Investigation and Statistical Analysis for Optimizing Surface Roughness, Cutting Forces, Temperature, and Productivity in Turning Grey Cast Iron
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Effect of Feed Rate, Cutting Speed, and Nose Radius on the Resultant Force
3.2. Effect of Feed Rate, Cutting Speed, and Nose Radius on Cutting Temperature
3.3. Effect of Feed Rate, Cutting Speed, and Nose Radius on Average Surface Roughness
3.4. Statistical Analysis
3.5. Validation and Verification of Optimum Conditions
4. Conclusions
- 1
- Increasing the feed rate increases the resultant force, cutting temperature, and surface roughness, whereas increasing cutting speed and nose radius increases the cutting temperature, which in turn reduces the resultant cutting force.
- 2
- Increasing the feed rate increases cutting temperature by 5 to 11% depending on nose radius and cutting speed, whereas the influence of increasing cutting speed is limited at small nose radius and increases with it reaching about 11%.
- 3
- Increasing nose radius increases cutting temperature depending mainly on cutting speed reaching a maximum of 21% at higher cutting speeds.
- 4
- Considerably increasing the feed rate increases the average surface roughness to about 120% at high cutting speeds and a large nose radius. On the other hand, increasing cutting speed and nose radius reduce the surface roughness by a maximum of 29 and 23%, respectively.
- 5
- Full factorial design and ANOVA showed that the coolant enhances the surface roughness, especially at higher cutting speeds.
- 6
- Regarding the cutting force, the main effect comes from the feed rate. Turning the coolant on reduces the cutting force significantly.
- 7
- Regarding the cutting temperature, the main contributor is the coolant, which is very much expected. The cooling affects the temperature more at high cutting speed, feed rate, and nose radius.
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Chen, J.; Liu, W.; Deng, X. Tool life and wear mechanism of WC–5TiC–0.5VC–8Co cemented carbides inserts when machining HT250 grey cast iron. Ceram. Int. 2016, 42, 10037–10044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fischer, G.; Wei, Y.; Dontamsetti, S. Process-controlled machining of grey cast iron. J. Mech. Work. Technol. 1989, 20, 47–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Souza, J.V.C.; Nono, M.C.A.; Ribeiro, M.V. Cutting forces in turning of grey cast iron using silicon nitride-based cutting tool. Mater. Des. 2009, 30, 2715–2720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meng, F.; Zhang, Z.; Feng, J. A study investigating the cutting mechanism of compacted graphite iron based on a novel microstructure of finite element model. J. Manuf. Process. 2022, 81, 250–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rajbongshi, S.K.; Borah, A.; Choudhury, P.K. Optimization of Process Parameters in Turning of Grey Cast Iron with Mixed Oxide Ceramic Tool using Taguchi’s Approach. In Proceedings of the Conference on Design and Research (AIMTDR 2014), Guwahati, Assam, India, 12–14 December 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Korkmaz, M.E.; Günay, M. Finite Element Modelling of Cutting Forces and Power Consumption in Turning of AISI 420 Martensitic Stainless Steel. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 2018, 43, 4863–4870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Asiltürk, I.; Kuntoğlu, M.; Binali, R.; Akku, H.; Salur, E. A Comprehensive Analysis of Surface Roughness, Vibration and Acoustic Emissions Based on Machine Learning during Hard Turning of AISI 4140 Steel. Metals 2023, 13, 437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ogedengbe, T.S.; Yezeed, O.A.; Yussouf, A. Effect of annealing on machinability of grey cast iron. J. Eng. Technol. 2019, 10. [Google Scholar]
- Binali, R.; Demirpolat, H.; Kuntoğlu, M.; Sağlam, H. Machinability Investigations Based on Tool Wear, Surface Roughness, Cutting Temperature, Chip Morphology and Material Removal Rate during Dry and MQL-Assisted Milling of Nimax Mold Steel. Lubricants 2023, 11, 101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abbas, A.T.; El Rayes, M.M.; Al-Abduljabbar, A.A.; Ragab, A.E.; Benyahia, F.; Elkaseer, A. Effects of Tool Edge Geometry and Cutting Conditions on the Performance Indicators in Dry Turning AISI 1045 Steel. Machines 2023, 11, 397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abbas, A.T.; Al-Abduljabbar, A.A.; El Rayes, M.M.; Benyahia, F.; Abdelgaliel, I.H.; Elkaseer, A. Multi-objective Optimization of Performance Indicators in Turning of AISI 1045 under Dry Cutting Conditions. Metals 2023, 13, 96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adel, T.; Abbas, A.T.; Adham, E.; Ragab, A.; Benyahia, F.; Mahmoud, S.; Soliman, M.S. Taguchi Robust Design for Optimizing Surface Roughness of Turned AISI 1045 Steel Considering the Tool Nose Radius and Coolant as Noise Factors. Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2018, 2018, 2560253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kuntoğlu, M.; Sağlam, H. ANOVA and fuzzy rule-based evaluation and estimation of flank wear, temperature, and acoustic emission in turning. CIRP J. Manuf. Sci. Technol. 2021, 35, 589–603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aouici, H.; Elbah, M.; Yallese, M.A. Performance comparison of the wiper and conventional ceramic inserts in hard turning of AISI 4140 steel: Analysis of machining forces and flank wear. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2016, 87, 2221–2244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Z.; Peng, R.L.; Zhou, J. Effect of machining parameters on cutting force and surface integrity when high-speed turning AD 730™ with PCBN tools. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2019, 100, 2601–2615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Thakur, D.G.; Ramamoorthy, B.; Vijayaraghavan, L. Machinability investigation of Inconel 718 in high-speed turning. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2019, 45, 421–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ali, M.H.; Ansari, M.N.M. The Effect of Nose Radius on Cutting Force and Temperature during Machining Titanium Alloy (Ti-6Al-4V). Int. J. Mech. Mechatron. Eng. 2014, 8, 2124–2127. [Google Scholar]
- Bouchelaghem, H.; Yallese, M.A.; Amirat, A.T. Experimental Investigation and Performance Analyses of CBN Insert in Hard Turing of Cold Work Tool Steel (D3). Mach. Sci. Technol. 2010, 14, 471–501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- İnce, M.A.; Asiltürk, İ. Effects of Cutting Tool Parameters on Surface Roughness. Int. J. Eng. Sci. 2015, 4, 15–22. [Google Scholar]
- Gokkaya, H.; Nalbant, M. The effects of cutting tool geometry and processing parameters on the surface roughness of AISI 1030 steel. Mater. Des. 2007, 28, 717–721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bhushan, R.K. Impact of nose radius and machining parameters on surface roughness, tool wear and tool life during turning of AA7075/SiC composites for green Manufacturing. Bhushan Mech. Adv. Mater. 2020, 6, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Element | C | Fe | Mn | Si | P | S |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
wt. % | 3.6 | 93 | 0.65 | 2.3 | 0.15 | 0.14 |
Properties | Value |
---|---|
Ultimate tensile strength, MPa | 140 |
Yield strength (Proof), MPa | 94 |
Elongation at break, % | 14 |
Modulus of elasticity (Typical for steel), GPa | 180 |
Hardness, HV10 | 185 |
Thermal Sensitivity: | ≤0.08 °C at 30 °C |
---|---|
Measuring range: | −20–1000 °C |
Detector type: | Micro-bolometer-UFPA384 × 288 pixels |
Spectral Range: | 8–14 μm |
Accuracy: | ±2 °C |
Designation | Process Parameter | Level 1 | Level 2 | Level 3 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Vc | Cutting Speed (m/min) | 80 | 120 | - |
FR | Feed Rate (mm/rev.) | 0.056 | 0.112 | 0.168 |
r | Nose Radius (mm) | 0.4 | 0.8 | 1.2 |
Coolant | Coolant | On | Off | - |
Nose Radius “r”, mm | Feed Rate, “FR”, mm/rev. | Temperature, “T” °C, at: | |
---|---|---|---|
80 m/min | 120 m/min | ||
0.4 | 0.056 | 270.3 | 273.1 |
0.112 | 275.7 | 280.6 | |
0.168 | 282.8 | 287.0 | |
Tavg. % | 4.6 | 5.0 | |
0.8 | 0.056 | 279.1 | 298.3 |
0.112 | 290.9 | 321.7 | |
0.168 | 308.2 | 331.6 | |
Tavg. % | 10.4 | 11.1 | |
1.2 | 0.056 | 290.2 | 330.4 |
0.112 | 306.9 | 339.8 | |
0.168 | 320.1 | 346.5 | |
Tavg. % | 10.3 | 4.8 |
Nose Radius “r”, mm | Feed Rate, “FR”, mm/rev. | Cutting Temperature, “T” °C, at: | Percentage Increase in Temperature, % | Tavg. % | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
80 m/min | 120 m/min | ||||
0.4 | 0.056 | 270.3 | 273.1 | 1.0 | 1.36 |
0.112 | 275.7 | 280.6 | 1.7 | ||
0.168 | 282.8 | 287.0 | 1.4 | ||
0.8 | 0.056 | 279.1 | 298.3 | 6.8 | 8.26 |
0.112 | 290.9 | 321.7 | 10.5 | ||
0.168 | 308.2 | 331.6 | 7.5 | ||
1.2 | 0.056 | 290.2 | 330.4 | 13.8 | 10.9 |
0.112 | 306.9 | 339.8 | 10.7 | ||
0.168 | 320.1 | 346.5 | 8.2 |
Feed rate “FR”, mm/rev. | Nose Radius “r”, mm | Temperature °C at: | |
---|---|---|---|
80 m/min | 120 m/min | ||
0.056 | 0.4 | 270.3 | 273.1 |
0.8 | 279.1 | 298.3 | |
0.12 | 290.2 | 330.4 | |
Tavg. % | 7.3 | 20.9 | |
0.112 | 0.4 | 275.7 | 280.6 |
0.8 | 290.9 | 321.7 | |
0.12 | 306.9 | 339.8 | |
Tavg. % | 11.3 | 21.0 | |
0.168 | 0.4 | 282.8 | 287.0 |
0.8 | 308.2 | 331.6 | |
0.12 | 320.1 | 346.5 | |
Tavg. % | 13.1 | 20.7 |
Nose Radius “r”, mm | Feed Rate “FR”, mm/rev. | “Raavg”, µm | Increase in “Raavg”, % | The Overall Increase in “Raavg”, % |
---|---|---|---|---|
0.4 | 0.056 | 1.512 | 40 | 67 |
0.112 | 2.121 | |||
19 | ||||
0.168 | 2.528 | |||
0.8 | 0.056 | 1.352 | 47 | 76 |
0.112 | 1.986 | |||
20 | ||||
0.168 | 2.381 | |||
1.2 | 0.056 | 1.291 | 42 | 79 |
0.112 | 1.841 | |||
25 | ||||
0.168 | 2.311 | |||
(a) | ||||
Nose Radius “r”, mm | Feed Rate “FR”, mm/rev. | “Raavg”, µm | Increase in “Raavg” % | Overall Increase in “Raavg”, % |
0.4 | 0.056 | 1.126 | 51 | 96 |
0.112 | 1.706 | |||
29 | ||||
0.168 | 2.213 | |||
0.8 | 0.056 | 1.048 | 45 | 96 |
0.112 | 1.528 | |||
34 | ||||
0.168 | 2.062 | |||
1.2 | 0.056 | 0.808 | 68 | 120 |
0.112 | 1.36 | |||
31 | ||||
0.168 | 1.781 | |||
(b) |
Nose Radius “r”, mm | Feed Rate “FR”, mm/rev. | “Raavg”, µm | Percentage Reduction in “Raavg”, % | Average Percentage Reduction in “Raavg”, % | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
80 m/min | 120 m/min | ||||
0.4 | 0.056 | 1.512 | 1.126 | 26 | 20 |
0.112 | 2.121 | 1.706 | 20 | ||
0.168 | 2.528 | 2.213 | 13 | ||
0.8 | 0.056 | 1.352 | 1.048 | 23 | 20 |
0.112 | 1.986 | 1.528 | 23 | ||
0.168 | 2.381 | 2.062 | 14 | ||
1.2 | 0.056 | 1.291 | 0.808 | 38 | 29 |
0.112 | 1.841 | 1.36 | 26 | ||
0.168 | 2.311 | 1.781 | 23 |
Feed Rate “FR”, mm/rev. | Nose Radius “r”, mm | Cutting Speed, “Vc” m/min. | Percentage Reduction in “Raavg”, % | Average Percentage Reduction in “Raavg”, % | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0.4 | 0.8 | 1.2 | ||||
0.056 | 1.512 | 1.352 | 1.291 | 80 m/min | 14.6 | 12.1 |
0.112 | 2.121 | 1.986 | 1.841 | 13.2 | ||
0.168 | 2.528 | 2.381 | 2.311 | 8.5 | ||
0.056 | 1.126 | 1.048 | 0.808 | 120 m/min | 19.5 | 22.6 |
0.112 | 1.706 | 1.528 | 1.36 | 20.3 | ||
0.168 | 2.213 | 2.062 | 1.781 | 28.2 |
Source | DF | Adj SS | Adj MS | F-Value | p-Value |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Vc | 1 | 1.9895 | 1.9895 | 8.18 | 0.008 |
FR | 1 | 6.9305 | 6.9305 | 28.50 | 0.000 |
Coolant | 1 | 0.1150 | 0.1150 | 0.47 | 0.497 |
R | 2 | 2.2202 | 1.1101 | 4.57 | 0.019 |
FR * Coolant | 1 | 1.2083 | 1.2083 | 4.97 | 0.034 |
Error | 29 | 7.0520 | 0.2432 | ||
Total | 35 | 22.6232 |
Source | DF | Adj SS | Adj MS | F-Value | p-Value |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Vc | 1 | 252.25 | 252.25 | 70.42 | 0.000 |
FR | 1 | 5018.49 | 5018.49 | 1401.05 | 0.000 |
Coolant | 1 | 54.12 | 54.12 | 15.11 | 0.001 |
r | 2 | 1928.52 | 964.26 | 269.20 | 0.000 |
Vc * Coolant | 1 | 86.44 | 86.44 | 24.13 | 0.000 |
FR * Coolant | 1 | 126.10 | 126.10 | 35.20 | 0.000 |
Coolant * r | 2 | 118.78 | 59.39 | 16.58 | 0.000 |
Error | 26 | 93.13 | 3.58 | ||
Total | 35 | 8136.09 |
Source | DF | Adj SS | Adj MS | F-Value | p-Value |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Vc | 1 | 1077 | 1076.93 | 46.70 | 0.000 |
FR | 1 | 978 | 977.93 | 42.41 | 0.000 |
Coolant | 1 | 1897 | 1897.28 | 82.28 | 0.000 |
r | 2 | 62 | 30.76 | 1.33 | 0.282 |
Vc * Coolant | 1 | 834 | 834.25 | 36.18 | 0.000 |
Vc * r | 2 | 379 | 189.38 | 8.21 | 0.002 |
FR * Coolant | 1 | 570 | 570.37 | 24.74 | 0.000 |
Coolant * r | 2 | 2574 | 1287.19 | 55.82 | 0.000 |
Error | 24 | 553 | 23.06 | ||
Total | 35 | 212,204 |
Exp. # | Optimum Conditions | Validation | Percentage Difference, % | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Raavg., μm | “T” °C | “R” N | “Raavg.”, μm | “T” °C | “R” N | Raavg., μm | “T” °C | “R” N | |
1 | 0.7 | 157 | 56 | 0.74 | 162 | 55 | 5.7 | 3.1 | −1.7 |
2 | 0.69 | 159 | 53 | −1.5 | 1.2 | −5.4 | |||
3 | 0.72 | 164 | 59 | 2.8 | 4.4 | 5.3 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
El Rayes, M.M.; Abbas, A.T.; Al-Abduljabbar, A.A.; Ragab, A.E.; Benyahia, F.; Elkaseer, A. Investigation and Statistical Analysis for Optimizing Surface Roughness, Cutting Forces, Temperature, and Productivity in Turning Grey Cast Iron. Metals 2023, 13, 1098. https://doi.org/10.3390/met13061098
El Rayes MM, Abbas AT, Al-Abduljabbar AA, Ragab AE, Benyahia F, Elkaseer A. Investigation and Statistical Analysis for Optimizing Surface Roughness, Cutting Forces, Temperature, and Productivity in Turning Grey Cast Iron. Metals. 2023; 13(6):1098. https://doi.org/10.3390/met13061098
Chicago/Turabian StyleEl Rayes, Magdy M., Adel T. Abbas, Abdulhamid A. Al-Abduljabbar, Adham E. Ragab, Faycal Benyahia, and Ahmed Elkaseer. 2023. "Investigation and Statistical Analysis for Optimizing Surface Roughness, Cutting Forces, Temperature, and Productivity in Turning Grey Cast Iron" Metals 13, no. 6: 1098. https://doi.org/10.3390/met13061098