Tables at a glance

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Table 5

Figures at a glance

Comments

Figure 1

Comments

Figure 2

Comments

Figure 3

Comments

Figure 4

Comments

Figure 5

Comments

Figure 6

Comments

Figure 7

Comments

Figure 8

Comments

Figure 9

Table 1

S.N O	X1	X2	X3	X4	Surface Roughness (µm)	Length(m)
1	20	3	0.06	20	26.5624	2.28
2	20	3	0.1	40	25.05	2.96
3	20	3	0.2	60	17.0742	3.04
4	20	5	0.06	40	20.6803	4.05
5	20	5	0.1	60	19.707	3.44
6	20	5	0.2	20	19.6453	3.49
7	20	7	0.06	60	22.715	3.45
8	20	7	0.1	20	22.2216	3.47
9	20	7	0.2	40	21.141	3.48
10	30	3	0.06	40	17.2513	3.21
11	30	3	0.1	60	19.402	3.33
12	30	3	0.2	20	17.5803	3.49
13	30	5	0.06	60	19.7496	3.4
14	30	5	0.1	20	19.1703	3.45
15	30	5	0.2	40	20.3823	3.49
16	30	7	0.06	20	17.7786	3.45
17	30	7	0.1	40	20.1396	3.47
18	30	7	0.2	60	17.8646	3.48
19	40	3	0.06	60	19.0826	3.24
20	40	3	0.1	20	18.9223	3.35
21	40	3	0.2	40	21.6203	3.49
22	40	5	0.06	20	23.0316	3.41
23	40	5	0.1	40	17.8516	3.45
24	40	5	0.2	60	16.9586	3.49
25	40	7	0.06	40	22.132	3.45
26	40	7	0.1	60	18.8296	3.47
27	40	7	0.2	20	21.174	3.48

Table 1: Experimental data for surface roughness and the length

Table 2

S.NO	X1	X2	X3	X4	Surface Roughness(µm)	Length(m)	SR in Excel Data	Length in Excel data
1	20	3	0.06	20	26.5624	2.28	26.564	3.08778
2	20	3	0.1	40	25.05	2.96	25.05	3.14398
3	20	3	0.2	60	17.0742	3.04	17.072	3.24508
4	20	5	0.06	40	20.6803	4.05	20.683	3.27002
5	20	5	0.1	60	19.707	3.44	19.707	3.32614
6	20	5	0.2	20	19.6453	3.49	19.643	3.3489
7	20	7	0.06	60	22.715	3.45	22.715	3.45222
8	20	7	0.1	20	22.2216	3.47	22.226	3.43002
9	20	7	0.2	40	21.141	3.48	21.141	3.53112
10	30	3	0.06	40	17.2513	3.21	17.253	3.17898
11	30	3	0.1	60	19.402	3.33	19.402	3.23508
12	30	3	0.2	20	17.5803	3.49	17.583	3.25778
13	30	5	0.06	60	19.7496	3.4	19.746	3.36114
14	30	5	0.1	20	19.1703	3.45	19.173	3.3389
15	30	5	0.2	40	20.3823	3.49	20.383	3.44002
16	30	7	0.06	20	17.7786	3.45	17.776	3.46502
17	30	7	0.1	40	20.1396	3.47	20.136	3.52112
18	30	7	0.2	60	17.8646	3.48	17.866	3.62222
19	40	3	0.06	60	19.0826	3.24	19.086	3.27008
20	40	3	0.1	20	18.9223	3.35	18.923	3.24778
21	40	3	0.2	40	21.6203	3.49	21.623	3.34898
22	40	5	0.06	20	23.0316	3.41	23.036	3.3739
23	40	5	0.1	40	17.8516	3.45	17.856	3.43002
24	40	5	0.2	60	16.9586	3.49	16.956	3.53114
25	40	7	0.06	40	22.132	3.45	22.132	3.55612
26	40	7	0.1	60	18.8296	3.47	18.826	3.61222
27	40	7	0.2	20	21.174	3.48	21.174	3.63502

Table 2: Experimental data and excel data for the surface roughness

Table 3

Fill density(mm/s)	40
Shell thickness(mm)	3
Layer height(mm)	0.2
Speed(mm/s)	60

Table 3: Results obtained from Goal Programming

Table 4

Fill density(mm\s)	39.793
Shell thickness(mm)	3.353
Layer height(mm)	0.2
Speed(mm\s)	59.881

Table 4: Results obtained from the Genetic algorithm

Table 5

Parameters	Genetic Algorithm	Goal programming
Fill density(mm/s)	39.793	40
Shell thickness(mm)	3.353	3
Layer height(mm)	0.2	0.2
Speed(mm/s)	59.881	60

Table 5: Comparison between the Genetic algorithm and Goal Programming

FIGURE 1

Figure 1: Fused deposition modeling machine (Courtesy: Vasavi College of Engineering)

FIGURE 2

Figure 2: Rectangular workpieces after fabrication on FDM machine

FIGURE 3

Figure 3: Summary Report and Regression equation for surface roughness

FIGURE 4

Figure 4: Summary Report and Regression equation for the length

FIGURE 5

Figure 5: Experiment number Vs length

FIGURE 6

Figure 6: Experiment number Vs surface roughness

FIGURE 7

Figure 7: Goal programming solution in Microsoft Excel

FIGURE 8

Figure 8: MATLAB code for GA

FIGURE 9

Figure 9: GA function values and decision variables