2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2019.103430
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Optimization of material removal rate in milling of thin-walled structures using penalty cost function

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The objective functions were determined using regression analysis, and optimal machining parameters to enhance the quality and productivity were determined using NSGA-II. Ringgaard et al [21] made an attempt to optimize the thin-wall machining process by maximizing the material removal rate. The researchers considered chatter stability and forced vibration as constraints and used the penalty cost function approach to optimize the process.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The objective functions were determined using regression analysis, and optimal machining parameters to enhance the quality and productivity were determined using NSGA-II. Ringgaard et al [21] made an attempt to optimize the thin-wall machining process by maximizing the material removal rate. The researchers considered chatter stability and forced vibration as constraints and used the penalty cost function approach to optimize the process.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Where a r s, k, q (r = 1, 2, 3) is the random coefficient, which is taken the number of interval [21,1].…”
Section: F T Optimization Based On the Golden Section Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Germashev et al 20 analyzed the vibration response of the flexible thin-walled parts during the milling process and found that the dynamic action between the force and workpiece would be different at various spindle speeds, and a better spindle speed was selected by considering the vibration amplitude of workpiece. Recently, Ringgaard et al 21 presented an optimization method to maximize the MRR without violating forced vibration and chatter stability constraints. The cost function was formulated using penalty terms which penalized the function as chatter and forced vibration constraints.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In contrast, the tool with a high helix angle of 55°provided a superior surface finish [20]. A penalty cost function approach was used to optimize the MRR while machining thin-wall structures [21]. Recently, Cheng et al [22] utilized Artificial Bee Colony (ABC) algorithm to minimize the surface roughness and wall deformation and determine the optimum process variables.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%