You are on page 1of 8

Amir Mosavi, Shape Optimization, International modeFrontier Conference, 2010, Trieste, Italy.

Shape Optimization
Amir Moasvi,
The University of British Columbia, 2329 West Mall, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada

Summary
Design of profiles is important as by applying further surface design tools of CAD such as extrude, lofting and
sweeping almost any shapes can be reached. Profile design is the foundation of shape design and has wide
application in different disciplines of engineering. As long as the splines have found to be the best choice for
modeling the fine, smooth and accurate profiles and furthermore can easily substitute the original profiles of the
initial shape, the optimization the splines has got importance. In order to invent a general strategy for getting the
optimal geometry of the profiles there have been many researches on optimization the spline, which is a
multiobjetive and highly non-linear problem, but we havent reached the goals of an automatic and high
performance design process yet.
In this regard this paper aims to widen the awareness of the readers of the effective application of
medeFRONTIER in optimization the splines. The combination of modeFRONTIER and splining is introduced
for developing the profile design procedures which use CAD and CAE tools as an interface to the designer and
splines for profile construction.
After an introduction to multiobjective optimization (MOO) problem of the splining, the foundations of an
automated engineering design environment are briefly presented. Then the former GA-based approach to splined
profile optimization is reviewed. In following the selective approaches to profile design and surface deformation
utilizing the general strategy of modeFRONTIER are reviewed and its benefits in developing mechanical design
procedures are described.

Keywords
Automated engineering design environment, profile design, modeFRONTIER

Introduction
The discipline of computer aided geometric design (CAGD) deals with computational visual effects of geometry
[1]. Several disciplines have interacted with CAGD e.g. computer graphics, computational geometry, solid
modeling. Furthermore CAGD has also influenced fields such as medical imaging, geographic information
systems, computer gaming, and scientific visualization.

Amir Mosavi, Shape Optimization, International modeFrontier Conference, 2010, Trieste, Italy.

The standard approach to surface design has been to design a network of curves and build a surface to cover the
network utilizing computer tools. However currently many CAD software systems exist for this purpose,
employing standard techniques of surface design on the basis of the profiles [1] [2] [3] [10].
As far as the 2D geometry of profiles is concerned, one of the major issues of CAGD applications is how to
automatically reach to optimal curve shape using nonstandard data which is not ordered in a convenient way.
Yet it depends critically on the designer, aesthetic stylists and manufacturing engineers [2] [3].
The major achievement in CAGD has been the theory of Bezier curves and surfaces which later was combined
with spline methods. Utilizing the splining methods allows smooth shape changes via the control points. This
characteristic cannot be achieved by arcs because they have very low degree of freedom. Instead splines easily
substitute the original profiles of the initial shape.
When a profile design cannot be based on features defined, optimization provides a tool for automatically
achieving a desired geometry using limited design information. The essence of the method is to choose a single
or multiple functions, called an objective function, whose value is determined by the control points of a spline.
Then each objective function must attain a minimum or maximum value when the shape variables assume
values that correspond to the desired shape. In order to find the optimal value for an objective function, one must
solve simultaneous equations. Solving equations generally requires too much computer time, often hours of
runtime, and sometimes no suitable solution is actually found [10] [11] [12]. In this regard GA has been seen as
a solution for dealing with such complexity in CAGD. A survey by Gabor and Aniko [4] devoted to this topic.
Goldenthal et al. [5]-[7] in 2003 utilized GA for dealing with MOO problems of curves and surfaces design. In
their studies the geometry has been optimized respecting the design objectives i.e. approximation errors,
elasticity energy, length and area. Although still there is not any straight solution for the MOO problem of
curves.
however because of the complexity of MOO problems; mainly nonlinearity, caused by multiple conflicting
objectives, CAGD optimization has generally focused on simpler application problems with less objectives
which can be solved by linear methods. Yet this has been an automatic technique for generating shapes [12].

The Automated Engineering Design Environment


for Profiles
An automated environment tries to push designs to reach the optimal solutions. Consequently, an efficient
design can be achieved from an improvement process. In particular, the ability to apply automatic changes into
our 2D design environment is linked to the concept of computer aided innovation (CAI), allowing for an
exploration of a broader field for possible solutions to a design problem. Generally the conceptual framework of
CAI includes evolutionary design and decision making [9].
An automated engineering design environment uses integrated CAD/CAE tools for providing support to the
process in generating variants, simulations and decision making. This support, can improve the performance of
the concepts by generating alternative solutions to optimization problems.
Shape parameterization, evolutionary design process and optimization system can be considered as the
foundations of creating an automated engineering design environment.
An automated spline-based engineering design environment can guarantee the design efficiency of the different
disciplines of engineering e.g. marine, appliance, multibody, crash, structural, vibro-acoustics, turbomachinery,
civil engineering and aerospace.

Evolutionary design process


The application of advanced computation methods in generating the optimal design is around since last three
decades [12]. However a new area of development called evolutionary design has recently become a topic of
intensive research. According to Bentley [11] evolutionary design process is capable of generating designs by
optimizing the geometry. The ability of combining CAD and CAE which has been powered by managing the
advanced computer science, geometric parameterization, design and evolutionary biology is well utilized in this
application. Additionally the integrated CAD/CAE design method presents characteristics that add value to the
product by creating the novel shapes which deliver higher performance.

Amir Mosavi, Shape Optimization, International modeFrontier Conference, 2010, Trieste, Italy.

Evolutionary design approach via experience and judgment leads to better profile design. In its most reviewed
applications [5-19] judgment has been done by evolutionary algorithms -which are mostly GAs- when
evaluating a fitness function and comparison against certain criteria.

Shape parameterization
Optimization the existing designs by parameterization described and studied in study cases of Williams [15],
Olhofer et al.[16], Obayashi et al.[17] and Sheriff [19] is the first type of evolutionary design and nowadays has
widely application. In the mechanical field, geometric parameterization has been utilized to define the described
changes by design variables. The methods used by the design developers of evolutionary design systems vary.
However the spline parameterization approach [8-18] has the potential to be classified as creative where the
shape optimization task is converted to a parameter value optimization task by using spline-based curves for
profile representation. Furthermore it has been found that the spline method of parameterization is beneficial
because its computational implementation is efficient and free of problems with numerical stability and
parameterized splines allow smooth shape changes via the coordinates of their control points. Yet it is
advantageous that the degree of the curve and the number of control points can be selected independently in
order to satisfy curve smoothness and continuity for curve shape modifications.

Design optimization system


A profile design optimization process is utilized as the basic of surface design for seeking optimal shapes of
product geometry. The geometry of profile is defined in terms of spline parameters which define the external
border of the product and allow more freedom to manipulate, see figure 1. Then optimization process is done by
changing these external borders [9].
Typically, the process of optimization the splined profile is a MOO problem in a heavily constrained
environment. In this regard the goal of MOO is to optimize a vector function whose elements are the objective
functions often in conflicting each other [17] which is a difficult task to deal. The possible solutions of these
problems are represented in a diagram called Pareto-solution diagram [12]. To solve this, a decision must be
made by exploring the achievable limits of each particular attribute of parameter to find an ideal alternative. For
this reason GAs are viewed as a mechanism for embedding the innovative principles in a CAD interface.
Furthermore the use and combination of optimization tools and innovation capabilities is intended to provide a
means for automatically varying the geometry from the evaluation made by CAE systems.

Automatic Optimization the Splined Profile by GA


Engineering design community desperately needs an effective and automatic environment in surface
deformation and design applications. In this regard there have been lots of researches so far and some methods,
mostly GA-based, have been introduced. However there are also other methods for exploring the design space
for shape optimization available [28, 35, 36, 37]. But still GA-based methods maintain their application because
of benefits mentioned in [4, 7, 12 and 13]. Accordingly by using GA, it is possible to optimize the geometry and
additionally automate the design process. In fact, the design automation is the main motivations for developing
the GA-based approaches. GAs can be utilized to automatically produce alternative profile shapes for the
simulator, and finally to evaluate the shapes on the basis of the simulator output data.
The splining approach combined with GA-based optimization [5-19] is relatively new. The splined profile and
its codified control points by genetic algorithms, form the basis of an evolutionary designed process.
Furthermore a range of efforts [8- 10] have been applied so far for improving the strategy of splining approach.
Lampinen [18] overviews such this approach for preliminary optimization of concept profiles for dynamic
mechanisms. He creates a complete systematic approach for preliminary 2D designs with respect to the
simulated computer models. A cam shape profile was given as an example to illustrate the proposed workflow
process and its effectiveness. Albers et al. [8-10] also utilized similar strategy to develop an engine crankshaft.
In these cases the 2D cross sections of the concept are represented by splines, which make it possible to freely
express the shape in parametric forms.

Workflow
The spline control points during optimization process are called floating-points which are actually variables for
optimization. The splined profile is defined with a number of floating-points valued as parameters, see figure 1.

Amir Mosavi, Shape Optimization, International modeFrontier Conference, 2010, Trieste, Italy.

The idea is to convert a splined profile optimization task to a parameter value optimization task. Same as the
presented general workflow in [5-19], parametric CAD software is automatically manipulated by the GAs via
interface software. This interface allows the CAD software to run continually and get saved in the computer
memory, therefore every time a solution is generated the geometry automatically adapts to the set of parameters.
The process starts with an existing design, substitutes the current construction with splines and adds control
points. The spline is modeled inside the tolerances of the original shapes profile but changes during the
development process. The floating points of the splines which are subjected to improvement are parameterized.
A single coordinate of the spline floating points (for instance Y coordinate as in [18]) are encoded as genes. In
other worlds each gene represents one floating-point of the spline curve. Three main genetic operators act on the
genes of the geometry are selection, crossover, and mutation. Crossover allows the geometrical characteristics of
selected splines to be merged in pairs and their properties to be extended to following generations. The
crossover and mutation are responsible for generating new alternative shapes by altering the organization of
floating-points.

AOE

Figure 1: a: initial product (existing design) subjected to optimization b: digitizing process c: point
cloud d: substitutes the current construction with splines, adds control points and parameterization the
spline e: splined shape and parameterization the surfaces f: automatic optimization environment for
profiles and covering surfaces g: optimal shape

Each individual of the population describes one complete concept shape with constant number of floating-point
values in a parametric form. So, a chromosome, composed of many floating points valued genes, represents each
individual shape. The GA-based optimization process attempts to find a series of shapes which satisfy the design
objectives and meets all constraints. The objectives of the analysis are to develop the geometry in order to obtain
the optimal results of emphasized CAE simulations.
The objectives are introduced into the CAD and automatically provide the value of the fitness function.
Individual shapes, represented by a vector of constant number of control points, will be evaluated with this
fitness-function which is automatically updated every time the geometry is modified. When evaluating a fitness
function, GA relies on judgment, based on evaluation and comparison against certain criteria. Yet it is supposed
that experience and judgment the new shapes created by floating-point sets can lead to a good design.

Improving the workflow


There have been lots of efforts by researchers for the reason of approaching the optimal geometry of splines via
an automatic design environment in order to speed up the optimization process. As the result it was witnessed
that the quality of optimized designs utilizing GA-based optimization was improved in comparison with the
conventionally designed counterpart concepts. Obviously there are number of drawbacks to the process too. For
instance in the applied workflow utilizing GA there is a weakness in handling numerous objectives which,
makes the optimization process of more than two objectives very complicated. The other drawback is the
complexity of workflow in setting a new project which might engineers couldnt work with it properly.
However it is expected to improve the process by satisfying some factors such as:

Better defining the target value of CAE objectives


Maintaining the limitations concept design and manufacturability
Developing the interface for integration of the CAD, geometric evaluations, CAE and optimization
Complementing the innovation principles to apply to the geometry.

Amir Mosavi, Shape Optimization, International modeFrontier Conference, 2010, Trieste, Italy.

Obtaining new design concepts for the shapes

In this regard lots of efforts have been done for the improving the whole process in terms of ease, automation,
effectiveness, etc. As mentioned earlier the profile design is typically a multiobjective optimization problem in a
heavily constrained environment. The objective functions are also highly multimodal and non-linear. For this
reason it is expected to utilize more effective MOO algorithms, decision support tools, data assessment and
sampling tools. In the next chapter modeFRONTIER is introduced as an improved design and optimization
facility which can be completely responsible for an automatic design environment. This facility brings together
techniques which have their origins in the fields of optimization, applied in [5-19], and new tools for innovation.

Splined Profile Optimization Utilizing modeFRONTIER


modeFRONTIER is a multiobjective optimization and design environment, which can easily couple almost any
CAE and CAD packages. One of the success reasons of it is the utilizing lots of optimization algorithms and
tools including response surface modeling tool, MOGA, NSGA, NASH and B-BFGS in a hybrid form instead of
a single algorithm.
It acts as a robot controlling the design process [27]. Therefore the role of the users is limited to create a
parameterized model, and to specify the objectives, which they wish to attain.. modeFRONTIER modifies the
design variables till achieving the user-specified objectives. The use of it is put forward as a mechanism for
mediating conflicts. The further modeFRONTIER extensive set of modules are listed as follow:

Provides Design of Experiment (DOE) techniques


Includes standard applications such as Excel and Matlab
Robust design optimization
Multi Criteria Decision Making (MCDM)
Statistical analysis tools

In order to be able to easily design and effectively optimize the complex 2D profiles the novel method of
combined splining and modeFRONTIER is suggested. It is assumed that spline can deliver extraordinary results
in an automated optimization environment such as modeFRONTIER. There have been some experiences in this
regard too. Although according to author's knowledge there is not enough description available regarding the
details of coupling splining and modeFRONTIER. However automatic shape optimization on the basis of the
solid modeling tools is one of the well-known applications of modeFRONTIER. In most of the shape
optimization cases utilizing modeFRONTIER, the shape has been modeled and parameterized by solid modeling
tools. Lung design [29], MEMS design [38] and ball grid array design [39] are few examples in this regard.
The applied strategy of modeFRONTIER in optimizing the spline has been around since 2003 in different
applications including profile design. Pinto et al. [21] in optimization the profile of connective wavy channel of
a heat exchanger utilize this strategy for modeling, parameterization and optimization. Applying splines for 2D
periodic channel and further geometrical parameterizations presented better deformation to the shape though
with more variables. With the aid of spline, lots of different possibilities were generated and the optimal
geometry of profile applying modeFRONTIER was achieved.
In the other project presented by Ciprian et al. [33] the geometry profile of a transonic airfoil with uncertainties
has been optimized. For parameterization the upper and lower sides of the profile a Bezier curve, very similar to
spline curve, has been utilized. The coordinate of their control points are the variables of optimization. The
optimization goal was to find out an airfoil geometry which yields better results respecting to the performances
and stability.
Further applications which are reviewed below [20, 22 and 23] arent devoted directly on profile design but
utilize same method and confirm the suitability of the applied strategy. For instance optimization and selecting
advantageous ship routes on the basis of hydrodynamic simulations [22 and 23] which can also be considered as
the early application of modeFRONTIER in optimizing the splines. The ship routes are actually in the form of
open curves and easily are modeled by splines. In these studies high number of variables was manipulated and

Amir Mosavi, Shape Optimization, International modeFrontier Conference, 2010, Trieste, Italy.

possible solutions were introduced as a graph of Pareto optimal solutions. Furthermore Rousselon [20] aimed to
increase the performance of sails by utilizing same tools. Splines have been applied for modeling via CAD,
where each sail is parametrically defined as splines by control points. In order to have access to a wide range of
high-performance optimization algorithms modeFRONTIER was applied. The application of utilized tools in
the real proposed cases has been found to be robust, accurate and successful.
The approach to MOO of splines and the benefits of the Pareto optimal solutions in identifying conflicts are
presented in [25]. The role of splines in this context is found to be closely integrated with modeFRONTIER in
enabling this development on a CAD&CAE software interface, and in enabling automation of the development.
The optimization procedure utilizing modeFRONTIER freely explores a wide range of possible geometries.
Dominique and Gabor [25] developed a flexible spline-based reconstruction technique utilizing
mofeFRONTIER to reconstruct a distribution. The moment computation and the spline interpolation needed for
a given set of control point positions are performed by Matlab. The modeFRONTIER easily was coupled with
Matlab and the NSGA-II algorithm was applied to adjust the control points. It is concluded that optimization
may support the development of an even more efficient procedures.

Surface Deformation Utilizing modefrontier


In this part the application of modeFRONTIER in Surface design is reviewed. Surface design along with the
confirmed profile design strategy would deliver a complete tool for 3D surface design.
The potential of combination of modeFRONTIER and surface deformation methods for automating the process
of optimization and design has been already proven. Surface deformation methods are divided in two different
parts; mesh-based methods and CAD-based methods. modeFRONTIER is able to manage the optimization
process with both methods. However the latter methods need less computation efforts.
The combination of modeFRONTIER and meshing packages for surface deformation has found to be an ideal
tool in CFD-based shape optimization problems. Paul and Mark [31] optimized an IP and console duct surface
utilizing this tool. The focus of their study was to invent a procedure that accelerate the optimization process by
utilizing arbitrary shape deformation (ASD) technology [32] coupled with CAE via modeFRONTIER. The ASD
volume is defined by control points. It is the movement of these control points that changes the geometry of the
ASD and the dependent mesh. Control points that are moved to deform the mesh are defined as design variables
for the optimization process.
The process of ASD has been mostly facilitated by mesh-deformation package of Sculptor. The combination of
modeFRONTIER and Sculptor is in interest of researchers who look for flexible solution to optimize shapes
with minimum parameters but great freedom, without involving CAD and mesh-generator software in the
optimization loop. Additionally research group of Prof. Sinia Krajnovi [34] utilized this coupled tool for shape
optimization and active flow control for improved aerodynamic properties of car and fast train. However a
drawback to the application of mesh-deformation in generating new geometry of shapes would be the low
accuracy in modeling the complex shapes.
The Study cases of CAD-based methods of surface deformation [26, 30, and 31] in optimization the complex 3D
shapes utilize surface modeling tools integrated with modeFRONTIER. Cooling duct shape optimization [26] is
one of the early documented examples which show the effectiveness of the method in 3D shape design.
However in this study the subjected shape, because of the simplicity of its cross sections, has been modeled by
surface sweeping tool based on the simple polygonal profiles. It was aimed to show the benefits of
modeFRONTIER in design process, by using parametric models and distributed computational resources for
flow analysis. The fast and easy integration of CAE packages in modeFRONTIER allows improvement in the
geometry of the shape. The duct geometry was modified through surface parameters respecting the CFD-based
objectives. Moreover robustness analysis was what modeFRONTIER offered on proposed solutions. In [30] in
order to enable parameterized surface based shape modifications which can immediately be used in the CADbased surface deformation and design process, CatiaV5 as a powerful CAD package is deserved as a tool for
managing the geometry via effective surface modeling tools.

Conclusions and Future Works


CAI uses modeFRONTIER to provide support for the design process by letting an integrated computer tool of
CAD and CAE takes part in ingenerating variants, simulations and decision making. This support, has improved
the performance of the concepts by generating alternative solutions to optimization problems.

Amir Mosavi, Shape Optimization, International modeFrontier Conference, 2010, Trieste, Italy.

The system of geometric shape optimization offer hints about the next generation of optimization tools. Yet in
order to have a general and automated design procedure, the design environment must be effective in both
profile design (2D) and then surface design (3D). It is concluded that modeFRONTIER can be highly effective
in both fields.
It was reviewed that surface modeling tools of powerful CAD packages or ASD facilitated by mesh-deformation
packages can be utilized for 3D surface modeling and parameterization in modeFRONTIER environment for a
standard and controlled optimization strategy. Furthermore the role of splines in this context is found to be
closely integrated with modeFRONTIER in enabling concepts profiles development on a CAD/CAE software
interface, and in enabling automation of the development.
The details of workflow and description of the combination of modeFRONTIER and splining for profile design
would be the subject of future work which will be presented at the next modeFRONTIER user meeting.

References
[ 1] G. Farin. A history of curves and surfaces in CAGD. In G. Farin, J. Hoschek, and M.-S. Kim, editors,
Handbook of 3D Modeling and Graphics, pages 1-22. Elsevier, 2002.
[ 2]
R. Barnhill and R. F. Riesenfeld, editors. Computer Aided Geometric Design, Academic Press, 1974.
[ 3] Ramon F. Sarraga, Recent methods for surface shape optimization, Computer Aided Geometric Design
vol.15 (1998)
[ 4] Gabor Renner, Aniko Ekart, Genetic algorithms in computer aided design, Computer-Aided Design 35
(2003) 709726
[ 5] Goldenthal, R., Bercovier, M., Spline curve approximation and design over the knots using genetic
algorithms, International Congress Evolutionary Methods for Design, Optimization and Control with
Applications to Industrial Problems, Bugeda, G., Desideri, J.-A, Periaux, J., Schoenauer, M., and
Winter G. (eds.), 2003
[ 6] Goldenthal, R., Bercovier, M., Spline curve approximation and design over the knots, Computing,
Springer-Verlag Wien,Vol. 72, num. 1-2, pp. 5364, April 2004
[ 7] Rony Goldenthal and Michel Bercovier, Design of Curves and Surfaces Using Multi-Objective
Optimization, 2005
[ 8] H. Aguayo-Te llez, N. Leon-Rovira, Computer aided innovation of crankshafts using genetic algorithms,
in: Knowledge Enterprise: Intelligent Strategies in Product Design, Manufacturing and Management,
Springer Boston, USA, 2006, pp. 471476.
[ 9] H. Aguayo-Tellez, N. Leon-Rovira, A. Albers, T. Maier, Comparison of strategies for the
optimization/innovation of crankshaft balance, in: Trends in Computer Aided Innovation, Springer,
USA, 2007, pp. 201210.
[ 10] Albers, N. Leon-Rovira, H. Aguayo, T. Maier, Development of an engine crankshaft in a framework of
computer-aided innovation, Computers in Industry, Springer 60 (2009) 604612
[ 11]
P. Bentley, Evolutionary Design by Computers, Morgan Kaufmann, USA, 1999.
[ 12] C.A. Coello Coello, A comprehensive survey of evolutionary-based multi-objective optimization
techniques, Knowledge and Information Systems 1 (1999) 129156.
[ 13] N. Leon-Rovira, J.M. Cueva de Leo n, J. Gutierrez, D. Silva, Automatic Shape Variations in 3d CAD
Environments, in: 1st IFIP-TC5 Working Conference on Computer Aided Innovation, Germany,
(2005), pp. 200210.
[ 14] N. Leon-Rovira, J. Cueva, C. Villarreal, S. Hutron, G. Campero, in: N. Leon-Rovira (Ed.), IFIP
International Federation for Information Processing, Volume 250, Trends in Computer Aided
Innovation, Springer, Boston, 2007, pp. 179188.
[ 15] S. Williams, Unnatural selectionmachines using genetic algorithms are better than humans at designing
other machines, Technology Review: MITs Magazine of Innovation 108 (2005) 54.
[ 16] M. Olhofer, Y. Jin, B. Sendhoff, Adaptive encoding for aerodynamic shape optimization using evolution
strategies, in: Congress on Evolutionary Computation, Seoul, (2001), pp. 576583.
[ 17] S. Obayashi, T. Tsukahara, T. Nakamura, Multiobjective genetic algorithm applied to aerodynamic design
of cascade airfoils, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics 47 (2000) 211216.
[ 18] J. Lampinen, Cam shape optimisation by genetic algorithm, Computer-Aided Design 35 (2003) 727 737
[ 19] N. Mohamed Sheriff, N.K. Gupta, R. Velmurugan, N. Shanmugapriyan, Optimization of thin conical frusta
for impact energy absorption, Thin-Walled Structures 46 (2008) 653666

Amir Mosavi, Shape Optimization, International modeFrontier Conference, 2010, Trieste, Italy.

[ 20]
[ 21]

[ 22]
[ 23]

[ 24]

[ 25]
[ 26]

[ 27]
[ 28]
[ 29]
[ 30]

[ 31]

[ 32]
[ 33]

[ 34]

[ 35]
[ 36]

[ 37]

Rousselon N., 2008, "Optimization for Sail Design", paper presented at the ModeFrontier Conference,
June 2008, Trieste, Italy
F. Pinto G. Rizzetto E. Nobile, Coupling FEMLAB and modeFRONTIER for Multiobjective Shape
Optimization of ConvectiveWavy Channels, Excerpt from the Proceedings of the COMSOL
Multiphysics User's Conference 2005 Stockholm
Harries, S.; Heimann, J.; Hinnenthal, J.: Pareto-optimal Routing of Ship, International Conference on
Ship and Shipping Research - NAV 2003, Palermo, June 2003
Hinnenthal, J.; Harries, S.: A Systematic Study on Posing and Solving the Problem of Pareto Optimal
Ship Routing, 3rd International Conference on Computer Applications and Information Technology in
the Maritime Industries (COMPIT 2004), Siguenza, Spain, May 2004
Silvia Poles, Mariana Vassileva and Daisuke Sasaki, Multiobjective Optimization Software, 2008, Eds:
Jurgen Branke Kalyanmoy Deb Kaisa Miettinen Roman Sowinski, Multiobjective Optimization
Interactive and Evolutionary Approaches
Dominique Thevenin Gabor Janiga, 2008, Optimization and Computational Fluid Dynamics,
Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
Silvia Poles, Paolo Geremia, F.Campos, S.Weston, and M.Islam, 2007, MOGA-II for an Automotive
Cooling Duct Optimization on Distributed Resources, Eds; Shigeru Obayashi Kalyanmoy Deb Carlo
Poloni Tomoyuki Hiroyasu Tadahiko Murata, Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimization, 4th
International Conference, EMO 2007 Matsushima, Japan, springer Berlin, Heidelberg
Nader Fateh, Esteco North America Inc. 2006, Esteco newsletter
Indirect
Optimization
on
the
basis
of
Self-Organization
(IOSO),
http://www.iosotech.com/ioso_tech.htm, (accessed Nov 7, 2009).
Case studies available in http://www.enginsoft.net (accessed May 7, 2010).
N. Kroll, K. Becker, H. Rieger, F. Thiele, 2006, ongoing activities in flow simulation and shape
optimization within the Gernman MEGADESIGN project , 25thinternational congress of the
aeronautical sciences
Paul Hoke, Mark Doroudian, Optimization of an IP and Console Duct using Advanced Shape
Deformation Technology, 3rd European Automotive CFD Conference 5-6 July 2007, Frankfurt,
Germany
Dominique Bechmann, Dominique Gerber, 2003, arbitrary shaped deformations with DOGME,
Springer-Verlag the Visual Computer, 19:175186
M. Ciprian, V. Pediroda, and C. Poloni, 2007, Multi Criteria Decision Aiding Techniques, Eds; Shigeru
Obayashi Kalyanmoy Deb Carlo Poloni Tomoyuki Hiroyasu Tadahiko Murata, Evolutionary MultiCriterion Optimization, 4th International Conference, EMO 2007 Matsushima, Japan
Sinia Krajnovi, Eysteinn Helgason and Haukur E. Hafsteinsson and Luca Fuligno, low-emissions
vehicles with modeFRONTIER, Sculptor and AVL FIRE: external shape aerodynamic optimization,
newsletter year 6 no3 autumn 2009
K. Wieghardt,t D. Hartmann and K. R. Leimbach, 1997, Interactive shape optimization of continuum
structures, Engineering Strmture~. Vol. 19, No. 4. pp. 325-331.
P.A. Sherar, C.P. Thompson, B. Xu, B. Zhong, 2007,
An Optimization Method Based On B-spline
Shape Functions & the Knot Insertion Algorithm, Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering,
Vol II
Jae-Woo Lee, Byung-Young Min and Yung-Hwan Byun, 2006, Multipoint Nose Shape Optimization
of Space Launcher Using Response Surface Method, JOURNAL OF SPACECRAFT AND ROCKETS, Vol. 43, No. 1,
JanuaryFebruary 2006

[ 38]
[ 39]

MEMS Design with Architect3D, http://www.coventor.com/pdfs/Architect%20modeFrontier.pdf

H. Strandberg, T. Makkonen, J. Leinvuo, 2009, Multi-Objective Optimization of a Ball Grid Array


Using modeFRONTIER & COMSOL Multiphysics, Excerpt from the Proceedings of the COMSOL
Conference 2009 Milan

You might also like