Enhancing Engineering Design and Analysis Interoperability Part 3: Steps toward Multi-Functional Optimization Rod Dreisbach The Boeing Company Computational Structures Technology First MIT Conference on Computational Fluid and Structural Mechanics Cambridge, Massachusetts USA June 12-15, 2001 Russell Peak Georgia Tech Engineering Information Systems Lab eislab.gatech.edu

2 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC Maturation of product life cycle knowledge

3 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC e se tr P f 0 2   2 1 e be ht P Cf  ),,( 13 hbrfK  Channel Fitting Analysis Typical Current Approach: Optimize idealized parameters (vs. detailed design) Analysis Model (with Idealized Features) Detailed Design Model Idealizations   1 : b = cavity3.inner_width + rib8.thickness/2 + rib9.thickness/2  “It is no secret that CAD models are driving more of today’s product development processes... With the growing number of design tools on the market, however, the interoperability gap with downstream applications, such as finite element analysis, is a very real problem. As a result, CAD models are being recreated at unprecedented levels.” Ansys/ITI press Release, July Need fine-grained CAD-CAE associativity

4 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC Multi-Functional Optimization (MFO) u Term as coined at Boeing u Multitude of operational functional requirements u Concurrent consideration during product design process u Idealized design variables used in optimization associated directly with product (detailed design)

5 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC Progress on Necessary Components u Design-Analysis Integration –CAD-CAE Associativity –Connect diverse CAE models to same CAD model: Varying discipline, behavior, fidelity, method, tool –Multi-directional u Object-Oriented View of Optimization u Enhanced FEA Modeling for Built-Up Structure

6 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC X-Analysis Integration Techniques a. Multi-Representation Architecture (MRA)b. Explicit Design-Analysis Associativity c. Analysis Module Creation Methodology

7 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC COB-based Constraint Schematic for Multi-Fidelity CAD-CAE Interoperability Flap Link Benchmark Example

8 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC Test Case Flap Linkage: Analysis Template Reuse of APM Linkage Extensional Model (CBAM) Flap link (APM) reusable idealizations material effective length, L eff deformation model linear elastic model L o Extensional Rod (isothermal) F  L  A L  E x 2 x 1 youngs modulus, E cross sectionarea, A al1 al3 al2 linkage mode: shaft tension condition reaction allowable stress t s1 A Sleeve 1 A t s2 d d s1 Sleeve 2 L Shaft L eff  s stressmosmodel Margin of Safety (> case) allowable actual MS

9 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC Design Model Idealized Model Design-Idealization Relation Flap Link APM Implementation in CATIA v5

10 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC CATIA Model CATDAKXaiTools API VBScripts Analysis Inputs Analysis Outputs (Design Updates) VBScripts CATDAK Overview XaiTools CATIA Design-Analysis Knowledge Manager Traditional Solvers Analysis Templates Design & Idealizations (APM) API = application programming interface CAD-Analysis Template Coordination Analysis Template Usage (CBAMs)

11 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC Updating CAD Model from Analysis Template Results

12 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC Progress on Necessary Components u Design-Analysis Integration –CAD-CAE Associativity –Connect diverse CAE models to same CAD model: Varying discipline, behavior, fidelity, method, tool –Multi-directional u Object-Oriented View of Optimization u Enhanced FEA Modeling for Built-Up Structure

13 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC Thesis Abstract

14 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC Design Tools Analysis Tools Printed Wiring Assembly (PWA) Printed Wiring Board (PWB) Solder Joint Component Analyzable Product Model Solution Method Model Enhanced Optimization Model (EOM) Math Opt Model Engineering Opt. Model Find Design variable Notation solder joint height (h) PWB material type  Maximize Solder Fatigue life : Solution Method Model Analysis Building Block Context-Based Analysis Model Solder Joint Component PWB body T 0 Previous work [Peak et al. 2000, Tamburini 1999, Wilson, 2000] THESIS FOCUS Partition of Engineering Entities

15 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC Optimization Model Diversity Min Weight g (x)<0 h(x) =0 subject to Stress Design variables Area Min Weight OPTIMIZATION MODEL CLASS Optimization Object 1Optimization Object 2 Min Weight subject to X(H) Min Weight subject to X(H,LL,LR) OPTIMIZATION MODEL CLASS Optimization Object 1Optimization Object 2 Min Weight, Cost subject to Optimization Object 3 X(H,LL,LR,Mat) g (x)<0 h(x) =0 g (x)<0 h(x) =0 2D PLANE STRAIN MODEL 1D EXTENSIONAL STRESS MODEL Analysis Model(s) Enhancement and/or Addition subject to Stress Buckling Design variables Area, Material Objective, design variable, and/or constraint function enhancement

16 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC Optimization Model Enhancement Minimize LAf  1 Weight Subject to 0)( 1  AMSg stress Normal Stress Margin of Safety Design variables X ={A} Minimize LAf  1 Weight Subject to 0)( 1  AMSg stress Normal Stress Margin of Safety Design variables X ={A, material} OPTIMIZATION MODEL I OPTIMIZATION MODEL II

17 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC Minimization of Weight of a Linkage X(area) subject to (extensional stress) L eff product structure:linkage material effective length, L eff deformation model linear elastic model L o Extensional Rod (isothermal) F  L  A L  E x 2 x 1 youngs modulus, E cross sectionarea, A al1 al3 al2 analysis context goal:optimization mode:shaft tension condition: flaps down linkage reaction allowable stress Margin of Safety (> case) allowable actual MS t s1 A Sleeve 1 A t s2 d d s1 Sleeve 2 L Shaft L eff  s y x PP E, A  L L eff ,  L minimize weight constraint Design Variable A weight,W WAL  MS  0 density,  MS stress 

18 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC Minimization of Weight of a Linkage X(area, material) subject to (extensional stress) L eff product structure:linkage material effective length, L eff deformation model linear elastic model L o Extensional Rod (isothermal) F  L  A L  E x 2 x 1 youngs modulus, E cross sectionarea, A al1 al3 al2 analysis context goal:optimization mode:shaft tension condition: flaps down linkage reaction allowable stress Margin of Safety (> case) allowable actual MS t s1 A Sleeve 1 A t s2 d d s1 Sleeve 2 L Shaft L eff  s y x PP E, A  L L eff ,  L minimize weight constraint Design Variable area,A weight,W WAL  MS  0 density,  MS stress  material

19 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC Optimization Model Enhancement Minimize LAf  1 Weight Subject to 0)( 1  AMSg stress Normal Stress Margin of Safety 0)( 2  AMSg buckling Buckling Margin of Safety Design variables X ={A, material} OPTIMIZATION MODEL III OPTIMIZATION MODEL IV

20 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC Minimization of Weight of a Linkage X(area) subject to (extensional stress, buckling load) L eff product structure:linkage material effective length, L eff deformation model linear elastic model L o Extensional Rod (isothermal, buckling) F  L  A L  E x 2 x 1 youngs modulus, E cross section area, A analysis context goal:optimization mode:shaft tension condition: flaps down linkage reaction allowable stress Margin of Safety (> case) allowable actual MS t s1 A Sleeve 1 A t s2 d d s1 Sleeve 2 L Shaft L eff  s y x PP E, A  L L eff ,  L minimize weight constraints Design Variables A weight,W WAL  MS  0 MS stress  Margin of Safety (> case) allowable actual MS moment of inertia, I load,P MS buckling L o Extensional Rod (Buckling) P cr I E density, 

21 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC Minimization of Weight of a Linkage X(area, material) subject to (extensional stress, buckling load) L eff product structure:linkage material effective length, L eff deformation model linear elastic model L o Extensional Rod (isothermal, buckling) F  L  A L  E x 2 x 1 youngs modulus, E cross section area, A analysis context goal:optimization mode:shaft tension condition: flaps down linkage reaction allowable stress Margin of Safety (> case) allowable actual MS t s1 A Sleeve 1 A t s2 d d s1 Sleeve 2 L Shaft L eff  s y x PP E, A  L L eff ,  L minimize weight constraints Design Variables A weight,W WAL  MS  0 MS stress  Margin of Safety (> case) allowable actual MS moment of inertia, I load,P MS buckling L o Extensional Rod (Buckling) P cr I E density,  material

22 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC Progress on Necessary Components u Design-Analysis Integration –CAD-CAE Associativity –Connect diverse CAE models to same CAD model: Varying discipline, behavior, fidelity, method, tool –Multi-directional u Object-Oriented View of Optimization u Enhanced FEA Modeling for Built-Up Structure

23 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC Chip Package Products Shinko Plastic Ball Grid Array (PBGA) Packages Quad Flat Packs (QFPs)

24 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC Traditional VTMB FEA Model Creation Manually Intensive: 6-12 hours FEA Model Planning Sketches - EBGA 600 Chip Package VTMB = variable topology multi-body

25 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC Advanced Product Information-Driven FEA Modeling: Challenges Main challenges »Differences between design & analysis geometries »Variable topology multi-body geometries »FEA requirements: node matching, aspect ratio »Relative body sizes u Degree of indirect inter-body coupling »Mixed analytical bodies »Idealized inter-body interfaces »Loads & interfaces on non-explicit boundaries »Idealization-induced anomalies u Ex. - Shell mid-/outer-face matching »Arbitrary shapes (complex 3D surfaces …)

26 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC Multi-Representation Architecture Context u Composed of four representations (information models) u Provides flexible, modular mapping between design & analysis models u Creates automated, product-specific analysis modules (CBAMs) u Represents design-analysis associativity explicitly

27 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC Approach Outline: Test Cases u Benchmark test cases –“diving board” –eWidget –simplified PBGA u Production test cases (representative production-like problems for industry) –Chip package (Shinko) »Thermal analysis - Phase 2 »Thermomechanical (stress) analysis - after Phase 2 –Air frame structural analysis (Boeing) –PWA/B (JPL/NASA,…) »Thermomechanical,...

28 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC Chip Package Test Cases (for Shinko)

29 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC Airframe Structural Analysis Radar Support Structure (for Boeing) Automatic FEA Pre/Post-processing & Solution (in vendor-specific Solution Method Model) Design Model

30 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC PWA Thermomechanical Analysis (for JPL/NASA,...) Goal: Generalization of previous work [Zhou, 1997]

31 Georgia Tech  Engineering Information Systems Lab  eislab.gatech.edu © GTRC Summary Progress … u Design-Analysis Integration (maturing) –CAD-CAE Associativity –Connect diverse CAE models to same CAD model: Varying discipline, behavior, fidelity, method, tool –Multi-directional u Object-Oriented View of Optimization (initial progress) u Enhanced FEA Modeling for Built-Up Structure (in-progress) Further work needed … u High-level operational criteria, such as Product Design Requirements and Objectives u Need to leverage recent optimization tools –Ex. iSIGHT, ProductCenter, etc. –Provide enhanced modularity & knowledge capture