You are on page 1of 6

Applied Mechanics and Materials Vols.

813-814 (2015) pp 404-409 Submitted: 2015-04-21


© (2015) Trans Tech Publications, Switzerland Revised: 2015-08-06
doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.813-814.404 Accepted: 2015-08-07

TOOL WEAR ANALYSIS IN TURNING USING DIFFERENT INSERTS AND


DIFFERENT LUBRICATION SYSTEMS

R.PANNEER1a, KESARAJU VENKATA SAI PAVAN2b


1, 2
School of Mechanical Engineering, SASTRA University, Thanjavur 613401, INDIA
a b
panneer@mech.sastra.edu, saipavankesaraju@gmail.com,

Keywords: Turning, Cutting Fluid, Tool Wear, Surface Roughness, Taguchi Method, ANOVA

Abstract. In metal cutting, increasing cutting spped and feed achieve higher productivity, but it
will affect dimensional accuracy and surface integrity of the work surface, wear resistance and life
of tool. Cutting fluids when appropriately chosen and applied will minimize these problems. This
work deals with the optimization of process parameters in turning of EN24 and SS316L Steels with
different cutting fluids with different cutting inserts under different machining conditions using
Taguchi’s Robust Design Methodology. The control factors selected are machining environment,
cutting speed, feed, depth of cut, work piece material and type of tool. Investigations are carried out
on conventional lathe using the prefixed cutting conditions. Tool Wear and Surface Roughness are
measured and anlysed using ANOVA and appropriate conclusions are derived.

Introduction
The cutting tool plays an important role in achieving economical metal removal rate and quality of
the surface produced. The major difficulty faced during machining is the heat generated in the
primary and secondary cutting zones. As a consequence, the cutting temperatures in the tool, work-
piece interface rise significantly during machining. Emulsion-based cooling fluids with nano
powders with minimum quantity lubrication is used in metal cutting for a variety of reasons such as
improving surface finish, tool life, flushing away chips, and reducing work piece thermal
deformation [1]. Application of solid lubricant in metal cutting is a possible substitute to cutting
fluid, if it can be applied properly. Solid lubricants reduce friction between two surfaces sliding
against each other without the need for a liquid cutting fluid [2]. For machining harder alloys,
synthetic oil applied on the rake surface by minimum quality lubrication decrease tool wear [3]. It is
established that the servo oil, cotton seed oil, vegetable oil and soya bean oil has significant effect
on the surface roughness and MRR [4, 5]. It is interesting to note that 40% increase in cutting speed
can be achieved when machining steel with high speed steel tools using water as coolant [6].
Conventional cutting fluids pose environmental and ecological problems such as pollution in the
shop floor, creation of biologically hazardous environment to operators due to bacterial growth,
water pollution and soil contamination during final disposal [7] However, Cutting fluids improve
the efficiency of machining in terms of increased tool life, improved surface finish, improved
dimensional accuracy, reduced cutting force and reduced vibrations [8]. As the tool wear increases
with increase in temperature, the use of cutting fluids reduce the cutting region temperature, and
thereby achieve reduction in tool wear [9, 10]. The present work deals with tool wear analysis and
comparative study of coated and uncoated carbide tool inserts in machining EN24 and SS316L in
dry and wet environments using different lubricant mixtures at different cutting conditions. .

Experiment Requirements
EN24 and SS316L are selected as work piece materials, the compositions of which are presented in
Table 1. The tool inserts used for the proposed work are CNMG 120404 (Uncoated), CNMG
120408 (Uncoated) and CNMG 120408 (Coated)*. The tool holder used is PSBNR 2525 M12. Both
work piece materials are of Ø 60 mm diameter and 380 mm long.

All rights reserved. No part of contents of this paper may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without the written permission of Trans
Tech Publications, www.ttp.net. (ID: 14.139.181.229-24/11/15,11:54:26)
Applied Mechanics and Materials Vols. 813-814 405

Table 1 Composition of SS316L and EN24


Grade C [%] Mn [%] Si [%] P [%] S [%] Cr [%] Mo [%] Ni [%] N [%]
SS316L 0.03 2.0 0.75 0.045 0.030 18.0 3.00 14.0 0.10
EN24 0.44 0.70 0.35 0.035 0.040 1.40 0.35 1.70 -

Experimental Setup and Procedure


In the proposed experimental study, six input variables viz., Work piece Material, Carbide Inserts
with different Nose Radii, Cutting Speed, Feed, Depth of Cut, and Cutting Environment are
employed with different levels to obtain and analyse output variables such as Tool Wear and
Surface Roughness. Based on Taguchi’s Design of Experiment Approach, for the above number of
input variables and associated levels, an L^18 array is used for the experiment, and is designed
using Minitab 17. Table 2 shows the process parameters and levels used for this work and Table 3
shows the L^18 array. A Centre Lathe (Kirloskar make Turn Master 40) with variable speed and
feed drive is used for conducting the experiments. The inserts are clamped mechanically on a rigid
tool holder PCBNR 2525 M12. Fig. 1 depicts the experimental setup.
Table 2 Process Parameters and Levels

Parameters Units Description


Dry, (Water+Grease+Oil),
Cutting Environment -
(Graphite + Grease +Oil)
Cutting Speed m/min 84.82, 122.05, 179.07
Feed Rate mm/rev 0.1, 0.050, 0.075
Depth Of Cut mm 1, 0.7, 0.5
Tool Insert Radius mm 0.8, 0.8*, 0.4
Work piece Material - EN24, SS316L
Fig. 1 Experimental Setup

Table 3 L^18 Orthogonal Array


Insert
Trials

Speed Feed Depth of Cut


Material Cutting Environment Radius
[m/min] [mm/rev] [mm]
[mm]
L1 SS316L Dry 84.82 0.1 0.75 0.4
L2 SS316L Dry 84.82 0.075 0.50 0.8
L3 SS316L Dry 84.82 0.050 1 0.8*
L4 SS316L Water +Grease+Oil 122.52 0.1 0.50 0.8
L5 SS316L Water +Grease+Oil 122.52 0.075 1 0.8*
L6 SS316L Water +Grease+Oil 122.52 0.050 0.75 0.4
L7 SS316L Graphite+Grease +Oil 179.07 0.075 0.75 0.8*
L8 SS316L Graphite+Grease +Oil 179.07 0.050 0.50 0.4
L9 SS316L Graphite+Grease +Oil 179.07 0.1 1 0.8
L10 EN24 Dry 84.82 0.1 1 0.8
L11 EN24 Dry 84.82 0.050 0.75 0.8*
L12 EN24 Dry 84.82 0.075 0.50 0.4
L13 EN24 Water +Grease+Oil 122.52 0.075 1 0.4
L14 EN24 Water +Grease+Oil 122.52 0.050 0.75 0.8
L15 EN24 Water +Grease+Oil 122.52 0.1 0.50 0.8*
L16 EN24 Graphite+Grease +Oil 179.07 0.050 0.50 0.8*
L17 EN24 Graphite +Grease Oil 179.07 0.1 1 0.4
L18 EN24 Graphite +Grease Oil 179.07 0.075 0.75 0.8
406 Advances in Mechanical Engineering

Experiments are carried out, surface roughness is measured by Mitutyo’s surface roughness tester
and tool wear is measured by tool maker’s microscope. The results are shown in Table 4 below
along with the S/N Ratio values obtained thorugh ANOVA Analysis.
Table 4 Details of Output Variables and S/N Ratio
Surface Tool Surface Tool
Trials

Trials
Roughness Wear S/N Roughness Wear S/N
Material Material
(Ra ) [µm] [mm] Ratio (Ra ) [µm) [mm] Ratio

L1 SS316L 1.59 0.05 -49.6725 L10 EN24 1.78 0.03 -49.6748


L2 SS316L 1.17 0.03 -54.4599 L11 EN24 1.27 0.07 -54.4640
L3 SS316L 2.22 0.02 -41.0221 L12 EN24 2.81 0.03 -41.0067
L4 SS316L 1.09 0.03 -52.3133 L13 EN24 1.01 0.05 -52.3125
L5 SS316L 1.29 0.04 -50.3632 L14 EN24 1.96 0.02 -50.3588
L6 SS316L 1.08 0.03 -44.0880 L15 EN24 1.91 0.04 -44.0776
L7 SS316L 1.73 0.03 -46.3864 L16 EN24 1.15 0.03 -46.3835
L8 SS316L 1.38 0.02 -48.5207 L17 EN24 1.52 0.02 -48.5200
L9 SS316L 1.51 0.04 -45.4058 L18 EN24 1.03 0.05 -45.4119

Results and Analysis


Analysis of Variance: ANOVA analysis is carried out for SS316L and EN24, for tool wear and
surface roughness. Table 6 and 7 represent Analysis for EN24. Table 8 and 9 represent Analysis for
SS316L.Taguchi technique uses the S/N ratio to measure the quality characteristics that are
deviating from the desired value. Response Value for smaller the better is taken on surface
roughness and tool wear and represented below in Table 10 and 11 for EN24 and SS316L.
Table 6 ANOVA analysis of Surface Roughness (EN24)
Source DF Adj SS Adj MS F Value P Value % Contribution
Cutting Speed 1 0.00275 0.002746 0.02 0.907 0.2570
Feed Rate 1 0.00875 0.008751 0.05 0.835 0.8190
Depth Of Cut 1 0.11431 0.114312 0.63 0.463 10.6982
Error 5 0.90383 0.180766
Total 8 1.06852
Table 7 ANOVA Analysis of Tool Wear (EN24)
Source DF Adj SS Adj MS F Value P Value % Contribution
Cutting Speed 1 0.000008 0.000008 0.06 0.819 1.058
Feed Rate 1 0.000002 0.000002 0.01 0.919 0.265
Depth Of Cut 1 0.000023 0.000023 0.17 0.695 3.042
Error 5 0.000673 0.000135
Total 8 0.000756
Table 8 ANOVA Analysis of Surface Roughness (SS316L)
Source DF Adj SS Adj MS F Value P Value % Contribution
Cutting Speed 1 0.06960 0.002746 0.54 0.495 6.505
Feed Rate 1 0.09717 0.008751 0.76 0.424 9.082
Depth of Cut 1 0.37127 0.114312 2.89 0.150 34.701
Error 5 0.64287 0.180766
Total 8 1.06989
Applied Mechanics and Materials Vols. 813-814 407

Table 9 ANOVA Analysis of Tool Wear (SS316L)


Source DF Adj SS Adj MS F Value P Value % Contribution
Cutting Speed 1 0.000012 0.000012 0.23 0.655 1.587
Feed Rate 1 0.000232 0.000232 4.45 0.089 30.68
Depth Of Cut 1 0.000074 0.000074 1.42 0.287 9.788
Error 5 0.000260 0.000052
Total 8 0.000756

Table 10 Response Table for Signal-Noise Ratio (SS316L)


Level Cutting Speed Feed Rate Depth Of Cut Insert Radius
1 -0.1718 -0.4566 1.3713 0.5094
2 0.8833 0.2287 -0.1541 1.1100
3 -0.7170 0.2214 -1.2317 -1.6249
Delta 1.6003 0.6843 2.6030 2.7349
Rank 3 4 2 1

Table 11 Response Table for Signal-Noise Ratio (EN24)


Level Cutting Speed Feed Rate Depth Of Cut Insert Radius
1 -0.1821 0.2308 -1.1066 -0.4780
2 0.8933 -0.7472 0.6240 -0.2748
3 -0.7134 0.5143 0.4805 0.7506
Delta 1.6067 1.2616 1.7306 1.2285
Rank 2 3 1 4

Interaction Plots:
Interaction Plots are plotted for EN24 and SS316L selecting tool wear and surface roughness as
main variables, and associate variables as cutting speed, feed rate, depth of cut and environment.
Fig. 2 and Fig. 3 shows the interaction plots for tool wear and surface roughness for EN24 and
SS316L.

Results inferred from Interaction Plots of EN24: Surface roughness value is low, with second
type of environment with cutting speed of 179.07m/min, feed rate of 0.1mm/rev, depth of cut of
0.5mm, with coated carbide insert of 0.8mm radius. Similarly surface roughness value is observed
to be low with first environment, with 84.82 m/min of cutting speed, feed rate of 0.05mm/rev, and
depth of cut of 1mm with uncoated carbide insert of 0.4mm radius. Tool Wear is observed low with
environment three with a cutting speed of 122.52m/min, feed rate of 0.1mm/rev, and depth of cut of
1 mm with a coated carbide insert of 0.8mm radius. Similarly Tool Wear is very low with
environment one, with cutting speed of 179.07m/min, feed rate of 0.075mm/rev, depth of cut of
0.5mm with uncoated carbide insert of 0.4mm radius. Combination of both tool wear and surface
roughness is observed low with environment three with cutting speed of 122.52m/min, feed rate of
0.1mm/rev, depth of cut of 1mm, and with uncoated carbide insert of 0.4mm radius.

Results inferred from Interaction Plots of SS316L: Surface roughness value is low, with second
type of environment with a cutting speed of 179.07m/min, feed rate of 0.05mm/rev, depth of cut of
0.75mm, with uncoated carbide insert of 0.4mm radius. Similarly surface roughness value is low
with first environment with 84.82 m/min of cutting speed, feed rate of 0.1mm/rev, depth of cut of
0.50mm with uncoated carbide insert of 0.8mm radius. Tool Wear is also observed low with
environment three with 122.52m/min, feed rate of 0.05mm/rev, depth of cut of 0.5mm with
408 Advances in Mechanical Engineering

uncoated carbide insert of 0.4mm radius. Similarly Tool Wear is very low with environment one
with cutting speed of 179.07m/min, feed rate of 0.050mm/rev, depth of cut of 1mm with coated
carbide insert of 0.8mm radius. Combination of both tool wear and surface roughness is observed
low at environment three with cutting speed of 122.52m/min, feed rate of 0.05mm/rev, depth of cut
of 0.5mm, and with uncoated carbide insert of 0.4mm radius.

1 2 3 0.050 0.075 0.100 0.400 0.800 0.801


0.06
Material
1
0.04 2
Material
0.02
0.06
Environment
1
0.04 2
Environment
3
0.02
0.06
Cutting
Speed
0.04 84.82
Cutting Speed
122.52
0.02 179.07
0.06
Feed
Rate
0.04 0.050
Feed Rate
0.075
0.02 0.100
0.06
Depth
Of Cut
0.04 0.50
Depth Of Cut
0.75
0.02 1.00
0.06
Insert
Radius
0.04 0.400
Insert Radius
0.800
0.02 0.801
1 2 84.82 122.52 179.07 0.50 0.75 1.00

Fig. 2 Interaction Plot for Tool Wear (Material 1- EN-24, Material 2- SS316L: Environment 1-
Dry, Environment 2- Water+Grease+Oil, Environment 3- Graphite+Grease+Oil,)
1 2 3 0.050 0.075 0.100 0.400 0.800 0.801

2.4 Material
1
1.8 2
Material
1.2

2.4 Environment
1
1.8 2
Environment
3
1.2

2.4 Cutting
Speed
1.8
Cutting Speed 84.82
122.52
1.2
179.07
2.4 Feed
Rate
1.8 0.050
Feed Rate
0.075
1.2
0.100
2.4 Depth
Of Cut
1.8
Depth Of Cut 0.50
0.75
1.2
1.00
2.4 Insert
Radius
1.8
Insert Radius 0.400
0.800
1.2
0.801
1 2 84.82 122.52 179.07 0.50 0.75 1.00

Fig. 3 Interaction Plot-Surface Roughness(Material 1- EN-24, Material 2- SS316L: Environment 1-


Dry, Environment 2- Water+Grease+Oil, Environment 3- Graphite+Grease+Oil,)
Applied Mechanics and Materials Vols. 813-814 409

Conclusions
• Generally it is observed that a water miscible fluid made up of water, grease and oil performed
better in terms achieving good surface finish than other type of fluids. A new type of lubricant
mixture made up of graphite, grease and oil also produced better results as equally to the water
miscible fluid.
• In the case of EN24, tool wear and surface roughness together is observed low with cutting
fluid made up of graphite, grease and oil with cutting speed of 122.52m/min, feed rate of
0.1mm/rev, depth of cut of 1mm, and with a uncoated carbide insert of 0.4mm radius.
• In the case of SS316L also, tool wear and surface roughness together is observed low with
cutting fluid made up of graphite, grease and oil with cutting speed of 122.52m/min, feed rate
of 0.05mm/rev, depth of cut of 0.5mm, and with uncoated carbide insert of 0.4mm radius.
• The results declared may be generalized to a considerable extent while working on EN24 and
SS 316L which are most commercially used over decades in metal cutting industry. The study
is limited to the range of values of the specified cutting parameters.

References
[1] Prashant J. Patil, Chandrakant R. Patil, Critical review of Nanofluid Minimum Quantity
Lubrication for Grinding Application, International Journal of Engineering Sciences & Research
Technology 3(8), (2014) 187-192
[2] Jitendra. M Varma, Chirag. P Patel, A review of Effect of Solid Lubricant in Hard Turning of
Alloy Steel, International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Studies (2013) 12-15.
[3] M. Venkata Ramana, G. Krishna Mohan Rao, D. Hanumantha Rao, Optimization and Effect of
Process Parameters on Tool Wear in Turning of Titanium Alloy under different Machining
Conditions, Journal of Materials, Mechanics and Manufacturing Vol.2 No:4 (2014) 272-277.
[4] J.B.Shaikh, J.S.Sidhu, Experimental Investigation and Optimization of Process Parameters in
Turning of AISI D2 Steel using Different Lubricants, International Journal of Engineering and
Advanced Technology, Volume-3, Issue-5, (2014) 189-197.
[5] Mithun Shah, Umashankar Rawat, V.V.Potdar, A Review on Study of Performance of Vegetable
based oils as Cutting Fluid in Machining of Alloys, International Journal of Innovative Research in
Advanced Engineering, (2014) 47-49
[6] R.B. Da Silva, J.M. Vieira, R.N. Cardoso, H.C. Carvalho, E.S. Costa, A.R. Machado, R.F. De
Avila, Tool Wear Analysis in Milling of Medium Carbon Steel with Coated Cemented Carbide
Inserts using different Machining Lubrication/Cooling Systems”, Wear 271 (2011) 2469-2474.
[7] Wilfried J Bartz, Ecological and Environmental aspects of Cutting Fluids, Lubrication
Engineering, (2001) 13-16.
[8] N. R. Dhar, A. K. M. Masud, A. B. Chattopadhyay, Performance Evaluation of Uncoated
Tungsten Carbide Tool in Turning AISI 1040 Steel at Low Temperature” International Conference
of Mechanical Engineering ICME (2001) 79-83.
[9] M.T. Ahmed, N.R. Dhar, Tool Life Prediction In Turning of Medium Carbon Steel using High
Pressure Coolant by Factorial Design of Experiments” International Conference on Mechanical
Engineering ICME (2007) 29-31.
[10] M. Anthony Xavior, M. Adithan, Determining the influence of cutting fluids on tool wear and
surface roughness during turning of AISI 304 Austenitic Stainless Steel, Journal of Materials
Processing Technology, Vol 209 (2009) 900-909.