Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
article

A comparative study of metamodeling methods for multiobjective crashworthiness optimization

Published: 01 September 2005 Publication History

Abstract

The response surface methodology (RSM), which typically uses quadratic polynomials, is predominantly used for metamodeling in crashworthiness optimization because of the high computational cost of vehicle crash simulations. Research shows, however, that RSM may not be suitable for modeling highly nonlinear responses that can often be found in impact related problems, especially when using limited quantity of response samples. The radial basis functions (RBF) have been shown to be promising for highly nonlinear problems, but no application to crashworthiness problems has been found in the literature. In this study, metamodels by RSM and RBF are used for multiobjective optimization of a vehicle body in frontal collision, with validations by finite element simulations using the full-scale vehicle model. The results show that RSM is able to produce good approximation models for energy absorption, and the model appropriateness can be well predicted by ANOVA. However, in the case of peak acceleration, RBF is found to generate better models than RSM based on the same number of response samples, with the multiquadric function identified to be the most stable RBF. Although RBF models are computationally more expensive, the optimization results of RBF models are found to be more accurate.

References

[1]
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) Report: 2002 annual assessment motor vehicle traffic crash fatality and injury estimates for 2002. NCSA, 2003.
[2]
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and Regulations. US Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Washington, DC: 1998.
[3]
Marklund, P.O. and Nilsson, L., Optimization of a car body component subjected to side impact. Struct Multidiscip Optim. v21. 383-392.
[4]
Kim, C.H., Mijar, A.R. and Arora, J.S., Development of simplified models for design and optimization of automotive structures for crashworthiness. Struct Multidiscip Optim. v22. 307-321.
[5]
Redhe, M., Forsberg, J., Jansson, T., Marklund, P.O. and Nilsson, L., Using the response surface methodology and the D-optimality criterion in crashworthiness related problems. Struct Multidiscip Optim. v24. 185-194.
[6]
Avalle, M., Chiandussi, G. and Belingardi, G., Design optimization by response surface methodology: application to crashworthiness design of vehicle structures. Struct Multidiscip Optim. v24. 325-332.
[7]
Kirkpatrick, S.W., Simons, J.W. and Antoun, T.H., Development and validation of high fidelity vehicle crash simulation models. Int J Crash. v4. 395-405.
[8]
Zaouk, A.K., Marzougui, D. and Bedewi, N.E., Development of a detailed vehicle finite element model. Part I: Methodology. Int J Crash. v5. 25-35.
[9]
Zaouk, A.K., Marzougui, D. and Kan, C.D., Development of a detailed vehicle finite element model. Part II: Material characterization and component testing. Int J Crash. v5. 37-50.
[10]
Kan, C.D., Marzougui, D., Bahouth, G.T. and Bedewi, N.E., Crashworthiness evaluation using integrated vehicle and occupant finite element models. Int J Crash. v6.
[11]
Alexandrov, N.M., Dennis, J.E., Lewis, R.M. and Torczon, V., A trust region framework for managing the use of approximation models in optimization. Struct Multidiscip Optim. v15. 16-23.
[12]
Rais-Rohani, M. and Singh, M.N., Comparison of global and local response surface techniques in reliability-based optimization of composite structures. Struct Multidiscip Optim. v26. 333-345.
[13]
Wang, G., Dong, Z. and Aitchison, P., Adaptive response surface method-a global optimization scheme for approximation-based design problems. J Eng Optim. v33. 707-734.
[14]
Rodriguez J, Renaud JE, Watson LT. Trust region augmented Lagrangian methods for sequential response surface approximation and optimization. In: Proceedings of DETC'97 ASME design engineering technical conference. Sacramento, CA: Paper no. DETC97/DAC3773, ASME, 1997.
[15]
Yang, B.S., Yeun, Y.S. and Ruy, W.S., Managing approximation models in multi-objective optimization. Struct Multidiscip Optim. v24. 141-156.
[16]
Jin, R., Chen, W. and Simpson, T.W., Comparative studies of metamodelling techniques under multiple modeling criteria. Struct Multidiscip Optim. v23. 1-13.
[17]
Krishnamurthy T. Response surface approximation with augmented and compactly supported radial basis functions. The 44th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC structures, structural dynamics, and materials conference. Norfolk, VA: 2003.
[18]
Daberkow DD, Mavris DN. An investigation of metamodelling techniques for complex systems design. The 9th AIAA/ISSMO symposium on multidisciplinary analysis and optimization. Atlanta, GA: 2002.
[19]
Montgomery, D.C., Design and analysis of experiments. 2001. 5th ed. John Wiley&Sons, New York.
[20]
Hardy, R.L., Multiquadratic equations of topography and other irregular surfaces. J Geophys. v76. 1905-1915.
[21]
Branin, F.K., A widely convergent method for finding multiple solutions of simultaneous nonlinear equations. IBM J Res Develop. v16. 504-522.
[22]
LS-DYNA Keyword User's Manual, version 970. Livermore Software Technology Corporation, 2003.
[23]
Brezzi, F. and Bathe, K.J., A discourse on the stability conditions for mixed finite element formulations. Comput Meth Appl Mech Eng. v82. 27-57.
[24]
Bathe, K.J., The inf-sup condition and its evaluation for mixed finite element methods. Comput Struct. v79. 243-252.
[25]
Fang H, Horstemeyer MF. An integrated design optimization framework using object-oriented programming. In: Proceedings of the 10th AIAA/ISSMO multidisciplinary analysis and optimization conference. Albany, NY: 2004. Paper no. AIAA-2004-4499.
[26]
Lawrence CT, Zhou JL, Tits AL. User's guide for CFSQP, Ver2.5. Electrical Engineering Department and Institute for Systems Research, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, 1997.
[27]
Taguchi, G., . 1993. Quality engineering series, 1993.Japanese Standards Association, ASI Press, Tokyo.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Generating Cheap Representative Functions for Expensive Automotive Crashworthiness OptimizationACM Transactions on Evolutionary Learning and Optimization10.1145/36465544:2(1-26)Online publication date: 13-Feb-2024
  • (2024)Handling of constraints in multiobjective blackbox optimizationComputational Optimization and Applications10.1007/s10589-024-00588-289:1(69-113)Online publication date: 16-Jul-2024
  • (2024)A new cross-section layout method and geometrical parameter optimization for floor beams of rack car body considering modal factorsStructural and Multidisciplinary Optimization10.1007/s00158-024-03794-y67:5Online publication date: 11-May-2024
  • Show More Cited By
  1. A comparative study of metamodeling methods for multiobjective crashworthiness optimization

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image Computers and Structures
      Computers and Structures  Volume 83, Issue 25-26
      September, 2005
      163 pages

      Publisher

      Pergamon Press, Inc.

      United States

      Publication History

      Published: 01 September 2005

      Author Tags

      1. Crashworthiness
      2. Metamodeling
      3. Multiobjective optimization
      4. Radial basis function
      5. Response surface methodology

      Qualifiers

      • Article

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
      Reflects downloads up to 24 Dec 2024

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      Cited By

      View all
      • (2024)Generating Cheap Representative Functions for Expensive Automotive Crashworthiness OptimizationACM Transactions on Evolutionary Learning and Optimization10.1145/36465544:2(1-26)Online publication date: 13-Feb-2024
      • (2024)Handling of constraints in multiobjective blackbox optimizationComputational Optimization and Applications10.1007/s10589-024-00588-289:1(69-113)Online publication date: 16-Jul-2024
      • (2024)A new cross-section layout method and geometrical parameter optimization for floor beams of rack car body considering modal factorsStructural and Multidisciplinary Optimization10.1007/s00158-024-03794-y67:5Online publication date: 11-May-2024
      • (2024)A constrained Bayesian Optimization framework for structural vibrations with local nonlinearitiesStructural and Multidisciplinary Optimization10.1007/s00158-024-03747-567:4Online publication date: 13-Mar-2024
      • (2023)Structure–connection–performance integration lightweight optimisation design of multi-material automotive body skeletonStructural and Multidisciplinary Optimization10.1007/s00158-023-03656-z66:9Online publication date: 23-Aug-2023
      • (2023)Serial combinational optimization method for double wishbone suspension’s pseudo damage improvementStructural and Multidisciplinary Optimization10.1007/s00158-023-03579-966:6Online publication date: 10-May-2023
      • (2023)A novel metamodel-based multi-objective optimization method using adaptive multi-regional ensemble of metamodelsStructural and Multidisciplinary Optimization10.1007/s00158-023-03530-y66:4Online publication date: 7-Apr-2023
      • (2022)Learning the characteristics of engineering optimization problems with applications in automotive crashProceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference10.1145/3512290.3528712(1227-1236)Online publication date: 8-Jul-2022
      • (2022)An efficient hybrid sequential approximate optimization method for problems with computationally expensive objective and constraintsEngineering with Computers10.1007/s00366-020-01093-w38:1(727-738)Online publication date: 1-Feb-2022
      • (2021)An adaptive RBF neural network–based multi-objective optimization method for lightweight and crashworthiness design of cab floor rails using fuzzy subtractive clustering algorithmStructural and Multidisciplinary Optimization10.1007/s00158-020-02797-963:2(915-928)Online publication date: 1-Feb-2021
      • Show More Cited By

      View Options

      View options

      Media

      Figures

      Other

      Tables

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media