| robyTKD |
May 29, 2013 09:26 |
I have compiled the 2.0.4 version of the code and I have tested it on my case (NACA0012 turbulent subsonic); direct and adjoint simulations converge, also mesh deformation and optimization framework run without any problem.
When running shape optimization(DRAG minimization with constraint on LIFT), after the first iteration, Cd is not reduced, indeed it is greater than the undeformed case.
I post shape optimization configuration for my case:
Code:
% --------------------- OPTIMAL SHAPE DESIGN DEFINITION -----------------------%
% Objective function (DRAG, LIFT, SIDEFORCE, PRESSURE, MOMENT_X, MOMENT_Y,
% MOMENT_Z, EFFICIENCY, CHARGE, SONIC_BOOM)
OPT_OBJECTIVE= DRAG*0.01
%
% Inequality constraints list separated by comma (DRAG, LIFT, SIDEFORCE,
% PRESSURE, MOMENT_X, MOMENT_Y,
% MOMENT_Z, EFFICIENCY, SONIC_BOOM)
OPT_CONSTRAINT= ( LIFT>1.09 )*0.01
%
% Equality constraints list separated by comma (DRAG, LIFT, SIDEFORCE,
% PRESSURE, MOMENT_X, MOMENT_Y,
% MOMENT_Z, EFFICIENCY, SONIC_BOOM)
CONST_EQ= NONE
%
% Scale equality constraints (separated by comma)
CONST_EQ_SCALE= 0.0
%
% Value equality constraints list (separated by comma)
CONST_EQ_VALUE= 0.0
%
% List of design variables (Design variables are separated by semicolons)
% From 1 to 99, Geometrycal design variables.
% - HICKS_HENNE ( 1, Scale | Mark. List | Lower(0)/Upper(1) side, x_Loc )
% - NACA_4DIGITS ( 4, Scale | Mark. List | 1st digit, 2nd digit, 3rd and 4th digit )
% - ROTATION ( 6, Scale | Mark. List | x_Axis, y_Axis, z_Axis, x_Turn, y_Turn, z_Turn )
% From 100 to 199, Flow solver design variables.
% - MACH_NUMBER ( 101, Scale | Markers List )
% - AOA ( 102, Scale | Markers List )
DEFINITION_DV= ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 0, 0.05 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 0, 0.10 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 0, 0.15 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 0, 0.20 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 0, 0.25 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 0, 0.30 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 0, 0.35 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 0, 0.40 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 0, 0.45 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 0, 0.50 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 0, 0.55 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 0, 0.60 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 0, 0.65 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 0, 0.70 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 0, 0.75 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 0, 0.80 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 0, 0.85 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 0, 0.90 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 0, 0.95 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 1, 0.05 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 1, 0.10 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 1, 0.15 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 1, 0.20 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 1, 0.25 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 1, 0.30 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 1, 0.35 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 1, 0.40 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 1, 0.45 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 1, 0.50 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 1, 0.55 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 1, 0.60 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 1, 0.65 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 1, 0.70 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 1, 0.75 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 1, 0.80 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 1, 0.85 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 1, 0.90 ); ( 1, 1.0 | AIRFOIL | 1, 0.95 )
I think that gradients are not ok.
Do you have some reference to compare with my shape sensitivities?
Thank you very much. |
