Effect of Turning Parameters on Tool Wear, Surface ... - ScienceDirect

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect Procedia Technology 23 (2016) 304 – 310

3rd International Conference on Innovations in Automation and Mechatronics Engineering, ICIAME 2016

Effect of Turning Parameters on Tool Wear, Surface Roughness and Metal Removal Rate of Alumina Reinforced Aluminum Composite Puneet Bansala, Lokesh Upadhyayb a,

Department of Mechanical Engineering, U.V.Patel College of Engineering, Mehsana, India Department of Mechanical Engineering, Sachdeva Institute of Technology, Mathura, India

b

Abstract Now a day’s demand of light materials is increasing continuously and MMC of aluminum playing a vital role to fulfill these demands due to their light weight, high strength and appreciable hardness etc. This study deals with the manufacturing of Aluminum based MMC of Alumina. Three samples were manufactured by sand casting with 2%, 4% and 6% of alumina by weight and mechanical properties like tensile Strength and Hardness were tested. Investigation reveals that mechanical properties enhanced in appreciable fashion as compared to pure aluminum. Turning on MMCs were carried out using uncoated carbide tool and coated tool. Turning test were performed at various speed, feed rate, depth of cut and percentage of alumina inclusion in MMCs. Furthermore tool wear, surface roughness and metal removal rate were investigated. Purpose of the study is to observe and understand the behavior of the turning parameters of composite materials under various operating conditions. © 2016 Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Selection and/or of the Organizing of ICIAME 2016. Peer-review under peer-review responsibilityunder of theresponsibility organizing committee of ICIAME Committee 2016 Keywords: Metal Matrix Composite; Alumina; Tool Wear; MRR.; Hardness;

Nomenclature MMC MRR SEM

Metal Matrix Composite Metal Removal Rate Scanning Electron Microscope

* Puneet Bansal. Tel. +91-9427850207.

E-mail address: [email protected]

2212-0173 © 2016 Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of ICIAME 2016 doi:10.1016/j.protcy.2016.03.031

Puneet Bansal and Lokesh Upadhyay / Procedia Technology 23 (2016) 304 – 310

305

1. Introduction Metal matrix compositions (MMC) have become leading materials and particles reinforced aluminum MMCs has received Considerable attention due to their excellent mechanical properties. Metal matrix composite (MMC) are widely used composite materials in aerospace, automotive, electronics and medical industries. They have outstanding mechanical properties like high strength, low weight, low ductility, high wear resistance, high thermal conductivity and low thermal expansion. These desired properties are mainly manipulated by matrix, the reinforcement element and the interface. Aluminum-based Al2O3 particle reinforced MMC material have become useful engineering materials due to their properties such as low weight, heat-resistant, wear-resistant and low cost. These are found in various engineering applications such as cylinder block liners, vehicle drive shafts, automotive pistons, bicycle frames etc. These materials are known as the difficult-to-machine materials because of the hardness and abrasive nature of reinforcement element like alumina (Al2O3) particle [1].The addition of Al2O3 will not only strengthen the microstructure but also channel deformation at the tip of a crack into the matrix regions between the fibers, thereby constraining the plastic deformation in the matrix leading to reduction of fatigue ductility [2,3]. Selection of manufacturing method for MMC of Aluminum depends upon the type of reinforcement required. Methods like casting and powder metallurgy can be used to manufacture MMC of aluminum amongst them casting is most acceptable because it results in homogeneous mixing of particles with base metal and made a strong bond of foreign particles with the base metal. Due to the proper mixing of metal and ceramic particles, MMC not only combine properties of metallic base like ductility but also the ceramic reinforcement like high hardness and tensile strength which leads to a high strength in tension and shear [4]. MMCs are harder due to the presence of ceramic particles however the carbide tools are widely used commercially for cutting operations but tool wear is very high due to the reinforcement of particles like Al2O3 and SiC [5].Reinforced particles are harder as compared to cemented carbide tool cutting tool so cutting tools harder than these particles needed to machine MMCs. Some carbide tools are available to machine MMCs with particles like Al2O3 and SiC even tool wear is much rapid during the cutting of reinforced material [6-8].Tools like Polycrystalline diamond, cubic boron nitride and tungsten carbide are suggested for cutting operations for better surface finish [9-10].As these cutting tools are very expensive so selection of cutting tool is plays a vital role along with the cutting parameters, carbide tools can be used for cutting operations. Tool wear, MRR and surface roughness are not only depends upon the cutting tool but also on feed rate, depth of cut, speed and concentration of reinforcement of ceramic particles in MMCs [11-12]. When SiC based MMCs of Aluminum were tested for cutting operation, surface finish directly depends upon cutting speed i..e as cutting speed increased better surface finish achieved [13]. Surface finish of MMCs with reinforcement increases as compared to material without particulates due to the presence of peaks and valleys of ceramic particles [14]. Surface roughness of MMCs are increase with depth of cut and cutting speed also with the concentrations of reinforcement during the machining even effect of feed rate is much higher on surface roughness [15-16]. The cutting parameters like speed, feed rate, and depth of cut made an impact during the turning of MMCs for various levels of reinforcement ceramic particles. 2. Experimental Detail To prepare MMCs, Al 2024 alloy is used as base metal and α- Al2O3 is used as reinforcement material. Alumina was reinforced with the aluminum 2%, 4% and 6% by weight to manufacture MMCs. 2.1. Manufacturing of MMCs Manufacturing of MMCs done by sand casting, aluminium were act as base metal while alumina were reinforced with base metal, inclusion of alumina were 2,4 and 6 percentage by the weight of aluminium. During the manufacturing of the MMCs first aluminium were melted after melting of the base metal alumina were poured in to the molten aluminium while keeping continuous steering of solution. The dimensions of workspiece are 45 mm in diameter and 300 mm in length.

306


2.2. Selection of Cutting Tool Two types of tools for turning of composite material have been used first is coated and second is uncoated. The coated tool designation is DNMG 150608. It is the titanium nitride (TiN) coated carbide tool of golden (yellow) colour. The uncoated tool designation is DNMG 150608 THM. It is uncoated carbide tool of grey colour. The designation of tool holder which is used for hold the tool is MDJNR-2020-K15, MDJNR-2525-M15. 2.3. Turning test The turning experiments were conducted on the center lathe model Waltham mass, U.S.A having height 1371.60 mm, bed length 1066.80 mm, bed width 177.80 mm, bed to centre distance 127 mm and motor 1 hp. The 45 mm diameter and 300 mm length workpeice were subjected to tuning on the lathe. 2.4. Process Parameters There were four process parameters with the three levels to investigate the response variables. Table 1 shows the process parameters along with the levels of process parameters. Range of the process parameters selected based on previous studies and this range is quite common during conventional machining. Table 1. Process parameters and its levels Process Parameters

Unit of Parameters

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Concentrations of Alumina

%

Depth of Cut

mm

2

4

6

1

1.5

Feed Rate

2

mm/rev

0.29

0.32

0.35

Speed

rpm

265

400

535

2.5. Response Variables There were three response variables which were subjected to investigate during the turning test at various levels of process parameters. Response variables are Tool wear, Surface Roughness and Metal Removal Rate. 3. Results and Discussions This study focuses on mechanical behavior as well as turning parameters. Mechanical behavior includes the tensile strength and hardness, study is based to determine the increment in it due to the presence of very much harder abrasive particle while the turning parameters studied to know the behavior of the tool wear, surface roughness and metal removal rate under the various range of process parameters like speed, feed rate, depth of cut and percentage of alumina in parent material. So basically study observed the mechanical characterization as well as machining behavior. 3.1. Microstructure of MMCs The study the reinforcement of MMCs Scanning electron microscope (SEM) was done. Microstructure of MMCs indicates that there was homogeneous mixing of Alumina particles. Figure 1 shows the SEM of MMCs with 2, 4 and 6% of alumina particle inclusion in aluminum.


a

b

c

Fig. 1. (a); (b); (c) SEM of MMCs with 2%, 4% and 6% of Al 2O3 3.2. Hardness To determine the hardness of the MMCs, Rockwell hardness testing machine was used. Figure 2 indicated that hardness of the MMCs increases as the reinforcement increases due to that presence of hard ceramic particles.

Hardness

Harrdness (HRB)

110

100

90 2

4

6

Reinforcement Ratio (% alumina-p)

Fig 2. Variation of hardness of MMCs with respect to the variation of % reinforcement ratio 3.3. Tensile Strength

Tensile Strength (MPa)

Tensile strength of MMCs increases with the % reinforcement of alumina but the change is not much due to the presence of ceramic particles. Figure 3 shows the variation of tensile strength with the variation of reinforcement.

Tensile Strength

110

100

90

2

4

6

Reinforcement Ratio (% alumina-p)

Fig 3. Variation of tensile strength of MMCs with respect to the variation of % reinforcement ratio

307

308


3.4. Tool Wear Turing test performed for 60 sec on conventional lathe machine due to this turning operation flank wear came into picture that flank was investigate from a microscope since two types of tools were used for the machining. Figure 3 shows the variations of tool wear with coated and uncoated tool with respect to the process variables. Investigations show that tool wear on uncoated tool is greater than coated tool. Plot of tool wear (figure 3), it has been observed that tool wear increases with increase in speed (rpm). This is because at higher speed tool- workpiece interface temperature increases, softening the tool material. This promotes the abrasive, adhesive and diffusional wear. The tool wear increases with increasing the feed rate. This is because at higher feed rates, greater is the cutting force per unit area of chip-tool contact on the rake face and the work tool contact on the flank face. This increases the cutting temperature and mechanical shock thereby increasing the tool wear. Similarly tool wear increases with increasing the depth of cut. The area of contact increases with increase in depth of cut and accelerating the abrasive adhesive and diffusion type of tool wear. As the concentration of alumina is increased, the hardness of workpiece increases (Fig.4). Also, alumina has been used as abrasive. This may result in more force per unit area of chip-tool contact thereby more tool wear. 16.0

15.5

Coated

Coated

Coated

Coated

Uncoated

Uncoated

Uncoated

Uncoated

Tool Wear (microns)

15.0

14.5

14.0

13.5

13.0

12.5

12.0

2

3

4

5

Concentration (%)

6

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

Depth of Cut (mm)

2.0

0.29

0.30

0.31

0.32

0.33

0.34

Feed Rate (mm/rev)

0.35

250

300

350

400

450

500

550

Speed (rpm)

Fig 4. Tools wear on coated and uncoated tool with respect to process parameters Since coated tool have a coating of hard material so tool wear is less than uncoated tool for each process parameters while all the conditions remains constant. 3.5. Surface Roughness Surface roughness studied to know the surface irregularities during machining since Alumina is abrasive in nature and it is very difficult to machine so value of surface roughness revels the behaviour of manufactured composite materials after machining, of course its value higher than pure aluminium and upto which instant it may occur, to know this surface roughness is determined. The surface roughness was measured by Mitutoyo company surtronic 3+ measuring equipment. The cut of length is 0.8 mm and least count of Ra value is 1 micron. Figure 4 shows the variations of surface roughness for all the process parameters i.e concentrations of reinforced ceramic particle, speed, feed rate and depth of cut. From the main effect plot of surface roughness (figure 5), it has been observed that surface roughness decreases with increase in speed. This is due to fact that at higher cutting speeds, cutting forces and tendency towards built-up edge formation weakens due to increase in temperature and consequent decrease of frictional stress at the rake. The surface roughness increases with increase in the feed rate. This is because the height of the peaks and the depth of the valleys of feed marks are proportional to the square of the feed per revolution. Also, the higher values of feed

309


increase the tool wear rate. The surface roughness has been found to be increased with increasing the depth of cut. This is because, as the depth of cut is increased, cutting forces increases. Hence, the waviness of peaks increases leading to increase in surface roughness. As increasing the concentration ratio of alumina particle in aluminum, the surface roughness has been found to be increased due to abrasive behaviour of alumina.

7.2

Coated

Coated

Coated

Coated

Uncoated

Uncoated

Uncoated

Uncoated

7.0

Surface Roughness (µm)

6.8

6.6

6.4

6.2

6.0

5.8 2

3

4

5

6

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

0.29

Depth of Cut (mm)

Concentration (%)

0.30

0.31

0.32

0.33

0.34

0.35

250

300

350

Feed Rate (mm/rev)

400

450

500

550

Speed (rpm)

Fig 5. Surface Roughness on coated and uncoated tool with respect to process parameters 3.6. Metal Removal Rate Metal removal rate is determined by the rate of change in volume. From main effect plot of MRR (figure 6), it has been observed that material removal rate (MRR) increases with increasing the speed. This is because time is an important factor for MRR, for the same time at maximum speed number of turns increased. MRR increases with increasing the feed rate, but initially at lower feed rate MRR has been found to be increasing slowly. Similar pattern has been observed in case of depth of cut. Increasing the depth of cut the MRR also increased because the maximum thickness of chip may be removed. But as the concentration ratio of alumina is increased, the MRR is found to decrease. This is due to abrasive nature of alumina particles. The TWR has also been increased with increasing alumina concentration 25000

Coated

Coated

Coated

Coated

Uncoated

Uncoated

Uncoated

Uncoated

Metal Removal Rate (mm3/min)

24500

24000

23500

23000

22500

2

3

4

5

Concentration (%)

6

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

Depth of Cut (mm)

2.0

0.29

0.30

0.31

0.32

0.33

0.34

Feed Rate (mm/rev)

0.35

250

300

350

400

450

Speed (rpm)

Fig 6 MRR on coated and uncoated tool with respect to process parameters

500

550

310


4. Conclusions Experimental studies were done for the tool wear, MRR and surface roughness with two types of tool coated and uncoated. Based on following study some conclusions are observed x Microstructure of MMCs indicates the homogeneous mixture of the alumina in the composite. x Hardness and tensile strength increases with the reinforcement ratio. x Tool wear increases with the process variables whether it is coated or uncoated tool, however tool wear is less in coated tool as compared to uncoated due to the coating. x Surface Roughness increase with the process variables except the speed, speed made adverse effect on surface roughness. x MRR increases with the process parameters except the concentration of reinforced particles due the presence of hard ceramic particles. References [1] Puneet Bansal, Lokesh Upadhyay. Experimental Investigations To Study Tool Wear During Turning Of Alumina Reinforced Aluminium Composite. Procedia Engineering; 2013, p.818-837. [2] H.Z. Ding, H. Biermann, O. Hartmann, A low cycle fatigue model of a short-fiber reinforced 6061 aluminium alloy metal matrix composite. Composites Science and Technology 62 (2002) 2189–2199. [3] Hariprasad et al., Wear Characteristics of B4C and Al2O3 Reinforced with Al 5083 Metal Matrix based Hybrid Composite, Procedia Engineering 97 ( 2014 ) 925 – 929 [4] KOK M.production and Mechanical properties of Al2O3Particle reinforced 2024 aluminium alloy composites J.Maker process Techno 2005;161:381-7. [5] R.T. Coelho et al. Conventional machining of aluminium based SiC reinforced metal matrix composite (MMC) alloy, in: Proceedings of 30th MATADOR, 1993, pp. 125–133. [6] I. Ciftci, M. Turker, U. Seker, Evaluation of tool wear when machining SiCp-reinforced Al-2014 alloy matrix composites, Mater. Des. 25 (2004) 251–255. [7] O. Quigley, J. Monaghan, P. O’Reilly, Factors affecting the machinabilityof an Al/SiC metal-matrix composite, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 43 (1994) 21–36. [8] L.A. Looney et al. The turning of an Al/SiC metal-matrix composite, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 33 (1992) 453–468. [9] C.J.E. Andrewes et al. Machining of an aluminum/SiC composite using diamond inserts, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 102 (2000) 25–29. [10] A.R. Chambers, S.E. Stephens, Machining of Al-5Mg reinforced with 5 vol.% Saffil and 15 vol.% SiC, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 135 (1991) 287–290. [11] X. Li, W.K.H. Seah, Tool wear acceleration in relation to workpiece reinforcement percentage in cutting of metal matrix composites, Wear 247 (2001) 161–167. [12] Q. Yanming, Z. Zehua, Tool wear and its mechanism for cutting SiC particle-reinforced aluminium matrix composites, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 100 (2000) 194–199. [11] E.Kilickap et al., Study of tool wear and surface roughness in machining of homogenized SiC-p reinforced aluminum metal matrix composite, Journal of material processing technology, 164-165 (2005) 862-867. [12] C.A.Brown, M.K.Surappa. The machinability of a cast aluminium alloy-Graphite Particle Composite, Material Science and Engineering, A102 (1988), pp31-37. [13] C.A.Brown, M.K.Surappa. The machinability of a cast aluminium alloy-Graphite Particle Composite, Material Science and Engineering, A102 (1988), pp31-37. [14] S.Kannan, H.A.Kishawy, 2008, Tribological aspects of machining aluminum metal matrix composites, Journal of material processing technology, 198, 399-406. [15] Gurpreet Singh, Maninder pal singh, Gurmeet singh, Optimization of machining parameters for surface roughness during turning of Al/SiC/Gr Hybrid MMC, International Journal of Engineering Reasearch & Technology, volume 2, issue 11, November – 2013, pp 16131617. [16] M.Ramalinga reddy, P.Ravi kumar, G.Krishna mohana rao, Effect of feed rate on the generation of surface roughness in turning, International Journal of Engineering Science & Technology, volume 3, issue 11, November – 2011, pp 8099-8105.