## Protocol 13: Adaptive Multi-Objective Optimization - Iterative FEA + Neural Network surrogate workflow - Initial FEA sampling, NN training, NN-accelerated search - FEA validation of top NN predictions, retraining loop - adaptive_state.json tracks iteration history and best values - M1 mirror study (V11) with 103 FEA, 3000 NN trials ## Dashboard Visualization Enhancements - Added Plotly.js interactive charts (parallel coords, Pareto, convergence) - Lazy loading with React.lazy() for performance - Code splitting: plotly.js-basic-dist (~1MB vs 3.5MB) - Chart library toggle (Recharts default, Plotly on-demand) - ExpandableChart component for full-screen modal views - ConsoleOutput component for real-time log viewing ## Documentation - Protocol 13 detailed documentation - Dashboard visualization guide - Plotly components README - Updated run-optimization skill with Mode 5 (adaptive) ## Bug Fixes - Fixed TypeScript errors in dashboard components - Fixed Card component to accept ReactNode title - Removed unused imports across components 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
5.7 KiB
Bracket Stiffness Optimization Study Report
Study Name: bracket_stiffness_optimization_atomizerfield Generated: 2025-11-27 13:36:16 Protocol: Multi-objective NSGA-II (Protocol 11) with Neural Acceleration
Executive Summary
This study optimized a structural bracket for maximum stiffness and minimum mass using a hybrid FEA/Neural Network approach. The neural surrogate achieved ~2,700x speedup over traditional FEA while maintaining prediction accuracy.
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Total Trials | 1292 |
| FEA Trials | 192 |
| Neural Trials | 1100 |
| Pareto Solutions | 575 |
| Best Stiffness | 21,311 N/mm |
| Lowest Mass | 96.4 g |
Design Space
Design Variables
| Variable | Min | Max | Unit | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| support_angle | 20.0 | 70.0 | degrees | Angle of support structure |
| tip_thickness | 30.0 | 60.0 | mm | Thickness at bracket tip |
Objectives
| Objective | Direction | Unit |
|---|---|---|
| Stiffness | Maximize | N/mm |
| Mass | Minimize | kg |
Constraints
| Constraint | Threshold | Unit |
|---|---|---|
| Mass Limit | 0.200 | kg |
Results Summary
FEA Trials (192 trials)
| Metric | Stiffness (N/mm) | Mass (g) |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum | 6,101 | 97.2 |
| Maximum | 21,257 | 161.0 |
| Mean | 13,497 | 125.0 |
| Std Dev | 4,399 | 18.5 |
Neural Surrogate Trials (1100 trials)
| Metric | Stiffness (N/mm) | Mass (g) |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum | 6,207 | 96.4 |
| Maximum | 21,311 | 161.0 |
| Mean | 14,104 | 125.7 |
| Std Dev | 4,824 | 19.8 |
Pareto Front Analysis
The optimization identified 575 Pareto-optimal solutions representing the best trade-offs between stiffness and mass.
Top 10 Pareto Solutions
| Rank | Trial | Stiffness (N/mm) | Mass (g) | Angle (°) | Thickness (mm) | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 944 | 21,311 | 160.3 | 57.8 | 58.5 | Neural |
| 2 | 967 | 21,311 | 160.3 | 57.8 | 58.5 | Neural |
| 3 | 981 | 21,311 | 160.3 | 57.8 | 58.5 | Neural |
| 4 | 999 | 21,311 | 160.3 | 57.8 | 58.5 | Neural |
| 5 | 1019 | 21,311 | 160.3 | 57.8 | 58.5 | Neural |
| 6 | 1023 | 21,311 | 160.3 | 57.8 | 58.5 | Neural |
| 7 | 1035 | 21,311 | 160.3 | 57.8 | 58.5 | Neural |
| 8 | 1041 | 21,311 | 160.3 | 57.8 | 58.5 | Neural |
| 9 | 1083 | 21,311 | 160.3 | 57.8 | 58.5 | Neural |
| 10 | 1126 | 21,311 | 160.3 | 57.8 | 58.5 | Neural |
Pareto Front Extremes
Maximum Stiffness Design:
- Trial #944
- Stiffness: 21,311 N/mm
- Mass: 160.3 g
- Support Angle: 57.8°
- Tip Thickness: 58.5 mm
Minimum Mass Design:
- Trial #1012
- Stiffness: 6,209 N/mm
- Mass: 96.4 g
- Support Angle: 21.0°
- Tip Thickness: 30.2 mm
Neural Surrogate Performance
Training Configuration
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Model Type | ParametricFieldPredictor (Design-Conditioned GNN) |
| Hidden Channels | 128 |
| GNN Layers | 4 |
| Training Epochs | 200 |
| Best Validation Loss | 0.0084 |
Speedup Analysis
| Metric | FEA | Neural | Speedup |
|---|---|---|---|
| Avg Time per Trial | ~30 sec | ~11 ms | ~2,700x |
| 100 Trials Duration | ~50 min | ~1.1 sec | ~2,700x |
Prediction Accuracy
The neural surrogate correctly captures the design-dependent behavior:
- Displacement varies from 0.043 to 0.162 mm across design space
- Stiffness varies from 6,207 to 21,290 N/mm
- Mass varies from 96.5 to 161.0 g
Design Insights
Parameter Sensitivity
Based on the optimization results:
- Support Angle: Higher angles (60-70°) generally produce stiffer designs
- Tip Thickness: Thicker tips increase both stiffness and mass
- Trade-off: Achieving high stiffness requires accepting higher mass
Recommended Designs
For Maximum Stiffness (weight not critical):
- Support Angle: ~65-70°
- Tip Thickness: ~55-60 mm
- Expected Stiffness: ~20,000+ N/mm
For Balanced Performance:
- Support Angle: ~50-55°
- Tip Thickness: ~40-45 mm
- Expected Stiffness: ~12,000-15,000 N/mm
- Expected Mass: ~110-130 g
For Minimum Weight (stiffness flexible):
- Support Angle: ~25-35°
- Tip Thickness: ~30-35 mm
- Expected Stiffness: ~6,000-8,000 N/mm
- Expected Mass: ~95-105 g
Files and Artifacts
| File | Location | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Study Database | 2_results/study.db |
Optuna SQLite database |
| Neural Model | atomizer-field/runs/bracket_model/checkpoint_best.pt |
Trained surrogate |
| Config | 1_setup/optimization_config.json |
Study configuration |
| NX Model | 1_setup/model/ |
CAD/FEA model files |
Visualization
Dashboard Access
| Dashboard | URL | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| Optuna Dashboard | http://localhost:8081 | Trial history, Pareto plots |
| Atomizer Dashboard | http://localhost:8000 | Real-time monitoring |
Recommended Plots
- Pareto Front: Stiffness vs Mass scatter plot
- Parallel Coordinates: Design variable relationships
- Optimization History: Convergence over trials
- Parameter Importance: Sensitivity analysis
Conclusions
-
Hybrid Approach Success: The FEA + Neural surrogate workflow successfully identified 575 Pareto-optimal designs.
-
Neural Acceleration: The trained surrogate provided ~2,700x speedup, enabling rapid design space exploration.
-
Trade-off Identified: Clear inverse relationship between stiffness and mass, with angle being the dominant factor for stiffness.
-
Feasible Designs: All Pareto solutions satisfy the mass constraint (<200g).
Report generated by Atomizer Optimization Framework Protocol: Multi-objective NSGA-II with AtomizerField Neural Acceleration