main| new issue| archive| editorial board| for the authors| publishing house|
Ðóññêèé
Main page
New issue
Archive of articles
Editorial board
For the authors
Publishing house

 

 


ABSTRACTS OF ARTICLES OF THE JOURNAL "INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES".
No. 9. Vol. 31. 2025

DOI: 10.17587/it.31.451-464

G. S. Veresnikov, Dr. Tech. Sc., Leading Researcher,
V. A. Trapeznikov Institute of Control Sciences of RAS, Moscow, 117997, Russian Federation

Methods for Conceptual Design of Aircraft under Uncertainty

Received on 13.09.2024
Accepted on 05.03.2025

One of the main challenges in organizing the efficient development of modern aircraft during the conceptual design phase is the provision of methodological support for a complex, iterative process of synthesizing and selecting design solutions under uncertainty. Uncertainty is the primary cause of unforeseen violations of critical constraints and errors in the determination of objective function values. At the same time, during the conceptual design phase, the main parameters and characteristics that define the overall appearance of the aircraft are selected. Failure to adequately consider uncertainty in computational and optimization tasks often results in uncompetitive and impractical design solutions. In recent years, there has been a growing number of studies aimed at addressing this issue by adapting traditional, deterministic models and algorithms to accommodate inaccurate input data. The article discusses the methods that are used to synthesize and select design solutions for aircraft design under uncertainty. At the same time, the main focus is on the latest achievements in statistical and intelligent computing, which reduce the time and increase the information content of the conceptual design stage. Approaches to dealing with parameter uncertainty, solving the problem of target uncertainty, and surrogate modeling to reduce computational costs are presented. The main provisions and conclusions presented in the framework of the review study are illustrated by examples from the world scientific literature.
Keywords: conceptual design, aircraft, uncertainty, intelligent computing, decision making, optimization, surrogate modeling

Acknowledgements: This work has been partially supported by the grants the Russian Science Foundation (project No. 24-19-00430).

P. 451-464

Full text on eLIBRARY

 

References

  1. Komarov V. A. Aircraft Conceptual Design: A Tutorial, 2010, Samara, Samar. state aerospace univ., 141 p. (in Russian).
  2. Konopleva V. M., Sonin O. V., Chanov M. N., Shelekhova A. S. Features of formalized technology of conceptual design in aircraft engineering, Design Ontology, 2023, no. 4 (50), pp. 479 —494 (in Russian).
  3. Alex A., Pesyridis A. Conceptual Advanced Transport Aircraft Design Configuration for Sustained Hypersonic Flight, Aerospace (Basel), 2018, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 91.
  4. Liu Y., Zhang S., Zhang J., Yao K., Luo M., Liu Y. Towards the Design of Future Aircraft: A Critical Review On the Tools and Methodologies, Aerospace Research Communications, 2024, vol. 2, pp. 1396.
  5. Neufeld D., Chung J., Behdinian K. Aircraft Conceptual Design Optimization Considering Fidelity Uncertainties, Journal of Aircraft, 2011, vol. 48, no. 5, pp. 1602—1612.
  6. Daskilewicz M., German B., Takahashi T., Donovan S., Shajanian A. Effects of disciplinary uncertainty on multi-objective optimization in aircraft conceptual design, Structural and Multi-disciplinary Optimization, 2011, vol. 44, pp. 831—846.
  7. Wang Y., Yin H., Zhang S., Yu H. Multi-objective optimization of aircraft design for emission and cost reductions, Chinese Journal of Aeronautic, 2014, vol. 27, iss. 1, pp. 52—58.
  8. Kolokolova L. G. Method of generalized models of aircraft properties for the early design stage, Air fleet technology, 1995, no. 5—6 (in Russian).
  9. Irodov R. D., Bashkirov I. G. Formation of the layout of an aircraft with supersonic cruising flight, Aerodynamics, stability and controllability of supersonic aircraft, Moscow, Russian Academy of Sciences, 2016, 704 p. (in Russian).
  10. Ogorodnikov O. V. Development and research of an algorithm based on the "Direct collocation" method to optimize the climb trajectory and speed of a maneuverable aircraft, Proceedings of the 15th International Conference "Managing the Development of Large-Scale Systems" (MLSD'2022), 2022, Moscow, IPU RAS, pp. 1156—1160 (in Russian).
  11. Bulleit W., Asce M. Uncertainty in Structural Engineering, Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction, 2008, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 23—30.
  12. Raymer D. Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach (AIAA Education Series), Amer Inst of Aeronautics, 2018, 800 p.
  13. Wei J., Yang B., Liu W. Design Optimization under Aleatory and Epistemic Uncertainties, Proceedings of the Eighth IEEE International Conference on Dependable, Autonomic and Secure Computing, 2009, Chengdu, China, pp. 491—495.
  14. Zheng M., Yu J. A probabilistic multi-objective optimiza­tion mechanical design, Journal of Umm Al-Qura University for Engineering and Architecture, 2023, vol. 14, pp. 115—121.
  15. Bahri O., Talbi E.-G. Dealing with Epistemic Uncertainty in Multi-objective Optimization: A Survey, Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Applications, 2018, pp. 260—271.
  16. Rezaei M., Fazelzadeh S. A., Mazidi A., Friswell M. I., Khodaparast H. H. Fuzzy uncertainty analysis and reliability assessment of aeroelastic aircraft wings, The Aeronautical Journal, 2020, vol. 124, no. 1275, pp. 786—811.
  17. Macalintal J. M. V., Ubando A. T. Optimal Aircraft Pay-load Weight and Balance using Fuzzy Linear Programming Model, Chemical Engineering Transactions, 2023, vol. 103, pp. 613—618.
  18. Prigent S. A robust optimization methodology for preliminary aircraft design, Engineering Optimization, 2015, vol. 48, no. 5, pp. 1—17.
  19. Zhu J., Qiu Z. Interval analysis for uncertain aerodynamic loads with uncertain-but-bounded parameters, Journal of Fluids and Structures, 2018, vol. 81, pp. 418—436.
  20. Tyan M., Nguyen N. V., Kim S., Lee J.-W. Database Adaptive Fuzzy Membership Function Generation for Possibility-Based Aircraft Design Optimization, Journal of Aircraft, 2017, vol. 54, pp. 114—124.
  21. Neufeld D., Nhu-Van N., Lee J.-W., Kim S. A Multi-disciplinary Possibilistic Approach to Light Aircraft Conceptual Design, Proceedings of the 53rd AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference, Hono­lulu, Hawaii, 2012.
  22. Browne F., Bell D., Liu W., Jin Y., Higgins C., Rooney N., Wang H., Mtiller J. Application of Evidence Theory and Discounting Techniques to Aerospace Design, Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Catania, Italy, 2012, pp. 543—553.
  23. Oberkampf W., Helton J. Investigation of evidence theory for engineering applications, AIAA non-deterministic approaches forum, 2002, Denver, Colorado, pp. 1569.
  24. Liu B. Uncertainty Theory, Berlin, Springer-Verlag, 2015, 487 p.
  25. Bashkirov I. G., Chernyshev S. L., Veresnikov G. S. Parametric synthesis optimization models for high speed transport aerodynamic design to comply with flight safety and low environmental impact requirements, Acta Astronautica, 2023, vol. 204, pp. 720—727.
  26. Veresnikov G. S., Pankova L. A., Pronina V. A. Models Of Uncertain-Random Programming, Advances in Systems Science and Applications, 2019, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 8—22.
  27. Liu S. Sensitivity analysis of aircraft structural fatigue reliability under mixed uncertainty, Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Aerospace and Control Engineering, Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2024, Nanjing, China, vol. 2764, pp. 012034.
  28. West T., Hosder S., Winter T. Quantification of Margins and Uncertainties for Aerospace Systems using Stochastic Expansions, Proceedings of the 52nd Aerospace Sciences Meeting, 2014, San Diego, CA, pp. 123584636.
  29. Alder M., Ahmed T., Fr hler B., Skopnik A. Assessment of Techniques for Global Sensitivity Analyses in Conceptual Aircraft Design, AIAA AVIATION 2023 Forum, Manchester Grand Hyatt, San Diego, 2023.
  30. Mavris D., Roth B., Macsotai N. A method for probabilistic sensitivity analysis of commercial aircraft engines, Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium for Air Breathing Engines (ISABE '99), Florence, Italy, 1999.
  31. Green L., Lin H. Z., Khalessi M. Probabilistic Methods for Uncertainty Propagation Applied to Aircraft Design, Proceedings of the 20th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, St. Louis, Missouri, 2002.
  32. McGurk M., Stodieck O., Yuan J. Probabilistic aeroelastic analysis of high-fidelity composite aircraft wing with manufacturing variability, Composite Structures, 2024, vol. 329, pp. 117794.
  33. McDonald R. A. The Role of Error in the Conceptual Design of a Transport Aircraft, 45th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit Proceedings, Reno, Nevada, 2007.
  34. Todorov V., Rakov D., Bardenhagen A. Sensitivity Analysis and System Attribute Importance for Conceptual Aircraft Design with the Advanced Morphological Approach, Aerospace, 2023, vol. 10, no. 7, pp. 608.
  35. Patil M., Hale L., Roy C. Sensitivity Analysis Methods for Systems with Epistemic Uncertainties, Proceedings of the 17th AIAA Non-Deterministic Approaches Conference, Kissimmee, Florida, USA, 2015.
  36. Dawei Z., Jinyu Z., Chunqiu L., Zhiling W. A short review of reliability-based design optimization, IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 2021, vol. 1043, pp. 032041.
  37. Ling C., Kuo W., Xie M. An Overview of Adaptive-Sur­rogate-Model-Assisted Methods for Reliability-Based Design Optimization, IEEE Transactions on Reliability. 2022, vol. 72, no. 3, pp. 1243—1264.
  38. Tang Z. The applications of an importance sampling method to reliability analysis of the inside flap of an aircraft, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part G Journal of Aerospace Engineering, 2012, vol. 227, pp. 916-932.
  39. 39. Thunnissen D. P., Au S. K., Swenka E. R. Uncertainty Quantification in Conceptual Design via an Advanced Monte Carlo Method, Journal of Aerospace Computing, Information, and Communication, 2007, vol. 4, no. 7, pp. 902—917.
  40. 40. Lyu Z., Wang H., Yang H., Wang J., Mikiyas K., Meng D. Uncertainty-based Multidisciplinary Design Optimization using An Approximated Second-Order Reliability Analysis Strategy, Mechanical Engineering Science, 2022, vol. 4, no. 1.
  41. 41. Long T., Wu Y., Wang Z., Tang Y., Wu D., Yu Y. Efficient aero-structure coupled wing optimization using decomposition and adaptive metamodeling techniques, Aerospace Science and Technology, 2019, vol. 95, pp. 105496.
  42. Nguyen N. V., Lee J.-W., Lee Y.-D, Park H.-U. A multidisciplinary robust optimisation framework for UAV conceptual design, Aeronautical Journal, 2014, vol. 118, pp. 123—142.
  43. Meng W., Ma D. Robust design optimization method for aircraft, Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on Systems and Control in Aeronautics and Astronautics, Harbin, China, 2010.
  44. Lee J.-W., Chung J., Behdinan K. Uncertainty-based MDO for aircraft conceptual design, Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology: An International Journal, 2015, vol. 87, iss. 4, pp. 345—356.
  45. Winyangkul S., Sleesongsom S., Bureerat S. Reliability-Based Design of an Aircraft Wing Using a Fuzzy-Based Meta-heuristic, Applied Sciences, 2021, vol. 11, iss. 14, pp. 6463.
  46. Wang L., Xiong C., Hu J., Wang X., Qiu Z. Sequential multidisciplinary design optimization and reliability analysis under interval uncertainty, Aerospace Science and Technology, 2018, vol. 80, pp. 508—519.
  47. Guo H. Method of reliability design optimization using evidence theory and interval analysis, Chinese Journal of Mechanical Engineering, 2014, vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 33—38.
  48. Murtha J. F. An Evidence Theoretic Approach to Design of Reliable Low-Cost UAVs, Ph.D. dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute, 2009.
  49. Veresnikov G. S., Ogorodnikov O. V. Uncertain Programming Models for Finding Reliably Compromise Design Solutions, Proceedings of the 15th International Conference Management of Large-Scale System Development (MLSD), Moscow, 2022,
  50. Alestra S., Brand C., Druot T., Morozov S. Multi-objective Optimization of Aircrafts Family at Conceptual Design Stage, Proceedings of the 5th European conference for aeronautics and space sciences (EUCASS), Munich, Germany, 2013.
  51. Veresnikov G. S., Bashkirov I. G., Gorchakov S. Ye. Determining SST Aerodynamic Configuration and Power Plant Parameters under Epistemic Uncertainty, Advances in Systems Science and Applications, 2023, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 152—163.
  52. Roelofs M., Kurowicka D., Vos R. Selecting Technolo­gies in Aircraft Conceptual Design Using Probabilistic Inversion, Journal of Aircraft, 2020, vol. 58, pp. 1—16.
  53. Lee D., Periaux J., Gonzalez L., Karkenahalli S., Ofiate E. Robust multidisciplinary UAS design optimization, Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 2012, vol. 45, pp. 433—450.
  54. Veresnikov G. Multi-Variant Simulation in the Preliminary Design of Technical Objects under Parametric Uncertainty 2021, Proceedings of the 14th International Conference Management of large-scale system development (MLSD), Moscow, 2021, pp. 1—5.
  55. Bianchi D., Secco N., Silvestre F. A framework for enhanced decision-making in aircraft conceptual design optimisation under uncertainty, The Aeronautical Journal, 2020, vol. 125, no. 1287.
  56. Veresnikov G. S., Ogorodnikov O. V. The choice of aerodynamic characteristics and engine parameters of a maneuverable aircraft under conditions of epistemic uncertainty, Bulletin of Samara University. Aerospace engineering, technology and mechanical engineering, 2024, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 7—17 (in Russian).
  57. Sun X. Incorporating Multicriteria Decision Analysis Techniques in Aircraft Conceptual Design Process, Journal of Aircraft, 2014, vol. 51, pp. 861—869.
  58. Donelli G., Boggero L., Nagel B. Concurrent Value-Driven Decision-Making Process for the Aircraft, Supply Chain and Manufacturing Systems Design, Systems, 2023, vol. 11, no. 12, pp. 578.
  59. Olvander J., Lunden B., Gavel H. A computerized optimization framework for the morphological matrix applied to aircraft conceptual design, Computer-Aided Design, 2009, vol. 41, pp. 187—196.
  60. Todorov V. T., Rakov D., Bardenhagen A. Enhancement Opportunities for Conceptual Design in Aerospace Based on the Advanced Morphological Approach, Aerospace, 2022, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 78.
  61. Todorov V., Rakov D., Bardenhagen A. Creation of innovative concepts in Aerospace based on the Morphological Approach, IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 2022, vol. 1226, pp. 012029.
  62. Peng R., Heping W., Wang Z., Lin Y. Decision-making of Aircraft Optimum Configuration Utilizing Multidimensional Game Theory, Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 2010, vol. 23, pp. 194—197.
  63. Setayandeh M. R., Babaei A. R. Multidisciplinary design optimization of an aircraft by using knowledge-based systems, Soft Computing, 2020, vol. 24, pp. 12429—12448.
  64. Cheng K., Lu Z., Ling C. et al. Surrogate-assisted global sensitivity analysis: an overview, Struct Multidisc Optim., 2020, vol. 61, pp. 1187—1213.
  65. Zhang X., Sun J. An Effective Approach for Uncertain Aerodynamic Analysis of Airfoils via the Polynomial Chaos Expansion, Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2020, vol. 2020, pp. 7417835.
  66. Yildiz S., Pehlivan S. H., Nikbay M. Multi-Fidelity Low-Rank Approximations for Uncertainty Quantification of a Supersonic Aircraft Design, Algorithms, 2022, vol. 15, no. 7, pp. 250.
  67. Sohst M., Vale J., Crawford C., Potter G., Banerjee S. A framework for multi-fidelity multi-disciplinary kriging-based surrogate model optimization of novel aircraft configurations. Multi-disciplinary Design Approaches and Performance Assessment of Future Combat Aircraft, NATO STO Review, 2022.
  68. Cao D., Bai G. DNN-Based Surrogate Modeling-Based Feasible Performance Reliability Design Methodology for Aircraft Engine, IEEE Access, 2020, vol. 8, pp. 229201—229218.
  69. Pedroni N. Computational methods for the robust optimization of the design of a dynamic aerospace system in the presence of aleatory and epistemic uncertainties, Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 2022, vol. 164, pp. 108206.
  70. Agarwal H., Renaud J. E., Preston E. L., Padmanabhan D. Uncertainty quantification using evidence theory in multi-disciplinary design optimization, Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2004, vol. 85, iss. 1—3, pp. 281—294.
  71. Sun G., Wang S. A review of the artificial neural network surrogate modeling in aerodynamic design, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G: Journal of Aerospace Engineering, 2019, vol. 233, no. 16, pp. 5863—5872.
  72. Espinosa Barcenas O. U., Quijada Pioquinto J. G., Kurkina E., Lukyanov O. Surrogate Aerodynamic Wing Modeling Based on a Multilayer Perceptron, Aerospace, 2023, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 149.
  73. Du Q., Liu T., Yang L., Li L., Zhang D., Xie Y. Airfoil design and surrogate modeling for performance prediction based on deep learning method, Physics of Fluids, 2022, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 015111.
  74. Pagliuca G., Kipouros T., Savill M. A. Surrogate Modelling for Wing Planform Multidisciplinary Optimisation Using Model-Based Engineering, International Journal of Aerospace Engineering, 2019, vol. 2019, pp. 4327481.
  75. Leng J.-X., Feng Y., Huang W., Shen Y., Wang Z.-G. Variable-fidelity Surrogate Model Based on Transfer Learning and Its Application in Multidisciplinary Design Optimization of Aircraft, Physics of Fluids, 2023, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 017131.
  76. Fan H., Dulikravich G., Han Z.-X. Aerodynamic Data Modeling Using Support Vector Machines, Inverse Problems in Science and Engineering, 2005, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 261—278.
  77. Bertoni A., Hallstedt S., Wejletorp S., Andersson P. Integration of value and sustainability assessment in design space exploration by machine learning: an aerospace application, Design Science, 2020, vol. 6, pp. e2.
  78. Chevalier M., Colombo M., Garcia J., Lapeyre C., Teste O. Surrogate modelling for an aircraft dynamic landing loads simulation using an LSTM AutoEncoder-based dimensionality reduction approach, Aerospace Science and Technology, 2022, vol. 126, pp. 107629.
  79. Tao J., Sun G., Guo L., Wang X. Application of a PCA-DBN-based surrogate model to robust aerodynamic design optimization, Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 2020, vol. 33, iss. 6, pp. 1573—1588.
  80. Bird G., Gorrell S., Salmon J. Dimensionality-reduction-based surrogate models for real-time design space exploration of a jet engine compressor blade, Aerospace Science and Technology, 2021, vol. 118, pp. 107077.
  81. Yondo R., Andres E., Valero E. A review on design of experiments and surrogate models in aircraft real-time and many-query aerodynamic analyses, Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 2018, vol. 96, pp. 23—61.
  82. Hong L., Li H., Fu. J. A novel surrogate-model based active learning method for structural reliability analysis, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2022, vol. 394, pp. 114835.

To the contents