| Literature DB >> 35125604 |
Yuh Wen Chen1, Jing Mau Shiu2.
Abstract
In the traditional electroplating industry of Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS), quality control inspection of the product surface is usually performed with the naked eye. However, these defects on the surface of electroplated products are minor and easily ignored under reflective conditions. If the number of defectiveness and samples is too large, manual inspection will be challenging and time-consuming. We innovatively applied additive manufacturing (AM) to design and assemble an automatic optical inspection (AOI) system with the latest progress of artificial intelligence. The system can identify defects on the reflective surface of the plated product. Based on the deep learning framework from You Only Look Once (YOLO), we successfully started the neural network model on graphics processing unit (GPU) using the family of YOLO algorithms: from v2 to v5. Finally, our efforts showed an accuracy rate over an average of 70 percentage for detecting real-time video data in production lines. We also compare the classification performance among various YOLO algorithms. Our visual inspection efforts significantly reduce the labor cost of visual inspection in the electroplating industry and show its vision in smart manufacturing.Entities:
Keywords: Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS); Additive manufacturing; Artificial intelligence; Automatic Optical Inspection (AOI); Deep learning; Smart manufacturing; You Only Look Once (YOLO)
Year: 2022 PMID: 35125604 PMCID: PMC8800425 DOI: 10.1007/s00170-022-08676-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Adv Manuf Technol ISSN: 0268-3768 Impact factor: 3.226
Fig. 1Research Process
Fig. 2Operation of AOI
Fig. 3CNN Framework
Fig. 4YOLO Framework
Fig. 5CAD and AOI Prototype
Fig. 6Comparison of Telecentric Lens (Right) and CCTV Lens(Left)
Fig. 7LED Mechanism for Capturing the Product Image
Fig. 8Preprocessing of Images: Enhanced (Left) and Sharpened (Right) with Different Kernels
Model Parameters
| Model Parameters | YOLOv2 | YOLOv3 | YOLOv4 | YOLOv5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Batch | 64 | 64 | 64 | 64 |
| Max Batches | 5000 | 5000 | 5000 | 1000 |
| Learning Rate |
The parameters are set according to the model scale
Fig. 9Loss Evolution with Iterations of YOLO v2
Fig. 10Loss Evolution with Iterations of YOLO v3
Fig. 11Loss Evolution with Iterations of YOLO v4
Fig. 12Loss Evolution with Iterations of YOLO v5
Fig. 13Confusion Matrix
Model Evaluation
| Model Performance | YOLOv2 | YOLOv3 | YOLOv4 | YOLOv5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TP | 0.18 | 0.71 | 0.71 | 0.75 |
| FP | 0.00 | 0.17 | 0.31 | 0.24 |
| FN | 0.82 | 0.29 | 0.29 | 0.25 |
| TN | 1.00 | 0.83 | 0.69 | 0.76 |
| Accuracy | 59 | 71 | 70 | 75 |
| Precision | 100 | 81 | 69 | 76 |
| Recall | 18 | 77 | 69 | 75 |
| F1-Score | 30 | 77 | 69 | 75 |
Here TP+FN = 1 and FP+TN = 1
Fig. 14Detected Results from Various YOLO Algorithms (Left: v3, Middle: v4, Right: v5)