2015
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-15892-1_21
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Aircraft Air Inlet Design Optimization via Surrogate-Assisted Evolutionary Computation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…An optimal inlet design ensures sufficient thrust by providing the requisite airflow pressure to the compressor. As a consequence, several researchers (1)(2)(3) have explored different inlet designs and identified the critical parameters to improve the airflow pressure and the overall aerodynamic features of the aircraft. Amongst these designs, the submerged inlet (also called the flush inlet) has attracted significant interest from researchers due to its unique architecture (4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9) , especially for aircraft operating in the subsonic flow regime.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An optimal inlet design ensures sufficient thrust by providing the requisite airflow pressure to the compressor. As a consequence, several researchers (1)(2)(3) have explored different inlet designs and identified the critical parameters to improve the airflow pressure and the overall aerodynamic features of the aircraft. Amongst these designs, the submerged inlet (also called the flush inlet) has attracted significant interest from researchers due to its unique architecture (4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9) , especially for aircraft operating in the subsonic flow regime.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the inlet position and structural parameters are different. Currently, most design of NACA air inlets follows the instruction of ESDU 86002 document [2], in which a two-dimensional surface design instruction is presented. It cannot be extended to all of the NACA shape design especially to three-dimensional shape of different aircraft.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Gradient-based optimization algorithms utilizing the adjoint method 2 are relatively cost-e↵ective, but are stymied by even low degrees of multimodality, and any confidence that the obtained solution is the global optimum only extends so far as the confidence that the design space is unimodal. On the other hand, gradient-free approaches like genetic algorithms 3 are quite robust with regard to even highly multimodal problems, but require a greater investment of computational resources than comparable gradient-based methods, 4 even if one considers potential cost savings from the use of hierarchical genetic algorithms, 5 surrogate methods, [6][7][8] or hybrid algorithms. 9,10 It has been demonstrated that multimodality can exist in aerodynamic shape optimization problems, 11 and the importance of understanding multimodality in this context is underscored by the recent inclusion of a multimodal problem in the Aerodynamic Design and Optimization Discussion Group (ADODG) test suite at the AIAA Aviation 2017 conference.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%