利用设计实验测试估算参数受控的非线性裂纹生长模拟模型的变异性

IF 0.5 Q4 ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL Journal of Verification, Validation and Uncertainty Quantification Pub Date : 2023-07-19 DOI:10.1115/1.4064053
Seungju Yeoa, Paul Funkenbuscha, H. Askari
{"title":"利用设计实验测试估算参数受控的非线性裂纹生长模拟模型的变异性","authors":"Seungju Yeoa, Paul Funkenbuscha, H. Askari","doi":"10.1115/1.4064053","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Variability in multiple independent input parameters makes it difficult to estimate the resultant variability in a system's overall response. The Propagation of Errors (PE) and Monte-Carlo (MC) techniques are two major methods to predict the variability of a system. However, the formalism of PE can lead to an inaccurate estimate for systems that have parameters varying over a wide range. For the latter, the results give a direct estimate of the variance of the response, but for complex systems with many parameters, the number of trials necessary to yield an accurate estimate can be sizeable to the point the technique becomes impractical. The effectiveness of a designed experiment (orthogonal array) methodology, as employed in Taguchi Tolerance Design (TD) method to estimate variability in complex systems is studied. We use a linear elastic 3-point bending beam model and a nonlinear extended finite elements crack growth model to test and compare the PE and MC methods with the TD method. Results from an MC estimate, using 10,000 trials, serve as a reference to verify the result in both cases. We find that the PE method works suboptimal for a coefficient of variation above 5% in the input variables. In addition, we find that the TD method works very well with moderately sized trials of designed experiment for both models. Our results demonstrate how the variability estimation methods perform in the deterministic domain of numerical simulations and can assist in designing physical tests by providing a guideline performance measure.","PeriodicalId":52254,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Verification, Validation and Uncertainty Quantification","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Variability Estimation in a Non-Linear Crack Growth Simulation Model with Controlled Parameters Using Designed Experiments Testing\",\"authors\":\"Seungju Yeoa, Paul Funkenbuscha, H. Askari\",\"doi\":\"10.1115/1.4064053\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Variability in multiple independent input parameters makes it difficult to estimate the resultant variability in a system's overall response. The Propagation of Errors (PE) and Monte-Carlo (MC) techniques are two major methods to predict the variability of a system. However, the formalism of PE can lead to an inaccurate estimate for systems that have parameters varying over a wide range. For the latter, the results give a direct estimate of the variance of the response, but for complex systems with many parameters, the number of trials necessary to yield an accurate estimate can be sizeable to the point the technique becomes impractical. The effectiveness of a designed experiment (orthogonal array) methodology, as employed in Taguchi Tolerance Design (TD) method to estimate variability in complex systems is studied. We use a linear elastic 3-point bending beam model and a nonlinear extended finite elements crack growth model to test and compare the PE and MC methods with the TD method. Results from an MC estimate, using 10,000 trials, serve as a reference to verify the result in both cases. We find that the PE method works suboptimal for a coefficient of variation above 5% in the input variables. In addition, we find that the TD method works very well with moderately sized trials of designed experiment for both models. Our results demonstrate how the variability estimation methods perform in the deterministic domain of numerical simulations and can assist in designing physical tests by providing a guideline performance measure.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52254,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Verification, Validation and Uncertainty Quantification\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Verification, Validation and Uncertainty Quantification\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4064053\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Verification, Validation and Uncertainty Quantification","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4064053","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

由于多个独立输入参数存在变异,因此很难估算系统整体响应的变异性。误差传播(PE)和蒙特卡洛(MC)技术是预测系统变异性的两种主要方法。然而,对于参数变化范围较大的系统,PE 的形式主义会导致估计结果不准确。对于后者,其结果可直接估算出响应的方差,但对于参数较多的复杂系统,要获得准确的估算结果,所需的试验次数可能会非常多,以至于该技术变得不切实际。我们研究了田口公差设计(TD)方法中采用的设计实验(正交阵列)方法在估计复杂系统变异性方面的有效性。我们使用线性弹性三点弯曲梁模型和非线性扩展有限元裂纹生长模型来测试和比较 PE 和 MC 方法与 TD 方法。使用 10,000 次试验得出的 MC 估计结果可作为验证两种方法结果的参考。我们发现,当输入变量的变异系数超过 5%时,PE 方法的效果并不理想。此外,我们还发现 TD 方法在两种模型中都能很好地使用中等规模的设计试验。我们的结果表明了变异性估计方法在数值模拟的确定性领域中的表现,并通过提供指导性的性能测量方法来帮助设计物理试验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Variability Estimation in a Non-Linear Crack Growth Simulation Model with Controlled Parameters Using Designed Experiments Testing
Variability in multiple independent input parameters makes it difficult to estimate the resultant variability in a system's overall response. The Propagation of Errors (PE) and Monte-Carlo (MC) techniques are two major methods to predict the variability of a system. However, the formalism of PE can lead to an inaccurate estimate for systems that have parameters varying over a wide range. For the latter, the results give a direct estimate of the variance of the response, but for complex systems with many parameters, the number of trials necessary to yield an accurate estimate can be sizeable to the point the technique becomes impractical. The effectiveness of a designed experiment (orthogonal array) methodology, as employed in Taguchi Tolerance Design (TD) method to estimate variability in complex systems is studied. We use a linear elastic 3-point bending beam model and a nonlinear extended finite elements crack growth model to test and compare the PE and MC methods with the TD method. Results from an MC estimate, using 10,000 trials, serve as a reference to verify the result in both cases. We find that the PE method works suboptimal for a coefficient of variation above 5% in the input variables. In addition, we find that the TD method works very well with moderately sized trials of designed experiment for both models. Our results demonstrate how the variability estimation methods perform in the deterministic domain of numerical simulations and can assist in designing physical tests by providing a guideline performance measure.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
16.70%
发文量
12
期刊最新文献
A Curved Surface Integral Method for Reliability Analysis of Multiple Failure Modes System with Non-Overlapping Failure Domains A Framework for Developing Systematic Testbeds for Multi-Fidelity Optimization Techniques Reliability Analysis for RV Reducer by Combining PCE and Saddlepoint Approximation Considering Multi-Failure Modes Machine Learning-Based Resilience Modeling and Assessment of High Consequence Systems Under Uncertainty Posterior Covariance Matrix Approximations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1