Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “OPTIMIZATION”

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 631 records · Page 35
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

A Computational Tool Compatible with NEAMS Code Packages for Optimizing the Shape of Nuclear Reactor Components and of Whole Core Performance

We designed and implemented a shape optimization tool that functions with NEAMS codes, and that nuclear scientists and engineers can employ to optimize the shape of individual components and the whole core under the applicable single- or multi-physics model comprising the employed code(s). The shape-optimization tool enables varying the geometric shape itself as well as its dimensions to yield, potentially, new component designs that are not limited by the designer’s intuition and previous experience. In cases where the optimal-shape object is an individual component, we provide the capability for additional verification that the whole-core performance using the optimized component performs better, under the prescribed optimization criteria, than the initial design. Our shape-optimization tool couples to NEAMS codes via a flexible input- composer interface and enables the user to constrain the shape’s evolution to ensure the component’s manufacturability. Finally, we demonstrate our shape-optimization tool with single- and multi-physics NEAMS codes. This objective is motivated by the recent advances in manufacturing technology that, combined with rising interest in novel reactor concepts, are creating new opportunities for innovation in the design of individual components that affect the performance of the full reactor system. In particular, Additive Manufacturing (AM) enables mass production of highly precise, intricate and complex component shapes that are not feasible with traditional manufacturing techniques. To accomplish this goal we developed and implemented in MOOSE: (1) discrete shape optimization capability based on a state-space search that uses Artificial Intelligence strategies to find the optimal state/shape; (2) smooth shape optimization tool that employs PETSc’s toolkit for advanced optimization (TAO) to optimize node-displacement of the components’ model sidesets; (3) hierarchical core optimization workflow that recognizes the repeating patterns typical in a nuclear reactor and performs the optimization one level at a time with increasing length scale. Each of these tools is equipped with user-specified constraints to avoid optimal shapes that are not manufacturable. The developed shape optimization tool is verified and demonstrated on various nuclear reactor core components and models. The optimization process accounts for tightly coupled physics that govern the behavior of these target reactors, and exercises several NEAMS codes in a coupled multiphysics fashion. The impact of the delivered shape optimization tool will materialize in the optimal design, from the outset, of advanced reactors currently contemplated to regain the US’s leadership in nuclear energy R&D. Novel reactor concepts, e.g. Molten Salt Reactors, and sizes/capacities, e.g. micro- reactors, provide a unique opportunity to optimize performance from the early stages of development, before the investment in components’ production lines, validation experiments, and licensing regimes make future improvements in performance prohibitively expensive and force sub-optimal performance on the affected reactor concept in perpetuity. This benefit will be realized by the delivered shape optimization tool regardless of the applicable manufacturing process whether traditional or AM, thereby broadening the impact of this project on current and future reactor concepts and technologies

11 - NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Joint Optimization of Well Completions and Controls for CO 2 Enhanced Oil Recovery and Storage

CO 2 storage through CO 2 enhanced oil recovery (EOR) is considered as one of the technologies to help promote larger scale deployment of CO 2 storage because of associated economic benefits through oil recovery, 45Q tax credits and the utilization of existing infrastructure. The objective of this study is to demonstrate how optimal reservoir management and operation strategies (including well completions and controls) can be used to optimize both CO 2 storage and oil recovery. The optimization problem was focused on jointly estimating the well completions (i.e., fraction of injection/production well perforations in each reservoir layer) and CO 2 injection/oil production controls that maximize the net present value (NPV) in a CO 2 EOR and storage operation. We utilized the newly developed StoSAG algorithm, one of the most efficient optimization algorithms in the reservoir management community, to solve the optimization problem. The performance of joint optimization approach was compared with the performance of well control only optimization approach. In addition, the performance of co-optimization of CO 2 storage and oil recovery approach was compared with the performances of maximization of only CO 2 storage and maximization of only oil recovery approaches. The optimization results showed that a joint optimization of well completions and well controls can achieve an 8.84% higher final NPV than the one obtained from the optimization of only well controls. It was observed that the NPV incremental for joint optimization is mainly due to the fact that the optimal well completions and controls approach results in efficient CO 2 storage and oil production from different reservoir layers depending on the differences in individual layer properties. Comparison of co-optimization (i.e., maximization of NPV) and maximization of only CO 2 storage or only oil recovery showed that the co-optimization and maximization of only oil recovery result in significantly higher final NPV than that obtained through maximization of only CO 2 storage approach while maximization of only CO 2 storage can achieve significantly higher CO 2 storage in the reservoir compared to the other two scenarios. The similar results for co-optimization and maximization of oil production are obtained because of the difference in oil revenue compared to CO 2 storage tax credit. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study in oil/gas industry and CO 2 storage community to perform joint optimization of well completions and well controls in the fields. We expect that the proposed optimization framework will be a useful and efficient tool for field engineers to optimally manage CO 2 EOR projects to maximize revenue through oil recovery as well as CO 2 storage by taking advantage of the new 45Q tax law.

Artificial intelligence↗
DOE OSTI2015

A feasibility study: Selection of a personalized radiotherapy fractionation schedule using spatiotemporal optimization

Purpose: To investigate the impact of using spatiotemporal optimization, i.e., intensity-modulated spatial optimization followed by fractionation schedule optimization, to select the patient-specific fractionation schedule that maximizes the tumor biologically equivalent dose (BED) under dose constraints for multiple organs-at-risk (OARs). Methods: Spatiotemporal optimization was applied to a variety of lung tumors in a phantom geometry using a range of tumor sizes and locations. The optimal fractionation schedule for a patient using the linear-quadratic cell survival model depends on the tumor and OAR sensitivity to fraction size (α/β), the effective tumor doubling time (T{sub d}), and the size and location of tumor target relative to one or more OARs (dose distribution). The authors used a spatiotemporal optimization method to identify the optimal number of fractions N that maximizes the 3D tumor BED distribution for 16 lung phantom cases. The selection of the optimal fractionation schedule used equivalent (30-fraction) OAR constraints for the heart (D{sub mean} ≤ 45 Gy), lungs (D{sub mean} ≤ 20 Gy), cord (D{sub max} ≤ 45 Gy), esophagus (D{sub max} ≤ 63 Gy), and unspecified tissues (D{sub 05} ≤ 60 Gy). To assess plan quality, the authors compared the minimum, mean, maximum, and D{sub 95} of tumor BED, as well as the equivalent uniform dose (EUD) for optimized plans to conventional intensity-modulated radiation therapy plans prescribing 60 Gy in 30 fractions. A sensitivity analysis was performed to assess the effects of T{sub d} (3–100 days), tumor lag-time (T{sub k} = 0–10 days), and the size of tumors on optimal fractionation schedule. Results: Using an α/β ratio of 10 Gy, the average values of tumor max, min, mean BED, and D{sub 95} were up to 19%, 21%, 20%, and 19% larger than those from conventional prescription, depending on T{sub d} and T{sub k} used. Tumor EUD was up to 17% larger than the conventional prescription. For fast proliferating tumors with T{sub d} less than 10 days, there was no significant increase in tumor BED but the treatment course could be shortened without a loss in tumor BED. The improvement in the tumor mean BED was more pronounced with smaller tumors (p-value = 0.08). Conclusions: Spatiotemporal optimization of patient plans has the potential to significantly improve local tumor control (larger BED/EUD) of patients with a favorable geometry, such as smaller tumors with larger distances between the tumor target and nearby OAR. In patients with a less favorable geometry and for fast growing tumors, plans optimized using spatiotemporal optimization and conventional (spatial-only) optimization are equivalent (negligible differences in tumor BED/EUD). However, spatiotemporal optimization yields shorter treatment courses than conventional spatial-only optimization. Personalized, spatiotemporal optimization of treatment schedules can increase patient convenience and help with the efficient allocation of clinical resources. Spatiotemporal optimization can also help identify a subset of patients that might benefit from nonconventional (large dose per fraction) treatments that are ineligible for the current practice of stereotactic body radiation therapy.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS2010

Particle Swarm Optimization Toolbox

The Particle Swarm Optimization Toolbox is a library of evolutionary optimization tools developed in the MATLAB environment. The algorithms contained in the library include a genetic algorithm (GA), a single-objective particle swarm optimizer (SOPSO), and a multi-objective particle swarm optimizer (MOPSO). Development focused on both the SOPSO and MOPSO. A GA was included mainly for comparison purposes, and the particle swarm optimizers appeared to perform better for a wide variety of optimization problems. All algorithms are capable of performing unconstrained and constrained optimization. The particle swarm optimizers are capable of performing single and multi-objective optimization. The SOPSO and MOPSO algorithms are based on swarming theory and bird-flocking patterns to search the trade space for the optimal solution or optimal trade in competing objectives. The MOPSO generates Pareto fronts for objectives that are in competition. A GA, based on Darwin evolutionary theory, is also included in the library. The GA consists of individuals that form a population in the design space. The population mates to form offspring at new locations in the design space. These offspring contain traits from both of the parents. The algorithm is based on this combination of traits from parents to hopefully provide an improved solution than either of the original parents. As the algorithm progresses, individuals that hold these optimal traits will emerge as the optimal solutions. Due to the generic design of all optimization algorithms, each algorithm interfaces with a user-supplied objective function. This function serves as a "black-box" to the optimizers in which the only purpose of this function is to evaluate solutions provided by the optimizers. Hence, the user-supplied function can be numerical simulations, analytical functions, etc., since the specific detail of this function is of no concern to the optimizer. These algorithms were originally developed to support entry trajectory and guidance design for the Mars Science Laboratory mission but may be applied to any optimization problem.

Grant, Michael J.↗
DOE OSTI2024

AEOLUS: Advances in Experimental Design, Optimal Control, and Learning for Uncertain Complex Systems

Sustained advances in the mathematics of modeling and simulation have resulted in the capability today for routine simulation of a number of large scale complex DOE-relevant systems. As remarkable as this capability for solving the so-called forward problem is, it is typically only the first step-an inner loop within an outer loop that explores the simulation model's parameter space and decision space to characterize uncertainty in the model's predictions, learn unknown model parameters from data, design the most informative experiments, determine optimal control strategies, and create optimal designs. Broadly, what unifies all of these outer loop problems is that they are, in one form or another, optimization problems over parameter/control/design space that are constrained by complex uncertain models. To fully realize the power of scientific simulation as a basis for scientific discovery, technological innovation, and rational decision-making, it is imperative to move beyond simulation to tackle the outer loop of optimization for learning from data, experimental design, and control with complex uncertain models. When the models under consideration are large-scale and complex, and when the optimization variable and uncertain parameter spaces are high (or infinite) dimensional, this constitutes a grand challenge of the highest order, and is intractable with conventional methods. To overcome these challenges, the AEOLUS Center was established to develop a unified mathematical, computational, and statistical framework for (1) Learning predictive models from complex data via Bayesian inference and optimization, and (2) Optimizing experiments, processes, and designs using the resulting uncertain models. These problems are intractable with conventional methods, for several reasons: (1) The simulation problems that govern the inner loops of the optimization problems are expensive to execute (due to severe nonlinearity, heterogeneity, multiphysics/multiscale coupling); (2) The optimization variable and uncertain parameter spaces are high dimensional, often stemming from discretizations of infinite dimensional fields such as initial conditions, sources, or material properties. We argue that the key to overcoming these challenges is to develop new mathematical, computational, and statistical methods that exploit the structure of the Bayesian inference and optimization problems mediated by their underlying complex uncertain models. This structure includes the regularity, sparsity, geometry, low intrinsic dimensionality, and multifidelity nature of the maps from uncertain parameter/optimization variable spaces to the specific objectives targeted: Bayesian inference, optimal experimental design, and optimal control design. Black box methods developed as generic tools are incapable of exploiting this structure. To be successful, we must create, integrate, and cross-fertilize ideas across multiple areas of applied math--including approximation theory, Bayesian inference, data science, experimental design, information theory, machine learning, model reduction, optimal control theory, parallel algorithms, PDE-constrained optimization, randomized algorithms, stochastic optimization, and uncertainty quantification--all while exploiting the structure of the problems at hand. With this goal in mind, we have marshaled a team of leading authorities in these areas. While the methods we develop will be broadly applicable across a wide spectrum of DOE problems in which experiments inform models and the systems those models describe must be optimized under uncertainty, we have chosen a specific area, advanced manufacturing and materials, to drive our work. AMM is characterized by complex models across multiple scales, and is a rich source of challenging problems in inference, experimental design, and optimal control, requiring multifaceted and integrated advances in applied mathematics. As such, AMM serves as an excellent vehicle to motivate and demonstrate the advances in applied mathematics developed by our center.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
NASA NTRS1999

The Analysis and Design of Low Boom Configurations Using CFD and Numerical Optimization Techniques

The use of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) for the analysis of sonic booms generated by aircraft has been shown to increase the accuracy and reliability of predictions. CFD takes into account important three-dimensional and nonlinear effects that are generally neglected by modified linear theory (MLT) methods. Up to the present time, CFD methods have been primarily used for analysis or prediction. Some investigators have used CFD to impact the design of low boom configurations using trial and error methods. One investigator developed a hybrid design method using a combination of Modified Linear Theory (e.g. F-functions) and CFD to provide equivalent area due to lift driven by a numerical optimizer to redesign or modify an existing configuration to achieve a shaped sonic boom signature. A three-dimensional design methodology has not yet been developed that completely uses nonlinear methods or CFD. Constrained numerical optimization techniques have existed for some time. Many of these methods use gradients to search for the minimum of a specified objective function subject to a variety of design variable bounds, linear and nonlinear constraints. Gradient based design optimization methods require the determination of the objective function gradients with respect to each of the design variables. These optimization methods are efficient and work well if the gradients can be obtained analytically. If analytical gradients are not available, the objective gradients or derivatives with respect to the design variables must be obtained numerically. To obtain numerical gradients, say, for 10 design variables, might require anywhere from 10 to 20 objective function evaluations. Typically, 5-10 global iterations of the optimizer are required to minimize the objective function. In terms of using CFD as a design optimization tool, the numerical evaluation of gradients can require anywhere from 100 to 200 CFD computations per design for only 10 design variables. If one CFD computation requires an hour of computational time on a Cray computer, one can see that the use of constrained numerical optimization quickly becomes impractical.Hence, in order to practically couple a numerical design optimization technique with a CFD method, the CFD method must be extremely efficient with running times on the order of only minutes. The CFD Euler code developed under NASA sponsorship and referred to as MIM3D-SB for the most part fulfills these efficiency requirements. Analysis of wing- body configurations can be computed in a matter of a few minutes. The present study will concentrate on the feasibility of the use of this CFD code in conjunction with a numerical design optimization technique for the sonic boom reduction of candidate HSCT configurations. A preliminary supersonic aircraft design system has been established that utilizes the numerical design optimization code NPSOL developed at Stanford University coupled with the supersonic NUM3D-SB CFD code. Many questions still need to be answered in regard to using CFD and numerical optimizers as design tools. There are difficulties related to both the CFD codes and the numerical optimizers. Numerical optimizers can converge to a local minima rather than a global minima. This behavior is largely a function of the initial guess in the design space. The optimizer also is searching for a minimum of the function in terms of its derivative without any regard to the actual function value. Numerically (i.e. CFD) determined gradients can also generate spurious numerical local minima. In addition, for the sonic boom problem, grid fineness will also determine the accuracy of the final design solution. Design optimization methods work well on problems defined by continuous objective functions. The sonic boom signature design problem is not necessarily defined by a continuous objective function. The signature can have a variety of shapes; i.e. from N-wave to multiple shocks. The far-field or ground signature may not transition continuously from one shape to another and hence, may exhibit discontinuous behavior. This is also a source of difficulty in using design optimization methods.In the following sections, several low boom and one reference aircraft configuration will be analyzed to predict their sonic boom signature characteristics. Modifications to some of these designs will also be presented to demonstrate the feasibility of using CFD as a design tool and to demonstrate the feasibility of designing shaped sonic boom signatures. Design modifications to some configurations will be presented to demonstrate the feasibility of achieving shaped signatures with reduced levels and not necessarily to represent realistic or aerodynamically efficient design modifications. Fuselage volume or camber are used as design variables in order to have a minimal effect on the primary wing aerodynamics. The paper will also seek to demonstrate whether a hybrid or ramped signature is feasible to achieve. For the low-boom configurations, the CFD predicted signatures will be compared qualitatively to their MLT design signatures.

Siclari, Michael J.↗
DOE OSTI2024

Optimization of the Second Target Station cold source moderators using an automated workflow

The Second Target Station (STS) at the US Department of Energy’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory is designed to become the world’s highest peak-brightness spallation source of cold neutrons. Successful completion of the STS, which is currently in the preliminary design phase, will provide transformative new capabilities to examine novel materials for future technologies. At STS, neutrons will be generated by spallation reactions in a solid tungsten target. They will be moderated and thermalized in two cold (20 K) para-hydrogen moderators. Careful optimization of these moderators is essential to the project’s success. To find optimal moderator designs, an advanced optimization workflow integrates high-fidelity neutronics calculations using the Monte Carlo N-Particle (MCNP) transport code MCNP6.2 with state-of-the-art optimization algorithms in the Dakota optimization toolkit. For each design iteration, a parametrized solid CAD geometry is generated in Creo and automatically converted into an unstructured mesh geometry by Attila 4MC for the neutronics calculation with MCNP. Iterations repeat until optimal designs are found. Herein this paper presents the results of a sensitivity and optimization study for the cylindrical and tube moderators. Both moderators can be optimized for maximum peak brightness, maximum time-integrated brightness, or any combination between these extremes. Maximum peak brightness is achieved by using smaller optimal dimensions of the moderators, whereas maximum time-integrated brightness is achieved by using larger dimensions. A Pareto front details the designs that optimally balance both brightness metrics. The Pareto front can be found in only 40–110 iterations with 4–5 design parameters when using the efficient global and Pareto-set optimization algorithms in Dakota. Additionally, important engineering constraints can be taken into account, such as the coupling between the cylindrical moderator radius and aluminum vessel wall thicknesses required to ensure structural integrity of the vessels. This interaction has a significant impact on the resulting optimal designs. Our new, highly efficient, fully automated optimization workflow will be used to optimize additional STS components in the future and can be adopted for design and optimization studies at other experimental neutron and accelerator facilities.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗
DOE OSTI2015

WE-AB-303-06: Combining DAO with MV + KV Optimization to Improve Skin Dose Sparing with Real-Time Fluoroscopy

Purpose: Real-time fluoroscopy may allow for improved patient positioning and tumor tracking, particularly in the treatment of lung tumors. In order to mitigate the effects of the imaging dose, previous studies have demonstrated the effect of including both imaging dose and imaging constraints into the inverse treatment planning object function. That method of combined MV+kV optimization may Result in plans with treatment beams chosen to allow for more gentle imaging beam-on times. Direct-aperture optimization (DAO) is also known to produce treatment plans with fluence maps more conducive to lower beam-on times. Therefore, in this work we demonstrate the feasibility of a combination of DAO and MV+kV optimization for further optimized real-time kV imaging. Methods: Therapeutic and imaging beams were modeled in the EGSnrc Monte Carlo environment, and applied to a patient model for a previously treated lung patient to provide dose influence matrices from DOSXYZnrc. An MV + kV IMRT DAO treatment planning system was developed to compare DAO treatment plans with and without MV+kV optimization. The objective function was optimized using simulated annealing. In order to allow for comparisons between different cases of the stochastically optimized plans, the optimization was repeated twenty times. Results: Across twenty optimizations, combined MV+kV IMRT resulted in an average of 12.8% reduction in peak skin dose. Both non-optimized and MV+kV optimized imaging beams delivered, on average, mean dose of approximately 1 cGy per fraction to the target, with peak doses to target of approximately 6 cGy per fraction. Conclusion: When using DAO, MV+kV optimization is shown to Result in improvements to plan quality in terms of skin dose, when compared to the case of MV optimization with non-optimized kV imaging. The combination of DAO and MV+kV optimization may allow for real-time imaging without excessive imaging dose. Financial support for the work has been provided in part by NIH Grant T32 EB002103, ACS RSG-13-313-01-CCE, and NIH S10 RR021039 and P30 CA14599 grants. The contents of this submission do not necessarily represent the official views of any of the supporting organizations.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗