This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

**Modeling and optimization of drilling process
**

B.Y. Lee a,*, H.S. Liu a, Y.S. Tarng b

a b

Department of Mechanical Manufacture Engineering, National Huwei Institute of Technology, Huwei 632, Taiwan, ROC Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Taiwan Uni6ersity of Science and Technology, Taipei 106, Taiwan, ROC Received 22 October 1996

Abstract In this paper, the use of an abductive network for modeling drilling processes is ﬁrst described. The abductive network is composed of a number of functional nodes, these nodes being self-organized to form an optimal network architecture by using a predicted squared error (PSE) criterion. Once the process parameters (drill diameter, cutting speed and feedrate) are given, the drilling performance (tool life, metal removal rate, thrust force and torque) can be predicted by this developed network. A simulated annealing optimization algorithm with a performance index is then applied to the developed network when searching for the optimal process parameters. Experimental results are provided to conﬁrm the effectiveness of this approach. © 1998 Elsevier Science S.A.

Keywords: Abductive network; Drilling processes; Drilling performance

1. Introduction The largest amount of money spent on any one class of cutting tools is spent on drills. Therefore, from the viewpoint of cost and productivity, modeling and optimization of drilling processes are extremely important for the manufacturing industry [1]. In this paper, an abductive network [2] is used to model drilling processes from ﬁnite drilling data and then a simulated annealing optimization technique [3] is applied to this network for obtaining the optimal drilling process parameters. Abductive networks based on the abductive modeling technique are able to represent complex and uncertain relationships between input and output variables [2]. Basically, abductive networks are composed of a number of polynomial functional nodes and are organized into several layers. The best network structure, number of layers and functional node types can be determined automatically by using a predicted squared error (PSE) criterion [4]. In other words, unlike most approaches to regression and neural networks, the abductive modeling technique can automatically synthesize the optimal net* Corresponding author. Fax: + 886 2 7376460; e-mail: ystarng@mail.ntust.edu.tw 0924-0136/98/$19.00 © 1998 Elsevier Science S.A. All rights reserved. PII S 0 9 2 4 - 0 1 3 6 ( 9 7 ) 0 0 2 6 3 - X

work architecture instead of requiring the user to specify the network architecture in advance. In addition, the iterative tuning process necessary with regression or neural network approaches is largely reduced in the abductive approach. It has also been shown that the prediction accuracy in abductive networks is much greater than that in neural networks [2]. In this paper, it is shown that the tool life, metal removal rate, thrust force and torque under varying drill diameter, cutting speed and feedrate can be predicted reasonably by means of the developed network. Once the drilling process model is constructed by the abductive network an appropriate optimization algorithm with a performance index is then employed to search for the optimal drilling parameters. In this paper, a sound optimization method of simulated annealing [5] is adopted. Traditionally, the annealing process, used in metal working, involves heating the metal to a high temperature and then letting it cool down gradually to reach a minimum energy state. The simulated annealing algorithm is a simulation of the annealing process for minimizing the performance index. It has been shown that simulated annealing can provide an effective way to jump out from a local optimum and draw a near-global optimum [6]. As a result, the simulated annealing algorithm has emerged as a general tool

y1 is the normalized input and w0 and w1 are the coefﬁcients of the normalizer. Normalizer A normalizer transforms the original input into the Fig. In an abductive network. the corresponding polynomial function being expressed as: y1 = w0 + w1x1 (1) where x1 is the original input. discrete tolerance design [9]. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 74 (1998) 149–157 for optimization of arbitrary functions and has been applied successfully in noise ﬁltering in image processing [7]. Firstly.1. then transmitted into individual functional nodes. The general methodology of dealing with a limited number of inputs at a time.1. Unitizer On the other hand.150 B. Polynomial functional nodes In the present study. Description of abductive networks It is well known that reasoning from general principles and initial facts to new facts with certainty is called deductive reasoning. is deﬁned as reasoning from general principles and initial facts to new facts under uncertainty [11].1. As a result.2. 2. as a classiﬁer for handling difﬁcult pattern recognition problems. cutting parameter selection in wire electrical discharge machining [10]. The experimental details of using an abductive network in modeling the drilling process are then described. At the same time. abductive networks can be recognized as a special class of biologically-inspired networks with machine intelligence [13]. An abductive network is a network for modeling numerical information through abductive reasoning. reasoning in real problems is very often uncertain. Therefore. 1) are used to model drilling processes in the abductive network. the normalized input y1 is adjusted to have a mean of zero and a variance of unity. inputs are also sub-divided into groups. 2. These nodes evaluate the limited number of inputs by a polynomial function and generate an output to serve as an input to the subsequent nodes of the next layer. Finally.Y. 1. simpler sub-systems and grouped into several layers using polynomial functional nodes.1. Various polynomial functional nodes. then summarizing the input information and then passing the summarized information to a higher reasoning level. called abductive reasoning. the paper concludes with a summary of the study. normalized input. another class of reasoning. An explanation of these polynomial functional nodes is given as follows. is related directly to human behavior. VLSI layout generation [8]. a unitizer converts the output of the network to the real output. . Lee et al. the theory of abductive networks is introduced. several types of polynomial functional nodes (Fig. The theory of simulated annealing is brieﬂy introduced and then applied to searching for the optimal process parameters in drilling. complex systems are decomposed into smaller. the abductive network can be used effectively as a predictor for estimating the outputs of complex systems. y1 is the real output and w0 and w1 are the coefﬁcients of the uni- 2. However. as observed by Miller [12]. etc. Therefore. The polynomial equation of the unitizer can be expressed as: y1 = w0 + w1x1 (2) where x1 is the output of the network. etc. or as a system identiﬁer for determining which inputs are important to the modeling system. During this normalization process. 2.

xn are the inputs to the node. Each of these process parameters was set at three levels (Table 1). Network synthesis and e6aluation To build an abductive network. x2.1. Double node The double node takes two inputs at a time and its third-degree polynomial equation has the cross-term so that the interaction between the two inputs can be considered.: y1 = w0 + w1x1 +w2x +w3x 2 1 3 1 ﬁrst. 2.6.: PSE=FSE+ KP (7) (3) where x1 is the input to the node. i. the PSE is composed of two terms. a number of drilling experiments were carried out on a CNC machining center (First MCV641) using HSS twist drills for the machining of S45C steel plates. the optimal abductive network is the network with the minimum value of PSE. w1. y1 is the output of the node and w0.: y1 = w0 + w1x1 +w2x2 +w3x3 +···+ wnxn (6) where x1. where FSE is the average square error of the network for ﬁtting the training data and KP is the complex penalty of the network.: y1 = w0 + w1x1 +w2x2 +w3x 2 +w4x 2 +w5x1x2 +w6x 3 1 2 1 +w7x 3 2 (4) where x1. x2.e.: y1 = w0 + w1x1 +w2x2 +w3x3 +w4x 2 +w5x 2 +w6x 2 1 2 3 +w7x1x2 + w8x1x3 +w9x2x3 +w10x1x2x3 +w11x 3 1 +w12x 3 +w13x 3 2 3 (5) where CPM is the complex penalty multiplier. 3. a training data-base with regard to process parameters and drill performance is required in order to be able to build an abductive network for the modeling of drilling processes.3. As illustrated in Eq. …. a network as possible. The mean and variance of the real output must be equal to those of the output used to synthesize the network. Triple node Similar to the single and double nodes. On the other hand. the triple node with three inputs has a more complicated polynomial equation allowing interaction amongst these inputs. the cutting speed U in the range of 10–30 m min − 1 and the feedrate f in the range of 0. In the network synthesis and evaluation.24 mm rev − 1. w13 are the coefﬁcients of the triple node. Modeling of drilling processes As mentioned earlier.e. y1 is the output of the node and w0. w2 and w3 are the coefﬁcients of the single node. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 74 (1998) 149–157 151 tizer.06–0. Lee et al. Single node The single node only has one input and its polynomial equation is limited to the third degree. Usually. a more complex network has a better ﬁtting accuracy corresponding to a smaller value of FSE. y1 is the output of the node and w0. only 25 drilling experiments were performed due to the limited power of the machine. However. (8)). the next step is to construct an abductive network based on these functional nodes. CPM (Eq. x3 are the inputs to the node. K is the number of coefﬁcients in the network. the ﬁtting accuracy increases with decreasing FSE. ….1. w2.1. N is the number of training data and | 2 is a prior estimate of the model P error variance. …. the PSE criterion performs a trade-off between model accuracy and complexity. The drilling process parameters were selected by varying the drill diameter D in the range of 8–12 mm. i.e. 2. A complex network will be penalized more in the PSE criterion as the CPM is increased. the larger will be the value of KP (Eq. CPM is selected as 0. Now that the functions of polynomial functional nodes are explained. a predicted square error (PSE) criterion is used to automatically determine an optimal network structure [4]. Then. The drill-life is deﬁned as the period of 2.5. Hence. w1.B. w2. expressed by the following equation: KP= CPM 2| 2 K P N (8) 2. but less complex.e. ….4. x3. w7 are the coefﬁcients of the double node. (7). a complex network will be selected if the CPM is decreased. i. In addition. (8)) can be used to adjust the trade-off between model accuracy and complexity.1. Therefore.2. wn are the coefﬁcients of the triple node.Y. the more complex the network. Contrarily. 2. 27 (3× 3× 3) drilling experiments were designed based on the process parameter combinations. w1. i. w2. White node The white node is used to summarize all linear weighted inputs plus a constant. where x1. In the experiments. a training data-base with the information of inputs and outputs is required . To let the network have a better accuracy. The principle of the PSE criterion is to select as accurate. To accomplish this. x2 are the inputs to the node.1 in the following network synthesis. i. w1.e. y1 is the output of the node and w0.

2. The drilling performance (tool life. 2).24 0. metal removal rate. a threelayer abductive network for predicting tool life is synthesized automatically (Fig.24 0.24 528 30 226 45 38 176 40 31 940 527 60 282 75 59 188 63 39 340 136 283 68 43 170 60 38 98 128 87 153 225 88 145 216 116 206 279 117 203 266 124 181 272 175 237 152 229 334 148 234 313 223 407 175 359 576 178 378 546 298 663 957 288 619 870 271 538 813 424 842 400 803 1139 371 746 1087 drilling time until the average ﬂank wear land VB is equal to 0.06 0. Similarly. 4 shows where D is the drill diameter (mm).24 0.06 0. When the drill fully entered the workpiece. The mean ﬂank wear land VB was calculated by averaging six places of the ﬂank wear land on the cutting edges (Fig. cutting speed and feedrate) is summarized and listed in Table 1.15 0.152 B. Based on the developed training data-base.Y.15 0. f is the feedrate (mm rev − 1) and N is the rotational speed of the drill (rpm).3 mm or the maximum ﬂank wear land VBmax is equal to 0.6 mm.15 0. thrust force and torque) with the corre- Fig.15 0. Fig. this tool-life criterion being recommended by the International Standards Organization (ISO). The thrust force and torque signals were measured using a dynamometer (Kistler 9271A) under the workpiece. Lee et al. which can be calculated from the equation: N= 1000U yD (10) where U is the cutting speed (m min − 1).06 0.15 0. Features of the ﬂank wear land on the drill.06 0.15 0.15 0.24 0.15 0. The metal removal rate (MRR) is calculated by using the following equation: MRR= yD 2 fN 4 (9) sponding process parameters (drill diameter.06 0.06 0. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 74 (1998) 149–157 Table 1 Experimental process parameters and drilling performance Test number D (mm) V (m min−1) f (mm rev−1) Tool life (s) Metal removal rate (mm3 min−1) 1200 2999 2399 5999 9598 3599 8998 14 397 1502 3756 6010 3005 7512 12 020 4507 11 269 18 030 1797 4493 3595 8987 14 379 5399 13 496 21 595 Thrust force (N) Torque (N · cm) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 10 10 20 20 20 30 30 30 10 10 10 20 20 20 30 30 30 10 10 20 20 20 30 30 30 0.24 0. In the experiments. the ﬂank wear land was measured on both cutting edges of the drill using a tool microscope (Isoma).06 0.15 0. 3).24 0. .06 0. the steady-state portions of the thrust force and torque signals were obtained and used as the inputs to the network.06 0.

5 showing the ﬂow chart in the simulated annealing searching. the perturbed process parameters are accepted as the new process parameters and the temperature T drops a little. First. Furthermore. The temperature of the heat bath is then reduced slowly. the simulated annealing algorithm does not need the calculation of the gradient descent that is required for most traditional optimization algorithms. Fig. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 74 (1998) 149–157 153 Fig. Lee et al. 3 and 4) are listed in the Appendix A. Metropolis proposed a criterion to be used to simulate the cooling of a solid for reaching a new energy state [14]. annealing is referred to as a physical process that is used to reconstruct the crystal structure of a solid with a low energy state. If the new objective function becomes smaller. all particles of the solid re-arranging themselves and tending towards a low energy state. the simulated annealing algorithm with probabilistic hill-climbing characteristics can ﬁnd the global minimum efﬁciently. 3. 4. an initial temperature TS. In 1953. The objective function obj is deﬁned based on the drilling performance index: this will be discussed in Section 5. Based on the Metropolis criterion. The objective function obj is recalculated using the perturbed compensation parameters. All of the polynomial equations used in these networks (Figs. Simulated annealing algorithm In condensed-matter physics. A solid in a heat bath is ﬁrst heated to a temperature above the melting point of the solid. A small randomly generated perturbation is applied to the process parameters. at this temperature. instead of the objective function being trapped in a local minimum. an optimization algorithm called ‘simulated annealing’ was developed by Kirkpatrick [5]. the developed abductive networks for predicting thrust force and torque. with surrounding barriers. It has been shown that the simulated annealing algorithm possesses several ad- vantages in comparison with traditional optimization algorithms.B. As the cooling of the particle is carried out sufﬁciently slowly.: .Y. First. the simulated annealing search is independent of the initial conditions. Next. Abductive networks for predicting drill-life. In this paper. until the lowest energy state is reached. the simulated annealing algorithm is used to search for the optimal process parameters. i. lower and lower energy states are obtained.e. a ﬁnal temperature Te and a set of initial process parameter vector ( X0 is given. all of the particles of the solid being in a violent random motion. which means that the simulated annealing algorithm can be applied to all kinds of objective and constraint functions.

a normalization of tool life and metal removal rate between zero and unity is required. Several cases are presented to illustrate the optimization of the process parameters in drilling operations. The above procedure is repeated until the ﬁnal temperature Te is reached and then the optimal process parameters with the minimum objective function are outputted. To determine the optimal process parameters. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 74 (1998) 149–157 Fig. However. Since the tool life and the metal removal rate are the two different objectives. 4. the use of this model to optimize the drilling processes and then to obtain the optimal process parameters will be demonstrated in this section. The inequality constraints on the thrust force FT and torque TQ are given as follows: 0B FT B UFT 0 B TQ B UTQ (14) (15) 5. As mentioned earlier. Optimization of drilling processes Once the drilling process model has been developed.e. the probability of the acceptance of the perturbed process parameters is given based on the Metropolis criterion.: Pr(obj)=exp − Dobj kBT (12) ity are the criteria for the determination of drilling performance. In . if the objective function becomes larger. The objective function obj is formulated as follows: obj= − w1TL − w2MR (13) where kB is the Boltzmann constant and Dobj is the difference in the objective function. the objective function has to be deﬁned ﬁrst. where w1 and w2 are the weights of the normalized tool life TL and normalized metal removal rate MR in optimization.154 B. cost and productiv- where UFT and UTQ are the upper bounds of the thrust force FT and of the torque TQ. Abductive network for predicting thrust force and torque. i. Therefore. A weighting method is then adopted to transform the normalized tool life TL and normalized metal removal rate MR into a single objective format. Lee et al. the thrust force FT and torque TQ should be kept at an acceptable level.Y. the maximum tool life and the maximum metal removal rate should be considered for optimizing drilling performance. Ti + 1 =Ti CT (11) where CT is the decaying ratio for the temperature (CT B 1) and i is the index for the temperature decrement. At the same time. respectively.

the drill should be replaced when the period of drilling time reaches the predicted tool life.0001°C. the values of w1 and w2 can be used to adjust the trade-off between tool cost and productivity in optimization. drill diameters of D= 9 and 11 mm. the tool life decreases with increase of the metal removal rate.67 +1.00 11.08 mm rev − 1 are recommended to obtain the longest drill-life in the optimization procedure. To further understand the tool-life curve.00 0.80 1.00 −2. 5.33 Error (%) . 6.00 1. are selected in these cases to verify how well the abductive network performs.00 0.309 0. there is a high wear rate in the initial stage of drilling. A cutting speed of 10 m min − 1 and a feedrate of 0. Flow chart for the simulated annealing searching.74 10. For instance. 6).00 1.08 0.00 1. A comparison of the predicted and observed ﬂank wear at the end of the drill-life is also presented in Table 2. On the other hand.00 +7.00 1.300 0.300 Experiment 0. the parameters used in the simulated annealing algorithm are given as follows: the initial temperature TS = 100°C.300 0.00 0. a progressive ﬂank wear characterized by a nearly steady wear rate is found in the second stage. the process parameters with a longer tool life can be obtained by increasing the weight of w1.00 0.95. It can be seen that the predicted tool life of 861 s is very close to the zone of the end of the progressive wear (Fig. as shown in cases 3 and 4 (Table 2).00 0. a rapid wear rate is presented in the third stage until catastrophic failure of the drill.300 0.24 0. the process parameters with a higher metal removal rate can be obtained so as to improve the productivity of drilling operations. It can be seen that the tool-life curve consists of three stages with different wear rates.08 0.00 +9. the optimal process parameters with several weighting combinations are obtained (Table 2). However.00 10. Therefore.33 +3.00 30. In addition. the upper bound of the thrust force UFT = 300 N and the upper bound of the torque UTQ = 1000 N · cm. 7.300 0.08 1. For example. First. the effect of drilling time on ﬂank wear in this drilling test is shown in Fig.297 0.80 0. as the weight of w2 increases.Y.294 0.08 0.00667. A photograph of the drill at the end of the predicted drill-life is shown in Fig.00 30. Therefore. otherwise a rapid deterioration of the drill may occur if the drill is still in use. Through the simulated annealing searching.00 861 938 38 37 660 803 0.322 0. different from those in the training data-base (Table 1).97 0. these cases. the decaying ratio CT =0.304 −1.0 are selected in cases 1 and 2 (Table 2). Finally. Lee et al. After the occurrence of the initial wear. It can be seen that the developed network can predict the drill-life very well. the Boltzmann constant kB =0. w1 = 1. To save the tool cost in drilling.329 0.24 0. cases 5 and 6 are the drilling tests with consideration of the Table 2 Experimental veriﬁcation of the modeling and optimization of drilling processes Test number D (mm) V (m min−1) f (mm rev−1) w1 w2 Predicted tool life (s) Tool wear (mm) Prediction 1 2 3 4 5 6 11 9 11 9 11 9 10. the ﬁnal temperature Te = 0.B.0 and w2 = 0.300 0. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 74 (1998) 149–157 155 Fig.

446Z02 − 0.0317Z01Z02 Fig.503−0.123V 3. Appendix A (A) Normalizer 1.291Z02Z03 03 2. for which it can be found that the prediction error of the tool life for each case (Table 2) is less than 10%. it has been clearly shown that the process parameters with an optimum drilling performance can be obtained systematically through this approach.Y. Z03 = − 1.36+215.59Y31 3.0596Z02 − 0. Thrust Force= 189. 6. a useful technique for the modeling and optimization of drilling processes has been demonstrated in this study.68f (B) Unitizer 1.109+0.114Z 2 02 (D) Double node 1.88+ 283. .28X31 2. As a result. 7. Conclusions In this paper. Effect of drilling time on ﬂank wear (D=11 mm. Z02 = − 2. X12 = − 0.034−0.391Z02 − 0.156 B.12+ 0. V =10 m min − 1.304Z 2 01 02 + 0. f =0.261Z 2 + 0.268Z 2 + 0. Tool Life=179.56+ 0. The rela- tionships between process parameters and drilling performance can be constructed by the abductive networks. Several drilling tests using the optimal process parameters were performed to conﬁrm the effectiveness of this approach. 6).55Z21 (C) Single node 1. self-organized abductive networks to model drilling operations have been reported.08+70. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 74 (1998) 149–157 Fig. In the foregoing discussion.08 mm rev − 1).612D 2. Torque=558. Z01 = − 6.577Z03 + 0. Acknowledgements This research was partially supported by the National Science Council of the Republic of China under grant number NSC85-2216-E011-023. Photograph of the drill at the end of the predicted drill life (drilling conditions as shown in Fig. 6. Lee et al.95+ 13. trade-off between tool cost and productivity. A global optimization algorithm. simulated annealing. Y11 = 0.223Z 2 02 + 0. is then applied to these networks for searching for optimal drilling process parameters subject to an adjustable objective function and inequality constraints. X13 = − 0.

Determination of optimal cutting parameters in wire electrical discharge machining.J. Marcel Dekker. Gibbs distributions and the Bayesian restoration of images. 5 (1) (1989) 19 – 26. Self-Organizing Methods in Modeling: GMDH Type Algorithms.125Z03 + 0. M.A.199Y11Z03 +0. Teller. Tarng.167X21Z02 −0. Teller. Tools Manuf.012X 3 21 4. [8] B.419X 3 11 12 + 0. Lee et al.135+0. Simulated Annealing: Theory and Applications. F. [13] R. Pattern Anal. Science 220 (4958) (1983) 671 – 680. ASME Manuf.404X 3 13 3. Drake.02X11X12 +2.N.148Y21Y12Z01 +0. Mach. [7] S.A.3Y 2 − 13. [2] G. Neurocomputing 2 (1991) 97 – 104. Barron.264X13 − 1. Chung.13+0. . 1991. X31 = − 0. Rosenbluth. Mach. Kirkpatrick. Wang.1Z01Z03 5. Y31 = − 0. IEEE Trans.256Y11 +0. Abduction and induction.076Z02 −0.27Y12 +0.042Z02 +0. New York. Cook. The discrete tolerance optimization problem. Kluwer. K. J. Phys. Equation of state calculation by fast computing machines. C.628Y 3 −0. Geman.477X12 −0.7Y 2 +0. Dover.769X21 −0. Rosenbluth. A. B. A. Marcel Dekker. [11] C. Mucciardi.J.J. Y12 =0.L. Z11 = − 0.835Z03 +0.0828Z01 − 14. A. The magic number seven.P. Int.J. Aarts. Self-Organizing Methods in Modeling: GMDH Type Algorithms. in: Buckler (Ed. Laarhoven. Psychol.P.C.55Z01 +0. L.R. Abductive reasoning network.22X 2 − 0. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 74 (1998) 149–157 157 3. Rev. Barron. London. 35 (12) (1995) 1693 – 1701.A. Farlow (Ed.336Z02Z03 −0. Geman. Adaptive learning networks: Development and application in the United States of algorithms related to GMDH. W. 21 (1953) 1087 – 1092.862Z03 References [1] S. Hardware Annealing in Analog VLSI Neurocomputing. in: S.0979X21Z02Z03 −0. 6 (6) (1984) 721 – 741. Zhang.027Z 2 02 − 0. Miller. Craig.Y. E.J. J.0394X 2 −0. in: S.054Z02Z03 03 4.B.017−1. Lee. Rev. 63 (1956) 81 – 97.363X 3 −0. New York. S.R.493Z01 − 0.M. Montgomery.38Z 2 + 0. Tool life and machinability models for drilling steels. Farlow (Ed.06X11X12X13 −0.058+0.831X12X13 + 1.L. X21 = − 0. Rutenbar. 1988. New York.087+0.108Z02Z03 −0.0131Z 2 +28Y21Y12 21 12 01 + 0. A.107Z01Z02Z03 2. [4] A. H.464Y11Z01 11 03 + 0. Peirce. Kluwer. Metropolis.).603Z03 − 0. X11 = − 0. 1955. Optimization by simulated annealing.). . 1984. Kolarik.275Y12Z01 − 0. D.0217Z 2 −0. 6 (1) (1991) 60 – 71.0618Z 2 −0.W.J.231Z 2 01 02 03 + 0. Simulated annealing algorithms: An overview. [14] N. Mach.193Z 2 +0.032Z01 −0.S. plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. J. Vecchi.918X11 +0. Gelatt. [5] S. Sheu. [6] R.07Z01Z03 +0.158X21Z03 21 − 0.502Z01 +0.H.J. IEEE Circuits Devices Mag. [9] C. [3] P. Barron.K.262Y21Z01 −0. Tools Manuf. Z21 =Z11 + 0. M.26Z11Z01 (E) Triple node 1. Ma. J. [10] Y.513Y 3 21 12 (F) White node 1. Jalali. Y21 = − 0. Predicted square error: A criterion for automatic model selection. Int.44Y 2 + 0. E.85Z03 + 5. London.N.C. Stochastic relaxation.114Z02 +0. 1984.364Z02 −0. Philosophical Writings of Peirce. [12] G.D.38Y21 +2. 31 (3) (1991) 273–282.699X 2 −0. .74X11X13 −1. Intell.468X 2 11 12 13 + 2. Chem.).

- Analisys and innovation for penetrant testing.pdf
- Magnetic Properties of Steels
- The Birth of New Technology
- Tungsten Revista
- Matrix Analysis for Scientist
- Pensamiento de Diseno
- The Use of Rapid Prototyping in Clinical Applications
- Furação
- Véndase bien
- Modeling of Cutting Forces in End Milling Operations
- Programaciòn manual cnc
- normalizacion

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot useful- 5537-11839-2-PB (1)
- Drill Bit Parameters 090725040952 Phpapp02
- deep DD
- Multiple Response Optimizations in Drilling Using Taguchi and Grey Relational Analysis
- PDC Bit Offer for Mars1
- 56-145-1-PB
- Drill String Dynamics Closed Loop
- 2
- SMITH BITS Product Catalog 200
- Tunnelling
- Local Search
- Lecture 13
- Nips Demoreport 120709 Research
- Sgpr Talbi Book
- 15 Dynamic Programming
- MATH_F212_1122
- CoursOPT-07-08
- Randezvous Solver
- What is Difference Between Backtracking and Branch and Bound Method
- 1
- ITFUZ1
- Schoen
- Good Parameters for Particle Swarm Optimization
- Soil Exploration
- Brain-Computer Optimization for Solving Complicated Geometrical Decision-Making Problems
- C02
- Multi-Objective HPSO Algorithm Approach for Optimally Location of UPFC in Deregulated Power Systems.pdf
- Unit Commitment Solution Methods
- Slides on Sequences
- tmp14DE.tmp
- Modeling and Optimization of Drilling Process