Impact of stochastic industrial variables on the cost optimization of AISI 52100 hardened-steel turning process

  • Alexandre Fonseca Torres
  • Fabrício Alves de AlmeidaEmail author
  • Anderson Paulo de Paiva
  • João Roberto Ferreira
  • Pedro Paulo Balestrassi
  • Paulo Henrique da Silva Campos


An optimization problem of the AISI 52100 hard-steel turning process is examined. A new approach is presented in which not only the machine parameters (cutting speed, feed rate, and depth of cut) but also the stochastic industrial variables of setup time, insert changing time, batch size, machine and labor costs, tool holder price, tool holder life, and insert price are considered. By representing each of these variables by a given probability distribution, the goal was to analyze their impact on the total process cost per piece (Kp). Experiments were carried out following a central composite design to model tool life (T), average surface roughness (Ra), and peak-to-valley surface roughness (Rt) using a response surface methodology. Then, stochastic programming was used to model Kp’s expected value and standard deviation. The approach to the optimization problem aimed to maximize the probability for the cost to be less than a target value, subject to the experimental space and to maximum values of both Ra and Rt. The results were optimal values for the cutting conditions that provide a suitable confidence interval for Kp. The most-significant industrial variables on Kp were ranked. In addition, it was found that, in the addressed case, cutting conditions for maximum tool life actually increase Kp.


Stochastic programming Hardened-steel turning Process cost optimization 



The authors would like to thank FAPEMIG, FUPAI, CNPq, and CAPES for supporting this research.


  1. 1.
    Kumar R, Sahoo AK, Mishra PC, Das RK (2018) Comparative study on machinability improvement in hard turning using coated and uncoated carbide inserts: part II modeling, multi-response optimization, tool life, and economic aspects. Adv Manuf 6(2):155–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Paiva AP, Paiva EJ, Ferreira JR, Balestrassi PP, Costa SC (2009) A multivariate mean square error optimization of AISI 52100 hardened steel turning. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 43(7–8):631–643CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Revel P, Jouini N, Thoquenne G, Lefebvre F (2016) High precision hard turning of AISI 52100 bearing steel. Precis Eng 43:24–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lima JG, Ávila RF, Abrão AM, Faustino M, Davim JP (2005) Hard turning: AISI 4340 high strength low alloy steel and AISI D2 cold work tool steel. J Mater Process Technol 169:388–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bartarya G, Choudhury SK (2012) State of the art in hard turning. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 53(1):1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gaitonde VN, Karnik SR, Figueira L, Paulo Davim J (2009) Machinability investigations in hard turning of AISI D2 cold work tool steel with conventional and wiper ceramic inserts. Int J Refract Met Hard Mater 27(4):754–763CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Huang Y, Chou YK, Liang SY (2007) CBN tool wear in hard turning: a survey on research progresses. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 35(5–6):443–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Peruchi RS, Rotela Junior P, Brito TG, Largo JJJ, Balestrassi PP (2018) Multivariate process capability analysis applied to AISI 52100 hardened steel turning. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 95(9–12):3513–3522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chinchanikar S, Choudhury SK (2015) Experimental investigations, performance modeling and cooling techniques: a review. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 89:95–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Alok A, Das M (2018) Multi-objective optimization of cutting parameters during sustainable dry hard turning of AISI 52100 steel with newly develop HSN2-coated carbide insert. Measurement 133:288–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Alok A, Das M (2018) Cost-effective way of hard turning with newly developed HSN2-coated tool. Mater Manuf Process 33(9):1003–1010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Diniz AE, Marcondes FC, Coppini NL (2013) Tecnologia da usinagem dos materiais, 6th edn. Artliber, São PauloGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Díaz-garcía JA, Ramos-quiroga R, Cabrera-Vicencio E (2005) Stochastic programming methods in the response, vol 49, pp 837–848zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Samaddar S (2001) The effect of setup time reduction on its variance. Omega 29(3):243–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hu Z, Hu G (March 2018) A multi-stage stochastic programming for lot-sizing and scheduling under demand uncertainty. Comput Ind Eng 119:157–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Francas D, Löhndorf N, Minner S (2011) Machine and labor flexibility in manufacturing networks. Int J Prod Econ 131(1):165–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Almeida FA, De Paula TI, Leite RR, Gomes GF, Gomes JHF, Paiva AP, Balestrassi PP (October 2018) A multivariate GR & R approach to variability evaluation of measuring instruments in resistance spot welding process. J Manuf Process 36:465–479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Almeida FA, Gomes GF, Sabioni RC, Gomes JHF, De Paula VR, Paiva AP, Costa SC (2018) A gage study applied in shear test to identify variation causes from a resistance spot welding measurement system. Stroj Vestn J Mech Eng 64:621–631Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Alafaghani A, Oattawi A (2018) Investigating the effect of fused deposition modeling processing parameters using Tagushi design of experiment method. J Manuf Process 36:164–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Belinato G, Almeida FA, Paiva AP, Gomes JHF, Balestrassi PP, Rosa PARC (2018) A multivariate normal boundary intersection PCA-based approach to reduce dimensionality in optimization problems for LBM process. Eng Comput:1–12Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gaudêncio JHD, Almeida FA, Turrioni JB, Quinino RC, Balestrassi PP, Paiva AP (2019) A multiobjective optimization model for machining quality in the AISI 12 L14 steel turning process using fuzzy multivariate mean square error. Precis Eng 56:303–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Montgomery DC (2017) Design and analysis of experiments, 8th edn. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    de Almeida FA, Gomes GF, De Paula VR, Corrêa JE, Paiva AP, Gomes JHF, Turrioni JB (2018) A weighted mean square error approach to the robust optimization of the surface roughness in an AISI 12 L14 free-machining steel-turning process. Stroj Vestn J Mech Eng 64(3):147–156Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Myers RH, Montgomery DC, Anderson-Cook CM (2016) Response Surface Methodology: Process and Product Optimization Using Designed Experiments, 4th edn. John Wiley & Sons, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Torres AF, Miranda RPR, Paiva AP, Campos PHS, Balestrassi PP, Ferreira JR (2019) Stochastic optimization of AISI 52100 hard turning with six sigma capability constraint. IEEE Access 7:46288–46294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cauchick-Miguel PA, Coppini NL (1996) Cost per piece determination in machining process: an alternative approach. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 36(8):939–946CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Campos PHS, Ferreira JR, De Paiva AP, Balestrassi PP, Davim JP (2013) Modeling and optimization techniques in machining of hardened steels: A brief review. Rev Adv Mater Sci 34(2):141–147Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bouacha K, Yallese MA, Khamel S, Belhadi S (2014) Analysis and optimization of hard turning operation using cubic boron nitride tool. Int J Refract Met Hard Mater 45:160–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Labidi A, Tebassi H, Belhadi S, Khettabi R, Yallese MA (2018) Cutting conditions modeling and optimization in hard turning using RSM, ANN and desirability function. J Fail Anal Prev 18(4):1017–1033CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Taş D, Gendreau M, Jabali O, Jans R (2019) A capacitated lot sizing problem with stochastic setup times and overtime. Eur J Oper Res 273(1):146–159MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Linn RJ, Benjamin Y, Wei Z (2000) Just-in-time scheduling with machining economics for single-machine turning process. J Manuf Syst 19(4):219–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Tempelmeier H, Hilger T (2015) Linear programming models for a stochastic dynamic capacitated lot sizing problem. Comput Oper Res 59:119–125MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Canyakmaz C, Özekici S, Karaesmen F (2019) An inventory model where customer demand is dependent on a stochastic price process. Int J Prod Econ 212:139–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Campos PHS, Belinato G, Paula TI, de Oliveira-Abans M, Ferreira JR, Paiva AP, Balestrassi PP (2017) Multivariate mean square error for the multiobjective optimization of AISI 52100 hardened steel turning with wiper ceramic inserts tool: a comparative study. J Braz Soc Mech Sci Eng 39(10):4021–4036CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Montgomery DC, Runger GC (2019) Applied Statistics and Probability for Engineers, 7th edn. Wiley, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Montgomery DC, Runger GC (2013) Applied statistics and probability for engineers, 6th edn. John Wiley & Sons, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    ISO, ISO 1302 (2002) Geometrical Product Specifications (GPS) - Indication of surface texture in technical product documentation. International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 2002, p 46Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexandre Fonseca Torres
    • 1
  • Fabrício Alves de Almeida
    • 1
    Email author
  • Anderson Paulo de Paiva
    • 1
  • João Roberto Ferreira
    • 1
  • Pedro Paulo Balestrassi
    • 1
  • Paulo Henrique da Silva Campos
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Industrial EngineeringFederal University of ItajubáItajubáBrazil

Personalised recommendations