j o u r n a l o f m a t e r i a l s p r o c e s s i n g t e c h n o l o g y 2 0 3 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 72–79

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jmatprotec

An intelligent system for predicting HPDC process variables

in interactive environment

Jitender K. Rai, Amir M. Lajimi, Paul Xirouchakis ∗

Institute of Production and Robotics, LICP, EPFL, CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The selection of optimal parameters in high pressure die casting process (HPDC) has been
Received 12 June 2006 long recognized as a complex nonlinear problem due to the involvement of a large number
Received in revised form 1 June 2007 of interconnected process variables, each influencing the flow behavior of molten metal
Accepted 8 October 2007 inside the die cavity and thus part quality and productivity. In the present work a physical
model called Neural Network based Casting Process model (NN-CastPro) has been developed
for real time estimation of optimal HPDC process parameters. By submitting a set of four
Keywords: process parameters (having major impact on productivity and part quality) namely, (i) inlet
ANN melt temperature, (ii) mold initial temperature, (iii) inlet first phase velocity and (iv) inlet
HPDC second phase velocity, as input to the NN-CastPro, values for filling time, solidification time
Filling time and porosity can be obtained simultaneously. The proposed artificial neural network (ANN)
Solidification time model was trained using data generated by ProCast (an FEM-based flow simulation software).
Porosity The obtained prediction accuracy and enhanced functional capabilities of NN-CastPro show
its improved performance over other models available in the literature.
© 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
In today’s competitive environment high pressure die casting
process is playing a vital role in meeting the needs of modern
manufacturing industries by reducing lead time from design
to manufacture and facilitating high volume economical pro-
duction of complex automotive parts (such as automatic
transmission housing, piston heads, gear box components,
etc.) requiring better surface finish and higher dimensional
accuracy, as high as 0.2% of casting dimensions (Katzarov,
2003; Tai, 2000; KoBaS, 2007). An entire HPDC process cycle
passes through four main stages viz. (i) filling of runner half
and bringing the molten metal (such as alloys of aluminum,
copper and zinc) up to the feeding gate with a low velocity
ranging from 1.2 to 4.9 m/s, (ii) filling of casting cavity with
very high velocity (16.6–22.8 m/s) (iii) the solidification phase
and (iv) the ejection phase where moulded part is removed,
die halves are sprayed and positioned back to repeat the cycle
(KoBaS, 2007). Quality control over the entire moulding cycle is
mainly governed from the settings of various process parame-
ters such as, inlet melt temperature, mold initial temperature,
inlet first phase velocity, inlet second phase velocity, each
phase duration, etc., selection of which solely depends on
the experience and judgements of the human experts. Also
due to the involvement of large number of interrelated pro-
cess parameters it is analytically difficult to model nonlinear
flow behavior of molten metal inside the die cavity. A need
thus exist for the development of models for fast and accurate
prediction of moulding parameters, development of which
will not only shorten the reaction time of this process but
will also result in achieving better part quality and higher
productivity.
During the last decade die casting process simulations
have been mainly achieved through numerical techniques
like finite element method (FEM), finite difference method

∗
Corresponding author. Fax: +41 21 693 35 09.
E-mail addresses: jitenderkumar.rai@epfl.ch (J.K. Rai), paul.xirouchakis@epfl.ch (P. Xirouchakis).
0924-0136/$ – see front matter © 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2007.10.011
 j o u r n a l o f m a t e r i a l s p r o c e s s i n g t e c h n o l o g y 2 0 3 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 72–79
Nomenclature
En number of epochs
LR learning rate
tf filling time (s)
ts solidification time (s)
Tmelt inlet melt temperature (K)
Tmold mold initial temperature (K)
V1 inlet first phase velocity (m/s)
V2 inlet second phase velocity (m/s)
(FDM) or boundary element method (BEM) (Katzarov, 2003;
Tai, 2000; Davey and Bounds, 1997). At present various FEM-
based software such as ProCast, MoldFlow TM , C-Mold, etc.
for complex 3D flow behaviour simulations of molten metal
inside the die cavities are available. Excessive computational
time and high software price limit the use of these software
mainly in research by academicians or large manufacturing
enterprises. In recent years researchers had also shown keen
interest in developing artificial intelligence (AI)-based eco-
nomically sound models for fast and accurate prediction of
moulding parameters. AI techniques like ANN, GAs in com-
bination with DoE (design of experiments) techniques like
Taguchi method had been widely used for solving complicated
and multivariable manufacturing problems (Krimpenis et al.,
2006; Yarlagadda, 2002, 2000; Yarlagadda and Ang Teck Khong,
2001; Yarlagadda and Chiang, 1999; Syrcos, 2003; Suneel et al.,
2002). In the recent work of Krimpenis et al. (2006) a hybrid
model comprising of ANN and GA was developed for the
optimal selection of pressure die casting process parameters.
Here based on DoE results a total of 16 data sets (obtained
from ProCAST simulations) were used to train two indepen-
dent neural network configurations predicting solidification
time and defects (i.e. filling/incomplete filling) with achieved
mean relative error of 8.9 and 15%, respectively. Yarlagadda
and Ang Teck Khong (2001) presented a two-stage neural
network system where the first stage output namely filling
time is given as input to the second stage along with other
three input parameters for predicting injection pressure. In
Syrcos (2003) for optimizing casting density, optimal settings
of die casting parameters were obtained from the experimen-
tal data using Taguchi method. In most of these works the
selection of process parameters were made based on a single
objective criterion such as solidification/filling time (influenc-
ing productivity) or casting density/porosity (influencing part
quality). Despite a significant amount of published research
work in this area, still there is lack of comprehensive models
which by taking into account the complex relations between
the overall moulding process variables help in achieving opti-
mal results (i.e. better quality and higer productivity) from a
given moulding machine by assigning appropriate values to
process variables in an interactive environment.
This paper reports the design and implementaion issues
of a generic ANN-based HPDC process model (NN-CastPro)
developed for providing real time assistance to machine oper-
ators in setting optimal process parameters during various
phases of a moulding process cycle. The main advantages of
the proposed system over previous works are: it provides three
73
Fig. 1 – Test part(switch frame).
outputs namely filling time, solidification time and porosity
from a single configuration with better prediction accuracy.
The generic neural network architecture with an user friendly
environment allow users to configure the system to any set
of input–output parameter combinations. Moreover the sys-
tem can be easily integrated with the machine controller
for real time estimation and automatic setting of process
variables.
2. Selection of HPDC process parameters
The casting process parameters that may affect quality and
productivity of any moulding machine are grouped into four
categories namely, (i) machine related parameters such as
plunger velocity, injection pressure, etc., (ii) cast metal related
parameters like melt temperature, melt composition, (iii) die
related parameters like die venting system design, die cool-
ing system design, die initial temperature, etc. and (iv) shot
sleeve related parameters such as shot sleeve dimensions and
filling level (Han and Xu, 2005; Helenius et al., 2005). After mak-
ing detailed discussions with Urpemak, Spain (pressure die
casting system manufacturer and an industrial partner in the
KoBaS project (KoBaS, 2007)) and conducting various experi-
ments using ProCast software on the test part shown in Fig. 1,
it was found that, among the above-mentioned parameters,
the most significant are, melt temperature, mold tempera-
ture, first and second phase plunger velocities. The influence
of each of these parameters on productivity factors (such as,
filling time and solidification time) and quality factor (such as,
porosity) are shown in Figs. 2 and 3. Improper selection of any
of these parameters may cause defects (such as voids, sinks,
distortions and cracks) in the castings and longer process cycle
time. For instance, too high melt temperature may result in
problems with mould filling such as jetting, splashing or air
entrapment due to decrease in viscosity, therefore it must be
set to an optimal value within the specified liquidus–solidus
range of the cast alloy. Increasing the mould temperature
reduces heat losses and the maximum temperature differ-
ence at the end mould filling stage. This improves part quality,
but increases cooling time consequently the production time.
On the other hand, plunger velocity is having its own sig-
nificance as too high first phase plunger velocity may lead
to incomplete filling of the casting cavity, however, too low
74 j o u r n a l o f m a t e r i a l s p r o c e s s i n g t e c h n o l o g y 2 0 3 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 72–79

Fig. 2 – Characteristics of HPDC process parameters w.r.t. Tmelt and Tmold (normalized values on X–Y axis).

plunger velocity during any phase results in longer process
cycle time. Therefore, in the present work inlet melt tem-
perature, mold initial temperature, inlet first phase velocity,
inlet second phase velocity were considered as driver factors
(ANN inputs) and filling time, solidification time and porosity
as driven factors (ANN outputs) of the moulding process.
3. Neural networks
been given to analyze. This expert can then be used to provide
projections given new situations of interest and answer “what
if” questions. Other advantages of ANN include—(i) Adaptive
learning: an ability to learn how to do tasks based on the data
given for training or initial experience, (ii) Self-organisation:
an ANN can create its own organization or representation of
the information it receives during the learning phase and (iii)
Real time operation: ANN computations may be carried out in
parallel (Huang and Zhang, 1993; Masters,1993).

Artificial neural networks, with their remarkable ability to

derive meaning from complicated or imprecise data, can be 4. NN-CastPro design and implementation
used to extract pattern and detect trends that are too complex issues
to be noticed by either humans or other computer techniques
(Huang and Zhang, 1993). A trained neural network can be In the present work a feed-forward multilayer supervised neu-
thought of as an “expert” in the category of information it has ral network architecture was developed for predicting three

Fig. 3 – Characteristics of HPDC process parameters w.r.t. V1 and V2 (normalized values on X–Y axis).
 j o u r n a l o f m a t e r i a l s p r o c e s s i n g t e c h n o l o g y 2 0 3 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 72–79
Table 1 – Selected HPDC process parameters
S. no Parameter Range
1 Tmelt 405–430
2 Tmold 115–155
3 V1 1.0–5.0
4 V2 15–24
outputs namely filling time (tf ), solidification time (ts ), and
porosity for a given set of four input variables as listed in
Table 1. The developed ANN architecture comprise of five
layers viz. the input layer, three hidden layers and the out-
put layer. As shown in Fig. 4, four neurons in the input
layer represent the selected driver factors and the three neu-
rons in the output layer corresponds to the driven factors.
Whereas the number of hidden layer(s)/neurons was selected
using the hit and trial approach, i.e. various combinations
of hidden layer(s)/neurons were extensively experimented
upon before the final configuration which yields better accu-
racy was selected. The activation function selected for the
present work is the sigmoidal function defined by the logistic
function
1 Cast. Referring to the Zamak (zinc alloy) test part shown in
f (x) =
1 + e−x
where x is the summed weighted outputs to the neurons and
 is the sigmoid gain (threshold).
A Windows-based neural-network toolbox with user
friendly graphical interface (Fig. 5) developed during the
course of this research work using C++ (Masters, 1993) and
Java programming language was used to train the proposed
predictive model. The proposed system architecture comprise
of two main module: (i) training and test data post-processing
module, and (ii) the ANN module. The post-processing mod-
ule mainly deals with the normalization and formatting of
the training and test data sets which are then input to the
ANN module to train the network. One can functionally acti-
vate the proposed system by simply executing the following
tasks
Step 1: First, specify the maximum–minimum range values
for the selected input and output variables as shown
in Fig. 5 for normalizing the training and test data sets
in the range 0–1.
Step 2: Set the neural network parameters (shown in Fig. 5)
appropriately and upload training and test data sets
to the ANN module.
Step 3: Execute the network training.
Fig. 4 – NN-CastPro neural network configuration.
75
Selected values (training) Selected values (testing)
410, 418, 425 413, 416, 422
120, 135, 150 125, 138, 146
1.2, 3.5, 4.9 1.9, 2.8, 4.0
16.6, 18.7, 20.8, 22.8 17.2, 19.5, 21.4, 22.2
5. Gathering and preprocessing of training
data
Any neural network will not be able to identify the relation
between the given input–output parameters unless it is prop-
erly trained using accurate data, hence sufficient care must
be taken in the preparation of training data. Few prerequi-
sites for the preparation of training data are: for modelling
any nonlinear problem a minimum of three levels for each
input parameter must be chosen, the training data must
cover the wide variety of possible ranges and values of each
input–output parameter must be normalized appropriately.
This training data could either be collected by conducting tests
on a real machine or using FEM-based simulators like Pro-
(1)
Fig. 1 and specified process parameters range(Table 1), a total
of 185 test cases were designed and executed in batch run
mode, on a 2.99 GHz 2GB RAM Windows workstation running
ProCast. Simulation results, i.e. filling time, solidification time
and porosity values for these test cases with varying combi-
nation of input parameters were obtained in 28 days, taking
into account average computational time of 3.5 h/test and total
simulation setup time of 18 h. This data set of 185 data series
was divided into two representative subsets of 105 and 80 data
series, respectively. The first subset was used for ANN train-
ing and the second for checking the trained ANN’s prediction
accuracy using unknown inputs. Chosen levels for the selected
input parameters are depicted in Table 1.
Each data series (comprising four inputs and three output
variables) was normalized in the range 0–1 using the following
equation
v − min A
v = (2)
max A − min A
where A is an attribute, having maximum and minimum val-
ues of max A and min A; max–min normalization maps v of A
to v in the range 0–1. Table 2 presents a sample of normalized
data sets used to train the proposed neural network.
6. Training and testing
The proposed ANN model was trained using the back propoga-
tion (BP) alogorithm (Masters, 1993). The back propagation (BP)
algorithm is the most widely used method for determining the
error derivative of the weight (error surface gradient). The BP
algorithm progresses iteratively, through a number of epochs
(an epoch is a single pass through the entire training set).
On each epoch, the training cases are submitted to the net-
work, and the target and actual outputs compared and the
76 j o u r n a l o f m a t e r i a l s p r o c e s s i n g t e c h n o l o g y 2 0 3 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 72–79

Fig. 5 – NN-CastPro user interface.

Table 2 – A sample of normalized training data

S. no Tmelt Tmold V1 V2 tf ts Porosity (%)

1 0.2000 0.1250 0.0500 0.1778 0.2800 0.7143 0.9100

2 0.2000 0.1250 0.0500 0.6444 0.2775 0.7143 0.8989
3 0.2000 0.1250 0.0500 0.8667 0.2725 0.7143 0.8956
· · · · · · · ·
· · · · · · · ·
· · · · · · · ·
61 0.5200 0.1250 0.6250 0.8667 0.2050 0.8571 0.2344
62 0.5200 0.1250 0.9750 0.1778 0.2050 0.8571 0.1822
63 0.8000 0.5000 0.9750 0.4111 0.4600 0.7143 0.1800
· · · · · · · ·
· · · · · · · ·
· · · · · · · ·
103 0.8000 0.5000 0.9750 0.6444 0.4500 0.7143 0.1767
104 0.8000 0.5000 0.9750 0.8667 0.4500 0.7143 0.1711
105 0.8000 0.8750 0.0500 0.1778 0.8150 0.4286 0.9100
 j o u r n a l o f m a t e r i a l s p r o c e s s i n g t e c h n o l o g y 2 0 3 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 72–79 77

Table 3 – Prediction accuracy for different network

Mean error (%)

topologies with three outputs

0.558
0.681
0.510
0.871
1.355
4.017
3.699
6.604
5.611
3.929
Network configuration LR Momentum En Ej (%)

4-15-3 0.2 0.1 5 10.913

4-10-10-3 0.2 0.2 5 8.018
4-8-8-8-3 0.2 0.3 5 3.5

error calculated. This error, together with the error surface

Porosity
Absolute percentage error
gradient is used to adjust the weights, and then the process is

1.017
0.862
1.034
2.105
1.695
0.172
0.000
1.000
0.333
0.169
repeated. An overall performance measurement of the neural
network is also done by calculating the mean absolute error
(Ej , obtained from Eq. (3)) for each data series of the test set
after a certain number of training cycle/epochs. The learning
process terminates once the predefined convergence criteria,

0.334
0.745
0.385
0.199
0.106
0.478
0.553
1.374
0.604
0.044
ts
i.e. the number of attempts without any improvement in Emean
(obtained from Eq. (4)) met.

0.323
0.435
0.110
0.310
2.264
11.401
10.544
17.439
15.894
11.572

n0

tf
((Oai − Oni /Oai ) × 100)
i=1
Ej = (3)
n0

Porosity (%)

0.059
0.058
0.058
0.057
0.059
0.058
0.058

0.059

nt

0.06
0.06
Ej
j=1

ProCast
Emean = (4)
nt

1.497
1.637
1.635
1.611
1.611
1.589
1.591
1.427
1.522
1.585
where Ej is the mean absolute error for each jth test set, Oa

ts
and On are the actual and the neural network predicted ith
output, n0 is the total number of outputs and Emean is the mean
0.0310
0.0919
0.0911
0.0323
0.0265
0.0614
0.0607
0.0453
0.0453
0.0458
absolute error for the entire test sets (nt ).
tf

In the current work for analyzing the topological effect on

neural network performance different cases were considered.
Topologies were varied by varying the number of outputs, the
Porosity (%)

number of hidden layers and the corresponding number of

0.0596
0.0575
0.0574
0.0582
0.0580
0.0581
0.0580
0.0606
0.0598
0.0589
neurons. Also for analyzing the effect of individual training
parameters such as learning rate, momentum , number of
NN-CastPro

epochs and sigmoid gain on the performance of the neural

Table 4 – NN-Castpro and ProCast results for validation test sets

network various tests were made.

1.6248
1.6287
1.6078
1.6093
1.5966
1.5998
1.4074
1.5128
1.5843
1.492
ts

7. Results and discussion

0.0311
0.0915
0.0912
0.0324
0.0259
0.0684
0.0671
0.0374
0.0381
0.0405

Training and testing of the developed ANN model with vary-

tf

ing topologies viz. configuration with one hidden layer, two

hidden layers and three hidden layers, were first carried out.
Minimal mean absolute error (in %) obtained for these con-
22.8
16.6
20.8
16.6
16.6
17.2
22.2
22.2
22.2
19.5
V2

figurations with best possible training parameter values are

presented in Table 3. The network with three hidden layers
Input parameters

(eight neurons in each) was found to be the optimal config-

3.5
1.2
1.2
3.5
4.9
1.9
1.9
2.8
2.8
2.8
V1

uration, both in terms of prediction accuracy (mean absolute

error within 3.5% for all the cases tested) and computational
time (approximately 5 min to train and test the network).
Tmold

135
150
150
150
150
146
146
125
138
146

Finally, for validating the prediction accuracy of the devel-

oped system a set of 10 test cases were selected and simulated
using both NN-CastPro and ProCast software. The ANN results
Tmelt

410
418
418
418
418
416
416
422
422
422

were obtained in a fraction of seconds whereas ProCast took

36 h (total computational time for 10 test cases) for providing
final filling simulation results as shown in Figs. 6–8 for test
Test

6(Table 4). Obtained results from both systems are depicted in

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Table 4 and show good agreement.

78 j o u r n a l o f m a t e r i a l s p r o c e s s i n g t e c h n o l o g y 2 0 3 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 72–79
Fig. 6 – ProCast result: filling time (tf ) for test 6 in Table 4.
Fig. 7 – ProCast result: solidification time (ts ) for test 6 in
Table 4.
Fig. 8 – ProCast result: porosity for test 6 in Table 4.
8. Conclusions
In the current work, a generic feed-forward neural network
architecture was developed for providing real time assistance
in setting optimal process parameters during various phases
of a moulding process cycle. Comparisons between the pre-
diction accuracy and functional capabilities of the proposed
model with other similar works reported in the literature were
made. The obtained mean absolute error of 3.5% with three
outputs from a single ANN configuration show its better pre-
diction accuracy over its other counterparts (Krimpenis et
al., 2006; Yarlagadda, 2002, 2000; Yarlagadda and Ang Teck
Khong, 2001; Yarlagadda and Chiang, 1999) having minimal
absolute error ranging from 8 to 15% for a maximum number
of four input parameters and one output (either filling time or
solidification time). The obtained prediction accuracy has suc-
cessfully demonstrated the capabilities of ANN in modeling
complex multivariable problems as involved in various other
manufacturing processes.
A Windows based environment has been developed, using
which the system can be easily configured to another com-
binations of input–output(s) parameters of a HPDC process.
Its simple design allows even new users to fully configure the
system and make efficient use of the same in an interactive
environment.
The inclusion of optimization models such as genetic algo-
rithms (GA) in NN-CastPro will enhance its functionality by
enabling automatic selection and setting of optimal process
parameters on moulding machines, thus, reducing lead-time
from design to manufacture and allowing a manufacturer to
achieve better part quality with increased production rate.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to convey his sincere thanks to Mr.
Julian Urretavizcaya, Urpemak, Spain and Mr. Ramon Arana,
Tekniker, Spain, for providing test part with relevant infor-
mations and sharing their expertise knowledge in the HPDC
domain.
references
Davey, K., Bounds, S., 1997. Modelling the pressure die casting
process using boundary and finite element methods. J. Mater.
Process. Technol., 696–700.
KoBaS, Knowledge based customized services for traditional
manufacturing sectors provided by a network of high Tech
SMEs(KoBaS). Europe Union funded project. Proposal Number:
505339-1, Call identifier: FP6–2002-NMP-2.
Han, Q., Xu, H., 2005. Fluidity of alloys under high pressure die
casting conditions. Scr. Mater. 53, 7–10.
Helenius, R., Lohne, O., Arnberg, L., Laukli, H.I., 2005. The heat
transfer filling of a high-pressure die-casting shot sleeve.
Mater. Sci. Eng. 413/414, 52–55.
Huang, S.H., Zhang, H.-C., 1993. Neural networks in
manufacturing. A survey. In: IEEE /CHMT Int. Electronics
Manufacturing Technology Symposium, pp. 177–190.
Katzarov, I.H., 2003. Finite element modeling of the porosity
formation in castings. Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 46,
1545–1552.
 j o u r n a l o f m a t e r i a l s p r o c e s s i n g t e c h n o l o g y 2 0 3 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 72–79
Krimpenis, A., Benardos, P.G., Vosniakos, G.-C., Koukouvitaki, A.,
2006. Simulation-based selection of optimum pressure
die-casting process parameters using neural nets and
genetic algorithms. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 27,
509–517.
Masters, T., 1993. Practical Neural network Recipes in C++.
Academic Press, New York, p. 63.
Suneel, T.S., Pande, S.S., Date, P.P., 2002. A technical not on
integrated product quality model using artificial neural
networks. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 121, 77–86.
Syrcos, G.P., 2003. Die casting process optimization using Taguchi
methods. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 135, 68–74.
Tai, C.-C., 2000. The optimization accuracy control of a die-casting
product part. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 103, 173–188.
79
Yarlagadda, P.K.D.V., 2000. Prediction of die casting process
parameters by using an artificial neural network model for
zinc alloys. Int. J. Prod. Res. 38, 119–139.
Yarlagadda, P.K.D.V., 2002. Development of an integrated neural
network system for prediction of process parameters in metal
injection moulding source. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 130/131,
315–320.
Yarlagadda, P.K.D.V., Ang Teck Khong, C., 2001. Development of a
hybrid neural network system fr prediction of process
parameters in injection moulding. J. Mater. Process. Technol.
118, 110–116.
Yarlagadda, P.K.D.V., Chiang, E.C.W., 1999. A neural network
system for the prediction of process parameters in pressure
die casting. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 89/90, 583–590.