4.6 Article

Multi-Surrogate Collaboration Approach for Creep-Fatigue Reliability Assessment of Turbine Rotor

Journal

IEEE ACCESS
Volume 8, Issue -, Pages 39861-39874

Publisher

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2975316

Keywords

Reliability; Turbines; Rotors; Training; Computational modeling; Cost function; Mathematical model; Creep-fatigue life; reliability assessment; turbine rotor; surrogate model; neural network

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51975028, 51575024]
  2. Academic Excellence Foundation of BUAA [BY1604137]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The creep-fatigue resistance of turbine rotor seriously affects the reliability performance and service lifetime of aircraft engine. Creep-fatigue reliability assessment is an effective measure to quantify the uncertain creep-fatigue damage and evaluate the creep-fatigue reliable life for turbine rotor. To improve the modeling accuracy and simulation efficiency of creep-fatigue reliability assessment, a multi-surrogate collaboration approach (MSCA) is proposed by absorbing the strengths of the proposed dynamic neural network surrogate (DNNS) into distributed collaborative strategy. The creep-fatigue reliability assessment of a typical turbine rotor is regarded as one case to estimate the presented MSCA with respect to the fluctuations of multi-physical variables and the variabilities of multi-model parameters. The assessment results reveal that the creep-fatigue reliable life of turbine rotor under reliability degree of 0.998 7 is 629 cycles, and the fatigue strength coefficient and holding creep time play a leading role on creep-fatigue reliable life since their effect probabilities of 27 & x0025; and 19 & x0025;, respectively. Comparison of various methods (direct Monte Carlo simulation, response surface, neural network surrogate, DNNS) shows that the presented MSCA holds high efficiency and accuracy in creep-fatigue reliability assessment of turbine rotor.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available