Multidisciplinary Design Optimisation Strategy in Multistage Launch Vehicle Conceptual Design - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Multidisciplinary Design Optimisation Strategy in Multistage Launch Vehicle Conceptual Design PowerPoint presentation | free to view - id: 45999-ZDc1Z



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Multidisciplinary Design Optimisation Strategy in Multistage Launch Vehicle Conceptual Design

Description:

Multi-disciplinary Design Optimisation Strategy in Multi-stage Launch Vehicle Conceptual Design. Introduction to Launch Vehicle (LV) ... Braun, R.D. and Moore. ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:189
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 53
Provided by: sar98
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Multidisciplinary Design Optimisation Strategy in Multistage Launch Vehicle Conceptual Design


1
Multi-disciplinary Design Optimisation Strategy
in Multi-stage Launch Vehicle Conceptual Design
2
  • Introduction to Launch Vehicle (LV) conceptual
    design process
  • Literature survey on Multi-disciplinary Design
    Optimisation(MDO) in LV design
  • Proposed research work
  • Preliminary work done

3
Introduction to LV Conceptual Design Process
  • Design of Launch Vehicle
  • Making appropriate comprises to achieve balance
    among many coupled objectives.
  • Objectives
  • High performance
  • Safety
  • Simple operation
  • Low cost
  • Conceptual design
  • To reveal trends and allow relative comparison
    among alternatives, while design flexibility
    exists.

4
Introduction to LV Conceptual Design Process
  • Outcome of conceptual design
  • Number of stages
  • Type of stage/propellant
  • Mass split of stages
  • Thrust levels and propulsive system details
  • External layout

5
Mission Requirements
Propulsion Options design
Layout Surface geometry
Vehicle sizing
Weight C.G
Structural, Control Thermal Analyses
Trajectory Analyses
Vehicle Configuration Dimensions Steering rate
history
Aerodynamic Analysis
Launch vehicle conceptual design process
6
Introduction to LV Conceptual Design Process
  • Determining the optimum configuration
  • The evaluation of the interaction between the
    vehicle systems
  • The impact of this system upon the vehicles
    ability to perform the desired mission.

7
Introduction to LV Conceptual Design Process
  • Optimum values of design parameters
  • Vehicle performance will be carried out to
    examine the value of each parameters by fixing
    the values of remaining parameters.
    one-variable-at-a-time approach

8
Introduction to LV Conceptual Design Process
  • Conceptual design of Advanced Manned Launch
    System
  • Ref Stanley, D.O., Talay, A.T., Lepsch, R.A.,
    Morris, W.D., Kathy, E.W. Conceptual Design Of
    A Fully Reusable Manned Launch System. Journal
    of Spacecraft And Rockets, Vol 29, No.4, pp
    529-537, July-August, 1992
  • Reference vehicle geometry is chosen after all
    discipline analyses were carried out.
  • After finalising the reference vehicle, a series
    of parametric trade studies were performed to
    determine the major vehicle parameters.

9
Introduction to LV Conceptual Design Process
10
Layout Surface geometry
Vehicle Concept options
Aerodynamic analysis
Mission Requirements
Trajectory analysis
Structural, Control, thermal Propulsion analyses
Propulsion option
Configuration, Weights and sizing
Technology options
Cost Analysis
Operational analysis
Operational options
Rethink/modify requirements and options
11
Introduction to LV Conceptual Design Process
  • The limitations associated with conceptual design
    are
  • Conceptual design is carried out with low
    fidelity models
  • The relationships among design and the conceptual
    design parameters are often not well modeled or
    understood.
  • In one-variable-at-a-time approach, the impact
    of simultaneously considering all variables is
    not considered Result in near optimum
    configuration.

12
Introduction to LV Conceptual Design Process
  • These limitations result in probably inefficient
    final design - Leaving room for significant
    improvements in performance and reduction in life
    costs.

13
Introduction to LV Conceptual Design Process
  • To improve results during conceptual design
  • Improvement of disciplinary analysis, modelling
    and tools that capture, with sufficient fidelity,
    the major relationships among design variables
    and system objectives.
  • The development of methods for coordinating the
    engineering analysis and optimising the total
    launch vehicle system.
  • (iii) All-at-same-time approach is to be
    adopted.

14
Introduction to LV Conceptual Design Process
  • All these can be achieved by design of all
    systems together should be iteratively refined
    together, with sufficient fidelity models, by
    MDO scheme.
  • This was not practical earlier because of high
    computational expenditure associated with
    numerical prediction methods.
  • Now, with availability of various methods and
    computational capabilities an MDO based
    conceptual design can be made.

15
Introduction to LV Conceptual Design Process
  • MDO based conceptual design will allow system
    engineers to systematically explore the vast
    trade space and consider many more
    configurations during the conceptual design phase
    before converging on the final design.

16
Literature Review on MDO Works Related to Launch
Vehicle Design
17
Literature Review on MDO Works on LV Design
  • Performance optimisation of launch Vehicle
  • System design Vehicle characteristic and
    parameters like number of stages engine sizing.
  • Trajectory optimisation - Control vector that
    optimises the performance for the chosen
    configuration.
  • Ideally, design of the vehicle and propulsion
    system and trajectory shaping should be
    iteratively refined together by a coupled MDO
    scheme to obtain solution.

18
Literature Review on MDO works on LV design
  • MDO approaches in LV design
  • To optimise vehicle performance is collect
    all elements of the trajectory control vector and
    system design variables in one vector of
    optimisation parameters to be manipulated by an
    appropriate algorithm.
  • This approach has been applied successfully
    to ascent mission of Rocket powered
    single-stage-to-orbit.
  • (I) Iterative loop MDO strategy
  • (ii) Sequential compatibility constraint
    solution
  • (iii) Collaborative Optimization

19
Literature Review on MDO works on LV design
  • References
  • Braun, R. D., Powell, R. W., Lepsch, R. A..
    Stanley, D. 0., and Kroo, 1. M., "Comparison of
    Two Multidisciplinary Optimization Strategies for
    Launch-Vehicle Design," Journal of Spacecraft and
    Rockets, Vol. 32, No. 3, 1995,pp.404-410.
  • Braun, R.D. and Moore., Collaborative approach
    to launch vehicle design Journal of Spacecraft
    and Rockets, Vol. 34, No.4, pp 478-485,
    July-August,1997.

20
Iterative-loop solution strategy
Optimizer Minimize Jdry weight Design
variables(40) Subject to inflight and terminal
constraints
Initial guess at GLOW, Sref Base diameter Landed
weight
propulsion
GLOWGLOWc SrefSrefc Landed wt Landed
wtc base diameter base diameterc
Inflight Terminal Constraints
Trajectory
N0
Delta (GLOWc-GLOW)2 (Srefc-Sref) 2
(Landed wtc-Landed wt) 2 (base diameterc-
base diameter) 2
Is Delta small
Weights Sizing
GLOWc, Srefc Base diameterc Landed weightc
Yes
Dry weight
Done
21
Sequential compatibility-constraint solution
Optimizer Minimize Jdry weight Design
variables(40) Subject to inflight and terminal
constraints
propulsion
Trajectory
Inflight terminal constraints
Weights Sizing
Compatibility constraints GLOWc-GLOW
0 Srefc-Sref 0 Landed wtc-Landed wt 0 base
diameterc- base diameter 0
GLOWc Srefc Landed wtc base diameterc
Dry weight
22
Literature Review on MDO works on LV design
  • Advantages of sequential compatibility constraint
    approach
  • i) being 3-4 times more computationally
    efficient
  • ii) providing greater flexibility in the way
    in which consistency is maintained across
    disciplinary boundaries, and
  • iii) a smoother design space.
  • Disadvantage
  • The compatibility constraint approach is in
    situations terminates without reaching the
    solution - Because multidisciplinary
    feasibility is only guaranteed at a solution in
    this approach, the design information could be
    invalid.

23
Literature Review on MDO works on LV design
  • Collaboration optimization
  • A problem is decomposed into subproblems along
    domain-specific boundaries.
  • Through subspace optimization, each group is
    given control over its own set of local design
    variables and is charged with satisfying its own
    domain-specific constraints.
  • The objective of each subproblem is to reach
    agreement with the other groups on values of the
    interdisciplinary variables.
  • A system-level optimizer is employed to
    orchestrate this interdisciplinary compatibility
    process while minimizing the overall objective

24
Literature Review on MDO works on LV design
Collaborative optimization architecture for
launch vehicle design
25
Literature Review on MDO works on LV design
26
Literature Review on MDO works on LV design
  • Ref Tsuchiya, T. and Mori. T.
    Multidisciplinary Design Optimization to
    future space transportation vehicle. AIAA
    2002-5171.
  • MDO method to choose the best among the seven
    typical concepts of RLV.
  • The design variables are representing geometry
    and shape of vehicles, flight performance
    parameters
  • Similar to Sequential Compatibility Constraint
    Solution.

27
Literature Review on MDO works on LV design
  • Ref Hillesheimer, M., Schotlle, U. M. and
    Messerschmid, E., "Optimization of Two-Stage
    Reusable Space Transportation Systems with Rocket
    and Airbreathing Propulsion Concepts,"
    International Astronautical Federation Paper
    92-O863, Sept. 1992
  • Though these MDO architectures has been applied
    successfully to the ascent mission of single
    stage vehicle, it has shown poor convergence
    properties even for less complex mission examples
    of an expendable multistage rocket launches, when
    major system design parameters such as the mass
    split of stages or engine sizing were included
    to optimize trajectory control and vehicle
    parameters simultaneously

28
Literature Review on MDO works on LV design
  • Proposed another approach that avoids this
    difficulty is a multistep sequential optimization
    procedure.
  • Consists of a performance optimization cycle
    (inner loop) and a vehicle design cycle (outer
    loop).
  • Inner loop uses the data of the latter to
    determine the control functions and major system
    parameters yielding the optimum performance -
    responds to varying vehicle size needs as long
    as the departure from the preset design (outer
    loop) remains small.

29
Literature Review on MDO works on LV design
Multistep sequential procedure
30
Literature Review on MDO works on LV design
  • Otherwise, a vehicle redesign including system
    modifications and reevaluation of the aerodynamic
    coefficients (which are held constant in the
    inner optimization cycle) is performed in
    separate computations in the outer iteration
    loop.
  • The latter requires manual interaction and is
    supported by graphic interface tools.
  • This scheme outlined above is applied to enhance
    the performance of a reusable rocket launcher
    which is part of Ariane X family.

31
Literature Review on MDO works on LV design
  • Two design software based on the schemes similar
    to multistage sequential optimization process.
  • FASTPASS (Flexible analysis for synthesis
    trajectory and performance for advanced space
    systems) developed by Lockheed Martin
    Astronautics and
  • SWORD (Strategic Weapon Optimisation for rapid
    Design) developed by Lockheed Missile design and
    space Co. for solid motor missile.
  • References
  • Szedula, J.A., FASTPASS A Tool For Launch
    Vehicle Synthesis, AIAA-96-4051-CP, 1996.
  • Hempel, P. R., Moeller C. P., and Stuntz L.
    M., Missile Design Optimization Experience And
    Developments, AIAA-94-4344,1994-CP

32
Literature Review on MDO works on LV design
  • Ref Rahn, M. and Schottle, U. M., "Decomposition
    Algorithm for Performance Optimization of a
    Launch Vehicle," Journal of Spacecraft and
    Rockets, Vol. 33, No. 2, 1996, pp. 214--221.
  • Though Multistep sequential scheme was able
    to solve the optimization problem of a two-stage,
    winged rocket launch vehicle designed for
    vertical takeoff, severe convergence problems
    were encountered when it was applied to the more
    complex mission of an airbreathing launch
    vehicles.
  • These difficulties were attributed in part
    to different performance sensitivities of the
    various flight phases, controls, and major system
    design parameters, and to scaling problems.

33
Literature Review on MDO works on LV design
  • Proposes a decomposition approach to solve
    the overall optimization problem of a Reentry
    launch system.
  • Partitioning the trajectory into subarcs such
    that each mission segment can be optimized
    independently.
  • These subproblems constitute the first level of
    optimization.
  • A second-level controller is then used to
    optimize the entire mission.
  • Hence, a two-level optimization procedure
    results, with the master-level algorithm
    optimally coordinating the solution of the
    subproblems.

34
Literature Review on MDO works on LV design
35
Literature Review on MDO works on LV design
36
Literature Review on MDO works on LV design
  • MDO methods may be divided into three groups
  • i) Parameters methods based on design of
    experiments (DOE) techniques
  • ii) Gradient or Calculus based methods
  • iii) Stochastic methods such as genetic
    algorithm and simulated annealing.
  • Parametric methods as well as gradient based
    methods are applicable at conceptual design
    phase.

37

Literature Review on MDO works on LV design
  • Ref Stanley, D. O., Unal, R., and Joyner, C.
    R., "Application of Taguchi Methods to Dual
    Mixture Ratio Propulsion System Optimization for
    SSTO Vehicles," Journal of Spacecraft and
    Rockets, Vol. 29, No. 4, 1992, pp. 453-459.
  • Taguchi design method to determine the thrust
    levels of a variety of engine and vehicle
    parameter for single-stage-to-orbit vehicle.
  • This study considers five design parameters.

38
Literature Review on MDO works on LV design
  • Ref Stanley, D. 0., Engelund. W. C., Lepsch.
    R. A., McMillin, M. L.Wt K. E.. Powell. R. W.,
    Guinta. A. A., and Unal, R. "Rocket-Powered
    Single Stage Vehicle Configuration Selection and
    Design," Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets,
    Vol. 31, No. 5, 1994. pp. 792-798 also AIAA
    Paper93-Feb. 1993.
  • The configuration selection for rocket powered
    single stage vehicle configuration using RSM.
  • Five configuration parameters considered for
    study.
  • RSM was used to determine the minimum dry weight
    entry vehicle to meet constraints on performance.

39
Literature Review on MDO works on LV design
  • Ref Olds, J., and Walberg, G.,
    Multidisciplinary Design of a Rocket-Based
    Combined-Cycle SSTO Launch Vehicle using
    Taguchi Methods , AIAA 93-1096, Feb,1993.
  • Taguchi method was used to evaluate the
    effects of changing 8 design variables (2 of
    which were discrete) in an "all at the same time"
    approach.
  • Design variables pertained to both the
    vehicle geometry (cone half-angle, engine cowl
    wrap around angle) and trajectory parameters
    (dynamic pressure limits, heating rate limits,
    and airbreathing mode to rocket mode transition
    Mach number).

40
Literature Review on MDO works on LV design
  • Ref Anderson, m., Burkhalter J., and Jenkins R
    Multidisciplinary Intelligence Systems
    Approach To Solid Rocket Motor Design, Part I
    Single And Dual Goal Optimization. AIAA
    2001-3599, July, 2001.
  • Investigated the potential of using a
    multidisciplinary genetic algorithm approach to
    the design of a solid rocket motor propulsion
    system as a component within overall missile
    system. Aerodynamics and trajectory performance
    disciplines were considered in this study

41
Literature Review on MDO works on LV design
  • A survey on literature reveals that MDO works
    related to conceptual design, that is,
    simultaneous optimization of system and
    trajectory are limited to
  • Enhancement of an existing reference vehicle
    system
  • Selecting one among canididate configurations
  • Subsystem optimization with respect to vehicle
    performance.

42
Literature Review on MDO works on LV design
  • This may be attributed to the focused effort on
    the Advanced Manned Launch System (AMLS) activity
    since 1988. Two vehicles, single stage and two
    stages were used for this AMLS mission and all
    further design studies are to optimize the
    performance of these configuration.
  • Also, other recently developed vehicles are
    designed by evolution strategy.

43
Proposed Research Work
  • An MDO strategy with following capability would
    be useful in developing a new vehicle.
  • That is, given the range of realizable mass
    fraction and specific impulse, the scheme should
    be able to decide number of stages, mass and
    propellant fraction and iterate this vehicle,
    propulsion system and trajectory shaping and give
    optimum configuration and trajectory that meets
    the specification.

44
Proposed Research Work
  • This would be useful when no propulsion system or
    technological constraints are identified and the
    initial trade space is being defined.
  • This scheme may come up with a design which is
    non- intuitive and much better than traditional
    design technique.
  • Development of such scheme is the aim of present
    research effort.

45
Preliminary Work Done
46
Preliminary Work Done
  • Aim
  • To demonstrate the effect of bringing Mass
    estimation discipline into conceptual design
  • Problem considered
  • Choose a configuration with
    two-stage-to-orbit vehicle to inject 20t payload
    at 400km circular orbit.
  • Assumptions
  • ?V loss
  • Structural factors (?1, ? 2 )
  • Specific Impulse

47
Preliminary Work Done
48
Preliminary Work Done
Orbit Specifications Payload
Choice of propulsion Isp1, Isp2
ms1,mp1 ms2,mp2, mpf LOW
?Vtotal ? 1, ? 2
Ideal velocity calculations
Initialize ?V1
Assumptions ?V loss Structural factors (?1, ? 2 )
Optimum LOW Configuration
Is LOW minimum
Vary ?V1
Yes
No
49
Preliminary Work Done
Dy. Pressure Load factor Area ratios Fineness
ratios
mp1 mp2, mpf
Sizing of tanks
Weight estimation
ms1e,ms2e
50
Preliminary Work Done
Dy. Pressure Load factor Area ratios Fineness
ratios
Orbit Specifications Payload
Choice of propulsion Isp1, Isp2
ms1,mp1 ms2,mp2, mpf LOW
?Vtotal ? 1, ? 2
Ideal velocity calculations
Initialize ?V1
Sizing of tanks ms1e,ms2e
Assumptions ?V loss Structural factors (?1, ? 2 )
Is ms1 ms1e ms2 ms2e
Weight estimation
No
Vary ? 1, ? 2
Yes
LOW
Optimum LOW Configuration
Is LOW minimum
Vary ?V1
Yes
No
51
Preliminary Work Done
52
Preliminary Work Done
About PowerShow.com