Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T12:31:44.939Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Incorporation of manufacturing information into an MDO environment

Part of: Sustainable Aerospace

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 July 2016

K. Gantois  and
A. J. Morris
K. Gantois
Affiliation:
Structures and Materials Group, Cranfield College of Aeronautics, Cranfield Unversity, UK
A. J. Morris
Affiliation:
Structures and Materials Group, Cranfield College of Aeronautics, Cranfield Unversity, UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Paper describes a metal and composite recurrent cost model of a large civil aircraft wing structure for a multidisciplinary design, analysis and optimisation (MDO) environment. The work was part of a recent European MDO project (BE95-2056) which investigated methods for the integration of structures, aerodynamics, dynamics and manufacturing cost at the preliminary design stage.

The paper discusses the cost modelling approach, which is based on parametric and process cost model methods, and the integration of the cost models into an MDO process. Results for the cost models are shown.

A framework has been successfully developed which allows the incorporation of manufacturing cost models into an MDO environment. It allows a designer to evaluate cost changes with respect to specific design changes such as rib pitch, stringer pitch, wing area and wing sweep.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 103 , Issue 1026 , August 1999 , pp. 383 - 388
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 1999 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

†

Mechanical Systems Engineer, Verhaert Design and Development, Belgium.

References

1. Rais-rohani, M. and Dean, E.B. ‘Toward manufacturing and cost considerations in multidisciplinary aircraft design’, 37th AIAA/ASME/ ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, structural dynamics and materials conference and exhibit, Salt Lake City, 15-17 April, 1996, AIAA-96-1620-CP, pp. 2602–2612.Google Scholar
2. Borland, C.J., Benton, J.R., Frank, P.D., Kao, T.J., Mastro, R.A., and Barthelemy, J-F.M. ‘Multidisciplinary design optimisation of a commercial aircraft wing — An exploratory study’, 5th AIAA/USAF/ NASA/ISSMO Symposium on multidisciplinary analysis and optimiza tion, Panama City Beach, September 1994, AIAA 94-4305-CP, Part 1, pp. 505–519.Google Scholar
3. Boothroyd, G., Dewhurst, P., and Knight, W. ‘Product design for manufacture and assembly’, Marcel Dekker, 1994.Google Scholar
4. Morris, A.J. and Gantois, K. ‘Multidisciplinary Design and Optimisation of a large scale civil aircraft wing’, 21st Congress of the International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences, Melbourne Australia, 13-18 September, 1998, ICAS-98-6.4.2.Google Scholar
5. Giesing, J.P. and Wakayama, S. ‘A simple cost related objective function for MDO of transport aircraft’, 35th Aerospace Sciences Meet ing & Exhibit, Reno, 6-10 January, 1997, AIAA 97–0356.Google Scholar
6. Noton, B.R. ‘Optimizing aerospace structures for manufacturing cost’, 13th Congress of the International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences, September 1982, ICAS-82-3.8.1.Google Scholar
7. Noton, B.R. ‘Cost drivers and design methodology for automated air-frame assembly’, 31 st International SAMPE symposium and exhibition, Los Angeles, 7-10 April, 1986, pp. 1441–1455.Google Scholar
8. Taylor, I.M. ‘Cost Engineering — A feature based approach', AGARD workshop on Virtual Manufacturing, Allborg, Denmark, 13-15 October, 1997.Google Scholar
9. Scott, P.W. ‘The cost effectiveness of weight reduction by advanced material substitution’, SAE Transactions Aerospace, Volume 95, Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, 1986, SAE-86/1850.Google Scholar
10. Davis, J.G., Starnes, J.H. and Johnston, N.J. ‘Advanced composites research and development for transport aircraft’, 17th Congress of the International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences, Stockholm, Sweden, 9-14 September, 1990, ICAS-90-0.3.Google Scholar
11. Resetar, S.A., Rogers, J.C. and Hess, R.W. ‘Advanced airframe structural materials. A primer and cost estimating methodology’, RAND, Santa Monica, 1991, R-4016-AF.Google Scholar
12. Allwright, S. ‘MDO Process and specification for the primary sensitivity study’, Technical Report D2.4.S, British Aerospace, 30th April 1996, MDO/SPEC/BAE/SA960430Google Scholar
13. Allwright, S. ‘MDO reference aircraft performance and primary sensitivity study report’, D3.12.R., British Aerospace, 30 May 1997, MDO/TR/BAE/SA970530/1.Google Scholar
14. Grihon, S. ‘MDO planform shape optimisation’, Technical Report D4.21.R, Aerospatiale, 21 January 1998, MDO/TR/AS/SG980121.Google Scholar
15. Gould, A., ‘MDO surface shape optimisation’, Technical Report D5.21.R, British Aerospace, 5 January 1998, MDO/TR/BAE/ AG980105.Google Scholar
16. Allwright, S. ‘Technical data management for collaborative multi-discipline optimisation’, 6th AIAA/UASF/NASA/ISSMO Symposium on Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimisation, Seattle, September 1996, AIAA-69-4160-CP.Google Scholar
17. Gantois, K. ‘Multidisciplinary design analysis and optimisation of aerospace vehicles: incorporation of manufacturing information’, 21st Congress of the International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences, Melbourne, Australia, 13-18 September, 1998, ICAS-98-7.8.3.Google Scholar
18. Morris, A. and Gantois, K. ‘Combined MDO optimisation including mass, drag and manufacturing information’, 7th AIAA/UASF/NASA/ ISSMO Symposium on Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimisation, St-Louis, September 1998, AIAA-68-4777-CPGoogle Scholar