Uncertainty quantification using evidence theory in multidisciplinary design optimization

Advances in computational performance have led to the development of large-scale simulation tools for design. Systems generated using such simulation tools can fail in service if the uncertainty of the simulation toolʹs performance predictions is not accounted for. In this research an investigation of how uncertainty can be quantified in multidisciplinary systems analysis subject to epistemic uncertainty associated with the disciplinary design tools and input parameters is undertaken. Evidence theory is used to quantify uncertainty in terms of the uncertain measures of belief and plausibility. To illustrate the methodology, multidisciplinary analysis problems are introduced as an extension to the epistemic uncertainty challenge problems identified by Sandia National Laboratories. After uncertainty has been characterized mathematically the designer seeks the optimum design under uncertainty. The measures of uncertainty provided by evidence theory are discontinuous functions. Such non-smooth functions cannot be used in traditional gradient-based optimizers because the sensitivities of the uncertain measures are not properly defined. In this research surrogate models are used to represent the uncertain measures as continuous functions. A sequential approximate optimization approach is used to drive the optimization process. The methodology is illustrated in application to multidisciplinary example problems.