Zwack, Mathew R. | Search NASA

NASA NTRS2017

Improvement of Automated POST Case Success Rate Using Support Vector Machines

During early conceptual design of complex systems, concept down selection can have a large impact upon program life-cycle cost. Therefore, any concepts selected during early design will inherently commit program costs and affect the overall probability of program success. For this reason it is important to consider as large a design space as possible in order to better inform the down selection process. For conceptual design of launch vehicles, trajectory analysis and optimization often presents the largest obstacle to evaluating large trade spaces. This is due to the sensitivity of the trajectory discipline to changes in all other aspects of the vehicle design. Small deltas in the performance of other subsystems can result in relatively large fluctuations in the ascent trajectory because the solution space is non-linear and multi-modal. In order to help capture large design spaces for new launch vehicles, the authors have performed previous work seeking to automate the execution of the industry standard tool, Program to Optimize Simulated Trajectories (POST). This work initially focused on implementation of analyst heuristics to enable closure of cases in an automated fashion, with the goal of applying the concepts of design of experiments (DOE) and surrogate modeling to enable near instantaneous throughput of vehicle cases.3 As noted in [4] work was then completed to improve the DOE process by utilizing a graph theory based approach to connect similar design points.

Zwack, Mathew R.↗

NASA NTRS2017

Automation of POST Cases via External Optimizer and "Artificial p2" Calculation

During conceptual design speed and accuracy are often at odds. Specifically in the realm of launch vehicles, optimizing the ascent trajectory requires a larger pool of analytical power and expertise. Experienced analysts working on familiar vehicles can produce optimal trajectories in a short time frame, however whenever either "experienced" or "familiar " is not applicable the optimization process can become quite lengthy. In order to construct a vehicle agnostic method an established global optimization algorithm is needed. In this work the authors develop an "artificial" error term to map arbitrary control vectors to non-zero error by which a global method can operate. Two global methods are compared alongside Design of Experiments and random sampling and are shown to produce comparable results to analysis done by a human expert.

Dees, Patrick D.↗

NASA NTRS2017

Automation of POST Cases via External Optimizer and "Artificial p2" Calculation

During early conceptual design of complex systems, speed and accuracy are often at odds with one another. While many characteristics of the design are fluctuating rapidly during this phase there is nonetheless a need to acquire accurate data from which to down-select designs as these decisions will have a large impact upon program life-cycle cost. Therefore enabling the conceptual designer to produce accurate data in a timely manner is tantamount to program viability. For conceptual design of launch vehicles, trajectory analysis and optimization is a large hurdle. Tools such as the industry standard Program to Optimize Simulated Trajectories (POST) have traditionally required an expert in the loop for setting up inputs, running the program, and analyzing the output. The solution space for trajectory analysis is in general non-linear and multi-modal requiring an experienced analyst to weed out sub-optimal designs in pursuit of the global optimum. While an experienced analyst presented with a vehicle similar to one which they have already worked on can likely produce optimal performance figures in a timely manner, as soon as the "experienced" or "similar" adjectives are invalid the process can become lengthy. In addition, an experienced analyst working on a similar vehicle may go into the analysis with preconceived ideas about what the vehicle's trajectory should look like which can result in sub-optimal performance being recorded. Thus, in any case but the ideal either time or accuracy can be sacrificed. In the authors' previous work a tool called multiPOST was created which captures the heuristics of a human analyst over the process of executing trajectory analysis with POST. However without the instincts of a human in the loop, this method relied upon Monte Carlo simulation to find successful trajectories. Overall the method has mixed results, and in the context of optimizing multiple vehicles it is inefficient in comparison to the method presented POST's internal optimizer functions like any other gradient-based optimizer. It has a specified variable to optimize whose value is represented as optval, a set of dependent constraints to meet with associated forms and tolerances whose value is represented as p2, and a set of independent variables known as the u-vector to modify in pursuit of optimality. Each of these quantities are calculated or manipulated at a certain phase within the trajectory. The optimizer is further constrained by the requirement that the input u-vector must result in a trajectory which proceeds through each of the prescribed events in the input file. For example, if the input u-vector causes the vehicle to crash before it can achieve the orbital parameters required for a parking orbit, then the run will fail without engaging the optimizer, and a p2 value of exactly zero is returned. This poses a problem, as this "non-connecting" region of the u-vector space is far larger than the "connecting" region which returns a non-zero value of p2 and can be worked on by the internal optimizer. Finding this connecting region and more specifically the global optimum within this region has traditionally required the use of an expert analyst.

Dees, Patrick D.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Application of Design of Experiments and Surrogate Modeling within the NASA Advanced Concepts Office, Earth-to-Orbit Design Process

Decisions made during early conceptual design have a large impact upon the expected life-cycle cost (LCC) of a new program. It is widely accepted that up to 80% of such cost is committed during these early design phases. Therefore, to help minimize LCC, decisions made during conceptual design must be based upon as much information as possible. To aid in the decision making for new launch vehicle programs, the Advanced Concepts Office (ACO) at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) provides rapid turnaround pre-phase A and phase A concept definition studies. The ACO team utilizes a proven set of tools to provide customers with a full vehicle mass breakdown to tertiary subsystems, preliminary structural sizing based upon worst-case flight loads, and trajectory optimization to quantify integrated vehicle performance for a given mission. Although the team provides rapid turnaround for single vehicle concepts, the scope of the trade space can be limited due to analyst availability and the manpower requirements for manual execution of the analysis tools. In order to enable exploration of a broader design space, the ACO team has implemented an advanced design methods (ADM) based approach. This approach applies the concepts of design of experiments (DOE) and surrogate modeling to more exhaustively explore the trade space and provide the customer with additional design information to inform decision making. This paper will first discuss the automation of the ACO tool set, which represents a majority of the development effort. In order to fit a surrogate model within tolerable error bounds a number of DOE cases are needed. This number will scale with the number of variable parameters desired and the complexity of the system's response to those variables. For all but the smallest design spaces, the number of cases required cannot be produced within an acceptable timeframe using a manual process. Therefore, automation of the tools was a key enabler for the successful application of an ADM approach to an ACO design study. Following the overview of the tool set automation, an example problem will be given to illustrate the implementation of the ADM approach. The example problem will first cover the inclusion of ground rules and assumptions (GR&A) for a study. The GR&A are very important to the study as they determine the constraints within which a trade study can be conducted. These trades must ultimately reconcile with the customer's desired output and any anticipated "what if" questions. The example problem will then illustrate the setup and execution of a DOE through the automated ACO tools. This process is accomplished more efficiently in this work by splitting the tools into two separate environments. The first environment encompasses the structural optimization and mass estimation tools, while the second is focused on trajectory optimization. Surrogate models are fit to the outputs of each environment and are "integrated" via connection of the surrogate equations. Throughout this process, checks are implemented to compare the output of the surrogates to the output of manually run cases to ensure that the error of the final surrogates is at an acceptable level. The conclusion of the example problem demonstrates the utility of the ADM based approach. Using surrogate models gives the ACO team the ability to visualize vehicle sensitivities to various design parameters and identify regions of interest within the design space. The ADM approach can thus be used to inform concept down selection and isolate promising vehicle configurations to be explored in more detail through the manual design process. In addition it provides the customer with an almost instantaneous turnaround on any ''what if" questions that may arise within the bounds of the surrogate model. This approach ultimately expands the ability of the ACO team to provide its customer with broad and rapid turnaround trade studies for launch vehicle conceptual design. The ability to identify a selection of designs which can meet the customer requirements will help ensure lower LCC of launch vehicle designs originating from ACO.

Zwack, Mathew R.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Augmenting Conceptual Design Trajectory Tradespace Exploration with Graph Theory

No abstract available

Dees, Patrick D.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Application of Design of Experiments and Surrogate Modeling within the NASA Advanced Concepts Office, Earth-to-Orbit Design Process

Decisions made during early conceptual design have a large impact upon the expected life-cycle cost (LCC) of a new program. It is widely accepted that up to 80% of such cost is committed during these early design phases.1 Therefore, to help minimize LCC, decisions made during conceptual design must be based upon as much information as possible. To aid in the decision making for new launch vehicle programs, the Advanced Concepts Office (ACO) at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) provides rapid turnaround pre-phase A and phase A concept definition studies. The ACO team utilizes a proven set of tools to provide customers with a full vehicle mass breakdown to tertiary subsystems, preliminary structural sizing based upon worst-case flight loads, and trajectory optimization to quantify integrated vehicle performance for a given mission.2 Although the team provides rapid turnaround for single vehicle concepts, the scope of the trade space can be limited due to analyst availability and the manpower requirements for manual execution of the analysis tools. In order to enable exploration of a broader design space, the ACO team has implemented an Advanced Design Methods (ADM) based approach. This approach applies the concepts of Design of Experiments (DOE) and surrogate modeling to more exhaustively explore the trade space and provide the customer with additional design information to inform decision making. This paper will first discuss the automation of the ACO tool set, which represents a majority of the development e ort. In order to t a surrogate model within tolerable error bounds a number of DOE cases are needed. This number will scale with the number of variable parameters desired and the complexity of the system's response to those variables. For all but the smallest design spaces, the number of cases required cannot be produced within an acceptable timeframe using a manual process. Therefore, automation of the tools was a key enabler for the successful application of an ADM approach to an ACO design study. Following the overview of the tool set automation, an example problem will be given to illustrate the implementation of the ADM approach. The example problem will first cover the inclusion of Ground Rules and Assumptions (GR&A) for a study. The GR&A are very important to the study as they determine the constraints within which a trade study can be conducted. These trades must ultimately reconcile with the customer's desired output and any anticipated \what if" questions. The example problem will then illustrate the setup and execution of a DOE through the automated ACO tools. This process is accomplished more efficiently in this work by splitting the tools into two separate environments. The first environment encompasses the structural optimization and mass estimation tools, while the second is focused on trajectory optimization. Surrogate models are t to the outputs of each environment and are integrated via connection of the surrogate equations. Throughout this process, checks are implemented to compare the output of the surrogates to the output of manually run cases to ensure that the error of the final surrogates is at an acceptable level. The conclusion of the example problem demonstrates the utility of the ADM based approach. Using surrogate models gives the ACO team the ability to visualize vehicle sensitivities to various design parameters and identify regions of interest within the design space. The ADM approach can thus be used to inform concept down selection and isolate promising vehicle configurations to be explored in more detail through the manual design process. In addition it provides the customer with an almost instantaneous turnaround on any \what if" questions that may arise within the bounds of the surrogate model. This approach ultimately expands the ability of the ACO team to provide its customer with broad and rapid turnaround trade studies for launch vehicle conceptual design. The ability to identify a selection of designs which can meet the customer requirements will have the potential to lower LCC of launch vehicle designs originating from ACO.

Zwack, Mathew R.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Augmenting Conceptual Design Trajectory Tradespace Exploration with Graph Theory

Within conceptual design changes occur rapidly due to a combination of uncertainty and shifting requirements. To stay relevant in this fluid time, trade studies must also be performed rapidly. In order to drive down analysis time while improving the information gained by these studies, surrogate models can be created to represent the complex output of a tool or tools within a specified tradespace. In order to create this model however, a large amount of data must be collected in a short amount of time. By this method, the historical approach of relying on subject matter experts to generate the data required is schedule infeasible. However, by implementing automation and distributed analysis the required data can be generated in a fraction of the time. Previous work focused on setting up a tool called multiPOST capable of orchestrating many simultaneous runs of an analysis tool assessing these automated analyses utilizing heuristics gleaned from the best practices of current subject matter experts. In this update to the previous work, elements of graph theory are included to further drive down analysis time by leveraging data previously gathered. It is shown to outperform the previous method in both time required, and the quantity and quality of data produced.

Dees, Patrick D.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Augmenting Conceptual Design Trajectory Tradespace Exploration with Graph Theory

Within conceptual design changes occur rapidly due to a combination of uncertainty and shifting requirements. To stay relevant in this fluid time, trade studies must also be performed rapidly. In order to drive down analysis time while improving the information gained by these studies, surrogate models can be created to represent the complex output of a tool or tools within a specified tradespace. In order to create this model however, a large amount of data must be collected in a short amount of time. By this method, the historical approach of relying on subject matter experts to generate the data required is schedule infeasible. However, by implementing automation and distributed analysis the required data can be generated in a fraction of the time. Previous work focused on setting up a tool called multiPOST capable of orchestrating many simultaneous runs of an analysis tool assessing these automated analyses utilizing heuristics gleaned from the best practices of current subject matter experts. In this update to the previous work, elements of graph theory are included to further drive down analysis time by leveraging data previously gathered. It is shown to outperform the previous method in both time required, and the quantity and quality of data produced.

Dees, Patrick D.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Application of Design of Experiments and Surrogate Modeling within the NASA Advanced Concepts Office, Earth-to-Orbit Design Process

Decisions made during early conceptual design have a large impact upon the expected life-cycle cost (LCC) of a new program. It is widely accepted that up to 80% of such cost is committed during these early design phases [1]. Therefore, to help minimize LCC, decisions made during conceptual design must be based upon as much information as possible. To aid in the decision making for new launch vehicle programs, the Advanced Concepts Office (ACO) at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) provides rapid turnaround pre-phase A and phase A concept definition studies. The ACO team utilizes a proven set of tools to provide customers with a full vehicle mass breakdown to tertiary subsystems, preliminary structural sizing based upon worst-case flight loads, and trajectory optimization to quantify integrated vehicle performance for a given mission [2]. Although the team provides rapid turnaround for single vehicle concepts, the scope of the trade space can be limited due to analyst availability and the manpower requirements for manual execution of the analysis tools. In order to enable exploration of a broader design space, the ACO team has implemented an advanced design methods (ADM) based approach. This approach applies the concepts of design of experiments (DOE) and surrogate modeling to more exhaustively explore the trade space and provide the customer with additional design information to inform decision making. This paper will first discuss the automation of the ACO tool set, which represents a majority of the development effort. In order to fit a surrogate model within tolerable error bounds a number of DOE cases are needed. This number will scale with the number of variable parameters desired and the complexity of the system's response to those variables. For all but the smallest design spaces, the number of cases required cannot be produced within an acceptable timeframe using a manual process. Therefore, automation of the tools was a key enabler for the successful application of an ADM approach to an ACO design study. Following the overview of the tool set automation, an example problem will be given to illustrate the implementation of the ADM approach. The example problem will first cover the inclusion of ground rules and assumptions (GR&A) for a study. The GR&A are very important to the study as they determine the constraints within which a trade study can be conducted. These trades must ultimately reconcile with the customer's desired output and any anticipated "what if" questions.

Zwack, Mathew R.↗

NASA NTRS2015

An Expert System-Driven Method for Parametric Trajectory Optimization During Conceptual Design

During the early phases of engineering design, the costs committed are high, costs incurred are low, and the design freedom is high. It is well documented that decisions made in these early design phases drive the entire design's life cycle cost. In a traditional paradigm, key design decisions are made when little is known about the design. As the design matures, design changes become more difficult in both cost and schedule to enact. The current capability-based paradigm, which has emerged because of the constrained economic environment, calls for the infusion of knowledge usually acquired during later design phases into earlier design phases, i.e. bringing knowledge acquired during preliminary and detailed design into pre-conceptual and conceptual design. An area of critical importance to launch vehicle design is the optimization of its ascent trajectory, as the optimal trajectory will be able to take full advantage of the launch vehicle's capability to deliver a maximum amount of payload into orbit. Hence, the optimal ascent trajectory plays an important role in the vehicle's affordability posture yet little of the information required to successfully optimize a trajectory is known early in the design phase. Thus, the current paradigm of optimizing ascent trajectories involves generating point solutions for every change in a vehicle's design parameters. This is often a very tedious, manual, and time-consuming task for the analysts. Moreover, the trajectory design space is highly non-linear and multi-modal due to the interaction of various constraints. When these obstacles are coupled with the Program to Optimize Simulated Trajectories (POST), an industry standard program to optimize ascent trajectories that is difficult to use, expert trajectory analysts are required to effectively optimize a vehicle's ascent trajectory. Over the course of this paper, the authors discuss a methodology developed at NASA Marshall's Advanced Concepts Office to address these issues. The methodology is two-fold: first, capture the heuristics developed by human analysts over their many years of experience; and secondly, leverage the power of modern computing to evaluate multiple trajectories simultaneously and therefore enable the exploration of the trajectory's design space early during the pre- conceptual and conceptual phases of design. This methodology is coupled with design of experiments in order to train surrogate models, which enables trajectory design space visualization and parametric optimal ascent trajectory information to be available when early design decisions are being made.

Dees, Patrick D.↗