SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Convex quadratic programming”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

7 records

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Comparison of Control Allocation Methods in the Presence of Parametric Model Uncertainty

When allocating redundant effectors to virtual control commands, linear (generalized inverse) allocators have historically been used on aircraft and spacecraft. While simple to implement, generalized inverses are unable to realize a significant portion of the attainable moments. To address this drawback, the control allocation problem can also be formulated as a linear programming or quadratic programming problem and solved using convex optimization based solvers. These approaches have been shown to access a larger set of attainable moments, however, little work has been done to understand the performance of convex optimization-based control allocation in the presence of parametric model uncertainty. This paper seeks to compare the performance of several control allocation approaches, including two forms of generalized inverse allocators, the pseudo inverse and minimum-variance, and the linear programming and quadratic programming approach in the presence of parametric model uncertainty. The performance of these four allocators were tested on an aircraft model in the presence of realistic parametric model uncertainty and the convex optimization approaches were shown to outperform the generalized inverses.

Luke J Miller↗

NASA NTRS2012

Active Mirror Predictive and Requirements Verification Software (AMP-ReVS)

This software is designed to predict large active mirror performance at various stages in the fabrication lifecycle of the mirror. It was developed for 1-meter class powered mirrors for astronomical purposes, but is extensible to other geometries. The package accepts finite element model (FEM) inputs and laboratory measured data for large optical-quality mirrors with active figure control. It computes phenomenological contributions to the surface figure error using several built-in optimization techniques. These phenomena include stresses induced in the mirror by the manufacturing process and the support structure, the test procedure, high spatial frequency errors introduced by the polishing process, and other process-dependent deleterious effects due to light-weighting of the mirror. Then, depending on the maturity of the mirror, it either predicts the best surface figure error that the mirror will attain, or it verifies that the requirements for the error sources have been met once the best surface figure error has been measured. The unique feature of this software is that it ties together physical phenomenology with wavefront sensing and control techniques and various optimization methods including convex optimization, Kalman filtering, and quadratic programming to both generate predictive models and to do requirements verification. This software combines three distinct disciplines: wavefront control, predictive models based on FEM, and requirements verification using measured data in a robust, reusable code that is applicable to any large optics for ground and space telescopes. The software also includes state-of-the-art wavefront control algorithms that allow closed-loop performance to be computed. It allows for quantitative trade studies to be performed for optical systems engineering, including computing the best surface figure error under various testing and operating conditions. After the mirror manufacturing process and testing have been completed, the software package can be used to verify that the underlying requirements have been met.

Basinger, Scott A.↗

NASA NTRS1984

Convex profiles from asteroid lightcurves

A lightcurve inversion method that yields a two-dimensional convex profile is introduced. The number of parameters that characterize the profile is limited only by the number of Fourier harmonics used to represent the parent lightcurve. The implementation of the method is outlined by a recursive quadratic programming algorithm, and its application to photoelectric lightcurves and radar measurements is discussed. Special properties of the lightcurves of geometrically scattering ellipsoids are pointed out, and those properties are used to test the inversion method and obtain a criterion for judging whether any lightcurve could actually be due to such an object. Convex profiles for several asteroids are shown, and the method's validity is discussed from a physical as well as purely statistical point of view.

Ostro, S. J.↗

NASA NTRS1985

Convex-profile Inversion of Asteroid Lightcurves

A lightcurve inversion method that yields a two-dimensional convex profile is introduced. The number of parameters that characterize the profile is limited only by the number of Fourier harmonics used to represent the parent lightcurve. The implementation of the method is outlined by a recursive quadratic programming algorithm, and its application to photoelectric lightcurves and radar measurements is discussed. Special properties of the lightcurves of geometrically scattering ellipsoids are pointed out, and those properties are used to test the inversion method and obtained a criterion for judging whether any lightcurve could actually be due to such an object. Convex profiles for several asteroids are shown, and the method's validity is discussed from a physical as well as purely statistical point of view.

Ostro, S. J.↗

NASA NTRS2004

A Study of Penalty Function Methods for Constraint Handling with Genetic Algorithm

COMETBOARDS (Comparative Evaluation Testbed of Optimization and Analysis Routines for Design of Structures) is a design optimization test bed that can evaluate the performance of several different optimization algorithms. A few of these optimization algorithms are the sequence of unconstrained minimization techniques (SUMT), sequential linear programming (SLP) and the sequential quadratic programming techniques (SQP). A genetic algorithm (GA) is a search technique that is based on the principles of natural selection or "survival of the fittest". Instead of using gradient information, the GA uses the objective function directly in the search. The GA searches the solution space by maintaining a population of potential solutions. Then, using evolving operations such as recombination, mutation and selection, the GA creates successive generations of solutions that will evolve and take on the positive characteristics of their parents and thus gradually approach optimal or near-optimal solutions. By using the objective function directly in the search, genetic algorithms can be effectively applied in non-convex, highly nonlinear, complex problems. The genetic algorithm is not guaranteed to find the global optimum, but it is less likely to get trapped at a local optimum than traditional gradient-based search methods when the objective function is not smooth and generally well behaved. The purpose of this research is to assist in the integration of genetic algorithm (GA) into COMETBOARDS. COMETBOARDS cast the design of structures as a constrained nonlinear optimization problem. One method used to solve constrained optimization problem with a GA to convert the constrained optimization problem into an unconstrained optimization problem by developing a penalty function that penalizes infeasible solutions. There have been several suggested penalty function in the literature each with there own strengths and weaknesses. A statistical analysis of some suggested penalty functions is performed in this study. Also, a response surface approach to robust design is used to develop a new penalty function approach. This new penalty function approach is then compared with the other existing penalty functions.

Ortiz, Francisco↗

NASA NTRS1990

Global optimization methods for engineering design

The problem is to find a global minimum for the Problem P. Necessary and sufficient conditions are available for local optimality. However, global solution can be assured only under the assumption of convexity of the problem. If the constraint set S is compact and the cost function is continuous on it, existence of a global minimum is guaranteed. However, in view of the fact that no global optimality conditions are available, a global solution can be found only by an exhaustive search to satisfy Inequality. The exhaustive search can be organized in such a way that the entire design space need not be searched for the solution. This way the computational burden is reduced somewhat. It is concluded that zooming algorithm for global optimizations appears to be a good alternative to stochastic methods. More testing is needed; a general, robust, and efficient local minimizer is required. IDESIGN was used in all numerical calculations which is based on a sequential quadratic programming algorithm, and since feasible set keeps on shrinking, a good algorithm to find an initial feasible point is required. Such algorithms need to be developed and evaluated.

Arora, Jasbir S.↗

NASA NTRS1996

CometBoards Users Manual Release 1.0

Several nonlinear mathematical programming algorithms for structural design applications are available at present. These include the sequence of unconstrained minimizations technique, the method of feasible directions, and the sequential quadratic programming technique. The optimality criteria technique and the fully utilized design concept are two other structural design methods. A project was undertaken to bring all these design methods under a common computer environment so that a designer can select any one of these tools that may be suitable for his/her application. To facilitate selection of a design algorithm, to validate and check out the computer code, and to ascertain the relative merits of the design tools, modest finite element structural analysis programs based on the concept of stiffness and integrated force methods have been coupled to each design method. The code that contains both these design and analysis tools, by reading input information from analysis and design data files, can cast the design of a structure as a minimum-weight optimization problem. The code can then solve it with a user-specified optimization technique and a user-specified analysis method. This design code is called CometBoards, which is an acronym for Comparative Evaluation Test Bed of Optimization and Analysis Routines for the Design of Structures. This manual describes for the user a step-by-step procedure for setting up the input data files and executing CometBoards to solve a structural design problem. The manual includes the organization of CometBoards; instructions for preparing input data files; the procedure for submitting a problem; illustrative examples; and several demonstration problems. A set of 29 structural design problems have been solved by using all the optimization methods available in CometBoards. A summary of the optimum results obtained for these problems is appended to this users manual. CometBoards, at present, is available for Posix-based Cray and Convex computers, Iris and Sun workstations, and the VM/CMS system.

Guptill, James D.↗