Production Planning & Control,

Vol. 15, No. 3, April 2004, 336–341

Simultaneous determination of the optimal process

mean and cutting speed for a manufacturing
process
M. A. AL-FAWZAN and A. M. A. AL-AHMARI

Keywords Machining conditions, process mean, process
drift, cutting speed, process optimization
Abstract. The relationship between machining speed and the
process mean for a manufacturing process has received little
attention. This paper presents an analytical model and its solu-
tion procedure to simultaneously determine the optimal
machining speed and process mean when the objective is to
minimize the total cost per part. The total cost of the model
includes replacement (resetting), production and quality costs.
A global optimization algorithm is used to solve the proposed
unconstrained model. Numerical examples to demonstrate the
effectiveness of the proposed model are given and an extensive
sensitivity analysis of the proposed model parameters is
also provided. It has been concluded that machining speed
and process mean are highly related. Therefore, the machining
conditions should be taken into account when solving process
mean targeting problems.
1. Introduction
In most manufacturing areas, machine tools play an
important role in the production of quality components
(Jeang 1998). Tools that are used in this type of

Authors: M. A. Al-Fawzan (corresponding author), King Abdulaziz City for Science and
Technology, P.O. Box 6086, Riyadh 11442, Saudi Arabia. E-mail: mfawzan@kacst.edu.sa.
A. M. A. Al-Ahmari, Industrial Engineering Department, College of Engineering, King Saud
University, P.O. Box 800, Riyadh 11421, Saudi Arabia. E-mail: alahmari@ksu.edu.sa

MOHAMMAD A. AL-FAWZAN is an Associate Professor at King Abdulaziz City for Science and
Technology, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. He received his PhD in systems engineering from King
Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, in 1997. His research inter-
ests are in the areas of mathematical programming, production planning, quality control, and
maintenance. He has published in several journals including European Journal of Operational Research,
International Journal of Production Research, International Journal of Production Economics, Production
Planning & Control, Computers and Operations Research and Annals of Operations Research. He has been
an adjunct professor for King Saud University, industrial engineering department, since September
1998. He is a member in the council of the Saudi Industrial Engineering Chapter, Riyadh.

A. M. A. AL-AHMARI is Associate Professor at the Industrial Engineering Department, College of

Engineering, King Saud University, Saudi Arabia. Dr. Al-Ahmari obtained his PhD from the
Manufacturing Systems Division, University of Sheffield, UK. His research interests include
modelling, analysis and design of manufacturing systems, computer-integrated manufacturing,
cellular manufacturing, and simulation.

Production Planning & Control ISSN 0953–7287 print/ISSN 1366–5871 online # 2004 Taylor & Francis Ltd
http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
DOI: 10.1080/09537280410001658353
 Simultaneous determination of the optimal process mean and cutting speed
production wear over time. The tool wear is usually
affected by machining speed, which has a major influence
on the tool life and tool replacement period. Consequently,
there are relationships between the dimensional toler-
ances of parts in machining and process parameters
such as cutting speed.
Two major problems of manufacturing processes have
long been a field of interest for many researchers. These
two problems are (a) selection of process conditions and
(b) tool replacement and resetting considerations. Many
researchers have considered the first problem. Ermer
and Kromodihardjo (1981) and Gopalakrishnan and
Al-Khayyal (1991) considered the single and multipass
turning operations based upon some practical constraints
(speed, feed, cutting tool life, cutting force and surface
roughness) using minimum production cost or time cri-
teria. Yellowey and Gunn (1989) considered the optimal
subdivision of depth of cut for both turning and milling
operations without knowledge of the relevant tool life
equation. They considered cutting power and torque
constraints. Shin and Joo (1992) presented a model for
multipass turning operation using a fixed machining
interval. They used dynamic programming approach
for the selection of depth of cut for individual passes.
Gupta et al. (1995) considered the optimal subdivisions
of depth of cut using two steps. The first step is the
minimization cost for rough and finish passes for various
fixed depth of cut. In the second step, an optimal combi-
nation of depths of cut for rough passes and the finish
pass, the optimal number of passes and the minimum
total cost are determined using an integer programming
model. Lee et al. (1999) also developed a fuzzy non-linear
programming model to optimize machining operations.
Arezoo et al. (2000) developed an expert system for selec-
tion of cutting tools and conditions of turning operations
using Prolog. That system can be used to select the tool
holder, insert and cutting conditions (feed, speed and
depth of cut). They used dynamic programming to opti-
mize cutting conditions. Cakir and Gurarda (2000) pre-
sented a procedure to select the machining conditions for
milling operations according to the minimum cost criter-
ion. They used a circular direction search method to find
the optimum values of machining conditions. Hitomi
(1996) considered the multi-stage of a flow-type auto-
mated manufacturing system under three criteria: the
minimum production time, the minimum production
cost and the maximum profit rate. He developed an
optimization algorithm to determine the optimal
machining speeds to be utilized on the multi-type stages
of the manufacturing system. Unfortunately, these papers
derived the optimal machining conditions independently
of other important process factors such as tool resetting,
replacement strategies and quality aspects.
337
The second problem (tool replacement and resetting)
has also been considered by several researchers. Chen
and Chung (1996) considered the problem of joint deter-
mination of the optimal process mean and the production
run for a process and extended the quality selection pro-
blem to production systems in which the process mean
(target) shifts to an out-of-control state due to an assign-
able cause. Sheikh et al. (1999) proposed optimal cost
models for replacement and resetting using renewal func-
tions. Rahim and Banerjee (1988) also considered the
problem of selecting the optimal production run for a
process with random linear drifts. They used a search
algorithm and a graphical method to find the optimal
production run. Rahim and Banerjee’s model was
extended by Al-Sultan and Al-Fawzan (1997a) to have
both upper and lower specification limits. Al-Sultan and
Al-Fawzan’s model can be used to find the optimal initial
setting of the process mean and the optimal production
cycle length. They used the Hooke and Jeeves search
algorithm to optimize their model. Jeang (1998) devel-
oped a model to determine optimal tool replacement
policies in consideration of possible tool failure. His
model determined the optimal initial tool setting and
optimal tool replacement time. Al-Sultan and Raouf
(1998) considered a production process with a continuous
drift in the mean of a quality characteristic of the product
and proposed models for this problem taking into con-
sideration the drift to be either known in advance and
constant, or occurs randomly. La Commare et al. (1983)
suggested models for tool replacement strategies in man-
ufacturing systems considering a penalty cost if the tool
fails during the cut. Their proposed models are based
upon general stochastic tool life distribution. For more
details about the problem of process mean setting (target-
ing), the reader can refer to Al-Fawzan (1999) and Al-
Fawzan and Al-Sultan (1996). All of the aforementioned
papers have not considered the effect of machining con-
ditions such as cutting speed on the process mean setting.
In this paper, the two problems (i.e. determination of
machining speed and process mean setting) are consid-
ered jointly in an unconstrained model to determine the
optimal cutting speed and process mean with the objec-
tive to minimize total production, resetting and quality
costs. The rest of this paper is organized as follows.
Section 2 contains the notation; section 3 presents the
proposed model and its solution procedures; section 4
presents numerical examples and extensive sensitivity
analysis; section 5 concludes the paper.
2. Notation
USL upper specification limit (mm)
LSL lower specification limit (mm)
338 M. A. Al-Fawzan and A. M. A. Al-Ahmari

(t) process mean at time t (mm) The production time per part can be calculated as
 process variance (mm) follows:
T cycle length (tool replacement time) (min) tp ¼ t1 þ tm ð3Þ
t1 handling time (min)
tc tool change time (min) where tm ¼ k/v.
tp production time per part (min) Tool replacement time can be calculated using the
tm machining time per part (min) well-known Taylor equation:
w wear rate (mm/min)
c1=n
c constant in the Taylor tool life equation T¼ ð4Þ
v
n Exponent in the Taylor tool life equation
k machining constant The replacement cost per part is given as:
Cdu cost of a defective part due to USL ($/part) t
CR ¼ ðCt þ Cm tc Þ m ð5Þ
Cdl cost of a defective part due to LSL ($/part) T
Cm machine rate per unit time ($/min) The quality cost per part is:
Ct tool cost ($/tool edge) " Z ( !)
T
TC(
0,v) total cost per part given that the initial 1 USL

ðtÞ
CQ ¼ C 1
 dt
process mean and the cutting speed ($/part) T du 0 
ZT ! #
Decision variables LSL

ðtÞ
þCdl  dt ð6Þ

0 initial setting of the process mean (mm) 0 
v cutting speed (m/min)
where T is as given in (4).
The production cost per part can be calculated as
follows:
3. The proposed model and its solution
CP ¼ Cm tp ð7Þ
3.1. The proposed model
Hence, the total cost per part can be obtained using (5),
(6) and (7):
Al-Sultan and Al-Fawzan (1997a) presented an exten-
sion of the Rahim and Banerjee (1988) model for a TCð
0 ; vÞ ¼ CR þ CQ þ CP ð8Þ
process with a random linear drift. They suggested the
expected total cost during the production cycle, T, to be
as follows:
EðTCÞ ¼ CR þ TCl Dl ðT;
Þ þ TCu Du ðT;
Þ 3.2. The proposed model solution
þ Cp T ½r
Dl ðT;
Þ
Du ðT;
Þ ð1Þ A direct approach for solving this problem is to use
where R is the replacement cost, Cp is the cost of one of the multidimensional search algorithms, such as
producing conforming units, and Cu(Cl) is the cost of the Hooke and Jeeves method (see Bazaraa et al. 1993).
a non-conforming unit due to USL (LSL), respectively, Moreover, since our objective function cannot be claimed
and Du(T,
) Dl(T,
) is the average number of defective to be convex, global optimality of our solution is not
units due to USL (LSL), respectively, during a produc- guaranteed. For this reason, we propose to use the
tion cycle. It has been suggested that a tool wearout is an global algorithm that was developed by Al-Sultan and
example of positive drift in manufacturing processes. In Al-Fawzan (1997b) to solve our model. Their algorithm
the above model (1), resetting cost and production cost is based on the tabu search technique. In the next
have been kept constant. However, in manufacturing paragraph, we give a brief description of tabu search.
processes, the effect of cutting speed on the production Tabu search is a metaheuristic that guides local heur-
run cannot be ignored. In this paper, the model of istic search procedures to explore the solution space
Al-Sultan and Al-Fawzan (1997a) is extended to beyond local optimality. It was introduced by Glover
incorporate the cutting speed. (1986, 1989, 1990) specifically for combinatorial
The process mean at time t is given by problems. Since then, tabu search has been applied to a
wide range of problem settings in which it has consis-

ðtÞ ¼
0 þ wt ð2Þ
tently found better solutions than methods previously
where w is assumed to be known and constant. The pro- applied to these problems. Tabu search starts at some
cess mean (
0) is the diameter of workpiece, that can be initial point and then moves successively among neigh-
programmed on CNC using diameter programming. bouring points. At each iteration, a move is made to the
 Simultaneous determination of the optimal process mean and cutting speed 339

best point in the neighbourhood of the current point
which may not be an improving solution. The method
forbids (makes tabu) points with certain attributes with
the goals of preventing cycling and guiding the search
towards unexplored regions of the solution space. This
is done using an important feature of the tabu search
method called a tabu list. The tabu list consists of the
latest moves made so that recently visited points are
not generated again. The size of the tabu list can be
either fixed or variable. In its simplest form, tabu search
requires the following ingredients: an initial point; a
mechanism for generating some neighbourhood of the
current point; a tabu list; an aspiration criterion; and a
stopping criterion. For a complete description of this
method, the interested reader is referred to the papers
of Glover (1989, 1990).
4. Numerical examples
To illustrate the usefulness of the developed model,
three manufacturing examples are presented. Table 1
illustrates the data of the problems.
Table 2 shows the optimal solutions found using the
global algorithm of Al-Sultan and Al-Fawzan (1997b).
For all three examples,
0 lies within the specification
limits. This is not a general conclusion and it may lie
outside the specification limits in other situations, as
can be seen later in this section.
The total cost as a function of
0 and v for example 1 is
depicted in figure 1. The convexity of TC(
0, v) for the
three examples is shown.
To investigate the effect of changing model parameters
on process mean and cutting speed, an extensive sensitiv-
ity analysis is provided. Tables 3 to 8 illustrate the results
of the sensitivity analysis based on the first example. The
observations of these results are as follows:
. Table 3 illustrates the effect of changing the value
of Cm on the process mean and cutting speed. As
expected, the results show that increasing value of
Cm leads to higher values of the process mean, cut-
ting speed and total cost. When the cost of operating
the machine, Cm, is high, one would like to reduce
the total cost per part by increasing the number
of parts produced during one cycle. This can be
achieved by increasing the production rate, which
is, in its simplest form, the reciprocal of the machin-
ing time. From (3), one can reduce the machining
time by increasing the cutting speed.

Table 1. Data for examples 1, 2 and 3.

Parameter Example 1 Example 2 Example 3
 1 1 1
USL 51 21 30.01
LSL 49 19 29.99
Cdl 2 3 4
Cdu 2 3 4
Figure 1. TC(
0, v) as a function of
0 and v for example 1.
w 0.1 0.1 0.1
k 153 4 100
c 200 60 100
n 0.2 0.16 0.23 Table 3. Effect of Cm.
t1 3 4 5
tct 1 2 3 Cm
0 v* TCð
0 ; v Þ
Ct 3 4 7
0.05 49.18589 114.4845 1.201980
Cm 0.25 0.17 0.33
0.25 49.25727 116.5138 2.084057
0.45 49.30764 118.2772 2.963062
0.65 49.35859 120.0022 3.839264
0.85 49.40067 121.7009 4.712944
Table 2. Optimal solutions to examples 1, 2 and 3. 1.05 49.43589 123.1561 5.584375
Parameter Example 1 Example 2 Example 3 1.25 49.46829 124.5959 6.453824
1.45 49.49802 126.0968 7.321529

0 49.25 19.679 29.9904 1.65 49.52235 127.2943 8.187710
 1.85 49.54189 128.4800 9.052556
v 116.36 44.57 50.78
TCð
0 ; v Þ 2.084 1.7325 4.663 2.05 49.61287 129.5183 9.916235
340 M. A. Al-Fawzan and A. M. A. Al-Ahmari

Table 4. Effect of Cdl. Table 7. Effect of tool wear, w.

Cdl
0 v* TCð
0 ; v Þ w
0 TCð
0 ; v Þ
1 48.68626 112.94 1.850596 0.01 49.78092 93.910 1.920488
2 49.25277 116.36 2.084057 0.11 49.22450 117.790 2.100054
3 49.53102 117.70 2.234150 0.21 48.99649 127.290 2.240792
4 49.71939 118.49 2.344035 0.31 48.86637 133.490 2.357990
5 49.91309 118.87 2.429928 0.41 48.68874 138.030 2.460269
6 49.96856 119.08 2.499850 0.51 48.56129 141.540 2.551879
7 50.05981 119.32 2.558384 0.61 48.44348 144.410 2.635273
8 50.19091 119.30 2.608404 0.71 48.32571 146.730 2.712014
9 50.20399 119.32 2.651828 0.81 48.21010 148.650 2.783162
10 50.26623 119.35 2.690007 0.91 48.13649 150.260 2.849464
1.01 47.98154 151.650 2.911458
1.11 47.85291 152.600 2.969525
1.21 47.76209 153.210 3.023919
Table 5. Effect of Cdu. 1.31 47.42067 152.820 3.074770
1.41 47.35381 153.480 3.122055
Cdu
0 v* TCð
0 ; v Þ 1.51 47.06784 152.518 3.165460
1 49.57349 112.97 1.850596
2 49.25113 116.42 2.084057
3 49.05208 117.68 2.234151
Table 8. Effect of process variance, .
4 48.91008 118.43 2.344035
5 48.79276 118.87 2.429928 
0 v* TCð
0 ; v Þ
6 48.69642 119.06 2.499850
7 48.61200 119.23 2.558384 0.1 49.14535 113.36 1.351654
8 48.50389 119.21 2.608403 0.4 49.39744 121.64 1.516003
9 48.47265 119.29 2.651828 0.7 49.37643 120.69 1.807746
10 48.41223 119.28 2.690006 1 49.25064 116.35 2.084057
1.3 49.10105 112.20 2.289570
1.6 48.95558 108.90 2.438910
1.9 48.78143 106.20 2.550123
Table 6. Effect of tool cost, Ct. 2.2 48.70997 103.90 2.635530
2.5 48.55273 102.06 2.702994
Ct
0 v* TCð
0 ; v Þ 2.8 48.40777 100.54 2.757580
1 49.53115 127.82 1.878109
2 49.36969 120.48 1.990376
3 49.25167 116.39 2.084057 the process mean and cutting speed, respectively.
4 49.15011 113.52 2.167264 This is expected since, as the tool cost gets higher,
5 49.05980 111.20 2.243371 one needs to slow down the cutting speed in order to
6 48.98162 109.46 2.314179 elongate the tool life (tool replacement cycle).
7 48.90575 107.85 2.380796
8 48.83585 106.60 2.443960 . Table 7 shows the effect of the tool wear rate. As the
9 48.76856 105.39 2.504194 tool wear rate gets higher, the process mean gets
10 48.73837 104.26 2.561884 lower and the cutting speed gets higher in order to
have smaller tool replacement cycle.
. The results in table 8 show that a higher process
. The results illustrated in table 4 indicate that the
variance decreases the values of the process mean
higher value of Cdl leads to a higher value of the pro-
and cutting speed but increases the total cost.
cess mean to guard for producing non-conforming
products due to LSL. Table 5 shows the effect of
changing the value of Cdu, which has a similar
interpretation. Tables 4 and 5 also show that 5. Conclusion
when Cdl or Cdu increases, a greater penalty is
incurred when producing non-conforming units, This paper presents an economic model to jointly
and hence tool replacement time gets smaller (cut- determine the optimal process mean and cutting speed
ting speed gets higher, see (4)), to reduce number for a manufacturing process when the objective is the
of non-conforming units. minimization of the total cost per part consisting of pro-
. Table 6 illustrates that decreasing (increasing) the duction cost, resetting cost and quality cost. A global
unit cost of the tool leads to higher (lower) values of search algorithm is employed to find the optimal process
 Simultaneous determination of the optimal process mean and cutting speed
mean and machining speed. It is concluded that the pro-
cess mean is affected by the selection of machining speed.
The proposed model can be applied in various manufac-
turing processes such as turning, milling and drilling. The
proposed model can be utilized as a building block in
most of the expert systems developed for selection of
machining conditions. This work can be extended to
include other parameters of the manufacturing process,
such as feed rate and depth of cut, and solved using an
appropriate method.
References
AL-FAWZAN, M. A., 1999, Optimal monitoring of a production
process subject to random deterioration. Proceedings of the 8th
Annual Industrial Engineering Research Conference, pp. 269–274.
Phoenix, Arizona, USA, 23–24 May 1999.
AL-FAWZAN, M. A., and AL-SULTAN, K. S., 1996, The optimal
control of a production process subject to drift and shift in
the process mean: a survey. Proceedings of the 20th International
Conference on Computers and Industrial Engineering, pp. 961–964.
Kyongjo, Korea, 6–9 October 1996.
AL-SULTAN, K. S., and AL-FAWZAN, M.A., 1997a, An extension
of Rahim and Banerjee’s model for a process with upper and
lower specification limits. International Journal of Production
Economics, 53, 265–280.
AL-SULTAN, K. S., and AL-FAWZAN, M. A., 1997b, A tabu
search hook and jeeves algorithm for unconstrained optimi-
zation. European Journal of Operational Research, 103, 198–208.
AL-SULTAN, K. S., and RAOUF, A., 1998, Optimal production
run for processes with constant and random drifts.
International Journal of Production Economics, 56, 13–19.
AREZOO, B., RIDGWAY, K., and AL-AHMARI, A., 2000, Selection
of cutting tools and conditions of machining operations using
an expert system. Computers in Industry, 42, 43–58.
CAKIR, M., and GURARDA, A., 2000, Optimization of machining
conditions for multi-tool milling operations. International
Journal of Production Research, 38, 3537–3552.
CHEN, S., and CHUNG, K., 1996, Determination of optimal
production run and the most profitable process mean for a
production process. International Journal of Production Research,
34, 2051–2058.
341
ERMER, D., and KROMODIHARDJO, S., 1981, Optimization of
multipass turning with constraints. Transactions of the ASME
Journal of Engineering for Industry, 10, 462–468.
GLOVER, F., 1986, Future paths for integer programming
and linkage to artificial intelligence. Computers and Operations
Research, 13, 533–549.
GLOVER, F., 1989, Tabu search–Part I. ORSA Journal on
Computing, 1, 190–206.
GLOVER, F., 1990, Tabu search–Part II. ORSA Journal on
Computing, 2, 4–32.
GOPALAKRISHNAN, B., and AL-KHAYYAL, F., 1991, Machine
parameter selection for turning with constraints: an analyti-
cal approach based on geometric programming. International
Journal of Production Research, 29, 1897–1908.
GUPTA, R., BATRA, J., and LAL, G., 1995, Determination of
optimal subdivisions of depth of cut in multipass turning
with constraints. International Journal of Production Research,
33, 2555–2565.
HITOMI, K., 1996, Manufacturing Systems Engineering (London:
Taylor & Francis).
JEANG, A., 1998, Reliable tool replacement policy for quality
and cost. European Journal of Operational Research, 108,
334–344.
LA COMMARE, U., DIEGA, S., and PASSANNANTI, A., 1983,
Optimal tool replacement policies with penalty cost for
unforeseen tool failure. International Journal of Machine Tool
Design and Research, 23, 237–243.
LEE, H., YANG, B., and MOON, K., 1999, An economic machin-
ing process model using fuzzy non-linear programming and
neural network. International Journal of Production Research, 37,
835–847.
RAHIM, M., and BANERJEE, P., 1988, Optimal production run
for a process with random linear drift. Omega, 16, 347–351.
SHEIKH, A., RAOUF, A., and SEKERDEY, U., 1999, Optimal tool
replacement and resetting strategies in automated manufac-
turing systems. International Journal of Production Research, 37,
917–937.
SHIN, Y., and JOO, Y., 1992, Optimization of machining
conditions with practical constraints. International Journal of
Production Research, 30, 2907–2919.
YELLOWEY, I., and GUNN, E., 1989, The optimal subdivision of
cut in multipass machining operations. International Journal of
Production Research, 27, 1573–1579.