A framework for simulation-based multi-objective optimization and knowledge discovery of machining process

  • Kaveh AmouzgarEmail author
  • Sunith Bandaru
  • Tobias Andersson
  • Amos H. C. Ng
Open Access


The current study presents an effective framework for automated multi-objective optimization (MOO) of machining processes by using finite element (FE) simulations. The framework is demonstrated by optimizing a metal cutting process in turning AISI-1045, using an uncoated K10 tungsten carbide tool. The aim of the MOO is to minimize tool-chip interface temperature and tool wear depth, that are extracted from FE simulations, while maximizing the material removal rate. The effect of tool geometry parameters, i.e., clearance angle, rake angle, and cutting edge radius, and process parameters, i.e., cutting speed and feed rate on the objective functions are explored. Strength Pareto Evolutionary Algorithm (SPEA2) is adopted for the study. The framework integrates and connects several modules to completely automate the entire MOO process. The capability of performing the MOO in parallel is also enabled by adopting the framework. Basically, automation and parallel computing, accounts for the practicality of MOO by using FE simulations. The trade-off solutions obtained by MOO are presented. A knowledge discovery study is carried out on the trade-off solutions. The non-dominated solutions are analyzed using a recently proposed data mining technique to gain a deeper understanding of the turning process.


Machining Turning simulation Multi-objective optimization Cutting parameters Tool geometry 



This work was partially financed by the Knowledge Foundation (KKS), Sweden, through the Synergy project, Knowledge-Driven Decision Support via Optimization (KDDS). The authors gratefully acknowledge their provision of research funding, and thank the industrial partners, Volvo Car Corporation and AB Volvo, for their collaborative supports during the project. We also we would like to thank Dr. Mirza Cenanovic for developing the initial architecture of the automation system.


  1. 1.
    Wei L, Yuying Y (2008) Multi-objective optimization of sheet metal forming process using Pareto-based genetic algorithm. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 208(1):499–506. ISSN 0924-0136. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nor NHM, Muhamad N, Ibrahim MHI, Ruzi M, Jamaludin KR (2011) Optimization of injection molding parameter of Ti-6Al-4V powder mix with palm stearin and polyethylene for the highest green strength by using Taguchi method. International Journal of Mechanical and Materials Engineering 6(1):126–132. ISSN 1823-0334Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tutum CC, Hattel JH (2010) Optimisation of process parameters in friction stir welding based on residual stress analysis: a feasibility study. Sci Technol Weld Join 15(5):369–377. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Olofsson J, Salomonsson K, Johansson J, Amouzgar K (2017) A methodology for microstructure-based structural optimization of cast and injection moulded parts using knowledge-based design automation. Adv Eng Softw 109(Supplement C):44–52. ISSN 0965-9978CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nagendra Parashar BS, Mittal RK (2002) Elements of manufacturing processes PHI Learning Pvt Ltd.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mukherjee I, Ray PK (2006) A review of optimization techniques in metal cutting processes. Comput Ind Eng 50(1):15–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Aggarwal A, Singh H (2005) Optimization of machining techniques—a retrospective and literature review. Sadhana 30(6):699–711CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tutum CC, Hattel J (2011) State-of-the-art multi-objective optimisation of manufacturing processes based on thermo-mechanical simulations. Springer, London, pp 71–133. ISBN 978-0-85729-652-8Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Deb K (2001) Multi-objective optimization using evolutionary algorithms, vol 16. WileyGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cus F, Balic J (2003) Optimization of cutting process by GA approach. Robot Comput Integr Manuf 19 (1):113–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lee BY, Tarng YS (2000) Cutting-parameter selection for maximizing production rate or minimizing production cost in multistage turning operations. J Mater Process Technol 105(1):61–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sardiñas QR, Marcelino Rivas Santana, Brindis EA (2006) Genetic algorithm-based multi-objective optimization of cutting parameters in turning processes. Eng Appl Artif Intell 19(2):127–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yusup N, Zain AM, Hashim SZM (2012) Evolutionary techniques in optimizing machining parameters: review and recent applications (2007–2011). Expert Syst Appl 39(10):9909–9927CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sultana I, Dhar NR (2010) GA based multi objective optimization of the predicted models of cutting temperature, chip reduction co-efficient and surface roughness in turning AISI 4320 steel by uncoated carbide insert under HPC condition. pages 161–167, Sanya, 2010. ISBN 9780791859544. cited By 2; Conference of International Conference on Mechanical, Industrial, and Manufacturing Technologies, MIMT 2010 ; Conference Date: 22 January 2010 Through 24 January 2010; Conference Code: 80589Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Umer U, Qudeiri JA, Hussein HAM, Khan AA, Al-Ahmari AR (2014) Multi-objective optimization of oblique turning operations using finite element model and genetic algorithm. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 71 (1-4):593–603. cited By 4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Thepsonthi T, Özel T (2014) An integrated toolpath and process parameter optimization for high-performance micro-milling process of Ti-6Al-4V titanium alloy. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 75(1-4):57–75. cited By 3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Deb K, Srinivasan A (2006) Innovization innovating design principles through optimization. In: Proceedings of the 8th annual conference on genetic and evolutionary computation, GECCO 2006, ACM, pp 1629–1636Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Deb K, Sindhya K (2008) Deciphering innovative principles for optimal electric brushless D.C. permanent magnet motor design. In: Proceedings of the World congress on computational intelligence (WCCI-2008). IEEE Press, Piscatway, pp 2283–2290Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ng AHC, Dudas C, Nießen J, Deb K (2011) Simulation-based innovization using data mining for production systems analysis. In: Multi-objective evolutionary optimisation for product design and manufacturing, Springer, pp 401–429Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dudas C, Frantzén M, Ng AHC (2011) A synergy of multi-objective optimization and data mining for the analysis of a flexible flow shop. Robot Comput Integr Manuf 27(4):687–695CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sugimura K, Obayashi S, Jeong S (2010) Multi-objective optimization and design rule mining for an aerodynamically efficient and stable centrifugal impeller with a vaned diffuser. Eng Optim 42(3):271–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Greco S, Matarazzo B, Slowinski R (2008) Dominance-based rough set approach to interactive multiobjective optimization. In: Multiobjective optimization, Springer, pp 121–155Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sugimura K, Obayashi S, Jeong S (2007) Multi-objective design exploration of a centrifugal impeller accompanied with a vaned diffuser. In: Proceedings of the 5th Joint ASME/JSME fluid engineering conference, ASME, pp 939–946Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sugimura K, Jeong S, Obayashi S, Kimura T (2009) Kriging-model-based multi-objective robust optimization and trade-off-rule mining using association rule with aspiration vector. In: 2009 IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, CEC, IEEE, pp 522–529Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Chiba K, Obayashi S, Nakahashi K, Morino H (2005) High-fidelity multidisciplinary design optimization of aerostructural wing shape for regional jet. In: Proceedings of the 23rd AIAA applied aerodynamics conference, AIAA, pp 621–635Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Jeong S, Chiba K, Obayashi S (2005) Data mining for aerodynamic design space. J Aerosp Comput Inf Commun 2(11):452–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Obayashi S, Jeong S, Chiba K (2005) Multi-objective design exploration for aerodynamic configurations. In: Proceedings of the 35th AIAA fluids dynamics conference and exhibit, AIAA, pp 2005–4666Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bandaru S, Deb K (2013) A dimensionally-aware genetic programming architecture for automated innovization. In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on evolutionary multi-criterion optimization, EMO 2013, Springer, pp 513–527Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Deb K, Bandaru S, Greiner D, Gaspar-Cunha A, Tutum CC (2014) An integrated approach to automated innovization for discovering useful design principles: case studies from engineering. Appl Soft Comput 15:42–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bandaru S, Ng AHC, Deb K (2017) Data mining methods for knowledge discovery in multi-objective optimization: part a—survey. Expert Systems with Applications 70:139–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Deb K, Kumar A (1995) Real-coded genetic algorhithms with simulated binary crossover: studies on multimodel and multiobjective problems. Comput Syst 9(6):431–454Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Zitzler E, Laumanns M, Thiele L (2001) SPEA2: Improving the strength Pareto evolutionary algorithm. TIK-report, 103Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Amouzgar K, Rashid A, Strömberg N Multi-objective optimization of a disc brake system by using SPEA2 and RBFN. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2013 international design engineering technical conferences, vol 3 B, Portland, August 4-7 2013. American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
  34. 34.
    Amouzgar K, Cenanovic M, Salomonsson K (2015) Multi-objective optimization of material model parameters of an adhesive layer by using SPEA2. In: 11Th world congress of structural and multidisciplinary optimization (WCSMO-11), pp 249–254Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Bandaru S, Ng AHC, Deb K (2017) Data mining methods for knowledge discovery in multi-objective optimization: part B—new developments and applications. Expert Syst Appl 70:119–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Agrawal R, Srikant R (1995) Mining sequential patterns. In: Proceedings of the 11th international conference on data engineering, IEEE, pp 3–14Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    López de Lacalle LN, Lamikiz A, Fernández de Larrinoa J, Azkona I (2011) Advanced cutting tools. In: Machining of hard materials, Springer, pp 33–86Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Jaspers S (1999) Metal cutting mechanics and material behaviour Technische Universiteit Eindhoven EindhovenGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Halim T, Maria S (2008) Finite element modeling of the orthogonal metal cutting process: modeling the effects of coefficient of friction and tool holding structure on cutting forces and chip thickness PhD thesisGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Klocke F (2011) Manufacturing processing i: cutting. RWTH ed., SpringerlinkGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Arrazola PJ, Villar A, Ugarte D, Marya S (2007) Serrated chip prediction in finite element modeling of the chip formation process. Mach Sci Technol 11(3):367–390Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Bordin A, Imbrogno S, Rotella G, Bruschi S, Ghiotti A, Umbrello D (2015) Finite element simulation of semi-finishing turning of electron beam melted Ti6Al4V under dry and cryogenic cooling. Procedia CIRP 31:551–556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Thepsonthi T, Özel T (2015) 3-d finite element process simulation of micro-end milling Ti-6Al-4V titanium alloy: experimental validations on chip flow and tool wear. J Mater Process Technol 221:128–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Iqbal SA, Mativenga PT, Sheikh MA (2008) An Investigative study of the interface heat transfer coefficient for finite element modelling of high-speed machining. Proc Inst Mech Eng B J Eng Manuf 222(11):1405–1416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Malakizadi A, Hosseinkhani K, Mariano E, Ng E, Del Prete A, Nyborg L (2017) Influence of friction models on fe simulation results of orthogonal cutting process. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 88(9):3217–3232. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Usui E, Shirakashi T, Kitagawa T (1984) Analytical prediction of cutting tool wear. Wear 100(1):129–151. ISSN 0043-1648. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Kitagawa T, Maekawa K, Shirakashi T, Usui E (1989) Analytical prediction of flank wear of carbide tools in turning plain carbon steels. Part 2. Prediction of flank wear. Bull Jpn Soc Precis Eng 23(2):126–134Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Engineering ScienceUniversity of SkövdeSkövdeSweden

Personalised recommendations