Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Application of the Kalai-Smorodinsky approach in multi-objective optimization of metal forming processes

  • Original Research
  • Published:
International Journal of Material Forming Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The problem of multi-objective optimization (MOP) is approached from the theoretical background of the Game Theory, which consists in finding a compromise between two rational players of a bargaining problem. In particular, the Kalai and Smorodinsky (K-S) model offers a balanced and attractive solution resulting from cooperative players. This approach allows avoiding the computationally expensive and uncertain reconstruction of the full Pareto Frontier usually required by MOPs. The search for the K-S solution can be implemented into methodologies with useful applications in engineering MOPs where two or more functions must be minimized. This paper presents an optimization algorithm aimed at rapidly finding the K-S solution where the MOP is transformed into a succession of single objective problems (SOP). Each SOP is solved by meta-model assisted evolution strategies used in interaction with an FEM simulation software for metal forming applications. The proposed method is first tested and demonstrated with known mathematical multi-objective problems, showing its ability to find a solution lying on the Pareto Frontier, even with a largely incomplete knowledge of it. The algorithm is then applied to the FEM optimization problem of wire drawing process with one and two passes, in order to simultaneously minimize the pulling force and the material damage. The K-S solutions are compared to results previously suggested in literature using more conventional methodologies and engineering expertise. The paper shows that K-S solutions are very promising for finding quite satisfactory engineering compromises, in a very efficient manner, in metal forming applications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Blasco X, Herrero JM, Sanchis J, Martínez M (2008) A new graphical visualization of n-dimensional Pareto Frontier for decision-making in multiobjective optimization. Inf Sci N Y 178:3908–3924

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Rachmawati L, Srinivasan D (2009) Multiobjective evolutionary algorithm with controllable focus on the knees of the pareto frontier. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 13:810–824

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Nagarajan M, Sošić G (2008) Game-theoretic analysis of cooperation among supply chain agents: review and extensions. Eur J Oper Res 187(3):719–745

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Kalai E, Smorodinsky M (1975) Other solutions to Nash’s bargaining problem. Econometrica 43(3):513–518

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Moulin H (1984) Implementing the Kalai-Smorodinsky bargaining solution. J Econ Theory, Elsevier, 33(1): 32–45

  6. Anant TCA, Mukherji B, Basu K (1990) Bargaining without convexity: generalizing the Kalai-Smorodinsky solution. Econ Lett 33(2):115–119

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Yann C, Siarry P (2003) Multiobjective optimization: principles and case studies. Springer, pp. 38–40

  8. Kohli R, Park H (1989) A cooperative game theory model of quantity discounts. Manag Sci 35(6):693–707

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Raquel S, Ferenc S, Emery C Jr, Abraham R (2007) Application of game theory for a groundwater conflict in Mexico. J Environ Manag 84(4):560–571

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Aalae B, Abderrahmane H, Gael M, Olivier B (2015) Multicriteria shape design of an aerosol can. J Comput Des Eng 2(3):165–175, ISSN 2288–4300

    Google Scholar 

  11. Rouhparvar M, Zadeh HM, Nasirzadeh F (2014) Quantitative risk allocation in construction projects: a fuzzy-bargaining game approach. Int J Ind Eng Prod Res 25(2):83–94

    Google Scholar 

  12. Nokleby M, Swindlehurst A (2009) Bargaining and the MISO interference channel. EURASIP J Adv Sig Process 2009(2)

  13. Iorio L, Fourment L, Marie S, Strano M (2015) Multi-objective optimization of metal forming processes based on the Kalai and Smorodinsky solution. In Key Engineering Materials - Proceeding of Esaform (Vol. 651–653, pp. 1387–1393). Graz

  14. Kim IY, De Weck OL (2006) Adaptive weighted sum method for multiobjective optimization: a new method for Pareto front generation. Struct Multidiscip Optim 31(2):105–116

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Benki A (2014) Méthodes efficaces de capture de Frontier de pareto en conception mécanique multicritère. Applications industrielles, Doctoral Thesis, pp. 99–101

  16. Emmerich MTM, Giannakoglou KC, Naujoks B (2006) Single-and multiobjective evolutionary optimization assisted by Gaussian random field metamodels. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 10(4):421–439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Marie S, Ducloux R, Lasne P, Barlier J, Fourment L (2014) Inverse analysis of forming processes based on FORGE environment. Key Eng Mater 611:1494–1502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Deb K (2001) Multi-objective optimization using evolutionary algorithms. Wiley, Chichester

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Poloni C, Giurgevich A, Onesti L, Pedirod V (2000) Hybridization of a multi-objective genetic algorithm, a neural network and a classical optimizer for a complex design problem in fluid dynamics. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 186(2–4):403–420

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Viennet R (1996) Multicriteria optimization using a genetic algorithm for determining a Pareto set. Int J Syst Sci 27:255–260

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Avitzur B (1963) Analysis of wire drawing and extrusion through conical dies of small cone angle. J Eng Ind 85(1):89–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Massé T, Fourment L (2013) The optimal die semi-angle concept in wire drawing, examined using automatic optimization techniques. Int J Mater Form 6(3):377–389

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Massé T, Chastel Y, Montmitonnet P, Bobadilla C, Persem N, Foissey S (2011) Mechanical and damage analysis along a flat-rolled wire cold forming schedule. Int J Mater Form 5(2):129–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Bobadilla C, Persem N, Foissey S (2007) Modelling of drawing and rolling of high carbon flat wires. AIP Conf Proc 907:535–540

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Mohsen E (2011) Optimisation multi-objectifs à base de Métamodèle pour les Procédés de Mise en Forme, Doctoral Thesis, pp. 107–108

Download references

Acknowledgments

The research has been partly funded by CEMEF and partly by the Politecnico di Milano, under the PRIN I-foams research program. The authors gratefully thank Abderrahmane Habbal for fruitful discussions on this paper and for initiating the idea of using the Kalai and Smorodisky paradigm in engineering applications. The authors also want to thank Fadi El Haddad for the help given during the initial development of the algorithm code.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dipartimento di Meccanica, Politecnico di Milano, Via La Masa 1, Milan, Italy

    Lorenzo Iorio & Matteo Strano

  2. MINES ParisTech, CEMEF - Centre de mise en forme des matériaux, PSL Research University, CNRS UMR 7635, CS 10207 rue Claude Daunesse, 06904, Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France

    Lionel Fourment

  3. Parc de Haute Technologie, TRANSVALOR, 694 av Dr Maurice Donat, 06255, Mougins, France

    Stéphane Marie

Authors
  1. Lorenzo Iorio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lionel Fourment
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stéphane Marie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Matteo Strano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lorenzo Iorio.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Iorio, L., Fourment, L., Marie, S. et al. Application of the Kalai-Smorodinsky approach in multi-objective optimization of metal forming processes. Int J Mater Form 10, 515–526 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12289-016-1297-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12289-016-1297-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation