Paralel CFD 2008, May 19-20, 2008, Lyon, France. Published by Springer Verlag.

Parallel Shape Optimization of a Missile on a Grid Infrastructure

Erdal Oktay1, Osman Merttopcuoglu2, Cevat Sener3, Ahmet Ketenci3, and Hasan U. Akay4
EDA Engineering Design & Analysis Ltd. Co., Ankara, Turkey 2 ROKETSAN Missile Industries, Inc., Ankara, Turkey 3 Dept. of Computer Engineering, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey 4 Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA eoktay@eda-ltd.com.tr, omerttopcuoglu@roketsan.com.tr, {sener, ketenci}@ceng.metu.edu.tr, hakay@iupui.edu
1

Abstract. A computational tool is developed to be used in the preliminary design of an air vehicle. This tool parametrically optimizes the airframe shape. In order to search the entire solution space thoroughly, a genetic algorithm is used. Code parallelization is utilized to decrease the convergence time of the airframe shape design of a realistic missile geometry on a Grid infrastructure to further improve the search quality. In this work, a generic missile geometry is taken as a test case for a design application. The problem is to maximize the weighted average of lift-to-drag ratio for given mass and propulsion unit. Keywords: Design Optimization, Shape Optimization, Genetic Algorithms, Parallel Computing, Grid Computing.

1 Introduction
Conventional methods that use gradient information have been used many times for engineering design problems in the past [1-3]. But, they often fall into difficulty of handling the high dimensional problems. It is hard to search the entire design space by these methods, especially if the problem includes disjoint solution sets. Besides, they require gradient information which is hard to obtain, or nonexistent. Heuristic methods have become widespread [4-7]. They can deal with such stiff problems with high dimensionality and with large number of local solutions, and are able to avoid unfeasible regions and handle inequality constraints. In this paper, genetic algorithms are used, because they are well suited for parallel computing, which is an important property for engineering design problems with large number of parameters. There has been an increasing tendency in the use of parallel genetic algorithms during the last decade [8-9]. In this study, such a parallel implementation is realized on a Grid infrastructure.

2 Problem Definition
2.1 The Cruise Flight The aim is to obtain an airframe geometry that provides the longest flight possible. Consider the following cruise equations, for = 0 :

x =V , z =0, V = ( FD + FT ) / m , V . = FL / m g .
where V and are speed and flight path angles, respectively. FT is thrust force, m is mass, and they are functions of time. FD and FL are the drag and lift forces, respectively, and are calculated as follows: (1)

FD = 1 2 . .V 2 .Sref .CD , FL = 1 2 . .V 2 .S ref .CL .

(2)

Here the drag and lift coefficients (CD and CL) are functions of Mach number (M) and angle of attack (). These coefficients correspond to the trim values; therefore, it is not necessary to deal with the short term variations. Since angle of attack is arbitrary, it is chosen so as to satisfy the condition = 0 . The atmospheric variables density (), and speed of sound (c) are found from the standard atmosphere model. The problem demands that, for a given set of initial and terminal values of V, the final value of range (xf) be maximum. Additionally, different configurations are checked for a static stability requirement that the minimum value of the stability margin should be greater than a reference value. 2.2 Shape Optimization In this work, it is assumed that propulsion, warhead and instruments sections are previously defined. This way, the length and diameter of the body, and the nose shape are already determined. Thus, the properties related to the body are taken as constants, and are not considered into optimization process. The configuration is built with a body with circular cross section and two sets of fins. The first fin set (wing section), consists of two panels whereas the second set (tail section) consists of cross-oriented four fins. The following parameters are selected as design variables on cross-sectional plane of each fin set: Position of leading edge on the body (ll) Leading edge sweep angle (l) Root chord length (cr) Aspect ratio (A=b2/2S, S: plan-form area) Taper ratio (=ct/cr)

Each plane is of double wedged cross section. It is assumed that thickness-to-chord ratios are fixed along the half span. The following parameters are selected as design variables for airfoil geometries, for each set: Thickness-to-chord ratios of upper and lower wedges (t/c) Cone angles for leading edges of upper and lower wedges (l) Cone angles for trailing edges of upper and lower wedges (t)

A typical airframe geometry, as well as the design parameters are illustrated in Figure 1.

Fig. 1. Airframe geometry.

3 Method
3.1 Genetic Algorithms The genetic algorithms technique is used frequently in non-linear optimization and constraint satisfaction problems. For a given problem, it maintains a population of candidate solutions; then it evaluates these solutions and assign objective values as the fitness values (in maximization). Based on the fitness values of the candidates, a new generation of candidate solutions is reproduced by means of operators inspired from evolutionary biology, such as mutation, selection, and crossover. This reproduction process favors for the better candidates (principle of the survival of the fittest), thus it reduces the probability of appearance of non-fitted solutions in the new generation. The process is iterated until solutions converge to an optimum fitness value; hence it is a simulated evolution process which typically requires a large number of fitness evaluations.

3.2 Shape Optimization of a Missile At each step of iteration, the master (i.e., the genetic algorithms engine) generates configuration parameters as the solution set, which are combined to form the individual. All these values are bounded with both upper and lower limits, which are physical or geometrical constraints. These design variables are represented by integers called genes, thus the desired resolution of each parameter must also be specified. The total set of solution proposals (individuals) is called population, which is divided into sub-populations. Each sub-population, in the form of a set of configuration parameters, is sent by the master to a separate worker. The subpopulation size is set to the population size divided by the number of workers configured. Each worker calculates a series of fitness values belonging to a group of individuals. The fitness value of an individual is the objective value being equal to the final range covered at the end of the cruise flight Moreover, the violations of static stability requirement are punished by means of inhibition of breeding, which reduces useless search space. In the evaluation, an aerodynamic preliminary-design tool is required. This refers to the family of industry-standard codes, which combine the linear aerodynamic theory with experimental data, and use component build-up methods to handle whole configuration through its parts. The simulation needs drag and lift values. The semiempirical aerodynamic analysis tool MISSILE DATCOM calculates these coefficients; and they are supplied in tabular form with respect to several Mach numbers and angle of attack () values [10]. All the fitness values calculated by workers are transferred back to the master where the population is updated as the best performances are rewarded with higher reproductive rates. That is, the master finds the fittest (best) solutions, out of the ones provided by workers, using the user supplied parameters for mutation, selection, and crossover genetic operators. The flow of this mentioned process is illustrated in Figure 2.
Master Worker

Selection Crossover Mutation

Simulations
[Aerodynamics DATCOM CD, CL]

Fitness
[xf, Vf] Configuration Parameters

Result of Objective & Penalty Evaluation

Fig. 2. Illustration of an overall solution flow where the master acts as the genetic engine and each worker calculates the fitness values.

3.3 Implementation of Problem on GridAE In this study, the genetic algorithms technique is implemented on the Grid environment since the search space is extremely large. This enables to obtain a higher level of diversification, and it becomes possible to find better solutions within this large solution space by the use of a Grid infrastructure. The method is experienced using the Grid-based Artificial Evolution framework (GridAE)1 deployed on the South Eastern European Grid (SEE-GRID) infrastructure [11, 12], which, like the other EGEE-like Grids, consists of a set of middleware services deployed on a broad collection of computational and storage resources, plus the services and support structures put in place to operate them [13]. It is a stable infrastructure, running the gLite Grid middleware on Scientific Linux Operating System instances [14, 15], for any scientific research, especially for projects where the time and resources needed for running the applications are considered impractical when using traditional IT infrastructures. Currently, it has about 40 sites (clusters) over 13 countries in the region with around 2000 various types of CPUs. The GridAE framework aims to create a transparent interface for the user which would distribute the execution of artificial evolution applications (through the genetic algorithms technique) onto the Grid. Other than using its built-in genetic library, a user may develop and use his/her own genetic operators. This framework is designed to fit to EGEE-like Grid infrastructures, currently supporting the gLite middleware. GridAE employs the master-worker paradigm, where it is theoretically possible to submit thousands of workers. As messaging is not supported among the sites by the infrastructure, it reserves and uses some temporary area on the Grid storage elements to simulate a shared memory region for the GridAE tasks to communicate with each other. Hence, submitting all the tasks to a single site and using a storage element located nearby obviously increase the evolution performance; however, one may need to wait for a very long time before that many processors in one site become available. Thus, GridAE makes use of the resource brokers for multi-site Grid execution of its tasks, where load-balancing is provided implicitly.

4 Test Case
A shape optimization test case is carried out as an application. Constants of the problem are specified in Table 1. These constants include, ballistic and inertial parameters of the generic missile which is handled in this work, body geometry shape parameters, and initial and terminal flight conditions. The shape optimization process takes the following set of design parameters into consideration: Design parameters for the wing section 11 values Design parameters for the tail section 11 values Resultant geometry parameters for each planform section are given in Table 2.
1

The development of GridAE is supported by the SEE-GRID project, funded by the European Commission under the contract FP6 RI-002356.

In order to give an insight into how the genetic algorithms work, some steps from the convergence history of a design parameter are given in Figure 3, as an example. The figures illustrate how the diversity in the population reduces and finally converges to an optimum value. Each dot in the figures represents an individual for corresponding AR (aspect ratio of the tail) value. The figure shows four ensembles belonging to different stages of the iteration. This c uses a 125-member population, and the final values of the design parameters are presented in Table 2. In addition, the effects of number of generations and population size on the maximum fitness achieved are illustrated in Figure 4. It can be observed that the population size is directly proportional to maximum fitness values when the number of generations is fixed. Thus, it can be claimed that increasing the population size will result in less number of generations for the parameters to converge their optimum. Also, the maximum fitness values tend to increase as population evolves as one may expect. The drops on the graph can be avoided by using improved parameters for the genetic algorithm or introducing elitism.

Fig. 3a-d. Selected steps in the convergence history of aspect ratio of the tail (a) Initial, (b) After 30 generations, (c) After 50 generations, (d) After 80 generations

48000

47700 47600

47500

47500

47000
47400

Fitness

46500

46000

Fitness

47300 47200

45500

47100 47000

45000
46900

44500
46800

10

30

50

70

90

19

21

23

25

13

11

15

17

27

29

40

80

160

320

640

Generation

Population Size

Fig. 4a. Maximum fitness values achieved at each 10th generation where population size is fixed at 40.

Fig. 4b. Maximum fitness values achieved for different population sizes after 100 generations.

Table 1. Constant parameters used in the test case. Full Mass Empty Mass Full Com Empty Com Thrust Burnout Time 2100 kg 1010 kg 3.0 m 2.3 m 40 kN 70 sec Body Length Diameter Exit Diameter Nose Length Nose Shape 5.0 m 0.6 m 0.4 m 0.8 m Ogive Z0 V0 zr Vr 2000 m 240 m/s 2000 m 280 m/s 30 deg 8 deg

r lim

Table 2a. Shape optimization for wing. lw cr ct/cr b2/2S l 2.3 m 1.74 m 0.42 0.46 10.9 deg tu tl 0.037 0.077 15.5 deg 11.0 deg 7.8 deg 7.9 deg

Table 2b. Shape optimization for tail. lw cr ct/cr b2/2S l 4.48 m 0.75 m 0.67 0.74 26.6 deg tu tl 0.041 0.071 24.8 deg 25.5 deg 23.8 deg 24.4 deg

ul ut ll lt

ul ut ll lt

5 Conclusions
Genetic algorithms prove to be reliable engineering design tools, especially in problems with a high degree of parameters space. It can safely be used in aeronautical design applications, in which the number of design variables are high, the sensitivity functions are inaccurate or unavailable, and the design space includes discontinues parts. More importantly, the genetic algorithm technique is very suitable for parallelization. In current technology, this aspect is invaluable and even crucial. Parallel genetic algorithm applications fit very well to the loosely-coupled nature of

the Grid infrastructures. This makes it possible to submit genetic algorithm applications onto Grid environments with many ten thousands of processors. These advantages encourage the inclusion of the more advanced methods or handling of the more stiff problems in design.

References
1. 2. 3. Baysal, O., Eleshaky, M.E.: Aerodynamic Design Optimization Using Sensitivity Analysis and Computational Fluid Dynamics. AIAA 91-0471 (1991) Ide, H., Abdi, F., Shankar, V.J.: CFD Sensitivity Study for Aerodynamic/Control Optimization Problems. AIAA 88-2336 (1988) Reuther, J., Jameson, A., Farmer, J., Martinelli, L., Suanders, D.: Aerodynamic Shape Optimization of Complex Aircraft Configurations via an Adjoint Formulation. AIAA 960094 (1996) Anderson, M.B., Burkhalter, J.E., Jenkins, R.M.: Missile Aerodynamic Shape Optimization Using Genetic Algorithms. AIAA 99-0261 (1999) Foster, N.F., Dulikravich, G.S.: Three-Dimensional Aerodynamic Shape Optimization Using Genetic and Gradient Search Algorithms. J. Spacecraft and Rockets 34, 36--41 (1997) Blaize, M., Knight, D., Rasheed, K.: Automated Optimal Design of Two Dimensional High Speed Missile Inlets. AIAA 98-0950 (1998) Tekinalp, O., Bingl, M.: Simulated Annealing for Missile Optimization: Developing Method and Formulation Techniques. J. Guidance, Control, and Dynamics 27, 616--626 (2004) Lee, J., Hajela, P.: Parallel Genetic Algorithm Implementation in Multidisciplinary Rotor Blade Design. J Aircraft 33 (1996) Jones, B.R., Crossley, W.A., Lyrintzis, A.S.: Aerodynamic and Aeroacoustic Optimization of Rotorcraft Airfoils via a Parallel Genetic Algorithm. J Aircraft 37 (2000) Buns, K.A., Stoy, S.L., Vukelich, S. R.: Missile DATCOM: User Manual 1997 Fortran 90 Revision (1998) GridAE: Grid-based Artificial Evolution Framework, http://GridAE.ceng.metu.edu.tr South Eastern European Grid-enabled Infrastructure Development Grid Project, http://www.see-grid.eu Enabling Grids for E-sciencE, http://www.eu-egee.org Lightweight Middleware for Grid Computing, http://glite.web.cern.ch/glite Scientific Linux, https://www.scientificlinux.org

4. 5.

6. 7.

8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15.