You are on page 1of 6

Tamkang Journal of Science and Engineering, Vol. 8, No 1, pp.

23-28 (2005)

23

Effect of Over Voltage on Material Removal Rate


During Electrochemical Machining
S. K. Mukherjee1, S. Kumar1 and P. K. Srivastava2*
1

Department of Production Engineering,


Department of Applied Chemistry, Birla Institute of Technology,
Mesra, Ranchi - 835215, India

Abstract
Material removal rate in electrochemical machining is analyzed in context of over voltage and
conductivity of the electrolyte solution. It is observed that over voltage is very sensitive to equilibrium
gap and tool feed rate. Material removal rate decreases due to increase in over voltage and decrease in
current efficiency, which is directly related to the conductivity of the electrolyte solution. It is observed
that the corrected current density is always lower than the actual current. The calculated material
removal rate efficiency is found to be 57%.
Key Words: Electrochemical Machining, Over-voltage, Material Removal Rate, Conductivity

1. Introduction
Advanced materials are known for their improved
strength, thermal resistance, wear resistance and corrosion
resistance, which are machined by non-conventional energy sources. Among several non-conventional processes
[1-4] electrochemical machining is interesting because
the removal of material is by an atom to an atom resulting
in higher finish with stressed crack free surface and independent of the hardness of the work materials. Advance
manufacturing technology has evolved thrust areas like
automation of manufacture with high precession[5-7].
Recently, the product size ranging from 50 to 500 mm have
been prepared by Micro-electrochemical machining
and Micro-electrochemical Grinding [8-11]. Electrochemical Machining (ECM) is good for steel and super alloys
and most often used when machining either shaped holes
or cavities into electrically conductive materials [12,13].
At high concentration of electrolyte, electrolytes do not
behave ideally and resistance of the solution [14] increases which may cause deviation from Faradays law
and Ohms law. Further, it has been assumed that the pro*Corresponding author. E-mail: pk_srivastavapk@sancharnet.in

cess of ECM to be ideal in nature till it obeys Ohms law


and Faradays law [2,15]. But there have been no report on
the applicability of these laws for electrochemical machining.

Principle of Electrochemical Machining


The process of Electrochemical Machining is developed on the principle of Faradays law and Ohms law. In
this process an electrolytic cell is formed by the anode
(work piece) and the cathode (tool) in the midst of a
flowing electrolyte. The metal is removed by the controlled dissolution of the anode according to the well
known Faradays law of electrolysis. When the electrodes are connected to about 20 V electric supply
source, flow of current in the electrolyte is established
due to positively charged ions being attracted towards
the cathode and vice versa. Current density depends on
the rate at which ions arrive at respective electrodes
which is proportional to the applied voltage, concentration of electrolyte, the gap between the electrodes and
tool feed rate. Due to electrolysis process at the cathode,
hydroxyl ions are released which combine with the metal
ions of anode to form insoluble metal hydroxides. Thus
the metal is mainly removed in the form of sludges and

24

S. K. Mukherjee et al.

precipitates by electrochemical and chemical reactions


occurring in the electrolyte cell. In this way even hardest
possible material can be given a complicated profile in a
single machining operation.

Electrochemical and Chemical Reaction Scheme


In aqueous solution of NaCl following reaction occurs
NaCl Na+ + ClH2O H+ + OHOn passing the electric current through the solution
positive ions moves towards cathode and negative ions
moves towards anode. Each Na+ ions gain an electron
and is converted to Na. Hence Na+ ions are reduced at the
cathode by means of electrons.
Cathode reactions
Following reaction takes place at cathode2.
Na+ + e Na
Na + H2O Na (OH) + H+
2H+ + 2e H2
It shows that only hydrogen gas will evolve at cathode and there will be no deposition.
Anode reaction
Fe Fe2+ + 2e
Fe2+ + 2Cl- FeCl2
Fe2+ + 2OH- Fe (OH)2
FeCl2 + 2 OH- Fe(OH)2 + 2 Cl2Cl- Cl2 (g) + 2e
2FeCl2 + Cl2 2FeCl3
H+ + Cl- HCl
2Fe (OH)2 + H2O + O2 2Fe(OH)3
Fe(OH)3 + 3HCl FeCl3 + 3H2O
FeCl3 + 3 NaOH Fe(OH)3 + 3NaCl
Cl- ions may loose an electron and hence undergoes
oxidation at anode leading to evolution of chlorine gas
at anode. First and second ionization potential of iron
are 182.2 kcal atom-1 and 373.1 kcal atom-1 respectively are not high and iron atom can easily loose two
electrons forming Fe2+ ions. The structure of Fe2+ ion is
not stable and easily loses one electron by the action of
air or an oxidizing agent to form Fe3+ ion (ionization potential 703 kcal atom-1) having stable electronic configuration. Therefore, iron may react with scheme given
above to form heavy flock of Fe(OH)3 as a sludge in addition to Fe(OH)2.

Table 1. Effect of penetration rate on machining gap and current


density
Current density
A/cm2
480
290
190
140
60

Equilibrium gap
(cm)

Penetration rate
(cm/sec)

0.0025
0.0050
0.0075
0.0100
0.0150

0.0100
0.0058
0.0038
0.0030
0.0017

Dominant Processes and Experimental Data


When sufficient electrical energy (about 6 eV) is
available between tool and work piece, a metallic ions
may be pulled out of the work piece surface. The positive metallic ions will react with negative ions present in
the electrolyte solution forming metallic hydroxides and
other compounds, and thus the metal will be anodically
dissoluted with the formation of sludges and precipitates.
The material removal rate depends chiefly on feed
rates. The feed rate determines the current passed between the work piece and the tool. As the tool approaches
the work, the length of the conductive current path decreases and the magnitudes of current increases. This
lessening of the gap and increase in the current continues
until the current is just sufficient to remove the metal at a
rate corresponding to the rate of tool advance. A stable
cut is then established with a fixed spacing between the
work and the tool, termed as the equilibrium machining
gap. If the tool feed rate is reduced, the tool advance will
momentarily lag behind, increasing the gap and thus resulting in a reduction of current. This happens until a stable gap is once again established. Current density value
is based on a fixed feed rate for one cm2 of work piece
considering an efficiency of 100%. The total amperage
required for machining of work piece can be calculated
by multiplying the current density and the surface area
being machined. The effect of penetration rate on machining gap and current density is given in Table 1 [15].
Over-voltage have been calculated with varying equilibrium gap and tool feed rate.

2. Results and Discussion


Over voltage was calculated by utilizing the Eq. (1)
DV =

V - rZ F
Ye f
KA

(1)

Effect of Over Voltage on Material Removal Rate During Electrochemical Machining

25

where DV = over voltage, V = applied voltage (10 V),


r = density of work piece, F = Faraday constant, K =
conductivity / specific conductance of electrolyte solution (taken as constant 0.20 ohm-1cm-1), A = atomic
number of work piece metal, Ye = equilibrium gap and
f = tool feed rate. The variation of over voltage with
equilibrium gap is shown in Figure 1 which indicate
that over-voltage decreases linearity with increase in
equilibrium gap. When equilibrium gap approaches to
zero, over voltage approaches to applied voltage. Figure 2 shows variation of tool feed rate with overvoltage, which shows that over voltage decreases
sharply with penetration rate and goes to negative side
after a certain tool feed rate. Negative value of DV,
seems to be unreal because un-matching long range
values of penetration rate for single fixed value of
equilibrium gap.
The variation of over voltage with equilibrium gap is
shown in Figure 3, when equilibrium machining gap (Ye)
and tool feed rate (f) both are varied in equation (1),
which shows that the over voltage is always high and is
above or around 6 V to the total applied voltage 10 V. The
corresponding variation in current densities shown in
Figure 4. It is clear from the Figure 4 that the corrected
current density (Ic) is significantly lower than the actual
current density. The current efficiency against equilibrium gap is shown in Figure 5 which indicate that there is

a maxima for a particular equilibrium gap i.e. maximum


efficiency can be obtained at this maxima. The plot of
current density against current efficiency is shown in
Figure 6 which also shows a maxima at a current density
of 104 Amp/cm2. The plot of corrected current density

Figure 1. Variation of over-voltage with equilibrium machining gap when tool feed rate (f) = 0.00167 cm/sec, V
= 10 V, K = 0.2 ohm-1 cm-1, F = 96500, Z = 2, A =
55.85, r = 7.86, Ye are taken from Table 1.

Figure 3. Variation of over-voltage with equilibrium Machining gap. When tool feed rate (f) is varied as
equilibrium machining gap. Other data are same as
in Figure 1.

Figure 2. Variation of over-voltage with tool feed rate (f), when


equilibrium machining gap Ye = 0.015 cm is fixed.
Other data are same as Figure 1.

26

S. K. Mukherjee et al.

(Ic) and electrolyte solution resistance is shown in Figure


7. The resistance of the electrolyte solution (R) is calculated by Eq. (2).
Vc = I cR

(2)

where Vc = corrected voltage, and Ic = corrected current


density and which shows that resistance of the solution decreases omically upto current density 104 Amp/cm2 after
that variations is seems to be non-omic. The actual corrected material removal rate (MRRc ) calculated and theoretical material removal rate MRRth obtained by Eq. (3)
MRR = AIc/ZF

are shown in Figure 8. The efficiency (h) of material removal calculated by Eq. 4,
h=

MRRc
100
MRRth

(4)

indicate that efficiency is about 57%. However the efficiency of maximum material removal is about 72% at
optimum condition [15,16]. It appears that this discrepancy in the material removal rate is due to de-

(3)

Figure 4. Variation of current density with equilibrium machining gap. When tool feed rate (f) varies as equilibrium machining gap, other data are same as in Figure
1, (a) for actual current density (b) for corrected current density.

Figure 5. Variation of current efficiency with equilibrium


machining gap. When tool feed rate (f) varies as equilibrium machining gap (Ye), other data are same
as in Figure 1.

Figure 6. Variation of current efficiency with current density.


When tool feed rate (f) varies as equilibrium machining gap (Ye), other data are same as in Figure 1.

Figure 7. Variation of Resistance of electrolyte solution with


effective current density (Ic). Other data are same as
in Figure 1.

Effect of Over Voltage on Material Removal Rate During Electrochemical Machining

27

reproduce the experimental results for different metals


and alloys in electrochemical machining.

References

Figure 8. Material removal rate, (a) theoretical, (b) experimental, determined by Eq. (3).

crease in current efficiency, which is directly related


to over-voltage, polarization and passivation. It may
also be attributed that a fraction of current consumed
in side reactions, as previously formed low valency
metal ions are oxidized to a higher valency wastefully
using current [17,18] The specific conductance (K) of
the solution is only parameter which is suppressed by
increasing over voltage, polarization and passivation
and side reactions.

3. Conclusion
The over-voltage is the important parameter which
restrict the material removal rate and is sensitive to tool
feed rate and equilibrium machining gap. If over voltage
DV = 0, then Eq. (1) reduces to
K = 345.57 Yef
This indicates that for maximum efficiency specific
conductance must be equal to 345.57 Yef. Increase in
over-voltage is associated with decrease in equivalent
conductance from its value at infinite dilution due to decrease in ionic mobility which depends on dielectric constant, viscosity and temperature of the electrolyte solution.
Further, researches are underway to test these models by taking the values of appropriate parameters and to

[1] Wilson, J. F., Practical and Theory of Electrochemical Machining, Wiley Interscience, New York, NY,
U.S.A. (1971).
[2] Mishra, P. K., Non-Conventional Machining, Narosa
Publishing House, New Delhi, India (1997).
[3] Jain, R. K., Production Technology, Khanna Publishers, Delhi, India (1991).
[4] Hocheng, H., Kao, P. S. and Lin, S. C., Prediction of
the Eroded Profile during Electrochemical Machining
of Hole, Proc. JSME/ASME Int. Conf. Materials and
Processing, pp. 303-307 (2002).
[5] Keown, Mc. P. A., The Role of Precision Engineering
in Manufacturing of the Future, Annals CIRP, Vol.
36, pp. 495-501 (1987).
[6] Ikawa, N. et al., Ultra Precision Metal Cutting the
Past, The Present and Future, Annals of CIRP, Vol. 40,
pp. 551554 (1991).
[7] Zhou, J. J., Zhai, X. B., Pang, G.B., Li, H. Y., Xu, W.
J. and Guo, L. S., Research on Pulse Electrochemical
Finishing, Journal of Dallan University of Technology, Vol. 43, pp. 311-314 (2003).
[8] Egashira, K., Masuzawa, T., Fugino, M. and Sun, X-O,
Application of USM to Micro Machining by on the
Machine Tool Fabrication, International Journal of
Electromachining, Vol. 2, pp. 31-36 (1997).
[9] Brinksmeier, E., Preu, W., Reimer, B. O. and Sigel, R.,
Manufacture of Shock-Wave Target Foils for Nuclear
Fusion Research, Proc. of the 3rd Int. Conf. on Ultra
Precision in Manufacturing Engineering, pp. 401-404
(1994).
[10] Schultze, J. W. and Bressel, A., Principal of Electrochemical Micro- and Nano-system Technologies,
Electrochimica Acta, Vol. 47, pp. 3-21 (2001).
[11] Bhattacharyya, B., Doloi, B. and Sridhar, P. S. Electrochemical Micromachining: New Possibilities for
Micro-manufacturing, J. Material. Proc. Tech., Vol.
113, pp. 301305 (2001).
[12] Rumyantsev, E. and Dovydev, A., Electrochemical Machining of Metals, MIR Publication, Moscow, Russia
(1989).
[13] McGeogh, J. A., Principles of Electrochemical Ma-

28

S. K. Mukherjee et al.

chining, Chapman and Hall, London, UK (1974).


[14] Kubasov, V. and Zuretsky, S., Introduction to Electrochemistry, Mir-Publishers, Moscow, Russia (1987).
[15] Electrochemical Machining in Production Technology, HMT, Bangalore, Tata McGraw Hill Publishing
Company, New Delhi, India, p. 478 (1980).
[16] Kahles, John F., in Electrochemical Machining edited
by Tayler Lynian, Metals Hand Book, 8th Edition,
Vol. 3, Machining American Society for Metals; Metals
Park, OH, U.S.A., (1967).

[17] Glastone, S., Electrochemistry, in Text Book of


Physical Chemistry, 2nd Edition, Macmillan India
(1990).
[18] De Barr, A. E. and Oliver, D. A., Electrochemical Machining, Macdonald & Co. Ltd., London, UK Chapter
5 (1968).

Manuscript Received: May 4, 2004


Revision Received: Jun. 25, 2004
Accepted: Sep. 8, 2004

You might also like