Composites: Part B 54 (2013) 224–233

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Composites: Part B
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compositesb

Artificial neural network modeling to effect of reinforcement properties

on the physical and mechanical properties of Al2024–B4C composites
produced by powder metallurgy
Temel Varol a, Aykut Canakci a,⇑, Sukru Ozsahin b
a
Department of Metallurgical and Materials Engineering, Engineering Faculty, Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon, Turkey
b
Department of Woodworking Industry Engineering, Technology Faculty, Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon, Turkey

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In the present study artificial neural network (ANN) approach was used for the prediction of effect of
Received 14 February 2013 physical and mechanical properties of Al2024–B4C composites produced by powder metallurgy. Effects
Received in revised form 22 April 2013 of reinforcement size and content (wt.%) on the physical and mechanical properties of composites were
Accepted 8 May 2013
determined by measuring the density, hardness and tensile strength values. Density, hardness and tensile
Available online 21 May 2013
values strength of the composites were the outputs obtained from the proposed ANN. It was found that
the effect of reinforcement size and content on the homogeneous distribution of B4C particles is as impor-
Keywords:
tant as the effect of milling time. By comparing the predicted values with the experimental data, it was
A. Metal matrix composites (MMCs)
B. Mechanical properties
demonstrated that the well-trained feed forward back propagation ANN model is a powerful tool for pre-
C. Computational modelling diction of effect of physical and mechanical properties of composites.
Crown Copyright Ó 2013 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction process has been widely employed as an effective method to pro-

Aluminum alloys have a wide diversity of industrial applica-
tions because of their light weight, high electric conductivity, and
corrosion resistance [1]. However, the use of aluminum and its al-
loys in advanced applications are limited due to their low stiffness,
resistance to wear and tear, and low yield strength. Furthermore,
industry demands advanced materials and technology for the
preparation of these materials, which include aerospace, automo-
tive, and defense applications [2]. It is attractive to use aluminum
based metal matrix composites (MMCs) in structural applications
because of their excellent stiffness-to-weight and strength-to-
weight ratios [3,4]. However, the disadvantage for these compos-
ites is their high production cost [5,6]. It has been determined that
the addition of ceramic particles to aluminum improves its
strength, wear resistance, and corrosion resistance [7,8].
MMCs can be synthesized by such methods as conventional
casting techniques [9,10] powder metallurgy [11], spray deposition
[12] and diffusion bonding [13] approach. Powder metallurgy
method is the most suitable method for making MMCs. Compared
with melting methods, the most important advantage of powder
metallurgy method is the low processing temperature. That is
why undesired phases between the matrix phase and the rein-
forcement phase are eliminated. Moreover, reinforcement particles
are also well-distributed in the matrix [14]. The gas atomization
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +90 462 3772927.
E-mail address: aykut@ktu.edu.tr (A. Canakci).
duce the metal powder. The principle of high pressure gas atomiza-
tion is to transfer kinetic energy from a high-speed gas jet to a
liquid metal stream. The liquid metal stream in turn becomes
unstable and breaks into ligaments that are successively atomized.
The particles produced in this process then undergo in-flight solid-
ification and are collected as metal powder [15].
Mechanical milling is a useful powder processing technique
that can improve the homogeneous distribution of ceramic rein-
forcement particles in the matrix material. Various researchers
have successfully investigated and reported the dispersion of alloy-
ing the diverse hard reinforcements such as SiC [13], Al2O3 [14], TiC
[16], AlN [17], Al4C3 [18] and NbC [19] on the aluminum based
MMCs through the mechanical milling technique. The use of B4C
as reinforcement in aluminum MMCs has received an inadequate
attention although it possesses high hardness and modulus with
superior corrosion resistance and wear resistance.
The use of artificial neural networks (ANNs) has recently been
used in modeling the manufacturing, physical and mechanical
properties of engineering materials. It is a promising field of re-
search in predicting experimental trends and has become increas-
ingly popular in the last few years as they can often solve problems
much faster compared to other approaches with the additional
ability to learn from small experimental data [20–27].
The content, size of reinforcing particle and milling time have
effect on the distribution of ceramic particles within matrix alloy,
density, hardness and tensile strength of the composites. There-
fore, the content (wt.%), size of reinforcing particle and milling

1359-8368/$ - see front matter Crown Copyright Ó 2013 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2013.05.015
 T. Varol et al. / Composites: Part B 54 (2013) 224–233 225

time were chosen as the three input parameters. In addition, the
microstructure, density and hardness and tensile strength are the
basic characteristics of composites produced by powder metal-
lurgy technique. For example, the variation of hardness with mill-
ing time can be explained by non-uniform, semi-uniform or
uniform distribution of reinforcing particles within matrix material
during the mechanical milling process. The non-uniform distribu-
tion of reinforcing particles during initial of mechanical alloying
gives the low hardness. In a later stage of the mechanical milling
process, the uniform distribution of reinforcing particles will pro-
vide an increase in the hardness.
The purpose of the present work, therefore, was to: (a) investi-
gate the effect of content (wt.%), size of reinforcing particle and
milling time on the physical and mechanical properties of
Al2024–B4C MMCs; and (b) develop an ANN model for the predic-
tion the role of reinforcement properties on the physical and
mechanical properties of Al2024–B4C composites produced by
powder metallurgy with the use of ANN.
2. Experimental details
The weight percentages of B4C particle in the composites are 5,
10 and 20 (wt.%), respectively. To produce Al2024–B4C composites,
Al2024 powders with average particle size of about 75 lm and B4C
powders with particle size of 49 lm and 5 lm were used. Al2024–
B4C composite powders were produced by gas atomization process
(Gundogdu Exotherm, Turkey). The mixtures were milled using a
planetary ball mill (Fritsch ‘‘Pulverisette 7, Premium line’’) at differ-
ent milling times (0.5, 1, 2, 5, 7 and 10 h). A ball to powder weight
ratio of 10:1 was kept constant in the tungsten carbide vials. Meth-
anol (2 wt.%) was used as a process control agent. The rotational
speed was controlled at 400 rpm. The parameters for mechanical
milling and initial material properties were given in Table 1.
The composite powder mixtures milled by mechanical milling
were loaded into a steel die and cold pressed at 200 MPa and then
hot-pressed at 400 °C at a pressure of 200 MPa. The graphite was
coated on the inner wall of mould and surface of samples as
lubricant. The microstructural characterization specimens were
prepared by grinding paper from 400 to 1200 grit and metallo-
graphically polished with 0.1 lm alumina, and subsequently ultra-
sonically cleaned and etched using a reagent comprising 2.5 ml
HNO3, 1.5 ml HCl, 1 ml HF and 95 ml distilled water (Keller’s solu-
tion). The microstructure of composites was characterized by
means of scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The density (d) of
compacts was determined by the Archimede’s method. In this
method, the relative density of the sample is calculated according
to Archimede’s principle. If (Wa) is the weight in air and (Ww) is the
weight in water, the actual density can be calculated according to
the following equation:
da ¼ W a =ðW a  W w Þ  dw
where da is the actual density, Wa is the mass of the sample in air,
Ww is the mass in distilled water and dw is the density of distilled
water. The sample was weighed using a photoelectric balance with
an accuracy of 0.01 mg.
The microstructure of composites was characterized by means
of scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and optical microscopy.
The theoretical density of compacts was calculated from the simple
rule of mixtures taking the fully dense values for Al2024 (2.8 g/cm3)
and B4C (2.52 g/cm3). The hardness of all samples was measured by
the Brinell hardness method and mean of at least five readings was
taken at a load of 31.25 kgf. Tensile test was performed using an
MTS model 45 electromechanical test instrument at room temper-
ature on plate specimens with a cross-head speed of 0.5 mm min1.
At least three samples were tested for each material.
3. Artificial neural networks
The basic neural cell model is shown in Fig. 1. In the artificial
neuron, the main components include: weights, addition function,
activation function and outputs.
Inputs (xi) are data, obtained from the external environment or
the other artificial neurons. The quantities (wij) demonstrate the ef-
fect of a data point on an arrives at a artificial neural cell. The addi-
tion function (threshold function, Eq. (1)) (netj) calculates the net
input on a neural cell. The sigmoid function (Eq. (3)) is the most
common activation function in the ANN because it combines
nearly linear behavior, curvilinear behavior, and nearly constant
behavior. All of these components depend on the value of the input
[26–29]. In the cell model, a bias with +1 value may increase the
net input or polarization threshold input (hj) by a value of, 1,
thereby decreasing the net input according to:
X
n
netj ¼ xi wij  hi ð2Þ
i¼1
where xi indicates the i input, wij is the connection weight from j
element to i element, hj is the polarization value (negative of the
threshold value), and n indicates the sent input signal of the artifi-
cial neuron number in the previous layer.
The artificial neuron output value, which depends on the se-
lected activation function employs a sigmoid function as the acti-
vation function [29] and is calculated using Eq. (3). The produced
output is sent via the network connections between different cells,
as explained by:
yj ¼ f ðnetj Þ ¼ 1=ð1 þ enetj Þ ð3Þ
When more than one parallel processing artificial neuron is nec-
essary, a multi-layered network structure is used. Fig. 2 shows a
typical ANN architecture consisting of three layers: one input layer,
one hidden layer and an output neuron.
3.1. Collecting the experimental data
ð1Þ
In this study, the alteration of density, hardness, and tensile
strength of composites produced by powder metallurgy method

Table 1
The properties of as-received materials and milling parameters.

Material Composites designation Milling parameters PCA Milling

(wt.%) time (h)
Al2024 particle B4C weight B4C particle Milling BPR
size (lm) percent (%) size (lm) speed
Al2024 75 0 – 400 10:1 2 0–10
Al2024–B4C 75 5 49 400 10:1 2 0–10
Al2024–B4C 75 10 49 400 10:1 2 0–10
Al2024–B4C 75 20 49 400 10:1 2 0–10
Al2024–B4C 75 5 5 400 10:1 2 0–10
Al2024–B4C 75 10 5 400 10:1 2 0–10
Al2024–B4C 75 20 5 400 10:1 2 0–10
226 T. Varol et al. / Composites: Part B 54 (2013) 224–233

Fig. 1. Artificial neural cell (artificial neuron).

Fig. 2. A typical multi-layered ANN architecture.

were modeled by the ANN. To examine the effect of the reinforce-
ment content (wt.%), size and milling time on the density, hardness
and tensile strength, the experimental data were grouped into
training and test data. The training data were used in the forecast
model, as shown in Table 2.
From the well known and widespread identification tools, the
root mean squared error (RMSE) and the mean absolute percentage
error (MAPE) values are calculated from Eqs. (4) and (5)[29]. Mod-
els that produce the best estimated values were selected as the
forecasting models.
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
1 XN
RMSE ¼ i¼1 i
ðt  tdi Þ2
N was carried out using the MATLAB software package. In this study,
N  !
1 X t i  tdi 
MAPE ¼  100
N i¼1  t i 
where ti is the real value, tdi is the model prediction value and N is
the number of testing data. Table 2 shows the actual values, degrees
of deviation, percentage error rates, RMSE and MAPE calculated
using the estimated models.
3.2. Neural network architecture
Fig. 3 shows the ANN models containing one input layer, two
hidden layers and one output layer. A number of numerical exper-
iments with single and double hidden layer neural networks and
tansig and linear transfer functions were carried out with varying
number of neurons in the hidden layer, in order to decide the best
network architecture and processing function. The double hidden
layer neural networks and the logsig processing function of neu-
rons were found to be more suitable for hidden layer and linear
for output layer. The minimum error was obtained at 5 nodes at
the first hidden layer and 5 nodes at the second hidden layer for
the prediction model of the density, hardness and tensile strength.
The reinforcement content (wt.%), size (lm) and milling time were
used as the input variables, while the density, hardness and tensile
strength values were used as the output variables in the ANN
models.
3.3. Network training and testing
A forward and backward feed propagation multilayer ANN was
used for solving problems, and the network training and testing
ð4Þ
the hyperbolic tangent sigmoid function (tansig) (Eq. (3)) and the
linear transfer function (purelin) were used as the activation trans-
ð5Þ
fer functions, the resilient back propagation function (trainrp) was
used as the training algorithm, the gradient descent with a
momentum back propagation algorithm (traingdm) was used as
the learning rule, and the mean square error (MSE) was used as
the performance function. To ensure an equal contribution of each
parameter in the model, the training and test datasets were nor-
malized (1, 1 range) due to the use of the hyperbolic tangent sig-
moid function in the model and network, which allowed the data
to be translated into the original value, with a reverse normalizing
process for the interpretation of the results. The normalization
(scaling) operations were carried out using the following equation:
X  X min
X norm ¼ 2  1 ð6Þ
X max  X min
where Xnorm is the normalized value, X is the true value of the var-
iable, Xmin is minimum value of the data set and Xmax is the maxi-
mum value of the data set.
 T. Varol et al. / Composites: Part B 54 (2013) 224–233 227

Table 2
Experimental data and predicted output from the ANN network for training set.

Sample Reinforcement Reinforcement Milling Density (g/cm3) Hardness (BHN) Tensile strength (MPa)
ID ratio (%) size (lm) time (h)
Measured Predicted % Measured Predicted % Measured Predicted %
Error Error Error
1 0 0 0 2.675 2.670 0.20 86 85.1 1.06 187 189.7 1.46
3 0 0 0.5 2.659 2.665 0.24 90 89.6 0.49 195 188.5 3.32
4 0 0 2 2.634 2.641 0.28 97 97.7 0.71 231 230.7 0.12
6 0 0 5 2.621 2.616 0.20 120 118.4 1.32 234 234.5 0.21
7 0 0 10 2.603 2.605 0.06 156 157.3 0.81 144 144.6 0.41
9 5 49 0.5 2.645 2.640 0.20 113 112.3 0.60 184 181.1 1.59
10 5 49 1 2.630 2.632 0.09 118 119.0 0.88 181 182.3 0.71
12 5 49 5 2.594 2.592 0.09 156 154.3 1.10 255 254.5 0.21
13 5 49 7 2.571 2.571 0.00 206 204.2 0.86 175 176.8 1.05
15 5 49 10 2.566 2.561 0.19 219 213.7 2.42 167 165.6 0.82
16 10 49 0 2.615 2.604 0.42 113 114.3 1.18 165 173.6 5.24
17 10 49 1 2.587 2.585 0.08 129 129.2 0.12 169 174.3 3.13
19 10 49 2 2.572 2.569 0.12 135 133.0 1.47 261 260.0 0.39
20 10 49 7 2.465 2.469 0.16 248 253.4 2.18 184 184.1 0.08
22 20 49 0.5 2.551 2.553 0.07 136 136.0 0.01 160 161.7 1.08
23 20 49 2 2.530 2.527 0.13 164 163.0 0.63 220 219.9 0.04
25 20 49 5 2.511 2.509 0.08 245 241.9 1.27 217 216.7 0.13
26 20 49 7 2.420 2.422 0.06 290 291.9 0.67 141 141.2 0.14
28 5 5 0 2.652 2.646 0.23 110 107.5 2.30 182 182.4 0.23
29 5 5 1 2.624 2.631 0.27 119 121.2 1.82 184 183.7 0.17
31 5 5 2 2.613 2.612 0.03 122 121.1 0.71 260 261.0 0.39
32 5 5 5 2.585 2.586 0.05 157 160.3 2.11 264 261.8 0.82
34 5 5 10 2.554 2.559 0.18 225 229.7 2.09 172 171.7 0.18
35 10 5 0 2.598 2.599 0.03 115 117.6 2.23 170 172.3 1.35
37 10 5 0.5 2.580 2.589 0.33 123 125.4 1.95 178 170.4 4.28
38 10 5 2 2.560 2.560 0.01 136 137.9 1.40 274 273.7 0.10
40 10 5 5 2.533 2.536 0.13 222 221.7 0.16 280 281.8 0.64
41 10 5 7 2.455 2.450 0.20 288 281.0 2.43 191 190.3 0.35
43 20 5 0.5 2.539 2.542 0.13 146 139.8 4.23 162 159.5 1.52
44 20 5 1 2.532 2.529 0.14 150 150.3 0.21 165 162.0 1.80
46 20 5 2 2.510 2.515 0.19 166 170.3 2.62 225 226.1 0.50
47 20 5 7 2.402 2.400 0.09 320 322.5 0.79 144 143.8 0.17
49 20 5 10 2.385 2.386 0.05 336 333.2 0.84 136 136.1 0.05
MAPE 0.143 1.323 0.991
RMSE 0.004 2.870 2.818

It was decided that the 0.001 targeted error values would be
sufficient for the training of the artificial neural network. Fig. 4
shows the iteration dependent error variation quantity for an arti-
ficial neural network selected for a specific particle size. The num-
ber of epoch after which the training models were stopped is 59.
4. Results and discussion
4.1. The effect of reinforcement properties on the relative density
Macrograph and micrograph of Al2024–5 wt.% B4Ccoarse com-
posites were given in Figs. 5 and 6, respectively. As is expected at
initial milling time (Figs. 5a and 6b), the particle distribution was
not uniform and the distance between B4C particles was too high.
But increasing milling time caused the big and brittle B4C particles
to break. Also, with increasing milling time the distance between
B4C particles decreased gradually (Figs. 5 and 6b). After 10 h mill-
ing time, B4C particles were dispersed throughout the Al2024 alloy
matrix with a better homogeneity (Figs. 5 and 6c).
Fig. 7a and b shows the dependence of relative density on the
milling time for unreinforced Al2024 alloy and mechanically
milled composite. The experimental density is compared to the cal-
culated density (theoretical density) based on the rule of mixture
as follows:
dcom ¼ df V f þ dm V m
where dcom, df, and dm are densities of the composite, B4C parti-
cles, and the Al2024 matrix powders, respectively. Furthermore,
Vf and Vm are the volume fraction of B4C particles and Al2024
matrix powders. The rule of mixture is considered to be valid
when aluminum powder is just physically mixed with B4C
particles.
Hafizpour et al. [27] examined that the effects of reinforcement
volume and particle sizes on the compressibility of Al–SiC compos-
ite powders. They observed that decreasing the reinforcement
particle size or increasing the volume fraction results in an increase
in the yield pressure of the powder material, and eventually reduce
the densification rate. It can be seen that the presence of reinforce-
ment particles reduced the relative density in mechanically milled
composite (Fig. 7). The relative densities for pressed samples de-
creased with increasing milling time [30,31], until reached a min-
imum value after 10 h. Decreasing the relative density is due to the
work hardening effect of mechanical milling and hence lower
deformation capacity during pressing. Mechanical milling pro-
motes work hardening and homogeneous dispersion of B4C parti-
cles which in turn decrease the powder deformation capacity
[32–34].
4.2. The effect of reinforcement properties on the hardness
The hardness of Al2024 samples and Al2024–B4Ccoarse and
Al2024–B4Cfine composites versus milling time is plotted in
Fig. 8a and b. Since the density of samples was around 95% up to
ð7Þ
5 h of milling, it was possible to characterize their hardness. It
can be seen that the produced samples have higher hardness.
The increase in hardness is attributed to the milling time as shown
228 T. Varol et al. / Composites: Part B 54 (2013) 224–233
Fig. 3. The ANN architecture selected as the prediction model for the density, hardness and tensile strength.
Fig. 4. A plot of the iteration-dependent error variation of the ANN; density,
hardness, tensile strength.
in Fig. 8a and b. Canakci et al. [35] studied the effect of mechanical
milling on Al2O3 distribution and properties of Al2O3 particle rein-
forced Al-MMCs. They observed that the hardness of mechanical
milled unreinforced Al and Al2O3 reinforced composites is affected
by two factors: the first factor is the work hardening of matrix alloy
due to the milling and second is the role of Al2O3 particles as
reinforcement. Since the work hardening increases by increasing
the milling time, the hardness and accordingly resistance to
plastic deformation during compaction are enhanced. Moreover,
mechanical milling leads to extreme refinement of the microstruc-
ture, finally resulting in nanocrystalline structure with high-lattice
micro-strain. Also, with increasing the milling time, more homoge-
neous distribution and refinement of the reinforcement were ob-
served. These powder characteristics should result in harder
structure [33,34]. It should be note that the particle size of B4C
powders affects the number of particles within surface area of
indentation. The number of reinforcement particles per unit
impression area in fine B4C reinforced composite is greater than
that in coarse B4C reinforced composite due to the embedded pro-
cess of hard B4C particles. Therefore, impression diameter de-
creases with increasing number of hard ceramic particles.
4.2.1. Modeling results
The predicted values, deviation and % error for the density,
hardness and tensile strength are provided in Tables 2 and 3. The
ANN was tested for accuracy using the test values (Table 3) se-
lected from the experimental results that were not used during
the learning processes. In most cases, the neural network predic-
tion is very close to the actual value. However, several values are
not as close as others, which is due to the errors caused by the
material, the measurements and process parameters. However,
these errors could be neglected given that the learning level of
the artificial neural network is 98%. This study revealed that the
predictions made using the ANN produced more accurate results.
In this study, we evaluated over 100,000 different network con-
figurations by systematically varying the number of hidden layers
(between 1 and 2), the number of neurons in the hidden layer (be-
tween 2 and 10) and different training datasets (1–10) in order to
introduce optimum network architectures that simulate the effect
of reinforcement properties on the physical and mechanical prop-
erties of powder metallurgy Al2024–B4C composites. Each network
was trained with 70% of the data and then tested by the other 30%
of the data. The performance of each network was assessed in
terms of the mean relative error. The networks that yielded the
lowest mean relative error were chosen subsequently for modeling
the effect of reinforcement properties on the physical and mechan-
ical properties of powder metallurgy Al2024–B4C composites. Ta-
ble 4 shows MAPE and RMSE values for the three best prediction
models.
Figs. 9 and 10 show the relationship between the real and cal-
culated values obtained using the prediction models. A compara-
tive plot of these values is provided in Fig. 9. The mean absolute
percentage error (MAPE) was used to evaluate the performance
of the proposed ANN as a prediction technique. The mean absolute
percentage errors (MAPE) were 0.312% for density, 2.463% for
hardness and 2.515% for tensile strength. With respect to the re-
sults obtained from the plots of the ANN prediction, the highest
MAPE value of 2.515% demonstrates that the network effectively
generates sensitive results.
From these comparison charts, it can be clearly observed that
the ANN is properly trained and shows consistency in predicting
the properties of the powder. A comparison of the measured and
predicted density, hardness and tensile strength, at the testing
stage is provided in Fig. 9. A comparison between the measured
and predicted composite powder properties at the testing stage
indicates a high correlation. In other words, the results of the com-
parison plots indicate the similarities between the experimental
study and the ANN model, and support the reliability of the model.
The comparison diagrams reveal that the slope and intercept of the
regression equations for the outputs are very close to 1 and 0,
respectively.
The validity of the prediction models was proven by means of
the determination of the predictive mean absolute error (MAPE)
and correlation coefficient (R). RMSE is also known as the fit stan-
dard error and the standard error of the regression. An RMSE value
closer to zero indicates a better fit. Fig. 10 shows the regression
analysis of the ANN model for the density, hardness and tensile
strength. The correlation coefficient was obtained to be 0.99,
 T. Varol et al. / Composites: Part B 54 (2013) 224–233 229

Fig. 5. Optical macrograph of Al2024–5 wt.% B4Ccoarse composites: (a) 0.5 h, (b) 2 h, and (c) 10 h.

Fig. 6. SEM micrograph of Al2024–5 wt.% B4Ccoarse composites: (a) 0.5 h, (b) 2 h, and (c) 10 h.

indicating good agreement between the experimental results and squared error (RMSE) and the mean absolute percentage error
the model predication (Rdensity = 0.99138, Rhardness = 0.99693, Rtensile (MAPE), are within an acceptable range and meet the integrity of
strength = 0.98746). The statistical results namely, the root-mean the ANN learning and testing stages. Thus, reasonable agreement
230 T. Varol et al. / Composites: Part B 54 (2013) 224–233

98 300
Al2024
97 Al2024-5wt.%B 4C 280
Al2024-10wt.%B 4C
Al2024-20wt.% B 4C 260
96
Relative density (%)

240

Hardness (HB)
95
220
94 200

93 180
160
92
140
Al2024
91 120 Al2024-5wt.%B 4C
Al2024-10wt.%B 4C
90 100 Al2024-20wt.%B 4C

80
89 0 2 4 6 8 10
0 2 4 6 8 10
Milling time (h) Milling time (h)

(a) (a)

98 340
Al2024 320
97 Al2024-5wt.%
Al2024-10wt.% 300
Al2024-20wt.%
96
280
Relative density (%)

95 260
Hardness (HB)

94 240
220
93
200
92 180
91 160
140
90 Al2024
120 Al2024-5wt.% B 4C
89 Al2024-%10wt.% B 4C
100 Al2024-%20wt.% B 4C

88 80
0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10
Milling time (h) Milling time (h)
(b) (b)
Fig. 7. Effect of milling time and amount of B4C on relative density of consolidated: Fig. 8. The HB hardness evolution of the composites as a function of milling time
(a) coarse B4C reinforced composites, and (b) fine B4C reinforced composites. and amount of B4C particles; (a) coarse B4C reinforced composites and (b) fine B4C
reinforced composites.

Table 3
Experiment data and predicted output from the ANN network for testing test.

Sample Reinforcement Reinforcement Milling Density (g/cm3) Hardness (BHN) Tensile strength (MPa)
ID ratio (%) size (lm) time (h)
Measured Predicted % Measured Predicted % Measured Predicted %
Error Error Error
1 0 0 0 2.645 2.660 0.56 94 94.9 0.93 190 188.5 0.79
3 0 0 0.5 2.612 2.606 0.21 149 151.0 1.36 152 155.1 2.03
4 0 0 2 2.658 2.646 0.46 111 106.5 4.09 178 182.5 2.53
6 0 0 5 2.622 2.615 0.25 124 120.2 3.10 252 248.2 1.50
7 0 0 10 2.595 2.595 0.01 124 121.4 2.12 173 171.8 0.70
9 5 49 0.5 2.540 2.549 0.35 216 201.0 6.97 263 272.9 3.75
10 5 49 1 2.450 2.451 0.04 259 261.9 1.14 174 170.0 2.30
12 5 49 5 2.583 2.564 0.73 128 127.2 0.60 153 164.4 7.48
13 5 49 7 2.542 2.540 0.06 145 145.9 0.61 157 162.8 3.68
15 5 49 10 2.415 2.409 0.26 302 298.4 1.21 133 134.1 0.81
16 10 49 0 2.633 2.639 0.24 113 114.1 0.93 190 181.0 4.75
17 10 49 1 2.562 2.568 0.23 208 216.7 4.17 181 183.5 1.38
19 10 49 2 2.572 2.577 0.19 130 133.6 2.77 172 175.1 1.79
20 10 49 7 2.438 2.431 0.27 305 292.7 4.04 182 175.0 3.83
22 20 49 0.5 2.565 2.555 0.37 135 130.3 3.47 158 162.4 2.79
23 20 49 2 2.473 2.492 0.75 270 264.8 1.92 221 221.3 0.13
MAPE 0.312 2.463 2.515
RMSE 0.010 6.054 5.543
 T. Varol et al. / Composites: Part B 54 (2013) 224–233 231

Table 4
MAPE and RMSE values for the three best prediction models.

The number of MAPE RMSE

neurons
Hidden layer Training Testing Training Testing
Layer Layer Density Hardness Tensile Density Hardness Tensile Density Hardness Tensile Density Hardness Tensile
I II strength strength strength strength
5 5 0.143 1.323 0.991 0.312 2.463 2.515 0.004 2.870 2.818 0.010 6.054 5.543
6 4 0.106 1.885 1.023 0.343 2.949 2.360 0.004 3.359 2.872 0.012 6.489 4.767
4 6 0.132 1.938 0.921 0.356 2.506 3.069 0.005 4.122 2.177 0.012 5.560 6.221

Fig. 9. The comparison of measured values and ANN values for the (a) density (b) hardness and (c) tensile strength.

between the predicted and experimental data supports the accu-
racy of the model.
4.2.2. The desired ANN values
One significant advantage of artificial neural networks is the
ability to provide the desired intermediate values for their
experimental studies. The properties of the produced materials
can be altered by determining the optimal production parame-
ters using the ANN method. The composite properties (density,
hardness and tensile strength) predicted by the ANN model
for different milling times (step of 30 min) are shown in
Table 5.
232 T. Varol et al. / Composites: Part B 54 (2013) 224–233

Fig. 10. Regression analysis for the neural network responses and the target for all data set: (a) ANN for the density, (b) ANN for the hardness, and (c) ANN for the tensile
strength.

Table 5
The desired ANN values for different milling time.

Reinforcement ratio (wt.%) Reinforcement size (lm) Milling time (h) Density (g/cm3) Hardness (BHN) Tensile strength (MPa)
10 20 0 2.599 117.085 172.337
10 20 0.5 2.589 124.819 170.345
10 20 1 2.577 133.094 174.233
10 20 1.5 2.566 137.239 206.907
10 20 2 2.559 137.723 270.458
10 20 2.5 2.557 144.851 310.594
10 20 3 2.558 157.230 322.259
10 20 3.5 2.559 170.440 322.270
10 20 4 2.557 184.474 316.478
10 20 4.5 2.550 201.284 303.902
10 20 5 2.536 221.536 281.946
10 20 5.5 2.513 242.387 252.455
10 20 6 2.486 259.808 223.879
10 20 6.5 2.464 272.402 203.045
10 20 7 2.450 280.713 190.290
10 20 7.5 2.441 285.784 183.081
10 20 8 2.437 288.666 179.121
10 20 8.5 2.434 290.182 176.958
10 20 9 2.433 290.880 175.771
10 20 9.5 2.432 291.086 175.106
10 20 10 2.432 290.985 174.719
 T. Varol et al. / Composites: Part B 54 (2013) 224–233
5. Conclusions
Al2024–B4C composites with 5, 10 and 20 wt.% B4C for two dif-
ferent reinforcement size have been successfully fabricated by
powder metallurgy method. The microstructure, density, hardness
and tensile strength of composites were systemically investigated.
Moreover, the use of ANN to study the effect of the reinforcement
properties on the density, hardness and tensile strength of Al2024–
B4C composites was explored in this study.
Conclusions are drawn as follows:
1. The relative density decreased with increasing the content of
B4C particles in the consolidated samples. Moreover, the
relative density decreases with decreasing particle size of B4C
particles. The compressibility of the composite with reinforced
coarse B4C particles was increased as compared to the compos-
ite powder with reinforced fine B4C particles at the same mill-
ing time. The lowest relative density is 88.81% in the
composite containing 20 wt.% B4Cfine particles and produced
after 10 h of milling.
2. The strengthening of composites was improved with the
increasing milling time (from 1 h to 5 h), and then decreased
with further increasing the milling time. The results of tensile
strength measurements showed that after 5 h milling process
the steady state was achieved at 10 wt.% B4C. The tensile
strength of composites with reinforced fine B4C particles
increased by 20% compared to the unreinforced Al2024 alloy
for 5 h of milling.
3. In this study, both 5 h of milling and 10 wt.% B4C composite was
suggested and other milling times (5 h < milling time and mill-
ing time > 5 h) and B4C content were not recommended for
manufacturing of B4C reinforced MMCs.
4. The ANN model generates satisfactory results when compared
to the experimental measurements. The mean absolute per-
centage error (MAPE) for predicted values does not exceed
2.15%. Therefore, using ANN values, satisfactory results can be
estimated rather than measured which thereby reduces the
testing time and cost.
5. The reinforcement properties had considerable affects on the
density, hardness and tensile strength, as well as the structural
behavior of the composites. Moreover, the ANN is an alternative
method for estimating the properties of Al2024–B4C composites
produced by the mechanical milling method.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to the Karadeniz Technical University
Research Fund for financially supporting this research (No.
2010.112.010.4). The researchers would also like to thank the Gun-
dogdu Exotherm Service for providing the Al2024 powders.
References
[1] Estrada GI, Carreno GC, Mendoza RDC, Miki YM, Rocha RE, Martínez SR.
Graphite nanoparticle dispersion in 7075 aluminum alloy by means of
mechanical alloying. J Alloys Compd 2009;483:173–7.
[2] Bostan B, Özdemir AT, Kalkanli A. Microstructure characteristics in Al–C
system after mechanical alloying. Powder Metall 2004;47:37–42.
[3] Tang F, Anderson EI, Herold TG, Prask H. Pure Al matrix composites produced
by vacuum hot pressing: tensile properties and strengthening mechanisms.
Mater Sci Eng A 2004;383:362–73.
[4] Ceschini L, Boromei I, Minak G, Morri A, Tarterini F. Effect of friction stir
welding on microstructure, tensile and fatigue properties of the AA7005/
10 vol.%Al2O3p composite. Compos Sci Technol 2007;67:605–15.
[5] Torralba JM, Da Costa CE, Velasco F. P/M aluminum matrix composites: an
overview. J Mater Process Technol 2003;133:203–6.
[6] Rahimiana M, Ehsania N, Parvin N, Baharvandi HR. The effect of particle size,
sintering temperature and sintering time on the properties of Al–Al2O3
composites made by powder metallurgy. J Mater Process Technol
2009;209:5387–93.
233
[7] Torres BH, Ibanez L, Garcia-Escorial JA. Mechanical properties of some PM
aluminize and silicate reinforced 2124 aluminum matrix composites. Scr
Mater 2002;47:45–9.
[8] Sahin Y, Murphy S. The effect of fiber orientation of the dry sliding wear of
borsic-reinforced 2014 aluminum alloy. J Mater Sci 1996;34:5399–407.
[9] Gopalakrishnan S, Murugan N. Production and wear characterization of AA
6061 matrix titanium carbide particulate reinforced composite by enhanced
stir casting method. Compos Part B: Eng 2012;43:302–8.
[10] Sukumaran K, Ravikumar KK, Pillai SGK, Rajan TPD, Ravi M, Pillai RM, et al.
Studies on squeeze casting of Al 2124 alloy and 2124-10% SiCp metal matrix
composite. Mater Sci Eng A 2008;490:235–41.
[11] Chenga NP, Zenga SM, Liu ZY. Preparation, microstructures and deformation
behavior of SiCP/6066Al composites produced by PM route. J Mater Process
Technol 2008;202:27–40.
[12] Yang B, Wang F, Zhang JS. Microstructural characterization of in situ TiC/Al and
TiC/Al–20Si–5Fe–3Cu–1Mg composites prepared by spray deposition. Acta
Mater 2003;51:4977–89.
[13] Taskin M, Caligulu U. Modelling of microhardness values by means of artificial
neural networks of Al/SiCp metal matrix composite material couples
processed with diffusion method. Math Comput Appl 2006;11(3):163–72.
[14] Canakci A, Ozsahin S, Varol T. Modeling the influence of a process control agent
on the properties of metal matrix composite powders using artificial neural
networks. Powder Technol 2012;228:26–35.
[15] Zeoli N, Tabbara H, Gu S. CFD modeling of primary breakup during metal
powder atomization. Chem Eng Sci 2011;66:6498–504.
[16] Yusoff M, Othman R, Hussain Z. Mechanical alloying and sintering of
nanostructured tungsten carbide-reinforced copper composite and its
characterization. Mater Des 2011;32:3293–8.
[17] Abdoli H, Salahi E, Farnoush H, Pourazrang K. Evolutions during synthesis of
Al–AlN-nanostructured composite powder by mechanical alloying. J Alloys
Compd 2008;461:166–72.
[18] Ozcatalbas Y. Investigation of the machinability behaviour of Al4C3 reinforced
Al-based composite produced by mechanical alloying technique. Compos Sci
Technol 2003;63:53–61.
[19] Zuhailawati H, Mahani Y. Effects of milling time on hardness and electrical
conductivity of in situ Cu–NbC composite produced by mechanical alloying. J
Alloys Compd 2009;476:142–6.
[20] Hayajneh M, Hassan AD, Alrashdan A, Mayyas AT. Prediction of tribological
behavior of aluminum–copper based composite using artificial neural
network. J Alloys Compd 2009;470:584–8.
[21] Durmus HK, Ozkaya E, Meric C. The use of neural networks for the prediction
of wear loss and surface roughness of AA 6351 aluminum alloy. Mater Des
2006;27:156–9.
[22] Jalham IS. Modeling capability of the artificial neural network (ANN) to predict
the effect of the hot deformation parameters on the strength of Al-base metal
matrix composites. Compos Sci Technol 2003;63:63–7.
[23] Genel K, Kurnaz SC, Durman M. Modeling of tribological properties of alumina
fiber reinforced zinc–aluminum composites using artificial neural network.
Mater Sci Eng A 2003;363:203–10.
[24] Taskin M, Dikbas H, Caligulu U. Artificial neural network (ANN) approach to
prediction of diffusion bonding behavior (shear strength) of Ni–Ti alloys
manufactured by powder metalurgy method. Math Comput Appl
2008;13(3):183–91.
[25] Taskin M, Caligulu U, Gur AK. Modeling adhesive wear resistance of Al–Si–
Mg–/SiCp PM compacts fabricated by hot pressing process, by means of ANN.
Int J Adv Manuf Technol 2008;37:715–21.
[26] Hassan AD, Alrashdan A, Hayajneh MT, Mayyas AT. Prediction of density,
porosity and hardness in aluminum–copper-based composite materials using
artificial neural network. J Mater Process Technol 2009;209:894–9.
[27] Hafizpour HR, Sanjari M, Simchi A. Analysis of the effect of reinforcement
particles on the compressibility of Al–SiC composite powders using a neural
network model. Mater Des 2009;30:1518–23.
[28] Aleksendric D, Duboka C. Prediction of automotive friction material
characteristics using artificial neural networks-cold performance. Wear
2006;261:269–82.
[29] Sagıroglu E, Besdok ME. Artificial intelligence applications in engineering-1:
artificial neural networks. Kayseri: Ufuk Books Stationery; 2003.
[30] Hafizpour HR, Simchi A, Parvizi S. Analysis of the compaction behavior of Al–
SiC nanocomposites using linear and non-linear compaction equations. Adv
Powder Technol 2010;21:273–8.
[31] Salahinejad E, Aminib R, Hadianfard MJ. Effect of milling time on structure and
mechanical properties of porous nickel-free austenitic stainless steels processed
by mechanical alloying and sintering. Mater Sci Eng A 2010;527:5522–7.
[32] Sivasankaran S, Sivaprasad K, Narayanasamy R, Iyer VK. Evaluation of
compaction equations and prediction using adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference
system on compressibility behavior of AA6061100  x–x wt.% TiO2 nanocom-
posites prepared by mechanical alloying. Powder Technol 2011;209:124–37.
[33] Parvin N, Assadifarda R, Safarzadeha P, Sheibani S, Marashi P. Preparation and
mechanical properties of SiC-reinforced Al6061 composite by mechanical
alloying. Mater Sci Eng A 2008;492:134–40.
[34] Fogagnolo JB, Velasco F, Robert MH, Torralba JM. Effect of mechanical alloying
on the morphology, microstructure and properties of aluminium matrix
composite powders. Mater Sci Eng A 2003;342:131–43.
[35] Canakci A, Varol T, Ertok S. The effect of mechanical alloying on Al2O3
distribution and properties of Al2O3 particle reinforced Al-MMCs. Sci Eng
Compos Mater 2012;19:227–35.