j ournal of materi als processi ng technology 2 0 9 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 27732780

j our nal homepage: www. el sevi er . com/ l ocat e/ j mat pr ot ec

An effective hybrid immune-hill climbing optimization
approach for solving design and manufacturing
optimization problems in industry
Ali Rza Yldz

University of Michigan, Mechanical Engineering Department, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 25 March 2007
Received in revised form 6 June 2008
Accepted 14 June 2008
Keywords:
Hybrid method
Immune algorithm
Disc-Brake
Shape optimization
Multi-pass turning
a b s t r a c t
The focus of this research is on a hybrid method combining immune algorithm with a hill
climbing local search algorithm for solving complex real-world optimization problems. The
objective is to contribute to the development of more efcient optimizationapproaches with
the help of immune algorithm and hill climbing algorithm. The hybrid algorithm combines
the exploration speed of immune algorithm with the powerful ability to avoid being trapped
inlocal minimumof hill climbing. This hybridizationresults ina solutionthat leads to better
parameter values. This research is the rst application of immune algorithm to the opti-
mization of machining parameters in turning and also shape design optimization problems
in the literature. The results of single-objective benchmark problem, multi-objective disc-
brake problem, an automobile shape design optimization problem taken from the literature
and case studies for multi-pass turning operation have demonstrated the superiority of the
proposed hybrid over the other techniques in terms of solution quality and convergence
rates.
Crown Copyright 2008 Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
In order to design and manufacture higher-quality prod-
ucts that meet competitive challenges and satisfy customer
demands and be the winners in the competitive market, cur-
rent design and manufacturing techniques in industry must
be improved. In recent years, erce competition conditions
have forced design and manufacturing companies to make
radical changes in design and manufacturing strategies.
Finding optimal design and machining parameters is a
crucial task in order to minimize the production costs. The
machining economic problems consist of the selection of
optimal machining parameters. Despite the fact that these
problems have been extensively researched, the complexity
of machining economics problems creates the requirement for
increasingly effective algorithms.

Mechanical Engineering Department, Uludag University, 16059, Bursa, Turkey. Tel.: +1 734 5658028; fax: +1 734 647 3170.
E-mail address: yildiz@umich.edu.
Various solution approaches like the gradient-based meth-
ods, dynamic programming and the sequential unconstrained
minimization technique have been used to optimize turn-
ing operations. The gradient-based methods differ in their
reliability, efciency and sensitivity to the initial solution.
Furthermore, they are inclined to obtain a local optimal
solution. The gradient-based methods are limited because
they are not ideal for non-convex problems. Shin and Joo
(1992) have presented a model for multi-pass turning and
used dynamic programming for the selection of depth of
cut.
Convergence speed to the global optimum and solu-
tion accuracy are important factors in the development of
optimization methods. Since the convergence speed of evolu-
tionary algorithms to the global optimal results is better than
that of conventional techniques, non-traditional optimization
0924-0136/$ see front matter. Crown Copyright 2008 Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2008.06.028
2774 j ournal of materi als processi ng technology 2 0 9 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 27732780
Nomenclature
C
0
constant pertaining to tool-life equation
C
I
machine idle cost (US$/piece)
C
M
cutting cost by actual time in cut (US$/piece)
C
R
tool replacement cost (US$/piece)
C
T
tool cost (US$/piece)
d
r
, d
s
depths of cut for each pass of rough and nish
machining (mm)
d
rL
, d
rU
lower and upper bounds of depth of rough cut
(mm)
d
sL
, d
sU
lower and upper bounds of depth of nish cut
(mm)
d
t
total depth of metal to be removed (mm)
D diameter of workpiece (mm)
f
r
, f
s
feeds in rough and nish machining (mm/rev)
f
rL
, f
rU
lower and upper bounds of feed in rough
machining (mm/rev)
f
sL
, f
sU
lower and upper bounds of feed in nish
machining (mm/rev)
F
r
, F
s
cutting forces during rough and nish machin-
ing (kgf)
F
U
maximum allowable cutting force (kgf)
h
1
, h
2
constants pertaining to tool travel and
approach/depart time (min)
k
1
, k
2
, k
3
constants for roughing and nishing parame-
ter relations
k
f
coefcient pertaining to specic
toolworkpiece combination
k
o
direct labour cost overhead (US$/min)
k
q
coefcient pertaining to equation of chiptool
interface temperature
k
t
cutting edge cost (US$/edge)
L length of workpiece (mm)
n number of rough passes
p, q, r constants pertaining to the tool-life equation
P
r
, P
s
cutting power during roughing and nishing
(kW)
P
U
maximum allowable cutting power (kW)
Q
r
, Q
s
temperatures during roughing and nishing
(

C)
Q
U
maximum allowable temperature (

C)
R
a
maximum allowable surface roughness (mm)
R
n
nose radius of cutting tool (mm)
S
c
limit of stable cutting region
t tool life (min)
t
c
constant term of machine idling time (min)
t
e
tool exchange time (min)
t
p
tool life (min) considering roughing and nish-
ing
t
r
, t
s
tool lives (min) for roughing and nishing
t
v
variable term of machine idling time (min)
T
I
machine idling time (min)
T
L
, T
U
lower and upper bounds of tool life
T
M
cutting time by actual machining (min)
T
Mr
, T
Ms
cutting time by actual machining for roughing
and nishing (min)
T
R
tool replacement time (min)
UC unit production cost except material cost
(US$/piece)
V
r
, V
s
cutting speeds in rough and nish machining
(m/min)
V
rL
, V
rU
lower and upper bounds of cutting speed in
rough machining (m/min)
V
sL
, V
sU
lower and upper bounds of cutting speed in
nish machining (m/min)
X vector of machining parameters
Greek letters
j power efciency
z,v constants pertaining to expression of stable
cutting region
j,u constants of cutting force equation
t,, constants pertaining to expression of chiptool
interface temperature
methods such as genetic algorithm (GA), simulated anneal-
ing, scatter search algorithm and ant colony algorithm have
beenwidelypreferredinthe solutionof optimizationproblems
from manufacturing industry.
Chen and Tsai (1996) used integration of simulated anneal-
ing and Hooke-Jeeves pattern search to optimize cutting
model provided by Shin and Joo (1992) for multi-pass turn-
ing operations. Their results showed that non-gradient-based
optimization techniques are reliable and accurate for solving
machining economics problems and offer certain advantages
over gradient-based methods.
Onwubolu and Kumalo (2001) and Vijayakumar et al. (2003)
used the GA and ant colony optimization algorithm, respec-
tively, for optimization of multi-pass turning problem based
on the mathematical model of Chen and Tsai (1996) without
considering the equality constraint basedontotal depthof cut.
Chen and Chen (2003) applied GA, named FEGA, to multi-
pass turning problem provided by Chen and Tsai (1996)
and pointed out that Onwubolu and Kumalo (2001) and
Vijayakumar et al. (2003) did not consider the equality con-
straint based on total depth of cut. They also showed that the
FEGA are provides better results than integration of simulated
annealing and Hooke-Jeeves pattern search (SA/HJPS) of Chen
and Tsai (1996).
Chen(2004) appliedscatter searchalgorithmtocase studies
for multi-pass turning problem. The results of scatter search
algorithm are better than those of FEGA and integration of
simulated annealing and Hooke-Jeeves pattern search.
Althoughit has beenshownthat evolutionary optimization
techniques offers better performances over classical optimiza-
tion approaches in solving of complex optimization problems,
they are plagued by their own limitations such as premature
convergence to a local minimum and poor exploitation abili-
ties.
The introduction of hybrid methods comes from the need
to tackle more and more complex real-world problems and
to reach to a global optimum. Since hybrid evolutionary algo-
rithms combine constructive properties of several methods,
they are fast and capable of global search. During the last
two decades, hybrid evolutionary optimization algorithms
j ournal of materi als processi ng technology 2 0 9 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 27732780 2775
have been commonly used in the literature. In the some of
the research on optimization of machining economic prob-
lems in the literature, hybrid evolutionary algorithms have
been preferred. For instance, Wang et al. (2004) proposed a
new hybrid approach, named genetic simulated annealing
approach (GSA), based on GA and simulated annealing to
optimize machining parameters in milling operations. They
showed that the results obtained by the proposed hybrid
approach were better than genetic algorithms and geomet-
ric programming. Yildiz and Ozturk (2006) developed a hybrid
robust genetic algorithm (HRGA) based on Taguchis method
and genetic algorithm. After the approach was validated
by single and multi-objective benchmark problems, it was
applied to the optimization of machining economic problems
in multi-pass turning operation. They showed that conver-
gence speed and accuracy of HRGA to global optimal results
was better than better than those of Chen and Tsai (1996),
Chen and Chen (2003) and Chen (2004).
Although some improvements regarding optimization of
cutting parameters in multi-pass turning operations have
been achieved, due to the complexity of cutting parameters
with conicting objective and constraints, optimization of the
machining economic problems still presents a matter of inves-
tigation. Therefore, in recent years, the hybrid optimization
methods gained much attention to optimize machining eco-
nomic problems in manufacturing industry.
The goal of this research is to further develop and
strengthen the immune algorithm for solving real-world
design and manufacturing optimization problems in indus-
try. In this research, a new optimization approach based on
articial immune algorithm and hill climbing local search
algorithm is developed. The hybrid approach is evaluated
using a single-objective benchmark problem and multi-
objective disc-brake problem taken from literature and is
compared with other optimization methods. Finally, the
hybrid approach is applied to the two case studies for min-
imization of the unit production cost in multi-pass turning
operations. The convergence speed to global optimum of the
proposed optimization approach for multi-pass turning prob-
lemis better than that of Chen and Tsai (1996), Chen and Chen
(2003), Chen (2004) and Yildiz and Ozturk (2006). The results
of single-objective benchmark problem and multi-objective
disc-brake problem and case studies for multi-pass tuning
operation showthat the proposed optimization approach pro-
vides outstanding results for multi-pass turning operations in
nding better solutions compared to other approaches that
are representative of the state-of-the-art in the evolutionary
optimization literature.
The organization of the paper is as follows. Section
2 presents a detailed formulation of the objective and
constraints in multi-pass turning. The immune system is pre-
sented in Section 3. Section 4 proposes the hybrid immune
approach. The proposed approach has been tested on bench-
mark problems that are commonly used in the optimization
literature in Section 5. Two case studies are solved. The results
and discussions for case studies are given in Section 6. The
paper is concludedinSection7. Anapplicationof the proposed
hybrid approach to shape optimization of an automobile
component from automotive industry is given in Appendix
A.
2. Optimization model of multi-pass
turning operation
2.1. The objective function
In multi-pass turning operations, the goal is to minimize unit
production cost (UC). The unit production cost is the sum of
the cutting cost (C
M
), machine idle cost (C
I
), tool replacement
cost (C
R
) and tool cost (C
T
). The mathematical formulation of
the case study for multi-pass turning operations was dened
by Shin and Joo (1992) and Chen and Tsai (1996). More details
about the mathematical model can be obtained fromShin and
Joo (1992), Chen and Tsai (1996) and Chen (2004). The unit
production cost (UC) is dened as follows:
UC = C
M
+C
I
+C
R
+C
T
(1)
UC = k
0

DL
1000V
r

d
t
d
s
d
r

+
DL
1000V
s

+k
0

t
c
+(n
1
L +n
2
)

d
t
d
s
d
r
+1

+k
0
t
e
T
p

DL
1000V
r

d
t
d
s
d
r

+
DL
1000V
s

+
k
t
T
p

DL
1000V
r

d
t
d
s
d
r

+
DL
1000V
s

(2)
2.2. Parameter bounds and cutting condition
constraints
Inmulti-pass turning operations, the unit productioncost (UC)
is imposed by different constraints during the roughing and
nishing operations cover (i) parameter bounds cover depth of
cut, cutting speed and feed, (ii) tool-life constraint, (iii) cutting
force constraint, (iv) power constraint, (v) stable cutting region
constraint, (vi) chiptool interface temperature constraint, (vii)
surface nish constraint (only for nish machining) and (viii)
parameter relations. The constraints and design variables are
given in the following subsections.
2.2.1. Rough machining
Bounds ondepthof cut : d
rL
d
r
d
rU
(3)
Bounds onfeed :
rL

r

rU
(4)
Bounds oncutting speed : V
rL
V
r
V
rU
(5)
Tool-life constraint : T
L
T
r
T
U
(6)
Cutting force constraint : F
r
= k
1

j
r
d
u
r
F
U
(7)
Power constraint : P
r
=
k
1

j
r
d
u
r
V
r
6120j
P
U
(8)
Stable cutting regionconstraint : V
z
r

r
d
u
r
S
c
(9)
The constraint on the stable cutting region has been sug-
gested by Philipson and Ravindran (1979) in order to take into
account the prevention of chatter vibration, adhesion and for-
2776 j ournal of materi als processi ng technology 2 0 9 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 27732780
mation of a built-up edge. Eq. (9) adopted in this research for
determination of the stable cutting region was proposed by
Narang and Fischer (1993) for multi-pass turning operations.
z and u are constants pertaining to specic toolworkpiece
combinations. S
c
is the limit of the stable cutting region. The
values of z and S
c
are based on the values used by Philipson
and Ravindran (1979) while the value for u is assumed to be
that proposed by Narang and Fischer (1993).
Chiptool interface temperature constraint :
Q
r
= k
q
V
t
R

r
d

r
Q
U
(10)
2.2.2. Finish machining
Bounds ondepthof cut : d
sL
= d
s
= d
sU
(11)
Bounds onfeed :
sL
=
s
=
sU
(12)
Bounds oncutting speed : V
sL
V
s
V
sU
(13)
Tool-life constraint : T
L
= t
s
= T
U
(14)
Cutting force constraint : F
s
= k
1

j
s
d
u
s
F
U
(15)
Power constraint : P
s
=
k
1

j
s
d
u
s
V
s
6120j
P
U
(16)
Stable cutting regionconstraint : V
z
s

s
d
v
s
S
c
(17)
Chiptool interface temperature constraint :
Q
s
= k
2
V
t
s

s
d

s
Q
U
(18)
Surface nishconstraint :

2
s
8R
SR
U
(19)
2.3. Parameter relations
In addition to the constraints mentioned previously, the rela-
tions between the speed, feed and depth of cut in both
roughing and nishing must be dened (Chen and Tsai, 1996).
During rough machining, the values of the depth of cut and
feed are usually greater than that for nishing. Nevertheless,
the speed for roughing is usually less than that for nish-
ing. These relations are important in determining machining
parameters and can be expressed as:
V
s
k
3
V
r
(20)

r
k
4

s
(21)
d
r
k
5
d
s
(22)
where k
3
, k
4
, k
5
are relationship coefcients and k
3
, k
4
, k
5
1.
d
r
=
d
t
d
s
n
(23)
In addition to these constraints, the total depth of cut is
another important constraint for the case study. The total
depth of cut (d
t
) is the sum of the depth of nish cut (d
s
) and
the total depth of rough cut (nd
r
). The optimization algorithm
does not determine the optimal depth of roughing since it can
be given by the mathematical manipulation as expressed in
Eq. (24).
d
s
= d
t
nd
r
(24)
Therefore, the equality constraint and the decision variable
(d
r
) and (n) in the optimization procedure can be eliminated.
The ve machining parameters (V
r
, f
r
, d
s
, V
s
, f
s
) are determined
for turning model optimization. Further details about the turn-
ing mathematical model and data with respect to machining
can be obtained fromShin and Joo (1992), Chen and Tsai (1996)
and Chen (2004).
3. The immune system
The human immune system has a vital role to protect our
body health from infectious foreign organisms like virus and
bacteria. The immune system needs to distinguish all cells (or
molecules) withinour body andcategorize these cells as self or
non-self. While the disease causing external cells are called as
non-self its ownharmless cells are calledas self. There are sev-
eral types of immune cells in immune system. Lymphocytes
are the main type of immune cells and are classied as T
and B cells. B-cells are capable of recognizing antigens free
in the blood stream whereas T-cells can recognize via other
accessory cells.
The immune algorithm used in this paper is based on
the clonal selection and afnity maturation principles of
the immune system. Clonal selection mechanism is used
to explain how an immune response is given when a non-
self antigenic pattern is recognized by a B-cell. De Castro
and Zuben (2000) developed the clonal selection algorithm
(CSA) based on clonal selection to solve engineering problems.
In their paper, they presented the overview of this mecha-
nism from the points of view of immunology and engineering
problems. Another mechanism in immune system is afnity
maturation. The two main mechanisms of afnity matura-
tionare hypermutationandreceptor editing. Randomchanges
(mutations) happen in the variable region genes of antibody
molecules and cause structurally different cells. Rarely, one
such change will lead to an increase in the afnity of the
antibody (Fig. 1).
The last stage of articial immune system is receptor edit-
ing. After cloning and mutation processes are completed,
a percentage of antibodies in the antibody population are
replaced with antibodies created randomly. This process is
called receptor editing. The receptor editing mechanismintro-
duces diversity and helps to escape from local optima on an
afnity landscape and leading to possible new candidates.
4. The proposed hybrid optimization
approach
In this paper, a hybrid immune-hill climbing algorithm (HIHC)
is presented. In the hybrid algorithm, after the problem is
j ournal of materi als processi ng technology 2 0 9 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 27732780 2777
dened, rstly an initial population of antibodies is randomly
generated within the range of design variables. Each antibody
(B-cell) in the population denes a possible solution to the
problem. The afnity (tness) values of the antibodies in the
population are calculated. Depending on the quality of the
afnity values, a decision is made about which antibodies
to copy. At the second stage, a mutation process is applied
to the antibodies. When the mutation process is applied to
an antibody in the population, if the afnity value of the
new antibody is better than that before mutation, the new
antibody is kept in the population. Otherwise, the old anti-
body is kept in population. The mutation process is applied
to each antibody in the population. After the mutation pro-
cess, receptor editing is applied to the antibody population.
In the receptor editing process, a percentage of antibodies in
the antibody population are replaced with antibodies created
randomly.
The nal step of the proposed hybrid approach is
a local search with the hill climbing algorithm. In the
hybrid approach, the optimum result (nearly global) obtained
by the immune algorithm is used as a starting point
for the tuning of the parameters by the hill climbing
local search algorithm to reach to the global optimum.
The pseudo-code of the proposed algorithm is given as
follows.
Fig. 1 The clonal selection principle (De Castro and Zuben,
2000).
5. Evaluation of proposed approach using
engineering optimization problem
In order to evaluate the performance of the hybrid approach,
it is rstly applied to a single-objective benchmark prob-
lem and multi-objective disc-brake problem taken from the
literature. After it is shown that the proposed approach is
successful at optimizing the single and multi-objective opti-
mization problems, it is applied to two case studies for
multi-pass turning operation. Although the articial immune
algorithmhas beenusedfor several optimizationapplications,
it has not yet been reported in the literature for optimization
of machining parameters in turning operation.
5.1. Single-objective test problem
The rst test problem is a minimization problem for a single-
objective function with thirteen variables and nine inequality
constraints. The problem is employed by several authors to
evaluate the performance of their new methods. The problem
is dened as follows:
Minimize:
(x) = 5
4

i=1
x
i
5
4

i=1
x
i
2
5
13

i=5
x
i
(25)
Subject to:
g
1
(x) = 2x
1
+2x
2
+x
10
+x
11
10 0 (26)
g
2
(x) = 2x
1
+2x
3
+x
10
+x
12
10 0 (27)
g
3
(x) = 2x
2
+2x
3
+x
11
+x
12
10 0 (28)
2778 j ournal of materi als processi ng technology 2 0 9 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 27732780
Table 1 Statistical results of different methods for test problem
Design variables Best Mean Worst S.D. Function evaluations
HIHC 15 14.8266 14.3417 0.145 120,000
Coello and Cortes (2004) 14.7841 14.5266 13.8417 0.2335 150,000
Yoo and Hajela (1999) 5.2735 3.7435 2.4255 0.9696 150,000
g
4
(x) = 8x
1
+x
10
0 (29)
g
5
(x) = 8x
2
+x
11
0 (30)
g
6
(x) = 8x
3
+x
12
0 (31)
g
7
(x) = 2x
4
x
5
+x
10
0 (32)
g
8
(x) = 2x
6
x
7
+x
11
0 (33)
g
9
(x) = 2x
8
x
9
+x
12
0 (34)
where 0x
i
1 (i =1, . . ., 9), 0x
i
100 (i =10,
11, 12) and 0x
13
1. The global optimum is at
x
*
=(1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,3,3,3,1) where f(x
*
) =15.
The parameters used by the hybrid approach for optimiza-
tion process are the following:
(a) antibody size: 80;
(b) maximum number of generations: 1500;
(c) number of objective function evaluations: 120,000.
The efciency of each approach can be measured by com-
paring the number of function evaluations, which is equal to
the antibody size (population size) and multiplied by the num-
ber of generations as each solution is evaluated once in every
generation. In the evolutionary optimization techniques, the
aim is to nd the optimum results with minimum number of
function evaluations. In this paper, the HIHC is run 30 times
independently.
The results of the HIHC for rst test problem are compared
against those provided by Coello and Cortes (2004). HIHC pro-
vides better solutions to this problem compared with those
given in Table 1 as far as the number of function evaluations,
the best solution computed and the statistical analysis results
are taken into account together.
The statistical values of HIHC show the robustness of the
solutions with the standard deviation of 0.145. The standard
deviation is very low, which indicates that HIHC is among the
most robust approach in nding an optimum solution.
Coello and Cortes (2004) found the best solution 14.7841
for 150,000 function evaluations with standard deviation of
0.2335.
The use of the HIHCimproves the convergence rate by com-
puting the best value 15 with respect to very low standard
deviation 0.145 and maintaining the less function evaluations
120,000.
5.2. Multi-objective disc-brake optimization problem
The second problem is the multi-objective disc-brake opti-
mization problem, which was solved by Osyczka and Kundu
(1996) to evaluate the performance of their method. It is
given here to illustrate the effects of the proposed algorithm
against other algorithms for solving multi-objective optimiza-
tionproblems. OsyczkaandKundu(1996) usedplainstochastic
method and genetic algorithms for optimization of disc-brake
problem. The objectives of the problem are to minimize the
mass of the brake andtominimize the stopping time. The disc-
brake optimization model has four variables that are x
1
, inner
radius of the discs; x
2
, outer radius of the discs; x
3
, engaging
force; and x
4
, number of the friction surfaces. The objective
functions and constraints of the disc-brake design optimiza-
tion model provided by Osyczka and Kundu (1996) are dened
as follows:
Objective functions:

1
(x) = 4.9 10
5
(x
2
2
x
1
2
)(x
4
1) (35)

2
(x) =
9.82 10
6
(x
2
2
x
2
1
)
x
3
x
4
(x
3
2
x
3
1
)
(36)
Table 2 Comparison of the extreme points obtained
from plain stochastic method, GA and HIHC
Method Minima F(X) =[f
1
(x), f
2
(x), f
3
(x)]
T
Plain stochastic
method
minf
1
(x) [1.79, 2.77, 2920.9]
minf
2
(x) [3.76, 2.24, 2948.4]
minf
3
(x) [3.25, 2.80, 2309.2]
Genetic algorithm minf
1
(x) [1.66, 2.87, 2982.4]
minf
2
(x) [3.25, 2.11, 2988.3]
minf
3
(x) [3.91, 2.86, 2255.1]
The proposed hybrid
approach (HIHC)
minf
1
(x) [0.137, 25.87,1794,7]
minf
2
(x) [2.816, 2.083,2999.2]
minf
3
(x) [2.515, 10.027,1000.004]
Table 3 Data for the example of multi-pass turning
D=50mm L =300mm d
t
=6.0mm
V
rU
=500m/min V
rL
=50m/min f
rU
=0.9mm/rev
f
rL
=0.1mm/rev d
rU
=3.0mm d
rL
=1.0mm
V
sU
=500m/min V
sL
=50m/min f
sU
=0.9mm/rev
f
sL
=0.1mm/rev d
sU
=3.0mm d
sL
=1.0mm
k
o
=0.5US$/min k
t
=2.5US$/edge h
1
=710
4
h
2
=0.3 t
c
=0.75min/piece t
e
=1.5min/edge
p=5 q=1.75 r =0.75
C
0
=610
11
T
U
=45min T
L
=25min
k
f
=108 j=0.75 u =0.95
j =0.85 F
U
=200kgf PU=5kW
z =2 v =1 S
c
=140
k
q
=132 t =0.4 =0.2
=0.105 Q
U
=1000

C R
n
=1.2mm
R
a
=10 k
1
=1.0 k
2
=2.5
k
3
=1.0
j ournal of materi als processi ng technology 2 0 9 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 27732780 2779
Table 4 Comparison of the best computed optimum results for turning problem
HIHC AIA HRGA SS SA/HJPS FEGA
Case 1: cost (US$) (d
t
=6mm) 2.0468 2.1230 2.0481 2.0667 2.2795 2.2988
Case 2: cost (US$) (d
t
=8mm) 2.4794 2.5148 2.4806 2.5417 2.7411 2.8170
HIHC: hybrid immune and hill climbing; AIA: articial immune algorithm; HRGA: hybrid robust genetic algorithm; SS: scatter search; SA/HJPS:
simulated annealing and Hooke-Jeeves pattern search; FEGA: oat encoding genetic algorithm.
Subject to:
g
1
(x) = (x
2
x
1
) 20 0 (37)
g
2
(x) = 30 2.5(x
4
+1) 0 (38)
g
3
(x) = 0.4
x
3
3.14(x
2
2
x
1
2
)
0 (39)
g
4
(x) = 1
2.66 10
3
x
3
(x
3
2
x
3
1
)
(x
2
2
x
2
1
)
2
0 (40)
g
5
(x) =
2.66 10
2
x
3
x
4
(x
3
2
x
3
1
)
(x
2
2
x
2
1
)
900 0 (41)
Side constraints :
55 x
1
80. 75 x
2
110. 1000 x
3
30000; 2 x
4
20
(42)
x
4
integer (43)
The parameters used by the hybrid approach for optimiza-
tion process are the following:
(a) antibody size: 50;
(b) maximum number of generations: 200;
(c) number of objective function evaluations: 10,000.
The results of the proposed hybrid approach are compared
with respect to the number of optimal Pareto front solutions
and evaluations taken from the previous solutions reported
in literature. The optimal Pareto front consists of 784 points
obtainedby HIHCafter 10,000 evaluations. Osyczka andKundu
(1996) reported 19 Pareto-optimal solutions for the multiple
disc brake using the plain stochastic method, and 133 solu-
tions with GA method after 20,000 evaluations. It can be seen
that the results found by the proposed hybrid approach are
better than the results of Osyczka and Kundu (1996) with less
function evaluations. Osyczka and Kundu (1996) also reported
the extreme points (i.e. minimum value points for each sep-
arate criterion) obtained from both methods in their paper.
Comparison of the extreme points obtained by three methods
is given in Table 2.
Inconclusion, the results are better thansolutions obtained
by Osyczka and Kundu (1996) in terms of Pareto-optimal solu-
tions and computational efciency in terms of less function
evaluations against those provided Pareto-optimal front solu-
tions and function evaluations.
6. Case study of computational machining
optimization
The hybrid approach is applied for solving the turning opti-
mization problem with the model and data provided in the
references of Shin and Joo (1992), Chen and Tsai (1996) and
Chen (2004). The two case studies for the multi-pass turning
operation are optimized using the proposed hybrid approach.
The constant values and parameters for case 1 are presented
in Table 3.
The total dept of cutting for case 1 is set with d
t
=6 and it is
set with d
t
=8 for case 2. The parameters used by the proposed
approach for optimization search process are the following:
(a) antibody size: 90;
(b) maximum number of generations: 300;
(c) number of objective function evaluations: 27,000.
From the comparison of best results given in Table 4, it
is seen that the minimization of the unit production cost in
multi-pass turning operation is achieved by proposed hybrid
approach.
The comparison of the results obtained by the proposed
approach, against other techniques, is given in Table 4. Func-
tion evaluation numbers are 40.000 and 60.000 to nd optimal
solutions for HRGA and FEGA, respectively. The HIHC also
improves the convergence rate by computing the best value
and maintaining the less function evaluations 27,000. It can
be seen that better results for the best computed solutions
are achieved for the turning optimization problem compared
to HRGA, SS (scatter search), FEGA (oat encoding GA) and
SA/HJPS as shown in Table 4. The results of this research indi-
cate that HIHC can offer a helpful potential as an alternative
approach for applications to the optimization of design and
manufacturing problems.
7. Conclusion
In this research, a hybrid immune-hill climbing optimization
algorithm is presented for global optimization in design and
manufacturing. The hybrid optimization approach is based
on immune algorithm inspired from human immune system
and hill climbing local search algorithm. The HIHC is applied
to the single benchmark problem, multi-objective disc brake
problem, shape design optimization problem and also to the
optimization of machining parameters in multi-pass turning
operation. The results of best known values of the single-
objective test problem, multi-objective disc-brake problem
2780 j ournal of materi als processi ng technology 2 0 9 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 27732780
Table 5 Comparison of the design optimization results for side door bracket
Methods x
1
(mm) x
2
(mm) x
3
(mm) x
4
(mm) Volume (cm
3
) Frequency (Hz) Stress (MPa)
The proposed hybrid approach (HIHC) 30 26.74 13.12 44.8 16,648 9.31 295
Hybrid genetic algorithm 30 26.7 12.6 44.4 16,754 9.3 291
Genetic algorithm (GA) 26.8 26.5 11.6 42.3 17,663 8.8 293
CAD optimum design 22 27 13.1 36.7 18,763 8.1 277
Topology optimization 18 24 11 32 20,727 8.3 256
and case studies for multi-pass turning optimization indicate
that the HIHC is effective optimization method for opti-
mization of machining parameters in nding better solutions
compared to other approaches that are representative of the
state-of-the-art in the evolutionary optimization literature.
Appendix A
A.1. An example from automobile industry
The example is considered to evaluate the HIHC and to
illustrate howit can be applied for shape optimization of auto-
mobile components. Most of the shape optimization problems
in automotive industry are usually multi-objective, often con-
icting. The aimof the problemis tondoptimumshape of the
side door part of a commercial vehicle. Further details about
gure and design variables of the side door part can be found
in Yildiz et al. (2007). The objective functions are due to the
volume and the frequency of the part that is to be designed
for minimum volume and avoiding critical frequency subject
to strength constraints. Multi-objective shape optimization is
performedusing HIHC. The comparisonof the results provided
by HIHC, against other techniques, is given in Table 5.
r e f e r e nce s
Chen, M.C., Tsai, D.M., 1996. A simulated annealing approach for
optimization of multi-pass turning operations. International
Journal of Production Research 34, 28032825.
Chen, M.C., Chen, K.Y., 2003. Optimization of multi-pass turning
operations with genetic algorithms: a note. International
Journal of Production Research 41, 33853388.
Chen, M.C., 2004. Optimizing machining economics models of
turning operations using the scatter search approach.
International Journal of Production Research 42, 26112625.
Coello, C.A.C., Cortes, N.C., 2004. Hybridizing a genetic algorithm
with an articial immune system for global optimization.
Engineering Optimization 36, 607634.
De Castro, L.N., Von Zuben, F.J., 2000. The clonal selection
algorithm with engineering applications. In: Proceedings of
the Workshop on GECCO 2000, Las Vegas, July 812,
pp. 3637.
Narang, R.V., Fischer, G.W., 1993. Development of a frame work to
automate process planning functions and to determine
machining parameters. International Journal of Production
Research 31, 19211942.
Onwubolu, G.C., Kumalo, T., 2001. Optimization of multi-pass
turning operation with genetic algorithm. International
Journal of Production Research 39, 3727
3745.
Osyczka, A., Kundu, S., 1996. A modied distance method for
multicriteria optimization using genetic algorithms.
Computers and Industrial Engineering 30, 871882.
Philipson, R.H., Ravindran, A., 1979. Application of mathematical
programming to metal cutting. Mathematical Programming
Study 11, 116134.
Shin, Y.C., Joo, Y.S., 1992. Optimization of machining conditions
with practical constraints. International Journal of Production
Research 30, 29072919.
Vijayakumar, K., Prabhaharan, G., Asokan, P., Saravanan, R., 2003.
Optimization of multi-pass turning operation using ant
colony system. International Journal of Machine Tools and
Manufacture 43, 16331639.
Wang, Z.G., Wong, Y.S., Rahman, M., 2004. Optimisation of
multi-pass milling using genetic algorithm and genetic
simulated annealing. International Journal Advanced
Manufacturing Technology 24, 727732.
Yildiz, A.R., Ozturk, F., 2006. Hybrid enhanced genetic algorithm
to select optimal machining parameters in turning operation.
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part B
Journal of Engineering Manufacture 220 (12), 20412053.
Yildiz, A.R., Ozturk, N., Kaya, N., Ozturk, F., 2007. Hybrid
multi-objective shape design optimization using Taguchi
method and genetic algorithm. Structural and
Multidisciplinary Optimization 34, 277365.