Numerical Method for Cost-Weight Optimization of Stringer-Skin Panels

Curran, Richard; Rothwell, A.; Castagne, Sylvie

doi:10.2514/1.13225

Cited by 34 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In literature, research on cost modelling is rich and varied, both from a general perspective (as discussed in Section 2.1) and from more applied perspectives, for instance through-life costing (Curran et al 2003(Curran et al , 2007b(Curran et al , 2008a, manufacturing cost estimation (Curran et al 2006a(Curran et al , 2006b(Curran et al , 2008c and composite material costing (Curran et al 2008b In fact, the cost model addresses the medium level of fidelity gap that has been identified in Section 2.1. Furthermore, its results enable the parameterisation of the costs and times associated with the discrete manufacturing processes for composite parts.…”

Section: Cost Model Evolutionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Knowledge-based cost modelling of composite wing structures

Verhagen

García²,

Mariot³

et al. 2012

International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The progressive industrialisation of composite-built aircraft is putting manufacturing engineers on a steep learning curve. An opportunity exists to use knowledge management tools to capture, share and reuse knowledge over multiple aircraft programs and maintain the constant flow of learning gained during aircraft program delivery. This article reports on research to develop a knowledge-based cost modelling capability for composite part concept evaluation. The approach integrates a knowledge management environment with a process-based cost estimation tool encoded in very large spreadsheets. To achieve this, the complexity of the cost model is managed by modularising it into simple, re-useable components. The knowledge management environment is then used to manage the knowledge life cycle, knowledge exploitation and knowledge visibility of those components. The result is a flexible cost modelling tool composed of traceable, verifiable and reliable knowledge elements that provides through-life knowledge support for cost engineering. Validation is achieved through functional application of the solution for composite wing top cover cost modelling.

show abstract

Section: Cost Model Evolutionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Knowledge-based cost modelling of composite wing structures

Verhagen

García²,

Mariot³

et al. 2012

International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Kelly et al [1], Wang et al [2], Curran et al [3,4] and Kaufmann et al [5] have incorporated weight penalty approaches for the optimisation of aircraft structures. These approaches had in common that the objective function is formed by weighted sums, the latter containing the manufacturing cost and the weight of the part.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Manufacturing process adaptation for integrated cost/weight optimisation of aircraft structures

Kaufmann¹,

Czumanski²,

Zenkert³

2009

Plastics, Rubber and Composites

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is the published version of a paper published in Plastics, rubber and composites.Citation for the original published paper (version of record):Kaufmann, M., Czumanski, T., Zenkert, D. (2009) Manufacturing process adaptation for integrated cost/weight optimisation of aircraft structures. Plastics March 2009A methodology is developed that enables cost-efficient design of composite aircraft structures. In earlier work, a cost/weight optimisation framework was presented. This framework is here enhanced by a module that minimises the manufacturing cost in each iteration by adaptation of manufacturing parameters. The proposed framework is modular and applicable to a variety of parts and geometries. Commercially available software is used in all steps of the optimisation. The framework extension is added to an existing cost/weight optimisation implementation and tested on an airliner centre wing box rear spar. Three optimisation runs are performed, and a low cost, an intermediate and a low weight design solution are found. The difference between the two extreme solutions is 4.4% in manufacturing cost and 9.7% in weight. Based on these optimisation trials, the effect of the introduced parameter adaptation module is analysed.

show abstract

“…Weight penalty p Curran et al [38] proposed that the economical value of weight saving is 300 $/kg. Similarly, Kim et al [39] referred to a recent report by the US National Materials Advisory Board [40] that estimated that a 1 lb weight reduction amounts to a total saving of $200 for a civil transport aircraft.…”

Section: Optimization For Minimum Lifecycle Costmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability-Based Structural Design of Aircraft Together with Future Tests

Acar¹,

Haftka²,

Kim³

et al. 2010

51st AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference

4
0
11
0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Traditional optimization changes variables that are available in the design stage to optimize objectives, such as aircraft structural reliability. However, there are many post-design measures, such as tests and structural health monitoring that reduce uncertainty andfurther improve the reliability. In this paper, a new reliability-based design framework that can include post-design uncertainty reduction variables is proposed. Among many post-design variables, this paper focuses on the number of coupon tests and the number of structural element tests. Uncertainty in the failure stress prediction, variability due to the finite number of coupon tests, and uncertainties in geometry and service conditions are studied in detail. The Bayesian technique is used to update the failure stress distribution based on results of the element tests. Tradeoff plots of the number of tests, weight and probability of failure in certification and in service are generated, and finally reliability-based design of future tests together with aircraft structure is performed for minimum lifecycle cost. Nomenclature A = load carrying area (width times thickness) of a small part of the overall structure be ef = bound of associated with failure criterion used while predicting failure in the structural element tests b t = bound of error in the design thickness, e t b w = bound of error in the design width, e w e ef = error associated with failure criterion used while predicting failure in the structural element tests e f = error in predicting failure of the entire structure in certification or proof testec e p = error in load calculation e σ = error in stress calculation e t = error in the design thickness due to construction errors e w = error in the design width due to construction errors DOC = direct operating cost E( ) = expected value (i.e., mean value) k d = knockdown factor at coupon level due to use of conservative (B-basis) material properties k f = additional knockdown factor at the structural level (nominal value is taken as 0.95) n c = number of coupon tests (nominal value is taken as 50) American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics2 n e = number of element tests (nominal value is taken as 3) N a = number of aircraft in a fleet (taken as 1,000) N mat = number of materials for which coupon testing is done (taken as 80) N elem = number of different types of structural elements tested (taken as 100) p = cost saving by reducing the structural weight by one unit P calc = calculated design load P d = true design load based on the FAA specifications (e.g., gust load specification) P f = probability of failure PFCT = probability of failing certification test σ ca = allowable stress (B-basis) from coupon testing σ ea = allowable stress (B-basis) from element testing σ a = allowable stress (B-basis) of the entire structure σ cf = failure stress from coupon testing σ ef = failure stress of the structural element (σ ef ) test = element failure stress measured in tests (σ ef ) calc = calculated (or predicted) element failure stress (σ ef...

show abstract

Numerical Method for Cost-Weight Optimization of Stringer-Skin Panels

Cited by 34 publications

References 22 publications

Knowledge-based cost modelling of composite wing structures

Knowledge-based cost modelling of composite wing structures

Manufacturing process adaptation for integrated cost/weight optimisation of aircraft structures

Reliability-Based Structural Design of Aircraft Together with Future Tests

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About