| Literature DB >> 35744334 |
Monika Kulisz1, Ireneusz Zagórski2, Jerzy Józwik2, Jarosław Korpysa2.
Abstract
The main purpose of the study was to define the machining conditions that ensure the best quality of the machined surface, low chip temperature in the cutting zone and favourable geometric features of chips when using monolithic two-teeth cutters made of HSS Co steel by PRECITOOL. As the subject of the research, samples with a predetermined geometry, made of AZ91D alloy, were selected. The rough milling process was performed on a DMU 65 MonoBlock vertical milling centre. The machinability of AZ91D magnesium alloy was analysed by determining machinability indices such as: 3D roughness parameters, chip temperature, chip shape and geometry. An increase in the feed per tooth fz and depth of cut ap parameters in most cases resulted in an increase in the values of the 3D surface roughness parameters. Increasing the analysed machining parameters did not significantly increase the instantaneous chip temperature. Chip ignition was not observed for the current cutting conditions. The conducted research proved that for the adopted conditions of machining, the chip temperature did not exceed the auto-ignition temperature. Modelling of cause-and-effect relationships between the variable technological parameters of machining fz and ap and the temperature in the cutting zone T, the spatial geometric structure of the 3D surface "Sa" and kurtosis "Sku" was performed with the use of artificial neural network modelling. During the simulation, MLP and RBF networks, various functions of neuron activation and various learning algorithms were used. The analysis of the obtained modelling results and the selection of the most appropriate network were performed on the basis of the quality of the learning and validation, as well as learning and validation error indices. It was shown that in the case of the analysed 3D roughness parameters (Sa and Sku), a better result was obtained for the MLP network, and in the case of maximum temperature, for the RBF network.Entities:
Keywords: artificial neural networks; chip geometry; chip temperature; magnesium alloy; rough milling; roughness 3D parameters
Year: 2022 PMID: 35744334 PMCID: PMC9227892 DOI: 10.3390/ma15124277
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.748
Figure 1Skewness and kurtosis, as well as graphical interpretation related to the surface geometrical structure and its parameters Ssk and Sku [3].
Comparison of modelling methods using the ANN for the milling.
| Type of Machining | Research Object | Methods * | Material | Year | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| milling | Ra | ANN | Ti–6Al–4V | 2016 | [ |
| milling | Ra, T | ANFIS, ANN | Inconel 690 | 2017 | [ |
| milling | Sa | ANN, GA, RSM | DD5 | 2018 | [ |
| milling | T | ANN-GA | AA6061 T6 | 2018 | [ |
| milling | T | ANN | Inconel 718 | 2018 | [ |
| milling | Ra | ANN-GA | AZ91D | 2018 | [ |
| milling | Ra | ANN | S45C steel | 2019 | [ |
| milling | Ra | ANN | Ti-6Al-4V | 2019 | [ |
| milling | Ra, T | ANN-GA | AISI D3 | 2019 | [ |
| milling | Ra | ANFIS, ANN-GA | AA6061, AA2024, AA7075 | 2019 | [ |
| milling | Ra | ANN, SVM, RA | AA 075-T6 | 2019 | [ |
| milling | Ra, Rz | ANN | Inconel 718 | 2020 | [ |
| milling | Ra | ANN-GA | P1.2738 | 2020 | [ |
| milling | T, Ra | ANN, FL, GA | AA7075 | 2020 | [ |
| milling | Ra | ANN | AA6061 | 2021 | [ |
| milling | Ra, Rz, RSm | ANN | AZ91D | 2021 | [ |
| dry milling | Ra | ANN | Co–28Cr–6Mo, Co–20Cr–15W–10Ni | 2021 | [ |
| dry turning | Ra, Rz, Rt | ANN | AISI420 | 2019 | [ |
| low speed turning | Ra | ANN | AISI316 | 2015 | [ |
* artificial neural network—ANN, adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system—ANFIS, fuzzy logic—FL, genetic algorithm—GA, regression analysis—RA; response surface method—RSM, temperature—T.
Figure 2Schematics of the artificial neural network with the analysed process parameters.
Artificial neural network learning parameters.
| ANN Types | Activation Function | Learning Algorithm | Hidden-Layer Neurons | Training Epochs |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MLP | exponential, logistic, linear, tanh and sinus | BFGS | 2÷15 | 150–300 |
| RBF | Gaussian, linear | RBFT |
Figure 3Results of measurements of the Sz roughness parameter as a function of feed per tooth fz and depth of cut ap.
Results of mathematical modelling of the Sa parameter as a function of the feed rate for different values of the depth of cut (regression functions y = Sa(fz); fz = x with the coefficient of determination R2).
|
| y = 1.0213x + 0.6017 |
| y = 0.8945x + 0.7405 |
| y = 1.4353x + 0.2389 |
| y = 1.803x − 0.1902 |
| y = 1.2984e0.3141x | y = 1.3174e0.2906x | y = 1.2856e0.3769x | y = 1.2673e0.4184x | ||||
| y = 2.4998ln(x) + 1.2720 | y = 2.1884ln(x) + 1.3286; | y = 3.5233ln(x) + 1.1713; | y = 4.38ln(x) + 1.0249 | ||||
| y = −0.0601x2 + 1.3817x + 0.1812; | y = −0.0371x2 + 1.1169x + 0.481; | ||||||
| y = 1.5642x0.9759 | y = 1.5785x1.0815 |
Figure 4Results of measurements of the Sa roughness parameter as a function of feed per tooth fz and depth of cut ap.
Results of mathematical modelling of the Sz parameter as a function of the feed rate for different values of the depth of cut (regression functions y = Sa(fz); fz = x with the coefficient of determination R2).
|
| y = 31.469x − 15.111 |
|
y = 3.656x + 57.136 |
|
y = 22.381x − 0.641 |
|
y = 21.313x + 26.095 |
| y = 16.603e0.4565x | y = 53.741e0.0566x | y = 14.293e0.4498x | y = 40.48e0.2466x
| ||||
| y = 73.803ln(x) + 8.6294 | y = 8.5086ln(x) + 59.957; | y = 56.532ln(x) + 12.373; | y = 50.547ln(x) + 41.64 | ||||
| y = 21.99x1.1368 | y = 57.338x0.1098 | y = 17.507x1.1974 | y = 47.588x0.6037
|
Figure 5Results of measurements of roughness parameters Sv and Sp as a function of feed per tooth fz and depth of cut ap.
Results of mathematical modelling of the Sv and Sp parameters as a function of the feed rate for various values of the depth of cut (regression functions y = Sv(fz), y = Sp(fz); fz = x with the coefficient of determination R2).
|
|
| y = 16.988x − 7.19 |
| y = −7.399x + 60.241 |
| y = 6.3234x + 5.8894 |
| y = 9.928x + 13.612 |
| y = 10.618e0.4095x
| y = 55.657e−0.174x | y = 7.7707e0.3446x | y = 21.924e0.1994x
| |||||
| y = 38.745ln(x) + 6.6755 | y = −18.31ln(x) + 55.573; | y = 16.909ln(x) + 8.6697; | y = 20.619ln(x) + 23.65 | |||||
| y = 14.218x0.9781 | y = 52.314x−0.481 | y = 8.7915x0.9507 | y = 26.84x0.4134
| |||||
|
|
| y = 14.478 x − 7.9082 |
| y = 11.456x − 4.7116 |
| y = 16.058x − 6.5352 |
| y = 11.395x + 12.461 |
| y = 5.6101e0.5324x
| y = 5.1903e0.4945x | y = 6.9099e0.5178x | y = 16.759e0.3015x
| |||||
| y = 35.053ln(x) + 1.9623 | y = 28.004ln(x) + 2.8435; | y = 39.623ln(x) + 3.6995; | y = 29.949ln(x) + 17.97 | |||||
| y = 7.4551x1.371 | y = 6.7438x1.2758 | y = 8.9054x1.3574 | y = 18.922x0.8178
|
Figure 6The results of measurements of roughness parameter Ssk as a function of feed per tooth fz and depth of cut ap.
Results of mathematical modelling of the Ssk parameter as a function of the feed rate for different values of the depth of cut (regression functions y = Ssk(fz); fz = x with the coefficient of determination R2).
|
| y = 0.0587x − 0.4083 |
| y = −0.0065x − 0.0471 |
| y = 0.0261x − 0.1609 |
| y = −0.0459x − 0.003 |
| y = 0.1922ln(x) − 0.4164 | y = 0.0394ln(x) − 0.1043; | y = 0.0645ln(x) − 0.1445; | y = −0.061ln(x) − 0.0821 | ||||
Figure 7Results of measurements of the roughness parameter Sa as a function of feed per tooth fz and depth of cut ap.
Results of mathematical modelling of the Sku parameter as a function of the feed rate for different values of the depth of cut (regression functions y = Sku(fz); fz = x with the coefficient of determination R2).
|
| y = 0.3139x + 2.1769 |
| y = −0.5463x + 5.0093 |
| y = 0.1913x + 2.2297 |
| y = 0.1723x + 2.5429 |
| y = 2.3037e0.0973x
| y = 4.9188e−0.141x
| y = 2.2689e0.0679x
| y = 2.6017e0.05x
| ||||
| y = 0.6998ln(x) + 2.4486 | y = −1.594ln(x) + 4.8968; | y = 0.4503ln(x) + 2.3725 | y = 0.2537ln(x) + 2.817 | ||||
| y = 2.5003x0.2194
| y = 4.787x−0.413
| y = 2.3886x0.1591
| y = 2.8297x0.0689
|
Figure 8Exemplary thermal imaging of chips removed from the working space during machining.
Figure 9Results of measurements of the chips’ maximum temperature as a function of feed per tooth and depth of cut.
Results of mathematical modelling of the T parameter as a function of the feed rate for different values of the depth of cut (regression functions y = T(fz); fz = x with the coefficient of determination R2).
|
| y = 14.89x + 243.97 |
| y = −22.72x + 331.38 |
| y = −5.24x + 321.4 |
| y = −36.7x + 404.56 |
| y = 246.33e0.0514x
| y = 339.61e−0.095x
| y = 321.38e−0.018x
| y = 401.76e−0.111x
| ||||
| y = 33.236ln(x) + 256.82 | y = −58.81ln(x) + 319.53; | y = −7.793ln(x) + 313.14 | y = −106.5ln(x) + 396.48 | ||||
| y = 257.55x0.1146
| y = 323.46x−0.247
| y = 312.75x−0.029
| y = 391.91x−0.323
|
Figure 10Optical imaging of chip geometry: (a) general view, (b) rake face side view and (c) free side view.
Figure 11SEM imaging of a magnesium alloy chip surface on the free side (a) slip plane and (b) material decohesion.
Figure 12SEM imaging of a magnesium alloy chip surface from the chip flow side on the rake face (a) cracks and (b) tearing on the free edges.
Selected networks based on quality (learning, validation), errors (learning, validation).
| Network Name | Quality (Training) | Quality (Validation) | SS (Training) | SS (Validation) | Activation (Hidden) | Activation (Output) | R(i) Correlation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maximum Temperature | |||||||
| 0.9947 | 0.9837 | 17.3924 | 143.9912 | Gaussian | Linear | 0.9835 | |
| 0.9377 | 0.8392 | 202.8053 | 652.0954 | Tanh | Sinus | 0.8917 | |
|
| |||||||
| 0.9432 | 0.9849 | 0.2431 | 0.0726 | Gaussian | Linear | 0.9506 | |
| 0.9999 | 0.9924 | 0.0019 | 0.0565 | Logistic | Linear | 0.9970 | |
|
| |||||||
| 0.9287 | 0.7085 | 0.0335 | 0.4862 | Gaussian | Linear | 0.7440 | |
| 0.9903 | 0.9538 | 0.0046 | 0.1025 | Tanh | Exponential | 0.9414 | |
Figure 13Correlation graph of comparison between the modelling and experimental results of the RBF and MPL networks for (a) Maximum temperature, (b) Sa parameter and (c) Sku parameter.
Figure 14The simulation results of the variable feed per tooth fz and depth of cut ap for (a) maximum temperature, (b) Sa parameter and (c) Sku parameter.
Sensitivity analysis values for the technological parameters: feed per tooth fz and axial depth of cut ap.
| Sensitivity Analysis | fz | ap | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Maximum temperature | RBF 2-13-1 | 43.6506 | 28.7312 |
| Sa | MLP 2-4-1 | 127.9466 | 32.3221 |
| Sku | MLP 2-5-1 | 445.2054 | 12.2694 |