Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2010) 51:965–971
DOI 10.1007/s00170-010-2668-5
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Prediction of surface roughness in turning operations
by computer vision using neural network trained
by differential evolution algorithm
S. H. Yang & U. Natarajan & M. Sekar & S. Palani
Received: 26 December 2008 / Accepted: 12 April 2010 / Published online: 23 April 2010
# Springer-Verlag London Limited 2010
Abstract In recent years, the measurement of surface
roughness of a workpiece plays a vital role since the
roughness of a surface has a considerable influence on the
product quality and the functional aspects. In this work, a
differential evolution algorithm (DEA)-based artificial neural
network (ANN) has been used for the prediction of surface
roughness in turning operations. Cutting speed, feed rate,
depth of cut, and average gray level of the surface image of
workpiece, acquired by computer vision, were taken as the
input parameters and surface roughness as the output
parameter. The results obtained from the DEA-based ANN
model were compared with the backpropagation (BP)-based
ANN. It is found that the error percentage is very close, and it
is also observed that the convergence speed for the DEA-
based ANN is higher than the BP-based ANN.
Keywords Turning . ANN . Backpropagation . DEA
1 Introduction
In the present industrial scenario, the major concern is to
produce the quality products at competitive price. Since the
direct contact methods (stylus instruments) of measuring
surface roughness are having limited flexibility in handling
free-form parts, the indirect method using optical instru-
S. H. Yang : U. Natarajan (*) : M. Sekar
School of Mechanical Engineering,
Kyungpook National University,
Daegu, South Korea
e-mail: nattu6963@yahoo.com
S. Palani
Mount Zion College of Engineering,
Pudukkottai, Tamil Nadu, India
ments has emerged. Besides, the measurement speed of the
stylus is also slow [1–3]. Many researchers developed the
models to predict the surface roughness using computer
vision system. Lee and Tarng [1] developed a self-
organizing adaptive learning algorithm called polynomial
network to map the actual surface roughness of a turned
workpiece with the surface image feature and the various
cutting conditions. Shinn-Ying Ho et al.[2] used an
adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system model to predict
the surface roughness of the workpiece. Kiran et al. [3]
made an attempt to evaluate the surface roughness of
workpiece surfaces using direct image processing, light
sectioning method, and phase shifting approach. It is
reported that the direct imaging approach is quick and
easy to apply in the shop floor level. Few researchers
evaluated the surface roughness using image processing
based on monochromatic speckle correlation technique
[4–7]. Shahabi et al.[8] proposed an alternative method
for the measurement of surface roughness in turning
operation using the 2-D profile extracted from an edge
image of the workpiece surface. They reported that there is a
10% error in the average surface roughness value between the
stylus method and vision method. They also proposed
machine vision methods [9, 10] to assess and monitor the
tool wear in turning operation. Hu Zhongxiang et al.[11]
evaluated three-dimensional surface roughness parameters
based on digital image processing. Recently, there have been
significant research efforts to apply evolutionary computa-
tional techniques for determining the neural network weights
[12–15]. Hence, a nontraditional optimization algorithm
differential evolution algorithm (DEA) was used in artificial
neural network (ANN) training as an attempt to predict the
surface roughness of the turned components. DEA is one of
the recent population-based global optimization methods. It
is widely used in the various fields like engineering, medical,
966 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2010) 51:965–971

and banking[16–20]. Some researchers used DEA to train Hence, the DE performs a global exploratory search during
the ANN [21–29] in which the experimental data are small- the early stages of the evolutionary process and local
scale problems. In this work, a new DEA was applied to train exploitation during the mature stage of the search.
feed-forward multilayer perceptron neural networks In DE, a solution, l, in a generation is a multidimensional
T
(MLPNN) and compared with the ANN trained with vector x!l
G¼i ¼ ðx1 ; :::; xN Þ . A population, PG=K, at genera-
backpropagation (BP) method. tion G=k is a vector

of M solutions(M>4).
 The initial
This paper is organized as follows: In Section 2, the population, PG¼0 x!l !M l
G¼0 ; :::; xG¼0 , is initialized as xl;G¼0 ¼
DEA methodology is described. In Section 3, the neural lower(xi) + rand i[0, 1]×(upper(xi)−lower(xi)),
network training using DEA is presented. In Section 4,
experimental setup for the measurement of surface finish is l ¼ 1; . . . ; M i ¼ 1; 2; . . . ; N ð1Þ
presented. Section 5 explains the implementation of neural-
network-trained DE. Section 6 deals with results and where M is the population size, N is the solution’s
discussion, and Section 7 concludes the paper. dimension, and each variable i in a solution vector l in the
initial generation, G ¼ 0; x!l G¼0 , is initialized within its
boundaries (lower(xi), upper(xi)). For each target vector
xji;G¼k , i = 1,2,3,…M, a mutant vector vi;G¼k is generated
0

2 Differential evolution methodology

according to the following equation:
Differential evolution (DE) is a type of evolutionary 0
 
algorithm developed by Rainer Storn and Kenneth Price vi;G¼k ¼ xri;G¼k1
3
þ F  xri;G¼k1
1
 xri;G¼k1
2
ð2Þ
[14–16] for optimization problems over a continuous
domain. The prime idea of DE is to adapt the search where the random indices r1, r2, r3 Єf1; 2; :::; M g, F is a
during the evolutionary process. During the initial stage of scaling factor Є[0, 1] which controls the amplification of the
evolution, the perturbations are large since parent individ- differential variation ðxri;G¼k1
1
 xri;G¼k1
2
Þ and represents the
uals are far away from each other. As the evolutionary amount of perturbation added to the main parent. The values
process matures, the population converges to a small of each variable in the mutant vector are changed with some
region, and the perturbations adaptively become small. crossover probability (CR) to

8 
> r3
< xi;G¼k1 þ F  xri;G¼k1
1
 xri;G¼k1
2
0
8  N ; xi;G¼k ¼ if ðrandom½0; 1  CR ^ i ¼ irand Þ ð3Þ
>
:
xji;G¼k1 otherwise

The new solution replaces the old one if it is better, and at 3 Neural network training using differential evolution
least one of the variables should be changed. The latter is algorithm
represented in the algorithm by randomly selecting a
variable, irand Є (1, N). After crossover, if one or more of Differential evolution algorithm is a heuristic method for
the variables in the new solution are outside their optimizing nonlinear and nondifferentiable continuous space
boundaries, the following repair rule is applied. functions. Hence, it can be applied to global searches within
8 the weight space of a typical neural network. In this work, a
j
xi;G þlowerðxi Þ
>
> if j
xi;Gþ1  lowerðxi Þ most popular feed-forward MLPNN is used. Training an
< 2
x;i;G¼k ¼ x j upperðxi Þ
lowerðxi Þ þ i;G 2 j
xi;Gþ1  upperðxi Þ
MLPNN to recognize the objectors is typically realized by
>
>
if
: j adopting an error correction strategy that adjusts the network
xi;Gþ1 Otherwise
weights through minimization of learning error:
ð4Þ
E ¼ E ðY0 ; Y Þ ð5Þ
Price and Storn [23] attempted various strategies in DE
based on the vector to be perturbed, number of difference Where Y is the real output vector of an MLPNN, Y0 is
vectors considered for perturbation, and the type of the target output vector, and Y is a function of synaptic
crossover. However, strategy 7 (DE/rand/1/bin) is the most weights w and input values X. In the MLPNN, the input
successful and most widely used strategy. In this work, vector x and the target output vector Y0 are known, and the
strategy 7 (“Appendix”) was attempted. The detailed synaptic weights in W are adapted to obtain appropriate
algorithm (pseudocode) is available in the literature [18–20]. functional mappings from the input x to the output Y0.
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2010) 51:965–971
Normally, the adaptation can be carried out by minimizing
the network error function E, i.e., network training
procedure. The optimization goal is to minimize the
objective function E by optimizing the values of the
network weights:
W ¼ ðw1 ; w2 ; :::; wD Þ ð6Þ
Differential evolution maintains a population M of
constant size and the real value vector liG, where i(i=1,2,
…,M) is the index to the population and G(G=1,2,…Gmax)
is the generation to which the population belongs:


PG ¼ l1G ; l2G ; . . . ; lM
G
ð7Þ
Based on the differential evolution methodology dis-
cussed in Section 2, each individual of the population is
compared with its counterpart in the current population, and
the vector with the lower objective function value wins a
place in the next generation’s population. As a result, all the
individuals of the next generation are as good as or better
than their counterparts in the current generation. Schematic
flow chart for the neural network training using differential
evolution algorithm is shown in Fig. 1
4 Experimental setup for the measurement of surface
image of a workpiece
The surface image of a workpiece is grabbed using high-
resolution digital camera through frame grabber, as shown in
Fig. 2. The captured image is processed in the computer
using Matlab Software (version7). The image is digitized
into a rectangular array of intensity values. Each array
element called “pixel” corresponds to the mean intensity in a
small rectangular area of the original image. These values are
referred as the gray levels of the corresponding pixels. Each
pixel corresponds to a gray intensity level. The arithmetic
average of the gray level Ga can be expressed as:
1X n
Ga ¼ j gi j ð8Þ
n i¼1
Where gi is the gray level of the surface image and n is
the total number of pixels. The photographic view of the
Rapid I machine vision system used for the image
acquisition and subsequent processing is shown in Fig. 3.
5 Implementation of neural-network-trained differential
evolution
The experimental works were carried out in CNC Lathe under
different cutting conditions to investigate the surface rough-
ness. EN-24 steel was used as the workpiece material and
967
tungsten carbide as the cutting tool. Twenty-seven experi-
ments have been conducted for the various sets of cutting
conditions, i.e., cutting speed, feed rate, and depth of cut as
shown in Table 1. The ranges of cutting parameters are given
below:
Cutting speedðV Þ : 42  201 m=min
Feed rateðFÞ :0:05  0:33 mm=rev
Depth of cutðDÞ :0:5  2:5 mm
The surface roughness of the turned workpiece was
measured by using SE-1100 portable surfcorder, within a
sampling length of 8 mm and with a measurement speed of
0.5 mm/s. The surface roughness Ra is the arithmetic
average of the absolute value of the heights of roughness
irregularities from the mean value measured:
1X n
Ra ¼ j yi j ð9Þ
n i¼1
where yi is the height of roughness irregularities from the
mean value and n is the number of sampling data. To
implement the proposed methodology, initially, a popula-
tion of size M is randomly generated for neural network
weightages. The error between the target output vector and
the real output vector of an MLPNN is evaluated by using
the experimental data sets. Then, the differential evolution
method is applied to train the neural network. From the
initial population, a target vector and base vector (r3) are
chosen. Thereafter, two vectors are selected randomly (r1,
r2) from the same population, and the weighted difference
vector (r1 ∼r2) is computed. Then, the weighted difference
is added to the base vector. In order to increase the diversity
of the perturbed vectors, crossover is performed. After the
crossover, a trial vector as shown in Eq. 3 is formed. This
trial vector is then compared with the target vector using
greedy criterion to decide the better one. In this manner, a
new population is generated and evaluated until the solution
converges.
6 Results and discussion
The experimental data sets shown in Table 1 were used to
train the neural network with differential evolution
algorithm using C program. The crossover constant (CR)
and scaling factor (F) are taken (optimal values obtained
after different trials) as 0.8 and 0.5, respectively. Neural
network with different topologies has been trained, and the
optimal structure (4-6-6-1) was found out by trial-and-
error approach for the error convergence 0.01. Similarly,
another neural network model has been trained with scaled
conjugate backpropagation algorithm, and the optimal
structure (4-5-5-1) was found out. The number of
968 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2010) 51:965–971

Fig. 1 Schematic flow chart for

the neural network training Begin
using differential evolution
algorithm
Initialize the population
for weightages

Evaluate the error

E=E(Y0,Y)

gen = 0
Apply differential evolution

Target vector Base vector Weighted difference vector

Add

Trial vector
gen = gen+1

Cross- over

Select trial or target vector

Generate new population

No Is solution
converged?

Yes
End

Fig. 2 Schematic diagram of computer vision system for surface Fig. 3 The photographic view of Rapid I computer vision system
roughness measurement (adapted from Lee and Tarng [1]) used to capture surface image of turned components
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2010) 51:965–971 969

Table 1 Experimental turning data sets for training the neural network model

Cutting speed (V), m/min Feed rate (F), mm/rev Depth of cut (D), mm Average gray level Surface roughness (Ra), μm

42 0.05 0.5 10.31 6.713

132 0.05 0.5 8.39 0.882
200 0.05 0.5 7.78 0.664
42 0.05 1.5 10.33 7.176
132 0.05 1.5 8.41 0.887
200 0.05 1.5 7.8 0.825
42 0.05 2.5 10.34 8.54
132 0.05 2.5 8.41 2.30
200 0.05 2.5 7.81 2.265
42 0.16 0.5 28.52 9.0
132 0.05 0.5 23.21 7.02
200 0.05 0.5 21.54 6.713
42 0.05 1.5 28.58 9.20
132 0.05 1.5 23.26 8.70
200 0.05 1.5 21.58 7.273
42 0.05 2.5 28.61 9.62
132 0.05 2.5 23.28 8.934
200 0.05 2.5 21.6 7.81
42 0.33 0.5 53.73 16.461
132 0.33 0.5 43.72 12.41
200 0.33 0.5 40.57 10.50
42 0.33 1.5 53.85 17.98
132 0.33 1.5 43.82 13.121
200 0.33 1.5 40.66 11.71
42 0.33 2.5 53.91 21.32
132 0.33 2.5 43.87 17.631
200 0.33 2.5 40.7 12.93

iterations used in DE-based ANN was 5,000, whereas in
BP-based ANN, it was 10,000. The computation time for
the BP-based ANN was 4.8 min, whereas in the DE-based
ANN, it was only 3 min which is nearly 38% less than that
of the conventional BP-based ANN. The neural network
models trained by differential evolution algorithm and the
backpropagation were validated by using eight sets of
testing data shown in Table 2. To evaluate the perfor-
mance, the predicted surface roughness values were
compared with the experimental values and summarized
in Table 3, and the performance with respect to percentage
error is shown in Fig. 4. The average absolute percentage

Table 2 Testing data for the validation of developed models

Test no. Cutting speed (V), m/min Feed rate (F), mm/rev Depth of cut (D), mm Gray level (Ga) Surface roughness (Ra), µm

1 132 0.33 0.5 43.72 12.41

2 200 0.33 0.5 40.57 10.50
3 42 0.33 1.5 53.85 17.98
4 132 0.33 1.5 43.82 13.121
5 200 0.33 1.5 40.66 11.71
6 42 0.33 2.5 53.91 21.32
7 132 0.33 2.5 43.87 17.631
8 200 0.33 2.5 40.7 12.93
970 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2010) 51:965–971

Table 3 Comparison of mea-

sured and predicted surface Test no. Surface roughness (Ra) Absolute percentage error
roughness values
Measured BP-based ANN DEA-based ANN BP-based ANN DEA-based ANN

1 12.41 12.44 12.525 0.24 0.921

2 10.50 10.525 10.398 0.231 0.965
3 17.98 17.869 17.894 0.617 0.478
4 13.121 13.085 13.191 0.27 0.53
5 11.71 11.625 11.76 0.72 0.425
6 21.32 21.389 21.109 0.32 0.989
7 17.631 17.714 17.546 0.47 0.481
8 12.93 12.985 12.9 0.42 0.203

error is 0.62 for the DE-based ANN and 0.41 for the BP-
based ANN. However, unlike the BP-based ANN, the DE-
based ANN is simple and robust. The solution accuracy
greatly depends on the experimental setup and the image
measurement system configuration. It is difficult to ensure
absolute flatness during the image acquisition of turned
components. This drawback can be eliminated by using
shadow removal algorithm.
ANN is lesser than the BP-based ANN. The proposed DE-
based ANN model is simple, faster, and robust at numerical
optimization. It is a powerful population-based, direct
search algorithm for globally optimizing the functions with
real valued parameters. The solution accuracy may be
further enhanced by using high-resolution frame-grabber
card in the machine vision system and with the use of
shadow removal algorithm.

7 Conclusion Appendix

In this work, a novel attempt has been made to predict the
surface roughness of the turned components using neural
network model trained by nontraditional optimization
technique. It is observed that the error percentage of
DEA-based ANN is closer to the BP-based ANN, and it
is also found that the convergence speed for DEA-based
Price and Storn [23] suggested ten different working
strategies of DE and some guidelines in applying these
strategies for any given problem for which DE is applied.
The strategies can vary based on the vector to be perturbed,
number of difference vectors considered for perturbation,
and finally the type of crossover used. The following are
the ten different working strategies proposed by Price and
Storn:

1.5 1. DE/best/1/exp
BP based ANN 2. DE/rand/1/exp
DE based ANN
3. DE/rand-to-best/1/exp
1
4. DE/best/2/exp
5. DE/rand/2/exp
0.5
Percentage error

6. DE/best/1/bin
7. DE/rand/1/bin
0 8. DE/rand-to-best/1/bin
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9. DE/best/2/bin
-0.5 10. DE/rand/2/bin
The general convention for the above strategies is DE/x/
-1
y/z. DE represents differential evolution, x represents a
string denoting the vector to be perturbed, y is the number
-1.5
of difference vectors considered for perturbation of x, and z
Test no.
stands for the type of crossover used (exp, exponential; bin,
Fig. 4 Performance of DE-based ANN with BP-based ANN binomial).
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2010) 51:965–971
References
1. Lee B-Y, Tarng Y-S (2001) Surface roughness inspection by
computer vision in turning operations. Int J Adv Manuf Technol
41:1251–1263
2. Ho SY et al (2002) Accurate modeling and prediction of surface
roughness by computer vision in turning operations using an
adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system. Int J Machine Tools
Manuf 42:1441–1446
3. Kiran M-B et al (1998) Evaluation of surface roughness by vision
system. Int J Machine Tools Manuf 38(5–6):685–690
4. Dhanasekaran B et al (2008) Evaluation of surface roughness
based on monochromatic speckle correlation using image pro-
cessing. Precision Eng 32:196–206
5. Yamaguchi I et al (2004) Measurement of surface roughness by
speckle correlation. Soc Photo-Optical Instrum Eng 43(11):2753–61
6. Persson U (1993) Measurement of surface roughness on rough
machined surface using speckle correlation and image analysis.
Wear 160:221–225
7. Persson U (1992) Real time measurement of surface roughness on
ground surfaces using speckle contrast technique. Opt Laser Eng
17:61–67
8. Shahabi HH, Ratnam MM (2009) Non-contact roughness mea-
surement of turned parts using machine vision. Int J Adv Manuf
Technol. doi:10.1007/s00170-009-2101-0
9. Shahabi HH, Ratnam MM (2008) Assessment of flank wear and nose
radius wear from workpiece roughness profile in turning operation
using machine vision. Int J Adv Manuf Technol. doi:10.1007/
s00170-008-1688-x
10. Shahabi HH, Ratnam MM (2008) In-cycle monitoring of tool nose
wear and surface roughness of turned parts using machine vision. Int
J Adv Manuf Technol 40:1148–1157. doi:10.1007/s00170-008-
1430-8
11. Zhongxiang H et al (2008) Evaluation of three dimensional surface
roughness parameters based on digital image processing. Int J Adv
Manuf Technol 40:342–348. doi:10.1007/s00170-007-1357-5
12. Eberhart R-C, Shi Y (1998) Comparison between genetic
algorithms and particle swarm optimisation. The 7th Annual
Conference on Evolutionary Programming, San Diego, USA
13. Rajasekaran S, Vijayalakshmi Pai GA (1996) Genetic algorithm
based weight determination for back-propagation networks. Proceed-
ings of Fourth International Conference on Advanced Computing, pp
73–79
14. Kennedy J, Eberhart RC (1995) Particle swarm optimization.
Proceedings of IEEE International conference on neural networks
IV, pp 1942–1948
971
15. Du J-X et al (2007) Shape reconstruction based on neural
networks trained by differential evolution algorithm. Neuro-
computing 70:896–903
16. Magoulas GD, Plagianakos VP, Vrahatis MN (2004) Neural
network-based colonoscopic diagnosis using on-line learning
and differential evolution. Applied Soft Computing 4(1):369–
379
17. dos Santos Coelho L et al (2010) Model-free adaptive control
design using evolutionary-neural compensator. Expert Syst Appl
37(1):499–508
18. Nikunj Chauhan, Ravi V, Karthik Chandra D (2009) Differen-
tial evolution trained wavelet neural networks: application to
bankruptcy prediction in banks. Expert Syst Appl 36(4):7659–
7665
19. dos Santos Coelho L, Guerra FA (2008) B-spline neural network
design using improved differential evolution for identification of an
experimental nonlinear process. Applied Soft Computing 4(8):1513–
1522
20. Basturk A, Gunay E (2009) Efficient edge detection in digital
images using a cellular neural network optimized by differential
evolution algorithm. Expert Syst Appl 36(2):2645–2650
21. Ilonen J et al (2003) Differential evolution training algorithm for
feed-forward neural networks. Neural Process Lett 17:93–105
22. Zelinka I, Lampinen J (1999) An evolutionary learning algorithms
for neural networks. Fifth International Conference on Soft
Computing: MENDEL’99:410–414
23. Storn R, Price K (2005) Differential evolution—a practical
approach to global optimization. Springer, Berlin
24. Storn R, Price K (1997) Differential evolution—a simple
evolution strategy for fast optimization. Dr Dobb’s J 22(4):18–
24
25. Storn R, Price K (1995) Differential evolution—a simple and
efficient adaptive scheme for global optimization over continuous
spaces. Technical Report TR-95-012, International Computer
Science Institute, Berkeley, CA, USA
26. Mayer D-G et al (2005) Differential evolution—an easy and efficient
evolutionary algorithm for model optimization. Agric Syst 83:315–
328
27. Coello CA et al (2007) Evolutionary algorithms for solving multi-
objective problems, 2nd edn. Springer, Heidelberg
28. Abbass H-A, Sarker R (2002) The Pareto differential evolution
algorithm. Int J Artif Intell Tools 11(No.4):531–552
29. Babu B-V, Rakesh Angira (2002) A differential evolution
approach for global optimization of MNLP problems. Proceedings
of 4th Asia-Pacific Conference on Simulated Evolution and
Learning (SEAL’02), Singapore, paper no. 1033, vol. 2, pp 880–
884, November 18–22