2004 Design Optimization of The Blow Moulding Process Using A Fuzzy Optimization Algorithm - DPF
2004 Design Optimization of The Blow Moulding Process Using A Fuzzy Optimization Algorithm - DPF
2004 Design Optimization of The Blow Moulding Process Using A Fuzzy Optimization Algorithm - DPF
Abstract: Blow moulding is the forming of a hollow part by `blowing’ a mould cavity shaped parison
made by a thermoplastic molten tube. Blow-moulded parts often require strict control of the thickness
distribution in order to achieve the required mechanical performance and ®nal weight. A fuzzy
optimization algorithm for determining the optimal die gap openings and die geometry for the
required thickness distribution in the blow moulding process is presented. The idea of the fuzzy
optimization algorithm is that, instead of using purely numerical information to obtain the new
design point in the next iteration, engineering knowledge and the human supervision process can be
modelled in the optimization algorithm using fuzzy rules. The structure of an optimization
algorithm is still maintained to guide the engineering decision process and to ensure that an optimal
solution rather than a trial and error solution can be obtained. It is shown how a single fuzzy
engine can be used in various cases and types of optimization of the blow moulding process.
model. Design modi®cations in the optimization process A fuzzy system is characterized by a collection of
rely on numerical information rather than engineering linguistic statements based on expert knowledge. The
heuristics, experience and knowledge. This paper develops linguistic statements are usually in the form of if±then
a `fuzzy optimization algorithm’ for engineering optimiza- rules. As shown in Fig. 4, if the relations between the
tion problems, which enables the use of engineering heur- system process input xq (die gap openings) and system
istics to generate the new design point of the next process output yq (thickness distribution) and ¢yq are
iteration. The structure of an optimization algorithm is known empirically (reducing the die gap opening will
still maintained to guide the engineering decision process reduce the thickness of the corresponding portion of
and to ensure that an optimal solution rather than a the ®nal part, and vice versa), a fuzzy logic engine instead
trial and error solution can be obtained. Currently, this of a numerical optimization algorithm can be used to
fuzzy optimization algorithm is developed speci®cally generate the system process input change rate ¢xq
for engineering optimization problems whose objective according to a set of domain parameters given by the
functions are in the form of equation (1). users.
This paper ®rstly explains the concept of fuzzy optimi- Arakawa and Yamakawa [5] demonstrated an optimi-
zation algorithms. The blow moulding process optimiza- zation method using qualitative reasoning, which makes
tion results are presented to demonstrate the generality use of qualitative information giving an approximate
of this approach to various optimization cases in di er- direction of the optimum search. Hsu et al. [6] proposed
ent application domains. a fuzzy optimization algorithm and applied it for deter-
mining the `move limit’, which is an important optimiza-
tion process parameter in the sequential linear
2 CONCEPT OF `FUZZY OPTIMIZATION programming algorithm. Mulkay and Rao [7] also pro-
ALGORITHMS’ posed a modi®ed sequential linear programming algo-
rithm using fuzzy heuristics to control the optimization
As shown in Fig. 4, the optimization process can be parameters. Arabshahi et al. [8] pointed out that many
viewed as a closed-loop control system. In the case of optimization techniques involve parameters that are
blow moulding process optimization, BlowSim is analo- often adapted by the user through trial and error, experi-
gous to the system process to be controlled, whereas an ence and other insight. Instead, they applied neural and
optimization algorithm is analogous to the controller. In fuzzy ideas adaptively to select these parameters.
the qth iteration, BlowSim simulation results (thickness In these papers, fuzzy heuristics were used to control
distribution yq ) are input to the optimization algorithm, the parameters of the optimization algorithm to improve
which in turn generates the change in die gap openings, its performance. The following sections demonstrate
¢xq , according to its search rules. Die gap openings for how engineering heuristics can also be modelled into
the next iteration are updated …xq ‡ 1 ˆ xq ‡ ¢xq † and the fuzzy optimization algorithm for optimization of
simulated again using BlowSim to continue the iteration. the blow moulding process.
Finally, a control system attempts to achieve a stable,
prede®ned output. The optimization process pursues a
converging objective function value. 3 DIE GAP OPENING OPTIMIZATION FOR A
When traditional numerical optimization algorithms CONSTANT PART THICKNESS
are applied to an engineering problem, the engineering
problem is treated as a pure mathematical problem. The bottle case study in Fig. 3 was ®rstly used to illus-
Engineering heuristics are totally ignored. This motivates trate the fuzzy optimization algorithm. In this example,
the idea that, in addition to crisp numerical rules, the it is hoped to manipulate the die gap openings at seven
engineering heuristics such as `reduction in the die gap discrete programming points (xi , i ˆ 1, . . . , 7) to obtain
opening if the corresponding portion of the ®nal part is a uniform wall thickness part of 2 mm. Therefore, in
too thick, and vice versa’ should also be modelled in the objective function equation (1), Y ˆ 2. Note that
the optimization algorithm using fuzzy rules. As sug- the die gap opening at a discrete time point xi may
gested in Fig. 4, the `controllers’ in the optimization a ect the thickness of many nodes. BlowSim provides
process may as well be fuzzy controllers! the `average weighted thickness’ y·i of all nodes a ected
Table 1 Quantization table Table 2 shows the results for the ®rst two iterations of the
bottle example. Initially, the die gap openings are set at
Boundaries of fuzzy Boundaries of fuzzy Quantized
input, y·i output, ¢xi level
50 per cent for all seven programming points. From
BlowSim simulation, the average weighted thickness
Y ‡ … y·i, max ¢ Y † xi, max ¢ xi 2 varies from 1.341 to 5.119 mm, and the objective func-
Y ‡ … y·i, max ¢ Y †=2 …xi, max ¢ xi †=2 1
Yj 0 0
tion value is 0.82. Then, the fuzzy engine generates the
Y ¢ …Y ¢ y·i, min †=2 …xi, min ¢ xi †=2 1 change in die gap openings ¢xi , and the die gap openings
Y ¢ …Y ¢ y·i, min † xi, min ¢ xi 2 at the seven programming points are updated. From
BlowSim simulation, the average weighted thickness
now varies from 1.374 to 3.262 mm, and the objective
by xi . As discussed earlier, designers usually adjust the
function value is reduced to 0.78. The fuzzy engine
die gap openings empirically: reduce the die gap opening
then generates ¢xi for this iteration, and the die gap
if the corresponding portion of the ®nal part is too thick,
openings are updated again.
and vice versa. This engineering heuristic indicates that
Referring to Fig. 4, in the optimization iterations, the
the average weighted thickness of a certain portion, y·i ,
objective function is expected to ¯atten out when
is a monotonic increasing function with respect to the
approaching convergence. However, in reality, the objec-
corresponding die gap opening, xj , and can be expressed
tive function value might `overshoot’ when approaching
by ®ve rules:
convergence. In many numerical optimization algo-
1. If y·i is PB, then ¢xi is NB. rithms, a scalar multiplier ¬q (often called the `step
2. If y·i is PS, then ¢xi is NS. size’) determining the amount of change for this iteration
3. If y·i is ZE, then ¢xi is ZE. is introduced, and xq ‡ 1 ˆ xq ‡ ¬q ¢xq [9]. Usually, ¬ is
4. If y·i is NS, then ¢xi is PS. adjusted dynamically throughout the iteration process.
5. If y·i is NB, then ¢xi is PB. The heuristics for adjusting ¬ are simply to reduce it if
the change in objective function value is big, and vice
The quantization table (Table 1) gives quantitative
versa. Obviously, this can also be expressed by the
de®nitions for PB (positive big), PS (positive small), ZE
same ®ve rules previously discussed. In the examples in
(zero), NS (negative small) and NB (negative big).
this paper, initially ¬0 ˆ 1, and, in the iteration process,
There are ®ve `domain parameters’ in Table 1 to be
¬ is adjusted using the same fuzzy engine. If the change in
determined by the user according to the application
objective function is big (the objective function increases
problem. The de®nitions of the ®ve domain parameters
rather than decreases), ¬ in the next iteration will be
and their numerical values for the bottle case example
reduced to 0.5±1.0 times of that of the current iteration.
are as follows:
The current iteration will be given up if the increase in the
Y ˆ target thickness (2 mm) objective function is larger than 10 per cent.
y·i, min ˆ minimum value of average weighted thickness Finally, Fig. 5a shows the iteration history for the
(0 mm for all programming points) bottle case, including the history of the objective function
y·i, max ˆ maximum value of average weighted value and the step size to show the e ect of the step size
thickness (4 mm for all programming points) control. Figure 5b compares the initial (50 per cent die
xi, min ˆ minimum allowable die gap opening gap openings for all programming points) and ®nal die
(5 per cent for all programming points) gap openings, and Fig. 5c compares the average weighted
xi, max ˆ maximum allowable die gap opening thickness of the initial and ®nal design at the seven
(95 per cent for all programming points) programming points.
Table 2 Results for the ®rst two iterations of the bottle example
Programming points
Objective
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 function value
Initial values
xi (%) 50 50 50 50 50 50 50
y·i (mm) 5.119 2.671 1.362 1.341 1.858 3.957 4.828 0.82263
¢xi (%) ¢ 34.604 ¢ 15.623 14.336 14.791 2.787 ¢ 33.998 ¢ 34.604
First iteration
xi (%) 15.396 34.377 64.336 64.791 52.787 16.002 15.396
y·i (mm) 3.258 1.374 1.938 2.29 2.015 2.846 3.262 0.77913
¢xi (%) ¢ 5.151 18.928 0.835 ¢ 18.767 ¢ 0.3119 ¢ 4.475 ¢ 5.159
Second iteration
xi (%) 10.256 53.305 65.171 46.025 52.475 11.528 10.237
y·i (mm) 3.453 2.292 1.978 1.212 1.652 2.696 3.042 0.61265
¢xi (%) ¢ 2.842 ¢ 6.330 0.2905 18.902 6.788 ¢ 2.263 ¢ 2.398
Fig. 5 Die gap opening optimization results for the bottle case study using seven programming points
Downloaded
Proc. Instn Mech. Engrs Vol. 218 Part B: J. Engineering from pib.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on June 10, 2015
Manufacture B03803 # IMechE 2004
DESIGN OPTIMIZATION OF THE BLOW MOULDING PROCESS 203
Fig. 6 Die gap opening optimization results of the bottle case study using 31 programming points
Fig. 8 Die gap opening optimization results for the ¯uid reservoir case
sections or `die points’ at di erent angular positions. geometry. For unsymmetrical parts, GapMin and
Figure 9 shows the geometry of a typical bushing and GapMax at each die point should be optimized ®rst to
mandrel die head components. GapMin is de®ned as obtain a die geometry that is suitable for the shape of
the e ective die gap for 0 per cent die gap opening the unsymmetrical part. Then the die gap opening opti-
Dob ¢ Dom mization is carried out to obtain a part with constant
GapMin ˆ …2† thickness using this die geometry. BlowSim also provides
2
the average weighted thickness of all nodes a ected by a
and GapMax is de®ned as the e ective die gap for 100 die point.
per cent die gap opening Here, the die geometry optimization manipulates only
Dob ¢ Dim GapMax while keeping GapMin ®xed. The objective is
GapMax ˆ …3† to obtain constant average weighted thickness for all
2
die points. The engineering heuristics for adjusting
For symmetrical parts with circular cross-sections, a GapMax are the same as those for adjusting die gap
uniform thickness can be obtained using circular die openings: reduce GapMax if the corresponding average
B03803 # IMechE 2004 Downloaded from pib.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SANProc.
DIEGOInstn
on JuneMech.
10, 2015Engrs Vol. 218 Part B: J. Engineering Manufacture
208 Y-L HSU, T-C LIU, F THIBAULT AND B LANCTOT
weighted thickness is too large, and vice versa. Obviously of the parameters have been changed, though the same
this can also be expressed by the same ®ve fuzzy rules fuzzy engine is used. In this case, the die gap openings
previously discussed. Note that the objective function were kept at 50 per cent during the die geometry optimi-
used here is to minimize the deviation of the average zation, and GapMin was ®xed at 3 mm. Figure 10a
weighted thickness of the die points from the target shows that after 11 iterations, the fuzzy optimization
thickness. Moreover, in die geometry optimization, xi algorithm converged to the expected circular die geome-
becomes the GapMax at die point i. try shown in Fig. 10b because the bottle is a symmetrical
The bottle case in Fig. 3 was used again to verify the part. A total of 11 BlowSim simulations were needed.
results of die geometry optimization using the fuzzy Figure 10c shows that the ®nal average weighted thick-
optimization algorithm. As shown in Fig. 10b, a non- ness of all die points are close to the target thickness of
circular initial die geometry was deliberately created for 2 mm.
validation purposes. The domain parameters are: The die geometry optimization process was then
Y ˆ 2 mm, y·i, min ˆ 0 mm, y·i, max ˆ 4 mm, xi, min ˆ 3 mm applied to the windshield washer ¯uid reservoir in
and xi, max ˆ 13 mm. Note that the de®nitions of some Fig. 7. In this case the die gap openings were kept at 50
Downloaded
Proc. Instn Mech. Engrs Vol. 218 Part B: J. Engineering from pib.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on June 10, 2015
Manufacture B03803 # IMechE 2004
DESIGN OPTIMIZATION OF THE BLOW MOULDING PROCESS 209
Y 2 mm 2 mm
y·i, max 4 mm 4 mm
y·i, min 0 mm 0 mm
xi, max 20 mm 95%
xi, min 2 mm 5%
Y 5 mm 5 mm
y·i, max 10 mm 10 mm
y·i, min 0 mm 0 mm
xi, max 40 mm 95%
xi, min 2 mm 5%
Fig. 12 Geometry of the jerry can
Fig. 14 Die geometry and die gap opening optimization results for the jerry can case
were kept at 50 per cent during the die geometry optimiza- were kept at 50 per cent during the die geometry optimi-
tion. The die geometry optimization process terminated zation. The die geometry optimization process termi-
after ®ve iterations. Die gap opening optimization was nated after 11 iterations. Figure 15a shows the initial
then applied to the jerry can example using the ®nal die and ®nal die geometry. Die gap opening optimization
geometry shown in Fig. 14a. Eleven programming was then applied to the gas tank example using the
points were used. The die gap opening optimization termi- ®nal die geometry shown in Fig. 15a. Twenty program-
nated after 20 iterations. Figure 14b shows the ®nal die ming points were used. The die gap opening optimization
gap openings. The objective function value drops from terminated after 13 iterations. Figure 15b shows the ®nal
0.84 of the initial design to 0.62 of the ®nal design, and die gap openings. The objective function value drops
a total of 5 ‡ 20 ˆ 25 BlowSim simulations were needed. from 1.89 of the initial design to 1.32 of the ®nal
In the gas tank example, eight die points were used, design, and a total of 11 ‡ 13 ˆ 24 BlowSim simulations
GapMin was ®xed at 2 mm and the die gap openings were needed.
Downloaded
Proc. Instn Mech. Engrs Vol. 218 Part B: J. Engineering from pib.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on June 10, 2015
Manufacture B03803 # IMechE 2004
DESIGN OPTIMIZATION OF THE BLOW MOULDING PROCESS 211
Downloaded
Proc. Instn Mech. Engrs Vol. 218 Part B: J. Engineering from pib.sagepub.com at UNIV CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on June 10, 2015
Manufacture B03803 # IMechE 2004