nonlinear

© All Rights Reserved

6 views

nonlinear

© All Rights Reserved

- Forecasting Trends
- Linear Regression
- Impact of Office Design on Employees’ Productivity- A Case study of Banking
- Linear Regression 1
- Improvement of Earnings of Small Industrial Public of Alcohol Ant Sugar, „Kolang Kaling‟ and Nata de coco Through Technology Usage Precise In Countryside Rasi District Ratahan Sub Provinsi Minahasa South East
- Linear Regression with One Predictor variable
- IM.2012_coursework Guidelines 3
- econ 203 final project
- Multiple Linear Regression
- IJRTEM_H021052065.pdf
- Managerial Economic 2
- Regression
- 330 Diagnostics 2015
- 19871-22084-1-PB
- Ceramic Industry
- 07 Solutions Regression
- Impact of Executive Support on Organizational Core Competencies Management for Strategic Product Innovation
- Introduction to s As
- Intro to Finance
- Indri Sas Fix

You are on page 1of 30

CHAPTER 4

PARAMETERS

4.1 INTRODUCTION

various models to find out the influence of machining parameters on the

performance measure. The effect of machining parameters on surface

roughness and flank wear has been investigated for the performance analysis

uncoated carbide cutting tool in finish turning and facing processes. The data

collected from the experiments were used to build the mathematical model

using linear and non-linear regression analysis. The experimental results were

analyzed by means of the analysis of variance (ANOVA) through statistical

simulation software used for identifying the factors that significantly affect

the performance measures. The machining parameters are optimized by using

Taguchi, response surface methodology (RSM) and GA-based multi objective

optimization techniques. In the GA-based simultaneous optimization process,

the mathematical models were used as objective functions.

MACHINING PARAMETERS FOR FINISH TURNING AND

FACING PROCESSES

The data collected from the experiments are used to build the linear

and non-linear regression models. Using these models, the multi-objective

optimization technique employed for optimization of machining parameters.

37

parameters as single objective function. The multi objective optimization

process generates optimum machining parameters as Pareto optimal front for

minimizing surface roughness and flank wear. These processes briefly

discussed in the following sub-sections.

Analysis

between two quantitative variables (y, x) such that the value of y (dependent

variable) can be predicted based on the value of x (independent variable).

Determining the mathematical relationship between these two variables, such

as surface roughness and feed rate is very common in applied research.

Mathematical model is a representation in mathematical terms of the

behaviour of real devices and objects. The fundamental model for a simple

regression is

Yi 0 1 i i (4.1)

population y intercept, when x i= 0; 1 is the population regression parameter;

xi is the independent variable; i is the random error for the ith observation.

Multiple linear regressions are the direct extension of simple linear

regression. In simple linear regression models, only one x predictor variable is

present, but in multiple linear regression, there are k predictor values, x 1, x2, .

. . , xk. A three-variable predictor model is presented in the following

equation:

Yi 0 1 i1 2 i2 3 i3 i (4.2)

38

where 1 is the ith regression slope constant acting on x i1; 2, the ith regression

slope constant acting on x i2; xi1, the ith x value in the first x predictor; x i2, the

ith x value in the second x predictor; x i3, the ith x value in the third x predictor

and i is the ith error term (Oktem et al 2005).

The correlations between the factors (cutting speed, feed and depth

of cut) and the measured surface roughness on the workpiece and flank wear

on the tool face were obtained by multiple linear regressions. The obtained

equations for surface roughness (Ra) and flank wear (VB) under dry, wet and

refrigerated coolant turning and facing processes were as follows:

R-Squared value is 82.9%.

R-Squared value is 82.6%.

R-Squared value is 82.8%

R-Squared value is 82.3%

R-Squared value is 66%

R-Squared value is 82.8%

R-Squared value is 81.1%

R-Squared value is 80.0%

39

R-Squared value is 84.7%

R-Squared value is 80.0%

R-Squared value is 84.6%

R-Squared value is 78.6%

V the cutting speed in m/min, f the feed in mm/rev and a the depth of cut in

mm. The R-squared value of the model is always greater than 0 and less than

1 (0<R-sq. <1). If the value closes to 1, the developed model gives the reliable

estimation of performance measure.

family of regression models. Nonlinear regression is a method of finding a

nonlinear model of the relationship between the dependent variable and a set

of independent variables. Unlike traditional linear regression, which is

restricted to estimating linear models, nonlinear regression can estimate

models with arbitrary relationships between independent and dependent

variables. This is accomplished using iterative estimation algorithms. The

proposed mathematical models of various responses are presented in the

following form

where C is the constant, V is the cutting speed, f is the feed, a is the depth of

cut and x1, x2, x3 are estimated coefficients of regression model. Statistical

40

Levenberg-Marquardt nonlinear least-squares algorithm.

response variables of surface roughness and flank wear and input machining

parameters of cutting speed, feed and depth of cut, were developed by means

of the NCSS simulation software. By using the machining parameters and

responses from the experiments the following empirical models for surface

roughness and tool flank wear were developed. The obtained equations for

surface roughness (Ra) and flank wear (VB) under dry, wet and refrigerated

coolant turning and facing processes were given below.

0.2188181

‘Ra Dry turning’ = 3.365515 V f 0.5294387 a 0.08976348 (4.16)

0.20969

‘Ra Wet turning’ = 2.616893 V f 0.5218135 a 0.091756 (4.18)

0.2188181

‘Ra Refrigerated turning’ = 3.365515 V f 0.5294387 a 0.08976348 (4.20)

0.3480606

‘Ra Refrigerated facing’ = 5.74774 V f 1.225497 a 0.9238904 (4.21)

41

they actually fit the experimental data. The checks used here involved

computation of the various R-squared coefficients which have values between

0 and 1. In addition to the above, the adequacy of the model is also

investigated by the examination of residuals (Puertas Arbizu et al 2003,

Palanikumar 2007). The residuals, which are the differences between the

respective observed responses and the predicted responses, are examined

using the normal probability plots of the residuals and the residuals verses the

predicted responses plots. If the model is adequate, the points on the normal

probability plots of the residuals should be a straight line. On the other hand,

the plots of the residuals versus the predicted responses should be structure-

less, that is, they should contain no obvious patterns.

Following terms are visualizing the model estimation processes.

regression. This is a pseudo R-Squared constructed to approximate the usual

R-Squared value used in multiple regression. The following generalization of

the usual R-Squared formula as,

where Mean SS is the sum of squares due to the mean, Model SS is the sum

of squares due to the model, and Total SS is the total (uncorrected) sum of

squares of Y (the dependent variable). This version of R-Squared tells about

how well the model performs after removing the influence of the mean of Y.

Since many nonlinear models do not explicitly include a parameter for the

mean of Y, this R-Squared may be negative or difficult to interpret. However,

a direct extension of the R-Squared used in multiple regressions, it will serve

well for comparative purposes.

42

nonlinear algorithm terminated. If the number of iterations set by less than

that the required Maximum Iterations the algorithm did not converge, but was

aborted.

regression model. It is displayed as per required format so that it may be

copied to the clipboard and used elsewhere.

Note that these sums of squares are based on Y, the dependent variable.

Individual terms are defined as follows:

Mean: The sum of squares associated with the mean of Y. This may

or may not be a part of the model. It is presented since it is the amount used to

adjust the other sums of squares.

sum of squares.

often called the sum of squares error or just SSE.

mean sum of squares.

freedom. The Mean Square for error is an

estimate of the underlying variation in the

data.

43

analysis is shown in Equations (4.16-4.21). The R-Squared value is high and

close to 1; this is desirable for prediction of surface roughness. A check on the

plots in Figures 4.1, 4.3 and 4.5 revealed that the residuals generally fall on a

straight line, implying that the errors are distributed normally. Figure 4.2, 4.4,

4.6 reveals that the predicted responses have no obvious pattern and the plots

have unusual structures. This implies that the proposed model is adequate for

the prediction of surface roughness.

process under dry turning conditions was given in Table 4.1.

Table 4.1 Surface roughness model estimation and analysis for dry

turning process

Name Estimate Standard 95% C.L. 95% C.L.

Error

C 3.365515 0.8272648 1.654187 5.076843

k1 -0.2188181 6.282258E-02 -0.3487765 -0.08

k2 0.5294387 5.735224E-02 0.4107966 0.6480

k3 8.976348E-02 9.212647E-02 -0.1008147 0.2803

R-Squared = 0.818261

Iterations = 13

-0.2188181 0.5294387 8.976348E-02

Estimated Model = 3.365515 × V ×f ×a

Analysis of Variance

Sum of Mean

Source DF Squares Square

Mean 1 8.955648 8.955648

Model 4 9.176457 2.294114

Model (Adjusted) 3 0.2208093 7.360309E-02

Error 23 0.0490426 2.132287E-03

Total (Adjusted) 26 0.2698519

Total 27 9.2255

44

0.1 0.1

0.1 0.1

0.0 0.0

-0.1 -0.1

-0.1 -0.1

-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8

Expected Normals Predicted

roughness of dry turning process

under wet turning conditions was given in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2 Surface roughness model estimation and analysis for wet

turning process

Name Estimate Standard Error 95% C.L. 95% C.L.

C 2.616893 0.6354383 1.302389 3.931397

K1 -0.20969 6.205816E-02 -0.3380671 -0.081313

K2 0.5218135 5.656654E-02 0.4047967 0.6388302

K3 9.091756E-02 0.0909953 -9.732056E-02 0.2791557

k k k

Model Ra = C V 1 f 2 a 3

R-Squared 0.816961

Iterations 13

Estimated Model ‘Ra’ = 2.616893 × V-0.20969 × f0.5218135 × a0.09091756

Analysis of Variance

Sum of Mean

Source DF Squares Square

Mean 1 5.945515 5.945515

Model 4 6.087164 1.521791

Model (Adjusted) 3 0.141649 4.721632E-02

Error 23 3.173622E-02 1.379836E-03

Total (Adjusted) 26 0.1733852

Total 27 6.1189

45

0.1 0.1

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

-0.1 -0.1

-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.6

Expected Normals Predicted

roughness of wet turning process

process under refrigerated coolant turning conditions was given in Table 4.3.

refrigerated coolant turning process

Name Estimate Standard Error 95% C.L. 95% C.L.

C 1.719974 0.5843411 0.5111719 2.928775

K1 -0.2051812 8.693255E-02 -0.3850149 -2.534749E-02

K2 0.4377969 7.807502E-02 0.2762864 0.5993074

K3 0.1827729 0.1278215 -8.164589E-02 0.4471917

k k k

Model Ra = C V 1 f 2 a 3

R-Squared 0.635802

Iterations 11

Estimated Model ‘Ra’ = 1.719974 × V-0.2051812 × f0.4377969 × a0.1827729

Analysis of Variance Table

Sum of Mean

Source DF Squares Square

Mean 1 3.793126 3.793126

Model 4 3.862094 0.9655235

Model (Adjusted) 3 6.896799E-02 2.298933E-02

Error 23 3.950609E-02 1.717656E-03

Total (Adjusted) 26 0.1084741

Total 27 3.9016

46

0.1 0.1

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

-0.1 -0.1

-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.6

Expected Normals Predicted

roughness of refrigerated coolant turning process

facing conditions was given in Table 4.4.

Table 4.4 Surface roughness model estimation and analysis for dry

facing process

Name Estimate Standard Error 95% C.L. 95% C.L.

C 3.722944 0.9155447 1.828995 5.616892

K1 -0.2177489 6.285577E-02 -0.3477759 -0.08772185

K2 0.5243214 5.732733E-02 0.4057308 0.642912

K3 9.660935E-02 9.219092E-02 -0.0941021 0.2873208

k k k

Model Ra = C V 1 f 2 a 3

R-Squared 0.815541

Iterations 14

-0.2177489 0.5243214 0.09660935

Estimated Model ‘Ra’ = 3.722944 × V ×f ×a

Analysis of Variance

Sum of Mean

Source DF Squares Square

Mean 1 11.2908 11.2908

Model 4 11.56433 2.891083

Model (Adjusted) 3 0.2735323 9.117744E-02

Error 23 6.186767E-02 2.689899E-03

Total (Adjusted) 26 0.3354

Total 27 11.6262

Total 27 3.9016

47

0.1 0.1

0.1 0.1

0.0 0.0

-0.1 -0.1

-0.1 -0.1

0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 -2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0

Predicted Expected Normals

roughness of dry facing process

process under wet conditions was given in Table 4.5.

Table 4.5 Surface roughness model estimation and analysis for wet

facing process

Parameter Parameter Asymptotic Lower Upper

Name Estimate Standard Error 95% C.L. 95% C.L.

K1 -0.5117385 0.2016653 -0.928915 -0.0945621

K2 0.5340432 0.1836252 0.1541855 0.9139009

K3 0.3574919 0.297724 -0.2583971 0.9733809

k k k

Model Ra = C V 1 f 2 a 3

R-Squared 0.410391

Iterations 21

Estimated Model ‘Ra’ = 8.32541 × V-0.5117385 × f 0.5340432 × a0.3574919

Analysis of Variance

Sum of Mean

Source DF Squares Square

Mean 1 7.76557 7.76557

Model 4 8.072883 2.018221

Model (Adjusted) 3 0.3073126 0.1024375

Error 23 0.441517 1.919639E-02

Total (Adjusted) 26 0.7488296

Total 27 8.5144

48

0.2 0.2

0.1 0.1

-0.1 -0.1

-0.2 -0.2

-0.3 -0.3

-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.7 0.8

Expected Normals Predicted

Figure 4.5 Normality plot and residuals versus predicted plot surface

roughness of wet facing process

process under refrigerated coolant conditions was given in Table 4.6.

refrigerated coolant facing process

49

0.2 0.2

0.1 0.1

-0.1 -0.1

-0.2 -0.2

-0.3 -0.3

-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4

Expected Normals Predicted

Figure 4.6 Normality plot and residuals versus predicted plot surface

roughness of refrigerated coolant facing process

analysis is shown in Equations (4.22-4.27). The R-Squared value is high and

close to 1; this is desirable for prediction of flank wear. A check on the plots

in Figure 4.7 to Figure 4.12 revealed that the residuals generally fall on a

straight line, implying that the errors are distributed normally. From the

Figures 4.7- 4.12 reveals that the predicted responses have no obvious pattern

and the plots have unusual structures. This implies that the proposed model is

adequate for the prediction of flan wear.

was given in Table 4.7.

50

Table 4.7 Flank wear model estimation and analysis for dry turning

process

Parameter Parameter Asymptotic Lower Upper

Name Estimate Standard Error 95% C.L. 95% C.L.

K1 0.9239683 0.1006263 0.7158069 1.13213

K2 0.1288328 7.811905E-02 -3.276877E-02 0.2904344

K3 -0.5574793 0.1327506 -0.8320948 -0.2828638

k k k

Model VB = C V 1 f 2 a 3

R-Squared 0.830288

Iterations 25

Estimated Model ‘VB’ = 0.00607674 × V0.9239683 × f 0.1288328 × a-0.5574793

Analysis of Variance

Sum of Mean

Source DF Squares Square

Mean 1 0.3438596 0.3438596

Model 4 0.3636299 9.090748E-02

Model (Adjusted) 3 1.977032E-02 6.590106E-03

Error 23 4.04109E-03 1.756995E-04

Total (Adjusted) 26 2.381141E-02

Total 27 0.367671

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2

Expected Normals Predicted

Figure 4.7 Normality plot and residuals versus predicted flank wear of

dry turning process

was given in Table 4.8.

51

Table 4.8 Flank wear model estimation and analysis for dry facing

process

Name Estimate Standard Error 95% C.L. 95% C.L.

C 4.987501E-03 2.264574E-03 3.028726E-04 9.67213E-03

K1 1.011719 0.1148805 0.7740704 1.249367

K2 0.1591203 8.807188E-02 -2.307031E-02 0.3413108

K3 -0.3990844 0.1487553 -0.7068082 -9.136061E-02

k1 k2 k3

Model VB = C V f a

R-Squared 0.809936

Iterations 25

1.011719

Estimated Model = 0.004987501×V ×f 0.1591203×a -0.3990844

Analysis of Variance

Sum of Mean

Source DF Squares Square

Mean 1 0.4109467 0.4109467

Model 4 0.4370982 0.1092745

Model (Adjusted) 3 2.615147E-02 8.717155E-03

Error 23 6.136831E-03 2.668187E-04

Total (Adjusted) 26 0.0322883

Total 27 0.443235

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2

Expected Normals Predicted

Figure 4.8 Normality plot and residuals versus predicted flank wear of

dry facing process

was given in Table 4.9.

52

Table 4.9 Flank wear model estimation and analysis for wet turning

process

Parameter Parameter Asymptotic Lower Upper

Name Estimate Standard Error 95% C.L. 95% C.L.

C 2.876988E-03 1.215817E-03 3.618789E-04 0.005392098

K1 1.058313 0.1069287 0.8371146 1.279512

K2 8.526174E-02 8.070245E-02 -0.081684 0.2522075

K3 -0.3694086 0.1372205 -0.653271 0.08554626

k1 k2 k3

Model VB = C V f a

R-Squared 0.838266

Iterations 27

1.058313

Estimated Model = 0.002876988×V ×f 0.08526174 ×a -0.3694086

Analysis of Variance

Sum of Mean

Source DF Squares Square

Mean 1 0.2569613 0.2569613

Model 4 0.2739351 6.848377E-02

Model (Adjusted) 3 1.697376E-02 5.65792E-03

Error 23 3.274906E-03 1.423872E-04

Total (Adjusted) 26 2.024867E-02

Total 27 0.27721

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2

Expected Normals Predicted

Figure 4.9 Normality plot and residuals versus predicted flank wear of

wet turning process

was given in Table 4.10.

53

Table 4.10 Flank wear model estimation and analysis for wet facing

process

Parameter Parameter Asymptotic Lower Upper

Name Estimate Standard Error 95% C.L. 95% C.L.

C 3.946223E-03 1.790898E-03 2.414693E-04 7.650977E-03

K1 1.010674 0.1148242 0.7731426 1.248206

K2 0.1582187 8.803728E-02 -2.390034E-02 0.3403377

K3 -0.3996844 0.1487119 -0.7073184 -9.205046E-02

k1 k2 k3

Model VB = C V f a

R-Squared 0.809682

Iterations 26

1.010674

Estimated Model = 0.003946223×V ×f 0.1582187 ×a -0.3996844

Analysis of Variance

Sum of Mean

Source DF Squares Square

Mean 1 0.2561815 0.2561815

Model 4 0.2724452 6.811129E-02

Model (Adjusted) 3 0.0162637 5.421232E-03

Error 23 3.822823E-03 1.662097E-04

Total (Adjusted) 26 2.008652E-02

Total 27 0.276268

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2

Expected Normals Predicted

Figure 4.10 Normality plot and residuals versus predicted flank wear of

wet facing process

process was given in Table 4.11.

54

Table 4.11 Flank wear model estimation and analysis for refrigerated

turning process

Parameter Parameter Asymptotic Lower Upper

Name Estimate Standard Error 95% C.L. 95% C.L.

C 1.892394E-03 7.97736E-04 2.421515E-04 3.542637E-03

K1 1.058552 0.1066634 0.8379018 1.279202

K2 0.0907384 8.053679E-02 -7.586465E-02 0.2573414

K3 -0.3774002 0.1368853 -0.6605692 -9.423135E-02

k1 k2 k3

Model VB = C V f a

R-Squared 0.839707

Iterations 26

1.058552

Estimated Model = 0.001892394×V ×f 0.0907384 ×a -0.3774002

Analysis of Variance

Sum of Mean

Source DF Squares Square

Mean 1 0.1086803 0.1086803

Model 4 0.1159024 2.897559E-02

Model (Adjusted) 3 7.22204E-03 2.407347E-03

Error 23 1.378627E-03 5.994029E-05

Total (Adjusted) 26 8.600667E-03

Total 27 0.117281

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1

Expected Normals Predicted

Figure 4.11 Normality plot and residuals versus predicted flank wear of

refrigerated coolant turning process

process was given in Table 4.12.

55

Table 4.12 Flank wear model estimation and analysis for refrigerated

coolant facing process

Parameter Parameter Asymptotic Lower Upper

Name Estimate Standard Error 95% C.L. 95% C.L.

C 9.541166E-04 4.333562E-04 5.7651E-05 1.850582E-03

K1 0.9818614 0.11492 0.7441311 1.219592

K2 0.1223279 8.825677E-02 -6.024513E-02 0.3049009

K3 -0.3384602 0.1495224 -0.6477709 -2.914945E-02

k1 k2 k3

Model VB = C V f a

R-Squared 0.795794

Iterations 27

0.9818614

Estimated Model = 0.0009541166×V ×f 0.1223279 ×a -0.3384602

Analysis of Variance

Sum of Mean

Source DF Squares Square

Mean 1 1.432904E-02 1.432904E-02

Model 4 1.516857E-02 3.792142E-03

Model (Adjusted) 3 8.395329E-04 2.798443E-04

Error 23 2.154301E-04 9.366527E-06

Total (Adjusted) 26 1.054963E-03

Total 27 0.015384

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Expected Normals Predicted

Figure 4.12 Normality plot and residuals versus predicted flank wear of

refrigerated coolant facing process

experimental and regression analysis and statistical inferences. The concept of

56

variable and several independent variables x1, x2,…,xk (Hicks 1993). The

RSM was initially developed and described by Box et al (1957) in the study

of optimization problems in chemical processing engineering. Mead et al

(1975), Hill et al (1966) and Choudhury et al (1999) used this RSM method in

their research. Davim (2003, 2007) also established a correlation between

cutting speed, feed and the cutting time with the tool wear using multiple

regression analysis. This has been used in tool life modelling, surface

roughness modelling, cutting force modelling in the other machining

processes. If all of these variables are assumed to be measurable, the response

surface can be expressed as

the independent variables (x 1,x2,…,xk) are continuous and controllable by the

experimenter with negligible error. The response or the dependent variable is

assumed to be random variable. In general, a suitable combination of cutting

speed (V), feed (f) and depth of cut (a) that optimizes tool life, surface

roughness, cutting force and material removal rate for the lathe machining

operations. The observed response y as a function of the cutting speed, feed

and depth of cut can be written as

surface represented by = f(x1,x2,x3) is called a response surface. It is

required to find a suitable approximation for the true functional relationship

between y and the set of independent variables xi’s. Usually a second order

model is utilized in response to the surface methodology (Montgomery 1991).

57

k k

y 0 i xi ii x i2 ij xi x j for i < j (4.31)

i 1 i 1 i j

of least squares. The response surface methodology can be used to find the

values of the controllable parameters that results in optimization of response

to discover what values for the x values will result in a process satisfying

several requirements or specifications (Kwak 2005). In the present set of

analysis, cutting speed (V), feed (f) and depth of cut (a) are considered as

controlling variables. Their effects on surface roughness and flank wear are

optimized for various cutting conditions.

using response optimizer in MINITAB software and is discussed below. Here

minimizing surface roughness and flank wear are the important objectives in

the machining process. To establish the response optimizer the settings given

in the Table 4.13 are keyed into the program. As per the optimization

requirements the surface roughness and the tool life are having more

importance than the cutting force and material removal rate. Minitab’s

response optimizer searches for combination of input variables that jointly

optimize a set of responses by satisfying the requirements for each response in

the set. The optimization is accomplished by:

desirability (D)

optimal input parameter settings.

58

the simultaneous optimization technique based on the desirability functions.

The general approach is to first convert each response y i into an individual

desirability function d i that varies over the range 0 d i 1 where if the

response yi is at its goal or target, then d i =1, and response is outside an

acceptable region, d i =0. Then the design variables are chosen to maximize

the overall desirability

1

D d1 d 2 ......d m m (4.32)

Surface roughness ‘Ra’ Minimum 0.5 0.5 0.7 1

Flank wear ‘VB’ Minimum 0.1 0.1 0.175 1

the individual and composite desirability value. The optimization results are

discussed in detail at results and discussion chapter.

of a single objective, it is very often hard to define all the aspects in terms of a

single objective. Defining multiple objectives often gives a better idea of the

task. Multi-objective optimization has been available for about two decades,

and its application in real-world problems is continuously increasing

(Malakooti 1991). A single objective optimization algorithm will normally be

59

multi-objective problems, there could be a number of optimal solutions.

Suitability of one solution depends on a number of factors including user’s

choice and problem environment, and hence finding the entire set of optimal

solutions may be desired. Genetic algorithm works with a population of

feasible solutions and, therefore, it can be used in multi-objective

optimization problems to capture a number of solutions simultaneously. The

cutting parameters must be selected that the cutting tool is utilized to the

maximum possible extent and that the desired surface finish as much as

possible. These are two conflicting objectives; therefore a compromise must

be reached. If cutting speed, feed and cutting depth are decreased, the work

efficiency is reduced and the tool resistance to wear prolonged (Cus et al

2002, 2003, 2006). In this way, the tools are saved and the cost of the tool

replacement reduced, but the labour cost and the machining cost are

increased. Inversely, it is not always our aim to produce as much as possible

within the shortest possible time because of machining difficulties of Inconel

718 material. When selecting the optimum cutting conditions for finish

turning operation, the process planner makes a compromise between the

extent of removal of the material and the maximum tool life. The purpose of

the optimization is to determine such a set of the machining parameters V

(cutting speed), f (feed rate), a (depth of cut) that satisfies the limitation

equations and balances the conflicting objectives. The main objective of the

present paper is to determine the optimal machining parameters that minimize

(surface roughness, and cutting force) and maximize (tool life and material

removal rate) the objective functions without violating any imposed cutting

constraints. All of the mentioned objectives are represented as a function of

the cutting speed, feed and depth of cut.

60

modification to the ranking procedure originally proposed by Goldberg for

Multi-objective optimization. This NSGA algorithm is based on several layers

of classifications of the individuals. Before selection is performed, the

population is ranked on the basis of non domination: all non-dominated

individuals are classified into one category (Arsecularatne et al 1992). To

maintain the diversity of the population, these classified individuals are

shared with their dummy fitness values (Ahn 2006). Subsequently, this group

of classified individuals is ignored and another layer of non-dominated

individuals is considered. The process continues until all individuals in the

population are classified. The NSGA is also a highly inefficient algorithm

because of the way in which it classifies individuals. Kalyanmoy Deb (2002)

has proposed an improved version of the NSGA algorithm, called NSGA-II.

The non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm-II (NSGA-II) is a generic non-

explicit based multi-objective evolutionary algorithm applied to multi-

objective problems based on the original design of NSGA shown in

Figure 4.13.

parameters (decision variables) are limited to the bottom and top permissible

limits. Permissible range of cutting conditions of the selected tool, based on

the tool maker specifies the limitations of the cutting conditions. Here surface

roughness and the flank wear are restricted to a maximum of 1.0 m and

0.15 mm respectively. Since these are the constraints which affect selection of

the optimal cutting conditions, they will be taken into account. These

constraints are mathematically modelled using non-linear regression analysis.

61

62

for and which the following parameters were established.

Population Size : 20

No. of generations : 100

Selection Strategy : Tournament Selection

Cross-over Probability : 0.95

Mutation Probability : 0.05

generation is completed. An elaborated discussion is made on the

optimization results in the Results and discussion chapter.

Turning and Facing Processes

robust parameter design, which is an engineering method for product or

process design that focuses on minimizing variation and/or sensitivity to

noise. Taguchi designs are used orthogonal arrays, which estimate the effects

of factors on the response mean and variation. Orthogonal arrays allowed to

investigate each effect independently from the others and may reduce the time

and cost associated with the experiment when fractionated designed are used.

In Taguchi designed experiments, the objective is to identify control factor

settings that minimize the variability produced by uncontrollable factors,

called noise factors. Examples of control factors are equipment settings,

material used to manufacture the product, or product design features. The

factors used in the experiments that cause variability in the performance of a

system or product, but cannot be controlled during production or product use

(Yang et al 1998). However, it can control or simulate noise factors during

experimentation. Based on the choice of noise factor levels reflect the range

of conditions under which the response should remain robust.

63

and environmental exposure.

variability to occur, then from the results, identify optimal control factor

settings that make the process or product resistant, or robust to variation from

the noise factors. Control factors are those design and process parameters that

can be controlled (Davim 2007). The goal of robust experimentation is to find

an optimal combination of control factor settings that achieve robustness

against (insensitivity to) noise factors. Minitab software calculates response

tables, linear model results, and generates main effects and interaction plots

for:

robustness) versus the control factors

control factors

factors.

Use the results and plots to determine factors and interactions are

important and evaluate how they affect responses. To get a complete

understanding of effects of factor, it is advisable to evaluate S/N ratios, means

and standard deviations. Make sure that the choice of an S/N ratio that is

appropriate for the type of data and desired goal for optimizing the response.

In this research the lower values of surface roughness and flank wear are

64

desirable. In the finishing turning and facing processes, desired responses are

minimum surface roughness and minimum flank wear so “Smaller is Better”

ratio is selected (Table 4.14). The surface roughness and flank wear are

individually analysed using MINITAB software. The mean S/N ratio for each

level of the machining parameters is calculated and the results are obtained.

Based on this data the optimal performance for the surface roughness and

flank wear are analysed. The detailed discussion on the optimization results

and its effectiveness are presented in the results and discussion chapter.

Choice

of S/N S/N ratio formulas Desired goal Data type

ratio

Larger 1 Maximize the Positive

S/N = - 10×log )/n

is better Y2 response

Target the Non-negative

response and you with an

(Y 2 ) want to base the "absolute zero"

Nominal S/N = -10 log 2 S/N ratio on in which the

is best means and standard

standard deviation is

deviations zero when the

mean is zero

Y2 Minimize the Non-negative

Smaller S/N = -10 log response with a target

is better n

value of zero

4.3 SUMMARY

simulation software for predicting the effect of various input machining

parameters such as cutting speed, feed and depth of cut on the surface

roughness and flank wear under dry, wet and refrigerated machining

conditions. A non-linear regression equation has been developed and

65

proposed in this chapter. The NCSS, MINITAB and MATLAB software have

been used to develop the mathematical model and optimization process. The

various modelling, optimization and selection techniques have been applied

for analysis of machining parameters and their interaction with the response

variables. The next chapter discuss the performance of carbide cutting tool in

finish turning and facing processes.

- Forecasting TrendsUploaded byMahrukh Rasheed
- Linear RegressionUploaded bymahmud_a
- Impact of Office Design on Employees’ Productivity- A Case study of BankingUploaded byani ni mus
- Linear Regression 1Uploaded byamjaddawar
- Improvement of Earnings of Small Industrial Public of Alcohol Ant Sugar, „Kolang Kaling‟ and Nata de coco Through Technology Usage Precise In Countryside Rasi District Ratahan Sub Provinsi Minahasa South EastUploaded byInternational Organization of Scientific Research (IOSR)
- Linear Regression with One Predictor variableUploaded byZaid Hadi
- IM.2012_coursework Guidelines 3Uploaded byMartin Kukovski
- econ 203 final projectUploaded byapi-341699951
- Multiple Linear RegressionUploaded byNamdev
- IJRTEM_H021052065.pdfUploaded byjournal
- Managerial Economic 2Uploaded byAhmad Hirzi Azni
- RegressionUploaded bybibekmishra8107
- 330 Diagnostics 2015Uploaded byPETER
- 19871-22084-1-PBUploaded byindian royal
- Ceramic IndustryUploaded byShishir Gupta
- 07 Solutions RegressionUploaded byijaz afzal
- Impact of Executive Support on Organizational Core Competencies Management for Strategic Product InnovationUploaded byInternational Journal of Business Marketing and Management
- Introduction to s AsUploaded byrabindra
- Intro to FinanceUploaded byNotmeNo
- Indri Sas FixUploaded byindriyani hasanah
- Chap 011Uploaded byRishi Bigghe
- Lect 4Uploaded bythermopolis3012
- QBA finalUploaded byAl Amin
- ANL-DIS-06-3Uploaded byMohammed Abdo
- curve fitUploaded byprakush_prakush
- Regression an OvaUploaded byatul_sancheti
- impact of office design on employees productivityUploaded byapi-237768633
- 13_Regression1Uploaded byMoldovian Daria
- BEUploaded bySania Wadud
- 5451-1Uploaded byabhi

- Class 22Uploaded byNaas Djeddaoui
- Nonlinear Regression Using EXCEL SolverUploaded byRalph John Ugalino
- GPVDM simulation.pdfUploaded byNaas Djeddaoui
- The StrangerUploaded bysveralrus
- 100 most commonirregular verbs list.pdfUploaded byFabian Philip
- 243Uploaded byNaas Djeddaoui
- OPVUploaded byHimadri Mandal
- 10.1109@pvsc.2012.6318272Uploaded byNaas Djeddaoui
- 1-s2.0-S0009261415007010-mainUploaded byNaas Djeddaoui
- 925280Uploaded byNaas Djeddaoui
- Tesis Celdafv+Organicas Myungsu 1Uploaded bysdle
- ICRESD07_14Uploaded byJhon Burbano
- vedioUploaded byNaas Djeddaoui
- Part III – I-V Characterization of Photovoltaic Cells Using PXI - National InstrumentsUploaded byNaas Djeddaoui
- IEA-PVPS T13!01!2014Uploaded byNaas Djeddaoui
- Comparative Study of the Effects-2717.pdfUploaded byNaas Djeddaoui
- Programming in PascaL البرمجة بلغة باسكالUploaded byأكبر مكتبة كتب عربية
- Carriere Et Al_ - Paper JNES 2014 FinalUploaded byNaas Djeddaoui
- Nouveau document texte.txtUploaded byNaas Djeddaoui
- 06645304Uploaded byNaas Djeddaoui
- Ee 290 c PresentationUploaded byNitu Vlsi
- 555_timer.pptUploaded byMuhammad Aqeel Aslam

- 2_lecture.pdfUploaded bySangetha Chelladorai
- statistical_toolbox_manual.pdfUploaded byLyly Magnan
- Lecture 4_decline Curve AnalysisUploaded bygeber39
- 26430838 Nonlinear Least Squares Data Fitting in Excel SpreadsheetsUploaded byAlbyzia
- [essay] It Feels Like We're Thinking. The rationalizing voter. Bartels.pdfUploaded byManuel R. Fraga
- Exam InterpretationUploaded byShashi Dhar
- Polymath Demo Solutions 2002Uploaded byNozes Da Castanha
- 9780470316757.ch2Uploaded bykherberrus
- nlreg10E.pdfUploaded bybennyferguson
- Twyman-Lothian-Beer´s-LawUploaded byMaicol García
- (Motulsky, Brown) Detecting Outliers When Fitting Data With Nonlinear Regression – a New Method Based on Robust Nonlinear Regression and the False Discovery RateUploaded byJohann Sebastian Claveria
- 848-sap-bw-35-regression-analysis.pdfUploaded byrohit sharma
- Nonlinear Regression EBS127Uploaded byHamza Shaikh
- The Bass Model - Marketing EngineeringUploaded byNecula Amalia
- Analyzing Data PrismUploaded byShannon Smith
- P4 Dose Response CurvesUploaded bySiti Zaleha Raduan
- Analysis, Evaluation, And Optimization of Kinetic ParametersUploaded byThiagoSilvaOliver
- Equillibrium dialysis Manual.pdfUploaded byOwen Chen
- Six Sigma Black Belt - Cheat SheetUploaded byrgrao85
- 59492741-Nonlinear-Regression-MATLAB.pdfUploaded byAndika Bayu Aji
- Rheology of Supersaturated Sucrose SolutionsUploaded byAtmira Nurandarini Utomo
- The Most Important Economic Traits of Japanese Quail Are Their Egg and Meat ProductionUploaded byAgungFauzi
- Group 10 - Curve Fitting.docxUploaded bykaye
- NLS Tools forUploaded byTyler
- RegressionUsingExcelUploaded bySaleem Rashid
- invitro drug release kinetics excellent.pdfUploaded byvelsiva2k6554
- Sprexpnntl Trnds Info TechUploaded byiweinel
- 1110201-4343 IJET-IJENSUploaded byShakerMahmood
- NLREGUploaded bymanuelq9
- Introduction to econometrics - Christopher DoughertyUploaded byMarco Antonio Tumiri López