A genetic programming technique was employed to develop empirical models for predicting specific wear rate and coefficient of friction on brake friction materials. The models consist of independent variables representing the volume fraction of the ingredients. The average absolute relative error for specific wear rate and coefficient of friction were found to be 1.93% and 1.92%, respectively. The models were also verified by the experimental data used for further control of the formulation. Utilizing Tornado plots, the models were found to be able to properly demonstrate the role of the ingredients on overall tribological performance of the brake friction materials. Moreover, a non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm II method was utilized to optimize the formulation of the brake friction materials in terms of braking performance and final cost of the materials.
BartonDC. Modeling of materials for automotive braking. Int Mater Rev2004; 49: 379–385.
2.
SmalesH. Friction materials—black art or science?Proc Inst Mech Eng D J Automob Eng1995; 209: 151–157.
3.
LuYTangCFWrightMA. Optimization of a commercial brake pad formulation. J Appl Polym Sci2002; 84: 2498–2504.
4.
LuY. A golden section approach to optimization of automotive friction materials. J Mater Sci2003; 38: 1081–1085.
5.
BijweJ. Composites as friction materials: recent developments in non‐asbestos fiber reinforced friction materials—a review. Polym Compos1997; 18: 378–396.
6.
KatoTSoutomeH. Friction material design for brake pads using database. Tribol Trans2001; 44: 137–141.
7.
LuY. A combinatorial approach for automotive friction materials: combined effects of ingredients on friction performance. Polym Compos2002; 23: 814–823.
8.
TangCFLuY. Combinatorial screening of ingredients for steel wool based semimetallic and aramid fiber based nonasbestos organic brake materials. J Reinf Plast Compos2004; 23: 51–63.
9.
LuY. A combinatorial approach for automotive friction materials: effects of ingredients on friction performance. Compos Sci Technol2006; 66: 591–598.
10.
KimSJKimKSJangH. Optimization of manufacturing parameters for a brake lining using Taguchi method. J Mater Process Technol2003; 136: 202–208.
11.
LuCS. The application of uniform design in developing friction materials. J Nanjing Univ Sci Technol1999; 3: 249–252.
12.
DravaGLeardiRPortesaniA. Application of chemometrics to the production of friction materials: analysis of previous data and search of new formulations. Chemometr Intell Lab Syst1996; 32: 245–255.
Elzey DM, Vancheeswaran R, Myers S, et al. Multi-criteria optimization in the design of composites for friction applications. In: Proceedings of the international conference on brakes 2000 Automotive braking-technologies for the 21st century, 2000; pp.197--205, Leeds, UK.
AleksendrićDBartonDCVasićB. Prediction of brake friction materials recovery performance using artificial neural networks. Tribol Int2010; 43: 2092–2099.
17.
GrosmanBLewinDR. Automated nonlinear model predictive control using genetic programming. Comput Chem Eng2002; 26: 631–640.
18.
RaoRKTunKLakshminarayananS. Genetic programming based variable interaction models for classification of process and biological systems. Ind Eng Chem Res2009; 48: 4899–4907.
19.
Koza JR. Genetic programming: on the programming of computers by means of natural selection. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press, 1992.
20.
GandomiAHAlaviAHKazemiS. Behavior appraisal of steel semi-rigid joints using linear genetic programming. J Constr Steel Res2009; 65: 1738–1750.
21.
ShokirEMEMDmourHN. Genetic programming (GP)-based model for the viscosity of pure and hydrocarbon gas mixtures. Energ Fuel2009; 23: 3632–3636.
22.
MadárJAbonyiJSzeifertF. Genetic programming for the identification of nonlinear input-output models. Ind Eng Chem Res2005; 44: 3178–3186.
23.
GrayGJMurray-SmithDJLiY. Nonlinear model structure identification using genetic programming. Control Eng Pract1998; 6: 1341–1352.
24.
GopalPDharaniLRBlumFD. Hybrid phenolic friction composites containing Kevlar® fiber Part 1. Enhancement of friction and wear performance. Wear1996; 193: 199–206.
25.
SaffarAShojaeiA. Effect of rubber component on the performance of brake friction materials. Wear2012; 274: 286–297.
26.
KimSSHwangHJShinMW. Friction and vibration of automotive brake pads containing different abrasive particles. Wear2011; 271: 1194–1202.
27.
ChoMHJuJKimSJ. Tribological properties of solid lubricants (graphite, Sb2S3, MoS2) for automotive brake friction materials. Wear2006; 260: 855–860.
28.
SatapathyBKBijweJ. Performance of friction materials based on variation in nature of organic fibres: Part II. Optimisation by balancing and ranking using multiple criteria decision model (MCDM). Wear2004; 257: 585–589.
29.
JangHKoKKimSJ. The effect of metal fibers on the friction performance of automotive brake friction materials. Wear2004; 256: 406–414.
30.
JangHLeeJSFashJW. Compositional effects of the brake friction material on creep groan phenomena. Wear2001; 251: 1477–1483.
31.
GurunathPVBijweJ. Friction and wear studies on brake-pad materials based on newly developed resin. Wear2007; 263: 1212–1219.
32.
BozMKurtA. The effect of Al2O3on the friction performance of automotive brake friction materials. Tribol Int2007; 40: 1161–1169.
33.
KimSJJangH. Friction and wear of friction materials containing two different phenolic resins reinforced with aramid fiber. Tribol Int2000; 33: 477–484.
34.
ChoMHKimSJKimD. Effects of ingredients on tribological characteristics of a brake lining: an experimental case study. Wear2005; 258: 1682–1687.
35.
TsangPHSJackoMGRheeSK. Comparison of chase and inertial brake dynamometer testing of automotive friction materials. Wear1985; 103: 217–232.
36.
EtemadiHShojaeiAJahanmardP. Effect of alumina nanoparticle on tribological performance of automotive brake friction materials. J Reinf Plast Comp2013; 33: 166–178.
37.
McNamee P and Celona J. Decision analysis for the professional. 4th ed. CA, USA: SmartOrg inc., 2001.
38.
GhiasiHPasiniDLessardL. A non-dominated sorting hybrid algorithm for multi-objective optimization of engineering problems. Eng Optim2011; 43: 39–59.
39.
GhiasiHPasiniDLessardL. Pareto frontier for simultaneous structural and manufacturing optimization of a composite part. Struct Multidisc Optim2010; 40: 497–511.
