Numerical sensitivity analysis for aerodynamic optimization: A survey of approaches

Computers and Fluids

Volumn 39, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 373-391

  Peter, Jacques E V ^a   Dwight, Richard P ^b  

^a ONERA   (France)

^b DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Adjoint method; Aerodynamic optimization; Duality preserving iteration; Flow solver linearization; Krylov stabilization; Linearized Navier Stokes; Sensitivity analysis

Indexed keywords

ADJOINT METHODS; AERODYNAMIC OPTIMIZATION; DUALITY PRESERVING ITERATION; FLOW SOLVER; FLOW SOLVER LINEARIZATION; LINEARIZED NAVIER-STOKES;

AERODYNAMICS; AIRCRAFT; ALGORITHMS; LINEARIZATION; NAVIER STOKES EQUATIONS; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; STABILIZATION; THREE DIMENSIONAL;

SHAPE OPTIMIZATION;

EID: 72149112461     PISSN: 00457930     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.compfluid.2009.09.013     Document Type: Review

References (159)

1. Sobieszczanski-Sobieski J. The case for aerodynamic sensitivity analysis. Technical Report CP 2457, NASA; 1987.
2. Brezillon J., and Wild J. Evaluation of different optimization strategies for the design of a high-lift flap device. Evolutionary and deterministic methods for design (2005), EUROGEN, Munich
3. Lombardi G., Mengali G., and Beux F. A hybrid genetic based optimization procedure for aircraft conceptual analysis. Optim Eng 7 2 (2006) 151-171
4. Kelner V, Grondin G, Léonard O, Moreau S. Multi-objective optimization of a fan blade by coupling a genetic algorithm and a parametric solver. In: Proceedings of EUROGEN, Munich; 2005.
5. Jameson A., Martinelli L., and Pierce N. Optimum aerodynamic design using the Navier-Stokes equations. Theor Comput Fluid Dyn 10 1 (1998) 213-237
6. Dwight R, Brezillon J, Vollmer D. Efficient algorithms for solution of the adjoint compressible Navier-Stokes equations with applications. In: Proceedings of the ONERA-DLR aerospace symposium (ODAS), Toulouse; 2006.
7. Mavriplis D. Discrete adjoint-based approach for optimization problems on three-dimensional unstructured meshes. AIAA J 45 4 (2007) 740-752
8. Brezillon J, Brodersen O, Dwight R, Ronzheimer A, Wild J. Development and application of a flexible and efficient environment for aerodynamic shape optimisation. In: Proceedings of the ONERA-DLR aerospace symposium (ODAS), Toulouse; 2006.
9. Pironneau O. On optimum profiles in Stokes flow. J Fluid Mech 59 1 (1973) 117-128
10. Pironneau O. On optimum design in fluid mechanics. J Fluid Mech 64 2 (1974) 97-110
11. Jameson A. Aerodynamic design via control theory. J Sci Comput 3 3 (1988) 233-260
12. Sharp H., and Sirovitch L. Constructing a continuous parameter range of computational flows. AIAA J 27 10 (1989) 1326-1331
13. Bristow D, Hawk J. Subsonic panel method for the efficient analysis of multiple geometry perturbations. Technical Report CR 3528, NASA; 1982.
14. Bristow D, Hawk J, Subsonic panel method for designing wing surface from pressure distribution. Technical Report CR 3713, NASA; 1983.
15. Elbanna H, Carlson L. Determination of aerodynamic sensitivity coefficients in the transonic and supersonic regimes. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 89-0532; 1989.
16. Taylor III A, Korivi V, Hou G. Sensitivity analysis applied to the Euler equations: a feasibility study with emphasis on variation of geometric shape. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 91-0173; 1991.
17. Baysal O., and Eleshaky M. Aerodynamic design sensitivity analysis methods for the compressible Euler equations. J Fluids Eng 113 4 (1991) 681-688
18. Shubin G, Frank P. A comparison of implicit gradient approach and the variational approach to aerodynamic design optimization. Technical Report AMS-TR-163, Boeing Computer Service, Applied Mathematics and Statistics, June; 1991.
19. Frank P., and Shubin G. A comparison of optimisation-based approaches for a model computational aerodynamics design problem. J Comput Phys 98 (1992) 74-89
20. Dulikravitch G. Aerodynamic shape design optimization: status and trends. J Aircraft 29 6 (1992) 1020-1026
21. Sobieszczanski-Sobieski J., and Haftka R. Multidisciplinary aerospace design optimization: survey of recent developments. Struct Optim 14 1 (1997) 153-160
22. Newman III J., Taylor III A., Barnwell A., Newman P., and Hou G. Overview of sensitivity analysis and shape optimization for complex aerodynamic configurations. J Aircraft 36 1 (1999) 97-116
23. In: Uthup B., Koruthu S.-P., Sharma R.-K., and Priyadarshi P. (Eds). Recent trends in aerospace design and optimization (2005), Tata-McGraw Hill, New Delhi
24. Haftka R. Sensitivity calculations for iteratively solved problems. Int J Numer Methods Eng 21 (1985) 1535-1546
25. Anderson W., Newman J., Whitfield D., and Nielsen E. Sensitivity analysis for the Navier-Stokes equations on unstructured meshes using complex variables. AIAA J 39 1 (2001) 56-63
26. Hicks R, Murman E, VanderPlaats G. An assessment of airfoil design by numerical optimization. Technical Report TMX 3092, NASA; 1974.
27. VanderPlaats G, Hicks R. Numerical airfoil optimization using a reduced number of design coordinates. Technical Report TMX 73151, NASA; 1976.
28. Hicks R, Henne P. Wing design by numerical optimization. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 77-1247; 1977.
29. Reneaux J. Méthode de définition de profils par optimisation numérique. La Rech Aerospatiale 5 (1984) 303-321
30. Reneaux J, Thibert J. The use of numerical optimization for airfoil design. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 85-5026; 1985.
31. Aidala P, Davis W, Mason W. Smart aerodynamic optimization. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 83-1863; 1983.
32. Reuther J, Cliff S, Hicks R, van Dam C. Practical design optimization of wing/body configurations using the Euler equations. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 92-2633; 1992.
33. Hager J, Eyi S, Lee K. Design efficiency evaluation for transonic airfoil optimization: a case for Navier-Stokes design. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 93-3112; 1993.
34. Matsuzawa T., and Hafez M. Optimum shape design using adjoint equations for compressible flows with shock waves. Comput Fluid Dyn J 7 3 (1998) 74-89
35. Baysal O, Eleshaky M, Burgreen G. Aerodynamic shape optimization using sensitivity analysis on third-order Euler equations. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 91-1577; 1991.
36. Baysal O., and Eleshaky M. Aerodynamic design optimization using sensitivity analysis and computational fluid dynamics. AIAA J 30 (1992) 718-725
37. Baysal O. Flow analysis and design optimization methods for nozzle afterbody of a hypersonic vehicle. Technical Report CR 4431, NASA; 1992.
38. Newman III J, Taylor III A, Burgreen G. An unstructured grid approach to sensitivity analysis and shape optimization using the Euler equations. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 95-1646; 1995.
39. Newman III J, Taylor III A. Three dimensional aerodynamic shape sensitivity analysis and design optimization using the Euler equations on unstructured grids. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 96-2464; 1996.
40. Taylor III A, Newman III J, Barnwell R. Aerodynamic shape sensitivity analysis and design optimization of complex configurations on unstructured grids. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 97-2275; 1997.
41. Shubin G. Obtaining cheap optimization gradients from computational aerodynamics codes. Technical Report AMS-TR-164, Boeing Computer Service, Applied Mathematics and Statistics, June; 1991.
42. Dwight R, Brezillon J. Adjoint algorithms for the optimization of 3d turbulent configurations. In: Proceedings of the 15th STAB symposium; 2006.
43. Dwight R., and Brezillon J. Effect of approximations of the discrete adjoint on gradient-based optimization. AIAA J 44 12 (2006) 3022-3071
44. Griewank A. Evaluating derivatives, principles and techniques of algorithmic differentiation, No. 19 in Frontiers in Applied Mathematics, SIAM, Philadelphia; 2000, ISBN 08-987-1451-6.
45. In: Corliss G., Le Faure C., Griewank A., Hascoét L., and Naumann U. (Eds). Automatic differentiation: from simulation to optimization, computer and information science (2001), Springer
46. Ghate D, Giles M. Hessian calculation using automatic differentiation. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 2007-4059; 2007.
47. Abergel F., and Temam R. On some control problems in fluid mechanics. Theor Comput Fluid Dyn 1 1 (1990) 303-325
48. Giles M, Pierce N. An introduction to the adjoint approach to design. In: Proceedings of ERCOFTAC workshop on adjoint methods; 1999.
49. Jameson A. Optimum aerodynamic design via boundary control. In: AGARD-FDP-VKI special course; 1994.
50. Gauger N., and Brezillon J. Aerodynamic shape optimization using the adjoint method. J Aero Soc India 54 3 (2002) 247-254
51. Anderson W., and Venkatakrishnan V. Aerodynamic design optimization on unstructured grids with a continuous adjoint formulation. Comput Fluids 29 (1998) 443-480
52. Jameson A. Aerodynamic shape optimization using the adjoint method. In: VKI course in optimization; 2003.
53. Hiernaux S, Essers J-A. An optimal control theory based algorithm to solve 2d aerodynamic shape optimisation problems for inviscid and viscous flows. In: Proceedings of the RTO-AVT symposium on aerodynamic design and optimisation of flight vehicles; 1999.
54. Hiernaux S, Hessers J. Aerodynamic optimization using Navier-Stokes equations and optimal control theory. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 99-3297; 1999.
55. Giles M, Pierce N. Adjoint equations in CFD: duality, boundary conditions and solution behaviour. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 97-1850; 1997.
56. Iollo A, Salas M, Ta'asan S. Shape optimization governed by the Euler equations using an adjoint method. Technical Report 93-78, ICASE; 1993.
57. Iollo A., and Salas M. Contribution to the optimal shape design of two-dimensional internal flows with embedded shocks. J Comput Phys 125 (1996) 124-134
58. Cliff E, Heikenschloss M, Shenoy A. On the optimality system for a 1d Euler flow problem. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 96-3993; 1996.
59. Giles M, Pierce N. On the properties of solutions of the adjoint Euler equations. In: Proceedings of the 6th ICFD conference on numerical method for fluid dynamics, Oxford; 1998.
60. Gunzburger M. Sensitivities, adjoint and flow optimization. Int J Numer Methods Fluids 35 (1999) 53-78
61. Bardos C., and Pironneau O. Derivatives and control in the presence of shocks. Comput Fluid Dyn J 11 4 (2003) 383-392
62. Mohammadi B., and Pironneau O. Optimal shape design for fluids. Ann Rev Fluids Mech 36 (2004) 255-279
63. Pironneau O. Shape sensitivities and design for fluids with shocks. Int J Comput Fluid Dyn 17 14 (2003) 235-242
64. Pelletier D, Turgeon E, Lacasse D, Boorggaard J. Adaptivity, sensitivity and uncertainty: towards standards in CFD. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 2001-0192; 2001.
65. Pelletier D, Turgeon E, Etienne S, Boorggaard J. Reliable sensitivity analysis via an adaptive sensitivity equation method. In: AIAA Paper Series, Paper 2002-2578; 2002.
66. Brezillon J., and Gauger N. 2D and 3D aerodynamic shape optimization using the adjoint approach. Aerospace Sci Technol J 8 8 (2004) 715-727
67. Jameson A, Alonso J, Reuther J, Martinelli L, Vassberg J. Aerodynamic shape optimization techniques based on control theory. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 98-2538; 1998.
68. Weinerfelt P, Enoksson O. Numerical methods for aerodynamic optimization. In: Proceedings of the 8th international symposium on CFD, Swansea, Wales; 1999.
69. Soto O., Löhner R., and Yang C. An adjoint-based design methodology for CFD problems. Int J Numer Methods Heat Fluid Flow 14 6 (2004) 734-759
70. Jameson A, Sriram, Martinelli L, Haimes B. Aerodynamic shape optimization of complete aircraft configurations using unstructured grids. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 2007-4060; 2007.
71. Castro C, Lozano C, Palacios F, Zuazua E. A systematic continuous adjoint approach to viscous aerodynamic design on unstructured grids. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 2006-0051; 2006.
72. Widhalm M, Ronzheimer A, Hepperle M. Comparison between gradient-free and adjoint based aerodynamic optimization of a flying wing transport aircraft in the preliminary design. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 2007-4060; 2007.
73. Nadarajah S, Jameson A. Studies of continuous and discrete adjoint approaches to viscous automatic aerodynamic shape optimization. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 2001-2530; 2001.
74. Giles M., and Pierce N. Analytic adjoint solutions for the quasi-one-dimensional Euler equations. J Fluid Mech 426 (2001) 327-345
75. Hartmann R, Derivation of an adjoint consistent discontinuous Galerkin discretization of the compressible Euler equations. In: Lube G, Rapin G, editors. Proceedings of the BAIL conference, Goettingen; 2006.
76. Dwight R, Han Z-H. Efficient uncertainty quantification using gradient-enhanced Kriging. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 2009-2276; 2009.
77. Nielsen E., and Anderson W. Aerodynamic design optimization on unstructured meshes using the Navier-Stokes equations. AIAA J 37 11 (1999) 185-191
78. Giles M., Duta M., Muller J.-D., and Pierce N. Algorithm developments for discrete adjoint methods. AIAA J 41 2 (2003) 198-205
79. Le Moigne A, Qin N. A discrete adjoint method for aerodynamic sensitivities for Navier-Stokes. In: Proceedings of CEAS Cambridge; 2002.
80. Kim C, Kim C, Rho O, Lee S. Aerodynamic sensitivity analysis for the Navier-Stokes equations. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 99-0402; 1999.
81. Pham C. Linéarisation du flux visqueux des equations de Navier-Stokes et de modéles de turbulence pour l'optimisation aérodynamique en turbomachines. Ph.D. thesis, L'Ecole Nationale Supérieure d'Arts et Métiers, September; 2006.
82. Giles M, Duta M, Muller J. Adjoint code developments using the exact discrete approach. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 2001-2596; 2001.
83. Anderson W, Bonhaus D. Aerodynamic design on unstructured grids for turbulent flows. Technical Report TM 112867, NASA; 1997.
84. Anderson W., and Bonhaus D. Airfoil design optimization on unstructured grids for turbulent flows. AIAA J 37 2 (1999) 185-191
85. Nielsen E., and Anderson W. Recent improvements in aerodynamic design optimization on unstructured meshes. AIAA J 40 6 (2002) 1155-1163
86. Nemec N, Zingg D. Towards efficient aerodynamic shape optimization based on the Navier-Stokes equations. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 2001-2532; 2001.
87. Brezillon J., and Dwight R. Discrete adjoint of the Navier-Stokes equations for aerodynamic shape optimization. Evolutionary and deterministic methods for design (2005), EUROGEN, Munich
88. Kim C., Kim C., and Rho O. Sensitivity analysis for the Navier-Stokes equations with two equations turbulence models. AIAA J 39 5 (2001) 838-845
89. Kim C, Kim C, Rho O. Effects of constant eddy viscosity assumption on gradient-based design optimization. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 2002-0262; 2002.
90. Renac F, Pham C-T, Peter J. Sensitivity analysis for the RANS equations coupled with a linearized turbulence model. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 2007-3948; 2007.
91. Peter J, Mayeur J. Improving accuracy and robustness of a discrete direct differentiation method and discrete adjoint method for aerodynamic shape optimization. In: Proceedings of ECCOMAS, Egmond ann Zee; 2006.
92. Jameson A, Pierce N, Martinelli L. Optimum aerodynamic design using the Navier-Stokes equations. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 97-101; 1997.
93. Soemarwoto B. The variational method for aerodynamic optimization using the Navier-Stokes equations. Technical Report 97-71, ICASE, December; 1997.
94. Valentin V. Optimisation aérodynamique 3d des aubages dans les turbomachines axiales multi-etages. Ph.D. thesis, Université Paris 6, June; 2002.
95. Hou G, Maroju V, Taylor A, Korivi V, Newman P. Transonic turbulent airfoil design optimization with automatic differentiation in incremental iterative form. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 97-0101; 1995.
96. Mohammadi B. A new optimal shape design procedure for inviscid and viscous flows. Int J Numer Methods Fluids 25 2 (1997) 183-203
97. Bischof C., Buecker H., and Rasch A. Sensitivity analysis of turbulence models using automatic differentiation. SIAM J Sci Comput 26 2 (2005) 510-522
98. Mavriplis D. Multigrid solution of the discrete adjoint for optimization problems on unstructured meshes. AIAA J 2006;44(1):42-50, Paper 0001-1452.
99. Beux F., and Dervieux A. Exact-gradient shape optimization of a 2d Euler flow. Finite Elem Anal Design 12 (1992) 281-302
100. Beux F, Dervieux A. A hierarchical approach for shape optimization. Technical Report 1868, INRIA; 1993.
101. Marco N, Beux F. Multilevel optimization: Application to one-shot shape optimum design. Technical Report 2068, INRIA; 1993.
102. Marco N, Dervieux A. Multilevel parameterization for aerodynamical optimization of 3d shapes. Technical Report 2949, INRIA; 1996.
103. Nielsen E, Anderson W. Aerodynamic design optimization on structured meshes using the Navier-Stokes equations. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 98-4809; 1998.
104. Peter J, Drullion F, Pham C-T. Contribution to discrete implicit gradient and discrete adjoint method for aerodynamic shape optimization. In: Proceedings of ECCOMAS, Jyvaskyla; 2004.
105. Meaux M, Cormery M, Voizard G. Viscous aerodynamic shape optimization based on the discrete adjoint state for 3d industrial configurations. In: Proceedings of ECCOMAS, Jyvaskyla; 2004.
106. Kuruvila G, Narducci R, Agrawal S. Development and application of TLNS3d-Adjoint: a practical tool for aerodynamic shape optimization. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 2001-2400; 2001.
107. Mohammadi B. Dynamical approaches and incomplete gradients for shape optimization and flow control. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 99-3374; 1999.
108. Medic G, Mohammadi B, Petruzzelli N, Stanciu M, Hecht F. 3d optimal shape design for complex flows: applications to turbomachinery. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 99-0182; 1999.
109. Mohammadi B. Flow control and shape optimization in aeroelastic configurations. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 99-0182; 1999.
110. Kim H.-J., Obayashi S., and Nakahashi K. Flap-deflection optimization for transonic cruise performance improvement of supersonic transport wing. J Aircraft 38 4 (2001) 709-717
111. Kim C., Kim C., and Rho O. Feasibility study of the constant eddy-viscosity assumption in gradient-based design optimization. J Aircraft 40 (2003) 1168-1176
112. Newman III J., Taylor III A., Hou G.-W., and Jones H. An approximately factored incremental strategy for calculating consistent discrete aerodynamic sensitivity derivatives. J Comput Phys 113 (1994) 336-346
113. Nemec M., and Zingg D. A Newton-Krylov algorithm for aerodynamic design using the Navier-Stokes equations. AIAA J 40 6 (2002) 1146-1154
114. Giles M. On the iterative solution of the adjoint equations. In: Automatic differentiation: from simulation to optimization; 2001. p. 145-52.
115. Christianson B. Reverse accumulation and attractive fixed points. Optim Methods Softw 3 4 (1994) 311-326
116. Nielsen E, Lu J, Park M, Darmofal D. An exact dual adjoint solution method for turbulent flows on unstructured grids. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 2003-0272; 2003.
117. Dwight R. Efficiency improvements of RANS-based analysis and optimization using implicit and adjoint methods on unstructured grids. Ph.D. thesis, School of Mathematics, University of Manchester; 2006.
118. Giles M. On the use of Runge-Kutta time-marching and multigrid for the solution of the steady adjoint equations. In: AD2000 conference in Nice; 2000.
119. Nielsen E., and Park M. Using an adjoint approach to eliminate mesh sensitivities in aerodynamic design. AIAA J 44 5 (2005) 948-953
120. Nielsen E. Aerodynamic design sensitivities on an unstructured mesh using the Navier-Stokes equations and a discrete adjoint formulation. Ph.D. thesis, Virginia State University; 1998.
121. Campobasso M., and Giles M. Stabilization of a linear flow solver for turbomachinery aeroelasticity by means of the recursive projection method. AIAA J 42 9 (2004) 1765-1774
122. Campobasso M., and Giles M. Stabilizing linear harmonic flow solvers for turbomachinery aeroelasticity with complex iterative algorithms. AIAA J 44 5 (2006) 1048-1059
123. Saad Y., and Schultz M.H. GMRES: a generalized minimum residual algorithm for solving non-symmetric linear systems. SIAM J Sci Stat Comput 7 3 (1988) 856-859
124. Schroff G., and Keller H. Stabilization of unstable procedures: the recursive projection method. SIAM J Numer Anal 30 4 (1993) 1099-1120
125. Keller H. RPM: a remedy for instability. In: Estep D, Tavener S, editors. Collected lectures on the preservation of stability under discretization, SIAM Proceedings in applied mathematics, vol. 109; 2002. p. 185-96.
126. Mani K, Mavriplis D. An unsteady discrete adjoint formulation for two-dimensional flow problems with deforming meshes. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 2007-0060; 2007.
127. Jakobsson S., and Amoignon O. Mesh deformation using radial basis functions for gradient-based aerodynamic shape optimization. Comput Fluids 36 (2007) 1119-1136
128. Sherman L., Taylor III A., Green L., Newman A., Hou G., and Korivi V. First- and second-order aerodynamic sensitivity derivatives via automatic differentiation with incremental iterative methods. J Comput Phys 129 (1996) 307-331
129. Bischof C., Carle A., Corliss G., Griewank A., and Hovland P. The ADIFOR 2.0 system for the automatic differentiation of Fortran 77 programs. Sci Program 187 (1992) 1-29
130. Taylor III A., Green L., Newman P., and Putko M. Some advanced concepts in discrete sensitivity analysis. AIAA J 48 7 (2003) 1224-1229
131. Guillaume P., and Masmoudi M. Computation of high order derivatives in optimal shape design. J Numer Math 67 (1994) 231-250
132. Aubert S, Tournier J, Rochette M, Blanche J, N'Diaye M, Melem M, et al. Optimisation of a gas mixer using a new parametric solver. In: Proceedings of ECCOMAS CFD, Swansea, Wales; 2001.
133. Hascoët L. TAPENADE: a tool for automatic differentiation of programs. In: Proceedings of 4th European congress on computational methods, ECCOMAS 2004, Jyvaskyla, Finland; 2004.
134. Wakayama S. Lifting surfaces design using multidisciplinary optimization. Ph.D. thesis, Stanford University, June; 1994.
135. Fazzolari A. An aero-structure adjoint formulation for efficient multidisciplinary wing optimization. Ph.D. thesis, Technical University of Braunschweig, September; 2005.
136. Sobieszczanski-Sobieski J. Sensitivity of complex internally coupled systems. AIAA J 28 1 (1990) 153-160
137. Haftka R. Structural optimization with aeroelastic constraints: a survey of U.S. applications. Int J Vehicle Des 7 (1986) 381-392
138. Bowman K., Grandhi R., and Eastep F. Aerodynamic design optimization using sensitivity analysis and computational fluid dynamics. J Struct Optim 1 (1989) 153-161
139. Friedmann P. Helicopter vibration reduction using structural optimization with aeroelastic/multidisciplinary constraints: a survey. AIAA J 28 (1991) 8-21
140. Barthelemy J.-F., Wrenn G., Dovi A., and Hall L. Supersonic transport wing minimum design integrating aerodynamics and structures. J Aircraft 31 (1994) 330-338
141. Giunta A, Sobieszczanski-Sobieski J. Progress toward using sensitivity derivatives in a high-fidelity aeroelastic analysis of a supersonic transport. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 98-4763; 1998.
142. Ghattas O., and Li X. Domain decomposition methods for the sensitivity analysis of a nonlinear aeroelastic problem. Int J Comput Fluid Dyn 11 (1998) 113-130
143. Moller H, Lund E. Shape sensitivity analysis of strongly coupled fluid-structure interaction problems. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 2000-4823; 2000.
144. Maute K, Lesoinne N, Farhat C. Optimization of aeroelastic systems using coupled analytical sensitivities. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 2000-0560; 2000.
145. Hou G, Satyanarayana A. Analytical sensitivity analysis of a static aeroelastic wing. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 2000-4824; 2000.
146. Maute K., Nikbay N., and Farhat C. Coupled analytical sensitivity analysis and optimization of three-dimensional nonlinear aeroelastic systems. AIAA J 39 11 (2001) 2051-2061
147. Martins J, Alonso J, Reuther J. High-fidelity aero-structural design optimization of a supersonic business jet. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 2002-1483; 2002.
148. Farhat C., Lesoinne M., and Maman N. Mixed explicit/implicit time integration of coupled aeroelastic problems: three-field formulation, geometric conservation and distributed solution. Int J Numer Methods Fluids 21 (1995) 807-835
149. Jameson A. Re-engineering the design process through computation. J Aircraft 36 1 (1999) 36-50
150. Reuther J., Jameson A., Remlinger M., and Saunders D. Constrained multi-point aerodynamic shape optimization using an adjoint formulation and parallel computers, Part I. J Aircraft 36 1 (1999) 51-60
151. Reuther J., Jameson A., Remlinger M., and Saunders D. Constrained multi-point aerodynamic shape optimization using an adjoint formulation and parallel computers, Part II. J Aircraft 36 1 (1999) 61-74
152. Leoviriyakit K, Jameson A. Aero-structural wing planform optimization. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 2004-0029; 2004.
153. Leoviriyakit K, Jameson A. Multi-point wing planform optimization via control theory. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 2005-0450; 2005.
154. Jameson A, Leoviriyakit K, Shankaran S. Multi-point aero-structural optimization of wings including planform variations. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 2007-764; 2007.
155. Campobasso M, Duta M, G MB. Adjoint calculation of sensitivities of turbomachinery objective functions. AIAA J Propulsion Power 2003;19(4):693-703.
156. Duta M., Giles M., and Campobasso M. The harmonic adjoint approach to unsteady turbomachinery design. Int J Numer Methods Fluids 40 3-4 (2002) 323-332
157. Gerhold T, Galle M, Friedrich O, Evans J. Calculation of complex 3d configurations employing the DLR TAU-Code. In: AIAA paper series, Paper 97-0167; 1997.
158. Mouton S, Laurenceau J, Carrier G. Aerodynamic and structural optimization of powerplant integration under the wing of a transonic transport aircraft. In: Proceedings of 42th AAAF symposium on applied aerodynamics, Nice; 2007.
159. Salah El Din I, Carrier G, Mouton S. Discrete adjoint method in elsA (Part 2): application to aerodynamic design optimisation. In: Proceedings of the ONERA-DLR aerospace symposium (ODAS), Toulouse; 2006.