The design of space systems is a complex and multidisciplinary process with multiple conflicting objectives, large number of design variables, and constraints that limits application of the existing multidisciplinary design optimization architectures to this class of design problems. This paper presents an enhanced multidisciplinary design optimization architecture to concurrent holistic design optimization of a satellite system. The proposed multidisciplinary design optimization architecture extends concepts of multidiscipline feasible and bi-level integrated system synthesis into a unified architecture using metamodels. The proposed architecture was evaluated and compared with the existing multidisciplinary design optimization architectures that include all-at-once, bi-level integrated system synthesis, and multidisciplinary design optimization using a remote sensing small satellite in low earth orbit. The satellite design optimization problem deals with the minimization of the total mass of the satellite, involving disciplines of mission analysis, payload, structures, attitude determination and control, communication, command and data handling, power and thermal. The computational performance and accuracy of the proposed architecture were compared with multidisciplinary design optimization benchmark problems. Then the proposed architecture is successfully applied to the satellite system design problem. The results obtained show that metamodel-based bi-level integrated system synthesis-multidisciplinary design optimization architecture presented in this paper provides an effective way of solving large-scale design problems.
HaftkaRTSobieszczanski-SobieskiJPadulaSL. On options for interdisciplinary analysis and design optimization. Struct Optim1992; 4: 65–74.
2.
Cramer EJ, Frank PD, Shubin GR, et al. On alternative problem formulation for multidisciplinary optimization. In: 4th AIAA/USAF/NASA/OAI symposium on multidisciplinary analysis and optimization, Cleveland, OH, USA, 1992, AIAA 92-4752.
3.
BallingRJSobieszczanski-SobieskiJ. Optimization of coupled systems: A critical overview of approaches. AIAA J1996; 34: 6–17.
4.
MartinsJRRALambeAB. Multidisciplinary design optimization: A survey of architectures. AIAA J2013; 51: 2049–2075.
5.
ZadehPMSadat ShiraziM. Metaheuristic applications in structures and infrastructures, New York: Elsevier, 2013, pp. 103–127.
6.
KrooIMMDO for large-scale design. In: AlexandrovNHussainiMY (eds). Multidisciplinary design optimization: State-of-the-art, Philadelphia, PA: SIAM, 1997, pp. 22–44.
7.
KodiyalamSSobieszczanski-SobieskiJ. Multidisciplinary design optimization: some formal methods, framework requirement and application to vehicle design. Int J Veh Des2001; 25: 3–32.
8.
Sobieszczanski-Sobieski J. Optimization by decomposition: A step from hierarchic to non-hierarchic systems. In: Proceedings of the 2nd NASA/Air force symposium on recent advances in multidisciplinary analysis and optimization, Hampton, VA, USA, 1988, NASA-CP-3031.
9.
BloebaumCLHajelaPSobieszczanski-SobieskiJ. Non-hierarchic system decomposition in structural optimization. Eng Optim1992; 19: 171–186.
10.
Braun RD. Collaborative optimization: An architecture for large-scale distributed design. PhD Thesis, Stanford University, USA, 1996.
11.
Braun RD, Gage PJ, Kroo IM, et al. Implementation and performance issues in collaborative optimization. In: Proceedings of the 6th AIAA/USAF/NASA/ISSMO multidisciplinary analysis and optimization symposium, Bellevue, WA, USA, September 1996, AIAA 1996-4017.
12.
Sobieszczanski-SobieskiJAgteJSSanduskyRRJr. Bilevel integrated system synthesis. AIAA J2000; 38: 164–172.
Alexandrov NM and Lewis RM. Analytical and computational properties of distributed approaches to MDO. In: 8th AIAA / NASA / USAF / ISSMO symposium on multidisciplinary analysis and optimization, Long Beach, CA, USA, 2000.
15.
ShankarJRibbensCJHaftkaRT. Computational study of a nonhierarchical decomposition algorithm. Comput Optim Appl1993; 2: 273–293.
Parashar S and Bloebaum CL. Robust multi-objective genetic algorithm concurrent subspace optimization (RMOGACSSO) for multidisciplinary design. In: Proceedings of the 11th AIAA/ISSMO multidisciplinary analysis and optimization conference, Porthsmouth, VA, USA, September 2006, AIAA 2006-6907.
18.
TappetaRVNagendraSRenaudJE. A multidisciplinary design optimization approach for high temperature aircraft engine components. Struct Optim1999; 18: 134–145.
19.
Sellar RS, Batill SM and Renaud JE. Response surface based, concurrent subspace optimization for multidisciplinary system design. AIAA, 1996, paper 714.
20.
WujekBARenaudJEBatillSM. Concurrent subspace optimization using design variable sharing in a distributed computing environment. Concurr Eng1996; 4: 361–377.
21.
Perez RE, Liu HHT and Behdinan K. Evaluation of multidisciplinary optimization approaches for aircraft conceptual design. In: Proceedings of the 10th AIAA/ISSMO multidisciplinary analysis and optimization conference, Albany, NY, USA, August 2004, AIAA 2004-4537.
Kroo I, Altus S, Braun R, et al. Multidisciplinary optimization method for aircraft preliminary design. In: Proceedings of the 5th AIAA/ NASA/USAF/ISSMO symposium on multidisciplinary analysis and optimization, Panama City, FL, USA, 7–9 September 1994, pp.697–707.
24.
AlexandrovNMLewisRM. Analytical and computational aspects of collaborative optimization for multidisciplinary design. AIAA J2002; 40: 301–309.
25.
DeMiguel, A.-V. and Murray, W., “An Analysis of Collaborative Optimization Methods,” Proceedings of the 8th AIAA/USAF/NASA/ISSMO Symposium on Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization, Long Beach, CA, 2000, AIAA 2000-4720.
26.
DeMiguelAVNogalesFJ. On decomposition methods for a class of partially separable nonlinear programs. Math Oper Res2008; 33: 119–139.
Zadeh PM and Toropov VV. Multi-fidelity multidisciplinary design optimization based on collaborative optimization framework. In: Proceedings of the 9th AIAA/ISSMO symposium on multidisciplinary analysis and optimization, Atlanta, GA, USA, September 2002, AIAA-2002-5504.
29.
Zadeh PM, Mehmani A and Sadat Shirazi M. Multidisciplinary design optimization using variable fidelity modeling: Application to a wing based on high fidelity models. In: ASMDO conference, Paris, 2010.
ZhaoMCuiWC. Application of optimal Latin hypercube and radial basis function network to collaborative optimization. J Marine Sci Appl2007; 6: 24–32.
32.
ZadehPMMehmaniAMessacA. High fidelity multidisciplinary design optimization of a wing using the interaction of low and high fidelity models. Optim Eng J2015. DOI: 10.1007/s11081-015-9284-z.
33.
Sobieszczanski-SobieskiJAltusTDPhillipsM. Bilevel integrated system synthesis for concurrent and distributed processing. AIAA J2003; J 41: 19–19.
KimHKokkolarasMLoucaL. Target cascading in vehicle redesign: A class VI truck study. Int J Veh Des2002; 29: 199–225.
36.
Allison JT, Walsh D, Kokkolaras M, et al. Analytical target cascading in aircraft design. In: Proceedings of the 44th AIAA aerospace sciences meeting and exhibit, Reno, NV, USA, January 2006, AIAA 2006-1325.
37.
ChoudharyRMalkawiAPapalambrosPY. Analytic target cascading in simulation-based building design. Autom Construct2005; 14: 551–568.
38.
KokkolarasMFelliniRKimHM. Extension of the target cascading formulation to the design of product families. Struct Multidisc Optim2002; 24.
39.
Allison J, Roth B and Kokkolaras M. Aircraft family design using decomposition-based methods. In: Proceedings of the 11th AIAA/ISSMO multidisciplinary analysis and optimization conference, Porthsmouth, VA, September 2006, AIAA 2006-6950.
40.
Roth B and Kroo I. Enhanced collaborativeoptimization. In: 12th AIAA/ISSMO multidisciplinary analysis and optimization conference, Victoria, BC, Canada, 2008.
41.
de Wit AJ and van Keulen F. Numerical comparison of multi-level optimization techniques. In: Proceedings of the 48th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC structures, structural dynamics, and materials conference, Honolulu, HI, USA, April 2007, AIAA 2007-1895.
42.
ZhaoMCuiW. On the development of bi-level integrated system collaborative optimization. Struct Multidisc Optim2011; 43: 73–84.
43.
Luo W. Study and application of theory of multi-method collaborative optimization in the system design of flying vehicles. PhD Thesis, National University of Defense Technology, China, 2003.
44.
TaoYRHanXJiangC. A method to improve computational efficiency for CSSO and BLISS. Struct Multidisc Optim2011; 44: 39–43.
45.
Sobieszczanski-Sobieski J, Aget J and Sandusky R Jr. Bi-level integrated system synthesis (BLISS). In: 7th AIAA/USAF/NASA/OAI symposium on multidisciplinary analysis and optimization, St. Louis, MO, USA, 1998, NASA/TM-208715.
46.
Simpson TW, Peplinski J, Mitchell TJ, et al. On the use of statistics in design and the implications for deterministic computer experiment. In: Proceedings of the ASME, DETC97/DTM-3881, design theory and methodology— DTM’97, Sacramento, CA, USA, 1997.
47.
MontgomeryDC. Design and analysis of experiment, New York: Wiley, 1997.
48.
NarayananAToropovVVWoodAS. Simultaneous model building and validation with uniform designs of experiments. Eng Optim2007; 39: 497–512.
49.
KianifarMRCampeanFWoodAS. Application of permutation genetic algorithm for sequential model building–model validation design of experiments. Soft Compute2015. DOI: 10.1007/s00500-015-1929-5.
50.
Jurecka F. Robust design optimization based on metamodeling techniques. Technischen University, Munchen, 2007.
ToropovVVGiessenEVDParameter identification for nonlinear constitutive models: Finite element simulation – optimization – nontrivial experiments. In: PedersonP (ed). Optimal design with advanced materials, Proceedings of IUTAM symposium, New York: Elsevier Science Publishers, 1993, pp. 113–130.
53.
ToropovVVModelling and approximation strategies in optimization-global and mid-range metamodels, response surface methods, genetic programming, and low/high fidelity models. In: JBlachutHAEschenauer (eds). Emerging methods for multidisciplinary optimization. CISM Courses and Lectures, No. 425, International Center for Mechanical Science, New York: Springer, 2001, pp. 205–256.
54.
MartinsJRRALambeAB. Multidisciplinary design optimization: A survey of architectures. AIAA J2013; 51: 2049–2075.
55.
YiSIShinJKParkGJ. Comparison of MDO methods with mathematical examples. Struct Multidisc Optim2008; 35: 391–402.
Padula SL, Alexandrov N and Green LL. MDO test suite at NASA Langley research center. In: Proceedings of the 6th AIAA/NASA/ISSMO symposium on multidisciplinary analysis and optimization, Bellevue, WA, USA, 1996, AIAA 1996-4028.
58.
WertzJLarsonWJ. Space mission analysis and design, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1999.
59.
YaoWChenXQOuyangQ. A surrogate based multistage-multilevel optimization procedure for multidisciplinary design optimization. Struct Multidisc Optim2012; 45: 559–574.
