Page 119 - MSAM-3-2
P. 119

Materials Science in Additive Manufacturing                           Hybrid lattice structures design with AI



































            Figure 4. Examples of hybrid lattice configurations (red color represents P-Honeycomb cell and blue color represents G-Honeycomb cell).

            Figure 7 provides a visual representation of the 3,000 randomly   reduction. Around 20 epochs into training, the model loss
            created hybrid lattices within the property space. Specifically,   for the validation set reaches a state of convergence.
            the elastic modulus along the X- and Y-directions ranged from   Subsequently, both the training and validation set
            10 MPa to 24 MPa, while Poisson’s ratio spans from 0.22 to   losses become below 0.05 after 80 epochs, indicating
            0.34. Remarkably, the hybrid lattice designs demonstrated the   robust prediction capabilities regarding the properties of
            capability to exhibit isotropic behavior across the entire range   hybrid lattices. To validate the training outcomes further,
            of elastic modulus values while also offering a high degree   the target and predicted properties for the validation set
            of anisotropy within the dataset (Figure  7C). Furthermore,   were extracted. Figure 9 compares the target and predicted
            it is observed that for a given elastic modulus along the   values of E , E , ν  and ν  for the hybrid lattices within
                                                                           y
                                                                        x
                                                                                    yx
                                                                             xy
            X-  or Y-direction, the lattice could show varying Poisson’s   the validation set. Overall, a good agreement was observed
            ratios (Figure  7D). The randomly generated hybrid lattice   between the actual and predicted properties. However,
            structures show a broad spectrum of mechanical properties.   it is notable that the model slightly underestimated
            Consequently, the dataset generated for the training of the   the elastic modulus of the hybrid lattice. Moreover, the
            BPNN can provide comprehensive insights into the properties   predictive accuracy varied across different properties: the
            and behaviors of the hybrid lattices.              model performed better in predicting the modulus along
                                                               the Y-direction compared to the X-direction, whereas it
            3.2. Training and validation of BPNN
                                                               demonstrated higher accuracy in predicting the Poisson’s
            A total of 3000 random hybrid lattices were generated,   ratio along the X-direction. The trained model was saved
            with 80% of the dataset (2,400) allocated for training and   for future predictions of properties based on the lattice
            the remaining 20% (600) for validation. The MSE loss   configuration.
            function was employed to quantify the model prediction
            error. Early stopping was implemented to improve training   3.3. Performance of BPNN
            efficiency and prevent overfitting. Figure 8 illustrates the   The  performance of  trained BPNN  was  tested  by  the
            evolution of model loss for both the training and validation   dataset prepared using the homogenization method. The
            sets throughout the training process, demonstrating the   randomly generated lattice patterns were simplified to
            convergence status of the model. Notably, as the total   binary matrix and input into the trained BPNN. Elastic
            iterations increase, the model loss exhibits a significant   modulus along the X- and Y-direction and Poisson’s ratio




            Volume 3 Issue 2 (2024)                         6                              doi: 10.36922/msam.3430
   114   115   116   117   118   119   120   121   122   123   124