Selecting probabilistic approaches for reliability-based design optimization

TLDR: In this article, a guide for selecting an appropriate method in RBDO is provided by comparing probabilistic design approaches from the perspective of various numerical considerations, and it has been found in the literature that PMA is more efficient and stable than RIA in terms of numerical accuracy, simplicity, and stability.

Abstract: During the past decade, numerous endeavors have been made to develop effective reliability-based design optimization (RBDO) methods. Because the evaluation of probabilistic constraints defined in the RBDO formulation is the most difficult part to deal with, a number of different probabilistic design approaches have been proposed to evaluate probabilistic constraints in RBDO. In the first approach, statistical moments are approximated to evaluate the probabilistic constraint. Thus, this is referred to as the approximate moment approach (AMA). The second approach, called the reliability index approach (RIA), describes the probabilistic constraint as a reliability index. Last, the performance measure approach (PMA) was proposed by converting the probability measure to a performance measure. A guide for selecting an appropriate method in RBDO is provided by comparing probabilistic design approaches for RBDO from the perspective of various numerical considerations. It has been found in the literature that PMA is more efficient and stable than RIA in the RBDO process. It is found that PMA is accurate enough and stable at an allowable efficiency, whereas AMA has some difficulties in RBDO process such as a second-order design sensitivity required for design optimization, an inaccuracy to measure a probability of failure, and numerical instability due to its inaccuracy. Consequently, PMA has several major advantages over AMA, in terms of numerical accuracy, simplicity, and stability. Some numerical examples are shown to demonstrate several numerical observations on the three different RBDO approaches.