Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Design optimization for robustness in multiple performance functions

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, we propose a new approach to include robustness considerations in problems with multiple performance functions under uncertainty. Robustness of performance under uncertainty is typically ensured by minimizing the variation of the performance function, usually modeled by its variance or standard deviation. Such moment-based methods generally become cumbersome to solve as the number of performance functions increases, because of a large number of objective functions. The current paper proposes a new approach that tackles both robustness and optimality using the joint probability density function of all the performance functions. For a set of designer-specified thresholds, which can be viewed as upper bounds on the performance functions (for minimization), joint optimality is ensured by maximizing a single quantity irrespective of the number of performance functions: the joint probability that the design’s performance is bounded by the thresholds. To ensure joint robustness, we minimize a single scalar quantity irrespective of the number of performance functions: the determinant of the covariance matrix of the performance functions. Two examples are presented: an automobile side impact problem with two performance functions and a two-stage-to-orbit launch vehicle conceptual design problem with three performance functions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allen JK, Seepersad C, Choi H, Mistree F (2006) Robust design for multiscale and multidisciplinary applications. ASME J Mech Des 128:832–843

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Apley D, Liu J, Chen W (2006) Understanding the effects of model uncertainty in robust design with computer experiments. ASME J Mech Des 128(4):745–958

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrico C, Antunes CH (2006) Robustness analysis in multi-objective optimization using a degree of robustness concept. In: IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, pp 1887–1892

  • Barrico C, Antunes CH (2007) An evolutionary approach for assessing the degree of robustness of solutions to multi-objective models. In: Yang S, Ong Y, Jin Y (eds) Evolutionary computation in dynamic and uncertain environments, studies in computational intelligence, vol 51, pp 565–582

  • Besharati B, Luo L, Azarm S, Kannan PK (2006) Multi-objective single product robust optimization: An integrated design and marketing approach. ASME J Mech Des 128(4):884–892

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen W, Garimella R, Michelena N (2001) Robust design for improved vehicle handling under a range of maneuver conditions. Eng Optim 33(3):303–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiralaksanakul A, Mahadevan S (2005) First order approximation methods in reliability-based design optimization. ASME J Mech Des 127(5):851–857

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deb K, Gupta H (2006) Introducing robustness in multi-objective optimization. Evol Comput 14:463–494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Disatnik DJ, Benninga S (2007) Shrinking the covariance matrix. J Portf Manage 33(4):55–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Du X, Chen W (2000) Towards a better understanding of modeling feasibility robustness in engineering design. ASME J Mech Des 122:385–394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Du X, Chen W (2004) Sequential optimization and reliability assessment method for efficient probabilistic design. J Mech Des 126(2):225–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Du X, Sudjianto A, Chen W (2004) An integrated framework for optimization under uncertainty using inverse reliability strategy. ASME J Mech Des 126:562–570

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elsayed EA, Chen A (1993) Optimal levels of process parameters for products with multiple characteristics. Int J Prod Res 31(5):1117–1132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fan J, Fan Y, Lv J (2008) High dimensional covariance matrix estimation using a factor model. J Econom 147:186–197

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Goh C, Tan K (2007) Evolving the tradeoffs between pareto-optimality and robustness in multi-objective evolutionary algorithms. In: Yang S, Ong Y, Jin Y (eds) Evolutionary computation in dynamic and uncertain environments, studies in computational intelligence, vol 51, pp 457–478

  • Gu X, Renaud JE, Batill SM, Brach RM, Budhiraja A (2000) Worst case propagated uncertainty of multidisciplinary systems in robust optimization. Struct Optim 20(3):190–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gunawan S, Azarm S (2005) Multi-objective robust optimization using a sensitivity region concept. Struct Multidisc Optim 29:50–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haldar A, Mahadevan S (2000) Probability, reliability and statistical methods in engineering design. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Holmström K, Edvall MM, Göran AO (2003) Tomlab—for large-scale robust optimization. In: Proceedings of the Nordic MATLAB conference. http://tomoptcom/

  • Johnson RA, Wichern DW (2002) Applied multivariate statistical analysis, 5th edn. Prentice Hall, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiureghian AD (2005) First- and second-order reliability methods. In: Engineering design reliability handbook. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • Ledoit O, Wolf M (2004) Honey, I shrunk the sample covariance matrix. J Portf Manage 30(4):110–119

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Lee I, Choi KK, Du L, Gorsich D (2008) Dimension reduction method for reliability-based robust design optimization. Comput Struct 86:1550–1562

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee S, Chen W, Kwak B (2009) Robust design with arbitrary distributions using Gauss-type quadrature formula. Struct Multidisc Optim 39:227–243

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Li M, Azarm S (2008) Multiobjective collaborative robust optimization with interval uncertainty and interdisciplinary uncertainty propagation. ASME J Mech Des 130(8):081402

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li M, Azarm S, Aute V (2008) A multi-objective genetic algorithm for robust design optimization. In: Proceedings of the conference on genetic and evolutionary computation, pp 771–778

  • Magnus JR, Neudecker H (1988) Matrix differential calculus with applications in statistics and econometrics. In: Wiley series in probability and mathematical statistics

  • McAllister CD, Simpson TW (2003) Multidisciplinary robust design optimization of an internal combustion engine. ASME J Mech Des 125(1):124–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Messac A, Ismail-Yahaya A (2002) Multiobjective robust design using physical programming. Struct Multidisc Optim 23(5):357–371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mourelatos ZP, Liang J (2006) A methodology for trading-off performance and robustness under uncertainty. ASME J Mech Des 128:856–863

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noh Y, Choi KK, Lee I (2010) Identification of marginal and joint CDFs using Bayesian method for RBDO. Struct Multidisc Optim 40:35–51

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Pamadi BN, Neirynck TA, Hotchko NJ, Tartabini PV, Scallion WI, Murphy KJ, Covell PF (2005) Simulation and analyses of stage separation of two-stage reusable launch vehicles. In: AIAA/CIRA 13th international space planes and hypersonics systems and technologies

  • Pandey MD (1998) An effective approximation to evaluate multinormal integrals. Struct Saf 20:51–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parkinson A, Sorensen C, Pourhassan N (1993) A general approach for robust optimal design. ASME J Mech Des 115:74–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rangavajhala S, Mahadevan S (2011) Joint probability formulation for multiobjective optimization under uncertainty. J Mech Des 133:051007. doi:10.1115/1.4003540

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rousseeuw PJ, Driessen KV (1998) A fast algorithm for the minimum covariance determinant estimator. Technometrics 41:212–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott DW (1992) Multivariate density estimation: theory, practice and visualization. In: Wiley series in probability and mathematical statistics

  • Silvaa RR (1998) The trace formulas yield the inverse metric formula. J Math Phys 39(11):6206–6213

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Sinha K, Krishnan R, Raghavendra D (2007) Multiobjective robust optimization for crashworthiness during side impact. Int J Veh Des 43:116–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sornette D, Simonetti P, Andersen JV (2000) ϕ q-field theory for portfolio optimization: fat tails and nonlinear correlations. Phys Rep 335(2):19–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strang G (2006) Linear algebra and its applications, 4th edn. Cengage. http://www.cengage.com/search/productOverview.do?

  • Subramanyan K, Diwekar UM, Goyal A (2004) Multi-objective optimization for hybrid fuel cells power system under uncertainty. J Power Sources 132:99–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sundaresan S, Ishi K, Houser D (1993) A robust optimization procedure with variations in design variables and constraints. ASME Adv Des Autom 65(1):379–386

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsui KL (1999) Robust design optimizaton for multiple characteristic problems. Int J Prod Res 37(2):433–445

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Youn B, Xi Z (2009) Reliability-based robust design optimization using the eigenvector dimension reduction (EDR) method. Struct Multidisc Optim 37(5):475–492

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Youn BD, Choi KK, Yang RJ, Gu L (2004) Reliability-based design optimization for crashworthiness of vehicle side impact. Struct Multidisc Optim 26(3–4):272–283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Youn BD, Choi KK, Du L, Gorsich D (2007) Integration of possibility-based optimization and robust design for epistemic uncertainty. J Mech Des 129(8):876–882

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zaman K, McDonald M, Mahadevan S, Green L (2011) Robustness-based design optimization under data uncertainty. Struct Multidisc Optim 24(2):183–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zou T, Mahadevan S (2006) A direct decoupling approach for efficient reliability-based design optimization. Struct Multidisc Optim 31:190–200

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

This study was supported by funds from NASA Langley Research Center under Cooperative Agreement No. NNX08AF56A1 (Technical Monitor: Lawrence Green). The support is gratefully acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA

    Sirisha Rangavajhala & Sankaran Mahadevan

Authors
  1. Sirisha Rangavajhala
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sankaran Mahadevan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sankaran Mahadevan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rangavajhala, S., Mahadevan, S. Design optimization for robustness in multiple performance functions. Struct Multidisc Optim 47, 523–538 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-012-0860-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-012-0860-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation