Figure 1 Schematic of finishing on a workpiece (a) with and (b) without the work-hardened layer Two panels compare cutting of a material matrix layer with and without a work hardened layer under force f and rotation w. The two panels are labelled a and b. Panel a shows a cutting tool moving un... More about this image found in Schematic of finishing on a workpiece (a) with and (b) without the work-har...

Figure 2 Surface topography of the samples ( Song et al., 2022 ) Note(s): (a) f_z1 = 0.01 mm/z, a_e1 = 1.5 mm; (b) f_z1 = 0.02 mm/z, a_e1 = 1.5 mm; (c) f_z1 = 0.03 mm/z, a_e1 = 1.5 mm; (d) f_z1 = 0.01 mm/z, a_e1 = 2.0 mm; (e) f_z1 =0.02 mm/z, a_e1 = 2.0 mm; (f) f_z1 = 0.03 mm/z, a_e1 = 2.0 mm; (g) No preceding roughing pass Seven surface topography maps compare feed and normal directions, with panel e showing the widest height range and panel a the narrowest. The seven panels are labelled a to g. Each panel presents a surface topography map with Feed direction in micrometres on the horizontal axis and Normal direction in micrometres on the vertical axis. The feed direction extends from 0 to 1427 micrometres. The normal direction extends from 0 to 1070 micrometres. Panel a ranges from minus 8.687 to 10.879 micrometres. Panel b ranges from minus 9.301 to 22.125 micrometres. Panel c ranges from minus 10.815 to 15.348 micrometres. Panel d ranges from minus 8.448 to 29.507 micrometres. Panel e ranges from minus 31.759 to 34.395 micrometres. Panel f ranges from minus 10.823 to 12.522 micrometres. Panel g ranges from minus 8.052 to 12.541 micrometres. The surface patterns contain repeated elongated ridges and grooves along the feed direction. More about this image found in Surface topography of the samples ( Song et al., 2022 ) ...

Figure 3 Surface roughness of the samples ( Song et al., 2022 ) A bar chart compares surface roughness S sub a across groups a to g, with group e highest and group g lowest. The bar chart compares surface roughness S sub a in micrometres across seven groups. The vertical axis ranges from 1.0 to 1.6 micrometres. The horizontal axis lists groups a, b, c, d, e, f, and g. Surface roughness increases from group a to group c, decreases at group d, rises to the highest value at group e, stays slightly lower at group f, and decreases to the lowest value at group g. More about this image found in Surface roughness of the samples ( Song et al., 2022 ) ...

Figure 4 (a) Milling of GH4169 superalloy on a JDMR600 machining center; (b) microhardness test using an HV-1000Z Vickers tester; (c) surface roughness measurement using an Alicona InfiniteFocus SL profilometer Three panels present a machining setup, a hardness testing setup, and a surface me... More about this image found in (a) Milling of GH4169 superalloy on a JDMR600 machining center; (b) microha...

Figure 5 (a) Subsurface microhardness profiles of the five samples after roughing; (b) corresponding final surface roughness S_a of the five samples Two panels compare microhardness by subsurface depth and surface roughness S sub a across 5 experimental samples. The two panels are labelled a and b. Panel a plots Microhardness in H V against Subsurface depth in micrometres for groups 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. The vertical axis ranges from 440 to 510 H V. The horizontal axis ranges from 0 to 50 micrometres. All groups rise to a peak at 20 micrometres and then decrease towards 50 micrometres. Panel b compares Surface roughness S sub a in micrometres across experimental sample numbers 1 to 5. The values increase from 1.02 for sample 1 to 1.18, 1.28, 1.52, and 1.65 for sample 5. More about this image found in (a) Subsurface microhardness profiles of the five samples after roughing; (...

Figure 6 Structure of the IDBO-BP-NN model A neural network structure maps roughing and finishing inputs through hidden nodes to output surface roughness S sub a. The neural network diagram is titled I D B O optimised back propagation. The input layer lists roughing inputs v sub 1, f sub z 1, ... More about this image found in Structure of the IDBO-BP-NN model A neural network structure maps roughi...

Figure 7 Effect of hidden layer neurons on model prediction error ( MSE ) A line chart plots M S E against number of neurons, decreasing to a marked minimum at 11 neurons before increasing. The line chart plots M S E in square micrometres against Number of neurous. The vertical axis ranges fro... More about this image found in Effect of hidden layer neurons on model prediction error ( MSE ) A line ...

Figure 8 Flowchart of the IDBO-BP-NN model A flow diagram outlines the B P N N optimisation process using a dung beetle algorithm from initialisation and data processing to weight optimisation, error evaluation, and termination. The flow diagram begins with Start. The process continues through... More about this image found in Flowchart of the IDBO-BP-NN model A flow diagram outlines the B P N N op...

Figure 9 Fitness curves of four optimization algorithms A line plot compares fitness values across 50 iterations for P S O, G A, D B O, and I D B O, with all values decreasing. The line plot has Number of iterations on the horizontal axis, from 0 to 50, and Fitness value on the vertical axis, ... More about this image found in Fitness curves of four optimization algorithms A line plot compares fitn...

Figure 10 Comparative prediction accuracy of five BP-NN models for surface roughness A line chart compares true and predicted surface roughness S sub a values across 16 test samples for six neural network models. The line chart compares surface roughness S sub a in micrometres across 16 test s... More about this image found in Comparative prediction accuracy of five BP-NN models for surface roughness ...

Figure 11 Comparison of absolute residuals of five BP-NN models A bar chart compares absolute residual values across 16 test samples for five B P hyphen N N based models. The bar chart compares absolute residual in micrometres across 16 test sample numbers. The vertical axis ranges from 0.00 t... More about this image found in Comparison of absolute residuals of five BP-NN models A bar chart compar...

Figure 12 Performance comparison of the five BP-NN models Note(s): (a) MAD; (b) MRE; (c) MSE; (d) R² Four bar charts compare M A D, M R E, M S E, and R squared values across five B P hyphen N N based models. The figure contains four panels labelled a, b, c, and d. Panel a compares M A D in micrometres across models. Values decrease from B P hyphen N N at 0.15 to G A hyphen B P hyphen N N at 0.115, P S O hyphen B P hyphen N N at 0.095, D B O hyphen B P hyphen N N at 0.075, and I D B O hyphen B P hyphen N N at 0.051. Panel b compares M R E per cent across the same models. Values decrease from 10.2 to 8.5, 7.2, 5.8, and 5. Panel c compares M S E in square micrometres. Values decrease from 0.025 to 0.014, 0.011, 0.007, and 0.004. Panel d compares R-squared. Values increase from 0.815 to 0.851, 0.912, 0.949, and 0.969 across the same model order. More about this image found in Performance comparison of the five BP-NN models Note(s): (a) MAD; (b) MR...

Figure 13 Sensitivity distribution of eight milling parameters for surface roughness prediction A bar chart compares sensitivity per cent for eight parameters, with v sub 2 highest and a sub e 1 lowest. The bar chart compares sensitivity per cent across eight parameters. The vertical axis is S... More about this image found in Sensitivity distribution of eight milling parameters for surface roughness ...

Figure 1 Cockpit design A cockpit design layout presents side, top, front, and angled views with seat, control panel, sight lines, angles, and dimensions. The layout contains four cockpit design views. The left view shows a seated person inside the cockpit from the side. It includes a head cir... More about this image found in Cockpit design A cockpit design layout presents side, top, front, and an...

Figure 2 Experimental equipment set A V R workstation has a 360 V R headset, two V R sensors, a computer, an additional screen, and V R controller grips. The workstation has a curved desk with labelled V R equipment and displays. A 360 V R headset sits on the left side between two V R sensors.... More about this image found in Experimental equipment set A V R workstation has a 360 V R headset, two ...

Figure 3 Task list steps on instrument panel equipment A labelled control panel layout maps numbered parts from 6 to 37 to switches, screens, knobs, gauges, and panel sections. The layout contains multiple control panel sections with numbered callouts and connector lines. The largest central d... More about this image found in Task list steps on instrument panel equipment A labelled control panel l...

Figure 4 Layout 1 (shuffled) A cockpit panel layout shows labelled instruments, displays, switches, gauges, and control modules across the dashboard. The cockpit panel layout contains labelled instruments, displays, switches, gauges, and control modules arranged across one dashboard. The left ... More about this image found in Layout 1 (shuffled) A cockpit panel layout shows labelled instruments, d...