Results
Results of the simulated points for the selected iterations appear as dots on the scatter plots. This feature allows the three-dimensional plotting of any three entities. A forth dimension may be visualised using the color of the points. 2D plots can be obtained by selecting No entity for the z axis.
LS-OPT Viewer
| |
Variable "rail_l" vs. Response "max_intrusion_rail_l":
Feasible points are shown in green, infeasible points in red. The Figure shows the correlation between a variable and a response. The remaining dimensions, that could also have influence on the response, are projected into the plot. |
|
Variable "hreinf3" vs. Response "IIHS_max_accel_engine_top": | |
Variable "w_wellO" vs. Response "max_torsion_angle":For the X-axis select the Variable w_wellO and for Y-axis select max_torsion_angle. Obviously we can say: the bigger the thickness of the variable w_wellO (see highlighted in red in the figure below), the smaller is the maximal torsion angle.
| |
Variable "w_wellO" vs. Response "torsional_stiffness":For the X-axis select the Variable w_wellO and for Y-axis select tors_stiffness. We defined torsional stiffness as x-moment / torsion angle. As expected the scatter plot shows: the thicker the w_wellO, the smaller the maximal torsion angle (scatter plot above), the greater is the torsional stiffness.
|
This plot visualizes history curves based on time data or crossplots obtained from simulations.
| |
| |
→ History curves of 60 simulations for intrusion_rail_l. The value of the variable rail_l determines the color of each curve.
| |
Choose now accel_seat_average as y-coordinate and leave the variable rail_l as c-coordinate. →The chaotic behaviour does not mean inevitable, that the variable does not have an influence on the response. It could be, that the influence of other variables leads to this behaviour.
|
Two- or three-dimensional cross-sections of the metamodel surfaces and simulation points can be plotted and viewed from arbitrary angles.
Metamodel
| |
Set up the panels
| |
→The residuals are mainly small, thus you can say this is a well approximated metamodel.
| |
Select now for response max_intrusion_steering and for variables rail_l and A_pil_l.
|
Which variable appears to be the most important?
The significance of a variable for a response can be illustrated with ANOVA (analysis of variance) or GSA/Sobol (global sensitivity ananlysis). Note that also GSA/Sobol illutstrates only the linear influence here, because we use a linear metamodel.
| |
ANOVA
→ For the response mass the variables rail_l and t_floor are the most important variables. (They are highlighted in red and blue in the figure below .) In contrast the variables mat_rl and mat_rO are insignificant. |
|
The influence of different variables on response max_intrusion_rail_l: From Response select max_intrusion_rail_l for the load case US_NCAP, to see therefor the belonging diagramm. → rail_l and mat_rl are the most important variables.
| |
GSA/Sobol
| |
Select now from Response IIHS to see the influence of variables on this load case.
| |
Sobol - Diagram for load case Torsion:
| |
Sobol - Diagram for load case EVA:
|
This information may be used to reduce the set of variables for each load case and e.g. perform an optimization afterwards. Here, 8 most important variables are selected for each load case. The colors in the table below visualize the common variables of the load cases. Obviously the variable firewal is important for all four load cases.