Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2009) 41:200–210
DOI 10.1007/s00170-008-1448-y
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
The method of grey-fuzzy logic for optimizing multi-response
problems during the manufacturing process: a case study
of the light guide plate printing process
Nun-Ming Liu & Jenn-Tsong Horng & Ko-Ta Chiang
Received: 3 November 2007 / Accepted: 18 February 2008 / Published online: 17 April 2008
# Springer-Verlag London Limited 2008
Abstract In this paper, a method of grey-fuzzy logic based
on the orthogonal array is proposed to achieve the
optimization of multi-response characteristics during the
manufacturing process. The optimal procedure proposed for
solving the optimal multi-response problem applies the grey
relational coefficient in each machining response and
converts a grey-fuzzy reasoning grade so as to evaluate
multiple-machining responses. One real case study per-
formed in the light guide plate (LGP) printing process
verifies that the optimum procedure proposed in this study is
feasible and effective. Through the grey-fuzzy logic analysis,
the printing processing parameters, namely mixed rate of ink,
velocity and pressure of printing process, and material and
angle of scraper, are optimized with considerations to the
multiple machining responses, including illumination, homo-
geny, value of variance for the illumination and printing ink
thickness. The experimental results using the optimal setting
easily clarified that the above-mentioned optimum procedure
greatly improved the manufacturing process in this study.
Keywords Grey-fuzzy logic . Optimizing . Multi-response .
Light guide plate (LGP)
1 Introduction
The setting of appropriate machining parameters for any
machined product with considerations of multiple perfor-
mance characteristics is very difficult as well as complicated,
N.-M. Liu : J.-T. Horng : K.-T. Chiang (*)
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Hsiuping Institute of Technology,
No. 11, Gungye Rd.,
Dali, Taichung, Taiwan 41280, Republic of China
e-mail: kota@mail.hit.edu.tw
and relies on a huge amount of experimental operations.
Therefore, in the manufacturing process, it is critically
important to effectively acquire the optimal process parame-
ters and to adjust factors for achieving optimal machining
responses and to decrease the trail-and-error time and
consuming cost.
Taguchi [1–3] proposed the plan of quality project
(called the Taguchi method) with the robust design based
on the experimental design so as to simplify a great
quantity of fully factor trial. This method has been
extensively used in engineering design and the analysis of
optimal manufacture [4–6], but for actual applications or
the research discussed in the article, they concentrated on
the optimal manufacture of single machining response that
was unable to satisfy the requests of multiple machining
responses. In fact, the optimization of multiple machining
responses including the lower-the-better, higher-the-better,
and nominal-the-better characteristics is concerned with
optimizing a vector of objectives.
The grey relational analysis theory, which was initialed
by Deng [7, 8], makes use of grey relational generation and
calculates the grey relational coefficient to handle the
uncertain systematic problem under the status of only
partial known information. The grey relational coefficient
can express the relationship between the desired and actual
experimental results and the grey relational grade is
simultaneously computed according to each machining
response. The single grey relational grade can provide an
optimal constitution of processing parameters in which the
manufacture simultaneously requests the multiple machining
responses. The optimal level of processing parameters was
confirmed through the level with the highest grey relational
grade. Lin [9] and Singh et al. [10] used this methodology
for optimizing the processing parameters of electrical
discharge machining of SKD11 and Al-10% SiCp alloy
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2009) 41:200–210
steel, respectively, with considering the multiple machining
responses.
The theory of fuzzy logic, which was originated by Zadeh
[11], is an effective module for resolving mathematical
problems that contain an uncertain and large amount of
information. The fuzzy logic analysis including the max-min
fuzzy inference and centroid defuzzification method [12]
adopts the fuzziness of human concepts to deal with multiple
machining responses. Therefore, the fuzzy logic can also be
applied to establish the optimal set of control parameters
with considerations to the multiple machining responses.
The main objective of this study is to apply the grey-
fuzzy logic based on the orthogonal array to establish the
optimal procedure by controlling machining parameters
with careful considerations to the multiple machining
responses in the manufacturing process. The optimal
procedure proposed for solving the optimal multiple-
response problem includes a series of steps capable of
generating the grey relational coefficient for each machining
response on the basis of the grey relational analysis and
converting a grey-fuzzy reasoning grade with the fuzzy logic
to evaluate the multiple machining responses. The grey-
based fuzzy algorithm, integrating grey relational analysis
and fuzzy logic, has been successfully used in the manufac-
turing of electrical discharge machining (EDM) process [13,
14], the turning process [15], an electricity management
system [16], and for water-quality management of a river
system [17]. Here, one real study case performed in the light
guide plate (LGP) printing process verifies that the optimum
procedure proposed is feasible and effective. Due to the
soaring development of electronic technologies, liquid
crystal display (LCD) products are extensively applied in
the computer, communication, and consumer electronic (3C)
products, such as notebook computers, personal computers,
screens for TV-games, screens for portable television sets,
viewfinders for video-recorders, etc., and their qualities
continue to be refined and the price lowered. The revelation
of LCD depends on the source of backlight, which comes in
the form of a backlight unit with light guide plate (LGP) that
is one of the LCD’s main components [18–20]. The demands
of optical characteristic of LGP, including higher illumination
and homogeny on the bright area and an appropriate amount
of printing ink thickness, belong to the multiple machining
responses in the manufacturing process. It is critical to
effectively control the optimal processing parameters and to
obtain better LGP quality response in the printing manufacture
procedure. In this study, the procedure of grey-fuzzy logic has
been developed to apply in the manufacture requests for
multiple machining responses. Through the grey-fuzzy logic
analysis, it is shown by this study that the optimization of
complicated multiple machining responses can be converted
into the optimization of a single grey-fuzzy reasoning grade.
Furthermore, a statistical analysis of variance (ANOVA) [21]
201
is performed to examine which processing parameters are
statistically significant. Through the grey-fuzzy logic, the
experimental results for the optimal settings will confirm the
above response characteristics in the LGP printing process
and prove that manufacture procedure can be improved
effectively.
2 Grey relational analysis
The grey means the primitive data with poor, incomplete
and uncertain information in the grey systematic theory; the
incomplete relation of information among these data is
called the grey relation. Grey relational analysis is to
compare quantitative analysis between every sequence in
the grey system dynamically, and to describe the relation
degree between an objective sequence (a collection of
measurements or experimental results) and a reference
sequence in the grey system. The measure of relevancy
between two sequences can be expressed as the grey
relational coefficient. In the grey relational space, the set
of sequence Xi is expressed as:
Xi ¼ ½Xi ð1Þ; Xi ð2Þ;


; Xi ðk Þ; i 2 I; k 2 N ð1Þ
where Xi (k), i≠0 is the objective sequence and X0 (k) is the
reference sequence. In the procedure of grey relational
analysis, the raw sequences were normalized at first in the
range between 0 and 1 due to the different measurement
units and scales, so this process is called the grey relational
generating. In the grey relational analysis, the normalized
results reveal the situation of better performance. The larger
value of normalized results can express the better performance
and the best-normalized value will be equal to one. The type
of processing to use depends upon the characteristic of
sequence including the larger-the-better, smaller-the-better
and nominal-the-better characteristics. Consequently, the
normalized experimental results can be expressed as:
for the larger-the-better characteristic
Xi ðk Þ  min Xi ðk Þ
Xi* ðk Þ ¼
8k
ð2Þ
max Xi ðk Þ  min Xi ðk Þ
8k 8k
and for the smaller-the-better characteristic
max Xi ðk Þ  Xi ðk Þ
Xi* ðk Þ ¼
8k
ð3Þ
max Xi ðk Þ  min Xi ðk Þ
8k 8k
and for the nominal-the-better characteristic
jXi ðk Þ  Xob ðk Þj
Xi* ðk Þ ¼ 1  ð4Þ
max Xi ðk Þ  min Xi ðk Þ
8k 8k
202 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2009) 41:200–210

where max Xi ðk Þ and min Xi ðk Þ are the largest and smallest proposed to obtain the optimal factors/levels combination in
8k 8k
value of Xi (k), respectively, and Xob (k) is the target of Xi a multi-response problem. In the procedure of fuzzy
(k). The grey relational coefficient ξi (k) for Xi (k) to X0 (k) analysis, at first the fuzzifier uses membership functions
is calculated as to fuzzify the grey relational coefficient ξi (k) of each
sequence. A membership function (MF) is a curve that
Δ min þ bΔ max
x i ðk Þ ¼ ð5Þ defines how each input value is mapped to a membership
Δo;i ðk Þ þ bΔ max
value (or degree of membership) between 0 and 1. The
where Δ0;i ðk Þ ¼ jX0* ðk Þ  Xi* ðk Þj is the absolute differences fuzzify inference engine will perform a fuzzy interface on
of two comparative sequence, Δ min ¼ min minjX0* ðk Þ fuzzy rules in order to generate a fuzzy value. The most
i2I k
* * *
X ðk Þj and Δ max ¼ max maxjX ðk Þ  X ðk Þj are the mini- popular defuzzification method is the centroid calculation,
i 0 i
i2I k
mum and maximum value of Δ0;i ðk Þ ¼ jX0* ðk Þ  Xi* ðk Þj which returns the center of area under the curve. The
respectively, and β is the distinguish coefficient whose value aggregate of a fuzzy set encompasses a range of output
is adjusted to meet the systematic actual need and defined in values, so it must be defuzzified in order to resolve a single
the range between 0 and 1. Here the value of β will be set to output value from the set. Therefore, the defuzzifier can
be 0.5, the quantity used in most situations. The grey convert the fuzzy value into the non-fuzzy value that is
relational coefficient is applied to display the relationship called the grey-fuzzy reasoning grade in this study.
between the optimal (best = 1) and actual normalized results. In this study, the membership function adopts the
A higher grey relational coefficient ξi (k) means that the trapezoidal membership function that has a flat top and is
corresponding experimental result is closer to the optimal really just a truncated triangle curve. In fuzzy logic, these
(best) normalized value for the single response. Then the grey if-then rule statements are used to formulate the conditional
relational grade ri can be obtained by the average-value statements that has the multi-response grey relational
processing of the grey relational coefficients ξi (k) for each coefficients ξn and one multi-response output η, that is
sequence.
Rule 1 : if ξ1 is A11 and ξ2 is A12 . . .
ð7aÞ
1 X
n and ξn is A1n then η is D1 else
ri ¼ x i ðk Þ ð6Þ
n k¼1

where n is the number of machining responses. In this grey Rule 2 : if ξ1 is A21 and ξ2 is A22 . . .
ð7bÞ
relational analysis, the single grey relational grade can easily and ξn is A2n then η is D2 else
simplify the optimization of processing parameters and the
manufacture simultaneously requests complex multiple
responses. As shown in Table 1, the relationship from the Rule i: if ξ1 is Ai1 and ξ2 is Ai2 . . .
grey relational grade ri can be categorized into four grades of ð7cÞ
and ξn is Ain then η is Di else
influences [7, 8].

Rule n : if ξ1 is An2 and ξ2 is An2 . . .

3 Fuzzy logic ð7dÞ
and ξn is Ann then η is Dn
In fact, the grey relational coefficients ξi (k) for each where Ai1, Ai2,...Ain and Di are the fuzzy subsets defined by
sequence contain a certain degree of uncertainty and the corresponding membership functions, i.e., mAi1 , mAi2 ,
vagueness in the definition of performance characteristic


mAin and mDi . The fuzzy multi-response output η is
such as the larger-the-better, smaller-the-better and nomi- provided from those rules mentioned above by employing
nal-the-better characteristics. A fuzzy reasoning of the the max-min interface operation. The inference results in a
multi-response characteristics based on the fuzzy logics is fuzzy set with the membership function for the multi-
response output η can be expressed as
μD0 ðηÞ ¼
Table 1 The four grades of grey relational grade

μA11 ðξ1 Þ ^ μA12 ðξ2 Þ ^ μA13 ðξ3 Þ ^


μA1n ðξn Þ ^ μD1 ðηÞ _


_
ri Grade


μAn1 ðξ1 Þ ^ μAn2 ðξ2 Þ ^ μAn3 ðξ3 Þ ^


μAnn ðξn Þ ^ μDn ðηÞ
>0.9 marked influence
0.8<ri<0.9 relatively marked influence ð8Þ
0.7<ri<0.8 noticeable influence
where ^ and _ are the minimum and maximum operation,
<0.6 negligible influence
respectively.
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2009) 41:200–210
Finally, the fuzzy multi-response output μD0(η) must be
transferred to a non-fuzzy value η0 by the calculation of
centroid defuzzification method, that is
P ments and define the total degrees of freedom to
h mD0 ðhÞ
h0 ¼ P
mD0 ðhÞ
This non-fuzzy value η0 is called the grey-fuzzy
reasoning grade. The grey-fuzzy reasoning grade η0 can
handle the optimization of the complicated multiple
performance characteristics. From the grey-fuzzy reasoning
grade η0, the relational degree between main factor and
other factors is computed concerning of each response
characteristic. Hence the higher grey-fuzzy reasoning grade
η0 indicates that this experimental result approaches to the
ideally normalized value.
4 The optimal procedure proposed
For determination of the processing parameters, the
procedure of grey-fuzzy logic with optimal response
characteristic is illustrated in Fig. 1. The optimal procedure
Fig. 1 Structure of the grey-fuzzy logic for the optimal processing
parameters
203
proposed in this study including seven steps is summarized
as follows:
Step (1) Use an appropriate orthogonal array for experi-
determine the level of processing parameters.
ð9Þ
Step (2) Define the machining responses evaluation and
normalize the experimental results Xi (k), i≠0
using the formula (2)–(4).
Step (3) Use formula (5) for each response to calculate the
grey relational coefficient ξi (k) and judge the
relationship of multi-responses according to its
grey relational grade ri.
Step (4) Establish the trapezoidal membership function
and the fuzzy rule to fuzzify the grey relational
coefficient ξi (k) of each response.
Step (5) Calculate the fuzzy multi-responses output μD0
(η) employing the max-min interface operation
and use formula (9) to transfer the μD0 (η) to a
grey-fuzzy reasoning grade η0.
Step (6) Perform the response table and the response
graph in order to select the optimal processing
parameters and then obtain the noticeable and
unnoticeable variable factors using the analysis
of variance (ANOVA).
Step (7) Confirm tests and verify the optimal processing
parameters setting.
5 The optimal setting of processing parameters
for the light guide plate (LGP) printing process
In this section, the case of light guide plate (LGP) printing
process is illustrated to confirm the feasibility of optimal
procedure in this study. The demands of optical character-
istic of LGP include both the illumination and the
homogeny because the above characteristics will immedi-
ately influence the display quality of LCD. The printing ink
thickness affects the light refraction and involves the
capitalized cost as well. The flow chart showing a printing
manufacture procedure is illustrated in Fig. 2. Therefore,
for the a LGP printing process, it is a critically important to
effectively acquire the optimal processing parameters and to
adjust the factors for decreasing the trial-and-error time and
the consuming cost; in the meantime, the multiple perfor-
mance characteristics of brightness, homogeny and printing
ink thickness are requested as well. The experimental studies
were performed on the ATMART56/G high precision
optoelectronics screen printer in the white room. The major
specifications, the velocity of printing head and the pressure
of gas source, were set in the range of 0–835 mm/s and 5–
8 kg/cm2, respectively. The six-inch type of LGP was used
204
Fig. 2 The printing manufacture procedure of LGP
as the experimental object and the light emitting diode was
used as a light source in this study. In the standard demands
of optical characteristic for a commercial LGP, the criterion
of illumination is over 330 cd/m2, the percentage of
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2009) 41:200–210
homogeny is over 70% and the printing ink thickness was
set as 8±1 μm, respectively.
The steps for the optimal procedure proposed in this
study are described as follows:
5.1 Planning experiment
In this case, the factors of processing parameters and the
factor levels were identified according to the characteristics
of LGP and the correlated processing parameter of
mechanical equipment. As shown in Table 2, this study
specifies five principal processing parameters including (A)
the mixed rate of ink, (B) the velocity of printing process,
(C) the pressure of printing process, (D) the hardness of
scraper and (E) the angle of scraper. Here, the material of
scraper was made of the cobalt-bonded tungsten carbide
(manufacturer: Protool Industrial Co.). Its hardness was
designed in the region between 60 HRC and 75 HRC using
the compacting techniques of powder metallurgy and high-
temperature sintering. The four levels for above each
machining parameter are identified by digits 1, 2, 3, and 4
as shown in Table 2.
In this present study, the five four-level processing
parameters, including (A) the mixed rate of ink, (B) the
velocity of printing process, (C) the pressure of printing
process, (D) the hardness of scraper and (E) the angle of
scraper, are regarded independent parameters in the printing
process. According to the results of experimental design
using the Taguchi method [1–3], the interactions between
the independent processing parameters will be unobvious.
The orthogonal array experimental design of relevant
researches [4–6, 9, 10, 13, 14] neglected the interactions
between the independent processing parameters. Therefore,
the interactions between the machining parameters were
neglected in this study. The table of L16 (45) orthogonal
arrays for five processing parameters and four levels are
employed and shown in Table 3. Each combination of
experiments will be repeated three times to acquire a more
accurate result in this process.
5.2 Machining performance evaluation and normalization
of the experimental results
In this study, the illumination (cd/m2), the homogeny (%),
the value of variance (VAR) for the illumination, and
printing ink thickness (μm) are used to evaluate machining
performances. The illumination is measured by using the
equipment of Spectrascan Colorimeter. The value of
illumination given in the study is the mathematical average
of thirteen measurements as shown in Fig. 3, denoted
Y (unit cd/m2). The ratio of maximum value to minimum
value of measured illumination is used to express the
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2009) 41:200–210 205

Table 2 Factors and levels

Symbol Factors Unit Level

1 2 3 4

A Mixed rate of ink % 30 35 40 45

B Velocity mm/s 400 450 500 550
C Pressure kg/cm2 5.5 6 6.5 7
D Hardness of scraper HRC 60 65 70 75
E Angle of scraper degree 70 75 80 85

homogeny on the bright area. The homogeny is calculated
by using the following formula:
Ymin
Homogeny ¼  100%
Ymax
where Ymin and Ymax are the minimum and maximum value
of measured illumination on the bright area, respectively.
The higher value of homogeny indicates that the variation
of illumination is small and the bright area will be uniform
brilliant. Furthermore, the value of variance (VAR) of
illumination at all measured points is used to confirm the
situation of brightness using the frame of statistics. The
VAR of illumination can be expressed as
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
P
2
Yi  Y
VAR ¼ ð11Þ
N 1
where Yi is the value of illumination for the ith measured
point and N are the number of measured point on the bright
area, respectively. The thickness of printing ink thickness is
measured by using the profilemeter (3D-Hommelewerk).
The measured point is posited in the center of bright area
and the measured unit is μm.
In the LGP printing process, the maximization of
illumination and homogeny and the minimization of the
ð10Þ
VAR of illumination are the indications of better machining
responses. For the characteristics of the illumination, the
homogeny was regarded as the larger-the-better character-
istic and the VAR of illumination is the smaller-the-better
characteristic. The printing ink thickness was set in the
target of commercial demands and therefore regarded as the
nominal-the-better characteristic. The experimental results
in Table 3 were normalized according to their character-
istics using formulas (2–4).
5.3 Computing the grey relational coefficient and grey
relational grade
The grey relational coefficient ξi (k) for each experiment
and the grey relational grade ri for each response were
calculated by formula (5) and (6), respectively, as listed in
Table 4.

Table 3 Experimental layout using an L16 (45) orthogonal array

Exp no. Processing parameter Illumination Homogeny (%) VAR of illumination Printing ink
(cd/m2) thickness (μm)
A B C D E

1 1 1 1 1 1 326.013 65.11 2.528 7.870

2 1 2 2 2 2 328.387 63.21 2.507 8.210
3 1 3 3 3 3 325.887 62.11 2.439 8.247
4 1 4 4 4 4 333.440 66.98 2.472 8.490
5 2 1 2 3 4 333.327 63.22 2.584 8.500
6 2 2 1 4 3 333.113 69.03 2.574 7.953
7 2 3 4 1 2 335.000 66.22 2.573 8.380
8 2 4 3 2 1 336.893 65.21 2.441 8.487
9 3 1 3 4 2 335.743 70.12 2.489 8.490
10 3 2 4 3 1 342.003 69.21 2.497 7.783
11 3 3 1 2 4 333.753 66.43 2.528 8.393
12 3 4 2 1 3 336.747 69.21 2.568 8.360
13 4 1 4 2 3 331.080 62.98 2.547 8.110
14 4 2 3 1 4 330.043 70.53 2.567 7.110
15 4 3 2 4 1 328.103 59.12 2.577 8.277
16 4 4 1 3 2 331.147 70.98 2.528 8.817
206 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2009) 41:200–210

1.2

0.8

Membership grade
Small
0.6 Middle
Large

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.05 0.45 0.55 0.95 1

Grey relational coefficient

Fig. 4 The trapezoidal membership functions for the illumination, the

Fig. 3 The position of measured point for the value of illumination homogeny, the VAR of illumination and the printing ink thickness

5.4 Establishing the trapezoidal membership function Rule 2 : if ξ1 is A21 and ξ2 is A22 and ξ3 is A23
ð12bÞ
and fuzzy rule and ξ4 is A24 then η is D2 else

In Fig. 4, three fuzzy subsets are assigned in the grey

relational coefficient of the illumination, the homogeny, the Rule 3 : if ξ1 is A31 and ξ2 is A32 and ξ3 is A33
VAR of illumination and the printing ink thickness using ð12cÞ
and ξ4 is A34 then η is D3 else
the trapezoidal membership function. In the fuzzy logic,
these if-then rule statements are used to formulate the
conditional statements that has the four grey relational
Rule 4 : if ξ1 is A41 and ξ2 is A42 and ξ3 is A43
coefficients, ξ1, ξ2, ξ3 and ξ4, and one multi-response ð12dÞ
output, η, that is and ξ4 is A44 then η is D4 :

Rule 1 : if ξ1 is A11 and ξ2 is A12 and ξ3 is A13 The seven fuzzy subsets can be applied to the multi-
ð12aÞ
and ξ4 is A14 then η is D1 else response output η, as shown in Fig. 5. Hence the 28 fuzzy

Table 4 The data of ξi (k)

and ri Exp No. ξ1 (k) ξ2 (k) ξ3 (k) ξ4 (k) ri

1 0.335 0.489 0.451 0.855 0.5324

2 0.372 0.421 0.516 0.751 0.5148
3 0.333 0.392 1.000 0.711 0.6090
4 0.485 0.586 0.689 0.526 0.5714
5 0.482 0.429 0.333 0.520 0.4409
6 0.475 0.763 0.350 1.000 0.6470
7 0.535 0.539 0.351 0.596 0.5054
8 0.612 0.507 0.982 0.528 0.6572
9 0.563 0.867 0.592 0.526 0.6369
10 1.000 0.750 0.555 0.743 0.7622
11 0.494 0.568 0.451 0.586 0.5247
12 0.605 0.782 0.361 0.611 0.5897
13 0.425 0.423 0.401 0.886 0.5338
14 0.403 0.986 0.361 0.368 0.5295
15 0.367 0.333 0.345 0.681 0.4316
16 0.426 1.000 0.449 0.390 0.5661
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2009) 41:200–210 207

Fig. 5 The seven fuzzy subsets 1.1

of multi-response output η 1
0.9 Very small

Membership grading
0.8
Small
0.7
Smaller middle
0.6
Middle
0.5
Biger middle
0.4
Big
0.3
0.2 Very big

0.1
0

00

08

15

23

31

38

46

54

62

69

77

85

92

00
0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

1.
grey-fuzzy reasoning grade

rules are directly obtained according to the occurrence that
the large grey relational coefficient is the better process
response.
5.5 Calculating the grey-fuzzy reasoning grade
The inferential results in a fuzzy set with membership
function for this multi-response output η can be expressed
as


μD0 ðηÞ ¼ μA11 ðξ1 Þ ^ μA12 ðξ2 Þ ^ μA13 ðξ3 Þ ^ μA14 ðξ4 Þ ^ μD1 ðηÞ _


μA21 ðξ1 Þ ^ μA22 ðξ2 Þ ^ μA23 ðξ3 Þ ^ μA24 ðξ4 Þ ^ μD2 ðηÞ _


μA31 ðξ1 Þ ^ μA32 ðξ2 Þ ^ μA33 ðξ3 Þ ^ μA34 ðξ4 Þ ^ μD5 ðηÞ _


μA41 ðξ1 Þ ^ μA42 ðξ2 Þ ^ μA43 ðξ3 Þ ^ μA44 ðξ4 Þ ^ μD4 ðηÞ
ð13Þ
parameters are A3, B2, C3, D3 and E1 for maximizing the
illumination and the homogeny, for minimizing the VAR of
illumination and for easy setting the demandable thickness
of printing ink simultaneously among the 16 experiments.
The steep slope of response graph indicates that there is
more influence of operating factor on the response
characteristic. From the response graph (Fig. 6), it shows
that the three operating factors mentioned above, namely
(C) the printing pressure, (A) the mixed rate of ink and (B)
the printing velocity, have greater values of steep slope and
will affect the multiple response characteristics.
The contribution of the different processing parameters
on those multiple performance characteristics mentioned
above was obtained by decomposition of variance, which is
Table 5 The grey-fuzzy reasoning grade η0

where ^ and _ are the minimum and maximum operation, Exp no. Grey-fuzzy Order
reasoning grade η0
respectively. The fuzzy multi-responses output μD0 (η) has
been transferred to a grey-fuzzy reasoning grade η0 1 0.5674 10
according to formula (8). The experiment result of grey- 2 0.5498 13
fuzzy reasoning grade η0 for the multiple (total) response 3 0.6440 5
characteristics are tabulated in Table 5. In this study, the 4 0.6064 7
experimental No. 10 has the best multiple (total) response 5 0.4759 15
6 0.6820 3
characteristics among the 16 experiments in Table 5.
7 0.5404 14
8 0.6922 2
5.6 Performing the response table, the response graph 9 0.6719 4
and the ANOVA 10 0.7972 1
11 0.5597 12
The response table and response graph were obtained from 12 0.6247 6
the average value of the grey-fuzzy reasoning grade for 13 0.5688 9
each level of the processing parameters in order to select 14 0.5645 11
15 0.4666 16
the composition of optimal factors. From the response table
16 0.6011 8
(Table 6), the level constitutions of optimal processing
208 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2009) 41:200–210

Table 6 Response table for the grey-fuzzy reasoning grade

Symbol Processing parameter Grey-fuzzy reasoning grade

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Max-Min

A Mixed rate of ink 0.5919 0.5976 0.6634 0.5503 0.1131

B Velocity 0.5710 0.6484 0.5527 0.6311 0.0957
C Pressure 0.6025 0.5293 0.6432 0.6282 0.1139
D Material of scraper 0.5743 0.5926 0.6296 0.6067 0.0553
E Angle of scraper 0.6308 0.5908 0.6299 0.5516 0.0792

Total mean value of the grey-fuzzy reasoning grade = 0.6008

called analysis of variance (ANOVA). In general, the terms grade η0 of each experiment and η0m is the total mean of the
in ANOVA are typically depicted as in the following: grey-fuzzy reasoning grade. Statistically, the Fisher’s F-test
[18] provides a decision at some confidence level as if these
parameters have a significant effect on the performance
X
n
n XL
characteristic. A large F-value indicates that the change of
SStotal ¼ η20i  nðηom Þ2 ; SSfactor ¼ ðη  η0m Þ2
i¼1
L i¼1 0i the machining parameter has a great effect on the
ð14Þ performance characteristic. From the results of analysis of
variance in the Table 7, the percent contribution of three
above-mentioned significant processing parameters namely
X
SSerror ¼ SStotal  SSfactor ð15Þ (C) the printing pressure, (A) the mixed rate of ink and (B)
the printing velocity are 28.91, 24.74, and 24.10%,
respectively. From the F-test analysis, those parameters
have been decided to be the significant factor again. From
DOFtotal ¼ n  1; DOFfactor ¼ L  1 ð16Þ the analysis of contribution in the process, the above three
operating factors are noticeable variable factors as the
resources of improving quality and the others are regarded
SSfactor Vfactor as unnoticeable variable factors to reduce production costs.
Vfactor ¼ ; Ffactor ¼ ð17Þ
DOF Verror
5.7 Confirmation tests and verify results

where SStotal is the total sum of squares, SSfactor is the
factorial sum of squares, n is the number of experiments,
DOF is the number of degrees of freedom, L is the number
of factor’s level, Vfactor is the variance of the factor, Ffactor
is the F ratio of the factor, η0i is the grey-fuzzy reasoning
While the optimal level of the processing parameters is
selected, the confirmation tests are processed to verify the
improvement of the response characteristics. The result of
the confirmation experiment is expressed by the predicted
grey-fuzzy reasoning grade b η0 . Using the residual analysis

Fig. 6 The response graph for 0.68

each level of the processing
parameters 0.66
Grey-fuzzy reasoning grade

0.64

0.62

0.60

0.58

0.56

0.54

0.52
A1 A2 A3 A4 B1 B2 B3 B4 C1 C2 C3 C4 D1 D2 D3 D4 E1 E2 E3 E4
Processing parameters level
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2009) 41:200–210 209

Table 7 Results of the analysis of variance

Symbol Processing parameter DOF Sum of squares Variance F Contribution

A Mixed rate of ink 3 0.0262 0.0087 4.0133 24.74%

B Velocity 3 0.0256 0.0085 3.9084 24.10%
C Pressure 3 0.0307 0.0102 4.6895 28.91%
D Material of scraper 3 0.0065 0.0022 1.0000 6.16%
E Angle of scraper 3 0.0171 0.0057 2.6096 16.09%
Error 0.0000
Total 15 0.1061 100.00%

[3, 12], the grey-fuzzy reasoning grade h^0 predicted for the is increased from 63.21 to 72.65%, the value of variance for
optimal level of the processing parameters can be calculated the illumination is reduced from 2.507 to 2.232 and the
as: thickness of printing ink is easily set to be 8.02 μm. The
predicted grey-fuzzy reasoning grade b η0 will be increased
X
K
b
η0 ¼ η0m þ ðη0i  η0m Þ ð18Þ to 0.8121, which is larger than all the grey-fuzzy reasoning
i¼1 grade η0 in the Table 5. Consequently, it is clearly shown
that the above-mentioned response characteristics in the
where η0i is the mean value of the grey-fuzzy reasoning
LGP printing process are greatly improved through this
grade at the optimal level and K is the number of the
study.
processing parameters that significantly affects the multiple
performance characteristics according to the results of the
ANOVA. In order to judge the closeness of the experimen-
6 Conclusions
tal value of b
η0 to that of the predicted value, the variance of
prediction error is determined and the corresponding two-
In this paper, a method of grey relational analysis and fuzzy
standard deviation confidence limits for the prediction error
logic based on the orthogonal array is proposed to achieve
of bη0 are calculated. From the results of conformity test,
the optimization of multi-response characteristics during the
summarized in Table 8, it can be observed that the
manufacturing process. Seven steps are included in the
calculated value of prediction error is within the confidence
optimal procedure proposed above. One real study case
limit for the obtained optimal processing parameters.
performed in the light guide plate (LGP) printing process
The results of grey-fuzzy logic optimization are also
substantiates that the optimum procedure proposed in this
shown in Table 8. The initial design processing parameters
study is feasible and effective. The conclusions of the
are A1, B2, C2, D2 and E2, which is the experiment 2 in
research are as follows:
the Table 3. As shown in Table 8, the results of optimal
processing parameters indicate that the illumination is (1) Through grey-fuzzy logic analysis, the procedure
improved from 328.387 to 343.751 cd/m2, the homogeny shows that the optimization of complicated multi-

Table 8 The comparing results of the initial and optimal processing parameters

Processing parameter Initial Optimal

Prediction Experiment

Level A1 B2 C2 D2 E2 A3 B2 C3 D3 E1 A3 B2 C3 D3 E1
Illumination (cd/m2) 328.387 344.651 343.751
Homogeny (%) 63.21 72.15 71.65
VAR of illumination 2.507 2.125 2.232
Printing ink thickness (μm) 8.21 8.01 8.02
Grey-fuzzy reasoning grade 0.5498 0.8121 0.8043
Improvement of the grey-fuzzy reasoning grade 0.2623 0.2545
Prediction error 0.078
Confidence limit ±1.783
210
response characteristics can be converted into the
optimization of a single grey-fuzzy reasoning grade.
As a result, this procedure can greatly simplify the
optimization procedure of the complicated multiple
response characteristics.
(2) The printing pressure, the mixed rate of ink, and the
printing velocity are the most significant machining
parameters with contribution percentage of 28.91,
24.74, and 24.10%, respectively, in the LGP printing
process.
(3) In the LGP printing process, the experimental results
obtained from the optimal setting have clarified that
the optimum procedure proposed in this study can
greatly improve the manufacturing process.
References
1. Taguchi G (1990) Introduction to quality engineering. Asian
Productivity Organization, Tokyo
2. Ross PJ (1996) Taguchi techniques for quality engineering.
McGraw-Hill International Editions, Singapore
3. Bendell A, Disney J, Pridmore WA (1989) Taguchi methods:
Applications in world Industry. IFS Publication, UK
4. Tarng YS, Yang WH (1998) Optimization of the weld bead
geometry in gas tungsten arc welding by the Taguchi method. Int J
Adv Manuf Technol 14:549–554
5. Deng CS, Chin JH (2005) Hole roundness in deep hole drilling as
analysed by Taguchi methods. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 25:420–426
6. Gaitonde VN, Karnik SR, Achyutha BT, Siddeswarappa B (2007)
Methodology of Taguchi optimization for multi-objective drilling
problem to minimize burr size. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 34:1–8
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2009) 41:200–210
7. Deng JL (1982) Control problems of grey systems. Sys Control
Lett 52:88–294
8. Deng JL (1989) Introduction to grey system. J Grey Sys 1(1):1–24
9. Lin JL, Lin CL (2002) The use of orthogonal array with Grey
relational analysis to optimize the electrical discharge machining
process with multiple performance characteristics. Int J Adv
Manuf Technol 42:237–244
10. Singh PN, Raghukandan K, Pai BC (2004) Optimization by Grey
relational analysis of EDM parameters on machining Al-10%SiCp
composites. J Mater Process Technol 155–156:1658–1661
11. Zadeh L (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf Contr 8:338–353
12. Zimmermann HJ (1985) Fuzzy set theory and its applications.
Kluwer, London
13. Lin CL, Lin JL, Ko TC (2002) Optimisation of the EDM process
based on the orthogonal array with fuzzy logic and grey relational
analysis method. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 19:271–277
14. Lin JL, Lin CL (2005) The use of grey-fuzzy for the optimization
of the manufacturing process. J Mater Process Technol 160:9–14
15. Wang WP, Peng YH, Li XY (2002) Fuzzy-grey prediction of
cutting force uncertainty in turning. J Mater Process Technol
129:663–666
16. Albert WL, Yao SC, Chen CK (2005) Development of an
integrated Grey-fuzzy-based electricity management system for
enterprises. Energy 30:2759–2771
17. Karmakar S, Mujumdar PP (2006) Grey fuzzy optimization model
for water quality management of a river system. Adv Water
Resour 29:1088–1105
18. O’Mara WC (1993) Liquid crystal flat panel display: manufacturing
science & technology. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York
19. Lin CS, Wu WZ, Lay YL, Chang MW (2001) A digital image-
based measurement system for LCD backlight module. Opt Laser
Technol 33:499–505
20. Feng D, Jin G, Yan Y, Fan S (2004) High-quality light guide
plates that can control the illumination angle based on microprism
structures. Appl Phys Lett 85(24):6016–6018
21. Fisher RA (1925) Statistical method for research worker. Oliver &
Boyd, London