Int. J. Manufacturing Research, Vol. X, No.

Y, xxxx 1

Optimisation of resistance spot welding process for

real unconstrained and constrained scenarios using
cuckoo search algorithm

Rushikesh Dandagwhal*
Mechanical Engineering Department,
NMIMS, MPSTME, Shirpur,
Maharashtra, 425405, India
Email: dandgwhalpes@gmail.com
*Corresponding author

C.V. Chavan
Optimisation and Simulation,
TATA Steel,
Jamshedpur, 831001, India

Chandrakant Wani
Mechanical Engineering Department,
NMIMS, MPSTME, Shirpur,
Maharashtra, 425405, India

Abstract: The optimum selection of process parameters is essential for a

designer, as it incur high initial investment, power and; operating and
maintenance costs. This article presents optimisation aspects of resistance spot
welding process using cuckoo search algorithm. The parameters are studied
critically to obtain the optimum settings satisfying one or more quality
characteristics. Some constrained and unconstrained single as well as
multi-objective optimisation problems related to the practical case studies are
solved. The obtained results are compared with those derived by the past
researchers. It is found that the present results are better than the previous
results in all the cases. The solved examples illustrated a novel effectiveness of
the presented algorithm and its application suitability in the field of resistance
spot welding.

Keywords: resistance spot welding; RSW; cuckoo search algorithm; CSA;

optimisation; parameters; response.

Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Dandagwhal, R.,

Chavan, C.V. and Wani, C. (xxxx) ‘Optimisation of resistance spot welding
process for real unconstrained and constrained scenarios using cuckoo search
algorithm’, Int. J. Manufacturing Research, Vol. X, No. Y, pp.xxx–xxx.

Biographical notes: Rushikesh Dandagwhal is an Assistant Professor at the

NMIMS, Mukesh Patel school of Technology Management and Engineering,
Shirpur, Maharashtra, India. He holds an MTech in CAD-CAM from the SV
National Institute of Technology, Surat, India. He has more than five years of

Copyright © 20XX Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

2 R. Dandagwhal et al.

experience in teaching and research. His current areas of research include

modelling and simulation, analysis and optimisation of resistant spot welding
and ballistic impact analysis of composite.

C.V. Chavan is a Manager in the Optimisation and Simulation, TATA Steel,

Jamshedpur, India. He holds an ME in Production from the Pune University,
Pune, India. He has more than six years of experience in optimisation and
research. His current areas of research include modelling and simulation,
analysis and optimisation of resistant spot welding and application of advanced
optimisation techniques. He has two research articles in reputed journals.

Chandrakant Wani is an Assistant Professor at the NMIMS, Mukesh Patel

school of Technology and Management, Shirpur, Maharashtra, India. He holds
an ME in Thermal system from the RGPV, Indore, India. He has more than six
years of experience in teaching and research. His current areas of research
include modelling and simulation, analysis and optimisation of resistant spot
welding and design of hybrid solar system. He has two research articles in
reputed journals.

1 Introduction

Resistance spot welding (RSW) is one of the primary welding processes and is
predominantly used in sheet metal joining applications such as automotive, rail, pressure
vessel, aerospace, etc. due to high productivity, low-cost, and short cycle times. The
process is preferred over mechanical fasteners, such as rivets or screws, when
disassembly is not required. Also, RSW is characterised by ability to weld
multi-material-multi-thickness sheets, non-chemical operation and does not require any
filler material for the joining of the materials. In RSW, coalescence of metal is produced
at the faying surface by the heat generated at the joint following Joule’s formula as given
by equation (1).
T2
Q= ∫T1
I (t ) 2 R(t )dt (1)

where ‘Q’ is the amount of heat energy generated in the weld, ‘I(t)’ is the welding
current, ‘R(t)’ is the resistance of the sheet metals, and ‘T1’, ‘T2’ denotes the beginning
and ending times of the operation, respectively. External electrical power is applied on
the work-pieces, for the generation of heat and it is initially generated at the interface of
two separate metal sheets, and then gradually spreads to nearby zones. In general cases,
the electrode force is applied on the RSW process to hold the sheets and is controlled
with air pressure in a pneumatic cylinder using a predetermined setting. General
schematic of working during various stages of RSW operation is shown in Figure 1.
RSW is a mass production method, particularly in automobile sector, wherein on an
average a vehicle body contains 3,000–7,000 spots (Martin et al., 2007), thus it becomes
very important to fine tune the parameters. RSW has some quality concerns also, as
major input parameters (such as welding current, welding power, welding time, sheet
thickness, and electrode force) governing the process are correlated; and thus makes the
process complicated. Large number of parameters as well as complex and stochastic
nature of the process mean that achieving the optimal performance, even for a highly
 Optimisation of resistance spot welding process for real unconstrained 3

skilled operator with a state-of-the-art RSW machine, is rarely possible. Also, process
parameter selection directly determines the amount of heat input and economy of the
welded joints, thus to obtain a good quality RSW weld is a challenging task for the
researchers. To overcome these challenges, various researchers experimented with RSW
and tried to optimise the process for various quality concerns. The next section presents a
brief review of the past research work done on optimisation of RSW process parameters.

Figure 1 Schematic representation of a typical RSW cycle

Source: Pereira et al. (2010

1.1 Review on parametric optimisation of RSW

In recent years, number of researchers applied various modelling and optimisation
techniques to improve the quality of RSW process. Particularly single-objective
optimisation is achieved by numerous researchers using traditional techniques such as:
Lin et al. (2008) applied Taguchi method and back propagated neural network (BPNN)
model for optimising tensile-shear (TS) strength based on electrode tip diameter, welding
current, electrode force and welding time. Esme (2009) applied design of experiment
(DOE) and Taguchi method to study the effect of RSW parameters such as electrode
force, welding current, welding time and electrode diameter on the TS strength. Kim
et al. (2011) applied ANOVA and Taguchi method to study the effect and influence of
welding current, electrode force and weld time on the joint strength of cross wires of
316 LVM stainless steel of 0.38 mm diameter by using RSW. Liang and Liu (2009) used
response surface method (RSM) for strength prediction of single sided sheet to tube RSW
process. Luo et al. (2009) applied RSM for predicting nugget diameter (ND) and TS
strength of the galvanised steels sheets. Oscar et al. (2009) optimised TS load bearing
capacity and micro-hardness of 304 austenitic steel and Hoseini et al. (2017) optimised
shear-tensile strength of the welded joints of Inconel alloy 625 by using artificial neural
network (ANN). Input parameters considered were welding current, welding time and
electrode force. Boriwal et al. (2012) optimised welding current, welding time and
electrode pressure for galvanised sheets. DOE was applied for recording the reading and
4 R. Dandagwhal et al.

effect of parameters was examined on quality characteristics such as nugget size, TS

strength, tensile-peel strength and failure mode. Faseeulla Khan et al. (2012) applied
RSM for optimising TS strength of 6061-T651 aluminium sheets based on welding
current, time and electrode force.
Apart from traditional techniques, RSW is optimised by few researchers for
single-objective optimisation problems using non-traditional approaches such as: Tseng
(2006) applied an approach of combining generalised regression neural network and
genetic algorithm (GRNN-GA) for optimising failure load within minimum RSW power
constraint. Lai et al. (2009) applied GA for optimising electrode cooling system of the
RSW process. Hamidinejad et al. (2012) predicted optimum TS strength based on
welding current, electrode force, welding time and holding time by applying GA. Zhao
et al. (2014a) modelled RSW by using RSM for optimising the value of failure energy.
After modelling, optimum value of input parameters and maximum failure load was
predicted by artificial fish swarm algorithm. Fang et al. (2014) applied artificial bee
colony integrated sequential Kriging optimisation for optimising fatigue life based on
spot locations.
Apart from single-objective optimisation, very few researchers opted for
multi-objective optimisation of RSW such as: Torres-Trevino et al. (2011) opted for
combined NN evonorm and GA for multi-objective optimisation of indentation and spot
diameter. Muhammad et al. (2013) did RSW optimisation using multi-objective Taguchi
and RSM method. Author simultaneously optimised weld nugget and HAZ width for
weld current, weld time and hold time. Pashazadeh et al. (2014) applied multi-objective
optimisation based on DOE, NN and (MOGA) NSGA-II. Simultaneous optimisation of
ND and nugget height based on welding force, current and time was done. Zhao et al.
(2014b) did multi-objective optimisation of titanium alloys based on RSM-based
principle component analysis. Simultaneous optimisation of ND, penetration rate, TS-
strength and failure energy was achieved. Wan et al. (2015) performed multi-objective
optimisation of ND, failure load, failure displacement and failure energy for small scale
RSW. Multiple stepwise regressions-based weighted principle components and GA was
applied for predicting optimum parameters.
By reporting aforementioned articles major conclusions related to the RSW
parametric optimisation are enumerated as:
1 Most of the researchers opted for single-objective optimisation of RSW process.
2 Traditional techniques such as Taguchi method, DOE, RSM and NN had been used
extensively to model, predict and optimise the RSW process parameters. Along with
these methods, GA is preferred as a primary optimisation tool for single as well as
multi-objective optimisation. However; RSW has complex functions, constraints and
numerous parameters for which the traditional techniques lacks the robustness and
may obtain a sub-optimal or near optimal solutions, leaving a scope for further
improvement.
3 Despite numerous correlated input parameters and quality characteristics, very few
literatures corresponding to the multi-objective optimisation aspects have been
reported so far.
4 Constrained optimisation of RSW is a rarely researched though there are lot of
constraints (such as power requirement, electrode degradation, spot spacing, etc.)
needed not to be violated while achieving the quality joints.
 Optimisation of resistance spot welding process for real unconstrained 5

5 There is a rare application of advanced meta-heuristic and population-based

algorithms in the field of RSW process to determine parameter settings more
accurately.
By considering all these aspects, the area related to application of advanced optimisation
methods for RSW process optimisation has been explored in the present work. An
attempt is made to solve some RSW unconstrained, constrained, single as well as
multi-objective problems using cuckoo search algorithm (CSA). The obtained results are
compared with the earlier results, trends of response variation are predicted and; new and
better parametric combinations are derived.

2 Cuckoo search algorithm

The CSA is a meta-heuristic bio-inspired algorithm developed by mimicking strange

hatching of cuckoo eggs. Some female parasitic cuckoos can imitate the colours and
patterns of the eggs of a few chosen host species, thus they lay their eggs in the host bird
nests. This reduces the probability of the eggs being abandoned and therefore, increases
their re-productivity. However; if host birds discover that the eggs are not their own, they
will either throw them away or simply abandon their nests and build new ones,
elsewhere. This phenomenon of hatching and survival of cuckoo eggs is used by Yang
and Deb (2009) to develop a CSA. In the CSA, each egg represents a solution and the
aim is to employ the new and potentially better solutions to replace not-so-good solutions
in the nests. The algorithm is based on three idealised rules (Yang and Deb, 2009; Long
et al., 2014):
• Each cuckoo lays one egg at a time, and dumps it in a randomly chosen nest.
• The best nests with high quality of eggs (solutions) will carry over to the next
iterations.
• The number of available host nests is fixed, and a host can discover an alien egg with
a probability Pa ∈ [0, 1]. In this case, the host bird can either throw the egg away or
abandon the nest so as to build a completely new nest in a new location.
For simplicity, the last assumption is approximated by a fraction ‘Pa’ of the ‘n’ nests
being replaced by new nests, having new random solutions. When generating new
solutions ‘xi(t + 1)’ for the ‘ith’ cuckoo and ‘tth’ iteration, the Lévy flight is performed as
shown by equation (2).
xi (t + 1) = xi (t ) + α ⊕ Lévy ( λ) (2)

where α > 0 is the step size, which should be related to the scale of the problem of
interest and the product ‘⊕’ means entry-wise multiplication location (Yang and Deb,
2009). In Lévy flight the step-lengths are distributed according to the probability
distribution which has an infinite variance as given in equation (3).
Lévy u = t − λ , 1 ≤ λ ≤ 3 (3)

The consecutive steps of a cuckoo follow a random walk process. It is also noted that, in
the real world, if a cuckoo’s egg is very similar to a host’s eggs, then it is less likely to be
6 R. Dandagwhal et al.

discovered, thus the fitness is related to the difference in solutions. Therefore, it is a good
idea to do a random walk in a biased way with some random step size locations (Yang
and Deb, 2010). Based on the above implementation, basic steps of the CSA are
summarised as the pseudo code, as follows (Yang and Deb, 2010):
Begin
Objective function f(x), x = (x1, …, xd)T;
Generate initial population of ‘n’ host nests (or solutions) xi(i = 1, 2, …, n);
While (t < MaxIteration) or (stop criterion);
Get a Cuckoo (Say i) randomly by Lévy flights;
Evaluate its quality/fitness Fi;
Choose a nest among ‘n’ (say j) randomly;
if (Fi > Fj)
replace ‘j’ by the new solution;
end
Abandon a fraction (Pa) of worse nests
[and build new ones at new locations via Lévy flights];
Keep the best solutions (or nests with quality solutions);
Rank the solutions and find the current best;
end while
Post process results and visualisation;

From the time of inception, CSA is applied by the numerous researchers for predicting
optimum results of engineering problems (Yang and Deb, 2009; Gandomi et al., 2013;
Yildiz, 2013; Valian, 2013; Koyee et al., 2014; Goswami and Chakraborty, 2015).
Application of CSA in above fields successfully predicted optimum parameters for
continuous single and multi-objective optimisation models within the given ranges and
constraints. CSA has a strong convergence and a high exploration capability, thus is
always considered as a promising algorithm to find optimal solutions for complex
optimisation problems. Moreover; CSA is also found superior to other algorithms such as
PSO, DE, GA, ABC, immune system, FA, etc. (Yang and Deb, 2009; Gandomi et al.,
2013; Yildiz, 2013; Goswami and Chakraborty, 2015; Asadi et al., 2014). By
summarising these literatures, it can be inferred that, CSA is relevant for solving all types
of complex optimisation problems; and as it is a population-based algorithm, chances of
achieving global optimum solution are utmost. Thus it is decided to use CSA for
predicting the performance of RSW process.

3 Optimisation of resistance spot welding process

In order to perform parametric optimisation of RSW process, some constrained and

unconstrained single as well as multi-objective optimisation problems are solved using
CSA. Example 1 presents unconstrained single and multi-objective optimisation of RSW
process considering ND and TS strength as the quality characteristics. Example 2 reports
a constrained single-objective multi-parameter optimisation for failure load and nugget
area (NA) without violating the minimum power constraint. Example 3 demonstrates
 Optimisation of resistance spot welding process for real unconstrained 7

optimisation of RSW process for unconstrained single-objective optimisation of TS

strength.

3.1 Example 1
In this example, Luo et al. (2009) considered ND and TS strength as the RSW quality
characteristics to be optimised. ND and TS strength are the primary quality
characteristics of RSW process and determine safety and integrity of the joint assembly.
Luo et al. (2009) carried out experiments employing a RSM-based design to establish
mathematical relationship between two responses (ND and TS) and RSW parameters
such as welding current (x1), electrode force (x2), current duration (x3) and preheating
current (x4). The objective of the work was to maximise the ND and TS strength for given
search space. Equations (4) and (5) shows the reported models considering main effects,
higher order effects and interaction effects for ND and TS strength, respectively.
Corresponding lower and upper bounds of the parameters are given as: 9000 ≤ x1 ≤
12,000 (A), 0.2 ≤ x2 ≤ 0.5 (Mpa), 8 ≤ x3 ≤ 18 (cycles), 4,000 ≤ x4 ≤ 7,000 (A). Table 1
represents the actual and corresponding coded variables reported.
YND = 6.05 + 0.39 x1 − 0.51x2 + 0.43 x3 + 0.31x1 x2 − 0.39 x1 x3 + 0.36 x2 x3
(4)
−0.15 x3 x4 − 0.09 x22 − 0.31x32

YTS = 6.664 + 0.825 x1 − 0.462 x2 + 0.97 x3 + 0.682 x1 x2 − 0.611x1 x3

(5)
+0.551x2 x3 − 0.449 x32 + 0.345 x42

For converting the natural parameters to the coded levels for jth parameter (any out of
four), equation (6) is used as given below:

( X j − X jLevel )
0
Zj = (6)
(∇ j )

Luo et al. (2009) employed RSM for optimising the parameters for maximum ND and TS
strength. However; to contemplate for the further improvement same models are now
explored using CSA. At first, both equations are separately optimised using CSA (at
25 cuckoos, 0.25 detection probability and 50 iterations) and the corresponding
single-objective optimisation results along with results of Luo et al. (2009) are shown in
Table 2. It is clearly observed that, for single-objective optimisation, the results obtained
by CSA are better than those obtained by the earlier results for both the responses. The
CSA persistently reported the improvement in the ND which is 2.5% more than that
reported earlier. The convergence of result for ND is shown in Figure 2(a). Considering
TS strength, Luo et al. (2009) reported the maximum value of 8.57 kN whereas, CSA has
given a much better impact strength of 9.92 kN reporting the improvement in TS of
15.75% over that obtained by earlier results. The convergence of results [as given in
Figure 2(b)] is also very fast and the result is obtained in third iteration only. Such
significant improvement in the result indicates the superiority of CSA towards the global
optimum solution. Also, the optimal process parameter settings are significantly changed.
Though the value of population size and number of iterations are very less, CSA still
converged very fast indicating it’s effectiveness in predicting the optimum RSW
parameters.
8 R. Dandagwhal et al.

Figure 2 Convergence of (a) ND and (b) TS strength obtained by CSA for example 1 (see online
version for colours)

(a) (b)

Table 1 Parameters and coded level for example 1

Natural variable (Xj)

Coded variable (Zj)
X1 X2 X3 X4
Upper star arm level (γ) 12,000 0.5 18 7,000
Upper level (1) 11,511 0.45 16 6,511
Zero level (0) 10,500 0.35 13 5,500
Bottom level (–1) 9,489 0.25 10 4,489
Bottom star arm level (–γ) 9,000 0.2 8 4,000
Variable spacing (∇j) 1,011 0.1 3 1,011
Source: Lou et al. (2009)
Table 2 Comparative results of single-objective optimisation for example 1

Parameter
Work Optimisation Optimal
Response x1 x2 x3 x4
done by method value
(A) (Mpa) (cycles) (A)
Luo et al. RSM Nugget 7.00 12,000 0.25 10 7,000
(2009) diameter (mm)
Tensile-shear 8.57 12,000 0.35 12 4,000
strength (kN)
Proposed CSA Nugget 7.18 12,000 0.2 8.62 7,000
work diameter (mm)
Tensile-shear 9.92 12,000 0.5 15.96 4,000
strength (kN)
 Table 3

Parameter
Combined objective
Work done by Optimisation method Condition Response Optimal value x1 x2 x3 x4
function (Z)
(A) (MPa) (cycles) (A)
Luo et al. (2009) RSM N.A. ND (mm) 6.62 N.A. 12,000 0.3 12 4,000
TS (kN) 8.39
Proposed work CSA W1 = W2 = 0.5 ND (mm) 6.67 0.964 12,000 0.5 15.9 4,000
TS (kN) 9.91
Multi-objective optimisation of example 1 using ICS algorithm
Optimisation of resistance spot welding process for real unconstrained
9
10 R. Dandagwhal et al.

Figure 3 Variation of ND with respect to different process parameters for example 1 (see online
version for colours)

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

The scatter plots in Figures 3 and 4 exhibit the variations of ND and TS strength with
respect to four RSW process parameters. The dots in these plots represent the locations in
the search space that are navigated by the CSA in one simulation run. These figures are
used to understand the trend of variation in both responses within the selected range of
process parameters. In these figures, the variation of the responses for each parameter can
be easily observed. It is also observed that, converge rate of the CSA is very fast as the
density of scatter points towards the optimum solution is very high. In Figure 3, it is
clearly observed that ND would increase with an increase in the welding current and
preheat current and an increase in the values of electrode force and current duration
would cause it to decrease. Thus, a combination of welding current = 12,000 A,
electrode force = 0.2 MPa, current duration = 8.62 cycles, preheating current = 7,000 A
can be set for obtaining the maximum ND. Figure 4 exhibits that the TS strength would
increase with an increase in the welding current and electrode force. For current duration,
TS strength increases initially and then it decreases towards the highest value after
16 cycles. However; preheating current showed a slight symmetry of variation in TS
 Optimisation of resistance spot welding process for real unconstrained 11

strength; and it is highest at the low end of parameter limit. For maximum TS strength; a
combination of welding current = 12,000 A, electrode force = 0.5 MPa, current
duration = 15.96 cycles, preheating current = 4,000 A can be set. These predicted
variations in responses are found in agreement with the earlier trends, moreover; it
improved the results.

Figure 4 Variation of TS with respect to different process parameters for example 1 (see online
version for colours)

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

It is also noted that, Luo et al. (2009) graphically predicted the parameters satisfying both
the responses simultaneously, however; by considering the inherently nonlinearity and
highly coupled multi-variability of the RSW process, it is necessary to apply
multi-objective optimisation aspect more scientifically. As no literatures are available on
model-based priori multi-objective optimisation approach for RSW process, an attempt is
made to predict the parametric combination using priori-weight approach. For the same, a
combined objective function is developed as shown by equation (7).
W1YND W2YTS
Max( Z ) = + (7)
NDmax TSmax
12 R. Dandagwhal et al.

where W1 and W2 are the relative importance prior-weights assigned to ND and TS

strength respectively, and NDmax and TSmax are the maximum or threshold values of ND
and TS, respectively. These maximum values of the two responses are the values
obtained from single-objective optimisation results reported by CSA. The weight values
allotted to the responses are so chosen that W1 + W2 = 1. It is to be noted that the most
acceptable and compromised optimisation results are obtained when equal importance is
allotted to both the responses, i.e., when the weightages are set as: W1 = W2 = 0.5. Still,
the choice for these weights entirely depends on the preference of the process designer.
Table 3 shows the results of multi-objective optimisation while employing CSA for equal
weightages along with the predictions of Luo et al. (2009). In present work, CSA
predicted simultaneous results showing improvement over the earlier predicted results for
both the responses. It can be used as a guideline by the future researchers to optimise
multiple responses simultaneously, as this approach is not used at all in the field of RSW.
Figure 5 shows the variation of combined objective function with respect to W1 and W2.
As both the responses are of maximisation type, it is observed that the value of ‘Z’ is
higher in the respective ends of the weightages and decreased towards the centre, i.e., at
the equal weightages.

Figure 5 Variation of combined objective function with respect to W1 and W2 (see online version
for colours)

3.2 Example 2
In this example, Darwish and AL-Dekhial (1999) performed RSW operation on BS1050
commercially pure Al sheets using a Meriut pedestal spot welding machine incorporating
a single-phase AC power supply. Authors considered four parameters with five levels
namely, welding current (x1), electrode force (x2), welding time (x3) and sheet thickness
(x4) as shown in the Table 4. RSM was applied to obtain input-output relation and predict
optimum parameters. For converting the natural parameters to the coded value
equation (8) is used as reported by Darwish and AL-Dekhial (1999):
 Optimisation of resistance spot welding process for real unconstrained 13

( X − X Level )
Xi = 0
(8)
( X Level+2 − X Level+1 )
where ‘Xi’ represents coded level of any parameter out of the four, and ‘X’ denotes actual
value of the corresponding parameter.
Darwish and AL-Dekhial (1999) calculated the resistances for 0.5 and 2.5 mm
aluminium sheet thickness as 3.663 × 104 Ω and 3.691 × 104 Ω, respectively and based on
the linear relationship between the sheet thickness and the average sheet resistance, the
resistances of 1, 1.5 and 2 mm thickness were reported to be 3.671 × 104 Ω, 3.678 ×
104 Ω and 3.685 × 104 Ω, respectively. The power consumption in the spot welding was
calculated according to the following equation (9):
P = I 2 RT (9)
where I is the welding current (A), R is the welding resistance (Ω), and T is the welding
time (ms). Darwish and AL-Dekhial (1999) optimised the input variables for
maximisation of failure load (N) and NA (mm2). For predicting the optimum parameters,
two separate third-order regression equations were developed for failure load and nugget
area. The corresponding third-order equations for failure load (FL) and NA in coded form
are given below by equations (10) and (11):
YFL = 911.8334 + 110.6112 x1 − 24.30555 x2 + 0.9722194 x3 + 8.500017 x4
27.77425 x12 + 2.649296 x22 − 10.35072 x32 − 84.30904 x42 − 27.5625 x1 x2
(10)
−12.43749 x1 x3 + 28.43751x1 x4 + 34.27086 x2 x3 − 10.10416 x2 x4
−1.22916 x3 x4 + 14.61806 x13 − 13.50695 x23 + 13.09028 x33 + 23.10417 x43

YNA = 16.9375 + 3.673612 x1 − 0.6736119 x2 + 0.7708336 x3 + 0.6319443 x4

0.09374888 x12 − 0.4375005 x22 − 0.1875002 x32 − 0.385417 x42
−0.7239584 x1 x2 + 0.6614584 x1 x3 + 0.6041668 x1 x4 + 0.5729167 x2 x3 (11)
+0.2343749 x2 x4 + 0.1406251x3 x4 − 0.07986146 x13 − 0.3836804 x23
−0.046875 x33 − 0.006944478 x43
Table 4 Four parameters with five levels

Level Levels
Parameter (unit) coding
–2 –1 0 +1 +2
Welding current (A) x1 13,860.3 15,236.315 16,612.33 17,988.345 19,364.36
Electrode force (N) x2 756.56 980.65 1,204.746 1,428.84 1,652.93
Welding time (ms) x3 75 140 205 270 335
Sheet thickness (mm) x4 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Source: Darwish and AL-Dekhial (1999)
 14

Table 5
R. Dandagwhal et al.

Optimisation Parameter Power

Work done by Response Optimal value
method x1 (A) x2 (N) x3 (ms) x4 (mm) consumption (KJ)

Darwish and AL-Dekhial RSM Failure load (N) 350 17,604.00 1,652.93 264.264 0.5 30
(1999) Nugget area (mm2) 9 16,718.58 1,652.93 318.75 0.5 32
Tseng (2006) GRNN-GA Failure load (N) 1,200 19,283.74 1,170.53 119.920 0.5 16.36
Proposed work CSA Failure load (N) 1,739.8 19,364.3 756.56 114.91 1.87 15.79*
1,738.1* 2*
Nugget area (mm2) 31.18 19,364.36 756.56 229.5765 2.38 31.6*
31.16* 2.5*
Note: *Thickness adjusted to next possible higher value.
Result of single-objective RSW optimisation for example 2
 Optimisation of resistance spot welding process for real unconstrained 15

Employing RSM approach for single-objective optimisation, Darwish and AL-Dekhial

(1999) determined the parametric settings for both the responses within minimum power
constraint. Also, for the same experimentation work, Tseng (2006) applied general
GRNN-GA approach for maximising single-objective optimisation of failure load for
minimum power constraint. In present work, the two RSM-based equations are optimised
using the CSA (at 25 cuckoos, 0.25 detection probability and 50 iterations). The
corresponding present single-objective optimisation results along with results of Darwish
and AL-Dekhial (1999) and Tseng (2006) are shown in Table 5.
In present work also, for optimising the process parameters, constraint of power
consumption is considered. It is to be noted that the maximum power that can be utilised
by the machine is 46.3 kJ considering maximum values of current, sheet resistance and
time respectively in the equation (9). For optimising FL, Tseng (2006) proposed optimum
parameters corresponding to minimum power requirement of 16.36 kJ. Thus, in order to
find out whether the better solution exists or not for the FL, it is searched in the power
constraint given by Tseng (2006). Thus, the power requirement constraint applied for FL
is given as P = I2RT ≤ 16.36 kJ. However; for NA, Darwish and AL-Dekhial (1999)
proposed optimum parameters corresponding to minimum power requirement of 32 kJ.
Thus, in order to find out whether the better solution exists or not for the NA, it is
searched in the power constraint given by Darwish and AL-Dekhial (1999). So, the
power requirement constraint applied for NA is given as P = I2RT ≤ 32 kJ. After
considering the above conditions, CSA is applied for optimising FL and NA as given by
equations (10) and (11), respectively. It is to be noted that, the best results obtained in
present work are at the penalty value of 50 and five for FL and NA, respectively.

Figure 6 Convergence of (a) FL and (b) NA obtained by CSA for example 2 (see online version
for colours)

(a) (b)

From Table 5 it is observed that CSA have clearly dominated the results obtained by the
earlier researchers. In case of FL, the improvement observed is 396% and 44% over RSM
and GRNN-GA results respectively within the minimum power constraint. For NA it
shows an improvement of 246% over RSM results for minimum power constraint.
Considerable improvement is obtained over the earlier predicted results and the constraint
of minimum power requirement is also not violated. It confirms the large scope for RSW
quality improvement and prediction accuracy of CSA. Figure 6 represents convergence of
16 R. Dandagwhal et al.

CSA for constrained single-objective optimisation of FL and NA, respectively and it is

observed that, though there is constrained optimisation, CSA still converged very fast.
The scatter plots in Figures 7 and 8 depict the variations of FL and NA with respect to
four RSW process parameters. For example 2 also, converge rate of the algorithm is very
fast as the density of scatter points towards the optimum solution is very high. Figure 7
shows that FL would increase with an increase in the current and an increase in the value
of force would cause it to decrease. For time it increases for a while and then rapid
decrease in FL is observed for increasing value of time. For thickness it predicted a near
average value for maximum value of FL. Figure 8 exhibits that the NA would increase
with an increase in the current and thickness; and higher value of force would cause it to
decrease. For time, it predicted near average value as NA increases initially and then it
decreases rapidly towards the highest value.

Figure 7 Variation of FL with respect to different process parameters for example 2 (see online
version for colours)

(a) (b)

(c) (d)
 Optimisation of resistance spot welding process for real unconstrained 17

Figure 8 Variation of NA with respect to different process parameters for example 2 (see online
version for colours)

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

3.3 Example 3
The optimisation problem formulated in this example is based on the empirical model
reported by Faseeulla Khan et al. (2012). RSM was employed earlier for modelling and
predicting the TS strength (kN) of the RSW welded 6061-T651 aluminium alloy sheet of
2 mm thickness (2-C plain epoxy resin) adhesive. The experimented three continuous
process parameters with three levels are namely, welding current (x1), welding time (x2)
and welding pressure (x3). Equation (12) shows the model reported by Faseeulla Khan
et al. (2012) for maximising TS strength of the weld bonds.
YTS = −132.15 + 12.94 x1 + 9.19 x2 + 8 x3 − 0.32 x12 − 0.32 x22 − 0.42 x32 − 0.23 x1 x2
(12)
−0.28 x1 x3 − 0.28 x2 x3

The upper and lower limits involved in the models for the process parameters are:
14 ≤ x1 ≤ 18 (kA), 4 ≤ x2 ≤ 8 (cycles), 4 ≤ x3 ≤ 6 (Kg/cm2). In present work, the model
18 R. Dandagwhal et al.

given by equation (12) is optimised using CSA (at 25 cuckoos, 0.25 detection probability
and 50 iterations) and the results obtained by CSA along with the results of
Faseeulla Khan et al. (2012) are shown in the Table 6. The objective function, process
parameters and their bounds considered in present work are same as those considered by
Faseeulla Khan et al. (2012). It is to be noted that by using CSA, the TS strength is
improved by 9.1% when compared with the earlier results. In this example also, CSA
converged at very small value of iterations as shown in the Figure 9(a). Simultaneous and
rapid convergence of the parameters is shown in the Figure 9(b) and it is observed that
mathematical model developed by Faseeulla Khan et al. (2012) converged very rapidly at
the optimum solution. In this example, it’s worth mentioning that, despite only three
parameters and; simple and limited interaction-based RSM model, CSA effectively
improved the predicted results. Thus, one may infer that, for RSW process optimisation
considering constraints, numerous parameters and responses, advanced optimisation
methods such as CSA must be applied to make maximum use of the process potential.
Table 6 Comparison of results for TS strength

Optimisation Optimal Parameter

Work done by Response
method value x1 (kA) x2 (cycles) x3 (kg/cm2)
Faseeulla RSM TS 14.1 16 6 4
Khan et al. strength
(2012) (kN)
Proposed work CSA 15.38 16.04 6.86 4

The presented RSW optimisation problems in all the examples are based on the
mathematical models developed by previous researchers. The real data obtained from
experimentation were used by the previous researchers for formulation of mathematical
models. The validation experiments for the developed mathematical models were also
conducted by the previous researchers in all the examples, respectively. Therefore,
confirmation experiments for the results obtained using CSA are not required as the
mathematical models used in this work are already validated by the previous researchers
thorough experimentation.

Figure 9 Convergence graphs by CSA for example 3, (a) convergence graph for TS strength
(b) convergence of the parameters (see online version for colours)

(a) (b)
 Optimisation of resistance spot welding process for real unconstrained 19

4 Conclusions

In this work, some practical single and multi-objective; constrained and unconstrained
optimisation aspects of RSW process are investigated using CSA. Important findings and
results are enumerated below:
1 The trends of variation of responses with process parameters are inferred accurately,
authenticating observations and input-output dependence.
2 The results obtained in present work by CSA are found superior to that of the earlier
results. Also, a novel priori-weight-based multi-objective optimisation approach is
coined. Moreover; CSA used very small population size and iterations; and
converged very rapidly to the optimum solution.
3 The obtained results are well supported with the experimental and the improvement
is achieved (despite RSW nonlinearity, numerous and correlated parameters,
responses and constraints) particularly due to application of CSA-like better
optimisation technique.
4 Due to the present investigation, application suitability of RSW for implementation
of advanced optimisation methods is verified.
5 The derived optimal parametric combinations for RSW will guide design engineers
in achieving better performance, exploiting full potential of the process. It opens a
new window for selecting the best RSW parameters, not solely depending on the
handbook data and traditional optimisation methods.

References
Asadi, M., Song, Y., Sunden, B. and Xie, G. (2014) ‘Economic optimization design of
shell-and-tube heat exchangers by a cuckoo-search-algorithm’, Applied Thermal Engineering,
Vol. 73, No. 1, pp.1032–1040.
Boriwal, L., Mahapatra, M.M. and Biswas, P. (2012) ‘Modelling and optimizing the effects of
process parameters on galvanised steel sheets’, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical
Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture, Vol. 226, No. 4, pp.664–674.
Darwish, S.M. and AL-Dekhial, S.D. (1999) ‘Statistical models for spot welding of commercial
aluminium sheets’, International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture, Vol. 39, No. 10,
pp.1589–1610.
Esme, U. (2009) ‘Application of Taguchi method for the optimization of resistance spot welding
process’, The Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, Vol. 34, No. 2B, pp.519–528.
Fang, J., Gao, Y., Sun, G., Xu, C., Zhang, Y. and Li, Q. (2014) ‘Optimization of spot-welded joints
combined artificial bee colony algorithm with sequential Kriging optimization’, Advances in
Mechanical Engineering, Article ID 573694 [online] http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/573694.
Faseeulla Khan, M.D., Dwivedi, D.K. and Sharma, S. (2012) ‘Development of response surface
model for tensile shear strength of weld-bonds of aluminium alloy 6061 T651’, Materials &
Design, Vol. 34, pp.673–678, ISSN: 0261-3069.
Gandomi, A.H., Yang, X.S. and Alavi, A.H. (2013) ‘Cuckoo search algorithm: a metaheuristic
approach to solve structural optimization problems’, Engineering with Computers, Vol. 29,
No. 3, pp.17–35.
20 R. Dandagwhal et al.

Goswami, D. and Chakraborty, S. (2015) ‘A study on the optimization performance of fireworks

and cuckoo search algorithms in laser machining processes’, Journal of The Institution of
Engineers (India), Series C, Vol. 96, No. 3, pp.215–229.
Hamidinejad, S.M., Kolahan, F. and Kokabi, A.H. (2012) ‘The modeling and process analysis of
resistance spot welding on galvanized steel sheets used in car body manufacturing’, Materials
& Design, February, Vol. 34, pp.759, ISSN: 0261-3069.
Hoseini, H.T., Farahani, M. and Sohrabian, M. (2017) ‘Process analysis of resistance spot welding
on the Inconel alloy 625 using artificial neural networks’, International Journal of
Manufacturing Research, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp.444–460.
Kim, J.M., Seo, J., Batish, A. and Bhattacharya, A. (2011) ‘Effect of parameters in resistance
micro-welding of stainless steel cross wire using fractional factorial experimental design’,
International Journal of Manufacturing Research, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp.290–303.
Koyee, R.D., Heisel, U., Eisseler, R. and Schmauder, S. (2014) ‘Modeling and optimization
of turning duplex stainless steels’, Journal of Manufacturing Processes, Vol. 16, No. 4,
pp.451–467.
Lai, X.M., Luo, A.H., Zhang, Y.S. and Chen, G.L. (2009) ‘Optimal design of electrode cooling
system for resistance spot welding with the response surface method’, The International
Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 41, Nos. 3–4, pp.226–233.
Liang, C. and Liu, X. (2009) ‘Strength prediction of sheet to tube single sided resistance spot
welding’, Materials & Design, Vol. 30, No. 10, pp.4328–4334.
Lin, H.L., Chou, T. and Chou, C.P. (2008) ‘Modelling and optimization of the RSW process via a
Taguchi neural approach in the automotive industry’, Proceedings Institution of Mechanical
Engineering, Part D: Journal of Automobile Engineering, Vol. 222, No. 8, pp.1385–1393.
Long, W., Zhang, W., Huang, Y. and Chen, Y. (2014) ‘A hybrid cuckoo search algorithm with
feasibility-based rule for constrained structural optimization’, Journal of Central South
University, Vol. 21, No. 8, pp.3197–3204.
Luo, Y., Liu, J., Xu, H., Xiong, C. and Liu, L. (2009) ‘Regression modeling and process analysis of
resistance spot welding on galvanized steel sheet’, Materials & Design, Vol. 30, No. 7,
pp.2547–2555.
Martin, O., Lopez, M. and Martin, F. (2007) ‘Artificial neural networks for quality control by
ultrasonic testing in resistance spot welding’, Journal of Materials Processing Technology,
Vol. 183, Nos. 2–3, pp.226–233.
Muhammad, N., Manurung, Y.H.P., Jaafar, R., Abas, S.K., Tham, G. and Haruman, E. (2013)
‘Model development for quality features of resistance spot welding using multi-objective
Taguchi method and response surface methodology’, Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing,
Vol. 24, No. 6, pp.1175–1183.
Oscar, M., Pilar, D.T., Manuel, L., Manuel, S.J., Cristina, G. and Fernando, M. (2009) ‘Quality
prediction of resistance spot welding joints of 304 austenitic stainless steel’, Materials &
Design, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp.68–77.
Pashazadeh, H., Gheisari, Y. and Hamedi, M. (2014) ‘Statistical modeling and optimization of
resistance spot welding process parameters using neural networks and multi-objective genetic
algorithm’, Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, DOI: 10.1007/s10845-014-0891-x.
Pereira, A.M., Ferreira, J.M., Loureiro, A., Costa, J.D.M. and Bartolo, P.J. (2010) ‘Effect of
process parameters on the strength of resistance spot welds in 6082-T6 aluminium alloy’,
Materials & Design, Vol. 31, No. 5, pp.2454–2463.
Torres-Trevino, L.M., Reyes-Valdes, F.A., Lopez, V. and Praga-Alejo, R. (2011) ‘Multi-objective
optimization of a welding process by the estimation of the Pareto optimal Set’, Expert Systems
with Applications, Vol. 38, No. 7, pp.8045–8053.
Tseng, H.Y. (2006) ‘Welding parameters optimization for economic design using neural
approximation and genetic algorithm’, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing
Technology, Vol. 27, Nos. 9–10, pp.897–901.
 Optimisation of resistance spot welding process for real unconstrained 21

Valian, E. (2013) ‘A cuckoo search algorithm by lévy flights for solving reliability redundancy
allocation problems’, Engineering Optimization, Vol. 45, No. 11, pp.1273–1286.
Wan, X., Wang, Y. and Zhao, D. (2015) ‘Multi-response optimization in small scale resistance spot
welding of titanium alloy by principal component analysis and genetic algorithm’,
International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, DOI: 10.1007/s00170-015-
7545-9.
Yang, X.S. and Deb, S. (2009) ‘Cuckoo search via levy flights’, Proceedings of World Congress on
Nature & Biologically Inspired Computing India, pp.210–214.
Yang, X.S. and Deb, S. (2010) ‘Engineering optimisation by cuckoo search’, International Journal
of Mathematical Modelling and Numerical Optimisation, Vol. 1, No. 4, pp.330–343.
Yildiz, A.R. (2013) ‘Cuckoo search algorithm for the selection of optimal machining parameters in
milling operations’, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 64,
Nos. 1–4, pp.55–61.
Zhao, D., Wang, Y., Wang, X., Wang, X., Chen, F. and Liang, D. (2014a) ‘Process analysis and
optimization for failure energy of spot weld titanium alloy’, Materials & Design, Vol. 60,
pp.479–489, ISSN: 0261-3069.
Zhao, D., Wang, Y., Sheng, S. and Lin, Z. (2014b) ‘Multi-objective optimal design of small scale
resistance spot welding process with principal component analysis and response surface
methodology’, Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Vol. 25, No. 6, pp.1335–1348.