Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology

The Korean Society of Mechanical Engineers (대한기계학회)
권호 표지

Trade-off Analysis in Multi-objective Optimization Using Chebyshev Orthogonal Polynomials

  • Baek Seok-Heum (School of Mechanical Engineering, Dong-A University) ;
  • Cho Seok-Swoo (Department of Vehicle Engineering, Kangwon National University) ;
  • Kim Hyun-Su (Department of Mechanical Engineering, Dong-A University) ;
  • Joo Won-Sik (Department of Mechanical Engineering, Dong-A University)
  • Published : 2006.03.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In this paper, it is intended to introduce a method to solve multi-objective optimization problems and to evaluate its performance. In order to verify the performance of this method it is applied for a vertical roller mill for Portland cement. A design process is defined with the compromise decision support problem concept and a design process consists of two steps: the design of experiments and mathematical programming. In this process, a designer decides an object that the objective function is going to pursuit and a non-linear optimization is performed composing objective constraints with practical constraints. In this method, response surfaces are used to model objectives (stress, deflection and weight) and the optimization is performed for each of the objectives while handling the remaining ones as constraints. The response surfaces are constructed using orthogonal polynomials, and orthogonal array as design of experiment, with analysis of variance for variable selection. In addition, it establishes the relative influence of the design variables in the objectives variability. The constrained optimization problems are solved using sequential quadratic programming. From the results, it is found that the method in this paper is a very effective and powerful for the multi-objective optimization of various practical design problems. It provides, moreover, a reference of design to judge the amount of excess or shortage from the final object.

Keywords

References

  1. Bramanti, A., Barba, P. D., Farina, M. and Savini, A., 2001, 'Combining Response Surfaces and Evolutionary Strategies for Multi-objective Pareto-Optimization in Electromagnetics,' International Journal of Applied Electromagnetics and Mechanics, Vol. 15, pp. 231-236
  2. Baek, S. H., Hong, S. H., Cho, S. S. and Joo, W. S., 2004, 'Multi-objective Optimization in Discrete Design Space using RSM-Based Approximation,' The Third China-Japan-Korea Joint Symposium on Optimization of Structural and Mechanical Systems (CJK-OSM3), Japan, pp. 125-130
  3. Chen, S., Yang, J., Mou, J. and Lu, Y., 2002, 'Quality Based Design Approach for a Single Crystal Silicon Microactuator using DOE Technique and Response Surface Model,' Microsystem Technologies, Vol. 8, pp. 182-187 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00542-001-0128-8
  4. Elsayed, E. A. and Chen, A., 1993, 'Optimal Levels of Process Parameters for Products with Multiple Characteristics,' Int. J. Prod. Res., Vol. 31, No. 5, pp. 1117-1132 https://doi.org/10.1080/00207549308956778
  5. Gautschi, W., 1996, 'Orthogonal Polynomials : Application and Computations, Acta Numerica,' Cambridge University Press, pp.45-119
  6. Gunawan, S. and Azarm, S., 2005, 'Multi-objective Robust Optimization using a Sensitivity Region Concept,' Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, Vol. 29, No.1, pp. 50-60 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-004-0450-8
  7. Kurtaran, H., Eskandarian, A., Marzougui, D. and Bedewi, N. E., 2002, 'Crashworthiness Design Optimization using Successive Response Surface Approximations,' Computational Mechanics, Vol. 29, pp. 409-421 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00466-002-0351-x
  8. Pignatiello, J. J., 1993, 'Strategies for Robust Multi Response Quality Engineering,' IIE Trans., Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 5-14 https://doi.org/10.1080/07408179308964286
  9. Park, S. H., 1996, 'Robust Design and Analysis for Quality Engineering,' Chapman & Hall
  10. Roux, W., Stander, N. and Haftka, R., 1998, 'Response Surface Approximations for Structural Optimization,' Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., Vol. 42, pp. 517-534 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0207(19980615)42:3<517::AID-NME370>3.0.CO;2-L
  11. Redhe, M., Giger, M. and Nilsson, L., 2004, 'An Investigation of Structural Optimization in Crashworthiness Design using a Stochastic Approach-A Comparison of Stochastic Optimization and the Response Surface Methodology,' Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, Vol. 27, No. 6, pp. 446-459 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-004-0400-5
  12. Tsui, K. L., 1999, 'Robust Design Optimization for Multiple Characteristic Problems,' Int. J. Prod. Res., Vol. 37, No. 2, pp. 433-445 https://doi.org/10.1080/002075499191850
  13. Timothy, W. S., Timothy, M. M., John, J. K. and Farrokh, M., 2001, 'Kriging Models for Global Approximation in Simulation-Based Multidisciplinary Design Optimization,' AIAA Journal, Vol. 39, No. 12, pp. 2233-2241 https://doi.org/10.2514/2.1234
  14. Tappeta, R. V. and Renaud, J. E., 2001, 'Interactive Multiobjective Optimization Design Strategy for Decision Based Design,' ASME J. Mech. Des., Vol. 123, pp. 205-215 https://doi.org/10.1115/1.1358302
  15. Wilson, B., Capperelleri, D., Simpson, T. W. and Frecker, M., 2001, 'Efficient Pareto Frontier Exploration using Surrogate Approximations,' Optimization and Engineering, Vol. 2, pp. 31-50 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011818803494
  16. Youn, B. D. and Choi, K. K., 2004, 'A New Response Surface Methodology for Reliability-Based Design Optimization,' Computers and Structures, Vol. 82, Iss. 2-3, pp. 241-256 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2003.09.002
  17. Zhang, H., Gopal, M. M., Saxena, R. and Avula, X. J., 2003, 'An Integrated Optimization System for Airbag Design and Modeling by Finite Element Analysis,' SAE-paper 2003-01-0506, SAE World Congress, Detroit, Michigan