Abstract
Multiobjective design optimization studies typically derive Pareto sets or use a scalar substitute function to capture design trade-offs, leaving it up to the designer’s intuition to use this information for design refinements and decision-making. Understanding the causality of trade-offs more deeply, beyond simple postoptimality parametric studies, would be particularly valuable in configuration design problems to guide configuration redesign. This article presents the method of multiobjective monotonicity analysis to identify root causes for the existence of trade-offs and the particular shape of Pareto sets. This analysis process involves reducing optimization models through constraint activity identification to a point where dependencies specific to the Pareto set and the constraints that cause them are revealed. The insights gained can then be used to target configuration design changes. We demonstrate the proposed approach in the preliminary design of a medical device for oral drug delivery.
Issue Section:
Design Automation
References
1.
Arthur
, W. B.
, 1993
, “Why Do Things Become More Complex?
,” Sci. Am.
, 268
(5
), p. 144
. 2.
Sobek
, D. K.
, Ward
, A. C.
, and Liker
, J. K.
, 1999
, “Toyota's Principles of Set-Based Concurrent Engineering Toyota's Principles of Set-Based Concurrent Engineering
,” Sloan Manage. Rev.
, 40
(2
), pp. 67
–83
.3.
Ahmed
, S.
, Wallace
, K. M.
, and Blessing
, L. T.
, 2003
, “Understanding the Differences Between How Novice and Experienced Designers Approach Design Tasks
,” Res. Eng. Des.
, 14
(1
), pp. 1
–11
. 4.
Pahl
, G.
, Beitz
, W.
, Feldhusen
, J.
, and Grote
, K.H.
, 2007
, Engineering Design: A Systematic Approach
, 3rd ed., Springer-Verlag London Limited
, London
, pp. 1
–629
.5.
Papalambros
, P. Y.
, and Shea
, K.
, 2001
, “Creating Structural Configurations,” Formal Engineering Design Synthesis
, E. K.
Antonsson
, J.
Cagan
, eds., Cambridge University Press
, Cambridge, UK
, pp. 93
–125
.6.
Ullman
, D. G.
, Dietterich
, T. G.
, and Stauffer
, L. A.
, 1988
, “A Model of the Mechanical Design Process Based on Empirical Data
,” Artif. Intell. Eng. Des. Anal. Manuf.
, 2
(1
), pp. 33
–52
. 7.
Suh
, N. P.
, 1998
, “Axiomatic Design Theory for Systems
,” Res. Eng. Des. Theory Appl. Concurr. Eng.
, 10
(4
), pp. 189
–209
. 8.
Sillitto
, H. G.
, 2009
, “On Systems Architects and Systems Architecting: Some Thoughts on Explaining and Improving the Art and Science of Systems Architecting
,” INCOSE International Symposium
, Singapore
, July 20–23
.9.
Andreasen
, M. M.
, and Howard
, T. J.
, 2011
, “Is Engineering Design Disappearing From Design Research?,” The Future of Design Methodology
, Birkhofer
, H.
, ed., Springer Verlag
, London
, pp. 21
–34
.10.
Shiau
, C.-S. N.
, and Michalek
, J. J.
, 2009
, “Should Designers Worry About Market Systems?
,” ASME J. Mech. Des.
, 131
(1
), p. 011011
. 11.
Purshouse
, R. C.
, and Fleming
, P. J.
, 2003
, “Conflict, Harmony, and Independence: Relationships in Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimisation,” Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimization
, Fonseca
, C. M.
, Fleming
, P. J.
, Zitzler
, E.
, Thiele
, L.
, Deb
, K.
, eds., Springer
, Berlin/Heidelberg
, pp. 16
–30
.12.
Das
, I.
, 1999
, “A Preference Ordering Among Various Pareto Optimal Alternatives
,” Struct. Optim.
, 18
(8
), pp. 30
–35
. 13.
Kelly
, J. C.
, Maheut
, P.
, Petiot
, J.-F.
, and Papalambros
, P. Y.
, 2011
, “Incorporating User Shape Preference in Engineering Design Optimisation
,” J. Eng. Des.
, 22
(9
), pp. 627
–650
. 14.
Marler
, R. T.
, and Arora
, J. S.
, 2004
, “Survey of Multi-Objective Optimization Methods for Engineering
,” Struct. Multidiscip. Optim.
, 26
(6
), pp. 369
–395
. 15.
Kasprzak
, E. M.
, and Lewis
, K. E.
, 2001
, “Pareto Analysis in Multiobjective Optimization Using the Collinearity Theorem and Scaling Method
,” Struct. Multidiscip. Optim.
, 22
(3
), pp. 208
–218
. 16.
Otto
, K. N.
, and Antonsson
, E. K.
, 1991
, “Trade-Off Strategies in Engineering Design
,” Res. Eng. Des.
, 3
(2
), pp. 87
–103
. 17.
Gunawan
, S.
, and Azarm
, S.
, 2005
, “Multi-Objective Robust Optimization Using a Sensitivity Region Concept
,” Struct. Multidiscip. Optim.
, 29
(1
), pp. 50
–60
. 18.
Mattson
, C. A.
, and Messac
, A.
, 2005
, “Pareto Frontier Based Concept Selection Under Uncertainty, With Visualization
,” Technical Report
, pp. 88
–115
.19.
Fonseca
, C. M.
, and Fleming
, P. J.
, 1998
, “Multiobjective Optimization and Multiple Constraint Handling With Evolutionary Algorithms—Part I: A Unified Formulation
,” IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A: Syst. Hum.
, 28
(1
), pp. 26
–37
. 20.
Unal
, M.
, Warn
, G. P.
, and Simpson
, T. W.
, 2016
, “Quantifying Tradeoffs to Reduce the Dimensionality of Complex Design Optimization Problems and Expedite Trade Space Exploration
,” Struct. Multidiscip. Optim.
, 54
(2
), pp. 233
–248
. 21.
Bendsøe
, M. P.
, and Kikuchi
, N.
, 1988
, “Generating Optimal Topologies in Structural Design Using a Homogenization Method
,” Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng.
, 71
(2
), pp. 197
–224
. 22.
Unal
, M.
, Warn
, G. P.
, and Simpson
, T. W.
, 2018
, “Quantifying the Shape of Pareto Fronts During Multi-Objective Trade Space Exploration
,” ASME J. Mech. Des.
, 140
(2
), p. 021402
. 23.
Das
, I.
, 1999
, “On Characterizing the ‘Knee” of the Pareto Curve Based on Normal-Boundary Intersection
,” Struct. Optim.
, 18
(10
), pp. 107
–115
. 24.
Frischknecht
, B.
, and Papalambros
, P.
, 2008
, “A Pareto Approach to Aligning Public and Private Objectives in Vehicle Design
,” ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences & Computers and Information in Engineering Conference
, Brooklyn, NY
, Aug. 3–6
.25.
Frischknecht
, B. D.
, Peters
, D. L.
, and Papalambros
, P. Y.
, 2011
, “Pareto Set Analysis: Local Measures of Objective Coupling in Multiobjective Design Optimization
,” Struct. Multidiscip. Optim.
, 43
(5
), pp. 617
–630
. 26.
Wu
, J.
, and Azarm
, S.
, 2001
, “Metrics for Quality Assessment of a Multiobjective Design Optimization Solution Set
,” ASME J. Mech. Des.
, 123
(1
), pp. 18
–25
. 27.
Athan
, T. W.
, and Papalambros
, P. Y.
, 1996
, “A Quasi-Monte Carlo Method for Multicriteria Design Optimization
,” Eng. Optim.
, 27
(3
), pp. 177
–198
. 28.
Papalambros
, P.
, and Wilde
, D. J.
, 1978
, “Global Non-Iterative Design Optimization Using Monotonicity Analysis
,” ASME J. Mech. Des.
, 101
(4
), pp. 645
–649
.29.
Michelena
, N. F.
, and Agogino
, A. M.
, 1988
, “Multiobjective Hydraulic Cylinder Design
,” ASME J. Mech. Transm. Autom. Des.
, 110
(1
), pp. 81
–87
. 30.
Gobbi
, M.
, Levi
, F.
, Mastinu
, G.
, and Previati
, G.
, 2015
, “On the Analytical Derivation of the Pareto-Optimal Set With Applications to Structural Design
,” Struct. Multidiscip. Optim.
, 51
(3
), pp. 645
–657
. 31.
Mastinu
, G.
, Gobbi
, M.
, and Miano
, C.
, 2006
, Optimal Design of Complex Mechanical Systems With Applications to Vehicle Engineering
, 1st ed., Springer Verlag
, Berlin/Heidelberg
, pp. 1
–359
.32.
Jain
, P.
, and Agogino
, A. M.
, 1990
, “Theory of Design: An Optimization Perspective
,” Mech. Mach. Theory
, 25
(3
), pp. 287
–303
. 33.
Ishii
, K.
, and Barkan
, P.
, 1987
, “Active Constraint Deduction—A Framework for Expert Systems in Mechanical Systems Design
,” ASME 1987 Design Technology Conferences
, Boston MA
, Sept. 27–30
.34.
Cagan
, J.
, and Agogino
, A. M.
, 1987
, “Innovative Design of Mechanical Structures From First Principles
,” Art. Intell. Eng. Des. Anal. Manufac.
, 1
(3
), pp. 169
–189
. 35.
Deb
, K.
, and Srinivasan
, A.
, 2006
, “Innovization: Innovating Design Principles Through Optimization
,” GECCO 2006 – Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference
, Seattle, WA
, July 8–12
, Vol. 2, pp. 1629
–1636
.36.
Papalambros
, P. Y.
, and Wilde
, D. J.
, 2017
, Principles of Optimal Design
, Cambridge University Press
, Cambridge, UK
.37.
Carmichael
, D.
, 1980
, “Computation of Pareto Optima in Structural Design
,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng.
, 15
(6
), pp. 925
–952
. 38.
Lin
, J. G.
, 1976
, “Maximal Vectors and Multi-Objective Optimization
,” J. Optim. Theory Appl.
, 18
(1
), pp. 41
–64
.39.
Mavrotas
, G.
, 2009
, “Effective Implementation of the -constraint Method in Multi-Objective Mathematical Programming Problems
,” Appl. Math. Comput.
, 213
(2
), pp. 455
–465
. 40.
Haimes
, Y. Y.
, and Hall
, W. A.
, 1974
, “Multiobjectives in Water Resource Systems Analysis: The Surrogate Worth Trade Off Method
,” Water Resour. Res.
, 10
(4
), pp. 615
–624
. 41.
Papalambros
, P. Y.
, 1994
, “Model Reduction and Verification Techniques,” Advances in Design Optimization
, Adeli
, H.
, ed., Chapman and Hall
, New York
, pp. 109
–138
.42.
Abramson
, A.
, Caffarel-Salvador
, E.
, Khang
, M.
, Dellal
, D.
, Silverstein
, D.
, Gao
, Y.
, and Frederiksen
, M. R.
, et al., 2019
, “An Ingestible Self-Orienting System for Oral Delivery of Macromolecules
,” Science
, 363
(6427
), pp. 611
–615
. 43.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration (CDER)
, 2013
, “Guidance for Industry: Size, Shape and Other Physical Attributes of Generic Tablets and Capsules
,” Pharmaceutical Quality/CMC, pp. 1
–11
.44.
Mathworks
, 2020
, Optimization ToolboxTM - Users Guide R2020B
(Software Documentation)
.45.
Channer
, K. S.
, and Virjee
, J. P.
, 1986
, “The Effect of Size and Shape of Tablets on Their Esophageal Transit
,” J. Clin. Pharmacol.
, 26
(2
), pp. 141
–146
. 46.
Azarm
, S.
, and Papalambros
, P.
, 1984
, “An Automated Procedure for Local Monotonicity Analysis
,” ASME J. Mech. Transm. Autom. Des.
, 106
(1
), pp. 82
–89
. 47.
Hazelrigg
, G. A.
, 1999
, “On the Role and Use of Mathematical Models in Engineering Design
,” ASME J. Mech. Des.
, 121
(3
), pp. 336
–341
. 48.
Radhakrishnan
, R.
, and McAdams
, D. A.
, 2005
, “A Methodology for Model Selection in Engineering Design
,” ASME J. Mech. Des.
, 127
(3
), pp. 378
–387
. 49.
Zhou
, J.
, and Mayne
, R. W.
, 1983
, “Interactive Computing in the Application of Monotonicity Analysis to Design Optimization
,” ASME J. Mech. Transm. Autom. Des.
, 105
(2
), pp. 181
–186
. 50.
Finger
, S.
, and Dixon
, J. R.
, 1989
, “A Review of Research in Mechanical Engineering Design. Part II: Representations, Analysis, and Design for the Life Cycle
,” Res. Eng. Des.
, 1
(2
), pp. 121
–137
. Copyright © 2021 by ASME
You do not currently have access to this content.
