1999
DOI: 10.2514/2.2438
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Reasonable Design Space Approach to Response Surface Approximation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
33
0

Year Published

2002
2002
2007
2007

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 64 publications
(34 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
33
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Mason et al (1998) present a review of work on the conceptual design of a high speed civil transport (HSCT) aircraft, in which DoE, variable complexity analysis using the 'reasonable design space' approach (Balabanov et al 1999), and polynomial response surface modelling are used to incorporate high-fidelity analysis into conceptual design. Knill et al (1999) make use of the same HSCT problem to investigate using a low-fidelity model to decrease the number of terms used to build a polynomial RSM and so reduce the number of high-fidelity simulations required.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Mason et al (1998) present a review of work on the conceptual design of a high speed civil transport (HSCT) aircraft, in which DoE, variable complexity analysis using the 'reasonable design space' approach (Balabanov et al 1999), and polynomial response surface modelling are used to incorporate high-fidelity analysis into conceptual design. Knill et al (1999) make use of the same HSCT problem to investigate using a low-fidelity model to decrease the number of terms used to build a polynomial RSM and so reduce the number of high-fidelity simulations required.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…All of these issues can be alleviated by intelligently examining the design space and reducing it accordingly. Balabanov et al applied the design space reduction technique to a high speed civil transport wing [1]. They discovered that 83% of the points in their original design space violated geometric constraints, while many of the remaining points were simply unreasonable.…”
Section: Design Space Refinementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A feasible design x (1) dominates another feasible design x (2) (denoted by x (1) < x (2) ), if both of the following conditions are true:…”
Section: Pareto Optimal Frontmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Hence, it might be appropriate to identify the region where we expect improvements in the performance of the designs, and construct surrogate models by sampling additional design points in that region (reasonable design space approach [31]). To identify the region of interest, we used the surrogate models, constructed with Set A data (110 design points), to evaluate response at a large number of points in design space.…”
Section: Design Space Refinementmentioning
confidence: 99%