Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “uncertainty Quantification”

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.

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

At least 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2018

Multifidelity Uncertainty Quantification of a Commercial Supersonic Transport

The objective of this work was to develop a multifidelity uncertainty quantification approach for efficient analysis of a commercial supersonic transport concept. An approach based on point-collocation, non-intrusive polynomial chaos was formulated in which a low-fidelity model could be corrected using multiple higher-fidelity models. The formulation and methodology also allows for the addition of uncertainty sources not present in the lower fidelity models. To demonstrate the applicability and potential computational savings of the multifidelity polynomial chaos approach, two model problems were explored. The first was a supersonic airfoil with three levels of modeling fidelity, each capturing a gradual increase in modeling of the underlying flow physics. As much as 50% computational cost reduction was observed using the mutlifidelity approach, while predicting nearly the same amount of uncertainty in drag. The second problem was a commercial supersonic transport. This model had three levels of fidelity that included two different modeling approaches and the addition of physics between the fidelity levels. Results of this analysis yielded nearly a 70% computational savings to predict a comparable amount of uncertainty in ground noise. Both problems illustrate the applicability and significant computational savings of the multifidelity method for efficient and accurate uncertainty quantification.

Thomas K. West IV↗
NASA NTRS2015

Uncertainty Quantification of Turbulence Model Closure Coefficients for Transonic Wall-Bounded Flows

The goal of this work was to quantify the uncertainty and sensitivity of commonly used turbulence models in Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes codes due to uncertainty in the values of closure coefficients for transonic, wall-bounded flows and to rank the contribution of each coefficient to uncertainty in various output flow quantities of interest. Specifically, uncertainty quantification of turbulence model closure coefficients was performed for transonic flow over an axisymmetric bump at zero degrees angle of attack and the RAE 2822 transonic airfoil at a lift coefficient of 0.744. Three turbulence models were considered: the Spalart-Allmaras Model, Wilcox (2006) k-w Model, and the Menter Shear-Stress Trans- port Model. The FUN3D code developed by NASA Langley Research Center was used as the flow solver. The uncertainty quantification analysis employed stochastic expansions based on non-intrusive polynomial chaos as an efficient means of uncertainty propagation. Several integrated and point-quantities are considered as uncertain outputs for both CFD problems. All closure coefficients were treated as epistemic uncertain variables represented with intervals. Sobol indices were used to rank the relative contributions of each closure coefficient to the total uncertainty in the output quantities of interest. This study identified a number of closure coefficients for each turbulence model for which more information will reduce the amount of uncertainty in the output significantly for transonic, wall-bounded flows.

Schaefer, John↗
NASA NTRS2017

Summary Findings from the AVT-191 Project to Assess Sensitivity Analysis and Uncertainty Quantification Methods for Military Vehicle Design

A NATO symposium held in Greece in 2008 identified many promising sensitivity analysis and uncertainty quantification technologies, but the maturity and suitability of these methods for realistic applications was not clear. The NATO Science and Technology Organization, Task Group AVT-191 was established to evaluate the maturity and suitability of various sensitivity analysis and uncertainty quantification methods for application to realistic vehicle development problems. The program ran from 2011 to 2015, and the work was organized into four discipline-centric teams: external aerodynamics, internal aerodynamics, aeroelasticity, and hydrodynamics. This paper summarizes findings and lessons learned from the task group.

Benek, John A.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Automation of the Uncertainty Quantification Process Based on Probability Boxes with DAKOTA

To date, while the use of CFD is prevalent, very few efforts have been undertaken that truly attempt to document all (or even most) of the sources of uncertainty in the simulations. Instead, the current state-of-the-art relies heavily on the experience of the CFD practitioner to estimate the uncertainty associated with their simulations through simple sensitivity studies or subject matter expertise. This practice will have to be replaced with a formal uncertainty quantification (UQ) process if CFD is to play an expanded role in the design research and engineering community, test and evaluation community, and ultimately certification for flight. This is especially true for hypersonic air-breathing propulsion systems due to the environment, scale, and duration limitations of ground test facilities. Accounting for uncertainties in a formal manner is a tedious process. Moreover, the typical CFD practitioner is not likely to be familiar with formal UQ methods. Hence, a major obstacle that has prevented the adoption of UQ methods for engineering design and development work is the lack of a tool set to automate most (if not all) of the UQ workflow. Towards this end, the SANDIA package DAKOTA (which has been developed to drive both UQ and optimization processes) will be tightly wrapped around the VULCAN-CFD code to automate the uncertainty quantification process. The automated process will be applied to an isolator turbulence model validation exercise that has previously been documented using a manual approach to the UQ process. Hence, the focus of this paper will be documenting the level to which automation can hide the UQ process details from the CFD practitioner rather than the UQ method itself.

CFD↗
NASA NTRS2014

The NASA Langley Multidisciplinary Uncertainty Quantification Challenge

This paper presents the formulation of an uncertainty quantification challenge problem consisting of five subproblems. These problems focus on key aspects of uncertainty characterization, sensitivity analysis, uncertainty propagation, extreme-case analysis, and robust design.

Crespo, Luis G.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Uncertainty Quantification and Certification Prediction of Low-Boom Supersonic Aircraft Configurations

The primary objective of this work was to develop and demonstrate a process for accurate and efficient uncertainty quantification and certification prediction of low-boom, supersonic, transport aircraft. High-fidelity computational fluid dynamics models of multiple low-boom configurations were investigated including the Lockheed Martin SEEB-ALR body of revolution, the NASA 69 Delta Wing, and the Lockheed Martin 1021-01 configuration. A nonintrusive polynomial chaos surrogate modeling approach was used for reduced computational cost of propagating mixed, inherent (aleatory) and model-form (epistemic) uncertainty from both the computation fluid dynamics model and the near-field to ground level propagation model. A methodology has also been introduced to quantify the plausibility of a design to pass a certification under uncertainty. Results of this study include the analysis of each of the three configurations of interest under inviscid and fully turbulent flow assumptions. A comparison of the uncertainty outputs and sensitivity analyses between the configurations is also given. The results of this study illustrate the flexibility and robustness of the developed framework as a tool for uncertainty quantification and certification prediction of low-boom, supersonic aircraft.

West, Thomas K., IV↗
NASA NTRS2018

Adjustments and Uncertainty Quantification for SLS Aerodynamic Sectional Loads

This paper presents a method for adjusting sectional loads to match target values for integrated force and moment coefficients. In a typical application, the sectional load profile for one flight condition is calculated from Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) while the integrated forces and moments are measured in a wind tunnel experiment. These two methods do not generally result in identical predictions, and this leads to an inherent inconsistency between different data products. This paper aims to provide a procedure to remove that inconsistency. A sectional load profile for a launch vehicle splits the rocket into slices along its length and calculates the aerodynamic loading on each slice, which leads to a one-dimensional aerodynamic load profile that is used for structural analysis. Adjusting sectional loads, also known as line loads, is a nontrivial matter due to several consistency constraints. For example, the adjusted sectional normal force profile must be consistent with both the integrated normal force and pitching moment. To avoid such inconsistency issues, this paper presents a method using a Proper Orthogonal Decomposition (POD) to generate basis functions to adjust the sectional load profiles. As a corollary, this correction method enables the creation of an uncertainty quantification for sectional loads that is consistent with the dispersed integrated force and moment database and its uncertainty quantification. Several extensions to this technique, such as applying the method to the surface pressures, are considered.

Quantification↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development Strategies for Uncertainty Quantification to Enable Aircraft Certification by Analysis

Aircraft Certification by Analysis (CbA) is a broad term that describes the process by which engineering analysis tools are used to supplement flight testing to demonstrate compliance with regulatory requirements. For each requirement that is to be met through this process, the analysis tools must be sufficiently accurate to ensure that an equivalent level of safety is obtained as if the aircraft to be certified had been flight tested for the requirement. In recent decades, the ability of analysis tools to accurately predict aircraft performance has improved dramatically, leading to increasing interest and limited early adoption of Certification by Analysis across the aerospace industry. However, rigorously demonstrating the credibility of analysis tools remains a challenge for many types of certification requirements, yet is necessary for widespread adoption of CbA approaches in the future. The field of uncertainty quantification is well-suited to address this problem, but will require substantial advances in order to achieve the ambitious industry goals for Certification by Analysis. The objective of this position paper is to highlight gaps in the current technical and programmatic state of uncertainty quantification. Four main categories – Mindset & Awareness, Tools & Capabilities, Data and Benchmarks for V&V, and Applied Research & Established Processes – will be introduced. Each of these categories contains several shortcomings and impediments which, if overcome, will enable more widespread possibilities for Certification by Analysis in the 2040-2050 timeframe.

Uncertainty Quantification↗
NASA NTRS2021

An Uncertainty Quantification Framework for Autonomous Flight System Tracking and Health Monitoring

This work proposes a perspective towards establishing a framework for uncertainty quantification of autonomous system tracking and health monitoring. The approach leverages the use of a predictive process structure, which maps uncertainty sources and their interaction according to the quantity of interest and the goal of the predictive estimation. It is systematic and uses basic elements that are system agnostic, and therefore needs to be tailored according to the specificity of the application. This work is motivated by the interest in low-altitude unmanned aerial vehicle operations, where awareness of vehicle and airspace state becomes more relevant as the density of autonomous operations grows rapidly. Predicted scenarios in the area of small vehicle operations and urban air mobility have no precedent, and holistic frameworks to perform prognostics and health management (PHM) at the system- and airspace-level are missing formal approaches to account for uncertainty. At the end of the paper, two case studies demonstrate implementation framework of trajectory tracking and health diagnosis for a small unmanned aerial vehicle. This work has been accepted for publication at the International Journal of Prognostics and Health Management Jan 2021. Minor edits have been incorporated to this original submission to incorporate complete overview and software integration.

Uncertainty Quantification↗
NASA NTRS2012

UQTools: The Uncertainty Quantification Toolbox - Introduction and Tutorial

UQTools is the short name for the Uncertainty Quantification Toolbox, a software package designed to efficiently quantify the impact of parametric uncertainty on engineering systems. UQTools is a MATLAB-based software package and was designed to be discipline independent, employing very generic representations of the system models and uncertainty. Specifically, UQTools accepts linear and nonlinear system models and permits arbitrary functional dependencies between the system s measures of interest and the probabilistic or non-probabilistic parametric uncertainty. One of the most significant features incorporated into UQTools is the theoretical development centered on homothetic deformations and their application to set bounding and approximating failure probabilities. Beyond the set bounding technique, UQTools provides a wide range of probabilistic and uncertainty-based tools to solve key problems in science and engineering.

Kenny, Sean P.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Uncertainty Quantification and Sensitivity Analysis in Process-Structure-Property Simulations for Laser Powder Bed Fusion Additive Manufacturing

Process variations and process-induced defects like porosity cause significant uncertainty in the microstructure and mechanical behavior of additively manufactured metals. Establishing process-structure-property (PSP) relationships and quantifying uncertainty using experiments alone is costly, especially for structural applications where mechanical allowables must be established for qualification and certification. This work presents a PSP simulation framework for laser powder bed fusion with a focus on uncertainty quantification through probabilistic calibration and multi-fidelity uncertainty propagation. Motivated by phenomenological input parameters related to grain nucleation and growth that are difficult to characterize, a global sensitivity analysis (GSA) is completed. Through GSA, the most important input parameters are identified based on their influence on the statistical distributions of microstructural metrics that influence mechanical behavior, including grain size, morphology, and crystallographic texture. The results provide insight on what experiments are necessary to quantify and control PSP uncertainties, particularly those associated with the more challenging input parameters.

additive manufacturing↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Practical Approach to Uncertainty Quantification Using Probability Boxes

To date, while the use of CFD for aerospace vehicle design and development is prevalent, the documentation of uncertainties associated with the simulations are rare. Instead, the current state-of-the-art relies heavily on the experience of the CFD practitioner to estimate the uncertainty associated with their simulations through simple sensitivity studies or subject matter expertise. This practice will have to be replaced with a formal uncertainty quantification (UQ) process if CFD is to play an expanded role in the research and engineering design community, test and evaluation community, and ultimately certification for flight. Accounting for uncertainties in a formal manner is a tedious process. Moreover, the typical CFD practitioner is not likely to be familiar with formal UQ methods. These factors have prevented the adoption of UQ methods in the engineering design and development cycle. This presentation will outline a credible approach to UQ using Probability Boxes that is straightforward to apply, and can readily be automated using existing UQ tool sets such as the DAKOTA packaged developed at Sandia. The added expense incurred when moving away from a deterministic CFD process to a stochastic one that captures uncertainties to enable risk-informed decision making will be discussed, as well as effective ways to reduce the computational costs.

Uncertainty Quantification↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Uncertainty Quantification of CFD Model Assumptions Against Sonic Boom Noise Prediction of a Commercial Supersonic Transport

This paper presents the results of uncertainty modeling of sonic boom noise generation from commercial supersonic transport considering the Spalart-Allmaras (SA) turbulence modeling parameters as well as Mach number, angle of attack and altitude. Sample generation and analysis for this uncertainty model was performed by UQPCE, which is a software package developed at the NASA Langley Research Center. To build the uncertainty model, 42 cases of sonic boom noise calculation were performed. Computation of the ground noise can be briefly summarized in two steps. First, the near field pressure waveforms are sampled from CFD calculation using the NASA Langley’s FUN3D solver. Second, this information is passed to an atmospheric propagation code, sBOOM, which solves an augmented Burger’s equation and simulates how the near field waveforms will change while passing through the atmosphere. The ground signature is further processed to obtain the perceived loudness, PLdB. Having a high spatial resolution near the shockwave in the CFD calculation is critical in sonic boom noise prediction. Because the variation in the input parameters for the current uncertainty quantification (UQ) study is likely to lead to change in shock location, angle and strength, the grid adaptation for shock capturing is independently applied for each condition. The final mesh used in the CFD calculation consists of approximately 420 million cells. The pressure signatures are sampled at three, four and five body lengths away from the aircraft to make sure the three dimensional effects around the aircraft are resolved. The results of the UQ analysis shows that within the three aleatory variables, the angle of attack had the most impact against ground noise, followed by the altitude and the Mach number. Between the two SA model parameters, the Kármán constant (𝜅) was significantly more important than the turbulent Prandtl number (𝜎), but these two parameters were only marginally significant in the overall prediction variance in ground noise. The UQ procedure explained in this paper can be widely applied to other model parameters.

Uncertainty Quantification↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Uncertainty Quantification of CFD Model Assumptions Against Sonic Boom Noise Prediction of a Commercial Supersonic Transport

This paper presents the results of uncertainty modeling of sonic boom noise generation from commercial supersonic transport considering the Spalart-Allmaras (SA) turbulence modeling parameters as well as Mach number, angle of attack and altitude. Sample generation and analysis for this uncertainty model was performed by UQPCE, which is a software package developed at the NASA Langley Research Center. To build the uncertainty model, 42 cases of sonic boom noise calculation were performed. Computation of the ground noise can be briefly summarized in two steps. First, the near field pressure waveforms are sampled from CFD calculation using the NASA Langley’s FUN3D solver. Second, this information is passed to an atmospheric propagation code, sBOOM, which solves an augmented Burger’s equation and simulates how the near field waveforms will change while passing through the atmosphere. The ground signature is further processed to obtain the perceived loudness, PLdB. Having a high spatial resolution near the shock wave in the CFD calculation is critical in sonic boom noise prediction. Because the variation in the input parameters for the current uncertainty quantification (UQ) study is likely to lead to change in shock location, angle and strength, the grid adaptation for shock capturing is independently applied for each condition. The final mesh used in the CFD calculation consists of approximately 420 million cells. The pressure signatures are sampled at three, four and five body lengths away from the aircraft to make sure the three dimensional effects around the aircraft are resolved. The results of the UQ analysis shows that within the three aleatory variables, the angle of attack had the most impact against ground noise, followed by the altitude and the Mach number. Between the two SA model parameters, the Kármán constant (𝜅) was significantly more important than the turbulent Prandtl number (𝜎), but these two parameters were only marginally significant in the overall prediction variance in ground noise. The UQ procedure explained in this paper can be widely applied to other model parameters.

Uncertainty Quantifications↗
NASA NTRS2007

The Roles of Verification, Validation and Uncertainty Quantification in the NASA Standard for Models and Simulations

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) recently issued an interim version of the Standard for Models and Simulations (M&S Standard) [1]. The action to develop the M&S Standard was identified in an internal assessment [2] of agency-wide changes needed in the wake of the Columbia Accident [3]. The primary goal of this standard is to ensure that the credibility of M&S results is properly conveyed to those making decisions affecting human safety or mission success criteria. The secondary goal is to assure that the credibility of the results from models and simulations meets the project requirements (for credibility). This presentation explains the motivation and key aspects of the M&S Standard, with a special focus on the requirements for verification, validation and uncertainty quantification. Some pilot applications of this standard to computational fluid dynamics applications will be provided as illustrations. The authors of this paper are the members of the team that developed the initial three drafts of the standard, the last of which benefited from extensive comments from most of the NASA Centers. The current version (number 4) incorporates modifications made by a team representing 9 of the 10 NASA Centers. A permanent version of the M&S Standard is expected by December 2007. The scope of the M&S Standard is confined to those uses of M&S that support program and project decisions that may affect human safety or mission success criteria. Such decisions occur, in decreasing order of importance, in the operations, the test & evaluation, and the design & analysis phases. Requirements are placed on (1) program and project management, (2) models, (3) simulations and analyses, (4) verification, validation and uncertainty quantification (VV&UQ), (5) recommended practices, (6) training, (7) credibility assessment, and (8) reporting results to decision makers. A key component of (7) and (8) is the use of a Credibility Assessment Scale, some of the details of which were developed in consultation with William Oberkampf, David Peercy and Timothy Trocano of Sandia National Laboratories. The focus of most of the requirements, including those for VV&UQ, is on the documentation of what was done and the reporting, using the Credibility Assessment Scale, of the level of rigor that was followed. The aspects of one option for the Credibilty Assessment Scale are (1) code verification, (2) solution verification, (3) validation, (4) predictive capability, (5) technical review, (6) process control, and (7) operator and analyst qualification.

Zang, Thomas A.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Uncertainty Quantification for Polynomial Systems via Bernstein Expansions

This paper presents a unifying framework to uncertainty quantification for systems having polynomial response metrics that depend on both aleatory and epistemic uncertainties. The approach proposed, which is based on the Bernstein expansions of polynomials, enables bounding the range of moments and failure probabilities of response metrics as well as finding supersets of the extreme epistemic realizations where the limits of such ranges occur. These bounds and supersets, whose analytical structure renders them free of approximation error, can be made arbitrarily tight with additional computational effort. Furthermore, this framework enables determining the importance of particular uncertain parameters according to the extent to which they affect the first two moments of response metrics and failure probabilities. This analysis enables determining the parameters that should be considered uncertain as well as those that can be assumed to be constants without incurring significant error. The analytical nature of the approach eliminates the numerical error that characterizes the sampling-based techniques commonly used to propagate aleatory uncertainties as well as the possibility of under predicting the range of the statistic of interest that may result from searching for the best- and worstcase epistemic values via nonlinear optimization or sampling.

Crespo, Luis G.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Integration of Uncertainty Quantification in a Model-Based Systems Analysis and Engineering Framework

This paper presents a technical approach to improve the confidence in the systems analysis process by integrating Uncertainty Quantification (UQ) techniques within a Model-Based Systems Analysis and Engineering (MBSA&E) framework. The MBSA&E architecture uses system models and multidisciplinary analytical solutions as central artifacts for system design and analysis. The integration of UQ enables engineers to assess and mitigate uncertainties associated with a system model, design parameters, and constraint inputs, leading to more complete design studies and further informed decision-making processes. The proposed approach leverages the strengths of MBSA&E and extends it with a UQ methodology to quantify uncertainties in the input parameters and to trace the uncertainties as they propagate throughout the system model. To demonstrate the effectiveness of an integrated MBSA&E-UQ approach, a case study involving a simplified analysis of a Transonic Truss-Braced Wing (TTBW) concept vehicle is performed. This integration enables a more comprehensive evaluation of system performance and behavior under uncertainty and a more robust approach for system design and analysis. Lastly, the paper addresses the challenges and considerations associated with integrating UQ into an MBSA&E framework.

systems analysis↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Integration of Uncertainty Quantification in a Model-Based Systems Analysis and Engineering Framework

This paper presents a technical approach to improve the confidence in the systems analysis process by integrating Uncertainty Quantification (UQ) techniques within a Model-Based Systems Analysis and Engineering (MBSA&E) framework. The MBSA&E architecture uses system models and multidisciplinary analytical solutions as central artifacts for system design and analysis. The integration of UQ enables engineers to assess and mitigate uncertainties associated with a system model, design parameters, and constraint inputs, leading to more complete design studies and further informed decision-making processes. The proposed approach leverages the strengths of MBSA&E and extends it with a UQ methodology to quantify uncertainties in the input parameters and to trace the uncertainties as they propagate throughout the system model. To demonstrate the effectiveness of an integrated MBSA&E-UQ approach, a case study involving a simplified analysis of a Transonic Truss-Braced Wing (TTBW) concept vehicle is performed. This integration enables a more comprehensive evaluation of system performance and behavior under uncertainty and a more robust approach for system design and analysis. Lastly, the paper addresses the challenges and considerations associated with integrating UQ into an MBSA&E framework.

systems analysis↗