Prediction of surface roughness in boring of 1.2311 material using machine learning enhanced by virtual sampling methods
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Accurate prediction of surface roughness is essential for quality assurance in boring operations. However, the long and slender structure of boring bars induces dynamic effects that make obtaining consistent surface quality challenging, while extensive experiments are costly and time-consuming. Traditional regression models fall short in predictive performance and cannot adequately capture the nonlinear interactions between cutting parameters. This study presents a machine learning-based methodology to estimate the surface roughness of 1.2311 plastic mold steel during boring on a milling machine. The primary objective is to model the connection between boring variables and hole quality under limited data conditions (72 data points). To overcome insufficient samples, the proposed framework integrates feature augmentation, principal component analysis (PCA), and virtual sampling (VSG) (0 to 500 in increments of 50) with different interpolation techniques. Results indicate that weighted interpolation-based VSG after feature space expansion significantly improves prediction accuracy by strengthening the representation of cutting parameter–Ra relationships. The highest-performing model, combining the Decision Tree algorithm with weighted interpolation and augmented features, achieved a minimum a Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) of 0.28 μm and Mean Absolute Percentage Error (MAPE) of 12.42%. Compared to models trained solely on real experimental data, prediction accuracy improved by 61.9% in MAPE and 34.88% in RMSE, demonstrating the effectiveness of the proposed virtual sampling and feature engineering strategy under limited experimental data conditions. The findings highlight how structured data enhancement can improve surface roughness prediction in milling-based boring and support more reliable process planning.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Advanced machining processes and optimization · Advanced Surface Polishing Techniques · Scientific and Engineering Research Topics
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (51)
Show source-provided references
1. Yildiz Y, Gunay M, Seker U (2007) The effect of the cutting fluid on surface roughness in boring of low carbon steel–technical communication. Mach Sci Technol 11(4):553–560. https://doi.org/10.1080/1091034070169705210.1080/10910340701697052 ↗
2. Siyambaş Y, Turgut Y (2023) Experimental and statistical investigation of mechanical properties and surface roughness in additive manufacturing with selective laser melting of AlSi10Mg alloy. J Braz Soc Mech Sci Eng 45(10):515. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40430-023-04445-x10.1007/s40430-023-04445-x ↗
3. Liu Y, Wang T, Chu F (2024) Hybrid machine condition monitoring based on interpretable dual tree methods using Wasserstein metrics. Expert Syst Appl 235:121104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2023.12110410.1016/j.eswa.2023.121104 ↗
4. Arsuaga M, de Lacalle LL, Lobato R, Urbikain G, Campa F (2012) Effect of centrifugal forces on dimensional error of bored shapes. in AIP Conference Proceedings. American Institute of Physics. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.470762410.1063/1.4707624 ↗
5. Valdivielso F (2012) Instrumentation and Control Methodology For Zero Defect Manufacturing In Boring Operations. Annals of Daaam & Proceedings 23(1)
6. Atabey F, Lazoglu I, Altintas Y (2003) Mechanics of boring processes—Part I. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 43(5):463–476. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0890-6955(02)00276-610.1016/S0890-6955(02)00276-6 ↗
7. Lacerda HB, Siqueira IL (2012) Blade geometry effects on the boring of valve seats of internal combustion engines. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 63:269–280. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-012-3905-x10.1007/s00170-012-3905-x ↗
8. Akman M, Uçar M, Uçar Z, Uçar K, Baraklı B, Bozkurt M (2022) Determination of body fat percentage by gender based with photoplethysmography signal using machine learning algorithm. IRBM 43(3):169–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irbm.2020.12.00310.1016/j.irbm.2020.12.003 ↗
9. Uçar MK, Ucar Z, Köksal F, Daldal N (2021) Estimation of body fat percentage using hybrid machine learning algorithms. Measurement 167:108173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2020.10817310.1016/j.measurement.2020.108173 ↗
10. Cui C, Tang J, Xia H, Qiao J, Yu W (2023) Virtual sample generation method based on generative adversarial fuzzy neural network. Neural Comput Appl 35(9):6979–7001. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-022-08104-510.1007/s00521-022-08104-5 ↗
11. Song X-L, He Y-L, Li X-Y, Zhu Q-X, Xu Y (2023) Novel virtual sample generation method based on data augmentation and weighted interpolation for soft sensing with small data. Expert Syst Appl 225:120085. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2023.12008510.1016/j.eswa.2023.120085 ↗
12. He Y-L, Hua Q, Zhu Q-X, Lu S (2022) Enhanced virtual sample generation based on manifold features: applications to developing soft sensor using small data. ISA Trans 126:398–406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isatra.2021.07.03310.1016/j.isatra.2021.07.033 ↗
13. Hu H, Song Y, Yu J, Liu Y, Chen F (2022) The application of support vector regression and virtual sample generation technique in the optimization design of transonic compressor. Aerosp Sci Technol 130:107814. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2022.10781410.1016/j.ast.2022.107814 ↗
14. Cheng H, Zhao J, Sun R, Liu S, Yang Z (2020) Finish boring process of hard alloy cutter based on electrostatic cooling-aided machining. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 111:2999–3013. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-020-06298-310.1007/s00170-020-06298-3 ↗
15. Akdulum A, Süzgünol M, Kayır Y (2025) AISI P20 Plastik Kalıp Çeliğinin Dik İşleme Tezgahında Baralanmasında İşleme Parametrelerinin Kesme Torkuna Etkisi. Gazi Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi Part C: Tasarım ve Teknoloji. 1–1. https://doi.org/10.29109/gujsc.154925110.29109/gujsc.1549251 ↗
16. Senbabaoglu F, Lazoglu I, Ozkeser SO (2010) Experimental analysis of boring process on automotive engine cylinders. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 48:11–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-009-2271-910.1007/s00170-009-2271-9 ↗
17. Zhan Y, Zhou J, Zuo Z, Xu Y, Li X, Jia M (2022) Multi-index cutting parameters optimization for surface quality and cutting energy consumption of boring. Métodos numéricos para cálculo y diseño en ingeniería: Revista internacional 38(1):1–18. https://doi.org/10.23967/j.rimni.2022.03.00410.23967/j.rimni.2022.03.004 ↗
18. Morelo F, Grabarski MI, Camargo Beltrão P, Pintaude G (2017) Surface integrity of bored super duplex stainless steel SAF 2507. Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering 39:2649–2658. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40430-016-0642-310.1007/s40430-016-0642-3 ↗
19. Zhang R, Lv D, Wang Y (2021) Wear performance and mechanisms of PCBN tools in boring of powder metallurgy steels. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 114(11):3605–3614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-021-07136-w10.1007/s00170-021-07136-w ↗
20. Yang R-T, Liao H-T, Yang Y-K, Lin S-S (2012) Modeling and optimization in precise boring processes for aluminum alloy 6061T6 components. Int J Precis Eng Manuf 13:11–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12541-012-0002-x10.1007/s12541-012-0002-x ↗
21. Zheng Z, Guo J, Gao R, Jin X, Jiang Z, Li C (2022) Research on process simulation and surface quality of the thin-walled neck by precision boring. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 123(11):4009–4024. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-022-10541-410.1007/s00170-022-10541-4 ↗
22. Thasana W, Sugimura N, Iwamura K, Tanimizu Y (2014j) A study on estimation of 3-dimensional surface roughness of boring processes including kinematic motion deviations. J Adv Mech Des Syst Manuf 8(4):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1299/jamdsm.2014jjamdsm004610.1299/jamdsm.2014jjamdsm0046 ↗
23. Siyambaş Y, Akdulum A (2024) Prediction of surface roughness using different features in vortex cooled turning process of Ti6Al4V alloy. Measurement: 115258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2024.11525810.1016/j.measurement.2024.115258 ↗
24. Nguyen V-H, Le T-T (2024) Predicting surface roughness in machining aluminum alloys taking into account material properties. Int J Comput Integr Manuf 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/0951192X.2024.237225210.1080/0951192X.2024.2372252 ↗
25. Mahakur VK, Bhowmik S, Patowari PK (2024) Experimental evaluation and prediction on drilling of Corchorus olitorius filler-based composite. Mater Manuf Process. https://doi.org/10.1080/10426914.2024.231138410.1080/10426914.2024.2311384 ↗
26. Akdulum A, Süzgünol M, Kayir Y (2024) Prediction of feed force with machine learning algorithms in boring of AISI P20 plastic mold steel. Mater Today Commun 41:110704. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtcomm.2024.11070410.1016/j.mtcomm.2024.110704 ↗
27. Kaigude AR, Khedkar NK, Jatti VS, Salunkhe S, Cep R, Nasr EA (2024) Surface roughness prediction of AISI D2 tool steel during powder mixed EDM using supervised machine learning. Sci Rep 14(1):9683. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-60543-310.1038/s41598-024-60543-3 ↗
28. Tian W, Zhang J, Zhao F, Feng X, Mei X, Chen G, Wang H (2024) Interpolation-based virtual sample generation for surface roughness prediction. J Intell Manuf 35(1):343–353. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-022-02054-410.1007/s10845-022-02054-4 ↗
29. Antwarg L, Galed C, Shimoni N, Rokach L, Shapira B (2023) Shapley-based feature augmentation. Inf Fusion 96:92–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2023.03.01010.1016/j.inffus.2023.03.010 ↗
30. Tian L, Wu W, Yu T (2023) Graph random forest: a graph embedded algorithm for identifying highly connected important features. Biomolecules 13(7):1153. https://doi.org/10.3390/biom1307115310.3390/biom13071153 ↗
31. Xin Z, Lv R, Liu W, Wang S, Gao Q, Zhang B, Sun G (2024) An ensemble learning-based feature selection algorithm for identification of biomarkers of renal cell carcinoma. PeerJ Comput Sci 10:e1768. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.176810.7717/peerj-cs.1768 ↗
32. Preyanka Lakshme R, Kumar SG (2022) A review based on machine learning for feature selection and feature extraction. in International Conference on Advancements in Smart Computing and Information Security. Springerhttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-23092-9_1210.1007/978-3-031-23092-9_12 ↗
33. Thomas JC, Shin K, Xie XJ (2025) Principal Component Analysis in Dental Research. Int J Oral Maxillofacial Implants 40(1). https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.1094010.11607/jomi.10940 ↗
34. Lin L-S, Lin Y-S, Li D-C, Liu Y-H (2023) Improved learning performance for small datasets in high dimensions by new dual-net model for non-linear interpolation virtual sample generation. Decis Support Syst 172:113996. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2023.11399610.1016/j.dss.2023.113996 ↗
35. Velayuthan P, Karunasingha N, Nagahawaththa H, Jayasekara BG, Hevapathige A (2023) Revisiting Class Imbalance: A Generalized Notion for Oversampling. in International Advanced Computing Conference. Springer.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-56700-1_3810.1007/978-3-031-56700-1_38 ↗
36. Chen J-Y, Conlon K, Xue L, Rogge R (2010) Experimental study of residual stresses in laser clad AISI P20 tool steel on pre-hardened wrought P20 substrate. Mater Sci Eng A 527(27–28):7265–7273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2010.07.09810.1016/j.msea.2010.07.098 ↗
37. Akdulum A, Kayir Y (2025) Improving the prediction accuracy of surface roughness in the boring process using integrated machine learning methods. Int J Precis Eng Manuf 26:3237–3253. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12541-025-01338-y10.1007/s12541-025-01338-y ↗
38. Biruk-Urban K, Bere P, Józwik J (2023) Machine learning models in drilling of different types of glass-fiber-reinforced polymer composites. Polymers 15(23):4609. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym1523460910.3390/polym15234609 ↗
39. Elahifar B, Hosseini E (2024) A new approach for real-time prediction of stick–slip vibrations enhancement using model agnostic and supervised machine learning: a case study of Norwegian continental shelf. J Petroleum Explor Prod Technol 14(1):175–201. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13202-023-01691-610.1007/s13202-023-01691-6 ↗
40. Wang R, Niu J, Sun Y (2022) Chatter identification in thin-wall milling using an adaptive variational mode decomposition method combined with the decision tree model. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part B J Eng Manuf 236(1–2):51–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/095440542093370510.1177/0954405420933705 ↗
41. Wang S, Tang B (2022) A comparative study of parameter identification methods for asymmetric nonlinear systems with quadratic and cubic stiffness. Sensors 22(15):5854. https://doi.org/10.3390/s2215585410.3390/s22155854 ↗
42. Akdulum A, Kayir Y (2023) Prediction of thrust force in indexable drilling of aluminum alloys with machine learning algorithms. Measurement 222:113655. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2023.11365510.1016/j.measurement.2023.113655 ↗
43. Akdulum A, Kayir Y (2023) Investigation of deviation from diameter, circularity and cylindricality in drilling AA2024-T351 with U drills with different properties. J Fac Eng Archit Gazi Univ 39(2):1167–1178. https://doi.org/10.17341/gazimmfd.113679810.17341/gazimmfd.1136798 ↗
44. Gökkaya H, Nalbant M (2007) The effects of cutting tool geometry and processing parameters on the surface roughness of AISI 1030 steel. Mater Des 28(2):717–721. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2005.09.01310.1016/j.matdes.2005.09.013 ↗
45. Kumar R, Sahoo AK, Mishra PC, Das RK (2018) Comparative investigation towards machinability improvement in hard turning using coated and uncoated carbide inserts: part I experimental investigation. Adv Manuf 6:52–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40436-018-0215-z10.1007/s40436-018-0215-z ↗
46. Akdulum A, Kayir Y (2024) Experimental comparison of the indexable drilling with different U drills on hole quality. Mach Sci Technol 28(1):1–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/10910344.2023.228665810.1080/10910344.2023.2286658 ↗
47. Özel T, Hsu T-K, Zeren E (2005) Effects of cutting edge geometry, workpiece hardness, feed rate and cutting speed on surface roughness and forces in finish turning of hardened AISI H13 steel. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 25:262–269. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-003-1878-510.1007/s00170-003-1878-5 ↗
48. Chen W, Chen K (2023) Nonlinear probabilistic virtual sample generation using Gaussian process latent variable model and fitting for rubber material. Comput Mater Sci 230:112477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2023.11247710.1016/j.commatsci.2023.112477 ↗
49. Zhu Q-X, Chen Z-S, Zhang X-H, Rajabifard A, Xu Y, Chen Y-Q (2020) Dealing with small sample size problems in process industry using virtual sample generation: a Kriging-based approach. Soft Comput 24:6889–6902. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-019-04326-310.1007/s00500-019-04326-3 ↗
50. Wang H, Li B, Xuan F-Z (2022) A dimensionally augmented and physics-informed machine learning for quality prediction of additively manufactured high-entropy alloy. J Mater Process Technol 307:117637. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2022.11763710.1016/j.jmatprotec.2022.117637 ↗
51. Adizue UL, Takács M (2025) Exploring the correlation between design of experiments and machine learning prediction accuracy in ultra-precision hard turning of AISI D2 with CBN insert: a comparative study of Taguchi and full factorial designs. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 137:2061–2090. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-025-15186-710.1007/s00170-025-15186-7 ↗