NUMERICALSTUDIESONHIGHPRESSURERATIOAIRFOILSFORAXIAL

FLOWCOMPRESSORS
AravindGP1,NileshPSalunke2,SalimA.Channiwala3
1,2,3,
SardarVallabhbhaiNationalInstituteofTechnology,

This would indicates that the airfoil section is

Abstract The gas turbine engine capable of producing that pressure ratio
manufacturers are looking for the efficient without flow separation. This process is
engines which can produce higher thrust, and repeatedtillanoptimumsolutionreached.The
havinghigherthrusttoweightratio.Toachieve maximumpressureratioattainedbybaseairfoil
thesegoals,improvementincompressorblade wasfoundouttobe1.4.Theprocesswascarried
design is essential. Therefore, the goal of the out for finding solutions for higher pressure
blade design is to achieve the desired flow ratios. The optimal solutions are obtained for
turning with minimum losses, within the higherpressureratiosupto3.0.
constraint of the blade rows. The new airfoil
design include various parameterization, Index Terms Numerical Simulation, High
meshing, solving NS computation and PressureRatioAirfoils.
optimization techniques. A CDA airfoil section
has been used as base airfoil and then NOMENCLATURES
parameterized by Bezier Parsec b BezierParameter
parameterization method. The optimization of c Chord
parametricCDAcascademodeliscarriedoutby y Camber/Thickness
Genetic algorithm coupled with CFD. k Curvature
Parameterizationandgenerationofnewairfoil p StaticPressure
coordinates are made using the programme T StaticTemperature
codepreparedinMatlab.Numericalsimulation
Po StagnationPressure
havebeencarriedoutbyCFDsoftwareGAMBIT
To StagnationTemperature
and FLUENT. Matlab evaluates the airfoil and
optimizes the airfoil using Genetic algorithms V Velocity
and checks the objective function in each U PeripheralVelocity
iteration. The main objective is to get lower CD CoefficientofDrag
valueoftotalpressurelosscoefficientathigher Po TotalPressureLoss
pressureratiowithoutanyflowseparation. r Radius
Bladeangle
Camberangle

ISSN (PRINT): 2393-8374, (ONLINE): 2394-0697,VOLUME-2, ISSUE-2,2015

32
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CURRENT ENGINEERING AND SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH (IJCESR)
TotalPressureLossCoefficient
Xcg,Ycg CenterofGravityofairfoil
Cp CoefficientofPressure
Staggerangle
I. INTRODUCTION
Thestudyofturbomachineryhasgonethrough
severalhistoricalstagesfromthe1940stillnow.
The study in this period has moved from one
dimensional to twodimensional and three
dimensional flows, from inviscid to viscous
flows, and from steady to unsteady flows [1].
The principal type of compressor being used
nowadays, in majority of the gas turbine and
power plants and especially in aircraft
applications, is the axial flow compressor. This
dominance is mainly due to the ability of the
axial flow compressor to satisfy the basic
requirements of the aircraft gas turbine.
Transonic axial flow compressors are today
widely used in aircraft engines to obtain
maximumpressureratiospersinglestage.High
stage pressure ratios are important because
they make it possible to reduce the engine
weightandsizeand,thereforeinvestmentand
operational costs. Performance of transonic
compressorshastodayreachedahighlevelbut
engine manufacturers are oriented towards
increasing it further [2]. A small increment in
efficiency, for instance, can result in huge
savingsinfuelcosts.Theincreaseingasturbine
efficiency mainly dependent on Increase in
Pressure Ratio. So in the present work CDA
airfoilisparameterizedandoptimizedforhigher
pressure ratios up to 3.0 with reduction of
overalltotalpressureloss.
II. LITERATUREREVIEW
Oneofthechallengingtopicsinoptimizationis
the selection of the mathematical
representation of airfoil design variables that
provides a wide variety of possible airfoil
shapes. A new method for airfoil shape
parameterizationispresentedwhichtakesinto
consideration the characteristics of viscous
transonic flow particularly around the trailing
edge. Typical practice is to resort to using a
seriesofcurves,suchaspolynomialsandBezier
ISSN (PRINT): 2393-8374, (ONLINE): 2394-0697,VOLUME-2, ISSUE-2,2015
33
curves, to describe the profile. This typically
reducesthenumberofdegreesoffreedomtoa
much smaller, manageable number. The
method is then applied to airfoil shape
optimizationathighReynoldsnumberturbulent
flow conditions using a Genetic Algorithm [3].
The influence of the selection of the
parameterization on the optimization has
receivedrelativelylittleconsiderationtodate.A
new airfoil parameterization, BezierPARSEC,
thatwasdevelopedtoextendandimprovethe
typical Bezier parameterization found in use.
This parameterization was found to fit the
knownshapeofawiderangeofexistingairfoil
profiles as well as resulting in accelerated
convergence. [4], [5]. Another innovative
method for airfoil geometry optimization is
based on the coupling of a PARSEC
parameterizationforairfoilshapeandagenetic
algorithms (GA) optimization method to find
Nash equilibria (NE). While the PARSEC airfoil
parameterization method has thecapability to
faithfully describe an airfoil geometry using
typical engineering parameters, on the other
hand the Nash game theoretical approach
allows each player to decide, with a more
physical correspondence between geometric
parameters and objective function, in which
direction the airfoil shape should be
modified[6].LarsSommer[7]introducesanew
curvature based design parameterization of
twodimensional high pressure compressor
blade sections to be used in a multicriteria
aerodynamic design optimization process. The
suctionsideoftheairfoilsectionisrepresented
byitscurvaturedistributionwhichisdescribed
by a Bspline curve. The coordinates are then
derived by numerical integration. The camber
line as well as pressure side are obtained by
adding a thickness distribution perpendicularly
tothecamberline.YongshengLian[8]reviewed
therecentprogressindesignoptimizationusing
evolutionary algorithms to solve realworld
aerodynamicproblems.Evolutionaryalgorithms
(EAs) are useful tools in design optimization.
Due to their simplicity, ease of use, and
suitability for multiobjective design
optimization problems, EAs have been applied
to design optimization problems from various
areas. Sergey Peigin [9] suggested a new
approach to the constrained design of
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CURRENT ENGINEERING AND SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH (IJCESR)
aerodynamic shapes. The approach employs
Genetic Algorithms (GAs) as an optimization
tool in combination with a ReducedOrder
Models (ROM) method based on linked local
data bases obtained by full NavierStokes
computations. Naixing Chen [10] describes an
optimization methodology for aerodynamic
design of turbomachinery combined with a
rapid 3D blade and grid generator
(RAPID3DGRID), a N.S. solver, a blade
parameterization method (BPM), a gradient
based parameterizationanalyzing method
(GPAM),aresponsesurfacemethod(RSM)with
zooming algorithm and a simple gradient
method. Syam [11] suggested the Bezier
PARSEC method for camber and thickness
distributionofCDAairfoilandGeneticAlgorithm
foroptimization.TSonoda[12]introducedtwo
different numerical optimization methods; the
evolution strategy (ES) and the multiobjective
geneticalgorithm(MOGA),whichwereadopted
for the design process to minimize the total
pressure loss and the deviation angle at the
designpointatlowReynoldsnumbercondition.
Akira Oyama [13] developed a reliable and
efficient aerodynamic design optimization tool
using evolutionary algorithm for transonic
compressorblades.
III. PARAMETERIZATIONANDOPTIMIZATION
Hereweareintroducingthemethodusedfor
the parameterization of CD Airfoil and the
MATLAB Genetic Algorithm (GA) toolbox used
for Optimization. The mainly used
parameterizationmethodsarebrieflypresented
herein.
A. BezierCurves[3]
One of the most popular methods for airfoil
shape representation is the Bezier curve
method that introduces control points around
the geometry. These points are then used to
definetheairfoilshape.ABeziercurveofdegree
nisuniquelydefinedbyn+1vertexpointsofa
polygon. These vertices are called the control
pointsofthenthorderBeziercurve.Thegeneral
expressionforannthorderBeziercurveisgiven
below:
!
1 (1)
! !
ISSN (PRINT): 2393-8374, (ONLINE): 2394-0697,VOLUME-2, ISSUE-2,2015
34
Where Pi = ith control point. The parameter u
goes from 0 to 1; with 0 at the zeroth control
point and unity at the nth control point. The
Bezier parameterization is determined by its
control points which are physical points in the
plane. However the other control points need
notbeonthecurveeventhoughtheydetermine
the shape of the curve. The number of design
variablesisoftensohighthatthecomputational
time of the whole process becomes
unaffordable. Fainekos and Giannakoglou [14]
usedtheBeziercurvetodefinetheairfoilshape
in inverse design of turbomachinery blade
airfoils. In their research, Fainekos and
Giannakoglou [14] fixed the leading edge and
trailingedgecontrolpointsandalsoabscissasof
the restofthecontrolpoints. Songand Keane
[15] compared the Bezier curve method with
originalbasisfunctionsingeneratingairfoilsand
concludedthattheBeziercurveproducesbetter
shapes in terms of accuracy but at a higher
computational time. In addition, special
curvature distributions that are required to
achieveadesirablepressuredistributionarenot
evidentinthismethod.
B. PARSECmethod[3]
Another common method for airfoil shape
parameterization is PARSEC which has been
successfully applied to many airfoil design
problems. This technique has been developed
to control important aerodynamic features by
usingthefinitenumberofdesignparameters.In
thismethodtherearebasicelevenparameters
that are used in PARSEC method including
leading edge radius ( rLE ), upper and lower
crest locations ( X UP , ZUP , XLO , ZLO ) and
curvatures ( ZxxUP ZxxLO ), trailing edge
coordinate( ZTE ) and direction( TE ), trailing
edgewedgeangle( TE )andthickness( Z TE ).A
linearcombinationofshapefunctionsisusedto
presenttheairfoilshapeinthismethod.
Z
/
a , X (2)
Thecoefficients aredeterminedfromdefined
geometricparameters.Theairfoilisdividedinto
upper and lower surfaces and the coefficients
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CURRENT ENGINEERING AND SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH (IJCESR)

aredeterminedusingtheinformationofthe D. OptimizationofBaseCDAusingGA[11]
pointsineachsection.Thesubscriptkchanges Total pressure loss as objective function for
from1to2inordertoconsiderthelengthofthe optimization since it is more significant in the
upperandlowersurfaces,respectively. compressor blade efficiency. And the
optimization is carried out for compressor
C. BezierPARSECParameterization[4] cascade at high subsonic velocities. The
DerksenandRogalsky[4]haveintroducedthe optimization is meant for finding a profile
BezierPARSECparameterization.Thisapproach section with minimal loss for the compressor
willusetheadvantagesofboththeBezierand blade. In this investigation we selected a CDA
PARSEC parameterization and avoid the cascade, third stage of a compressor for the
disadvantages of both to represent the airfoil optimization. Before starting the optimization
andprovideenoughflexibilityovergeometrical processweusedtoanalyzethebasecascadeto
andaerodynamicparameters.Theirapproachis predicttheperformance.Theanalysisiscarried
out numerically in CFD softwares, Gambit for
further subdivided into two parameterization
methods viz. BP3333 and BP3434. In both the modeling and meshingandFluentforanalysis.
methods,Beziercontrolpointsaredetermined The optimization of cascade has mainly five
intermsofthePARSECparametersofanairfoil. stepsasshownontheoptimizationflowchart.
ThecamberthicknessformulationoftheBezier AlltheprocessiscarriedoutusingMatlabcode.
curvesismoredirectlyrelatedtotheflowthan The design parameters are selected from the
istheuppercurvelowercurveformulationfor parametersobtainedfromtheBP334.Thisnew
PARSEC,whilethePARSECparametersaremore parameters are generated at each iteration by
aerodynamically oriented than the Bezier the GA based on the constraints and the
objectivefunction.Weselected15parameters
parameters. The BP parameterization uses the
PARSEC variablesas parameters,whichinturn ofBP3434foroptimizingthecascade.Thefirst
definefourseparateBeziercurves.Thesecurves step is terminated with the generation of the
describetheleadingandtrailingportionsofthe new parameters by GA. The next step is to
camberline,andtheleadingandtrailingportion generate the airfoil section from these
ofthethicknessdistributions.WhiletheBezier parameters. In the third step CFD software
parameterization joins the leading and trailing GambitiscalledinMatlabinbatchmodeforthe
curveswithfirstordercontinuity. cascade modeling and meshing using reading
The BP parameterization uses secondorder the Gambit journal file in Matlab. After the
completionandgenerationofthemeshfileasa
continuity.Theparametersare:
Leadingedgeradiusrle, fourthstepFluentiscalledinMatlabusingthe
Trailingcamberlineangleate, systemcommandandreadstheFluentjournal
Trailingwedgeanglebte, file, which includes all the commands for the
Trailingedgeverticaldisplacementzte, analysis.BytheexecutionoftheFluentwewill
Leadingedgedirectiongle, getalltheinletandoutletparameterssuchas
Locationofthecambercrestxc,yc, total pressures, total temperatures, static
Curvatureofthecambercrestkc, pressures,Machnumbers,etc.Alsowewillget
Positionofthethicknesscrestxt,yt, theflowparametersoverthecascadei.e.Mach
Curvatureofthethicknesscrestkt, number, static pressure, etc. The objective
thehalfthicknessofthetrailingedgedzte,and function is selected as total pressure loss
severalBeziervariables,b0,b2,b8,b15andb17. coefficient for this optimization which
This type of parameterization improves the calculatedfromtheresultsofFluentanalysis.At
robustness and convergence speed for each iteration GA checks the value of the loss
aerodynamicoptimization,whichmakesitmore coefficient for the next generation of next
suitable for optimization using Genetic population of parameters. The process ends
algorithms. whenthelosscoefficientisminimized.Genetic
Algorithm (GA) is used as an optimization
algorithm because of its global optimization
natureandspeedofconvergence.Theobjective

ISSN (PRINT): 2393-8374, (ONLINE): 2394-0697,VOLUME-2, ISSUE-2,2015

35
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CURRENT ENGINEERING AND SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH (IJCESR)

function used for GA is total pressure loss Modified turbulent viscosity: Second order
coefficient.WeselectedtheconstraintasChord upwind
lengthoftheCascadeandisfixedas46.46mm InletTotalPressurePO1=338000Pa
andsetthenumberofgenerationas100witha InletTotalTemperatureTO1=426K
crossover fraction of 0.8. After calculating and
Boundaryconditions:
checking the value of loss coefficient GA
generates the new population based on the Table2:BoundaryConditionsforHigherPR
crossover, selection and mutation with a [16][17]
constraintfixedchordlength. Thetable3showsthetotalpressureloss
After the convergence of the optimization
Pre Inlet
algorithmforagenerationof100weobtained ssu Mach
the airfoil section which has minimized the P1 T02 P2
re No.
objectivefunction.Thetable1showsthenewly (Pa) (K) (Pa)
Rat
generated profile has optimal total pressure io
losscoefficientcomparedtothebaseprofile. 1.5 0.75 232737.6 478.3231 349106.5
1.6 0.75 232737.6 487.225 372380.2
Table1:ComparisonofBaseandOptimized 1.7 0.75 232737.6 495.7379 395654
Airfoil[11] 1.8 0.75 232737.6 503.9003 418927.8
1.9 0.75 232737.6 511.7449 442201.5
Airfoil Total Pressure 2.0 0.75 232737.6 519.2998 465475.3
Sections pressure loss 2.2 1.2 139383.4 533.6354 306643.62
Inlet Outle coefficient 2.4 1.4 106213.4 547.0681 254912.62
t coefficientobtainedupto2.4pressureratios
BaseAirfoil 3380 3351 0.0427
0 50 Table3:Pressurelosscoefficientcomparison
Optimized 3380 3353 0.0394 upto2.4PR[17]
Airfoil 0 70 Pressure CDABaseAirfoil OptimizedAirfoils
Thisprocesswasrepeatedforvariouspressure Ratio PressureLoss PressureLoss
ratiosrangingfrom1.1tohigherpressureratios Coefficient Coefficient
1.5 0.007903
anditwasfoundthattherewasadragreversal
1.6 0.006527
afterapressureratioof1.4.Thenegativedrag
1.7 0.009531
indicatesthereversalofflowhencewederived
1.8 0.005681
aconclusionthatapressureratiogreaterthan
1.9 0.004332
1.4 cannot be achieved from the above airfoil 2.0 0.017324
for the given set of conditions and there is a 2.2 0.008038
need to optimize the airfoil further to gain 2.4 0.015610
higherpressureratios.
E. OptimizationofCDAforHigherPressure
Ratiosupto2.4[16][17]
The following boundary conditions were
applied:
Solver: Green Gauss node based, 2d, steady,
implicit,densitybased
Model:SpalartAllmarus
ConvergenceCriteria:0.001
Fluid:AirwithidealgasdensityandSutherland
viscosity
Discretization: Flow: Second order
upwind

ISSN (PRINT): 2393-8374, (ONLINE): 2394-0697,VOLUME-2, ISSUE-2,2015

36
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CURRENT ENGINEERING AND SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH (IJCESR)

IV. SIMULATIONRESULTSOFHIGHER
PRESSURERATIOSMORETHAN2.4
Furtheroptimizationoftheairfoilanduptohow
muchpressureratiowillbepossibleisfoundout
inthiswork.Weobtainedapressureratioof3.0
withoutanyflowseparationforaMachnumber
of 1.4. Beyond that further optimization is not
possiblewiththismethod.

Table4:BoundaryconditionsforHigherPRup
to3.1
Inlet
Pressur P1 T02 P2
Mac
eRatio (Pa) (K) (Pa) Thenewlyoptimizedairfoilscanperformbetter
hNo
1.4 106213 559.72 276154
2.6 Figure 3: Mach number pot for optimized 3.0 PR airfoil
.4 33 .9
1.4 106213 571.70 297397 at higher pressure ratios up to 3.0. The
2.8 optimized blades have shown perfect velocity
.4 11 .6
1.4 106213 583.08 318640 and pressure distribution as of CDA. In the
3.0 aboveplotswecanseetheexitMachnumberis
.4 24 .2
Theboundaryconditionsforpressureratiosup reducingasthepressureratioincreases.
to3.0isasshownintable4.
Table5:PressureLossCoefficientComparison
DistributionofMachnumberofOptimized
forPRupto3.0
airfoilsaregivenbelow.
Pressure CDABase Optimized
Ratio Airfoil Airfoils
PressureLoss PressureLoss
Coefficient Coefficient
2.6 0.006009
2.8 0.001717
3.0 0.007102

V. VALIDATIONOFSIMULATIONRESULTS
The optimized airfoil showed close CDA
characteristicswhichconfirmitsgoodbehaviour
athigherpressureratios.Thesuctionpeakislow
at higher pressure ratios as expected and
Figure 1: Mach number plot for optimized 2.6 PR airfoil
uniform diffusion is there till the trailingedge.
The pressure on the lower surface increases
uniformly till trailing edge. It is also observed
that as the pressure ratio increases the peak
Mach number decreases.For given pressure
ratios,onuppersurface,theMachnumberfirst
increasestoavalueofpeakMachnumberand
thereafter it reduces continuously. On lower
surface, Mach number first reduces and then
increasesgradually.Itsignifiesthatoverupper
surface, fluid is accelerated first and then it
Figure 2: Mach number plot for optimized 2.8 PR airfoil decelerates constantly to match the flow
conditionsatthetrailingedge.Theseallarethe
typical characteristics of a controlled diffusion

ISSN (PRINT): 2393-8374, (ONLINE): 2394-0697,VOLUME-2, ISSUE-2,2015

37
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CURRENT ENGINEERING AND SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH (IJCESR)
airfoil.Henceouroptimizedairfoilsexhibitthe
characteristicsofaCDAairfoil.
VI. CONCLUSION
The parameterization and GA
optimization method is capable of
findingefficientandoptimumairfoilsin
fewernumberofgenerations.
ThedevelopmentofacombinedBezier
PARSEC(BP)parameterizationutilizethe
advantages of both the Bezier and
PARSECparameterizations.
Coupling of BezierPARSEC
parameterization with GA and CFD
together, offers an optimal cascade
profilewithareasonabletotalpressure
losscoefficientreductionwithefficient
flowpatternoverthecascade.
ThebaseCDAairfoilcanoffermaximum
pressure ratio of 1.4, beyond which a
converged solution is not obtained
indicating that it cannot gain pressure
ratioshigherthan1.4.
The blade optimization with Bezier
PARSEC Parameterization has offered
most optimized results. The newly
optimizedbladescanperformbetterat
higher pressure ratios up to 3.0. The
optimized blades have shown perfect
velocity and pressure distribution as of
CDA.Upto3.0PRandMach1.4wecan
usetheseoptimizedairfoilswithoutany
flowseparation.
REFERENCES
1. Naixing Chen., Aerothermodynamics of
TurbomachineryAnalysisandDesign,1st
Edition, John Wiley & 0021
Sons,Singapore,2010,chap.14.
2. Saravanamuttoo H.I.H, Rogers G. F. C,
Henry Cohen., Gas Turbine Theory, 6th
Edition,PrenticeHall,USA,2008.chap.5
3. Ava Shahrokhi, Alireza Jahangirian,
Airfoil shape parameterization for
optimum NavierStokes design with
genetic algorithm, Aerospace science
andtechnology,11(2007)443450
4. R.W. Derksen, Tim Rogalsky, Bezier
PARSEC: An optimized aerofoil
parameterization for design, Advances
ISSN (PRINT): 2393-8374, (ONLINE): 2394-0697,VOLUME-2, ISSUE-2,2015
inEngineeringSoftware41(2010)923
930.
5. Athar Kharal, Ayman Saleem, Neural
networks based airfoil generation for a
given Cp using BezierPARSEC
Parameterization, Aerospace Science
andTechnology23(2012)330344.
6. Pierluigi Della Vecchia, Elia Daniele,
Egidio DAmato, An airfoil shape
optimizationtechniquecouplingPARSEC
parameterization and evolutionary
algorithm, Aerospace Science and
Technology32(2014)103110.
7. Lars Sommer, Dieter Bestle, Curvature
driven twodimensional multiobjective
optimization of compressor blade
sections, Aerospace Science and
Technology15(2011)334342.
8. Yongsheng Lian, Akira Oyama, Meng
Sing Liou, Progress in design
optimization using evolutionary
algorithms for aerodynamic problems,
Progress in Aerospace Sciences 46
(2010)199223
9. Sergey Peigin, Boris Epstein, Robust
optimizationof2Dairfoilsdrivenbyfull
NavierStokes computations,
Computers & Fluids 33 (2004) 1175
1200.
10. Naixing Chen, Hongwu Zhang, Yanji Xu,
Weiguang Huang, Blade
Parameterization and Aerodynamic
Design Optimization for a 3D Transonic
Compressor Rotor, Proceedings of the
8th International Symposium on
Experimental and Computational
Aerothermodynamics of Internal Flows
Lyon,July2007,Paperreference:ISAIF8
11. Syam,ChanniwalaSA,Optimizationof
CDAcascadeusingParameterizationand
Genetic Algorithm coupled with CFD,
2nd International Conference on
Mechanical,AutomotiveandAerospace
Engineering,ICMAAE2013.
12. T Sonoda, Y Yamaguchi, T Arima, M
Olhofer, B Senghoff and H A Schreiber,
Advanced High Turning Compressor
Airfoils for Low Reynolds Number
Conditions, Part 1: Design and
38
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CURRENT ENGINEERING AND SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH (IJCESR)

Optimization, Proceedings of ASME

TurboExpo2003,GT200338458.
13. Akira Oyama, Meng sing Liou, Shigeru
Obayashi, Transonic Axial Flow Blade
Shape Optimization using Evolutionary
Algorithmand3DNavierStokesSolver,
AIAA Journal of Propulsion and power,
20025642.
14. Fainekos and Giannakoglou, Inverse
ProblemsinScienceandEngineering,4th
Edition,Taylor&Francis,UK,2004chap
4.
15. Song W, Keane A, A Study of Shape
Parameterization Methods for Airfoil
Optimisation, 10th AIAA/ISSMO
Multidisciplinary Analysis and
OptimizationConference,20044482.
16. Vilash Rajendra Shingare, A study on
HighPressureRatioAirfoilsforAxialFlow
compressors, Mtech Thesis, S. V.
National Institute of Technology, Surat,
2012.
17. Rajesh N, High Pressure Ratio Blade
Design by Parameterization and
Optimization, MTech Thesis S. V.
NationalInstituteofTechnology,(2014).
18. MATLAB User Guide Genetic Algorithm
andDirectSearchToolboxUsersGuide
Copyright,Mathworks,2004.

ISSN (PRINT): 2393-8374, (ONLINE): 2394-0697,VOLUME-2, ISSUE-2,2015

39