• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
Improvement by Genetic Algorithm in Finding theOptimum Surface Finish When End Milling Ti64 usingSN
TR 
coated tools
A.S Mohruni
a
, S. Sharif, M.Y. Noordin
b
A .Novlianta
a
 Faculty of Engineering,Sriwijaya University, Indralaya, 30662 OI-Indonesia E-mail : Anggaimoetskali4@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
 In this works, surface roughness for end milling of Ti-6Al-4V under wet conditions were optimized.Genetic algorithm (AG) was used for finding the optimum cutting conditions such as cutting speed (V), feed per tooth (f 
 z 
 ), and radial rake angle (γ
o
 ). The optimized results were compared to that had been generated using response surface methodology (RSM). It has been proven that AG-results showed more accurate than RSM-results which have been validated using data takenaccording to the design of experiments (DOE). Keywords: Surface Roughness, End Milling, Titanium Alloys, Genetic Algorithm, ResponseSurface Methodology
 
1.
 
Introduction
Titanium alloys are used widely known as difficult tocut materials, especially at higher cutting speeds, due totheir several inherent properties. Among the titaniumalloys, Ti-6Al-4V is the most widely used in the aerospace,chemical and ship building industry because of their superior mechanical properties, heat and corrosionsresistance, so it has been chosen as the workpiece in thisstudy.[1].Due their low machinability of the alloy under study,selecting the machining conditions and parameters iscrucial. According to the past reports, the range of feedsand cutting speeds which provide a satisfactory tool performance is very limited. On the other hand, adequatetool, coating, geometry and cutting flow materials should be used [2].The study of [3] has pioneered in finding of theoptimum cutting conditions for machining processes usingresponse surface methodology, which are followed by [4]-[5]. After that, [6]-[8] have begun with the researches usingtitanium alloy as workpiece. Recently, it has begun toexplore the study using non-conventional algorithm in [9]-[11]. Furthermore, according to the previous studies, thereis no researcher employed genetic algorithm in searchingthe optimum cutting conditions for machining of aerospacematerials. Base on these facts, it is necessary to take part incontribution of providing such lack in information
2.
 
Procedure of Experiments
MAHO 700S CNC machining center for side millingoperation was used. The grade K-30 solid carbide end millcutters, with PVD Supernitride coated which were preparedwith different radial rake angle according to DOE, wereused for experimentation.Surface roughness of the machined surface wasmeasured using portable Taylor Hobson Surftronic +3.Before conducting the measurement, the instrument wascalibrated using a standard specimen roughness delivered toensure the consistency and accuracy of surface roughnessvalues. .There are three cutting parameters used in thisstudy, such as cutting speed, feed rate, and radial rakeangle. Machining conditions used in this optimization studyfor each cutting parameters are :
•
 
Cutting speed
V 
: 130 - 160 m/min.
•
 
Feed rate
 f 
 z 
: 0,03 - 0,07 mm/teeth.
•
 
Radial rake angle : 7 - 13
o
 Cutting parameters such as cutting speed, feed rate, andradial rake angle are coded using transformed equation (1)
 
according to circumstance of limitation of the millingmachine.
0ln1ln 0lnln
 xn xn xn xn x
−−=
(1)Where
 x
the coded variable of any factor corresponding to its natural is
 xn, xn1
is the natural value atthe +1 level and
 xn0
is the natural value of the factor corresponding to the base or zero level. The level of independent variables and coding identification are showsin Table 1.
Table 1. Levels of independent variables for end milling Ti6Al4V
Independent VariableLevel in coded form-α -1 0 1 α
1)min.(
1
 xmmV 
−
 124.53 130 144.22 160 167.03
 fz 
2).(
1
 xtoothmm
−
 0.025 0.03 0.046 0.07 0.083
3)(
 x
°
γο 
 6.2 7.0 9.5 13.0 14.8
3.
 
Research Methodology
The mathematical model used in this study is 2
nd
CCDsurface roughness model. Genetic algorithm resultcompared to the response surface methodology. Themathematical model shown by equation (2)
 
Ў2
= -1.0014 – 0.085531x
1
+ 0.43082x
2
- 0.070215x
12
+0.057597x
22
-0.016614x
1
x
3
- 0.020616x
2
x
3
-0.0752385x
12
+ 0.0787339x
1
x
2
(2)Thus model is valid for end milling of titanium alloy,Ti-6Al-4V using Supernitride coated carbide tools under wet conditions with the following range of respectivecutting speed (
V 
,
 f 
 z 
, and
γ
) : 130 ≤
V 
≤ 160 m/min; 0.03 ≤
 fz 
≤ 0.07 mm/teeth; 7 ≤
γ
≤ 13 (
o
) for std order 1 to stdorder 24.2
nd
order CCD surface roughness model also used for stdorder 13 to std order 24 with the following range of respective cutting speed (
V 
,
 f 
 z 
, and
γ
) : 124.53 ≤
V 
≤167.03 m/min; 0.025 ≤
 f 
 z 
 
≤ 0.083 mm/teeth; 6.2 ≤
γ
≤14.8 (
o
).Genetic Algorithm (AG) inspired from biologicalevolution where the evolution is the method of searchingamong en enormous number possibilities for solutions. AGis the algorithm of searching base on selection and geneticmechanism.The solution found by Genetic Algorithm is coded to binary numbers called chromosomes. The fitness value of each chromosome evaluated by an objective function.Selected individuals are then reproduced, the selectingusually in pairs through the application of genetic operator.These operators are applied to copulate of individuals witha given probability, and result in new offspring. Theoffspring from reproduction are then evaluated by mutationand elitism probability, and then these new individuals are prime for the next generation. Selection, reproduction andevaluation processes are repeated until some terminationcriteria are achieved. The flow chart of AG method isshowed by figure 1.To solve the problem in this optimization study, it’simportant to pick out the following parameters that takecrucial part of AG, such as population size, maximumnumber of generation, total string length, crossover  probability, mutation probability, and elitism probability.It’s important to acquire the best solutions. To solve the problem in this optimization study, it’s important to pick out the following parameters that take crucial part of GA,such as population size, maximum number of generation,total string length, crossover probability, mutation probability, and elitism probability. It’s important toacquire the best solutions.Parameters used in this study using GA that must determineare [13]:
•
 
Population size = 80
•
 
Maximum generation = 15
•
 
Crossover probability (
 Pc
) = 0.45
•
 
Mutation probability (
 Pm
) = 0.25
•
 
Elitism probability (
 Pe
) = 0.5
Figure 1: Genetic algorithm flow chart
Initial PoulationGen =0Crossover ReproductionEvaluate SolutionMutationGen=gen+1TerminationSto
 Noyes
 
4.
 
Results and Discussion
Surface roughness experimental result for Supernitridecoated solid carbide tools showed by table 2. This resultused for validate the comparison between Response SurfaceMethodology and Genetic Algorithm.
Table 2: Surface roughness result for Supernitride coated solidcarbide tools
StdOder Type
V 
 (m/min)
 fz 
(mm/tooth)γ (
⁰
)
 R
a
( 
m)1 Factorial -1 -1 -1 0,2842 Factorial 1 -1 -1 0,1963 Factorial -1 1 -1 0,6684 Factorial 1 1 -1 0,6245 Factorial -1 -1 1 0,2806 Factorial 1 -1 1
0,190
7 Factorial -1 1 1 0,6128 Factorial 1 1 1 0,5769 Center 0 0 0 0,32910 Center 0 0 0 0,41611 Center 0 0 0 0,35212 Center 0 0 0 0,40013 Axial -1.1412 0 0 0,34414 Axial -1.1412 0 0 0,32015 Axial 1.1412 0 0 0,27216 Axial 1.1412 0 0 0,28817 Axial 0 -1.1412 0 0,23018 Axial 0 -1.1412 0 0,23419 Axial 0 1.1412 0 0,64020 Axial 0 1.1412 0 0,69621 Axial 0 0 -1.1412 0,36122 Axial 0 0 -1.1412 0,36023 Axial 0 0 1.1412 0,36824 Axial 0 0 1.1412 0,360
Table 3 shows the optimization result of RSM and AG,and then compared to find out root mean square error (RMSE) of RSM and AG method.
Table 3: The optimization result for RSM and GA
StdOrder Experimental
  R
a
 RSM
 R
a
AG
 R
a
 1 0,284 0,282 0,2842 0,196 0,193 0,1973 0,668 0,639 0,6354 0,624 0,600 0,6175 0,280 0,282 0,2806 0,190 0,193 0,1907 0,612 0,639 0,6128 0,576 0,600 0,5769 0,329 0,380 0,34610 0,416 0,380 0,41511 0,352 0,380 0,35212 0,400 0,380 0,40313 0,344 0,360 0,36214 0,320 0,360 0,36115 0,272 0,282 0,28316 0,288 0,282 0,28517 0,230 0,224 0,22418 0,234 0,224 0,22519 0,640 0,758 0,64120 0,696 0,758 0,69621 0,361 0,367 0,36822 0,360 0,367 0,36823 0,368 0,367 0,36824 0,360 0,367 0,368
Table 4: The Optimization Result for RSM
 NO V (m/min)
 fz 
(mm/tooth)γ (
0
)
 R
a
( 
m)1
160,00 0,030000 8,3130 0,19298
2 160,00 0,030000 9,3537 0,192983 160,00 0,030000 12,8220 0,192984 160,00 0,030000 11,0570 0,192985 160,00 0,030000 10,9900 0,192986 160,00 0,030000 10,4470 0,192987 160,00 0,030000 10,4160 0,192988 160,00 0,030000 7,9021 0,192989 160,00 0,030000 12,9200 0,1929810 160,00 0,030000 9,0691 0,19298
Table 5 : The Optimization Result for AG
 NO V (m/min)
 fz 
(mm/tooth)γ (
0
)
 R
a
( 
m)1 132,906315 0,031630894 7,246147479 0,2842 158,5590309 0,030337631 7,027378405 0,1973 130,9776529 0,069577432 8,164525475 0,6354 146,0167593 0,069891315 9,53713297 0,617
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...