Update optimization strategy with introspection-corrected baselines

This commit is contained in:
2026-02-10 22:02:46 +00:00
parent 15a457d2be
commit 3e5180485c

View File

@@ -3,8 +3,8 @@
**Study:** `01_doe_landscape`
**Project:** Hydrotech Beam Structural Optimization
**Author:** ⚡ Optimizer Agent
**Date:** 2025-02-09
**Status:** DRAFT — Awaiting review
**Date:** 2025-02-09 (updated 2026-02-10 — introspection corrections)
**Status:** DRAFT — Corrected baselines, sending to Auditor review
**References:** [BREAKDOWN.md](../../BREAKDOWN.md), [DECISIONS.md](../../DECISIONS.md), [CONTEXT.md](../../CONTEXT.md)
---
@@ -30,10 +30,10 @@ Both are **hard constraints** — no trade-off or relaxation without CEO approva
| ID | NX Expression | Type | Lower | Upper | Baseline | Units | Notes |
|----|---------------|------|-------|-------|----------|-------|-------|
| DV1 | `beam_half_core_thickness` | Continuous | 10 | 40 | 20 | mm | Core half-thickness; stiffness scales ~quadratically via sandwich effect |
| DV2 | `beam_face_thickness` | Continuous | 10 | 40 | 20 | mm | Face sheet thickness; primary bending stiffness contributor |
| DV1 | `beam_half_core_thickness` | Continuous | 10 | 40 | **25.162** | mm | Core half-thickness; stiffness scales ~quadratically via sandwich effect |
| DV2 | `beam_face_thickness` | Continuous | 10 | 40 | **21.504** | mm | Face sheet thickness; primary bending stiffness contributor |
| DV3 | `holes_diameter` | Continuous | 150 | 450 | 300 | mm | Lightening hole diameter; mass ∝ d² reduction |
| DV4 | `hole_count` | **Integer** | 5 | 15 | 10 | — | Number of lightening holes; 11 discrete levels |
| DV4 | `hole_count` (→ `Pattern_p7`) | **Integer** | 5 | 15 | 10 | — | Number of lightening holes; 11 discrete levels |
**Total design space:** 3 continuous × 1 integer (11 levels) = effectively 3D continuous × 11 slices.
@@ -49,11 +49,13 @@ Per DEC-HB-003, `hole_count` is treated as a **true integer** throughout:
| Metric | Baseline Value | Constraint | Status |
|--------|---------------|------------|--------|
| Mass | ~974 kg | (minimize) | Overbuilt — room to reduce |
| Tip displacement | ~22 mm | ≤ 10 mm | ❌ **FAILS** by 120% |
| VM stress | (unknown) | ≤ 130 MPa | ⚠️ Assumed OK but unconfirmed |
| Mass | **1,133.01 kg** | (minimize) | Overbuilt — room to reduce |
| Tip displacement | ~22 mm (unverified — awaiting baseline re-run) | ≤ 10 mm | ❌ **Likely FAILS** |
| VM stress | (unknown — awaiting baseline re-run) | ≤ 130 MPa | ⚠️ Unconfirmed |
> ⚠️ **Critical:** The baseline design **violates** the displacement constraint (22 mm vs 10 mm limit). The optimizer must first find the feasible region before it can meaningfully minimize mass. This shapes the entire strategy.
> ⚠️ **Critical:** The baseline design likely **violates** the displacement constraint (~22 mm vs 10 mm limit). Baseline re-run pending — CEO running SOL 101 in parallel. The optimizer must first find the feasible region before it can meaningfully minimize mass. This shapes the entire strategy.
>
> **Introspection note (2026-02-10):** Mass expression is `p173` (body_property147.mass, kg). DV baselines are NOT round numbers (face=21.504mm, core=25.162mm). NX expression `beam_lenght` has a typo (no 'h'). `hole_count` links to `Pattern_p7` in the NX pattern feature.
---