×
Home Current Archive Editorial board
News Contact
Original scientific article

APPLICATION OF HYBRID SFLA AND ACO ALGORITHM TO OMEGA PLATE FOR DRILLING PROCESS PLANNING AND COST MANAGEMENT

By
Mehmood Nasir ,
Mehmood Nasir
Contact Mehmood Nasir

Business and Engineering Management Department, Sir Syed CASE Institute of Technology, Islamabad, Pakistan

Muhammad Umer ,
Muhammad Umer

Business and Engineering Management Department, Sir Syed CASE Institute of Technology, Islamabad, Pakistan

Umer Asgher
Umer Asgher

National Center of Artificial Intelligence (NCAI), School of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering (SMME), National University of Sciences and Technology, Islamabad, Pakistan

Abstract

Tool traveling and tool switching time constitute almost seventy percent (70%) of the total time
consumed in drilling process. This fact that 70% of the total time is nonproductive and does not add any value to the job, grabs attention of the researchers and the industrialist for optimization. A literature on drilling process revealed that very few studies have been done on hybridization of metaheuristics for optimization of tool travel time. This research gap is the motivation of the present study. In this study, two metaheuristic approaches – the shuffled frog leaping algorithm (SFLA) and ant colony optimization (ACO) were hybridized. With respect to hybridization of SFLA and ACO, this study signifies its originality and novelty in which main objective is to minimize the tool travel time. The literature review also revealed that the shortest path generated through commercially available software is not optimal all the time. This aspect emphasizes the application of metaheuristic algorithms on the real-world industrial problems. In this study, the proposed hybrid algorithm was applied to drilling of omega plate which is used in automobile manufacturing industry. The results of the proposed hybrid algorithm were compared with those of manual drilling path and software generated path. The results obtained through proposed hybrid algorithm were improved by 11.1% when compared to results of manual drilling path. The results of proposed algorithm were also better than results of commercial software Creo 6.0 and Siemens NX by 5.9% each. This showed that hybrid algorithm outperformed the commercially available software. This not only validates the efficacy of proposed hybrid algorithm, but also indicates the significance of the metaheuristic algorithm applications in industrial optimization problems.

References

1.
Merchant ME. World trends and prospects in manufacturing technology. International Journal of Vehicle Design. 1985;6(2):121–38.
2.
Medina-Rodriguez N, Montiel-Ross O. Tool path optimization for computer numerical control machines based on parallel ACO. Engineering Letters. 2012;20(1).
3.
Montiel-Ross O, Medina-Rodríguez N, Sepúlveda R, Melin P. Methodology to optimize manufacturing time for a CNC using a high performance implementation of ACO. International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems Syst. 2012;9:1–10.
4.
Nabeel PA, K AHF. Tool path optimization of drilling sequence in CNC machine using genetic algorithm. Innovative Systems Design and Engineering. 2014;5(1):15–26.
5.
Pezer D. Efficiency of Tool path optimization using genetic algorithm in relation to the optimization achieved with CAM software. In: International conference of manufacturing engineering and materials :374-379. 2016.
6.
Nguyen TT, Pham HT, Nguyen TH. Tool path optimization in CNC punching machine for sheet metal manufacturing. In: International conference on system science and engineering. 2017. p. 381–6.
7.
Saravanan M. Tool Path optimization by Genetic algorithm for Energy Efficient Machining. www.tagajournals.com. 2018;14.
8.
Garcia HR, J.S. R, Gomis HM, Rao RV. Parallel implementation of metaheuristics for optimizing tool path computation on CNC machining. Computers in Industry. 2020;
9.
Khatiwada D, Nepali N, Chaulagain R, A B. Tool path optimization for drilling holes using genetic algorithm. International journal of machine tools and maintenance engineering. 2020;1 1 ,36-42.
10.
Eusuff MM, K.E. L, Pasha F. Shuffled frog leaping algorithm: a memetic metaheuristic for discrete optimization. 2006.
11.
Luo XH, Y LX. Solving TSP with shuffled frog leaping algorithm. Proc. 2008;(DA;3:228-232).
12.
Luo PLU, Qinang WU, Chenxi. Modified shuffled frog leaping algorithm based on new searching strategy. In: Proceeding of the 7th international conference on natural computation. 2001.
13.
Roy P, Pritam R, A C. Modified shuffled frog leaping algorithm with genetic algorithm crossover for solving economic load dispatch problem with valve point effect. Appl. 2013;
14.
Niknam T, Nrimani MR, Jabbari M, Malekpour AR. modified shuffled frog leaping algorithm for multi objective optimal power flow. 2011.
15.
Elbeltagi E, Track H, Donald G. A modified shuffled frog leaping optimization algorithm application to project management. Stract. 2007;Infrastract.Eng.;3(1)53-60.
16.
Marco D, Thomas S. Ant colony optimization. 2004.
17.
Nasir M, Nasir M, Umer, Ahmad R. A Survey of Recent Developments for JSSP and FJSSP Using ACO. Advanced Materials Research. 2013;816–817:1133–9.

Citation

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 

Article metrics

Google scholar: See link

The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.