• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Engineering Index and Search

CoE Directory CoE Site Index

Sign Ons

  • AccessPlus
  • CyMail
  • Outlook
  • Blackboard
  • CyBox
  • CyHire
  • SharePoint
iowa state university

Multidisciplinary Optimization and Design Engineering Laboratory (MODEL)

  • MODEL
  • MDO Test Suite
    • I-A-1 Hypersonic Vehicle Configuration Optimization
    • I-B-1 Design of cable supported bridge
    • I C 1Multilevel Optimization of Beam like Truss
    • I-C-1Race Car Design
    • II-A-3 Alkylation Process Optimization
    • II-B-1 Tailless Unmanned Air Vehicle Design
    • II-B-3 Combustion of Propane
    • II-B-3 Electronic Packaging problem
    • II-B-3 Golinski’s Speed Reducer
    • II-C-1 Heart Dipole problem
  • People
  • Publications
  • Design Engineering Glossary
    • Decision Analysis Terms
    • Multidisciplinary Design Optimization (MDO) Terms

I-A-1 Hypersonic Vehicle Configuration Optimization

Description: The use of multidisciplinary optimization in the case of hypersonic vehicles is very important for proper sizing of the vehicle. The key disciplines are aerodynamics, inlet performance, propulsion and structures. One of the serious concerns in the preliminary design stage is the vehicle stage performance based on the assumed takeoff gross weight. Particularly, effective specific impulse is an important parameter in the attainment of a desired vehicle trajectory. Since the specific impulse is a direct function of the vehicle thrust and drags, minimizing the drag force is essential. On the other hand, the same thing can be achieved by maximizing thrust through the improvement of the inlet performance and the fuel volumetric efficiency. The traditional sizing method attains closure on a vehicle design by photographically scaling the baseline to achieve the required fuel fraction. This occurs at the interval of the fuel required and the fuel available curves. It is possible to attain closure by bringing curve up. As a first step, the fuel available will be held constant in the approach. Hence bringing the fuel curve down is the primary requirement. This is accomplished by maximizing the specific impulse (Isp) at a critical point in the trajectory by modifying the baseline configuration geometry. The forebody of the vehicle is only considered for simplicity. The effect of forebody on the aftbody aerodynamics is neglected. The aftbody effects are included in the propulsion contributing analysis (CA) and the trim content.
System Representation:
Design Structure Matrix:
Parameters:
Design Variables:
Optimization:
Constraints:

MDO Suite

  • MDO Test Suite (Spring 2008)
    • I-A-1 Hypersonic Vehicle Configuration Optimization
    • I-B-1 Design of cable supported bridge
    • I-C-1Race Car Design
    • I-C-1Multilevel Optimization of Beam like Truss
    • II-A-3 Alkylation Process Optimization
    • II-B-1 Tailless Unmanned Air Vehicle Design
    • II-B-3 Combustion of Propane
    • II-B-3 Golinski’s Speed Reducer
    • II-B-3 Electronic Packaging problem
    • II-C-1 Heart Dipole problem
  • MDO Test Suite (1996 – 2007)

Department of Aerospace Engineering, 2271 Howe Hall, Ames, IA 50011 · 515 294-5666 · aere-info@iastate.edu
Copyright © 2022 · Iowa State University of Science and Technology. All rights reserved.