
 Wall angle < 6°

 Diffusion angle < 3°

 6 * R
EQ < ROC
 Fluent for CFD
 RSM / DOE
X2-MIN  DACE
X1-MIN X1-MAX
 Surrogate Modeling

DOE / RSM modeling in physical experiments.

y
experimental point

RSM. Least Square Fit.

y = a0 + a1 x + a2 x2 . . .

x
Fitted model is smooth and easily differentiable.
Curse of dimensionality! 2k function evaluations
Sequential RSM.
Sequential RSM

Reported @ICIWIM
Design & Analysis of Computer Experiments

• Regression fit + Stochastic process

• Single global fit
• Variability in prediction known and exploitable
x = Computer exp
DACE Fit
x
x
x x
x Estimates of
Predictive error
 Building Models Using DACE
x x = Computer exp
DACE Fit
x x x
x x x
x

5% predictive
error

Use multi-modal GA to identify ‘n’ highest peaks.

Test if they are higher than 5%
Add computer experiments at those spots
 Homotopy / Continuation

• If you seek f(x) = 0

• Create a parametric problem;
g(x, λ ) = ( 1 - λ ) h(x) + λ f(x) λ =0
Solution to h(x) = 0 is known;
ie. g(x,0) = 0 is known
Vary λ slowly from 0 to 1
λ =1
g(x, 1) = 0 = f(x)
• Solution for duct-1 (λ = 0) is known
• Solve for duct-2 (λ = 1) by slowly varying λ
 How to evaluate gradients?

Consider design of wings;

– Design variables, x = [x1, x2]
– Objective function, f(x)
Analysis is CFD
– Give values to x = [x1, x2] → duct → mesh
– Run a CFD code and generate solution
– Generate f(x) based on solution.
How to evaluate
∂f ∂f
= ?; =?
∂ x1 ∂x 2
 Methods to Evaluate Gradients?

• Finite difference method. Easy to implement, but

problematic?
• Complex variables approach, requires source
• ADIFOR – Automatic DIfferentation in FORtran;
requires source. Analytical accuracy
• Surrogate Modeling – Surface fits
– Response Surface Method (RSM / DOE)
– Design & Analysis of Computer Experiments
 Problem with Finite Differencing?

Only (n+1) CFD runs?

Iterative
CL Convergence
Criteria

Correct step size for FDM is important!

Will demand more CFD runs!
 Complex Variable Approach

subroutine func (x, f) subroutine func(x, f)

real x, f complex x, f

Evaluate f{x + i e} ; e << 1

f(x) = Real Part { f(x + i e) } - f”(x) e2 / 2

df/dx = Imag Part { f(x+ i e) } / e - f ”’(x) e2 / 6

CPU time up by 3, RAM up by 2

 Gradients by ADIFOR

Complex Analysis
Code in FORTARN

Euler code is
Automated
being put through
ADIFOR Differentiation
(Not for 3D-Duct) Package

FORTRAN
source code
that can evaluate
gradients