ALBERT

Description: NASA Lewis Research Center's CometBoards Test Bed was used to create regression and neural network models for a High-Speed Civil Transport (HSCT) aircraft. Both approximation models that replaced the actual analysis tool predicted the aircraft response in a trivial computational effort. The models allow engineers to quickly study the effects of design variables on constraint and objective values for a given aircraft configuration. For example, an engineer can change the engine size by 1000 pounds of thrust and quickly see how this change affects all the output values without rerunning the entire simulation. In addition, an engineer can change a constraint and use the approximation models to quickly reoptimize the configuration. Generating the neural network and the regression models is a time-consuming process, but this exercise has to be carried out only once. Furthermore, an automated process can reduce calculations substantially.

Description: A preliminary methodology was obtained for the design optimization of a subsonic aircraft by coupling NASA Langley Research Center s Flight Optimization System (FLOPS) with NASA Glenn Research Center s design optimization testbed (COMETBOARDS with regression and neural network analysis approximators). The aircraft modeled can carry 200 passengers at a cruise speed of Mach 0.85 over a range of 2500 n mi and can operate on standard 6000-ft takeoff and landing runways. The design simulation was extended to evaluate the optimal airframe and engine parameters for the subsonic aircraft to operate on nonstandard runways. Regression and neural network approximators were used to examine aircraft operation on runways ranging in length from 4500 to 7500 ft.

Description: The neural network and regression methods of NASA Glenn Research Center s COMETBOARDS design optimization testbed were used to generate approximate analysis and design models for a subsonic aircraft operating at Mach 0.85 cruise speed. The analytical model is defined by nine design variables: wing aspect ratio, engine thrust, wing area, sweep angle, chord-thickness ratio, turbine temperature, pressure ratio, bypass ratio, fan pressure; and eight response parameters: weight, landing velocity, takeoff and landing field lengths, approach thrust, overall efficiency, and compressor pressure and temperature. The variables were adjusted to optimally balance the engines to the airframe. The solution strategy included a sensitivity model and the soft analysis model. Researchers generated the sensitivity model by training the approximators to predict an optimum design. The trained neural network predicted all response variables, within 5-percent error. This was reduced to 1 percent by the regression method. The soft analysis model was developed to replace aircraft analysis as the reanalyzer in design optimization. Soft models have been generated for a neural network method, a regression method, and a hybrid method obtained by combining the approximators. The performance of the models is graphed for aircraft weight versus thrust as well as for wing area and turbine temperature. The regression method followed the analytical solution with little error. The neural network exhibited 5-percent maximum error over all parameters. Performance of the hybrid method was intermediate in comparison to the individual approximators. Error in the response variable is smaller than that shown in the figure because of a distortion scale factor. The overall performance of the approximators was considered to be satisfactory because aircraft analysis with NASA Langley Research Center s FLOPS (Flight Optimization System) code is a synthesis of diverse disciplines: weight estimation, aerodynamic analysis, engine cycle analysis, propulsion data interpolation, mission performance, airfield length for landing and takeoff, noise footprint, and others.

Description: A key challenge in designing the new High Speed Civil Transport (HSCT) aircraft is determining a good match between the airframe and engine. Multidisciplinary design optimization can be used to solve the problem by adjusting parameters of both the engine and the airframe. Earlier, an example problem was presented of an HSCT aircraft with four mixed-flow turbofan engines and a baseline mission to carry 305 passengers 5000 nautical miles at a cruise speed of Mach 2.4. The problem was solved by coupling NASA Lewis Research Center's design optimization testbed (COMETBOARDS) with NASA Langley Research Center's Flight Optimization System (FLOPS). The computing time expended in solving the problem was substantial, and the instability of the FLOPS analyzer at certain design points caused difficulties. In an attempt to alleviate both of these limitations, we explored the use of two approximation concepts in the design optimization process. The two concepts, which are based on neural network and linear regression approximation, provide the reanalysis capability and design sensitivity analysis information required for the optimization process. The HSCT aircraft optimization problem was solved by using three alternate approaches; that is, the original FLOPS analyzer and two approximate (derived) analyzers. The approximate analyzers were calibrated and used in three different ranges of the design variables; narrow (interpolated), standard, and wide (extrapolated).

Description: At the NASA Glenn Research Center, NASA Langley Research Center's Flight Optimization System (FLOPS) and the design optimization testbed COMETBOARDS with regression and neural-network-analysis approximators have been coupled to obtain a preliminary aircraft design methodology. For a subsonic aircraft, the optimal design, that is the airframe-engine combination, is obtained by the simulation. The aircraft is powered by two high-bypass-ratio engines with a nominal thrust of about 35,000 lbf. It is to carry 150 passengers at a cruise speed of Mach 0.8 over a range of 3000 n mi and to operate on a 6000-ft runway. The aircraft design utilized a neural network and a regression-approximations-based analysis tool, along with a multioptimizer cascade algorithm that uses sequential linear programming, sequential quadratic programming, the method of feasible directions, and then sequential quadratic programming again. Optimal aircraft weight versus the number of design iterations is shown. The central processing unit (CPU) time to solution is given. It is shown that the regression-method-based analyzer exhibited a smoother convergence pattern than the FLOPS code. The optimum weight obtained by the approximation technique and the FLOPS code differed by 1.3 percent. Prediction by the approximation technique exhibited no error for the aircraft wing area and turbine entry temperature, whereas it was within 2 percent for most other parameters. Cascade strategy was required by FLOPS as well as the approximators. The regression method had a tendency to hug the data points, whereas the neural network exhibited a propensity to follow a mean path. The performance of the neural network and regression methods was considered adequate. It was at about the same level for small, standard, and large models with redundancy ratios (defined as the number of input-output pairs to the number of unknown coefficients) of 14, 28, and 57, respectively. In an SGI octane workstation (Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mountainview, CA), the regression training required a fraction of a CPU second, whereas neural network training was between 1 and 9 min, as given. For a single analysis cycle, the 3-sec CPU time required by the FLOPS code was reduced to milliseconds by the approximators. For design calculations, the time with the FLOPS code was 34 min. It was reduced to 2 sec with the regression method and to 4 min by the neural network technique. The performance of the regression and neural network methods was found to be satisfactory for the analysis and design optimization of the subsonic aircraft.

Description: The Flight-Optimization-System (FLOPS) code encountered difficulty in analyzing a subsonic aircraft. The limitation made the design optimization problematic. The deficiencies have been alleviated through use of neural network and regression approximations. The insight gained from using the approximators is discussed in this paper. The FLOPS code is reviewed. Analysis models are developed and validated for each approximator. The regression method appears to hug the data points, while the neural network approximation follows a mean path. For an analysis cycle, the approximate model required milliseconds of central processing unit (CPU) time versus seconds by the FLOPS code. Performance of the approximators was satisfactory for aircraft analysis. A design optimization capability has been created by coupling the derived analyzers to the optimization test bed CometBoards. The approximators were efficient reanalysis tools in the aircraft design optimization. Instability encountered in the FLOPS analyzer was eliminated. The convergence characteristics were improved for the design optimization. The CPU time required to calculate the optimum solution, measured in hours with the FLOPS code was reduced to minutes with the neural network approximation and to seconds with the regression method. Generation of the approximators required the manipulation of a very large quantity of data. Design sensitivity with respect to the bounds of aircraft constraints is easily generated.