Optimization of robotic polishing process parameters for mold steel based on artificial intelligence method

Abstract

Aimed to achieve quantitative control of workpiece surface after robotic polishing and improve polishing efficiency, a two-step processing optimization method involves artificial intelligence algorithms is investigated. Firstly, based on XGBoost algorithm, a prediction model for polished workpiece surface depending on key parameters is proposed, and the accuracy of the model is verified by experiments. After that, by using the above model, the influence of each parameter on the roughness was evaluated quantitatively. Subsequently, target roughness-driven optimization of processing parameters was presented by combining the roughness prediction model with NSGA II-TOPSIS algorithm based on the influence of each parameter on the roughness. To verify the proposed processing optimization method, polishing experiments of mold steel samples were conducted. The experimental results show that the maximum absolute error between the predicted and experimental roughness is 0.035 μm, and the maximum relative error is <9%. At the same time, when the minimum is set as the optimization objective. With the same length of polishing path, the feed rate is increased from 0.25 mm/s to 0.37 mm/s, and the efficiency is improved to 48%. The NSGA II-TOPSIS algorithm can achieve quantitative control of mold steel surface roughness after robotic polishing to improve polishing efficiency, and provide a basis for reasonable selection of processing parameters, which have certain practical value.

Keywords

Robotic polishing Mold steel Roughness prediction XGBoost algorithm NSGA II-TOPSIS algorithm

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Wei

. Design of a new passive end-effector based on constant-force mechanism for robotic polishing. Robot Comput-Integr Manuf 2022; 74: 102278.

Pan

Wang

Jiang

, et al. A novel method for aspheric polishing based on abrasive trajectories analysis on contact region. Proc IMechE Part B: J Engineering Manufacture 2015; 229(2): 275–285.

Ding

Min

, et al. Research and application on force control of industrial robot polishing concave curved surfaces. Proc IMechEng, Part B: J Engineering Manufacture, 2019; 233(6): 1674–1686.

Wang

Dailami

Matthews

. Towards collaborative robotic polishing of mould and die sets. Procedia Manuf 2019; 38: 1499–1507.

, et al. Review on robot-assisted polishing: status and future trends. Robot Comput-Integr Manuf 2023; 80: 102482.

Hong

Wang

Guan

. Synergistic integrated design of an electrochemical mechanical polishing end-effector for robotic polishing applications. Robot Comput-Integr Manuf 2019; 55: 65–75.

Tian

, et al. Modeling and control of robotic automatic polishing for curved surfaces. CIRP J Manuf Sci Technol 2016; 14: 55–64.

Zhang

Cheung

Wang

, et al. Modelling of surface morphology and roughness in fluid jet polishing. Int J Mech Sci 2023; 242: 107976.

Zhang

Shi

Lin

, et al. Parameter optimization of five-axis polishing using abrasive belt flap wheel for blisk blade. J Mech Sci Technol 2017; 31: 4805–4812.

10.

Azami

Khoshanjam

Jerez-Mesa

, et al. A new theoretical model for surface roughness prediction in rotationalal abrasive finishing process. Wear 2023; 524: 204772.

11.

Yaseer

Chen

. Machine learning based layer roughness modeling in robotic additive manufacturing. J Manuf Process 2021; 70: 543–552.

12.

Gim

Yang

Turng

. Transfer learning of machine learning models for multi-objective process optimization of a transferred mold to ensure efficient and robust injection molding of high surface quality parts. J Manuf Process 2023; 87: 11–24.

13.

Bien

. Predictive modeling of surface roughness in hard turning with rotary cutting tool based on multiple regression analysis, artificial neural network, and genetic programing methods. Proc IMechE, Part B: J Engineering Manufacture. Epub ahead of print 3 March, 2023. DOI: 10.1177/09544054231157112.

14.

Kong

Zhu

Duan

, et al. Bayesian linear regression for surface roughness prediction. Mech Syst Signal Process 2020; 142: 106770.

15.

Zhang

Shi

, et al. Prediction of surface roughness in extrusion-based additive manufacturing with machine learning. Robot Comput-Integr Manuf 2019; 57: 488–495.

16.

Boga

Koroglu

. Proper estimation of surface roughness using hybrid intelligence based on artificial neural network and genetic algorithm. J Manuf Process 2021; 70: 560–569.

17.

Alajmi

Almeshal

. Prediction and optimization of surface roughness in a turning process using the ANFIS-QPSO method. Materials 2020; 13(13): 2986.

18.

Xia

Pan

Polden

, et al. Modelling and prediction of surface roughness in wire arc additive manufacturing using machine learning. J Intell Manuf 2022; 33: 1467–1482.

19.

Chaouch

Ben Khalifa

Zitoune

, et al. Modeling and multi-objective optimization of abrasive water jet machining process of composite laminates using a hybrid approach based on neural networks and metaheuristic algorithm. Proc IMechE, Part B: J Engineering Manufacture. Epub ahead of print 24 August 2023. DOI: 10.1177/09544054231191816.

20.

Raju

Gupta

Bhanot

, et al. A hybrid PSO–BFO evolutionary algorithm for optimization of fused deposition modelling process parameters. J Intell Manuf 2019; 30: 2743–2758.

21.

Adithiyaa

Chandramohan

Sathish

. Optimal prediction of process parameters by GWO-KNN in stirring-squeeze casting of AA2219 reinforced metal matrix composites. Mater Today: Proc 2020; 21: 1000–1007.

22.

Fan

Ren

Pan

, et al. Model and optimize the magnetic composite fluid (MCF) polishing process with machine learning modeling and intelligent optimization algorithm. Int J Precis Eng Manuf 2022; 23(9): 957–967.

23.

Tong

Zhang

, et al. Mechanism and parameter optimization in grinding and polishing of M300 steel by an elastic abrasive. Materials 2019; 12(3): 340.

24.

Osorio-Pinzon

Abolghasem

Maranon

, et al. Cutting parameter optimization of Al-6063-O using numerical simulations and particle swarm optimization. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 2020; 111: 2507–2532.

25.

Elmousalami

. Artificial intelligence and parametric construction cost estimate modeling: state-of-the-art review. J Constr Eng Manag 2020; 146(1): 03119008.

26.

Evans

Davies

. Two-quadrant area structure function analysis for optical surface characterization. Opt Express 2012; 20(21): 23275–23280.

27.

Evans

Davies

. Optical surface characterization with the area structure function. CIRP Ann 2013; 62(1): 539–542.

28.

Xie

Chang

Yang

, et al. Process optimization of robotic polishing for mold steel based on response surface method. Machines 2022;10(4): 283.

29.

Liashchynskyi

. Grid search, random search, genetic algorithm: a big comparison for NAS. arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.06059, 2019.

30.

Bergstra

Bengio

. Random search for hyperparameter optimization. J Mach Learn Res 2012; 3(10): 281–305.

31.

Wang

Niu

, et al. Prediction of ground surface settlement by shield tunneling using XGBoost and bayesian optimization. Eng Appl Artif Intell 2022; 114: 105020.

32.

Zhang

Sun

, et al. A comprehensive survey on NSGA-II for multi-objective optimization and applications. Artif Intell Rev 2023; 56: 15217–15270.

33.

Yusoff

Ngadiman

Zain

. Overview of NSGA-II for optimizing machining process parameters. Proc Eng 2011; 15: 3978–3983.

34.

Verma

Pant

Snasel

. A comprehensive review on NSGA-II for multi-objective combinatorial optimization problems. IEEE Access 2021; 9: 57757-57791.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.03 MB