Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-n8gtw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-08T08:24:57.140Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cruise missile head shape optimisation using an adaptive sampling surrogate model

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 May 2018

S. Z. Guo ,
X. M. Zheng ,
H. S. Ang  and
H. M. Cai
S. Z. Guo*
Affiliation:
Nanjing University of Aeronautics & Astronautics, Baixia, Nanjing, China
X. M. Zheng
Affiliation:
Nanjing University of Aeronautics & Astronautics, Baixia, Nanjing, China
H. S. Ang
Affiliation:
Nanjing University of Aeronautics & Astronautics, Baixia, Nanjing, China
H. M. Cai
Affiliation:
Nanjing University of Science and Technology, Qinhuai, Nanjing, China
*
szguo@nuaa.edu.cn
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

High-precision response of the surrogate model is desired in the process of optimisation. An excessive number of sampling points will increase the cost of the calculation. The appropriate number of sampling points cannot only guarantee the accuracy of the surrogate model but also save the calculation cost. The purpose of this research is to demonstrate the eventuality of using an adaptive surrogate model for optimisation problems. The adaptive surrogate model is built on an adaptive sampling approach and an extended radial basis function (ERBF). The adaptive sampling is an approach that new sampling points are placed in the blank area and all the sampling points are uniformly distributed in the design region using Multi-Island GA. The precision of the ERBF surrogate model is checked using standard error measure to determine whether the surrogate model should be updated or not. This adaptive surrogate model is used to optimise a cruise missile head shape. Aerodynamic and stealthy performance of the cruise missile head shape are considered in this research. Different global objective function and different weight factor are used to research the aerodynamic and stealthy performance in this optimisation process. The results show that the drag is reduced with a slender head shape and the radar-cross section (RCS) value is reduced with a short head shape.

Keywords

Extended radial basis functionadaptive samplingsurrogate modeloptimisationcruise missile

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 122 , Issue 1253 , July 2018 , pp. 1145 - 1162
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

1. Forrester, A.I.J., Sóbester, A. and Keane, A.J. Engineering Design via Surrogate Modelling: A Practical Guide. DBLP, 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Deng, S., Percin, M., van-Oudheusden, B.W., Bijl, H., Remes, B. and Xiao, T. Numerical simulation of a flexible x-wing flapping-wing micro air vehicle, AIAA J, 2017, 55, (7), pp 2295–2306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Braun, M., Kleditzsch, S. and Scharler, R. A method for reduction of computational time of local equilibria for biomass flue gas compositions in CFD, Progress in Computational Fluid Dynamics, an Int J, 2006, 6, (4–5), pp 272–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Braun, U.M. and Riedel, U. Alternative fuels in aviation, Aeronaut J, 2015, 6, (1), pp 83–93.Google Scholar
5. Jouhaud, J.C., Sagaut, P. and Montagnac, M. A. Surrogate-model based multidisciplinary shape optimisation method with application to a 2D subsonic airfoil, Computers & Fluids, 2007, 36, (3), pp 520–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Queipo, N.V., Haftka, R.T. and Shyy, W. Surrogate-based analysis and optimization, Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 2005, 41, (1), pp 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Rosenow, J., Lindner, M. and Fricke, H. Impact of climate costs on airline network and trajectory optimization: A parametric study, Aeronaut J, 2017, 8, (2), pp 371–384.Google Scholar
8. Conway, B. A., ed. Spacecraft Trajectory Optimization. Cambridge University Press, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Box, G.E.P. and Wilson, K.B. On the experimental attainment of optimum conditions, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 1951, 13, (1), pp 1–45.Google Scholar
10. Wu, Z., Huang, D. and Wang, W. Optimization for fire performance of ultra-low density fiberboards using response surface methodology, BioResources, 2017, 12, (2), pp 3790–3800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Sun, Z.G., Xiao, S.D. and Xu, M.H. Optimization of the structure of water axial piston pump and cavitation of plunger cavity based on the Kriging model, J Vibroengineering, 2016, 18, (4), pp 2460-2474.Google Scholar
12. Akhtar, T. and Shoemaker, C.A. Multi objective optimization of computationally expensive multi-modal functions with RBF surrogates and multi-rule selection, J Global Optimization, 2016, 64, (1), pp 17–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Mullur, A.A. and Messac, A. Extended radial basis functions: More flexible and effective metamodeling, AIAA J, 2005, 43, (6), pp 1306–1315.Google Scholar
14. Chen, Z., Qiu, H. and Gao, L. A local adaptive sampling method for reliability-based design optimization using Kriging model, Structural & Multidisciplinary Optimization, 2014, 49, (3), pp 401–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Remondo, D., Srinivasan, R. and Nicola, V.F. Adaptive importance sampling for performance evaluation and parameter optimization of communication systems, IEEE Transactions on Communications, 2000, 48, (4), pp 557–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Li, T.M., Wu, Y.T. and Chuang, Y.Y. SURE-based optimization for adaptive sampling and reconstruction, ACM Transactions on Graphics, 2012, 31, (6), pp 1–9.Google Scholar
17. Vytla, V.V.S., Huang, P. and Penmetsa, R. Multi-objective aerodynamic shape optimization of high speed train nose using adaptive surrogate model, AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, 2010, 15, pp 25–34.Google Scholar
18. Golzari, A., Sefat, M.H. and Jamshidi, S. Development of an adaptive surrogate model for production optimization, J Petroleum Science & Engineering, 2015, 133, (6), pp 677–688.Google Scholar
19. Jones, D. R., Schonlau, M. and Welch, W. J. Efficient global optimization of expensive black-box functions. J Global Optimization, 1998, 13, (4), pp 455–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. Zhang, J.J., Xu, L.W. and Gao, R.Z. Multi-island genetic algorithm opetimization of suspension system, Telkomnika Indonesian J Electrical Engineering, 2012, 10, (7), pp 1685–1691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21. Guo, S.Z., Ang, H.S. and Cai, H.M. Construction of an adaptive sampling surrogate model and application in composite material structure optimization, Acta Materiae Compositae Sinica, 2018, doi:10.13801/j.cnki.fhclxb.20170904.003.Google Scholar
22. Peng, F., Wu, Z.Z. and Yi, Z. Influence of sampling point distribution in freeform surfaces fitting with radial based function model, Optics & Precision Engineering, 2016, 24, (7), pp 1564–1572.Google Scholar