2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.surfcoat.2021.127559
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Estimation of coating thickness in electrostatic spray deposition by machine learning and response surface methodology

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Precise control of film thickness reduces the paint consumption. [50][51][52] The variations in film thickness for normal paint material and different MWCNT-based nanopaint are plotted in Figure 8. It is observed that there is a decrease of 3.1% in film thickness when compared with 0.5 gm of MWCNT nanopaint and a 3.4% decrease than normal painting thickness.…”
Section: Effect Of Thickness Of the Coating By Robot Paintingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Precise control of film thickness reduces the paint consumption. [50][51][52] The variations in film thickness for normal paint material and different MWCNT-based nanopaint are plotted in Figure 8. It is observed that there is a decrease of 3.1% in film thickness when compared with 0.5 gm of MWCNT nanopaint and a 3.4% decrease than normal painting thickness.…”
Section: Effect Of Thickness Of the Coating By Robot Paintingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several papers have suggested machine learning (ML) approaches as an alternative to polynomial regression. The approaches that are considered in the literature include Support Vector Machines (SVM) [1][2][3][4][5][6], Neural Networks (NN) [1,2,4,[6][7][8][9], Random Forests (rf) [1,3,4,10], Boosting and its extension [1,3], Extra Tree regression (ET) [3,4] and Classification And Regression Trees (CART) [1]. In these papers, the authors compared some of these approaches only on real datasets, using specific settings with respect to the nature and dimensions of the data.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, typical control factors have been fed to machine learning models such as a support vector machine (SVM) [13], a neural network (NN) [14], or a Gaussian process regression (GPR) [15] to predict coating quality. Paturi et al [16] employed a genetic algorithm (GA) and response surface methodology to establish the optimum conditions for electrostatic spray deposition parameters, and they estimated coating thickness using proposed artificial neural network (ANN) and SVM models. However, this hybrid method had significant cost for model training and could not ensure production fluctuation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%