Skip to main content
Log in

An inverse-measure-based unilevel architecture for reliability-based design optimization

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Reliability-based design optimization (RBDO) is a methodology for finding optimized designs that are characterized with a low probability of failure. Primarily, RBDO consists of optimizing a merit function while satisfying reliability constraints. The reliability constraints are constraints on the probability of failure corresponding to each of the failure modes of the system or a single constraint on the system probability of failure. The probability of failure is usually estimated by performing a reliability analysis. During the last few years, a variety of different formulations have been developed for RBDO. Traditionally, these have been formulated as a double-loop (nested) optimization problem. The upper level optimization loop generally involves optimizing a merit function subject to reliability constraints, and the lower level optimization loop(s) compute(s) the probabilities of failure corresponding to the failure mode(s) that govern(s) the system failure. This formulation is, by nature, computationally intensive. Researchers have provided sequential strategies to address this issue, where the deterministic optimization and reliability analysis are decoupled, and the process is performed iteratively until convergence is achieved. These methods, though attractive in terms of obtaining a workable reliable design at considerably reduced computational costs, often lead to premature convergence and therefore yield spurious optimal designs. In this paper, a novel unilevel formulation for RBDO is developed. In the proposed formulation, the lower level optimization (evaluation of reliability constraints in the double-loop formulation) is replaced by its corresponding first-order Karush–Kuhn–Tucker (KKT) necessary optimality conditions at the upper level optimization. Such a replacement is computationally equivalent to solving the original nested optimization if the lower level optimization problem is solved by numerically satisfying the KKT conditions (which is typically the case). It is shown through the use of test problems that the proposed formulation is numerically robust (stable) and computationally efficient compared to the existing approaches for RBDO.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

\(\mathbf d\) :

design variables

\(\mathbf p\) :

parameters in deterministic optimization

\(\mathbf X\) :

random variables

\(\mathbf U\) :

standard normal random variables

\(\pmb{\theta}\) :

distribution parameters

\(\pmb{\eta}\) :

limit-state parameters

\(\mathbf {g}^R\) :

failure-driven or probabilistic hard constraints

\(\mathbf {g}^D\) :

deterministic constraints

\({\mathbf y}\) :

deterministic state variables

\({\mathbf Y}\) :

random state variables

\(\beta_i\) :

reliability index of \(i^{th}\) failure mode

\(\mathbf x^* \) :

most probable point in \(\mathbf{x}\)-space

\(\mathbf u^* \) :

most probable point in \(\mathbf{u}\)-space

\(f\) :

merit function

\(\mathbf g^{rc}\) :

reliability constraints

\(P_i\) :

probability of failure of \(i^{th}\) failure mode

\(P_{allow_i}\) :

allowable probability of failure for \(i^{th}\) failure mode

\(P_{sys}\) :

system probability of failure

\({\mathbf d}^l\) :

lower bounds on design variables

\({\mathbf d}^u\) :

upper bounds on design variables

\(N_{hard}\) :

number of hard constraints

\(N_{soft}\) :

number of soft constraints

\(\beta_{reqd_i}\) :

desired reliability index of \(i^{th}\) failure mode

References

  • Agarwal H, Renaud JE (2004) Decoupled methodology for probabilistic design optimization. ASCE joint specialty conference on probabilistic mechanics and structural reliability. Albuquerque, NM (July)

  • Agarwal H, Renaud JE, Mack JD (2003) A decomposition approach for reliability-based multidisciplinary design optimization. Proceedings of the 44th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC structures, structural dynamics, and materials conference & exhibit, AIAA 2003-1778. Norfolk, Virginia, 7–10 April 2003

  • Brietung K (1984) Asymptotic approximations for multinormal integral. J Eng Mech 110(3):357–366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen W, Du X (2002) Sequential optimization and reliability assessment method for efficient probabilistic design. ASME design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering conference, DETC2002/DAC-34127. Montreal, Canada

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen XC, Hasselman TK, Neill DJ (1997) Reliability based structural design optimization for practical applications. Proceedings of the 38th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC structures, structural dynamics, and materials conference, AIAA-97-1403, pp 2724–2732

  • Enevoldsen I, Sorensen JD (1994) Reliability-based optimization in structural engineering. Struct Saf 15(3):169–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gu X, Renaud JE, Batill SM, Brach RM, Budhiraja AS (2000) Worst case propagated uncertainty of multidisciplinary systems in robust design optimization. Struct Multidisc Optim 20(3):190–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haftka RT, Gurdal Z, Kamat MP (1990) Elements of structural optimization, vol 1, 2nd edn. Kluwer, Norwell, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Haldar A, Mahadevan S (2000) Probability, reliability and statistical methods in engineering design. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Khot NS (1994) Optimization of controlled structures. In: Adeli H (ed) Advances in design automation. Chapman & Hall, London, UK, 588 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirjner-Neto C, Polak E, der Kiureghian A (1998) An outer approximations approach to reliability-based optimal design of structures. J Optim Theory Appl 98(1):1–16

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kuschel N, Rackwitz R (2000) A new approach for structural optimization of series systems. Applications of Statistics and Probability 2(8):987–994

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu P-L, Kiureghian AD (1991) Optimization algorithms for structural reliability. Struct Saf 9(3):161–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mangasarian OL (1994) Nonlinear programming classics in applied mathematics. SIAM, Philadelphia, PA

    Google Scholar 

  • Nocedal J, Wright SJ (1999) Numerical optimization. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Oberkampf WL, DeLand SM, Rutherford BM, Diegert KV, Alvin KF (2000) Estimation of total uncertainty in modeling and simulation. Technical Report SAND2000-0824, Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore, CA

  • Oberkampf WL, Helton JC, Sentz K (2001) Mathematical representation of uncertainty. Proceedings of the 42nd AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC structures, structural dynamics, and materials conference & exhibit, AIAA 2001-1645. Seattle, WA. 16–19 April 2001

  • Padmanabhan D, Batill SM (2002) Decomposition strategies for reliability based optimization in multidisciplinary system design. Proceedings of the 9th AIAA/USAF/NASA/ISSMO symposium on multidisciplinary analysis & optimization, AIAA 2002-5471. Atlanta, GA. 4–6 September 2002

  • Polak E, Wets RJ-B, der Kiureghian A (2000) On an approach to optimization problems with a probabilistic cost and or constraints. In: Pillo GD, Giannessi F (eds) Nonlinear optimization and related topics, volume 36 of applied optimization, pp 299–316. Kluwer, Norwell, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Rackwitz R (2001) Reliability analysis—a review and some perspectives. Struct Saf 23(4):365–395

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenblatt M (1952) Remarks on a multivariate transformation. Ann Math Stat 23(3):470–472

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Royset JO, Kiureghian AD, Polak E (2001) Reliability based optimal structural design by the decoupling approach. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 73(3):213–221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sobieszczanski-Sobieski J, Bloebaum CL, Hajela P (1990) Sensitivity of control-augmented structure obtained by a system decomposition method. AIAA J 29(2):264–270

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutter TR, Camarda CJ, Walsh JL, Adelman HM (1988) Comparison of several methods for calculating vibration mode shape derivatives. AIAA J 26:1506–1511

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tu J, Choi KK, Park YH (1999) A new study on reliability-based design optimization. J Mech Des 121:557–564

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang L, Kodiyalam S (2002) An efficient method for probabilistic and robust design with non-normal distribution. Proceedings of the 43rd AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC structures, structural dynamics, and materials conference, AIAA 2002-1754. Denver, Colorado. 22–25 April 2002

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Harish Agarwal.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Agarwal, H., Mozumder, C.K., Renaud, J.E. et al. An inverse-measure-based unilevel architecture for reliability-based design optimization. Struct Multidisc Optim 33, 217–227 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-006-0057-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-006-0057-3

Keywords

Navigation