| Literature DB >> 30823684 |
Xiaoyan Wu1, Huarui Zhang2, Haiyang Cui3, Zhen Ma4, Wei Song5, Weimin Yang6, Lina Jia7, Hu Zhang2.
Abstract
In this paper, an artificial neural network (ANN) model with high accuracy and good generalization ability was developed to predict and optimize the mechanical properties of Al⁻7Si alloys. The quantitative correlation formulas of the mechanical properties with Mg content and heat treatment parameters were established based on the transfer function and weight values. The relative importance of the input variables, Mg content and heat treatment parameters, on the mechanical properties of Al⁻7Si alloys were identified through sensitivity analysis. The results indicated that the mechanical properties of Al⁻7Si alloys were sensitive to Mg content and aging temperature. Then the individual and the combined influences of these input variables on the properties of Al⁻7Si alloys were simulated and the process parameters were optimized using the artificial neural network model. Finally, the proposed model was validated to be a robust tool in predicting the mechanical properties of the Al⁻7Si alloy by conducting experiments.Entities:
Keywords: Mg content; artificial neural network; heat treatment parameter; mechanical property; quantitative relationship
Year: 2019 PMID: 30823684 PMCID: PMC6427633 DOI: 10.3390/ma12050718
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Chemical composition of the tested alloys (wt.%).
| Alloys | Si | Mg | Fe | Cu | Ti | Sr | Al |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Al–7Si–0.3Mg | 7.134 | 0.301 | 0.115 | 0.072 | 0.144 | 0.015 | Balance |
| Al–7Si–0.45Mg | 7.123 | 0.455 | 0.122 | 0.079 | 0.148 | 0.015 | Balance |
| Al–7Si–0.6Mg | 6.978 | 0.608 | 0.111 | 0.075 | 0.15 | 0.015 | Balance |
Figure 1Schematic of tensile test specimens (mm) in the present study.
Statistics of inputs and outputs used in the present model development.
| Experimental Data | Input and Output Variables | Minimum | Maximum |
|---|---|---|---|
| 65 training | Mg contents (wt.%) | 0.3 | 0.6 |
| Solution time (h) | 2 | 8 | |
| Aging temperature (°C) | 150 | 190 | |
| Aging time (h) | 1 | 42 | |
| Ultimate tensile strength (MPa) | 263.34 | 359.27 | |
| Yield strength (MPa) | 130.85 | 324.33 | |
| Elongation (%) | 1.07 | 18.19 |
The parameters of the proposed artificial neural network (ANN) model.
| The number of layers | Input layers: 1, hidden layers: 2, output layers: 1 |
| The number of neurons on the layers | Input neurons: 4, hidden neurons: 10 + 11, output neurons: 3 |
| The initial weights and biases | Randomly between −1 and 1 |
| The learning algorithm | Traindm |
| The learning rate | 0.01 |
| Activation function | purelin; purelin; tansig |
| Number of iterations | 1000 |
| Acceptable mean-squared error | 0.001 |
| The number of samples | 72 |
Figure 2The artificial neural network designed for this study.
Figure 3Regression analysis of the ANN model by program: R is the correlation coefficient.
Figure 4Comparison of the predictions and experiment results for: (a) Ultimate tensile strength (UTS) and (b) elongation.
Figure 5Bar charts showing the index of relative importance of Mg content and heat treatment parameters on UTS, yield strength (YS), and elongation of the Al–7Si alloy.
Figure 6Predicted mechanical properties with (a,b) Mg content and (c,d) aging temperature.
Figure 7Predicted mechanical properties with Mg content and aging temperature.
Figure 8Predicted mechanical properties with aging parameters.
Figure 9Isograms of UTS and elongation of Al–7Si alloy with different parameters: (a) Mg contents and Aging temperature; (b) Mg contents and Aging time and (c) Solution time and Aging time.
The coefficient of the outer layer parameters and the second hidden parameters’ quantitative formulae.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| U | −0.4023 | 0.5292 | −0.101 | −0.0045 | 0.2112 | 0.5448 | 0.7152 | −0.3718 | −0.2403 | 0.6613 | 0.8859 |
| Y | −0.6832 | 0.3263 | −0.2466 | 0.5169 | −0.5475 | −0.3655 | −0.3598 | −0.6839 | −0.2836 | −0.2466 | −0.4508 |
| L | −0.2647 | −0.0014 | 0.5874 | 0.2985 | −0.2851 | 0.5568 | 0.3655 | 0.754 | −0.4439 | 0.6605 | −0.3456 |
The coefficient of the second hidden parameters and the first hidden parameters’ quantitative formulae.
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | i | j | m | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.1355 | 0.1255 | −0.9365 | 0.9695 | 0.6344 | 0.9022 | 0.6263 | −0.2795 | −0.1363 | −0.1189 | 0.1248 |
| 2 | 0.0744 | 0.82 | 0.7178 | 0.8577 | −0.6858 | −0.0634 | 0.1839 | 0.4274 | 0.0599 | 0.9389 | 0.3639 |
| 3 | 0.2032 | 0.5231 | −0.132 | 0.54 | 0.3878 | 0.291 | 0.7298 | 0.5249 | −0.3397 | −0.067 | 0.8802 |
| 4 | 0.7328 | 0.5411 | −0.9638 | −0.8818 | 0.6809 | −0.3138 | 0.9492 | −0.498 | 0.3938 | −0.8847 | 0.2863 |
| 5 | 0.3375 | 0.5537 | −0.4681 | 0.2553 | 0.784 | 0.0925 | −0.8659 | 0.0174 | 0.914 | −0.7707 | 0.0188 |
| 6 | 0.9318 | −0.3483 | 0.1548 | −0.1213 | −0.8568 | −0.0474 | −0.1418 | −0.4778 | 0.3957 | −0.5603 | 0.5742 |
| 7 | −0.2923 | −0.8708 | 0.9148 | 0.0767 | 0.2453 | 0.4271 | 0.1244 | −0.9487 | 0.6576 | 0.5976 | 0.9884 |
| 8 | 0.3035 | 0.8515 | −0.9912 | −0.3685 | −0.0279 | 0.9527 | 0.5688 | 0.738 | 0.8249 | −0.5653 | 0.9095 |
| 9 | 0.1694 | −0.8473 | 0.6527 | −0.0688 | −0.4011 | 0.8883 | 0.0669 | 0.2996 | 0.728 | 0.8003 | 0.6363 |
| 10 | −0.1005 | −0.5128 | 0.9207 | 0.0134 | −0.8876 | −0.3215 | 0.4775 | 0.7924 | −0.819 | −0.1909 | 0.4992 |
| 11 | −0.5446 | −0.3827 | 0.4031 | −0.6027 | −0.3251 | −0.5347 | 0.9466 | 0.8724 | 0.5415 | 0.0567 | 0.9977 |
The coefficient of the first hidden layer parameters and the input parameters’ quantitative formulae.
| α | β | γ | δ | f | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.1702 | 0.107 | −0.7954 | −0.8409 | −0.5536 |
| 2 | 0.0846 | 0.8242 | 0.6174 | 0.0262 | 0.9687 |
| 3 | −0.2316 | 0.8773 | 0.1259 | −1.0369 | −0.4795 |
| 4 | −0.8426 | 0.2355 | 0.1741 | 0.5634 | 0.8002 |
| 5 | −0.8532 | 0.8353 | 1.0346 | 0.3406 | 0.9818 |
| 6 | 0.4669 | −0.3255 | −0.5395 | −0.6221 | −0.4456 |
| 7 | 0.5046 | 0.8691 | −0.9924 | −0.3892 | −0.0743 |
| 8 | −0.6015 | −0.0607 | 0.4271 | −0.5255 | −0.5005 |
| 9 | −0.9256 | −0.0907 | 0.2325 | −0.5866 | −0.2625 |
| 10 | 0.3276 | −0.8509 | −0.6511 | −0.0639 | −1.0178 |
ANN suggested optimum composition and heat treatment variables for desired mechanical properties.
| Designed Mechanical Properties | Mg Content/wt.% | Solution Time/h | Aging Temperature/°C | Aging Time/h | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UTS/MPa | YS/MPa | E/% | |||||
| A | 315.8 | 237.2 | 13.5 | 0.27 | 3.85 | 164 | 2.2 |
| B | 340.4 | 289.3 | 8.5 | 0.45 | 4.2 | 168 | 17.5 |
| C | 356.8 | 317.5 | 5.1 | 0.65 | 3.3 | 173 | 12.8 |
Figure 10The comparison of experimental and predicted properties: (a) Strength and (b) elongation.