Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T12:55:06.226Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

MULTIDISCIPLINARY DESIGN OPTIMIZATION OF A MOBILE MINER USING THE OPENMDAO PLATFORM

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 July 2021

Olle Vidner ,
Robert Pettersson ,
Johan A Persson  and
Johan Ölvander
Olle Vidner*
Affiliation:
Linköping University
Robert Pettersson
Affiliation:
Epiroc Rock Drills AB
Johan A Persson
Affiliation:
Linköping University
Johan Ölvander
Affiliation:
Linköping University
*
Vidner, Olle, Linköping University, Division of Product Realisation, Sweden, [email protected]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

This paper proposes an optimization framework based on the OpenMDAO software library intended for engineer-to-order products and applies it to the conceptual design of a Mobile Miner. A Mobile Miner is a complex machine and a flexible alternative to Tunnel Boring Machines for small-scale tunneling and mining applications. The proposed framework is intended for use in early design and quotation stages with the objective to get fast estimates of important product characteristics, such as excavation rate and cutter lifetime. The ability to respond fast to customer requests is vital when offering customized products for specific applications and thereby to stay competitive on the global market. This is true for most engineer-to-order products and especially for mining equipment where each construction project is unique with different tunnel geometries and rock properties. The presented framework is applied to a specific use-case where the design of the miner's cutter wheel is in focus and a set of Pareto optimal designs are obtained. Furthermore, the framework extends the capabilities of OpenMDAO by including support for mixed-variable formulations and it supports an exploratory approach to design optimization.

Keywords

OptimisationMulti- / Cross- / Trans-disciplinary processesLarge-scale engineering systemsMobile Miners
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 1: ICED21 , August 2021 , pp. 2207 - 2216
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

References

Andersson, Johan (2001). “Multiobjective optimization in engineering design: applications to fluid power systems”. PhD thesis. Linköping University. 201 pp.Google Scholar
Deb, Kalyanmoy, Pratap, Amrit, et al. (2002). “A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II”. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 6.2, pp. 182–197. DOI: 10.1109/4235.996017.10.1109/4235.996017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deb, Kalyanmoy and Agrawal, Ram Bhushan (1995). “Simulated Binary Crossover for Continuous Search Space”. Complex systems 9.2, pp. 115–148.Google Scholar
Epiroc (2021). Mobile Miner 22H 3D render front/left side view. Epiroc Media Gallery. URL: https://www.media.epiroc.com/en/search-results/file-detail.html/content/dam/epiroc/undergroundmining-and-tunneling/mre/mobile-miner/mobile-miner-22h/Mobile%20Miner%2022H_Mining_Tech02.tif.html (visited on 03/15/2021).Google Scholar
Fortin, Félix-Antoine et al. (2012). “DEAP: Evolutionary algorithms made easy”. The Journal of Machine Learning Research 13.1, pp. 2171–2175. DOI: 10.5555/2503308.2503311.Google Scholar
Gray, Justin S. et al. (2019). “OpenMDAO: An open-source framework for multidisciplinary design, analysis, and optimization”. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization 59.4, pp. 1075–1104. DOI: 10.1007/s00158-019-02211-z.10.1007/s00158-019-02211-zCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendricks, Eric S. and Gray, Justin S. (2019). “pyCycle: A Tool for Efficient Optimization of Gas Turbine Engine Cycles”. Aerospace 6.8, p. 87. DOI: 10.3390/aerospace6080087.10.3390/aerospace6080087CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoyer, Stephan and Hamman, Joseph J. (2017). “xarray: N-D labeled Arrays and Datasets in Python”. Journal of Open Research Software 5, p. 10. DOI: 10.5334/jors.148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jasa, John P. et al. (2020). “Large-Scale Path-Dependent Optimization of Supersonic Aircraft”. Aerospace 7.10, p. 152. DOI: 10.3390/aerospace7100152.10.3390/aerospace7100152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyly, Johnny, Hartwig, Sverker, and Nord, Gunnar (2018). “Epiroc Mobile Miner: hard rock cutting is now a reality”. Bergdagarna 2018. Svenska Bergteknikföreningen, pp. 277–290.Google Scholar
Martins, Joaquim R. R. A. and Lambe, Andrew B. (2013). “Multidisciplinary Design Optimization: A Survey of Architectures”. AIAA Journal 51.9, pp. 2049–2075. DOI: 10.2514/1.J051895.10.2514/1.J051895CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robbins, R.J. (2000). “Mechanization of underground mining: a quick look backward and forward”. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 37.1, pp. 413–421. DOI: 10.1016/S1365-1609(99)00116-1.10.1016/S1365-1609(99)00116-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmit, Lucien A. (1960). “Structural design by systematic synthesis”. Proceedings of the 2nd Conference on Electronic Computation. 2nd Conference on Electronic Computation. Pittsburgh: American Society of Civil Engineers, pp. 105–132.Google Scholar
Sgueglia, Alessandro et al. (2020). “Multidisciplinary Design Optimization Framework with Coupled Derivative Computation for Hybrid Aircraft”. Journal of Aircraft 57.4, pp. 715–729. DOI: 10.2514/1.C035509.10.2514/1.C035509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simpson, Timothy W. and Martins, Joaquim R. R. A. (2011). “Multidisciplinary Design Optimization for Complex Engineered Systems: Report From a National Science Foundation Workshop”. Journal of Mechanical Design 133.10, p. 101002. DOI: 10.1115/1.4004465.10.1115/1.4004465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sun, Wei, Xiaobang Wang, Maolin Shi, et al. (2018). “Multidisciplinary design optimization of hard rock tunnel boring machine using collaborative optimization”. Advances in Mechanical Engineering 10.1, p. 168781401875472. DOI: 10.1177/1687814018754726.10.1177/1687814018754726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sun, Wei, Xiaobang, Wang, Lintao, Wang, et al. (2016). “Multidisciplinary design optimization of tunnel boring machine considering both structure and control parameters under complex geological conditions”. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization 54.4, pp. 1073–1092. DOI: 10.1007/s00158-016-1455-9.10.1007/s00158-016-1455-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vidner, Olle (2020a). OpenMDAO-Bridge-MATLAB. Version v0.1. DOI: 10.5281/ZENODO.4316483.Google Scholar
Vidner, Olle (2020b). OpenMDAO-NSGA: NSGA-II and NSGA-III implementations for OpenMDAO. Version v0.1. DOI: 10.5281/ZENODO.4279483.Google Scholar
Vidner, Olle (2020c). Scop: an opinionated, self-contained data format and post-optimization toolchain. Version v0.3. DOI: 10.5281/ZENODO.4263728.Google Scholar
Wortmann, J. C. (1983). “A Classification Scheme for Master Production Scheduling”. Efficiency of Manufacturing Systems. Ed. by Wilson, B., Berg, C. C., and French, D.. Boston, MA: Springer US, pp. 101–109. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4684-4475-9_10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zitzler, Eckart and Lothar, Thiele (1998). “Multiobjective optimization using evolutionary algorithms— A comparative case study”. Parallel Problem Solving from Nature — PPSN V. Ed. by Eiben, Agoston E. et al. Red. by G. Goos, J. Hartmanis, and J. van Leeuwen. Vol. 1498. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 292–301. DOI: 10.1007/BFb0056872CrossRefGoogle Scholar