Chapter 5 Robust Performance Tailoring with Tuning - SSL - MIT
Chapter 5 Robust Performance Tailoring with Tuning - SSL - MIT Chapter 5 Robust Performance Tailoring with Tuning - SSL - MIT
(a) (b) (c) (d) Figure 6-8: Mode Shapes of nominal SCI TPF design (a) first bending, 1.07 Hz (b) second bending, 3.06 Hz (c) collector primary mirror, 5.99 Hz (d) third bending, 7.55 Hz. 196
6.2 Design Parameters In order to apply the tailoring and tuning design optimizations to the TPF SCI model to improve the RMS OPD, the control, or tailoring and tuning, and noise, or uncertainty, parameters must first be identified. In the following sections these parameters are presented along with appropriate design variable constraints. 6.2.1 Tailoring Similar to the development model the tailoring parameters allow variation of the truss geometry. However, since the TPF SCI model is a high-fidelity truss structure there are more design options available and a practical and easily visualized tailoring approach is possible. Instead of varying the cross-sectional diameters of each truss segment, the overall geometry of the truss is tailored. To this end, four tailoring parameters are selected as listed in Table 6.10. Table 6.10: TPF SCI model tailoring parameters. x Description x0 Units h1 outer bay height 1 m h2 center bay height 1 m w1 outer bay width 2 m w2 center bay width 2 m The values h1 and h2 are the height of the batten frames (Figure 6-5(c)) at the end and in the center of the truss, respectively as shown in Figure 6-9. In the nominal configuration these values are set equal to each other so that the batten frames are the same height from bay to bay (Figure 6-2(d)), but for the tailoring optimization they are allowed to change independently so that a configuration such as that shown in Figure 6-9(a) could result. The height of the bays between the end bay and the center bay vary linearly in the x-direction, and the top surface of the truss is always at Z=0 so that the positions of the collectors remain collinear. In order to reduce the number of tailoring parameters and limit the computational effort the truss is assumed to be symmetric about the center so that the batten height at either end is 197
- Page 145 and 146: Uncertainty Bounds Test �y [kg] S
- Page 147 and 148: Table 4.6: Tuning results on fifty
- Page 149 and 150: eters are discussed. The optimizati
- Page 151 and 152: Chapter 5 Robust Performance Tailor
- Page 153 and 154: MPC optimization by allowing a diff
- Page 155 and 156: where the notation yij indicates th
- Page 157 and 158: (Table 4.1), and the uncertainty pa
- Page 159 and 160: Table 5.2: Performance and design p
- Page 161 and 162: it in the worst-case uncertainty re
- Page 163 and 164: The data in Figure 5-2 indicate tha
- Page 165 and 166: configuration. The tuned configurat
- Page 167 and 168: same requirement. The effect become
- Page 169 and 170: indicating that this requirement is
- Page 171 and 172: E 2 [Pa] 7.8 7.6 7.4 7.2 7 6.8 6.6
- Page 173 and 174: than the RPT design, 155.45µm to 5
- Page 175 and 176: have a very small nominal performan
- Page 177 and 178: of these simulations fail to meet r
- Page 179 and 180: and that it is the only design meth
- Page 181 and 182: Chapter 6 Focus Application: Struct
- Page 183 and 184: optical path differences between th
- Page 185 and 186: Table 6.1: RWA disturbance model pa
- Page 187 and 188: FRF Magnitude 10 1 10 0 10 −1 10
- Page 189 and 190: Y Z Z X Y (a) w (c) w Y h Z Figure
- Page 191 and 192: Table 6.6: Primary mirror propertie
- Page 193 and 194: OP1 STAR Z OP2 OP3 Coll 1 Coll 2 Bu
- Page 195: PSD OPD14 [m 2 /Hz] CumulativeOPD14
- Page 199 and 200: 6.2.2 Tuning The tuning parameters
- Page 201 and 202: complex and the normal modes analys
- Page 203 and 204: does not change with the design par
- Page 205 and 206: (a) (b) (c) Figure 6-11: SCI TPF PT
- Page 207 and 208: Table 6.14: Performance predictions
- Page 209 and 210: performance trends similar to those
- Page 211 and 212: Chapter 7 Conclusions and Recommend
- Page 213 and 214: a statistical robustness measure su
- Page 215 and 216: and the worst-case performance is a
- Page 217 and 218: - Consider uncertainty analysis too
- Page 219 and 220: Appendix A Gradient-Based Optimizat
- Page 221 and 222: such that the gradient direction is
- Page 223 and 224: the descent direction. In some case
- Page 225 and 226: Bibliography [1] Jpl planet quest w
- Page 227 and 228: [24] Nightsky Systems Carl Blaurock
- Page 229 and 230: [48] S. C. O. Grocott, J. P. How, a
- Page 231 and 232: [74] M. Lieber. Development of ball
- Page 233 and 234: AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures,
6.2 Design Parameters<br />
In order to apply the tailoring and tuning design optimizations to the TPF SCI<br />
model to improve the RMS OPD, the control, or tailoring and tuning, and noise,<br />
or uncertainty, parameters must first be identified. In the following sections these<br />
parameters are presented along <strong>with</strong> appropriate design variable constraints.<br />
6.2.1 <strong>Tailoring</strong><br />
Similar to the development model the tailoring parameters allow variation of the<br />
truss geometry. However, since the TPF SCI model is a high-fidelity truss structure<br />
there are more design options available and a practical and easily visualized tailoring<br />
approach is possible. Instead of varying the cross-sectional diameters of each truss<br />
segment, the overall geometry of the truss is tailored. To this end, four tailoring<br />
parameters are selected as listed in Table 6.10.<br />
Table 6.10: TPF SCI model tailoring parameters.<br />
x Description x0 Units<br />
h1 outer bay height 1 m<br />
h2 center bay height 1 m<br />
w1 outer bay width 2 m<br />
w2 center bay width 2 m<br />
The values h1 and h2 are the height of the batten frames (Figure 6-5(c)) at the<br />
end and in the center of the truss, respectively as shown in Figure 6-9. In the nominal<br />
configuration these values are set equal to each other so that the batten frames are<br />
the same height from bay to bay (Figure 6-2(d)), but for the tailoring optimization<br />
they are allowed to change independently so that a configuration such as that shown<br />
in Figure 6-9(a) could result. The height of the bays between the end bay and the<br />
center bay vary linearly in the x-direction, and the top surface of the truss is always<br />
at Z=0 so that the positions of the collectors remain collinear. In order to reduce<br />
the number of tailoring parameters and limit the computational effort the truss is<br />
assumed to be symmetric about the center so that the batten height at either end is<br />
197