Non-traditional machining (NTM) has gained significant attention in the last decade due to its ability to machine conventionally hard-to-machine materials. However, NTMs suffer from several disadvantages such as higher initial cost, lower material removal rate, more power consumption, etc. NTMs involve several process parameters, the appropriate tweaking of which is necessary to obtain economical and suitable results. However, the costly and time-consuming nature of the NTMs makes it a tedious and expensive task to manually investigate the appropriate process parameters. The NTM process parameters and responses are often not linearly related and thus, conventional statistical tools might not be enough to derive functional knowledge. Thus, in this paper, three popular machine learning (ML) methods (viz. linear regression, random forest regression and AdaBoost regression) are employed to develop predictive models for NTM processes. By considering two high-fidelity datasets from the literature on electro-discharge machining and wire electro-discharge machining, case studies are shown in the paper for the effectiveness of the ML methods. Linear regression is observed to be insufficient in accurately mapping the complex relationship between the process parameters and responses. Both random forest regression and AdaBoost regression are found to be suitable for predictive modelling of NTMs. However, AdaBoost regression is recommended as it is found to be insensitive to the number of regressors and thus is more readily deployable.

Robots are being increasingly utilized for various operations in industrial and household applications. One such application is for spray painting, wherein atomized paint particles are sprayed on a surface to coat the surface with paint. As there are different models of robots available for the job, it becomes crucial to select the best among them. Multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) techniques are widely used in various fields to tackle selection problems where there are many conflicting criteria and several alternatives. This work focuses on selecting the best robot among twelve alternatives based on seven criteria, among which payload, speed, and reach are beneficial criteria while mechanical weight, repeatability, cost, and power consumption are cost criteria. Five MCDM techniques, namely combination distance-based assessment (CODAS), complex proportional assessment (COPRAS), combined compromise solution (CoCoSo), multi-attributive border approximation area comparison (MABAC), and višekriterijumsko kompromisno rangiranje (VIKOR) were used for the selection while a weight calculation was performed using an objective weight calculation technique called MEREC. HY1010A-143 was found to be the most suitable robot for spray-painting applications by four of the five techniques used. Correlation studies showed a significant level of correlation among all the MCDM techniques.

Due to increased demands of production capacity and higher quality requirements, industries are automating at a fast pace. Industrial robots are an important component of the industrial automation ecosystem. However, the selection of appropriate robots is a challenging task due to the sheer number of alternatives present and their varied specifications. The various characteristics or attributes of industrial robots that need due consideration before selection of an optimal robot for a given application are found to be conflicting in nature. Thus, in this paper, several multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods are deployed to select an optimal robot depending on the application. Three different industrial robot selection problems are solved in this paper by using Simple Additive Weighing (SAW), the Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), the Linear Programming Technique (LINMAP), VIseKriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje (VIKOR), Elimination and Choice Translating Priority III (ELECTRE-III), and the Net Flow Method (NFM).

Tungsten Inert Gas (TIG) welding is a commonly used welding technique for ferritic stainless steel, due to its ability to produce high-quality, clean, and precise welds. This welding method provides excellent control over the heat input, making it suitable for thin-walled, high-alloy materials such as ferritic stainless steel. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of using two different filler materials, 310 (austenitic) and 410 (ferritic), on the microstructural and mechanical properties of Tungsten Inert Gas (TIG) weld butt joints of 430 ferritic stainless steel (FSS). The results showed that the choice of filler material significantly impacted the dilution percentage, the chromium-nickel equivalent ratio, microstructure, microhardness, and tensile characteristics of the welded joint. The use of 310 filler resulted in a columnar microstructure, whereas the use of 410 filler resulted in a ferritic (acicular ferrite) microstructure with the presence of martensite and austenite. The sample welded with 410 filler demonstrated superior mechanical properties compared to the sample welded with 310 filler. These findings emphasize the importance of selecting the appropriate filler material in order to achieve the desired microstructural and mechanical properties in 430 FSS welded joints.

Due to the increase in the impact of different manufacturing processes on the environment, green manufacturing processes are the prime focus of many current pieces of research. In the current article, a green machining process for stainless steel and SS304 and AISI1045 steel has been optimized using newly developed Fuzzy Measurement Alternatives and Ranking according to the COmpromise Solution (F-MARCOS) method in the form of two case studies. In the first case study, nose radius, cutting speed, depth of cut, and feed rate are selected as the process parameters whereas surface roughness, consumption of electrical energy, and power factor are the outputs. In the second case study width of cut, depth of cut, feed rate, and cutting speed were the process parameters and material removal rate (MRR), active energy consumption (ACE), and surface roughness (Ra) are the response variables. The MARCOS method ranks the alternatives based on the ideal and anti-ideal solutions for the different criteria. The inclusion of fuzzy logic adds worth to the model by using a linguistic scale to make the method more practical and flexible. Based on the detailed analysis, it ranked the best alternative in case study one which results in a power factor of 0.862, 26.68 kJ of electrical energy consumption, and surface roughness of 0.36 $\mathsf{\mu }\mathrm{m}$. In the second case study, the best alternative selected by this method gave an MRR of 2400 ${\mathrm{mm}}^3/\min$ and Ra of 2.29 $\mathsf{\mu }\mathrm{m}$ and utilizes 53.988 kJ ACE.