Advertisement

The Continuous Adjoint Approach in Aerodynamic Shape Optimization

  • N.R. Gauger
  • J. Brezillon
Part of the Notes on Numerical Fluid Mechanics and Multidisciplinary Design (NNFM) book series (NNFM, volume 89)

Summary

Detailed numerical shape optimization will play a strategic role for future aircraft design. It offers the possibility of designing or improving aircraft components with respect to a pre-specified figure of merit subject to geometrical and physical constraints. However, the extremely high computational expense of straightforward methodologies currently in use prohibits the application of numerical optimization for industry relevant problems. Optimization methods based on the calculation of the derivatives of the cost function with respect to the design variables suffer from the high computational costs if many design variables are used. However, these gradients can be efficiently obtained by solution of the continuous adjoint flow equations.

Keywords

Design Variable Drag Reduction Pitching Moment Wing Section Adjoint Approach 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Kroll, N., Rossow, C.C., Becker, K. and Thiele, F., “The MEGAFLOW project”, Aerosp. Sci. Technol., Vol. 4, pp. 223–237, 2000.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kroll, N., Rossow, C.C., Schwamborn, D., Becker, K. and Heller, G., “MEGAFLOW — A Numerical Flow Simulation Tool for Transport Aircraft Design”, ICAS 2002-1.10.5, 23rd International Congress of Aeronautical Sciences, Toronto, 2002.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jameson, A., “Aerodynamic design via control theory”, Journal of Scientific Computing, Vol. 3, pp. 233–260,1988.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jameson, A., “Computational aerodynamics for aircraft design”, Science, Vol. 245, pp. 361–371, 1989.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jameson, A., “Optimum aerodynamic design via boundary control”, AGARDR-803, pp. 3.1–3.33, 1994.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Reuther, J., Jameson, A. et al, “Aerodynamic shape optimization of complex aircraft configurations via an adjoint formulation”, AIAA 96-0094, 1996.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jameson, A., Martinelli, L. and Pierce, N.A., “Optimum aerodynamic design using the Navier-Stokes equations”, Theoret. Comput. Fluid Dynamics, Vol. 10, pp. 213–237, Springer, 1998.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kroll, N., Rossow, C.C., Becker, K. and Thiele, F., “MEGAFLOW-a numerical flow simulation system”, 21st ICAS Symposium, paper 98-2.7.4, Melbourne, Australia, 1998.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gauger, N., “Aerodynamic shape optimization using the adjoint Euler equations”, Proceedings of the GAMM Workshop ‘Discrete Modelling and Discrete Algorithms in Continuum Mechanics’, pp. 87–96, Logos Verlag Berlin, 2001.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gauger, N., “Das Adjungiertenverfahren in der aerodynamischen Formoptimierung”, to appear as DLR-Report No. DLR-FB-2003-05 (ISSN 1434-8454), 2003.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gauger, N. and Brezillon, J., “Aerodynamic Shape Optimization Using Adjoint Method”, Journal of Aero. Soc. of India, Vol. 54, No. 3, 2002.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nadarajah, S. and Jameson, A., “Studies of the continuous and discrete adjoint approaches to viscous automatic aerodynamic shape optimization”, AIAA 2001-2530, 2001.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Giles, M.B., “Adjoint equations in CFD: duality, boundary conditions and solution behaviour”, AIAA 97-1850, 1997.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Selmin, V., “Multi-point aerodynamic shape optimization: The AEROSHAPE project”, Proceedings of ECCOMAS, Barcelona, Spain, 2000.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Weinerfelt, P., Gauger, N., Quagliarella, D., Soemarwoto, B. et al, “Sensitivity computations based on continuous equations”, Progress in Aerodynamic Shape Optimisation, Chap. 3, to appear in Notes on Numerical Fluid Mechanics.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Brezillon, J., “Application of the Adjoint Technique with the Optimization Framework Synaps Pointer Pro”, Present Notes on Numerical Fluid Mechanics.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Frommann, O., “Conflicting criteria handling in multiobjective optimization using the principles of fuzzy logic”, AIAA-98-2730, 1998.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • N.R. Gauger
    • 1
  • J. Brezillon
    • 1
  1. 1.DLRInstitute of Aerodynamics and Flow TechnologyBraunschweig

Personalised recommendations