The role of epistemic uncertainty of contact models in the design and optimization of mechanical systems with aleatoric uncertainty

被引:0
|
作者
M. R. Brake
机构
[1] Sandia National Laboratories,
来源
Nonlinear Dynamics | 2014年 / 77卷
关键词
Impact mechanics; Design optimization; Epistemic uncertainty; Aleatoric uncertainty; Dynamics; Contact;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Epistemic uncertainty, the uncertainty in the physical model used to represent a phenomenon, has a significant effect on the predictions of simulations of mechanical systems, particularly in systems with impact events. Impact dynamics can have a significant effect on a system’s functionality, stability, wear, and failure. Because high-fidelity models of systems with impacts often are too computationally intensive to be useful as design tools, rigid body dynamics and reduced order model simulations are used often, with the impact events modeled by ad hoc methods such as a constant coefficient of restitution or penalty stiffness. The choice of impact model, though, can have significant ramifications on design predictions. The effects of both epistemic and aleatoric (parametric) uncertainty in the choice of contact model are investigated in this paper for a representative multiple-degree of freedom mechanical system. Six contact models are considered in the analysis: two different constant coefficient of restitution models, a piecewise-linear stiffness and damping (i.e., Kelvin–Voight) model, two similar elastic-plastic constitutive models, and one dissimilar elastic-plastic constitutive model. Results show that the optimal mechanism design for each contact model appears extremely different. Further, the effects due to epistemic uncertainty are differentiated clearly in the response from the effects due to aleatoric uncertainty. Lastly, when the mechanisms are optimized to be robust against aleatoric uncertainty, the resulting designs show some robustness against epistemic uncertainty.
引用
收藏
页码:899 / 922
页数:23
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Multi-Fidelity Design Optimization under Epistemic Uncertainty
    Hou, Liqiang
    Tan, Wei
    Ma, Hong
    2016 IEEE CONGRESS ON EVOLUTIONARY COMPUTATION (CEC), 2016, : 4452 - 4459
  • [32] Uncertainty Theory-Based Structural Reliability Analysis and Design Optimization under Epistemic Uncertainty
    Zhou, Shuang
    Zhang, Jianguo
    Zhang, Qingyuan
    Huang, Ying
    Wen, Meilin
    APPLIED SCIENCES-BASEL, 2022, 12 (06):
  • [33] Aleatoric Uncertainty for Errors-in-Variables Models in Deep Regression
    J. Martin
    C. Elster
    Neural Processing Letters, 2023, 55 : 4799 - 4818
  • [34] Aleatoric Uncertainty for Errors-in-Variables Models in Deep Regression
    Martin, J.
    Elster, C.
    NEURAL PROCESSING LETTERS, 2023, 55 (04) : 4799 - 4818
  • [35] Epistemic uncertainty, risk management and information: the role of the detailed design
    Talamo, Cinzia
    Paganin, Giancarlo
    Atta, Nazly
    Rota, Francesco
    TECHNE-JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY FOR ARCHITECTURE AND ENVIRONMENT, 2019, 18 : 164 - 173
  • [36] Fuel performance uncertainty quantification and sensitivity analysis in the presence of epistemic and aleatoric sources of uncertainties
    Faure, Quentin
    Delipei, Gregory
    Petruzzi, Alessandro
    Avramova, Maria
    Ivanov, Kostadin
    FRONTIERS IN ENERGY RESEARCH, 2023, 11
  • [37] Epistemic Uncertainty, Rival Models, and Closure
    Taylor, C.
    Murnane, R.
    Graf, W.
    Lee, Y.
    NATURAL HAZARDS REVIEW, 2013, 14 (01) : 42 - 51
  • [38] Epistemic Uncertainty Propagation in Power Models
    Gribaudo, Marco
    Pinciroli, Riccardo
    Trivedi, Kishor
    ELECTRONIC NOTES IN THEORETICAL COMPUTER SCIENCE, 2018, 337 : 67 - 86
  • [39] Statistical model calibration and design optimization under aleatory and epistemic uncertainty
    Jung, Yongsu
    Jo, Hwisang
    Choo, Jeonghwan
    Lee, Ikjin
    RELIABILITY ENGINEERING & SYSTEM SAFETY, 2022, 222
  • [40] Integration of possibility-based optimization and robust design for epistemic uncertainty
    Youn, Byeng D.
    Choi, Kyung K.
    Du, Liu
    Gorsich, David
    JOURNAL OF MECHANICAL DESIGN, 2007, 129 (08) : 876 - 882