A Transformer and Random Forest Hybrid Model for the Prediction of Non-metallic Inclusions in Continuous Casting Slabs
Source abstract
Abstract
Non-metallic inclusions (NMIs) in continuous casting slabs will significantly reduce the performance of final steel products and lead to other defects in steel products. The traditional detection methods of NMIs in continuous casting slabs have the problem of low efficiency, and it is complicated to establish a prediction model of NMIs based on physics and chemistry. Therefore, we tried to use the machine learning method by integrating Transformer and Random Forest and established an RF-1DViT model to predict NMIs in continuous casting slabs. To predict the occurrence and the location of NMIs as accurately as possible, the whole process data of steelmaking, refining and continuous casting were used, and the continuous casting slab was processed in slices. The experimental results show that the proposed RF-1DViT model has an F1 score of 0.8991, surpassing Logical Regression, K-Nearest Neighbor, Support Vector Machine, Random Forest, AdaBoost, GradientBoost, Multi-Layer Perceptron and 1DViT model, and has good interpretability and strong feature extraction ability. By means of the Random Forest and histogram, the process importance can be analyzed and rules of inclusions generation can be given. The t-SNE manifold learning method can further assist researchers to accurately locate the defect.
Source: expertdata · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Metallurgical Processes and Thermodynamics · Iron and Steelmaking Processes · Metal Extraction and Bioleaching
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (39)
Show source-provided references
1. Wang R et al (2019) Comparison between the surface defects caused by Al2O3 and TiN inclusions in interstitial-free steel auto sheets. Int J Miner Metall Mater 26(2):178–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12613-019-1722-z10.1007/s12613-019-1722-z ↗
2. Li M, Wu HJ, Sun YH (2022) Effect of the inclusion features on mechanical properties of steel. Ironmak Steelmak 49(4):405–411. https://doi.org/10.1080/03019233.2021.200915910.1080/03019233.2021.2009159 ↗
3. Ånmark N, Karasev A, Jonsson PG (2015) The effect of different non-metallic inclusions on the machinability of steels. Materials 8(2):751–783. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma802075110.3390/ma8020751 ↗
4. Kaushik P, Pielet H, Yin H (2009) Inclusion characterisation-tool for measurement of steel cleanliness and process control: part 1. Ironmak Steelmak 36(8):561–571. https://doi.org/10.1179/030192309x1249291093813110.1179/030192309x12492910938131 ↗
5. Zhang LF, Thomas BG (2003) State of the art in evaluation and control of steel cleanliness. ISIJ Int 43(3):271–291. https://doi.org/10.2355/isijinternational.43.27110.2355/isijinternational.43.271 ↗
6. Cai DX et al (2021) Interaction of MnS inclusion behaviors and macrosegregation during solidification by multi-phase modelling. J Mater Process Technol 297:117243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2021.11724310.1016/j.jmatprotec.2021.117243 ↗
7. Kawasaki Steel 21st Century Foundation (1997–2002) A manufacturing process for iron and steel. http://www.jfe-21st-cf.or.jp/chapter_2/2a_1.html
8. Arvola DA (2018) Grain refinement of high alloy stainless steels in sand and directionally solidified castings. Masters Theses. 7793. https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/masters_theses/7793
9. Chu KY et al (2016) The effects of bottom blowing gas flow rate distribution during the steelmaking converter process on mixing efficiency. Metall Mater Trans B 47(2):948–962. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11663-016-0593-110.1007/s11663-016-0593-1 ↗
10. Jiang Y et al (2018) Characteristics of steel slags and their use in cement and concrete: a review. Resour Conserv Recycl 136:187–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.04.02310.1016/j.resconrec.2018.04.023 ↗
11. Yildirim IZ, Prezzi M (2011) Chemical, mineralogical, and morphological properties of steel slag. Adv Civ Eng 2011:463638. https://doi.org/10.1155/2011/46363810.1155/2011/463638 ↗
12. Yang W et al (2013) Cleanliness of low carbon aluminum-killed steels during secondary refining processes. Steel Res Int 84(5):473–489. https://doi.org/10.1002/srin.20120021310.1002/srin.201200213 ↗
13. Zhao ZJ et al (2020) Splashing simulation of liquid steel drops during the Ruhrstahl Heraeus vacuum process. Metals 10(8):1070. https://doi.org/10.3390/met1008107010.3390/met10081070 ↗
14. Holappa L et al (2013) Active tundish slag. Steel Res Int 84(7):638–648. https://doi.org/10.1002/srin.20120020910.1002/srin.201200209 ↗
15. Zhang LF et al (2007) Investigation of fluid flow and steel cleanliness in the continuous casting strand. Metall Mater Trans B 38(1):63–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11663-006-9007-010.1007/s11663-006-9007-0 ↗
16. Tervo H et al (2017) Effect of impurity level and inclusions on the ductility and toughness of an ultra-high-strength steel. Mater Sci Eng A 697:184–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2017.05.01310.1016/j.msea.2017.05.013 ↗
17. Ruiz E et al (2021) Machine learning methods for the prediction of the inclusion content of clean steel fabricated by electric arc furnace and rolling. Metals 11(6):914. https://doi.org/10.3390/met1106091410.3390/met11060914 ↗
18. Silva A (2018) Non-metallic inclusions in steels-origin and control. J Mater Res Technol 7(3):283–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2018.04.00310.1016/j.jmrt.2018.04.003 ↗
19. Cuartas M et al (2021) Machine learning algorithms for the prediction of non-metallic inclusions in steel wires for tire reinforcement. J Intell Manuf 32(6):1739–1751. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-020-01623-910.1007/s10845-020-01623-9 ↗
20. Yang S et al (2021) Process monitoring using causal graphical models, with application to clogging detection in steel continuous casting. J Process Control 105:259–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jprocont.2021.08.00610.1016/j.jprocont.2021.08.006 ↗
21. Liu YH et al (2022) Quality prediction of continuous casting slabs based on weighted extreme learning machine. IEEE Access 10:78231–78241. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2022.319254110.1109/access.2022.3192541 ↗
22. Abdelaziz S et al (2009) Control of Ca addition for improved cleanness of low C Al killed steel. Ironmak Steelmak 36(6):432–441. https://doi.org/10.1179/174328109x40157810.1179/174328109x401578 ↗
23. Wartiainen AM et al (2020) A tool for finding inclusion clusters in steel SEM specimens. Open Eng 10(1):642–648. https://doi.org/10.1515/eng-2020-006810.1515/eng-2020-0068 ↗
24. Kananen VE, Eskelinen JJ, Haeggstrom EO (2011) Discriminating pores from inclusions in rolled steel by ultrasonic echo analysis. Meas Sci Technol 22(10):105704. https://doi.org/10.1088/0957-0233/22/10/10570410.1088/0957-0233/22/10/105704 ↗
25. Zhou YJ et al (2022) Application of time series data anomaly detection based on deep learning in continuous casting process. ISIJ Int 62(4):689–698. https://doi.org/10.2355/isijinternational.ISIJINT-2021-37210.2355/isijinternational.ISIJINT-2021-372 ↗
26. Wu X et al (2021) Multiscale convolutional and recurrent neural network for quality prediction of continuous casting slabs. Processes 9(1):33. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr901003310.3390/pr9010033 ↗
27. Xiong L et al (2021) A method for predicting the quality of slabs based on GA-RF algorithm. In: 16th IEEE conference on industrial electronics and applications (ICIEA). 2021. Chengdu, Peoples Republic of China10.1109/ICIEA51954.2021.9516413 ↗
28. Ruiz E et al (2020) Machine learning algorithms for the prediction of the strength of steel rods: an example of data-driven manufacturing in steelmaking. Int J Comput Integr Manuf 33(9):880–894. https://doi.org/10.1080/0951192x.2020.180350510.1080/0951192x.2020.1803505 ↗
29. Zhan ZX, Li H (2021) Machine learning based fatigue life prediction with effects of additive manufacturing process parameters for printed SS 316L. Int J Fatigue 142:105941. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2020.10594110.1016/j.ijfatigue.2020.105941 ↗
30. Vaswani A et al (2017) Attention is all you need. arXiv:1706.03762. Retrieved June 01, 2017, from https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017arXiv170603762V
31. Devlin J et al (2018) BERT: pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. arXiv:1810.04805. Retrieved Oct 01, 2018, from https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018arXiv181004805D
32. Dosovitskiy A et al (2020) An image is worth 16x16 words: transformers for image recognition at scale. arXiv:2010.11929. Retrieved Oct 01, 2020, from https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020arXiv201011929D
33. Gorishniy Y et al (2021) Revisiting deep learning models for tabular data. arXiv:2106.11959. Retrieved June 01, 2021, from https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021arXiv210611959G
34. Grinsztajn L, Oyallon E, Varoquaux G (2022) Why do tree-based models still outperform deep learning on tabular data? arXiv:2207.08815. Retrieved July 01, 2022, from https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022arXiv220708815G
35. Cemernek D et al (2022) Machine learning in continuous casting of steel: a state-of-the-art survey. J Intell Manuf 33(6):1561–1579. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-021-01754-710.1007/s10845-021-01754-7 ↗
36. Pereira J et al (2021) Covered information disentanglement: model transparency via unbiased permutation importance. arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2111.09744. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2111.0974410.48550/arXiv.2111.09744 ↗
37. Sengupta J et al (2006) A new mechanism of hook formation during continuous casting of ultra-low-carbon steel slabs. Metall Mater Trans A 37A(5):1597–1611. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11661-006-0103-110.1007/s11661-006-0103-1 ↗
38. Wang WL, Lou ZC, Zhang HH (2018) Effect of slag-steel reaction on the initial solidification of molten steel during continuous casting. Metall Mater Trans B 49(3):1034–1045. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11663-018-1245-410.1007/s11663-018-1245-4 ↗
39. Garcia-Hernandez S et al (2010) Modeling study of the vortex and short circuit flow effect on inclusion removal in a slab tundish. Steel Res Int 81(6):453–460. https://doi.org/10.1002/srin.20090015210.1002/srin.200900152 ↗