Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2010) 51:627–638
DOI 10.1007/s00170-010-2653-z
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Artificial neural network model in surface modification
by EDM using tungsten–copper powder metallurgy
sintered electrodes
Promod Kumar Patowari & Partha Saha & P. K. Mishra
Received: 12 May 2009 / Accepted: 30 March 2010 / Published online: 22 April 2010
# Springer-Verlag London Limited 2010
Abstract Electro-discharge machining (EDM) is a widely
accepted nontraditional machining process used mostly for
machining materials difficult to machine by conventional
shearing process. Surface modification by powder metal-
lurgy sintered tools is an uncommon aspect of EDM. Of
late, it is being explored by many researchers. In the present
paper, attempts have been made to model the surface
modification phenomenon by EDM with artificial neural
networks. Two output measures, material transfer rate and
average layer thickness, have been correlated with different
process parameters and presented in the form of plots. The
predicted results are matching well with the experimental
results.
Keywords EDM . Artificial neural network (ANN) .
Powder metallurgy electrode . Surface modification
P. K. Patowari (*)
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
National Institute of Technology,
Silchar 788010 Assam, India
e-mail: ppatowari@yahoo.com
P. Saha
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Indian Institute of Technology,
Kharagpur 721302 W.B., India
e-mail: psaha@mech.iitkgp.ernet.in
P. K. Mishra
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
College of Engineering,
Pune 411005 Maharashtra, India
e-mail: pkm.mech@coep.ac.in
1 Introduction
Electro-discharge machining (EDM) is a well-established
nontraditional machining process. It is widely used for
machining complicated contours in hard materials. Thus, it
is a well-accepted practice in die- and mold-making
industries for quite a few decades. There are two major
disadvantages of conventional die-sinking EDM process;
one is tool wear and the other is the formation of brittle and
cracked white layer on the machined surface. The tool wear
can be controlled to some extent in EDM, but to achieve a
condition without tool wear is almost impossible. Since
EDM is an electrothermal process, so some alteration in
surface integrity takes place due to the formation of recast
or white layer. It has been also shown that the resolidified
layer is actually an alloy composed of both electrode
materials and decomposed products of dielectric like carbon
[1]. Due to the presence of resolidified alloyed material on
the surface and the heat-affected zone, the surface integrity
of the workpiece changes. This phenomenon can be turned
into an innovative and fairly cost-effective technique for the
modification of surface properties. Considering this aspect
of EDM, attempts have been made to determine the
possibility of using tool electrodes as feedstock materials.
This is an effort to produce significant alloying on
workpiece surface and, in doing so, enhance the surface
integrity of the machined surface.
The above phenomenon has inspired researchers to
explore the possibility of new method of surface modifica-
tion by EDM. By using an ordinary EDM machine tool and
hydrocarbon oil as dielectric fluid, a hard layer can be
created on the workpiece with a powder metallurgy (P/M)
628 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2010) 51:627–638

or empirical model to depict the change in surface integrity

by heat and mass transfer due to discharge, breaking up of
dielectric fluid, and diffusion of electrode materials has not
been reported until now. Such studies need to combine two
complex phenomena; one is electro-discharge and another
is mass transfer or diffusion process in electrical discharges
and that is again extremely complicated to model. Attempt
to model the entire phenomena even by the most elegant
numerical technique would require many assumptions
which might be far away from reality.
The aspect of surface modification by EDM has enough
scope to be explored. Application of artificial neural
Fig. 1 Schematic diagram of the principle of EDC network (ANN) in this process has not been reported yet.
In the present paper, ANN has been applied to model the
tool with certain parametric combinations. This novel surface modification phenomena by EDM with tungsten–
method is also called as electro-discharge coating (EDC). copper (W–Cu) P/M sintered electrodes. An attempt has
A schematic diagram of the principle of EDC is shown been made to correlate the input parameters such as
in Fig. 1. The process of EDC begins with erosion of the compaction pressure (CP), sintering temperature (ST), peak
tool during EDM, followed by creation of hard carbides current (Ip), pulse on time (Ton), pulse off time (Toff) with
through the chemical reaction between the worn electrode output measures like material transfer rate (MTR), and
material (M) and the carbon particles (C) decomposed from average layer thickness (LT). Thus, it would help in
hydrocarbon fluid under high temperature. The carbide predicting the MTR and LT with various input parameter
(MC) is gradually piled up on the work surface and combinations.
becomes a thick hard layer in a few minutes.
Electro-discharge coating is basically a process of mass
transfer to the work surface. So, the tool materials should 2 State of the art
erode sufficiently to get transferred to the work surface in
this type of treatment. P/M compact, either green or Software computing techniques like artificial neural net-
semisintered, can play a vital role as EDM tool, which works (ANN) are highly flexible modeling tools with the
can supply required materials to the workpiece surface. The capabilities of learning the mapping between input and
weak bonding among the powder particles helps in this output for any complex nonlinear system. The superior
regard. The other advantages of P/M tools lie in the facts
that they can be fabricated easily by mixing powders of any
composition and can be given various shapes with less
effort. The properties of P/M tools can be controlled by
varying compaction pressure and sintering temperature.
Thus, the P/M tools help in modifying the surface integrity
of a work surface.
The EDM is a complex phenomenon which is very
stochastic in nature and depends upon a number of
variables. A small change in one variable can abruptly
change the output. So it is very difficult to establish models
that accurately correlate the processing conditions with
processing results by means of mathematic relational
expressions [2–8]. Even though some efforts have been
made, a complete model that takes account of the physical
process has not yet been described in detail. Prediction of
material removal rate (MRR) and surface finish in EDM
process based on physical and empirical models have been
tried by some researchers.
Endeavors have been made by many researchers to
intentionally modify the work surface using EDM by
depositing a layer on it. But any mathematical, physical, Fig. 2 EDM setup
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2010) 51:627–638
Table 1 Process parameters
Parameters
Electrode composition
Compaction pressure, CP
Sintering temperature, ST
Peak current, Ip
Pulse duration, Ton
Polarity
Duty factor
Gap control and gap voltage
Processing time
performance of neural networks for modeling some aspects
of EDM, wire EDM, and other processes has been reported
in many literatures as follows.
Tarng et al. [2] utilized a feed-forward neural network to
associate the cutting parameters with the cutting perfor-
mance in wire electrical discharge machining (WEDM).
Spedding and Wang [3] presented optimization of process
parametric combinations by modeling the WEDM process
using ANN and characterized the WEDMed surface
through time series techniques. Kao and Tarng [4] used a
feed-forward neural network to monitor EDM process
online and established the relationship between tool–
workpiece gap signals and various pulse types, based on
the neural network through the backpropagation learning
algorithm. Tsai and Wang [5, 6] with their two attempts,
based upon six different neural networks models and a
neuro-fuzzy network model, illustrated the comparisons of
modeling the surface finish and material removal rate of
various work materials with the change of electrode
polarity. Wang et al. [7] discussed the development and
application of hybrid ANN and genetic algorithm method-
ology for modeling and optimization of EDM. Fenggou and
Dayong [8] presented a method that can be used to
automatically determine and optimize the processing
parameters in EDM sinking process with the application
of ANN. Wang et al. [9] proposed a hybrid two-phase
neural network approach for modeling WEDM. They
designed the network for characterizing input–output
relationship between machining thickness and the
corresponding cutting parameters. Mandal et al. [10]
attempted to map the input parameters current, pulse on
time, and pulse off time with output parameters MRR and
tool wear to model the complex EDM process using ANN
Table 2 Output measures
Parameters Descriptions
Material transfer rate (MTR) Net addition of material on work surface per unit time (mg/min)
Deposited average layer thickness (LT) Average of the layer thickness measured at every 200-µm interval of each sample (µm)
629
Conditions
75%W–25%Cu
120, 180, 240, and 300 MPa
700°C and 900°C
4, 8, 10, and 12 A
19 to 386 µs in different steps
Electrode (−)
At lower Ton settings: 50% and at higher Ton setting: 70%
Gap control is adjusted at average gap voltage around at 40–45 V
5 min
with backpropagation algorithm. Markopoulos et al. [11]
presented artificial neural network models for the prediction
of surface roughness in EDM of various steel grades.
Assarzadeh and Ghoreishi [12] presented a neural-network-
based approach for the prediction and optimal selection of
process parameters in die-sinking EDM. They developed a
backpropagation neural network model to measure the
performance (MRR and Ra) to be predicted in terms of
three control parameters such as current, pulse period, and
source voltage. ANN has been used in many other fields of
manufacturing also. Cook et al. [13] developed a neural
network model to predict the value of critical strength
parameter (internal bond) in a particle board manufacturing
process. Vitek et al. [14, 15] developed a new neural
network model for predicting ferrite number in stainless
steel arc welds more accurately than through existing
constitution diagrams.
3 Experimentation
A die-sinking EDM (model: Victor-I, make: Electronica
Machine Tools Ltd., Pune, India) shown in Fig. 2 has been
used for experimentation. Semisintered P/M tools made of
75% tungsten and 25% copper powders by weight
percentage (W75–Cu25) have been used for deliberate
transfer of electrode material over work surface. This has
resulted in depositing a layer of hard and composite
material over the work surface, thereby changing its surface
integrity. The MTR has been measured by taking the weight
difference of the workpiece before and after EDM, using a
precision electronic balance (make: Afcoset). To find out
the deposited LT, each workpiece was sectioned in
630
Fig. 3 Workpiece sample with the deposited material over it
transverse direction using WEDM and then mounted so that
the sectioned area remains exposed. The mounted specimen
was then polished and etched in order to reveal the
deposited layer over the substrate. The deposited layer
thickness has been measured on the screen of optical
micrometer at a regular interval of 200 µm, and average has
been taken. There is a correlation between MTR and LT.
The LT tends to increase when the MTR increases. This can
be witnessed in the presentation of results in the following
sections. The process parameters and output measures are
as given in Tables 1 and 2. The levels of each parameter
have been decided according to the options available with
the experimental setup and other associated equipment.
Moreover, some pilot experiments have been conducted to
fix the levels among the available options. A representative
workpiece sample with the deposited material on it and the
optical micrograph depicting the microstructure of the
deposited layer are shown in Figs. 3 and 4, respectively.
The deposited layer has been found to be composed of
W2C, W, Cu, and Fe. This can be observed through the X-
ray diffraction (XRD) plot of one of the typical sample,
Fig. 4 Microstructure of the deposited layer
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2010) 51:627–638
o
CP:120MPa, ST: 700 C, Ip:8A,Ton:256μs
14000
W 2C
12000 W
Cu
Intensity (arbitrary unit)
Fe
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
40 60 80 100
Angle 2θ (degree)
Fig. 5 XRD plot (with Cu target) of deposited layer of a typical
sample showing the peaks of W2C, W, Cu, and Fe
with thick deposited layer, as shown in Fig. 5. At the
hardest zone in the deposited layer, the microhardness has
been in the range of 9.81–12.75 GPa, whereas at the base
metal this value has been of the order of 2.00–2.95 GPa.
The surface roughness (Ra) values of the work surface have
been obtained in the wide range of 3 to 15 µm.
Experiments have been conducted as per the parameters
given in Table 3. The outcome of the experiments in the
form of MTR and LT is also given in Table 3. It has been
observed that a good amount of net material transfer takes
place over the work surface in some parameter settings, and
in some conditions only a net material removal takes place.
The negative values of MTR represent the net MRR rather
than the material transfer rates. However, in all the cases,
including the cases of material removal, the layer is present.
For experiment nos. 57 and 58 in Table 2, the LT values are
not presented. In these experimental conditions, the
material deposition has been mostly nonuniform, and there
has been some lump deposition due to uneven material
transfer as a result of arcing. So those samples were not
taken into consideration for finding out the LT.
4 ANN design and architecture
The ANN has been designed using the Neural Network
Toolbox of MATLAB® software. A multilayer feed-
forward network has been used, and the backpropagation
training algorithm has been employed to train the network.
Backpropagation is a systematic method for training
multilayer ANN. A backpropagation network is a multilay-
er feed-forward network which uses gradient-descent
method to minimize the total squared error of the output
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2010) 51:627–638 631

Table 3 Experimental conditions and results

Expt. no. Compt. pressure Sintering temp. Peak current On time Off time MTR, LT, µm
(CP), MPa (ST), °C (Ip), A (Ton), µs (Toff), µs mg/min

1 120 700 8 19 19 4.91 30.4

2 180 700 8 19 19 5.05 23.9
3 240 700 8 19 19 3.04 24.5
4 300 700 8 19 19 0.93 16.7
5 120 700 8 28 29 6.30 24.9
6 180 700 8 28 29 8.52 31.1
7 240 700 8 28 29 7.13 24.3
8 300 700 8 28 29 3.12 22.8
9 120 700 8 38 39 5.43 33.8
10 180 700 8 38 39 9.46 40.2
11 240 700 8 38 39 6.86 36.2
12 300 700 8 38 39 1.11 14.5
13 120 700 8 58 59 8.14 41.4
14 180 700 8 58 59 10.86 30.2
15 240 700 8 58 59 4.92 26.1
16 300 700 8 58 59 6.02 37.4
17 120 700 8 126 54 56.37 229.6
18 180 700 8 126 54 38.27 166.0
19 240 700 8 126 54 22.54 105.7
20 300 700 8 126 54 13.61 67.2
21 120 700 8 256 108 127.73 521.9
22 180 700 8 256 108 87.74 318.5
23 240 700 8 256 108 60.40 206.5
24 300 700 8 256 108 27.94 123.3
25 120 700 8 386 162 172.56 739.0
26 180 700 8 386 162 107.46 446.2
27 240 700 8 386 162 104.59 437.3
28 300 700 8 386 162 68.57 229.9
29 120 700 4 126 54 7.95 30.4
30 180 700 4 126 54 6.08 25.0
31 240 700 4 126 54 6.17 24.4
32 300 700 4 126 54 6.14 24.0
33 120 700 4 256 108 11.46 36.0
34 180 700 4 256 108 7.40 24.7
35 240 700 4 256 108 6.60 18.9
36 300 700 4 256 108 2.45 19.6
37 120 700 4 386 162 58.54 223.4
38 180 700 4 386 162 34.18 110.4
39 240 700 4 386 162 27.72 112.4
40 300 700 4 386 162 20.41 75.0
41 120 700 12 19 19 3.94 32.5
42 180 700 12 19 19 3.20 15.6
43 240 700 12 19 19 1.47 9.3
44 300 700 12 19 19 −0.40 14.6
45 120 700 12 28 29 7.61 34.2
46 180 700 12 28 29 5.41 39.1
47 240 700 12 28 29 0.24 15.1
48 300 700 12 28 29 −0.47 14.3
632 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2010) 51:627–638

Table 3 (continued)

Expt. no. Compt. pressure Sintering temp. Peak current On time Off time MTR, LT, µm
(CP), MPa (ST), °C (Ip), A (Ton), µs (Toff), µs mg/min

49 120 700 12 38 39 5.39 29.2

50 180 700 12 38 39 6.34 32.1
51 240 700 12 38 39 1.77 23.5
52 300 700 12 38 39 0.10 19.1
53 120 700 12 58 59 9.87 41.6
54 180 700 12 58 59 3.73 32.0
55 240 700 12 58 59 1.25 19.5
56 300 700 12 58 59 0.37 6.2
57 120 700 12 126 54 74.47 –
58 300 700 12 126 54 21.71 –
59 120 700 6 126 54 51.76 183.6
60 120 700 6 256 108 89.95 348.0
61 120 700 10 126 54 102.91 420.1
62 120 700 10 256 108 190.84 785.2
63 120 900 8 19 19 4.98 31.5
64 180 900 8 19 19 1.77 12.3
65 240 900 8 19 19 1.40 12.6
66 300 900 8 19 19 1.08 13.6
67 120 900 8 28 29 4.85 35.2
68 180 900 8 28 29 1.38 13.3
69 240 900 8 28 29 0.27 8.2
70 300 900 8 28 29 −0.50 8.8
71 120 900 8 38 39 6.65 29.9
72 180 900 8 38 39 0.78 9.0
73 240 900 8 38 39 −0.76 3.1
74 300 900 8 38 39 −1.52 16.8
75 120 900 8 58 59 5.77 34.4
76 180 900 8 58 59 0.89 13.0
77 240 900 8 58 59 −1.52 13.4
78 300 900 8 58 59 −5.08 17.4
79 120 900 8 126 54 6.17 35.2
80 180 900 8 126 54 −1.11 20.9
81 240 900 8 126 54 −5.07 19.2
82 300 900 8 126 54 −5.77 21.0
83 120 900 12 19 19 13.16 81.6
84 180 900 12 19 19 6.14 33.6
85 240 900 12 19 19 1.23 14.7
86 300 900 12 19 19 0.37 10.6
87 120 900 12 28 29 16.94 69.5
88 180 900 12 28 29 2.57 15.7
89 240 900 12 28 29 −3.13 6.8
90 300 900 12 28 29 −1.65 15.7
91 120 900 12 38 39 16.98 71.3
92 180 900 12 38 39 5.36 31.6
93 240 900 12 38 39 −4.29 7.5
94 300 900 12 38 39 −3.09 12.6
95 120 900 12 58 59 12.51 72.6
96 180 900 12 58 59 2.01 18.8
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2010) 51:627–638 633

Table 3 (continued)

Expt. no. Compt. pressure Sintering temp. Peak current On time Off time MTR, LT, µm
(CP), MPa (ST), °C (Ip), A (Ton), µs (Toff), µs mg/min

97 240 900 12 58 59 −3.14 11.4

98 300 900 12 58 59 −0.53 13.2
99 120 900 12 126 54 15.09 55.2
100 180 900 12 126 54 −5.67 26.8
101 240 900 12 126 54 −13.84 25.2
102 300 900 12 126 54 −11.89 22.2

computed by the net. The training algorithm of back-
propagation involves four stages which are initialization of
weights, feed-forward, backpropagation of errors, and
updating the weights and biases.
The architecture of the designed network comprises
five input neurons corresponding to five input parameters,
an output layer with one neuron corresponding to one
output parameter at a time, and a single hidden layer of
neurons. The transfer functions which have been used are
tansig and purelin in hidden and output layers, respec-
tively. The transfer function tansig is a hyperbolic tangent
sigmoid transfer function, and purelin is a linear transfer
function. These transfer functions calculate their outputs
as follows.
2
tansigðnÞ ¼ 1
1 þ e2n
trainlm in Neural Network Toolbox of MATLAB®
software. The transfer functions and the training algorithm
have been selected after some initial exhaustive trial
attempts. The intension has been to achieve the set target
error in minimum number of epochs during training. It has
been observed that the network with aforesaid conditions
has shown better performance. Thus, the transfer functions
and the training algorithm have been fixed for the
network. The number of neurons in the hidden layer has
been selected on the basis of the performance of the
network. The performance of the network has been
measured in terms of average error percentage and mean
squared error (MSE).
Average error percentage is: the mean of all the error
ð1Þ percentages in a particular training or testing event. Error
percentage is calculated as follows.

purelinðnÞ ¼ n ð2Þ  
T  A

Error percentage ¼    100 ð3Þ
T 
where
n input to the function
Performance with no.of neurons in the hidden layer
A two-layer tansig–purelin network with five input 20 0.025
neurons, one output neuron, and a single hidden layer of
five neurons is shown in Fig. 6. The network has been 16 0.02
Average error %

trained using Lavenberg–Marquardt algorithm, i.e.,

12 0.015
MSE

Input Hidden Layer Output Layer 8 0.01

tansig purelin 2 4 0.005

p1 a1 a
1,1 2,1
IW LW 1x1
5x1 n1 5x1 n2 0 0
5x5 + 5x1 +
5x1 1x1 2 3 4 5 6 7
b1 b2 Number of neurons in the hidden layer
5 5x1 5 1x1 1
Av Error%Train MSE Train
1
a =tansig(IW
1,1 1 1
p +b )
2
a =purelin(LW
2,1 1
a +b )
2 Av Error%Test MSE Test

Fig. 6 A two-layer tansig–purelin network with five input neurons, Fig. 7 Performance curves for training and testing with number of
one output neuron, and one hidden layer of five neurons neurons in the network for MTR
634 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2010) 51:627–638

Predicted and Target MTR during testing Predicted MTR-CP at Ip:8A, ST:700o C Ton (μs)
200
200 20
Predicted 40
Target 60
150

MTR (mg/min)
150 80
100
120
100
MTR (mg/min)

140
100
160
200
50
225
50 250
0 275
120 180 240 300 300
325
0 Compaction pressure (MPa) 350

Fig. 10 Plots of MTR–compaction pressure with tools sintered at

-50 700°C
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Data points

Fig. 8 Predicted MTR corresponding to target MTR at different data

points during testing All the input and target values have been normalized
between −1 and 1 as follows.

p  min p
MSE measures: the network’s performance according to the pn ¼ 2  1 ð5Þ
max p  min p
mean of squared errors. The MSE is calculated as follows.
where
2
ðT  AÞ pn normalized value
MSE ¼ ð4Þ
N p value to be normalized
minp minimum of all the values
maxp maximum of all the values
where
T Normalized target value A good number of experiments, as shown in Table 3, have
A Normalized predicted or simulated value been performed, and their results have been used for training
N Number of data points and testing of the network. Randomly selected results (67%)
have been used for training, and the rest of the results (33%)
have been used for testing. Separate networks have been
created for each output measure (MTR and LT).

Predicted MTR-Ton at Ip:8A, ST:700 o C Predicted MTR-Ip at CP:120MPa, ST:700 o C Ton (µs)

200 20
200
40
Comp. Pr.
150 60
(MPa)
MTR (mg/min)

150 80
MTR (mg/min)

120 100 100

120
100 180
140
50
240 160

300 200
50 0
225
250
-50 275
0 4 6 8 10 12 300
0 100 200 300 400
Ip (A) 325
T on (µs) 350

Fig. 9 Plots of MTR–Ton with tools sintered at 700°C and different Fig. 11 Plots of MTR–Ip with tools sintered at 700°C and different
compaction pressure Ton settings
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2010) 51:627–638 635

Predicted MTR-T on atCP:120MPa, ST:700o C Predicted MTR-CP at Ip:8A, ST:900o C

200 12
Ton (μs)
150 Ip(A) 8

MTR (mg/min)
20
MTR (mg/min)

4 40
100 4
6 60
50 8 0 80
10
100
0 -4
12
120
-50 -8
0 100 200 300 400 120 180 240 300
Ton (µs) Compaction pressure (MPa)

Fig. 12 Plots of MTR–Ton with tools sintered at 700°C and different Fig. 14 Plots of MTR–compaction pressure with tools sintered at
Ip settings 900°C and at different Ton

5 Modeling of MTR by ANN
A two-layer ANN has been created for mapping five input
parameters such as CP, ST, Ip, Ton, and Toff with the lone
output parameter, MTR. The network, described in Sec-
tion 4, has been trained and tested with the experimental
data given in Table 3 for MTR. Performance of the network
has been calculated in terms of average error percentage
and MSE for both training and testing with different
number of neurons in the hidden layer. The variation of
these performance parameters of the network with the
number of neurons in hidden layer is shown in Fig. 7. In
this plot, it can be seen that an optimum performance can
be achieved at five neurons considering both training and
testing. In the architecture composed of five neurons in the
hidden layer, the values of MSEs during training and
testing are 0.0014 and 0.0038, respectively. The average
error percentages during training and testing are 3.3321
and 8.4365, respectively. The MSE and average error
percentage during testing are the minimums in this
configuration. The predicted MTR corresponding to target
MTR at different data points during testing are shown in
Fig. 8. The predicted values are matching with the target
values in testing. Thus, five neurons in the hidden layer
have been selected for the final network. After training and
testing, the final network has been used for simulation at
some parameter values other than the training and testing
values. This simulation has been done to predict the values
of MTR in these parameter conditions. The simulated
results in the form of some plots are shown in Figs. 9, 10,
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16. From these plots, it can be
observed that the trends of predicted MTR with the process
parameters are corroborating well with the trends of actual
experimental results. The variation of MTR with Ton and
compaction pressure, at Ip of 8 A and sintering temperature
of 700°C, can be observed in Figs. 9 and 10. The MTR
increases with the increase in Ton and decreases with the
increase in compaction pressure. The prediction of MTR
with the variation of Ton and Ip, at compaction pressure of
120 MPa and sintering temperature of 700°C, is shown in
Figs. 11 and 12. The predicted trends of MTR with the
variations of Ton, compaction pressure, and Ip settings with

Predicted MTR-Ton at Ip:8A, ST:900 o C Predicted MTR-T on at CP:120MPa,ST:900o C

12 20
Comp. Pr.
8 (MPa) 16 Ip(A)
MTR (mg/min)

MTR (mg/min)

120 4
4 12
180 6
0 240 8 8

300 10
-4 4 12

-8 0
0 50 100 150 0 50 100 150
Ton (µs) Ton (µs)

Fig. 13 Plots of MTR–Ton with tools sintered at 900°C and different Fig. 15 Plots of MTR–Ton with tools sintered at 900°C and
compaction pressures compaction pressure of 120 MPa at different Ip settings
636 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2010) 51:627–638

CP ST Predicted and Target LT during testing

Predicted MTR-T on at Ip:8A
(MPa) (oC) 250
200 Predicted
120-700 Target
150
180-700 200
MTR (mg/min)

100 240-700
50 300-700
150
0 120-900

LT (µm)
180-900
-50
240-900 100
-100
300-900
-150
50
0 100 200 300 400

Ton (µs)
0
Fig. 16 The variation of predicted MTR with Ton at different
compaction pressures (CP) and sintering temperatures (ST) at peak
-50
current (Ip) setting of 8 A 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Data points

Fig. 18 Predicted LT corresponding to target LT at different data

tools sintered at 900°C are presented in Figs. 13, 14, and
15. Through these figures, it is clear that the net MTR is
much less with the tools sintered at 900°C than that with
the tools sintered at 700°C. The net positive MTR can be
observed at a compaction pressure of 120 MPa. At higher
compaction pressures, the net MTR is negative. The trend
of increase in MTR with the increase in Ip is evident at
lower Ton settings, but at higher Ton settings it is not very
clear. A concise plot showing the variation of predicted
MTR with Ton at different compaction pressures and
sintering temperatures at Ip setting of 8 A is given in
Fig. 16. Here, it can be observed that the MTR increases
with Ton and decreases with increase in compaction
pressure with tools sintered at 700°C. In the same plot, it
can also be observed that with the tools sintered at 900°C
the process moves towards material removal rather than
material addition.
Performance with no. of neurons in the hidden layer
25
points during testing
6 Modeling of LT by ANN
Similar to ANN for MTR, a two-layer ANN has been
created for mapping the same five input parameters with
output parameter, LT. Performance measures, average error
percentage, and MSE have been calculated both for training
and testing at different number of neurons in the hidden
layer. The variation of these performance measures of the
network with number of neurons in the hidden layer is
shown in Fig. 17. In this plot also, it can be seen that an
optimum performance can be achieved with five neurons in
hidden layer. In the architecture composed of five neurons
in the hidden layer, the values of MSEs during training and
testing are 0.0016 and 0.0020, respectively. The average
error percentages during training and testing are 6.5732
and 3.1824, respectively. The MSE and average error
0.03
percentage during testing are the minimums in this

20 0.025
Average error %

0.02
Predicted LT-T on at Ip:8A, ST:700 o C
15 800
MSE

0.015 Comp. Pr.

10 (MPa)
600
0.01
LT (µm)

120
5 0.005 400 180
240
0 0
2 3 4 5 6 7 200 300
Number of neurons in the hidden layer
0
Av Error%Train MSE Train 0 100 200 300 400
Av Error%Test MSE Test Ton (µs)

Fig. 17 Performance curve for training and testing with number of Fig. 19 Plots of LT–Ton with tools sintered at 700°C and different
neurons in the network for LT compaction pressures
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2010) 51:627–638 637

Predicted LT-CP at Ip:8A, ST:700 o C Ton (μs) Predicted LT-Ton at Ip:8A, ST:900o C
800 20 50
40 Comp. Pr.
60 40 (MPa)
600
80
120
LT (µm)

LT (µm)
100 30
400 120 180
160
20 240
200
200 225 300
10
250
275
0 300
0
120 180 240 300 325 0 50 100 150

Compaction pressure (MPa)

350 Ton (µs)

Fig. 20 Plots of LT–compaction pressure with tools sintered at 700°C Fig. 23 Plots of LT–Ton with tools sintered at 900°C and different
and different Ton settings compaction pressures

Predicted LT-Ip at CP:120MPa, ST:700 o C Predicted LT-CP at Ip:8A, ST:900 o C

Ton (µs) 50
1200
40 Ton (μs)
1000 40
80 20
800 100
40
LT (µm)

30
LT (µm)

120
600 160 60
400 200 20 80
225
200 250 100
10
275 120
0
300
0
-200 325
4 6 8 10 120 180 240 300
Ip (A) Compaction pressure (MPa)

Fig. 21 Plots of LT–Ip with tools sintered at 700°C and different Ton Fig. 24 Plots of LT–compaction pressure with tools sintered at 900°C
settings and different Ton settings

Predicted LT-Ton at CP:120MPa, ST:700 o C Predicted LT-Ton at CP:120MPa, ST:900 o C

1200 100

1000 80
Ip(A)
800 Ip(A)
LT (µm)

4
LT (µm)

60
600 8
6
400 8 40 12
200 10
20
0
-200 0
0 100 200 300 400 0 50 100 150 200
Ton (µs) Ton (µs)

Fig. 22 Plots of LT–Ton with tools sintered at 700°C and different Ip Fig. 25 Plots of LT–Ton with tools sintered at 900°C and two Ip
settings settings
638
configuration. Thus, the number of neurons in the hidden
layer has been chosen as five for the network of LT. The
predicted LT corresponding to target LT at different data
points during testing are shown in Fig. 18. The predicted
values of LT are matching satisfactorily with the target
values in testing.
After training and testing, the selected network has been
used for simulation at some parameters other than the
training and testing values. These simulated results in the
form of plots are shown in Figs. 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, and
25. From these plots, it can be observed that the trends of
predicted LT with the process parameters are corroborating
well with the trends of experimental results.
Prediction of LT with Ton, with Ip, and with the tools
compacted at different compaction pressures and sintered at
700°C is presented in the plots shown in Figs. 19, 20, 21,
and 22. It can be clearly observed through these plots that,
with the tools sintered at 700°C, the LT increases with
increase in Ton and Ip and decreases with increase in
compaction pressure. From the plots shown in Figs. 23, 24,
and 25, it can be seen that, at sintering temperature of 900°C,
the range of LT is much lower than that at 700°C, and the
trend is not very clear like that at 700°C. It is because, at
900°C and higher compaction pressures, the tool materials
are firmly bound, so the material transfer rate is lower. Still,
a layer formation is observed on the work surface. This is
due to the molten tool and work material and their
interaction. But this layer is very thin, and the variation of
this layer thickness with other controlling parameters is
within a small range. It can also be seen that, at compaction
pressure of 120 MPa, the LT with the deposited material is
more than that at other higher compaction pressures. But at
compaction pressure of 300 MPa, an increase in trend is seen
that may be due to the formation of recast layer without
much deposition of tool material. At Ip of 12 A, the LT is
higher than that at 8 A as shown in Fig. 25.
7 Conclusions
The ANN has been successfully applied for surface
modification with W–Cu P/M sintered electrodes in EDM.
The optimized architecture of the neural network has been
selected, trained, tested, and used for simulation. The trends
of predicted and target values from training and testing are
very much close to each other. The simulated results from
the networks have been presented and discussed. They are
in good agreement with experimental data. Thus, this study
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2010) 51:627–638
has presented an elaborate effect of different process
parameters on MTR and LT. This study has added more
insight in the surface modification phenomenon by EDM
which is still in the state of exploratory research.
References
1. Erden A (1983) Effect of materials on the mechanism of electric
discharge machining (E.D.M.). Trans ASME J Eng Mater Technol
105:132–138
2. Tarng YS, Ma SC, Chung LK (1995) Determination of optimal
cutting parameters in wire electrical discharge machining. Int J
Mach Tools Manuf 35(12):1693–1701
3. Spedding TA, Wang ZQ (1997) Parametric optimization and
surface characterization of wire electrical discharge machining
process. Precis Eng 20(1):5–15
4. Kao JY, Tarng YS (1997) A neutral-network approach for the on-
line monitoring of the electrical discharge machining process. J
Mater Process Technol 69(1–3):112–119
5. Tsai KM, Wang PJ (2001) Predictions on surface finish in
electrical discharge machining based upon neural network models.
Int J Mach Tools Manuf 41(10):1385–1403
6. Tsai KM, Wang PJ (2001) Comparisons of neural network models
on material removal rate in electrical discharge machining. J
Mater Process Technol 117(1–2):111–124
7. Wang K, Gelgele HL, Wang Y, Yuan Q, Fang M (2003) A hybrid
intelligent method for modelling the EDM process. Int J Mach
Tools Manuf 43(10):995–999
8. Fenggou C, Dayong Y (2004) The study of high efficiency and
intelligent optimization system in EDM sinking process. J Mater
Process Technol 149(1–3):83–87
9. Wang GN (2004) Two-phase reverse neural network approach for
modeling a complicate manufacturing process with small sample
size. Neural Inf Process Lett and Rev 2(1):1–9
10. Mandal D, Pal SK, Saha P (2007) Modeling of electrical discharge
machining process using back propagation neural network and
multi-objective optimization using non-dominating sorting genetic
algorithm-II. J Mater Process Technol 186:154–162
11. Markopoulos AP, Manolakos DE, Vaxevanidis NM (2008)
Artificial neural network models for the prediction of surface
roughness in electrical discharge machining. J Intell Manuf
19:283–292
12. Assarzadeh S, Ghoreishi M (2008) Neural-network-based model-
ing and optimization of the electro-discharge machining process.
Int J Adv Manuf Technol 39:488–500
13. Cook DF, Ragsdale CT, Major RL (2000) Combining a neural
network with a genetic algorithm for process parameter optimiza-
tion. Eng Appl Artif Intell 13(4):391–396
14. Vitek JM, Iskander YS, Oblow EM (2000) Improved ferrite
number prediction in stainless steel arc welds using artificial
neural networks—part 1: neural network development. Weld Res
79:33s–40s
15. Vitek JM, Iskander YS, Oblow EM (2000) Improved ferrite
number prediction in stainless steel arc welds using artificial
neural networks—part 2: neural network results. Weld Res
79:41s–50s