Skip to main content

Characterization of Geometric Uncertainty in Gas Turbine Engine Components Using CMM Data

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Advances in Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization (WCSMO 2017)

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Measurements of component geometry are routinely made for inspection during manufacturing. Typically this results in ‘clouds’ of points or pixels depending upon the measuring system. Examples include points form laser-based or touch-probe co-ordinate measuring machines (CMMs). The point density may vary as will the cost and time taken to make measurements. There can also be gaps and occlusions in data, and sometimes it is only practical to collect sparse sets or points in a single dimension.

This data often provides an untapped source of quantitative uncertainty information pertaining to manufacturing methods. It is proposed that state-of-the-art uncertainty propagation and robust design optimization approaches, often demonstrated using assumed normal input distributions in existing parameters, can be improved by incorporating these data. Inclusion of this information requires, however, that the point cloud be converted to an appropriate parametric form.

Although the design intent of a component may be described using simple geometric primitives joined with tangency or at vertices, manufactured geometry may not exhibit the same simple form, and line and surface segment end locations are notoriously difficult to locate where there is tangency or shallow angles. In this paper we present an approach to first characterise point cloud measurements as curves or surfaces using Kriging, allowing for gaps in data by extension to universal Kriging. We then propose a novel method for the reduction of variables to parameterize curves and surfaces again using Kriging models in order to facilitate practical analysis of performance uncertainty. The techniques are demonstrated by application to a gas turbine engine blade to disc joint where the contact surface shape is measured and the notch stresses are critical to component performance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 509.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 649.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 649.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Here we refer only to ‘black-box’ processes, but the difficulty associated with ensuring accuracy of input uncertainties is just as relevant to ‘intrusive’ approaches.

  2. 2.

    It is typical to use \(\mathbf {x}\), but to avoid confusion with \(\mathbf {x}\) from a measurement set, we refer to the design variable vector as \(\mathbf {v}\).

  3. 3.

    This methodology may have its own flaws but is not the focus of this paper, where it is assumed that the ‘cleaned’ curve is ‘correct’.

References

  1. Broomhead, D.S., Lowe, D.: Multivariate functional interpolation and adaptive networks. Complex Syst. 2, 321–355 (1988)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Cressie, N.A.C.: Statistics for Spatial Data. Wiley, Hoboken (1993). Revised edition

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Forrester, A., Sóbester, A., Keane, A.: Engineering Design via Surrogate Modelling - A Practical Guide. Wiley, Hoboken (2008)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  4. Forrester, A.I.J., Keane, A.J.: Recent advances in surrogate-based optimization. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 45, 50–79 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Iman, R.L., Conover, W.J.: A distribution-free approach to inducing rank correlation among input variables. Commun. Stat. B 11, 311–334 (1982)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Jurecka, F.: Robust Design Optimization Based on Metamodelling Techniques, Ph.D. thesis, Technical University of Munich (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Klimke, A.: Sparse Grid Interpolation Toolbox User’s Guide. Universität Stuttgart, Institut für Angewandte Analysis und Numerische Simulation, February 2008. Version 5.1

    Google Scholar 

  8. Morris, M.D., Mitchell, T.J.: Exploratory designs for computational experiments. J. Stat. Plan. Inference 43, 381–402 (1995)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Oberkampf, W.L., Helton, J.C., Joslyn, C.A., Wojtkiewicz, S.F., Ferson, S.: Challenge problems: uncertainty in system response given uncertain parameters. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 85, 11–19 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Papoulis, A., Pillai, S.U.: Probability, Random Variables and Stochastic Processes. McGraw-Hill Companies Inc., New York City (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Park, G.-J., Lee, T.H., Lee, K.H., Hwang, H.-H.: Robust design: an overview. AIAA J. 44(1), 181–191 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Picheny, V., Wagner, T., Ginsbourger, D.: A benchmark of kriging-based infill criteria for noisy optimization. J. Struct. Multidiscip. Optim. 48(3), 607–626 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Quttineh, N.-H., Holmström, K.: Implementation of a one-stage efficient global optimization (EGO) algorithm. In: 20th International Symposium on Mathematical Programming (ISMP), Chicago (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Sobol’, I.M.: On the systematic search of a hypercube. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 16(5), 790–793 (1979)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Xiong, F., Greene, S., Chen, W., Xiong, Y., Yang, S.: A new sparse grid based method for uncertainty propagation. Struct. Multidiscip. Optim. 41, 335–349 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-009-0441-x

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is supported by Rolls-Royce plc. and conducted in the Rolls-Royce University Technology Centre for Computational Engineering, in the Computational Engineering and Design research group, Aeronautics, Astronautics, and Computational Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and the Environment, at the University of Southampton, England.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jennifer Forrester .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Forrester, J., Keane, A. (2018). Characterization of Geometric Uncertainty in Gas Turbine Engine Components Using CMM Data. In: Schumacher, A., Vietor, T., Fiebig, S., Bletzinger, KU., Maute, K. (eds) Advances in Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization. WCSMO 2017. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67988-4_28

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67988-4_28

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-67987-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-67988-4

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics