PDF Arghya
Transcript of PDF Arghya
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
1/75
TaguchiBased Optimization and Numerical Modelling
of Surface Roughness in CNC Turning Operation
Thesis submitted to
Dr Sudhir Chandra Sur Degree Engg College
F o r aw a r d o f t h e d e g r e e
Of
Master of Technology
Arghya Gupta
Roll Number: 25521912001
Registration Number: 122550410001 OF 2012-2013
Under the guidance of
Dr. Aditi Majumdar
DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
Dr Sudhir Chandra Sur Degree Engg CollegeMAY 2014
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
2/75
ii
Acknowledgement
I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my guide Dr. Aditi Majumdar for her
valuable advice, support, numerous interesting ideas, wisdom, encouragement and patience
throughout the period of thesis work, right from the inception of the problem to the
successful completion of this study. It is due to her experience and timely suggestions that
the work has taken its present shape. I feel proud and honoured to be a student of such
personality.
I wish to express my sincere appreciation to The Head, Department of Mechanical
Engg., Dr. Sudhir Chandra Sur Degree Engg. College for extending the infrastructural
facilities of the department.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank Prof. Rahul Bhattacharyya of the
Department of Mechanical Engineering for his valuable advices and suggestions. I also
sincerely acknowledge all other faculty members of the department for their technical
suggestions as well as friendly interactions. I am very much thankful to my Institute and
Department for providing me all necessary assistance in the form of research and guidance.
Lastly but certainly not the least, I extend my sincere gratitude to my parents, for
their patience. I couldnt accomplish my goal without their moral support and
encouragement. Above all I would like to thank the almighty for their continued blessings
that have helped me complete this work successfully.
Dr. Sudhir Chandra Sur Degree Engg. College
540, Dumdum Road.
Kol-700028 (ARGHYA GUPTA)
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
3/75
iii
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the project report entitled Taguchi Based Optimization and
Numerical Modelling of Surface Roughness in CNC Turning Operation submitted by
Arghya Gupta to Dr. Sudhir Chandra Sur Degree Engineering College (under JIS Group of
colleges), is a record of bona fide research work under our supervision and is worthy of
consideration for the award of the degree of Master of Technology of the Institute.
Dated:
Prof. Sujoy Saha Dr. Aditi Majumdar(Thesis Guide)
Head of Mech. Engg. Dept Asst. Prof. of Mech. Engg. Dept
DSCSDEC, Dumdum, Kolkata DSCSDEC, Dumdum, Kolkata
Dr. Salil Halder,
Prof and Head of the department
Department of Aerospace & Applied Mechanics,
Indian Institute of Engineering,Science & Technology, Shibpur
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
4/75
ABSTRACT
iv
In any machining process, it is most important to determine the optimal setting of machining
parameters in order to reduce the machining cost and also to achieve the desired product
quality. In this Thesis work, the effect of some input cutting parameters like cutting speed,
feed and depth of cut on materials removal rate (MRR) and average surface roughness have
been studied with Aluminium(LM6) as work material and single point cutting tool with
indexable Tungsten Carbide insert on CNC lathe. A solution of Balmerol Protocool SL
20% and Distilled Water 80% is used as a coolant. Optimisation of cutting parameters is done
by using Taguchi method and experiment set up is designed according to Taguchis
orthogonal array. In the first part of this work MRR is calculated theoretically for 16
observations and in the second part, experiments have been carried out with the values as
tabulated through Taguchis method for 16 observations to measure average surface
roughness by Talysurf. The results were analysed using Signal to Noise Ratio ( NS/
Ratio) and Main Effects Plot for NS/ Ratios to obtain optimal values for input cutting
parameters. This paper aims at determining empirical relationships both of linear type and
exponential type between average surface roughness ( ) and the different input cutting
parameters.
Keywords: Surface Roughness, Materials Removal Rate, Cutting Speed, Feed, Depth of Cut,
CNC Lathe, Taguchi Orthogonal Array, NS/ Ratio, Empirical Relationships.
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
5/75
v
CONTENTS
Title Page No.
Title Page i
Acknowledgement iiCertificate iii
Abstract iv
Content v
List of Tables vii
List of Figures
List of Symbols
viii
ix
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 General introduction 1
1.2 Overview of Taguchi method 11.3 Properties and use of the workpiece material used (LM6) 2
1.4
1.5
1.6
Introduction to CNC lathe
1.4.1 CNC Lathe features
1.4.2 How CNC Lathe Works
1.4.3 CNC Part Programming Basics
1.4.4 CNC Part Programming Key Letters
1.4.5 Important G codes used
1.4.6 Important M codes used
Surface roughness tester (Talysurf)
1.5.1 Description of the parts of Talysurf
Objective
4
4
5
5
5
6
7
7
8
10
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Literature review 11
2.2 Critical observations from Literature review 13
3.MATHEMATICAL FORMULATIONS
3.1 Optimisation method used 14
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
Taguchi experiment design versus traditional design of
experiments
Input cutting parameters used to design Taguchi orthogonal array
Flow chat of Taguchi method
Determining Parameter Design Orthogonal Array
Properties of an orthogonal array
Minimum number of experiments to be conducted
Application of Taguchi method to calculate S/N ratios for MRR
(Materials removal rate)Description of the instrument used to measure surface roughness
15
15
16
17
19
19
2021
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
6/75
vi
3.10
3.9.1 Features and benefits of Talysurf
Development of empirical relationship between surface roughness
(Ra) and cutting speed (v), depth of cut (d) and feed (f)
22
23
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
4.9
4.10
4.11
4.12
4.13
4.14
Validation
4.1.1 Critical observation from validation of equations
Experimental design and set up
Selection of the levels of the input cutting parameters
Development of the orthogonal array
Materials removal rate (MRR) calculation and determination of
S/N ratiosSurface roughness measurement and determination of S/N ratios
Analysis of Signal to Noise ratio (S/N ratio) for MRR
Response surface plot for MRR
Analysis of S/N ratio for Surface Roughness
Response surface plots for surface roughness
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for surface roughness
Determination of empirical relationships between and v, d and
f
4.12.1 Determination of Linear empirical model
4.12.2 Determination of Exponential empirical model
Verification
Calculation of percentage error
4.14.1 Critical observation from percentage error
calculation
24
26
29
34
35
3638
39
41
42
43
45
48
48
49
51
56
57
5. CONCLUSION
5.1 Introduction 61
5.2 Significant contributions 61
5.3 Future scope of work 62
REFERENCES 63
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
7/75
vii
List of Tables
Table
No. Description
Page
No.
3.1 Layout of orthogonal array 18
4.1Surface roughness values by different published empirical
equations26
4.1.1Percentage error between surface roughness experimental
values and surface roughness from Eq. 4.527
4.2 Selection of the levels of the input parameters 35
4.3 Taguchi orthogonal array ( ) 36
4.4Theoretical calculation for MRR and determination of S/N
ratios37
4.5Experimental results for surface roughness and
determination of S/N ratios38
4.6 Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for surface roughness 47
4.7
Comparative study between surface roughness experimental
values and surface roughness values from developed linear
models
52
4.8
Comparative study between surface roughness experimental
values and surface roughness values from developedexponential models
53
4.9
Percentage error between Surface roughness experimental
values and Surface roughness values from developed linear
model 3 (Eq. 4.14)
56
4.10
Percentage error between Surface roughness experimental
values and Surface roughness values from developed
exponential model 1 (Eq. 4.16)
57
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
8/75
viii
List of Figures
Figure
No.Description
Page
No.
1.1 Important parts of CNC lathe 4
1.2 Parts of surface roughness tester-Talysurf 7
3.1 Taguchi Method flow chart 16
3.2 Diagram showing job zero 20
3.3 A portable surface roughness tester (Talysurf) 22
3.4 Job placed in a V-block (Front view) 22
3.5Typical set up for measurement of surface roughness with
Talysurf 23
4.1Surface roughness experimental values versus Surface roughness
values from Eq. 4.528
4.2 Experimental set up to measure surface roughness 29
4.2.1 Figure of chips from CNC during experiment (For obs. 1 to 4) 30
4.2.2 Figure of chips from CNC during experiment (For obs. 5 to 7) 31
4.2.3 Figure of chips from CNC during experiment (For obs. 9 to 12) 32
4.2.4 Figure of chips from CNC during experiment (For obs. 13 to 16) 33
4.3 Main effects plot for S/N ratios for MRR. 40
4.4 Response Surface Plot (MRR vs. d vs. f) 41
4.5 Main effects plot for S/N ratios for surface roughness (Ra) 42
4.6 Response surface plot 1 (Ra vs. f vs. v) 44
4.7 Response surface plot 2 (Ra vs. d vs. v) 44
4.8 Response surface plot 3 (Ra vs. d vs. f) 45
4.9Comparative study between experimental values and developed
linear model values. 54
4.10
Comparative study between surface roughness experimental
values and surface roughness values by developed exponential
models.55
4.11 Comparative study between Surface roughness experimentalvalues and Surface roughness values from developed linear model
3 (Eq. 4.14).
58
4.12
Comparative study between Surface roughness experimental
values and Surface roughness values from developed exponential
model 1 (Eq. 4.16).
59
4.13Surface roughness experimental values versus Surface roughness
values from developed linear model 3 (Eq. 4.14).60
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
9/75
ix
List of Symbols
Most of the symbols are defined as they occur in the thesis. Some of the most common
symbols, which are used repeatedly, listed below:
Average Surface Roughness (m)
f Feed Rate (mm/Rev)
v Cutting Speed (m/min)
d Depth of Cut (mm)
R Nose Radius (mm)
Flank Wear (mm)
N Spindle Speed (RPM )
D Diameter of Workpiece (mm or m)
NS/ Signal to Noise Ratio (dB)
MRR Materials Removal Rate (g/s or mm/s)
Total sum of squared deviations
The mean ratio for experiment
Sum of squared deviations of parameters
The sum of the S/N Ratio involving parameter p and level j
Sum of squared deviation of error
Sum of squared deviation of Spindle Speed
Sum of squared deviation of Depth of Cut
Sum of squared deviation of Feed Rate
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
10/75
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 General introduction:
One of the challenges faced by the engineers in manufacturing sector is to achieve desired
surface quality on machined surface. Within the prescribed limitations on machine tools, cost
in machining and machining time allowed desired quality of finished product is seldom
achieved. Efforts have been given to achieve better surface finish on machined surface. There
are certain factors like work piece material, cutting tool material, cutting tool design,
machining parameters such as cutting speed, feed, depth of cut, nose radius of cutting tool,
flank wear etc, govern the surface roughness of any machined component. Significant
influence of surface roughness is realised on solid bodies particularly at their contact region
due to contact stresses, wear and friction and lubrication conditions. Surface roughness is
found to be a key design feature in many applications such as fasteners, aesthetics parts,
precision fits and parts which are subjected to fatigue loads.
1.2 Overview of Taguchi method:
Quality of finished products is the highest priority in any manufacturing industry. This
process will include selection of a design of experiments that make sense for the company
and its processes. There are various ways of seeking optimization of a process. A Taguchi
Parameter Design Experiment (PDE) [24] is a method that is well studied to address one or
more response parameters with goal of reducing variance in a system. A PDE makes use of
orthogonal arrays that allow for efficient experimentation, and signal to noise ratio (S/N ratio)
that utilize both mean and variance in selecting optimal input cutting parameters.
Basically, classical parameter design, developed by R.A.Fisher [25], is complex and not easy
to use. Especially, a large number of experiments have to be carried out when the number of
the process parameters increases. To solve this task, the Taguchi method uses a special design
of orthogonal arrays to study the entire parameter space with a small number of experiments
only. A loss function is then defined to calculate the deviation between the experimental
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
11/75
Chapter 1
2
value and the desired value. Taguchi recommends the use of the loss function to measure the
performance characteristic deviating from the desired value. The value of the loss function is
further transformed into a signal-to-noise (S/N) ratio. The S/N ratio for each level of process
parameters is computed based on the S/N analysis. Regardless of the category of the
performance characteristic, the larger S/N ratio corresponds to the better performance
characteristic. Therefore, the optimal level of the process parameters is the level with the
highest S/N ratio. Furthermore, a statistical analysis of variance (ANOVA) is performed to
see which process parameters are statistically significant. In this present work with the help
of S/N ratio and ANOVA analyses, the optimal combination of the process parameters can be
predicted. Smaller the better approach is applied as smaller value of surface roughness is
desirable.
G.Taguchi [19], whose background was communication and electronic engineering,
introduced this same concept into the design of experiments. Two of the applications in
which the concept of S/N ratio is useful, are the improvement of quality through variability
reduction and the improvement of measurement. The S/N ratio transforms several repetitions
into one value which reflects the amount of variation present and the mean response. There
are several S/N ratios available depending on the type of characteristic continuous or discrete;
i) nominal-is-best, ii) smaller-the-better, or iii) larger-the-better. Taguchi recommends usingthe common logarithm of this S/N ratio multiplied by 10, which expresses the ratio in
decibels (dB); which has been used in communications for many years. Thus, for the cases of
continuous and larger the better characteristic, a fixed value is always desired. In the larger-
the-better type of measurement, the larger magnitude of evaluation will be preferred over
smaller ones. Theoretically, there is no upper limit on the results, but in practice, some upper
limit is required for numerical correctness. To achieve consistency, the average performance
can be considered as the target value.
1.3 Properties and use of the workpiece material used (LM6):
In this present study Aluminium (LM6) is used as workpiece material. LM6 exhibits
excellent resistance to corrosion under both ordinary atmospheric and marine conditions. For
the severest conditions this property can be further enhanced by anodic treatment. LM6 can
be anodised by any of the common processes, the resulting protective film ranging in colour
from grey to dark brown. Ductility can be improved slightly by heating at 250-300C, but
apart from stress relieving, the heat treatment of LM6 is of little industrial interest. Suitable
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
12/75
Introduction
3
for Marine 'on deck' castings, water-cooled manifolds and jackets, motor car and road
transport fittings; thin section and intricate castings such as housing, meter cases and
switchboxes; for very large castings, e.g cast doors and panels where ease of casting is
essential; for chemical and dye industry castings, e.g pump parts; for paint industry and food
and domestic castings. The general use where marine atmospheres or service conditions
make corrosion resistance a matter of major importance. Especially suitable for castings that
are to be welded. The ductility of LM6 alloy enable castings easily to be rectified or even
modified in shape, e.g simple components may be cast straight and later bent to the required
contour. Properties of LM6 is as follows,
LM6 (Aluminium Casting Alloy)
(AlSil2)
This alloy conforms to British Standards 1490 LM6
PERCENTAGE CHEMICAL COMPOSITION
Name Percentage composition
Copper . 0.1 Max.
Magnesium 0.1 Max.
Silicon 10.0-13.0 Max.
Iron 0.6 Max.
Manganese 0.5 Max.
Nickel 0.1 Max.
Zinc 0.1 Max.
Lead 0.1 Max.
Tin 0.05 Max.
Titanium 0.2 Max.
Aluminium Remainder
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
13/75
Chapter 1
4
1.4 Introduction to CNC lathe:
Figure 1.1: Important parts of CNC lathe.
Fig.1.1 shows important parts of a CNC Lathe. 3 jaw self centering chuck is used to hold theworkpiece. A single point cutting tool with indexable Tungsten Carbide insert is used to cut
the workpiece. Dead centre is used to support the workpiece. But when the length of the job
is short no support is required.
1.4.1 CNC Lathe features:
1. Automated version of a manual lathe.
2. Programmed to change tools automatically.
3. Used for turning and boring wood, metal and plastic.
4. Larger machines have a machine control unit (MCU) which manages operations.
5. Movement is controlled by a motor.
6. Feedback is provided by sensors.
7. Tool magazines are used to change tools automatically.
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
14/75
Introduction
5
1.4.2 How CNC Lathe Works:
Controlled by G and M codes.
These are number values and co-ordinates.
Each number or code is assigned to a particular operation.
Typed in manually to CAD/CAM by machine operators.
G&M codes are automatically generated by the computer software.
1.4.3 CNC Part Programming Basics:
CNC instructions are called part program commands.
When running, a part program is interpreted one command line at a time until all lines
are completed.
Commands, which are also referred to as blocks, are made up of words which each
begin with a letter address and end with a numerical value.
1.4.4 CNC Part Programming Key Letters:
O -Program number (Used for program identification)
N -Sequence number (Used for line identification)
G -Preparatory function
X -X axis designation
Y -Y axis designation
Z -Z axis designation
R -Radius designation
FFeed rate designation
S -Spindle speed designation
H -Tool length offset designation
D -Tool radius offset designation
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
15/75
Chapter 1
6
T -Tool Designation
M -Miscellaneous function
1.4.5 Important G codes used:
G00 Rapid Transverse
G01 Linear Interpolation
G02 Circular Interpolation, CW
G03 Circular Interpolation, CCW
G17 XY Plane,
G18 XZ Plane,
G19 YZ Plane
G21/G71 Metric Units
G40 Cutter compensation cancel
G41 Cutter compensation left
G42 Cutter compensation right
G43 Tool length compensation (plus)
G44 Tool length compensation (minus)
G49 Tool length compensation cancel
G80 Cancel canned cycles
G90 Absolute positioning
G91 Incremental positioning
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
16/75
Introduction
7
1.4.6 Important M codes used:
M00 Program stop
M01 Optional program stop
M02 Program end
M03 Spindle on clockwise
M04 Spindle on counter clockwise
M05 Spindle stop
M06 Tool change
M08 Coolant on
M09 Coolant off
M30 Program stop, reset to start
1.5 Surface roughness tester (Talysurf):
Figure 1.2: Parts of surface roughness tester-Talysurf
1
23
4
5 6
7
8
9
Movement of the
stylus
10 11
13
Display unit
Drive unit
12
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
17/75
Chapter 1
8
Talysurf- surface roughness tester is used to measure the surface finish in m. There are two
units of Talysurf, one is drive unit and another one is display unit as shown in Fig. 1.2.
These two units are connected with a wire. The units can be driven with both AC power
supply and battery. Instrument calibration is required before measuring any surface. Stylus is
kept at the same level of the surface to be measured. Both vertical and transverse movement
of the stylus is possible to measure the surface finish. Some specifications of Talysurf is
given below;
1.5.1 Description of the parts of Talysurf:
1) Large color monitor: Displays measurement results and setting conditions.
2) POWER/DATA : Power on key. Outputs data, prints data and saves data to the memory
card.
3) START/STOP : Starts and stops the measurement.
4) PAGE : Displays the measurement results for other parameters and evaluation profiles.
5,6) Blue, Red : Performs the function displays on each screen.
7) Cursor keys : Performs functions on the screen.
8) Esc/Guide : Escape key, guide key. Also power off on long press.
9) Enter/Menu : Enter key, Menu key.
10) Detector : Detects the signal generated by the stylus.
11) Extension rod : Connects detector to the drive.
12) Diamond stylus : Measures the roughness of the surface.
13) Drive : Connected to the display unit through a wire.
Detector
Detection methodDifferential inductance method.
Measurement range360 m (-200 m to +160 m)
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
18/75
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
19/75
Chapter 1
10
1.6 Objective:
The objective of this present work is to develop efficient linear and exponential empirical
equations of average Surface Roughness ( ) based on some input cutting parameters like
Cutting Speed ( v in m/min), Depth of Cut ( d in mm) and Feed ( f in mm/rev). The
developed equations are intended to validate with the experimental results to find out the
accurate model. Also Taguchi method is used to find out the optimal cutting parameters.
Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) is also done to determine the Fisher Ratio and
Percentage Contribution of the input cutting parameters (Cutting Speed, Depth of cut and
Feed).
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
20/75
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Literature review:
Gupta[1] et al. have presented the application of Taguchi method with logical fuzzy
reasoning for multiple output optimisation. The machining parameters were optimised with
considerations of the multiple performance measures. They have also fuzzified ANOVA toevaluate contribution of each factor through a single comprehensive output measure (COM).
Ahilan et al.[2] have developed neural network models for prediction of machining
parameters in CNC turning. Results from experiments, based on Taguchis Design of
Experiments (DOE) were used to develop neuro based hybrid models. ANOVA have been
used to decide influence of process parameters hence minimum power consumption and
maximum productivity can be achieved.
Risbood et al.[3] have used neural network to predict surface finish by taking the acceleration
of radial vibration of tool holder as a feed back. Neural network prediction models had
separately been developed for turning of a slender work piece. They have predicted
dimensional deviation by taking radial component of cutting force and acceleration of radial
vibration.
Benardros et al.[4] have presented various methodology and approaches based on machining
theory , experimental investigation, designed experiments and artificial intelligence with theirdrawbacks to avoid any re-processing of the machined work piece.
Karayel[5] had developed a feed forward multi layered neural network, using the scaled
conjugate gradient algorithm (SCGA) for the prediction and control of surface roughness in a
CNC lathe. The results of the neural network approach were compared with actual values.
Abburi et al.[6] have converted knowledge based neural networks into IF- THEN rules with
the help of fuzzy set theory. Boolean operations were used to reduce the TF-THEN rules, for
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
21/75
Literature review
12
prediction of surface roughness for given process variables as well as for the prediction of
process variables for a given surface roughness.
Nalbant et al.[7] have executed experimental studies on artificial neural networks (ANN). In
the input layer of the ANNs, the cutting tools, feed rate and cutting speed values were used
while at the output layer the surface roughness values were used. They have compared the
ANN predictions and the experimental values by statistical error analysing methods.
Kwon et al.[8] have used a fuzzy adaptive modelling technique, which adapts the
membership functions in accordance with the magnitude of the process variations, to predict
surface roughness.
Krishankant et al.[9] have designed Taguchi orthogonal array with three levels of turning
parameters with the help of MINITAB 15. They have measured initial and final weight of
workpiece (EN24) and also the machining tome to calculate MRR in two sets of experiment
(i.e. first run and second run). S/N ratio was calculated for the larger the better and hence
optimal levels of the machining parameters (speed, feed, depth of cut) were obtained.
Simpson et al. [10] have performed an experiment to determine a method to assemble an
electrometric connector to a nylon tube while delivering the requisite pull off performance
suitable for an automotive engineering application. The pull off force was maximised while
assembly effect was minimised and hence cost is reduced with the help of Taguchis method.
Both the and arrays were develop for noise factors and controllable factors
respectively. They have used Taguchis graphical approach to plot the marginal means of
each level of each factor and pick the winner to determine the best setting for each control
factor.
Quazi et al.[11] have employed orthogonal arrays of Taguchi, S/N ratio, the analysis of
variance (ANOVA) to analyse the effect of the turning parameters.
Lazarevic et al.[12] have analysed different cutting parameters on average surface roughness
on the basis of the standard Taguchi orthogonal array with the help of MINITAB. The
optimal cutting parameter settings were determined based on analysis of means (ANOM) and
analysis of variance (ANOVA).
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
22/75
Chapter 2
13
Vipindas et al.[13] have performed their experiments on Al 6061 material based on Taguchi
orthogonal array. They have observed that feed is the significant factor at 95% confidence
level.
Durai et al.[14] have taken three levels of process parameters to optimised the minimum
energy consumption with the help of Taguchis orthogonal array. They have shown that,
as material removal rate increases power demand increases and energy consumption
decreases.
Nanbant et al. [15] optimised three cutting parameters namely insert radius, feed rate and
depth of cut with consideration of surface roughness. They have employed the Orthogonal
array, the S/N ratio and ANOVA to study the performance characteristics in turning
operations of AISI 1030 steel bars using TiN coated tools.
Asilturk et al. [16] have used AISI 304 austenitc stainless steel workpiece and carbide coated
tool under dry condition to study the influence of cutting speed, feed and depth of cut on
surface roughness (Ra and Rz). The adequacy of the developed model is proved by ANOVA
and response surface 3D pots.
2.2 Critical observations from Literature review:
The empirical equations which were mostly used in most of the cases that is not very
close to the experimental results.
There are various optimization methods like single variable optimization algorithms,
multi variable optimization algorithms, constrained optimization algorithms,specialized optimization algorithms, non-traditional optimization algorithms used for
parametric study. But Taguchi method gives satisfactorily result than others.
Very few literatures are available in case of parametric study.
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
23/75
CHAPTER 3
MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION
3.1 Optimisation method used:
The traditional way of conducting the Taguchi method of design of experiments is to set the
level combinations of various influencing factors and conduct the real time experiment and
study the results.
The Taguchi method can be used for obtaining near optimal solution to the analytical
engineering problems. Instead of using the standard mathematical optimization procedure
with all the design variables, one can conduct the experiments based on the Taguchi method
and eliminate the insignificant design variable which does not contribute much to the
objective function. After eliminating the insignificant variables, the standard mathematical
optimization procedure could be used. The initial / starting value of the standard optimization
problem is the near optimum level values obtained based on the Taguchi method of design of
experiments. This results in significant saving of computational time.
Dr. Genichi Taguchi [24] found out empirically that NS/ ratios give the optimal
combination of the input parameters, where the variance is minimum, while keeping the
mean close to the target value. For this purpose, the experimental values should be
transformed into the NS/ ratios. Optimal levels based upon the specific NS/ ratio formula,
are of three types:
3.1.1. Smaller the better: For creating the lowest possible response value.
/ = -10 log ( ) ------------------------- (3.1)
3.1.2. Nominal the best: For targeting a nominal specified value.
/ = 10 log (
) ------------------------- (3.2)
3.1.3. Larger the better: For creating the highest possible response value.
/ = -10 log ( ) -------------------------- (3.3)
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
24/75
Mathematical Formulation
15
Where, is the average of observed data, is the variance of y, n is the number of
measurements (here value of n is 1 as only one response value will be converted into S/N
ratio) and is the observed data for parameter.
3.2 Taguchi experiment design versus traditional design of experiments:
1. Only the main effects and two factor interactions are considered. Higher order interactions
are assumed to be nonexistent.
2. Experiments are asked to identify which interactions might be significant before
conducting the experiment, through their knowledge of subject matter.
3. Taguchis orthogonal arrays are not randomly generated; they are based on judgement
sampling.
4. Traditional DOEs treat noise as nuisance (blocking), but Taguchi makes it the focal point
of his analysis.
3.3 Input cutting parameters used to design Taguchi orthogonal array:
In this present thesis work the following three input cutting parameters are used to design
Taguchi orthogonal array;
1. Cutting speed: In this present study Aluminium is used as work material and tool is single
point cutting tool with indexable Tungsten Carbide insert. Standard cutting speed with the
combination of cutting tool and work material as stated above is 75 to 105 m/min [26]. The
Cutting Speed in m/min can be converted into Spindle Speed in RPM by the formula
NDv .. where v in m/min, D is work piece diameter in m and N is in RPM.
2. Feed (mm/revolution): This is the advancement of the cutting tool along the spindle axis
in mm, per revolution of the chuck or the spindle of the CNC Lathe.
3. Depth of cut (mm): It is the depth of the material cut by the cutting tool in each pass.
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
25/75
Chapter 3
16
3.4 Flow chat of Taguchi method:
Selection of input parameters
Levels of input parameters
Taguchi method is an efficient design and experimental technique, which uses a special
orthogonal array to examine the quality characteristics through a minimum number of
experiments. The experimental results based on orthogonal array have been transformed into
NS/ Ratios to evaluate the performance characteristics. The optimal parameters are then
S/N ratio calculation
Analysis of variance
Response surface plot
Orthogonal array
Perform ex eriment
START
Problem formulation
Experimental set up
Analysis of results
Verified
END
Ob ective function
Selection of input parameters
Levels of input parameters
NO
YES
Figure 3.1: Taguchi Method flow chart
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
26/75
Mathematical Formulation
17
determined by performing the parameter design. Analysis of variance (ANOVA ) has been
done to determine the Fisher ratio and Percentage Contribution of each factor. Response
plot shows exactly how the output varies with the changes in the input parameters. The flow
chart of the Taguchi method is illustrated in Fig.3.1. Taguchi method can also be described
by the following three phases;
I) Planning phase
1. Taking the problem.
2. Determination of the objective of the experiment.
3. Selection of the quality characteristics.
4. Selection of the input parameters that may influence quality characteristics the most.
5. Choosing levels for the input parameters.
6. Developing the Taguchi orthogonal array.
II) Execution phase
1. Conducting the experiments as described by orthogonal array.
2. Conversion of the output results into Signal to Noise (S/N) ratios.
III) Analysis phase
1. Analysing the experimental results using analysis of variance (ANOVA).
2. Verification of the results by response surface plot.
3.5 Determining Parameter Design Orthogonal Array:
The effect of many different parameters on the performance characteristic in a condensed set
of experiments can be examined by using the orthogonal array experimental design proposed
by Dr.G.Taguchi [19]. Once the parameters affecting a process that can be controlled have
been determined, the levels at which these parameters should be varied must be determined.
Determining what levels of a variable to test requires an in-depth understanding of the
process, including the minimum, maximum, and current value of the parameters. If the
difference between the minimum and maximum value of a parameter is large, the values
being tested can be further apart or more values can be tested. If the range of a parameter is
small, then fewer values can be tested or the values tested can be closer together. For
example, if the temperature of a reactor jacket can be varied between 20C and 80C and it is
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
27/75
Chapter 3
18
known that the current operating jacket temperature is 50C, three levels might be chosen at
20, 50, and 80 C. Also, the cost of conducting experiments must be considered when
determining the number of levels of a parameter to include in the experimental design. In the
previous example of jacket temperature, it would be cost prohibitive to do 60 levels at 1
degree intervals. Typically, the number of levels for all parameters in the experimental design
is chosen to be the same to aid in the selection of the proper orthogonal array.
Once the number of input parameters and the number of levels are known, the proper
orthogonal array can be selected. In this present study the numbers of input parameters are 3
(Cutting speed, depth of cut and feed rate) and the numbers of levels are 4. Table 3.1 shows a
standard orthogonal array. There are totally 16 experiments to be conducted and each
experiment is based on the combination of level values as shown in the table. For example,
the third experiment is conducted by keeping the independent design variable 1 at level 1,
variable 2 at level 3 and variable 3 at level 3.
Table 3.1: Layout of orthogonal array
Experiment no. Independent Variables
Variable 1 Variable 2 Variable 3
1 1 1 1
2 1 2 2
3 1 3 3
4 1 4 4
5 2 1 2
6 2 2 1
7 2 3 4
8 2 4 3
9 3 1 3
10 3 2 4
11 3 3 1
12 3 4 2
13 4 1 4
14 4 2 3
15 4 3 2
16 4 4 1
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
28/75
Mathematical Formulation
19
3.6 Properties of an orthogonal array:
The orthogonal array has the following special properties that reduce the number of
experiments to be conducted.
1. The vertical column under each independent variables of the above table has a special
combination of level settings. All the level settings appear an equal number of times. For
array under variable 3, level 1, level 2, level 3 and level 4 appears 4 times. This is
called the balancing property of orthogonal arrays.
2. All the level values of independent variables are used for conducting the experiments.
3. The sequence of level values for conducting the experiments shall not be changed. This
means one can not conduct experiment 1 with variable 1, level 2 setup and experiment 4
with variable 1 , level 1 setup. The reason for this is that the arrays of each factor columns
are mutually orthogonal to any other column of level values. The inner product of vectors
corresponding to weights is zero.
3.7 Minimum number of experiments to be conducted :
The design of experiments using the orthogonal array is, in most cases, efficient when
compared to many other statistical designs. The minimum number of experiments that are
required to conduct the Taguchi method can be calculated based on the degrees of freedom
approach.
= 1 + ( 1) ------------------------ (3.4)
For example, in case of 8 independent variables study having 1 independent variable with 2
levels and remaining 7 independent variables with 3 levels ( orthogonal array), the
minimum number of experiments required based on the above equation is 16. Because of the
balancing property of the orthogonal arrays, the total number of experiments shall be multiple
of 2 and 3. Hence the number of experiments for the above case is 18.
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
29/75
Chapter 3
20
3.8 Application of Taguchi method to calculate S/N ratios for MRR
(Materials removal rate):
Orthogonal array has been developed by using Taguchi method. Based on this orthogonal
array, MRR values have been calculated. MRRcan be defined as, volume or weight of the
material removed per unit time during machining operation. As higher value for MRR is
desirable so Larger the better formula (Eq. 3.3) can be used to determine the optimal level.
Experimentally, MRR can be calculated as follows,
MRR =( )
g/s ---------------------- (3.5)
The job has been taken out from the chuck to measure the weight after machining (i.e., final
weight). It is required to set the job zero after the job is reloaded in the Lathe chuck. Some
changes in CNC part programming is required every time the job is unloaded from the chuck.
So if possible, weight of the chip for each run can be measured without unloading the job
from the chuck. Hence MRR becomes,
MRR = g/s --------------------- (3.6)
Figure 3.2: Diagram showingjob zero
Theoretically Materials removal rate can be calculated by the formula given below,
fdvMRR .. -------------------------------- (3.7)
Where, v= cutting speed in mm/min; d= depth of cut in mm; f=feed rate in mm/rev.
Eq. 3.7 gives the volume of materials removed per unit time. This volume of materials
removed per unit time can be converted into mass of materials removed per unit time. The
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
30/75
Mathematical Formulation
21
work material used in this present thesis work is Aluminium (LM6). Density of Al is 2.8
g/cm (.
g/mm). Density can be defined as mass per unit volume.
Density () =
( )
( ) --------------------------------- (3.8)
The volume (V) in the Eq. 4.10 is the materials removal rate (MRR) in mm/min. Let us take
an example where,
Cutting speed ( v ) = 75 m/min (75000 mm/min),
Depth of cut ( d ) = 0.8 mm and
Feed rate ( f ) = 0.15 mm/rev.
Therefore, MRR = 75000 x 0.8 x 0.15 = 9000 mm/min.
Now, from Eq. 3.8,
Mass (m ) of materials removed = Density () x MRR ----------------------------- (3.9)
Then, m =.
x g/ sec. = 0.42 g/sec.
3.9 Description of the instrument used to measure surface roughness:
Surface roughness (Ra ) is a determination of surface finish. A lower surface roughness value
indicates better surface finish. So for optimization of surface roughness smaller the better
formula (Eq. 3.1) is used.
A Talysurf is a type contact profilometer where a diamond stylus is moved vertically in
contact with a sample and then moved laterally across the sample for a specified distance and
specified contact force. It can measure small surface variations in vertical stylus displacement
as a function of position. With the help of Talysurf small vertical features ranging in height
from 10 nanometres to 1 millimetre can be measured. The height position of the diamond
stylus generates an analog signal which is converted into a digital signal stored, analyzed and
displayed. The radius of diamond stylus ranges from 20 nanometres to 50 m, and the
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
31/75
Chapter 3
22
horizontal resolution is controlled by the scan speed and data signal sampling rate. The stylus
tracking force can range from less than 1 to 50 milligrams.
For surface roughness measurement the job is taken out from lathe chuck and placed in a V-
block. The diamond stylus of the Talysurf is kept in the same plane as the surface to be
measured. Then the stylus is allowed to move horizontally. The LCD shows the value of
surface roughness ( ).
3.9.1 Features and benefi ts of Talysur f:
1. 1mm vertical range and 16 nm resolution: It allows both form (contour) measurement and
surface finish measurement.
2.50 mm horizontal traverse: Ideal for majority of shop floor applications.
3. 0.4 um / 50 mm straightness error: The high accuracy traverse datum makes possible
skidless measurement of waviness, form and contour even on large components.
4. 0.5 um horizontal data spacing: Small components can be measured more effectively.
Figure 3.3: A portable surface roughness tester (Talysurf)
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
32/75
Mathematical Formulation
23
Figure 3.4: Job placed in a V-block (Front view)
Stylus Movement of the stylus
Figure 3.5: Typical set up for measurement of surface roughness with
Talysurf.
3.10 Development of empirical relationship between surface roughness ( )
and cutting speed (v), depth of cut (d) and feed (f):-
. The following two models are used to develop the relationship between surface roughness
( ) and cutting speed ( v ), depth of cut (d ) and feed tare ( f ),
A linear empirical model of following type (by Ahilan et al. [2])
= + fcdbva ... ------------------------ (3.10)
V-Block
Drive unit
Display unit
Support
Cylindrical job
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
33/75
Chapter 3
24
An exponential model of following type as developed by Fang et al.[17]
=X ----------------------- (3.11)
Where A, X, a, b, c are constants.
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
34/75
CHAPTER 4
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Validation:
As discussed earlier, surface roughness is a measure of the technological quality of a product.
Surface finish determination is a necessary step in modern manufacturing industry. Efforts
have been given to determine relationship between surface roughness and input cutting
parameters since 1990s. Empirical relationships were established by various authors. Here in
this work, validation of the empirical relationships is done to determine their accuracy in
reference to our experiment for Aluminium (LM6) with Carbide tip High speed steel (HSS)
cutting tool.
4.1.1 A theoretical arithmetical expression was proposed by Whitehouse (1994) [21] as
follows,
= 0.032 ----------------------------- (4.1)
(f is the feed in mm/rev and R is the nose radius in mm)
4.1.2 The empirical equation developed by Bhattiprolu (1993) [22] has the form,
= -108 + (30.2X f) + (0.568 X ) , ------------------------------- (4.2)
Where f is the feed rate (in/rev) x 1000 and is the flank wear (0 to 0.0065 in) x 10000.
4.1.3 Another empirical equation as proposed by Sarikaya et al.(2013) [23] is as follows,
= ------------------------------ (4.3)
(f is the feed in mm/rev and R is the nose radius in mm)
4.1.4 The following empirical equation for surface roughness in turning was proposed by
Hongxiang et al., 2002[18] with diamond cutting tool and Aluminium alloy workpiece,
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
35/75
Result and discussion
25
= 13.636 . . . . ------------------------------- (4.4)
Where, = cutting speed; f= Feed; = Depth of cut.
4.1.5An empirical form was developed by Asilurk et al.(2012) [16] for AISI 304 austenitic
stainless steel machined by coated carbide insert under dry conditions as follows,
= - 0.2907 - 0.89v + 12.0593f - 1.4263a -0.00006 + 13.111 + 0.582222 +
0.348889vf + 0.0040333va - 2.06667fa. ------------------------------- (4.5)
Where, v = cutting speed (m/min); f= Feed (mm/rev); a= Depth of cut (mm).
4.1.6 A quadratic model as proposed by Ahilan et al. (2013) [2],
Surface roughness = 9.80674 (0.07608X1) (52.8926X2) (9.17185X3) +
(0.33241X4)+(0.96X1)+(198.00X2+9.18519X3)(0.10417X4)+(0.05404X1X2)
+(0.01849X1X3)(0.00002X1X4)+(5.45185X2X3)(0.13333X2X4)+(0.0037X3
X4) -----------------------------(4.6)
Where, X1 is cutting speed (m/min), X2 is feed rate (mm), X3 is depth of cut (mm) and X4 is
nose radius (mm).
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
36/75
Chapter 4
26
Table 4.1 Surface roughness values by different published empirical equations
Sl.
No.
Spindle
Speed
(m/min)
Depth
of cut
(mm)
Feed
(mm/rev)
Surface
Roughness
values as
measured
under this
experiment
(m)
Ra values calculated from various published
Empirical Equations
Eq. 4.1
(m)
Eq.
4.2
(m)
Eq.
4.3
(m)
Eq.
4.4
(m)
Eq.
4.5
(m)
Eq.
4.6
(m)
1 75 0.5 0.1 0.294 0.8 1.048 0.781 2.230 0.6593 1.205
2 75 0.8 0.15 0.578 1.8 1.033 1.757 2.697 0.6868 1.740
3 75 0.9 0.2 0.797 3.2 1.018 3.125 3.111 0.8982 1.256
4 75 1.1 0.25 0.744 5.0 1.003 4.882 3.461 0.7296 1.110
5 76 0.5 0.15 0.695 1.8 1.033 1.757 2.738 0.6779 1.025
6 76 0.8 0.1 0.286 0.8 1.048 0.781 2.185 0.6958 1.483
7 76 0.9 0.25 0.649 5.0 1.003 4.882 3.478 0.9860 1.825
8 76 1.1 0.2 0.689 3.2 1.018 3.125 3.079 0.7956 1.786
9 77 0.5 0.2 0.759 3.2 1.018 3.125 3.162 0.7598 1.265
10 77 0.8 0.25 0.71 5.0 1.003 4.882 3.481 0.6235 1.943
11 77 0.9 0.1 0.413 0.8 1.048 0.781 2.167 0.6985 1.387
12 77 1.1 0.15 0.53 1.8 1.033 1.757 2.647 0.7594 1.121
13 80 0.5 0.25 0.701 5.0 1.003 4.882 3.522 0.6656 1.352
14 80 0.8 0.2 0.758 3.2 1.018 3.125 3.086 0.6601 1.546
15 80 0.9 0.15 0.86 1.8 1.033 1.757 2.651 0.715 1.644
16 80 1.1 0.1 0.304 0.8 1.048 0.781 2.137 0.6594 1.565
4.1.1 Critical observation from validation of equations:
Equation 4.1contains feed and nose radius; 4.2 contains feed and flank wear and 4.3 contains
feed and nose radius. In this present study, input parameters are spindle speed, feed and depth of
cut. Equation 4.4 and 4.5 contains feed, spindle speed and depth of cut. So they are closely
related to this work but the combination of cutting tool and work materials used, as mentioned
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
37/75
Result and discussion
27
earlier, were different. From Table 4.1 it is clear that surface roughness values from Eq. 4.5 are
closely related to our experimental work.
Table 4.1.1 shows the percentage error between surface roughness experimental values and
surface roughness from Eq. 4.5. According to Risbood et al.[3] 20% error is reasonable. From
Table 4.1.1 it can be observed that 10 out of 16 percentage error values are within the range as
depicted above.
Table 4.1.1: Percentage error between surface roughness experimental
values and surface roughness from Eq. 4.5
Sl. No. Surface Roughness
experimental values
(m)
Ra from Eq.
4.5(m)
Percentage error
Within 20%
1 0.294 0.6593 X
2 0.578 0.6868
3 0.797 0.8982
4 0.744 0.7296
5 0.695 0.6779
6 0.286 0.6958 X
7 0.649 0.9860 X
8 0.689 0.7956
9 0.759 0.7598
10 0.71 0.6235
11 0.413 0.6985 X
12 0.53 0.7594 X
13 0.701 0.6656
14 0.758 0.6601
15 0.86 0.7015
16 0.304 0.6594 X
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
38/75
Chapter 4
28
Figure 4.1 Surface roughness experimental values versus Surface
roughness values from Eq. 4.5
Fig. 4.1 shows the Surface roughness experimental values versus Surface roughness values fromEq. 4.5. A line inclined at 45 and passing through the origin is also drawn in the figure. For
perfect prediction, all the points should lie on this line. Here it is seen that most of the points are
close to this line. Hence, Eq. 4.5 for surface roughness provides reliable prediction.
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
1.1
RafromE
q.4.5
(m)
Surface roughness experimental values(m)
B
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
39/75
Result and discussion
29
4.2 Experimental design and set up:
CNC LATHE
COMPUTER
SURFACE ROUGHNESS
MEASUREMENTSURFACE
ROUGHNESS
MODEL
CUTTING
PARAMETERS
CNC PART
PROGRAMMING
OPTIMUM CUTING PARAMETERS
Figure 4.2: Experimental set up to measure surface roughness
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
40/75
Chapter 4
30
Figure 4.2.1: Figure of chips from CNC during experiment (For obs. 1 to 4)
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
41/75
Result and discussion
31
Figure 4.2.2: Figure of chips from CNC during experiment (For obs. 5 to 7)
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
42/75
Chapter 4
32
Figure 4.2.3: Figure of chips from CNC during experiment (For obs. 9 to 12)
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
43/75
Result and discussion
33
Figure 4.2.4: Figure of chips from CNC during experiment (For obs. 13 to 16)
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
44/75
Chapter 4
34
Aluminium (LM6) work piece is used as a test sample in this present study. LM6 has been
machined with single point cutting tool with indexable Tungsten Carbide insert on CNC
lathe. During experiment it is required to use the cutting fluid (coolant) to wash out the chips
and to cool the tool tip. A solution ofBalmerol Protocool SL 20% and Distilled Water 80%
is used as a coolant. Appropriate values of input cutting parameters (cutting speed, depth of
cut and feed rate) are chosen and Taguchi orthogonal array has been generated. Then with the
combination of cutting parameters as generated through Taguchi orthogonal array, CNC part
programming is written. As the array generated through MINITAB 16 was (Table 4.3),
number of observations or the number of combinations for which the turning operations have
been carried out is 16. The job was unloaded from the lathe chuck and placed in a V-block
(as shown in Fig. 3.5) to measure the surface roughness value by Talysurf. Once the
surface roughness values have been measured, the values have been used in developing
empirical models. The experimental set up is shown in Fig.4.2 and the photos of the chip
from CNC as generated during experiment have been shown in Fig. 4.2.1, Fig.4.2.2, Fig.
4.2.3 and Fig.4.2.4 for all 16 observations.
4.3 Selection of the levels of the input cutting parameters:
The experimental work was performed in CNC Lathe, with work material as Aluminium
(LM6) and carbide tip HSS as cutting tool. Cutting speed with Aluminium as work material
and HSS as cutting tool is 75 to 105 m/min [26]. The initial diameter (D) of the cylindrical Al
work piece is 38mm. Hence spindle speeds in RPM can be calculated by the formula
NDv .. ( v in m/min and N in RPM). Here 4 levels of spindle speed, depth of cut and
feed values have been chosen, as tabulated in Table 4.2.
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
45/75
Result and discussion
35
Table 4.2: Selection of the levels of the input parameters:
Parameters Levels
1 2 3 4
Spindle speed (RPM) 628 645 668 711
Depth of cut (mm) 0.5 0.8 0.9 1.1
Feed (mm/rev) 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25
4.4 Development of the orthogonal array:
First step of the Taguchi method is to design an appropriate orthogonal array for the selectedcutting parameters. In this work the most appropriate array is determined as (from 4= 64
possible combination), in order to obtain the optimal cutting parameters and their effects. For
this approach MINITAB 16 software is used. Once the input 4 levels of input cutting
parameters are given as input, orthogonal array has been generated as shown in Table
4.3. Then the experiments have been carried out with the combinations of the input
parameters as tabulated through Taguchi orthogonal array.
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
46/75
Chapter 4
36
Table 4.3: Taguchi orthogonal array ( ):
Sl. No.
Spindle speed
values (RPM)
Depth of cut
values (mm)
Feed values
(mm/rev)
1 628 0.5 0.1
2 628 0.8 0.15
3 628 0.9 0.2
4 628 1.1 0.25
5 645 0.5 0.15
6 645 0.8 0.1
7 645 0.9 0.25
8 645 1.1 0.2
9 668 0.5 0.2
10 668 0.8 0.25
11 668 0.9 0.1
12 668 1.1 0.15
13 711 0.5 0.25
14 711 0.8 0.2
15 711 0.9 0.15
16 711 1.1 0.1
4.5 Materials removal rate (MRR) calculation and determination of S/N
ratios:
Materials removal rate (MRR ) values have been calculated theoretically by the equation
fdvMRR .. mm/min. Where, v is the cutting speed in mm/min; d is the depth of cut
in mm and f is feed rate in mm/rev. The MRR values can be converted into NS/ ratios
by using MINITAB 16 software; hence optimal values for the input parameters are
determined. NS/ ratios have been plotted graphically as Main effects plot for NS/ ratios
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
47/75
Result and discussion
37
to determine the optimal values of the input cutting parameters. As higher value of MRR is
desirable so NS/ ratio is calculated as per Larger the better (Eq. 3.3). In Table 4.4
theoretical calculations for MRR and determination of NS/ ratios have been tabulated.
Table 4.4: Theoretical calculation for MRR and determination of S/N
ratios.
Sl. No.
Spindle speed
values (RPM)
Depth of cut
values (mm)
Feed values
(mm/rev)
MRR
(mm/min)
S/N ratio
(dB)
1 628 0.5 0.1 3750 71.4806
2 628 0.8 0.15 9000 79.08485
3 628 0.9 0.2 13500 82.6066
4 628 1.1 0.25 20625 86.2878
5 645 0.5 0.15 5700 75.1174
6 645 0.8 0.1 6080 75.6780
7 645 0.9 0.25 17100 84.6599
8 645 1.1 0.2 16720 84.4647
9 668 0.5 0.2 7700 77.7298
10 668 0.8 0.25 15400 83.7504
11 668 0.9 0.1 6930 76.8146
12 668 1.1 0.15 12705 82.0794
13 711 0.5 0.25 10000 80
14 711 0.8 0.2 12800 82.1441
15 711 0.9 0.15 10800 80.6684
16 711 1.1 0.1 8800 78.8896
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
48/75
Chapter 4
38
4.6 Surface roughness measurement and determination of S/N ratios:
In the next step, with the combination of input parameters (Table 4.3), as generated throughTaguchi orthogonal array, experiments have been carried out and surface roughness value is
measured with Talysurf. Instrument calibration is required before conducting the
experiment. Turning operation was performed for 16 observations with the combination of
input cutting parameters. Surface roughness values are measured for each run. Work piece
must be taken out from chuck and placed in a V-block to measure surface roughness.
Measurements have been carried out in three different places and mean values are taken.
Then with the help of MINITAB 16 software, NS/ Ratios were calculated and Main
Effects Plot for NS/ Ratios have been plotted to obtain the optimal input cutting parameter
values. As a lower value of surface roughness is desirable so NS/ ratio is calculated as per
smaller the better (Eq. 3.1). Table 4.5 shows the experimental results for surface roughness
and determination of NS/ ratios.
Table 4.5: Experimental results for surface roughness and determination of
S/N ratios.
Sl. No.
Cutting
Speed
(m/min)
Depth of cut
(mm)
Feed
(mm/rev)
Surface
Roughness
(m)
S/N Ratio
(dB)
1 75 0.5 0.1 0.29410.633
2 75 0.8 0.15 0.5784.761
3 75 0.9 0.2 0.797 1.9708
4 75 1.1 0.25 0.7442.568
5 76 0.5 0.15 0.6953.1603
6 76 0.8 0.1 0.28610.8726
7 76 0.9 0.25 0.6493.7551
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
49/75
Result and discussion
39
4.7 Analysis of Signal to Noise ratio (S/N ratio) for MRR:
As discussed earlier, Materials removal rate ( MRR ) can be obtained both theoretically and
experimentally. In order to obtain MRR experimentally, weight of the workpiece before and
after machining have been measured, and also the machining time is noted with stopwatch.
The formula to obtain MRR is as follows,
MRR =( )
sg/ ---------------------- (4.7)
In CNC lathe as it is required to set the job zero after each time it is taken out from the
chuck, so some changes in CNC part programming is required every time. So if possible,
weight of the chip for each run can be measured without unloading the job from the chuck.
Hence MRR becomes,
MRR = sg/ ---------------------- (4.8)
In this thesis work MRR have been calculated theoretically by the equation fdvMRR ..
mm/min. The NS/ ratios have been calculated by using MINITAB 16 for 16 observations
as given in Table 3.2. To obtain the optimal values Main Effects Plot for NS/ Ratios is
given in Fig. 4.3.
8 76 1.1 0.2 0.6893.2356
9 77 0.5 0.2 0.7592.3951
10 77 0.8 0.25 0.712.974
11 77 0.9 0.1 0.4137.680
12 77 1.1 0.15 0.535.514
13 80 0.5 0.25 0.7013.085
14 80 0.8 0.2 0.7582.4066
15 80 0.9 0.15 0.861.3103
16 80 1.1 0.1 0.30410.342
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
50/75
Chapter 4
40
711668645628
84
82
80
78
76
1.10.90.80.5
0.250.200.150.10
84
82
80
78
76
Cutting speed values (RPM)
MeanofSNratios
Depth of cut values (mm)
Feed values (mm/rev)
Main Effects Plot for SN ratios
Data Means
Signal-to-noise: Larger is better
Figure 4.3: Main effects plot for S/N ratios for MRR.
In the Main effects plot for NS/ ratios, X-axes denote cutting speed (RPM ), depth of cut
(mm) and feed ( revmm/ ) values respectively. Regardless of the category of the performance
characteristics, a greater NS/ value corresponds to a better performance. Therefore, the
optimal level of the machining parameters is the levels with the greatest value.
Spindle speed:-
As shown in the Fig.4.3, effect of cutting speed on MRR is increasing with the increasing in
cutting speed and the optimal level is 711 RPM.
Depth of cut:-
Effect of depth of cut on MRR is increasing with the increasing in cutting speed and the
optimal level is 1.1 mm.
Feed rate:-
Effect of feed rate on MRR is increasing with the increasing in cutting speed and the optimallevel is 0.25 mm/rev.
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
51/75
Result and discussion
41
4.8 Response surface plot for MRR:
In Fig. 4.4 three dimensional plots for the measured responses are created based on Table 4.4through ORIGIN 6.0 software. MRR values are kept as the vertical axis and depth of cut (
d ) and feed rate ( f ) values are kept as horizontal axes. Fig. 4.4 reveals that at feed rate
0.26 mm/rev and at depth of cut 1.1 mm, materials removal rate (MRR ) is maximum. As
higher materials removal rate is desirable so this is the optimum value ofMRR . These results
from 3D surface plots matches with Main Effects Plot for NS/ Ratios forMRR .
0.50.6
0.70.8
0.91.0
1.1
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
18000
20000
22000
0.08
0.12
0.16
0.200.24
Figure 4.4: Response surface plot (MRR vs. d vs. f)
MRR
(mm/min)
feed(
mm/re
v)d(mm)
Figure 4.4: Response Surface Plot ( MRR vs. d vs. f)
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
52/75
Chapter 4
42
4.9 Analysis of S/N ratio for Surface Roughness:
Surface roughness can be measured with an instrument called Talysurf. For the
measurement of the surface roughness, the workpiece is taken out from the chuck and placed
in a V-block. Readings are taken in three different places and average values are taken.
Instrument calibration is required and after calibration it is seen that instrument is showing a
value which is 0.003 m less than the desired value, so 0.003 m is added every time with
the measured value. All the surface roughness values written in Table 4.5 are calibrated
values. As smaller values of Surface roughness is desirable, so signal to noise ratio ( NS/
ratio) is calculated as per smaller the better , using Eq. 3.1. To obtain optimal values Main
effect plot for NS/ ratios is shown in Fig. 4.5. As discussed earlier, optimum values are the
maximum values.
80777675
10
8
6
4
2
1.10.90.80.5
0.250.200.150.10
10
8
6
4
2
Spindle speed (m/min)
MeanofSNrat
ios
Depth of cut (mm)
Feed (mm/rev)
Main Effects Plot for SN ratios
Data Means
Signal-to-noise: Smaller is better
Figure 4.5: Main effects plot for S/N ratios for surface roughness (Ra)
Spindle speed:- As shown in the Fig. 4.5,the effect of cutting speed on surface roughness has
increased at first with the increasing in cutting speed upto 76m/min then it is decreasing with
the increasing in cutting speed. The optimal level is 76 m/ min.
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
53/75
Result and discussion
43
Depth of cut:- Effect of depth of cut on surface roughness has increased with the increasing
in cutting speed at first upto 0.8mm then it has again decreased to a minimum value for depth
of cut 0.9mm and then again increased to reach the optimal level at 1.1 mm.
Feed rate:- Effect of feed rate on surface roughness is maximum at first (i.e. at 0.1 mm/rev)
then it is decreasing with the increasing in cutting speed upto 0.20 mm/rev feed and then the
value has increased again for 0.25 mm/ rev. The optimal level is 0.1 mm/rev.
4.10 Response surface plots for surface roughness:
In order to understand the interaction effect of input cutting parameters on surface roughness,
three dimensional plots for the measured responses are created based on table 4.5 through
ORIGIN6.0 software. Fig. 4.6, 4.7, 4.8 gives the 3D surface graphs for the surface
roughness. value is kept as the vertical axes in all the cases. From the figures value can
be determined by the length of the projectors or projection lines from the points to the
horizontal surface as shown. Fig. 4.6 and 4.7 reveals that at cutting speed ( v ) 1.26 m/s (76
m/min) the length of the projectors are minimum; hence, surface roughness ( ) values are
minimum. It can be concluded from Fig. 4.6 and Fig. 4.8 that at feed rate ( f ) 0.1 mm/ rev,
the length of the projector from the point to the horizontal axis is minimum; so, surface
roughness value is minimum. As minimum surface roughness ( ) value signifies better
surface finish, so cutting speed 1.26 m/s and feed rate 0.1 mm/rev are the optimal values.
These results from 3D surface plots matches with Main effects plot for S/N ratios for surface
roughness.
From figure 4.6, for a particular cutting speed (say 75 m/min), value increases as feed rate
increases but for a particular feed (say 0.26 mm/rev), value does not increase much with
the increase in cutting speed values. So it can be concluded that feed rate has higher
contribution than cutting speed in determining surface finish.
From Fig. 4.8, for a particular depth of cut value (say 1.1 mm), value increases as feed
rate increases but for a particular feed (say 0.1 mm/rev), value does not increase much
with the increase in depth of cut values. So it can be concluded that feed rate has higher
contribution than depth of cut in determining surface finish. Hence it is clear from the
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
54/75
Chapter 4
44
response surface plots that feed rate has higher contribution than both cutting speed and depth
of cut in determination of surface finish of machined parts.
Figure 4.6: Response surface plot 1 (Ra vs. f vs. v)
Figure 4.7: Response surface plot 2 (Ra vs. d vs. v)
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
55/75
Result and discussion
45
4.11 Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for surface roughness:
The term Analysis of variance was introduced by Prof. R.A. Fisher in 1920s to deal with
problems in the analysis of agronomical data [20]. Variation is inherent in nature. The total
variation in any set of numerical data is due to a number of causes which may be classified
as; i) Assignable causes and ii) Chance causes.
The variation due to assignable causes can be detected and measured whereas the variation
due to chance causes is beyond the control of human hand and can not be traced separately.
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) can also be defined as a collection of statistical models, and
their associated procedures in which the observed variance in a particular variable is
partitioned into components attributable to different sources of variation. ANOVA is used in
the analysis of comparative experiments, those in which only the difference in outcomes is of
interest. In short, the purpose of ANOVA is to investigate which of the input parameters
significantly affect the performance characteristics. The following formulas are required in
analysis of variance,
Figure 4.8: Response surface plot 3 (Ra vs. d vs. f)
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
56/75
Chapter 4
46
4.11.1 Total sum of squared deviations,
= - [ ] --------------------------- (4.9)
Where m is the no. of observations, is the mean NS/ ratio for experiment.
4.11.2 Sum of squared deviations of parameters,
= ( )
- [ ] ------------------------ (4.10)
Where, t is the repetition of each level of parameters and " " is the sum of the S/N Ratio
involving this parameter p and level j.
4.11.3 Sum of squared deviation of error,
| | = ( + + ) ---------------------- (4.11)
Here in this present work, = 526.894
So, = 526.894 .
= 159.596775.
Sum of squared deviation due to spindle speed,
| |= ( . )
+ ( . )
+ ( . )
+ ( . )
- .
= 340.885225
Sum of squared deviation due to depth of cut,
| | = ( . )
+ ( . )
+ ( . )
+ ( . )
- .
= 355.657.
Sum of squared deviation due to feed,
| | = ( . )
+ ( . )
+ ( . )
+ ( . )
- .
= 366.757225.
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
57/75
Result and discussion
47
Sum of squared deviation of error,
| | = 159.596775340.885225355.657366.757225 = 903.70265
Mean sum of squares can be obtained by .
Fisher ratio can be obtained by .
Table 4.6: Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for surface roughness:
Sources of
variation
Degrees of
freedom
Sum of
Squares
Mean sum of
squares
Fisher ratio Percentage
contribution
Spindle speed 3 340.8852 113.6284 5.65814 31.05428
Depth of cut 3 355.657 118.55233 5.90332 32.6888
Feed rate 3 366.7572 122.252408 6.08757 33.91717
Error 45 903.7026 20.08228 2.33975
Total 54 1967.0021 100
The contribution of the input parameters (i.e., Spindle Speed, Depth of Cut and Feed rate) on
the output (i.e., surface roughness) can be determined by Fisher ratio (or variance ratio). The
higher value of Fisher ratio signifies greater contribution. Here from the Table 4.6 it can be
concluded that, spindle speed has the lowest contribution and feed has the highest
contribution. As both the Fisher ratio and percentage contribution are maximum for feed,
so it can be concluded that feed value has the highest contribution on surface finish of
machined parts.
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
58/75
Chapter 4
48
4.12 Determination of empirical relationships between and v, d and f:
As discussed in the article Mathematical formulation, Eq. 3.4 and Eq. 3.5 are used to
determine the relationship between surface roughness ( ) and Cutting speed ( v ), depth of
cut (d) and feed ( f ).
4.12.1 Determination of Linear empirical model:
Table 4.3 shows that cutting speed 75m/min remains constant for observations 1 to 4, 76
m/min for obs. 5 to 8, 77 m/min is for obs. 9 to 12 and 80 m/min remains constant for obs. 13
to 16. Hence, effort will be given to derive empirical relationship for a particular cutting
speed. It is clear from the Table 4.3 that 4 set of equations can be made for all 4 level of
cutting speeds, hence 16 equations can be generated, and ultimately 4 empirical relationships
can be derived. So let us take Eq. 3.10 ( = + fcdbva ... ) to develop 16 equations
for all 16 observations;
First set of equations (For obs. 1-4)
0.294 =A+75 +0.5 +0.1
0.578 =A+75 +0.8 +0.15
0.797 =A+75 +0.9 +0.9
0.744 =A+75 +1.1 +0.95
Second set of equations (For obs. 5-8)
0.695 =B+76 +0.5 +0.15
0.286 =B+76 +0.8 +0.1
0.649 =B+76 +0.9 +0.95
0.689 =B+76 +1.1 +0.9
Third set of equations (For obs. 9-12)
0.759 =C+77 +0.5 +0.9
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
59/75
Result and discussion
49
0.710 =C+77 +0.8 +0.95
0.413 =C+77 +0.9 +0.1
0.530 =C+77 +1.1 +0.15
Fourth set of equations (For obs. 13-16)
0.701 =D+80 +0.5 +0.95
0.758 =D+80 +0.8 +0.90
0.860 =D+80 +0.9 +0.15
0.304 =D+80 +1.1 +0.10
Where A, B, C, D and to are constants.
It is required to determine the values of the constants A, B, C, D and to .
The following 4 linear empirical relationships can be obtained after solving the equations
written above,
= 3.73f+0.3249d+0.3045v-0.2415- ---------------------- (4.12)
= 2.996f+0.8639d-0.362599v+0.67759 ---------------------- (4.13)
= 1.684f+0.444d-0.1216v+0.64419 ----------------------- (4.14)
= 2.4899f-0.22499d-0.6355v-1.4899 ----------------------- (4.15)
4.12.2 Determination of exponential empirical model:
An exponential empirical model for surface roughness as a function of cutting speed ( v ),
feed ( f ) and depth of cut ( d) was given in equation 3.5 as,R =X v d f
Now let us write all the 16 equations with reference to the table 4.3 as per the form stated
above,
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
60/75
Chapter 4
50
First set of equations (for obs. 1-4)
0.294 = A75 0.5 0.1
0.578 = A75 0.8 0.15
0.797 = A75 0.9 0.2
0.744 = A75 1.1 0.25
Second set of equations (for obs. 5-8)
0.695 = B76 0.5 0.15
0.286 = B76 0.8 0.1
0.649 = B76 0.9 0.25
0.689 = B76 1.1 0.2
Third set of equations (for obs. 9-12)
0.759 = C77 0.5 0.2
0.710 = C77 0.8 0.25
0.413 = C77 0.9 0.1
0.530 = C77 1.1 0.15
Fourth set of equations (for obs. 13-16)
0.701 = D80 0.5 0.25
0.758 = D80 0.8 0.2
0.860 = D80 0.9 0.15
0.304 = D80 1.1 0.1
It is required to determine the values of A, B, C, D and a to l.
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
61/75
Result and discussion
51
The equations can be transformed into linear form by taking natural logarithm on both sides.
And after solving them 4 empirical equations can be obtained as follows,
= 0.39806 . . . ------------------ (4.16)
= 0.48951 . . . ------------------ (4.17)
= 0.11033 . . . ------------------- (4.18)
= 1.215672 . . . ------------------- (4.19)
Eq. 4.16 is obtained for cutting speed 75 m/min.,4.17 is for 76m/ min, 4.18 for 77m/min and
4.19 is for cutting speed 80 m/min.
4.13 Verification:
Now it is required to verify the linear and exponential relationships as derived, in reference to
the experimental results. A comparative study has been carried out between surface
roughness experimental values and surface roughness values by linear and exponential
models, as tabulated below. In Fig. 4.7 and 4.8 comparative graphs between surface
roughness experimental values and surface roughness values by linear and exponential
models have been carried out to determine which empirical model is closer to the
experimental values. Table 4.7 is the Comparative study between surface roughness
experimental values and surface roughness values by linear models and Table 4.8 is the
Comparative study between surface roughness experimental values and surface roughness
values by exponential models.
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
62/75
Chapter 4
52
Table 4.7 Comparative study between surface roughness experimental
values and surface roughness values from developed linear models:
Obs.
No.
Surface
roughness
(Experimental
values) m
Surface roughness values from developed Linear empirical
models
(Linear
model 1) Eq.
4.12 (m)
(Linear
model 2) Eq.
4.13 (m)
(Linear
model 3) Eq.
4.14 (m)
(Linear
model 4) Eq.
4.15
(m)
1 0.294 0.086 0.998 0.742 0.334
2 0.578 0.197 0.889 0.693 0.142
3 0.797 0.416 0.952 0.733 0.004
4 0.744 0.667 0.929 0.728 0.174
5 0.695 0.096 0.151 0.694 0.203
6 0.286 0.007 0.742 0.61 0.260
7 0.649 0.599 1.105 0.818 0.135
8 0.689 0.478 0.783 0.645 0.056
9 0.759 0.277 1.308 0.914 0.065
10 0.710 0.561 1.199 0.865 0.126
11 0.413 0.034 0.663 0.568 0.224
12 0.530 0.285 0.640 0.564 0.055
13 0.701 0.448 1.476 1.004 0.090
14 0.758 0.359 1.067 0.787 0.033
15 0.860 0.205 0.831 0.658 0.068
16 0.304 0.083 0.509 0.485 0.148
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
63/75
Result and discussion
53
Table 4.8 Comparative study between surface roughness experimental
values and surface roughness values from developed exponential models:
Obs.
No.
Surface
roughness
(Experimental
values) m
Surface roughness values from developed Exponential
empirical models
(Exponential
model 1) Eq.
4.16 (m)
(Exponential
model 2) Eq.
4.17 (m)
(Exponential
model 3) Eq.
4.18 (m)
(Exponential
model 4) Eq.
4.19 (m)
1 0.294 0.116 0.223 0.057 1.318
2 0.578 0.229 0.211 0.059 1.067
3 0.797 0.316 0.252 0.066 0.929
4 0.744 0.440 0.258 0.068 0.83
5 0.695 0.163 0.340 0.071 1.09
6 0.286 0.166 0.139 0.047 1.282
7 0.649 0.381 0.317 0.074 0.836
8 0.689 0.368 0.206 0.061 0.917
9 0.759 0.206 0.457 0.083 0.952
10 0.710 0.350 0.358 0.078 0.839
11 0.413 0.181 0.124 0.045 1.27
12 0.530 0.292 0.154 0.052 1.043
13 0.701 0.250 0.579 0.094 0.852
14 0.758 0.295 0.287 0.069 0.921
15 0.860 0.255 0.190 0.056 1.045
16 0.304 0.212 0.102 0.042 1.246
In Fig 4.9 Surface roughness experimental values and surface roughness values by linear
empirical relationships have been plotted as Y-axis and observation number as X-axis. A
polynomial trend line, for surface roughness experimental values, of order 6 has been plotted.
It can be observed from Fig 4.9 that Surface roughness values through Eq. 4.14 i.e., linear
model no.3 is closer to the experimental values.
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
64/75
Chapter 4
54
In Fig 4.10 Surface roughness experimental values and surface roughness values by
exponential empirical relationships have been plotted as Y-axis and observation number as
X-axis. A polynomial trend line, for surface roughness experimental values, of order 6 has
been plotted. It can be observed from Fig 4.10 that Surface roughness values through Eq.
4.16 i.e., exponential model no.1 is closer to the experimental values.
Figure 4.9: Comparative study between experimental values and developed
linear model values.
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
65/75
Result and discussion
55
Figure 4.10: Comparative study between surface roughness experimental values and
surface roughness values by developed exponential models.
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
66/75
Chapter 4
56
4.14 Calculation of percentage error:
Table 4.9: Percentage error between Surface roughness experimental
values and Surface roughness values from developed linear model 3 (Eq.
4.14):
Obs.
No.
Surface
roughness
(Experimental
values) m
Surface roughness
(Linear model 3) Eq.
4.14 (m)
Percentage error
Within 20%
1 0.294 0.742 X
2 0.578 0.693
3 0.797 0.733
4 0.744 0.728
5 0.695 0.694
6 0.286 0.610 X
7 0.649 0.818
8 0.689 0.645
9 0.759 0.914
10 0.710 0.835
11 0.413 0.568 X
12 0.530 0.564
13 0.701 1.004 X
14 0.758 0.787
15 0.860 0.698
16 0.304 0.485 X
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
67/75
Result and discussion
57
Table 4.10: Percentage error between Surface roughness experimental
values and Surface roughness values from developed exponential model 1
(Eq. 4.16):
Obs.
No.
Surface
roughness
(Experimental
values) m
Surface roughness
(Exponential model 1) Eq.
4.16 (m)
Percentage error
(%)
1 0.294 0.116 60.544
2 0.578 0.229 60.380
3 0.797 0.316 60.351
4 0.744 0.440 40.860
5 0.695 0.163 76.546
6 0.286 0.166 41.958
7 0.649 0.381 41.294
8 0.689 0.368 46.589
9 0.759 0.206 72.859
10 0.710 0.350 50.704
11 0.413 0.181 56.174
12 0.530 0.292 44.905
13 0.701 0.250 64.336
14 0.758 0.295 61.081
15 0.860 0.255 70.348
16 0.304 0.212 30.263
4.14.1 Critical observation from percentage error calculation:
Table 4.9 shows the percentage error between Surface roughness experimental values and
Surface roughness values from developed linear model 3 (Eq. 4.14) and table 4.10 shows the
Percentage error between Surface roughness experimental values and Surface roughness
values from developed exponential model 1 (Eq. 4.16). According to Risbood et al. [3] 20%
error is reasonable. From table 4.10 it has been observed that all the percentage errors are
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
68/75
Chapter 4
58
greater that 30%. So, it can be concluded that Eq. 4.16 is not reliable while calculating
surface roughness theoretically.
From Table 4.9 it has been observed that 11 out of 16 cases, percentage error values are
within the range of 20%. The percentage error values are beyond the range as written above
for remaining cases. It can be concluded that Eq. 4.14 can be used to calculate surface
roughness theoretically.
Fig.4.11: Comparative study between Surface roughness experimental values
and Surface roughness values from developed linear model 3 (Eq. 4.14).
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
69/75
Result and discussion
59
Fig.4.11 shows the comparative study between Surface roughness experimental values and
Surface roughness values from linear model 3 (Eq. 4.14) and Fig.4.12 shows the comparative
study between Surface roughness experimental values and Surface roughness values from
exponential model 1 (Eq. 4.16). It has been observed that in Fig. 4.11 Surface roughness
experimental values are closer to Surface roughness values from linear model 3 (Eq. 4.14).
Fig.4.12: Comparative study between Surface roughness experimental values
and Surface roughness values from developed exponential model 1 (Eq. 4.16).
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
70/75
Chapter 4
60
Fig. 4.13 shows the Surface roughness experimental values versus Surface roughness values
from linear model 3 (Eq. 4.14). A line inclined at 45 and passing through the origin is also
drawn in the figure. For perfect prediction, all the points should lie on this line. Here it is seen
that most of the points are close to this line. Hence, this linear model for surface roughness
provides reliable prediction.
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
1.1
Su
rfaceroughness
values
(Linearm
odel3)Eq.
4.1
4
(m)
Surface roughness
experimental value
(m)
B
Fig. 4.13: Surface roughness experimental values versus Surface
roughness values from developed linear model 3 (Eq. 4.14).
-
8/12/2019 PDF Arghya
71/75
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSION
5.1 Introduction:
In this experimental based thesis work Taguchi method has been used to develop
Orthogonal Array with 4 levels of certain input cutting parameters like Cutting Speed (v
in m/min), Depth of Cut (d in mm) and Feed (f in mm/rev) . With the combination of
input cutting parameters, Materials Removal Rate ( MRR ) is calculated theoretically and
Surface Roughness ( ) have been measured with Talysurf surface roughness tester. The
output values ( MRR and ) are converted into NS/ Ratios by using MINIITAB 16
software. Main Effects Plot for NS/ Ratios have been plotted for both Surface Roughness
and Materials Removal Rate to obtain the optimal input cutting parameter values. These
optimal input cutting parameter values have been verified through 3-Dimensional Response
Surface Plot. In this thesis work efforts have also been given to develop Linear and
Exponential models to find out the accurate model.
5.2 Significant contributions:
The significant contributions of the present investigation are as follows,
4 Linear empirical models and 4 Exponential empirical models have been developed
based on Cutting Speed (v in m/min), Depth of Cut (d in mm) and Feed (f in
mm/rev).
Surface Roughness experimental values and Surface Roughness values from different
Linear and Exponential empirical models have been compared and throu