Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Today: Proceedings

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matpr

Prediction of surface roughness in turning of duplex stainless steel (DSS)

using response surface methodology (RSM) and artificial neural
network (ANN)
Mahesh Gopal ⇑
Department of Mechanical Engineering, College of Engineering and Technology, Wollega University, Post Box No. 395, Nekemte, Ethiopia

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

Article history: In this present study, an experimental investigation has been done to predict surface roughness by taking
Received 10 July 2020 into consideration of the following parameters: cutting speed, rate of feed, cutting depth and nose radius
Received in revised form 11 March 2021 in the hard turning of Duplex 2205 (ASTM A276) round bar material utilizing carbide tip tool material.
Accepted 6 May 2021
Machining of duplex stainless Steel is considered as an inefficient machinable material, low removal rate
Available online xxxx
and requires more exertion to machine the item. For experimental purposes, the 4-factor and 5-level
design matrix is structured using the Design-Expert software. The statistical method is used to analyze
Keywords:
the variance using ANOVA technique to examine the unique performance character.The statistical
Cutting speed
Rate of feed
method is employed to analysis of variance (ANOVA) in order to examine the performance uniqueness.
Cutting depth A second-order mathematical model is created according to the Design of Experiments (DoE) of
Nose radius Response Surface Methodology (RSM) to anticipate surface roughness. In view of cutting test, the cutting
Duplex stainless steel speed is the parameter which has the greatest impact on the machining activity. The nose radius is a
ANOVA minor parameter that has a less impact on machining activity. For the best possible results, the cutting
RSM parameters leading to surface roughness, the Artificial Neural Network (ANN) model is trained and tested
Artificial neural network (ANN) using MAT Lab. For this condition, the ANN suggests the utmost least predicted value of surface rough-
ness. The results of the tests confirming the expected values proved to be in perfect agreement with the
experimental values. Finally, efficiency of three different ANN transfer function were compared to choose
the best predicted values. The Log-sigmoid is the most suitable transfer function that provides minimum
surface roughness.
Ó 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Confer-
ence on Advances in Design, Materials and Manufacturing.

1. Introduction of aluminium oxide and titanium carbonitride are used to measure

A thin strip of material is removed from the workpiece due to
the relative movement between the cutting tool and workpiece.
During machining, the heat is generated in enormous amount
between tool and workpiece, which results wear on the cutting
tool, poor surface unevenness, etc. Surface unevenness of a work-
piece have occurred mainly due to the cutting parameters, tool
selection, tool geometry, machine tool vibration, the heat gener-
ated during cutting operation, changes in tribological properties,
proper selection of cooling and cutting fluids and soon. A hard
turning experiment is carried out using ceramic inserts composed
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: doctorgmahesh@gmail.com
surface roughness of bearing steel using nose radius and rake angle
as an input parameter and the authors indicate that the feed rate is
the primary factor that affect the surface finish compared to nose
radius and cutting velocity [1]. The author [2] conducted the exper-
iment by considering the nose radius of the tool as the primary fac-
tor to predict the surface finish and suggests that a large nose
radius gives a fine surface finish and less wear of the tool. The
researchers [3] performed the turning operation using TiC coated
and uncoated tungsten carbide tools in AISI 4140 steel and ana-
lyzed the impact of cutting speed, rate of feed, cutting depth and
nose radius on the surface roughness. An experimental study [4]
is performed on the AISI H11 steel using the boron nitride cube
tool. The three levels of design are designed using factorial method
and the mathematical models are formulated using response

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2021.05.118
2214-7853/Ó 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Conference on Advances in Design, Materials and Manufacturing.

Please cite this article as: M. Gopal, Prediction of surface roughness in turning of duplex stainless steel (DSS) using response surface methodology (RSM)
and artificial neural network (ANN), Materials Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2021.05.118
M. Gopal Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Table 1
Process parameters and their levels.

Cutting parameter Unit Levels

2
1 0 1 2
Cutting Speed (tc) m/min 80 100 120 140 160
Rate of feed (fz) mm/rev 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Depth of Cut (ap) mm 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5
Nose Radius (rn) mm 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.4 2.8

Table 2
Experimental Values with Responses.

Run Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 Experimental value (observed) Predicted by RSM Predicted by ANN
Cutting speed (tc) Rate of feed (fz) Cutting depth (ap) Nose radius (rn) Surface roughness Surface roughness Surface roughness
(m/min) (mm/rev) (mm) (mm) (lm) (lm) (lm)
1 120 0.4 3.5 1.6 2.47 2.49 2.4998
2 100 0.5 3 1.2 3.01 2.99 3.0828
3 140 0.5 3 1.2 2.01 2.00 2.0808
4 100 0.3 4 2.4 2.86 2.87 2.7478
5 120 0.4 4.5 1.6 2.74 2.73 2.7705
6 100 0.3 3 2.4 2.91 2.92 2.8744
7 140 0.5 4 1.2 2.29 2.3 2.2920
8 140 0.3 4 2.4 2.43 2.44 2.5580
9 120 0.4 3.5 1.6 2.53 2.49 2.4998
10 120 0.4 3.5 1.6 2.52 2.49 2.4998
11 140 0.5 4 2.4 2.21 2.22 2.2767
12 120 0.4 3.5 1.6 2.45 2.49 2.4998
13 80 0.4 3.5 1.6 3.39 3.40 3.2712
14 120 0.4 3.5 1.6 2.52 2.49 2.4998
15 100 0.5 4 1.2 3.34 3.35 3.1585
16 120 0.4 3.5 1.6 2.47 2.49 2.4998
17 140 0.3 3 1.2 2.17 2.16 2.1379
18 120 0.6 3.5 1.6 2.69 2.68 2.6709
19 140 0.3 4 1.2 2.51 2.5 2.5026
20 100 0.3 3 1.2 2.86 2.85 2.9770
21 140 0.5 3 2.4 2.31 2.32 2.3065
22 100 0.5 4 2.4 2.97 2.96 3.0503
23 120 0.4 2.5 1.6 2.31 2.32 2.3097
24 100 0.5 3 2.4 3.01 3.02 3.0597
25 120 0.2 3.5 1.6 2.74 2.75 2.7772
26 100 0.3 4 1.2 3.23 3.22 3.2301
27 160 0.4 3.5 1.6 1.88 1.86 2.1649
28 120 0.4 3.5 2.8 2.72 2.70 2.7061
29 140 0.3 3 2.4 2.54 2.53 2.5604
30 120 0.4 3.5 0.8 2.7 2.72 2.7337

surface methodology (RSM). The result point out that the cutting
force is the influential parameter compared to cutting depth and
hardness of the coating material, rate of feed and cutting material
hardness affect surface unevenness. The author assesses the
machinability of low-alloy high-strength AISI 4340 steel and cold
AISI D2 steel as a working material at different hardness levels.
The results specified that the surface finish increases at larger cut-
ting speed and rate of feed [5].The non-linear regression analysis
with logarithmic data transformation strategy is performed to
examine surface roughness in turning activity by considering work
material hardness, cutting time, rate of feed, spindle speed, tool
point angle and cutting depth as cutting parameters [6]. Numerous
investigations have been carried out by the researches to predict
surface irregularities as important output parameters.
1.1. Duplex stainless steel
The statistical model using is developed by Krolczyk et al. [7] on
duplex stainless steel using turning processes to measure surface
roughness, as a result, the feed rate is the fundamental variable
affecting surface roughness. A turning operation is carried out
using nitrogen alloyed duplex stainless steel by using the Taguchi
method to predict surface roughness and cutting force. The
2
researcher proposed that rate of feed is the most impacting vari-
able compared to other parameters [8]. The analytical research is
carried out with duplex stainless steel of the standard grade EN
1.4462 and super EN 1.4410 DSS. The experiment is performed
by maintaining at constant cutting speed during facing operation
[9]. The experimental investigation is done [10] to predict surface
roughness and high corrosion resistance by considering the cutting
speed and cooling conditions at low and high fluid pressure cool-
ing. Long tool life, good surface finish and better corrosion resis-
tance are achieved under high fluid pressure cooling conditions.
The experiment is conducted using super duplex stainless steel
to measure surface roughness and residual stress, feed rate, nose
radius, rake angle and cutting speed were chosen as experimental
factors [11]. An experiment [12] was conducted using TiC and TiCN
cemented carbide cutting tools to process duplex stainless steels of
different grades in dry turning. The outcome result of the experi-
ment is that when the cutting speed increases, the surface rough-
ness decreases automatically. A study is conducted by considering
cutting speed and feed speed as parameters using carbon steel and
duplex stainless steel materials to measure residual stress, micro-
structure, micro-hardness, and surface roughness during milling
operations. The results show that the higher cutting speed and
low feed enhance the quality of the machined surface. [13]. An
M. Gopal Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Table 3
ANOVA Table for prediction of surface roughness.

Source Sum of Squares df Mean Square F-value p-value

Model 3.90 14 0.2784 462.78 <0.0001 significant
Cutting Speed (tc) 2.99 1 2.99 4964.79 <0.0001
Rate of Feed (fz) 0.0095 1 0.0095 15.82 0.0012
C-Cutting depth (ap) 0.1057 1 0.1057 175.77 <0.0001
D-Nose Radius (rn) 0.0010 1 0.0010 1.60 0.2257
tc fz 0.1056 1 0.1056 175.59 <0.0001
tc ap 0.0025 1 0.0025 4.16 0.0595
tc rn 0.0920 1 0.0920 152.95 <0.0001
fz ap 0.0004 1 0.0004 0.6650 0.4276
fz rn 0.0011 1 0.0011 1.90 0.1881
ap rn 0.1737 1 0.1737 288.79 <0.0001
tc 2 0.0359 1 0.0359 59.65 <0.0001
fz 2 0.0869 1 0.0869 144.42 <0.0001
ap 2 0.0020 1 0.0020 3.31 0.0889
rn 2 0.0935 1 0.0935 155.43 <0.0001
Residual 0.0090 15 0.0006
Lack of Fit 0.0033 10 0.0003 0.2869 0.9560 not significant
Pure Error 0.0057 5 0.0011
Cor Total 3.91 29

Table 4
experiment is carried out using duplex stainless steel alloyed with Optimum values of network parameter.
nitrogen; optimization is performed using the Taguchi method to
Sl. No Parameter Values
reduce surface roughness. The author suggests that the rate of feed
and spindle speed is the main affecting parameter affecting surface 1 Number of input layer 1
2 Number of input layer unit 4
roughness [14]. The study has been made while turning of DSS rod
3 Number of Hidden layer 1
using WC-Co coated carbide inserts. The desirability function as 4 Number of Hidden layer unit 5
well as the Taguchi method approach is used to correlate surface 5 Number of output layer 1
roughness and material withdrawal rate. The results showed that 6 Number of output layer unit 1
7 Number of Epochs 1000
rate of feed is the most significant factor affecting machining
8 Algorithm Back propagation
[15]. The analysis is performed using speed, feed and depth of 9 Learning rule Gradient descent rule
cut to measure cutting speed, surface roughness and material
removal rate. The Taguchi experimental design methodology is
employed to measure for practical trial. [16]. Vegetable oils - coco-
nut oil and neem oil are used for cooling when turning stainless steel
duplex (DSS) using a multi-layered carbide insert using the ultra-
sonic emulsification method rather than using inorganic biodegrad-
able mineral oil. The input parameter is spindle speed, feed rate,
cutting depth and type of cutting fluid. The Taguchi method is used
for machining, results the coconut oil based cutting fluid shows bet-
ter performance to improve the surface roughness [17].

Fig. 2. Interaction result of cutting.

2. Experimental design

The experimental test is designed using the Response Surface

Methodology (RSM) is the most advanced tool for conducting the
experiment. The test is directed according to the methodology of
design of experiments (DoE) of RSM. The Central Composite Design
(CCD) approach is used to design an experiment is a factor design
that has center points and star points. A regression model is
Fig. 1. Interaction result of cutting speed. designed to predict the surface roughness of duplex stainless steel
3
M. Gopal
Fig. 3. Interaction result of cutting speed.
Fig. 4. Interaction effect of rate of feed.
from the experimentally measured values. The selected parameters
are the cutting speed, feed speed, cutting depth and nose radius,
and their ranges have been determined. The upper level is (+2)
and the lower level is (
2) of all the four variables as shown in
Table 1. The intermediate levels of 0 for the set of variables are
determined by interpolation. The surface roughness of the work-
piece material is the output response. The design matrix is selected
for experiments as a four-factor CCD with 30 sets of coded condi-
tions, as shown in Table 2. The Design Expert V12 software is
employed to solve the coefficient of the regression model.
2.1. Experimentation
The medium-duty Kirloskar turn master-35 is used to accom-
plish the experimental analysis. Duplex stainless steel 2205 (ASTM
A276) round bar material is utilized as work material. The shape of
the workpiece material is 20 mm in diameter and 70 mm in length.
The work tool is a carbide insert (Tungaloy make) with a general
4
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
Fig. 5. Relationship between predicted vs actual.
specification of SNMG 120 408 MT AH925 coated is used in the
dry condition by considering the process parameters such as cut-
ting speed, rate of feed, cutting depth, nose radius as an input vari-
able. Duplex stainless steels are used extensively in engineering
and in the oil and gas, petrochemical and pulp and paper sectors.
The surface waviness is estimated by using the Mitutoyo SJ201 sur-
face roughness tester.
2.2. Response surface model for the prediction of surface roughness
The actual association between the response surface y and the
independent variable  is unknown. To this end, the RSM tech-
nique is used to find the practical relationship between the
response and the independent factors [18]. The researchers
employed an equation to predict surface irregularities.
Ra ¼ c  tc  k1  fz  k2  ap  k3  rn  k4 ð1Þ
where,
Ra - Predicted surface roughness (lm).
tc - Cutting speed (m/rev).
fz - Rate of feed (mm/rev).
ap - Cutting depth (mm).
rn - Nose radius (mm).
k1, k2, k3, k4, k5 - are the model parameters (to be estimated
from experimental data).
C - Response error.
The Second order mathematical equation can be written as
Y ¼ b0 x0 þ b1 x1 þ b2 x2 þ b3 x3 þ b11 x12 þ b22 x22 þ b33 x32
þ b44 x42 þ b12 x1 x22 þ b12 x1 x2 þ b13 x1 x3 þ b14 x1 x4
þ b23 x2 x3 þ b24 x2 x4 ð2Þ
where,
b0 - constant,
b1, b2, b3 - linear term coefficient,
b11, b22 - quadratic term coefficient and
b12 - interaction term coefficient.
The Design Expert V12 software is used to analyze the test read-
ing to predict surface roughness. A second-order quadratic model
is developed in accordance with the DOE methodological design
rules.The developed model is checked for its satisfactoriness using
analysis of variance (ANOVA). The ANOVA analysis for the
prediction of surface roughness is shown in Table 3. The Model
F-value (462.78) implies the model is significant. There is only a
M. Gopal Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 6. Neural network training.

to the pure error. There is a 95.60% chance that a Lack of Fit F-value
this large could occur due to noise. A non-significant lack of fit is
good, so model to fit.

Fig. 7. ANN validation performance.

0.01% chance that such model could occur due to noise.

P-values<0.0500 indicate model terms are significant. In this case
- tc, fz, ap, tc fz, tc rn, ap rn, tc 2, fz 2, rn 2 are significant model
terms. The values is greater than 0.1000 point out that the model
terms are not significant. If there are many insignificant model
terms, model reduction may improve your model. The Lack of Fit
F-value is 0.29 involve that the Lack of Fit is not significant relation Fig. 8. Plot Regression.

5
M. Gopal Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Table 5
Comparison of predicted (ANN) and experimental values.

Run Cutting Speed Rate of feed (fz) Cutting depth Nose Radius Experimental surface roughness Predicted by ANN - surface Error
(tc) (m/min) (mm/rev) (ap) (mm) (rn) (mm) value (observed) (Ra) (lm) roughness value (Ra) (lm) (%)
21 140 0.5 3 2.4 2.31 2.3065 0.1515
22 100 0.5 4 2.4 2.97 3.0503 2.7037
23 120 0.4 2.5 1.6 2.31 2.3097 0.0130
24 100 0.5 3 2.4 3.01 3.0597 1.6512
25 120 0.2 3.5 1.6 2.74 2.7772 1.3577
26 100 0.3 4 1.2 3.23 3.2301 0.0031
27 160 0.4 3.5 1.6 1.88 2.1649 13.1600
28 120 0.4 3.5 2.8 2.72 2.7061 0.5137
29 140 0.3 3 2.4 2.54 2.5604 0.8031
30 120 0.4 3.5 0.8 2.7 2.7337 1.2481
Average Error (%) 2.1605

The regression equation in terms of actual factors are given depth has a slight notable effect on surface roughness in the
below machining process. Fig. 5 shows the relationship between pre-
dicted value vs actual value.
SurfaceRoughness ¼ þ4:07990
0:029924  tc þ 0:795276
 fz þ 0:700579  ap
0:338271  rn 4. Artificial neural network

0:040625  tc  fz
0:001250  tc
An artificial neural network is a versatile framework that mod-
 ap þ 0:006205  tc  rn
0:100000
ify its structure depends on external or internal data that run
 fz  ap
0:138393  fz  rn throughout the network, which can display difficult universal

0:341071  ap  rn þ 0:000090  tc2 performance, determined by the associations between the process-
ing components and component parameters. Artificial neural
þ 5:59742  fz2 þ 0:033897  ap2
þ 0:231020  rn2 ð3Þ
In the present research, the input variable is used to build up
mathematical model using RSM. The determined value of the F
ratio is greater than the tabulated surface roughness value as
shown in Table 3; the model satisfies a desired 95% confidence
level. The values in Table 2 shows the experimental and predicted
values, ie error is at an acceptable level Table 2.

3. Results and discussions

3.1. Interaction effect

The discussion of the interaction effect of process variables on

surface roughness is given below. The interaction effect of cutting
speed and rate of feed over surface roughness is shown in Fig. 1.
When the cutting speed increases the surface roughness decreases
Fig. 9. Comparison of output of trained ANN and Experimental data.
and vice versa. It is confirmed that the cutting speed exerts a
remarkable effect on the surface roughness, which is due to the
dissipation of energy in plastic deformation and friction as shown
in the figure. When the feed rate is low; the surface roughness is
also low and vice versa. The temperature of the cutting zone rises
very rapidly due to the heat produced in the cutting zone, the
results turn to promulgate the wear of the tool. The results are con-
firmed through the ANOVA Table 4. From Fig. 2. and Fig. 3, there is
an increase in the cutting depth; more material is removed from
the workpiece, resulting in an increase in surface roughness and
vice versa. At low cutting depth, the material removal rate is very
low and adheres to the side of the tool, causing an increase in sur-
face roughness. Fig. 4 shows the interaction outcome of nose radius
on surface roughness. As the nose radius increases, the point of
contact between the work piece and the tool point is also high,
so more amount of heat is generated. The figure shows that as
the radius of the nose is increased, the surface roughness decrease,
resulting in a significant effect of the surface roughness of the turn-
ing process. It is clear that the surface roughness is low between
1.2 mm and 2.4 mm. The result is also verified in the ANOVA
Table 4. Fig. 4 shows that the increase in feed rate and cutting Fig. 10. Comparison of experimental, RSM and ANN data.

6
M. Gopal Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Table 6
Prediction value of LOGSIG, TRANSIG and PURELIN transfer functions.

Run Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 LOGSIG Predicted by TANSIG Predicted by PURELIN Predicted
ANN ANN by ANN
Cutting speed (tc) Rate of feed (fz) Cutting depth (ap) Nose radius (rn) Surface roughness Surface roughness Surface roughness
(m/min) (mm/rev) (mm) (mm) (lm) (lm) (lm)
1 120 0.4 3.5 1.6 2.4998 2.5040 2.6340
2 100 0.5 3 1.2 3.0828 3.1528 2.8978
3 140 0.5 3 1.2 2.0808 2.0376 2.1596
4 100 0.3 4 2.4 2.7478 2.8853 3.1196
5 120 0.4 4.5 1.6 2.7705 2.7877 2.7956
6 100 0.3 3 2.4 2.8744 2.8654 3.0094
7 140 0.5 4 1.2 2.2920 2.2089 2.2723
8 140 0.3 4 2.4 2.5580 2.5700 2.3859
9 120 0.4 3.5 1.6 2.4998 2.5040 2.6340
10 120 0.4 3.5 1.6 2.4998 2.5040 2.6340
11 140 0.5 4 2.4 2.2767 2.2442 2.3138
12 120 0.4 3.5 1.6 2.4998 2.5040 2.6340
13 80 0.4 3.5 1.6 3.2712 3.2769 3.2401
14 120 0.4 3.5 1.6 2.4998 2.5040 2.6340
15 100 0.5 4 1.2 3.1585 3.2389 3.0299
16 120 0.4 3.5 1.6 2.4998 2.5040 2.6340
17 140 0.3 3 1.2 2.1379 2.1550 2.2140
18 120 0.6 3.5 1.6 2.6709 2.6958 2.5502
19 140 0.3 4 1.2 2.5026 2.4168 2.3405
20 100 0.3 3 1.2 2.9770 2.8168 2.9687
Average 2.6120% 2.6188% 2.6551%

networks can replicate a slight number of the functions of human Table 7

behavior, which are formed by a finite number of layers with dis- Validation of ANN data set.
similar computing elements called neurons [19]. ANN is working Sl. Transfer Maximum predicted Minimum predicted
on the learning algorithm. It is divided into two groups: namely No function value value
supervised and unsupervised learning. In supervised, the input 1 LOGSIG 3.2712 2.0808
and output are trained by using the data. In unsupervised, the out- 2 TANSIG 3.2769 2.0376
put is not available, new input data called cluster input data is to 3 PURELIN 3.2401 2.1596
be entered, the ANN can assign it into a resultant cluster [20].
The process component of the ANN structure of the cutting
parameter is shown in Fig. 6. The ANN architecture, the put and experimental data. Fig. 10 shows the evaluation of the
result is to predict surface roughness (Ra). The ANN network experimental data of the RSM and the ANN, the results show a
has three levels; 1. Input, 2. Hidden, 3. Output layers. The input good agreement between the experimental data, predicted by the
and output layers are named as nodes and the hidden layer give RSM and predicted by the ANN.
a relation between the input and output. The number of neurons
in the input layer and the output layer is based on the ANN archi-
tectural geometry of 5. Validation of the model
the problem. The input layer receives four neurons and the out-
put layer has one neuron. However, no general rule exists for There are various types of standardized statistical performance
selecting the number of neurons in a hidden layer and the number evaluation criteria used to assess and to validate the models
of hidden layers [21]. applied in artificial neural networks (ANN). Three different kinds
An backpropagation neural network algorithm is used in this of transfer functions have been used for neurons in hidden layers
study. To train the neural network, the cutting speed, rate of feed, ; hyperbolic tangent sigmoid (TANSIG), log sigmoid (LOGSIG) and
cutting depth and nose radius are used as input parameters and the PURELIN [22,23]. The artificial neural network is trained by trans-
surface roughness as the output parameter. Fig. 6 shows the neural fer functions using scaled gradient Descent with Momentum &
network trainer in which 1000 iterations are done to predict sur- Adaptive LR method. Tansing and purely transfer function model
face roughness. Fig. 7 shows the Validation Performance between are trained in ANN network to compare the model is efficient
experimentation, training, predicted value and best result of ANN and provide less predicted value. The 20 data sets are selected
and error response after 1000 epochs. Fig. 8 shows the Plot Regres- for testing. The results are compared, the logsig is the most suitable
sion of training and validation data. From the 30 data sets obtained transfer function that reflects the minimum prediction result. The
from the experiment, to train the ANN model, 20 data sets are predicted value of three transfer functions as shown Table 6. The
selected randomly. To test validation result is shown in Table 7.
the ANN model, 10 data sets are selected. The results predicted
by the ANN model are compared with experimental values and the 6. Conclusion
percentages of errors are shown in Table 5. Based on Table 5, it is
clear that the developed model is well trained using ANN and The multiple regression models are developed using central
has the ability to predict new results. The average prediction error composite designs (CCD) by the response surface methodology
for the data set is (RSM). Design of experiments (DoE) is used to build up a
found to be 2.1605% and the maximum prediction error is second-order mathematical model to predict surface roughness.
13.1600%. Fig. 9 shows the comparison between trained ANN out- The Duplex 2205 (ASTM A276) round rod is used for turning
7
M. Gopal
operation by using the carbide insert as cutting tool. The input
parameter is cutting speed, rate of feed, cutting speed and nose
radius. The optimization is carried out using an artificial neuronal
network (ANN). The cutting speed is the most noteworthy influ-
encing parameter compared to the other parameters. The surface
roughness is low at a high cutting speed. The radius of the nose
of the tool must be between 1.2 mm and 2.4 mm for the best min-
imum surface roughness. The optimization carried out using Arti-
ficial Neural Network, the results shows a good agreement
between the experimental and ANN predicted data for the increase
in surface roughness and the error percentage of the ANN data is
<5%. Thus, the logsig transfer function ANN predictive model is
found to be more effective in carrying out surface roughness pre-
dictions. So the predictive ANN model is found to be accomplished
of better predictions of surface roughness.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Mahesh Gopal: Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology,
Validation, Visualization, Writing - original draft, Writing - review
& editing.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.
References
[1] D. Singh, P.V. Rao, A surface roughness prediction model for hard turning
process, J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 32 (11–12) (2007) 1115–1124.
[2] Y.K. Chou, H. Song, Tool nose radius effects on finish hard turning, J. Mater.
Process. Technol. 148 (2) (2004) 259–268.
[3] R.M. Sundaram, B.K. Lambert, Mathematical models to predict surface finish in
fine turning of steel. Part I, J. Prod. Res. 19 (5) (1981) 547–556.
[4] A. Hamdi, M.A. Yallese, K. Chaoui, T. Mabrouki, J.F. Rigal, Analysis of surface
roughness and cutting force components in hard turning with CBN tool:
Prediction model and cutting conditions optimization, Measurement 45 (3)
(2012) 344–353.
[5] J.G. Lima, R.F. Avila, A.M. Abrao, M. Faustino, J. Paulo Davim, Hard turning: AISI
4340 high strength low alloy steel and AISI D2 cold work tool steel, J. Mater.
Process. Technol. 169 (3) (2005) 388–395.
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
[6] X. Wang, C.X. Feng, Development of empirical models for surface roughness
prediction in finish turning, J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 20 (5) (2002) 348–356.
[7] G. Krolczyk, S. Legutko, M. Gajek, Predicting the surface roughness in the dry
machining of duplex stainless steel (DSS), Metalurgija 52 (2) (2013) 259–262.
[8] D.S. Philip, P. Chandramohan, M. Mohanraj, Optimization of surface roughness,
cutting force and tool wear of nitrogen alloyed duplex stainless steel in a dry
turning process using Taguchi method, Measurement 49 (2014) 205–215.
[9] D.K. Rastee, U. Heisel, R. Eisseler, S. Schmauder, Modeling and optimization of
turning duplex stainless steels, J. Manuf. Processes 16 (4) (2014) 451–467.
[10] A.D.O.J. Carlos, A.E. Diniz, R. Bertazzoli, Correlating tool wear, surface
roughness and corrosion resistance in the turning process of super duplex
stainless steel, J. B Society Mech. Sci. Eng. 36 (4) (2014) 775–785.
[11] E. Capello, P. Davoli, G. Bassanini, A. Bisi, Residual stresses and surface
roughness in turning, Trans. ASME 121 (3) (1999) 346–351.
[12] D.S. Philip, P. Chandramohan, Influence of cutting speed, feed rate and bulk
texture on the surface finish of nitrogen alloyed duplex stainless steels during
dry turning, Engineering 2 (06) (2010) 453–460.
[13] W.B. Saı̈, N.B. Salah, J.L. Lebrun, Influence of machining by finishing milling on
surface characteristics, J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 41 (3) (2001) 443–450.
[14] D.S. Philip, P. Chandramohan, M. Mohanraj, P.K. Rajesh, Experimental
investigations on surface roughness, cutting force and tool wear of duplex
stainless steel in end milling using Taguchi method, I R Mech. Engg. 7 (6)
(2013) 1133–1141.
[15] P. Kumar, J.P. Misra, Optimization of duplex stainless steel dry turning
parameters using desirability function, Mater. Today Proc. 26 (2020) 1580–
1584.
[16] G. Dinde, G.S. Dhende, Multi-response Optimization of Process Parameters
During Wet Turning of Super Duplex Stainless Steel UNS S32760 Using
Taguchi-Grey Relational Analysis, in: Optimization Methods in Engineering,
Springer, Singapore, 2020, pp. 417–428.
[17] D.A. Ghatge, R. Ramanujam, B.S. Reddy, M. Vignesh, Improvement of
machinability using eco-friendly cutting oil in turning duplex stainless steel,
Mater. Today Proc. 5 (2018) 12303–12310.
[18] G. Mahesh, S. Muthu, S.R. Devadasan, Prediction of surface roughness of end
milling operation using genetic algorithm, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 77 (1–4)
(2015) 369–381.
[19] I. Asiltürk, M. Çunkasß, Modeling and prediction of surface roughness in turning
operations using artificial neural network and multiple regression method,
Expert Syst. Appl. 38 (5) (2011) 5826–5832.
[20] F. Jafarian, M. Taghipour, H. Amirabadi, Application of artificial neural network
and optimization algorithms for optimizing surface roughness, tool life and
cutting forces in turning operation, J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 27 (5) (2013) 1469–
1477.
[21] M. Pala, N. Caglar, M. Elmas, A. Cevik, M. Saribiyik, Dynamic soil–structure
interaction analysis of buildings by neural networks, Constr. Build. Mater. 22
(3) (2008) 330–342.
[22] R. Sarkar, S. Julai, S. Hossain, W.T. Chong, M.A. Rahman, Comparative study of
activation functions of NAR and NARX neural network for long-term wind
speed forecasting in Malaysia, Math. Probl. Eng. 6403081 (2019).
[23] M. Dorofki, A.H. Elshafie, O. Jaafar, O.A. Karim, S. Mastura, Comparison of
artificial neural network transfer functions abilities to simulate extreme runoff
data, Int. Proc. Chem. Biol. Environ. Eng. 33 (2012) 39–44.