Lecture 5

Engineering design optimization

Lecture 5: Alternative views on optimization.

Alternative views on optimization

P Problem 2.2 again-again P Bridge topology design problem P Optimization as an analysis tool P Optimization as a design principle P Optimality of biological systems P Ergonomic Optimization P AnyBody Demo

To read:
P From my homepage, www.ime.auc.dk/~jr/lecturenotes.htm: < Paper on Ergonomic Optimization of a Bicycle

John Rasmussen, Institute of Mechanical Engineering, Aalborg University, 2001

Problem 2.2
Solution
We must find out how much gasoline (G) and how much lube (L) to produce. The objective function is the profit: F = 50G + 120L - 30A - 36B Each crude oil, A and B, are separated into a thin part, G, and a thick part, L. So when we know how much A and B we use, we can also compute how much G and L is produced: G = 0.6A + 0.8B, L = 0.4A + 0.2B So we can eliminate G and L from the objective function: F = 50(0.6A + 0.8B) + 120(0.4A + 0.2B) - 30A - 36B = 48A + 28B We have constraints on resources of A and B and of the market for G and L: A # 20000 B # 30000 G = 0.6A + 0.8B # 20000 L = 0.4A + 0.2B # 10000 Solution: A=20000, B=10000, G=20000, L=10000, Profit=1240000

This means: We get 0.6 bbl of gas and 0.4 bbl lube out of one bbl A. It does NOT mean that we need 0.6 parts A and 0.8 parts B to produce one part gas.

Problem 2.2 (contd)

What happens if we formulate the problem in G and L instead?
The objective function is still F = 50G + 120L - 30A - 36B Our relationships between A , B, G and L are still given by: G = 0.6A + 0.8B, L = 0.4A + 0.2B From which we can isolate A and B: A = -G + 4L, B = 2G - 3L We substitute into the objective function F = 50G + 120L - 30(-G+4L) - 36(2G-3L) = 8G + 108L The resource and market constraints: A = -G + 4L # 20000 B = 2G - 3L # 30000 G # 20000 L # 10000 Solution: A=20000, B=10000, G=20000, L=10000, Profit = 1240000

Bridge topology problem

What happens if we move the load?

The first attempt

- looks a little strange

The second attempt

- with less stiff void material

How can void support a load? The truth is it cannot. But the blue parts are not completely void. The blue material is only 100 times less stiff than the red material. If we make the blue material 100000 times less stiff than the red material, we get a different result.
John Rasmussen, Institute of Mechanical Engineering, Aalborg University, 2001

Now the load has a support, but it is not fully developed. To achieve this requires more elements and more iterations.

Optimization as an analysis tool

We usually consider analysis as something thats used inside optimization as a subroutine. It can also be the other way around. Many physical phenomena are based on optimality, and analyzing them entails using this property actively.
PMechanical systems come to rest at a state of minimum energy P Drops of water take on shapes determined by minimum surface tension energy, possibly in concert with the work performed by a surrounding air pressure P Biological systems strive to minimize energy consumption to maximize the chance of survival

Mechanical systems in equilibrium

- a spring system subjected to a force

The system comes to rest - where the spring forces are in equilibrium with P1 and P2 - where the total potential energy is minimum. Either priciple will give us the solution.

Equilibrium condition
- the usual way to solve this kind of problem

Equilibrium cond. (contd)

Expressions for angles

l1

a1

l1

a1

a2 l2

Equilibrium i X1 and X2 gives: l2

a2

Equilibrium cond. (contd)

We obtain the rather complicated equations

Minimum potential energy

The potential energy of the system can be expressed as

l1

a1

a2 l2

We insert the numbers, solve the equations, and obtain X1 = 8.24; X2 = 4.76.
John Rasmussen, Institute of Mechanical Engineering, Aalborg University, 2001

This is obviously much simpler. You can put it into your spreadsheet and minimize it very easily.

Contact condition
The minimum energy principle still applies, but the equilibrium problem is much more complicated.

Optimality as a design principle

Optimality as an aesthetical quality?
We usually optimize to improve the technical performance of some product, process, business, etc. But how does this fit into design theory, and where do the aesthetical properties of the design come in?

The objective function is the same. Now we just have to add a constraint on X1 and X2 corresponding to the contact wall.

Design Theory
The Vitruvian Approach
Marcus Vitruvius Pollio, Roman architect and scientist, appr. 90-20 b.C. His 10-volume thesis De architectura libri decem about architecture and engineering science is the first known methodical description of design, and it became fundamental to designers in centuries after his death.

The Vitruvian Columns

Utilitas - Firmitas - Venustas

This pointless design illustrates Vitruvius columns. Access to the platform is provided by the ladder, thus representing utilitas. The platform is supported by the big column representing firmitas. Finally, a curtain has been added to partly hide the column and ladder - Venustas. But there is no synergy between the elements, and the arrangement is neither pretty, interesting, functional, or, for that matter, particularly useful.

The Vitruvian perception of design is built upon three columns: Utilitas, Firmitas and Venustas, which between them represent the qualities of design. Even today, most design can be understood according to the Vitruvian perception. The quality of a product appears due to the synergy between the columns.

Vitruvian perception
Binary combinations of columns

Vitruvian synergy
Design by Santiago Calatrava
Model of a bridge over the Vecchio.

Machine
Utilitas Firmitas

Plastic cups
Venustas

Sculpture

The harmonic visual expression follows from the bridges structure being so cleary visible and harmonic. A beatiful example of synergy between firmitas og venustas.

John Rasmussen, Institute of Mechanical Engineering, Aalborg University, 2001

Vitruvian synergy in products

Cars are both fuctionality and lifestyle

Synergy in shape
Cast your vote: which geometry is more interesting?

Car designers try to bring out the qualities of a given car in its exterior design. The family car should look practical and spatious. The sports car should look fast and aerodynamic. Car designers confirm unofficially that aerodynamics is not really important to them. But it is important that the car looks aerodynamic.

Natures design
Natures design is optimized from criteria of functionality and durability. Aesthetics in the human interpretation does not play any role. And yet we see natures designs as strikingly beautiful.
We are either equipped with a natural inclination towards natural shapes, or the natural, Darwinian optimization of firmitas and utilitas creates enough synergy to appear beautiful.

Nature as inspiration
Even classical ornamentation can find its roots in nature.

The towers of the city?

Forged iron?

Art in silver?

John Rasmussen, Institute of Mechanical Engineering, Aalborg University, 2001

So lets get back to optimization

Optimality as a design principle
In optimization we can only deal with firmitas and possibly utilitas (remember the topology-optimized actuator). But perhaps optimal structures posses a natural beauty (remember natures designs). If so, optimality becomes an aesthetic design principle. We simply tend to appreciate things that are well made. Optimization is often capable of finding creative combinations of the design elements that can benefit several criteria at once - the objective and the constraints. This is synergy!

Rokoko furniture?

Biomechanics
Modeling the mechanical behavior of living structures, mainly humans
P Living structures are results of Darwinistic development - an optimization process. Optimality is their design principle. P They also behave optimally (well, if they dont think too much about it).
< Example: many years of attempts to create an artificial heart have still not been successful. < Example: we are still unable to create a joint that works as well and is as durable as natural joints

The body is a mechanical robot

- consisting of body segments connected by joints and driven by muscle actuators

It has two types of indeterminacies:

# Kinematic indeterminacy (because we have redundant degrees of freedom for most movements) # Statical indeterminacy because we have more muscles than degrees of freedom
We can solve these indeterminacies by assuming that the body behaves optimally.

P So predicting the behavoir of living creatures can be done by assuming that they do things optimally. P Just like the mechanical system we assume comes to rest at an optimal energy state.

Inverse Dynamics
- the analysis method
Input: Geometry, anthropometry, motion External forces, environmental constraints

Statical Indeterminacy
More than one muscle for each degree of freedom

Biceps Brachii
Analysis: Position, velocity, acceleration Equilibrium

Brachialis

Output: Positions, velocities, accelerations Forces, relative forces Work, power, metabolism, efficiency

Brachioradialis

Solution: Distribute muscle force by an optimality criterion.

John Rasmussen, Institute of Mechanical Engineering, Aalborg University, 2001

Lombards Paradox
- an example of the bodys strange behavior
Tyngdepunkt 800 N e 800 N e CoG

Optimization explains
We assume that the body strives to postpose fatigue
0.7 0.6 0.5

The fact that the hamstrings are active when you rise from sitting position is Lombards paradox (Lombard 1903).
ilio-psoas rectus femoris vasti

RF/VAS TA GM SOL HA GA
-10 0
Excentricity, e [mm]

gluteus maximus hamstrings short biceps gastrocnemius soleus

Such antagonistic muscles are found in many ordinary movements. They can be understood if we assume that the body strives to postpone fatigue as far as possible.

gluteus maximus hamstrings Short biceps gastrocnemius soleus

ilio-psoas rectus femoris vasti

0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0

30

60

90

tibialis anterior

tibialis anterior

Muscle distribution problem

Mathematical formulation

min max
i

Fi 0) Fmax,i(L,L

Minimization problem Dynamic equilibrium Muscles cannot push

CF ' r Fi $ 0, i 0 {1..na}
John Rasmussen, Institute of Mechanical Engineering, Aalborg University, 2001

Min/max problems are not differentiable

A non-differentiable objective function is very difficult to handle mathematically

Bound formulation
The differentiability problem can be solved very elegantly by a simple reformulation

Fi(x)

min $ Fi 0) Fmax,i(L,L CF ' r Fi $ 0, i 0 {1..na} #$

max(Fi(x))

This problem has the same solution as the original, but it is linear and differentiable and can be solved very efficiently

The AnyBody System From metabolism to work

How the body creates and looses mechanical energy Energy is lost because
Metabolism creates ATP

We are developing the AnyBody body modeling system. It models smaller or larger parts of the human musculoskeletal system and can use the parameters of the models as design variables in optimization problems.
P Technology: C++, MS-Windows, MFC, OpenGL, ActiveX P Hill-type muscle models P Full 3-D modeling P Rigid elements except for elastic tendons P Analyzes down to individual muscle level P Handles very large problems > 100 muscles

Muscles burn ATP and perform work on tendons

Tendons perform work on the skeleton

Skeleton performs work against the environment

# Muscles burn ATP with an efficiency of between -120% and 25% # Negative muscle work requires positive energy input # Tendons are elastic and store potential energy

Biomechanical Optimization
- to invert inverse dynamics

Kinematical indeterminacy
- in pedaling

Optimization

In pedaling we assume the thigh to be hinged at the hip, and the foot to be hinged at the pedal. This leaves one unknown kinematical degree of freedom for each leg, for instance the foot angle.
Output forces, work, power, metabolism, efficiency

This takes care of the second type of indeterminacy: the kinematic indeterminacy. We can assume that the body moves optimally.

Input geometry, motion, external forces

Analysis position, velocity, acceleration, equilibrium

In addition the rider applies varying pedal forces over the cycle. This variation can take many different forms. It turns out that, if we assume the rider tries to minimize energy consumption, then we can optimize our way to the pedal motion pattern of a real bicycle rider.

Analysis
John Rasmussen, Institute of Mechanical Engineering, Aalborg University, 2001

Optimization of Foot Angle Control

70 60 50 40 30 20 0 Crank torque initial optimized
180 90 270 Crank angle from top dead center [deg]

Types of design variables

- some types must be present
P The kinematically indeterminate segment motions. In pedaling, the foot angle. P The voluntary force application pattern. In pedaling, the forces the rider chooses to apply to the pedals. P The design of the machine/working condition that forms the boundary condition for the motion.

Foot angle optimized initial

50 40 30 20 10 0
360 -10

The third category can generally not exist in the absence of the two first! If that happens, we are assuming that the bodys motion is independent of the working condition. This would not be reasonable.

Applications

Demo of AnyBody
- a short preview of the AnyBody system Analysis of steering forces

This type of analysis and optimization can solve practical problems in many different fields.
P Ergonomic design of tools, sports equipment, workplaces, driver spaces in cars, gym equipment, disability aids, furniture, etc. P Identification of loads on implants and prostheses. P Analysis of forces in individual muscles and joints during given tasks, and thereby identification of possible causes of musculo-skeletal disorders. P Optimization of movement strategies in sports. P A more detailed understanding of the function and control of the musculoskeletal system. P Design of control systems for FES.

Exercises
.. for lecture 5/10
P Last chance to complete the exercises from previous lectures. P Download AnyBody from http://anybody.auc.dk/20010306.zip, and install it on your computer P Run the assignment on the next pages

AnyBody Assignement
Investigate your bicycle
P Start AnyBody and choose the first template. P Click Window New explorer. This calls up a new spreadsheet-like window.

Grafer

Explorer
John Rasmussen, Institute of Mechanical Engineering, Aalborg University, 2001

Assignment (contd) Assignment (contd)

P Find parameters SeatVert og SeatHorz, which are horizontal and vertical distances between seat and crank respectively. Type in the values from your own bike or use the existing if you cannot measure your own bike. P Exspand the branch AnySeg and choose in turn thigh shank and foot, and type the correspondig dimensions of your own leg under Length. Prefix r and l are right and left leg respectively.

P Notice that the foot length is the distance from the ankle joint to the pedal axle. PWhen the correct data are entered, choose Operations Analysis.

Assignment (contd)
P When the analysis is done, go to the graph window and choose AnyMuscle MusclePower. The graphs show how much work each muscle is doing over one cycle. Keep an eye on negative contributions. They are not good for efficiency. P Go back to the Explore window and try to move the seat up, down, forward and back. Not too much. If the feet cannot touch the pedals, then the analyhsis breaks down. Repeat the analysis for each change and check the influence on negative muscle effects.

Assignment (contd)
What to look out for
P Initially, we must adjust the seat to have as small negative muscle powers as possible. P Secondly, the seat can be positioned to unload muscles that are too highhly loaded. Moving the seat forward can reduce the load on the front thigh muscles. Go on and try...

Negative contributions