Hybrid (Abrasives and Ultrasonically-assisted ECM)

Non-Conventional Machining Process

Shubham Yadav
Department of Mechanical Engineering, NIT Uttarakhand, Satellite Campus, MNIT Jaipur,
Jaipur 302017, India

Abstract: The interest for machining hard and weak materials is relentlessly expanding in numerous
applications. Ultrasonic machining (USM) produces parts having better surface quality. However, the
material removal rate and hence the machining productivity is low. On the other hand Electrochemical
Machining (ECM) has the advantage of achieving high machining rates as well as better surface quality.
ECM is only effective for machining conductive materials, while USM is suitable for hard and brittle
materials such as ceramics. In this review, the advancements of Ultrasonic-assisted Electrochemical
Machining (USMEC) in conventional machining as well as in advanced machining are presented. To
improve mechanical factors in electrochemical machining, the presentation of ultrasonic vibration is
legitimate. Also the effects of different kinds of abrasives, which are used in abrasive slurry in USM, are
analyzed in the Hybrid Non-Conventional machining process. Merging the two processes has the
advantage of combining their virtues especially when tackling difficult-to-machine composite materials.

Keywords: Ultrasonic Machining, Electrochemical Machining, Abrasives, Hybrid Machining Process.

1. Introduction
Non-conventional machining processes is defined as a group of processes that remove
excess material by virtue of various techniques which involve thermal, mechanical, electrical or
chemical energy or combinations of these energies but do not use a sharp cutting tools as it needs
to be used for conventional machining processes [1]. The major characteristics of Non-
conventional machining are:-
1. Material removal may occur with or without chip formation. For example in AJM, chips are of
microscopic size and in case of Electrochemical machining material removal occurs due to
electrochemical dissolution at atomic level.
2. In Non-Conventional Machining (NCM), the tool need not be harder than the work piece
material. For example, in Electrical discharge Machining (EDM), copper is used as the tool
material to machine hardened steels.
3. In NCM, there may not be a physical tool present. For example in laser jet machining,
machining is carried out by laser beam. However in Electrochemical Machining there is a
physical tool that is very much required for machining.
4. Mostly NCM processes do not necessarily use mechanical energy to provide material removal.
They use different energy domains to provide machining. For example, in USM, AJM, WJM
mechanical energy is used to machine material, whereas in ECM electrochemical dissolution
constitutes material removal [1].

1
1.1. Classification of Non-Conventional Machining Processes
Classification of NCM processes depends on the nature of energy used for material removal:-

1.1.1. Mechanical Processes

• Abrasive Jet Machining (AJM)

• Ultrasonic Machining (USM)
• Water Jet Machining (WJM)
• Abrasive Water Jet Machining (AWJM)

1.1.2. Electrochemical Processes

• Electrochemical Machining (ECM)

• Electro Chemical Grinding (ECG)
• Electro Jet Drilling (EJD)

1.1.3. Electro-Thermal Processes

• Electro-discharge machining (EDM)

• Laser Jet Machining (LJM)
• Electron Beam Machining (EBM)

1.1.4. Chemical Processes

• Chemical Milling (CHM)
• Photochemical Milling (PCM)

1.2. Needs for Non-Conventional Machining Process

1. Extremely hard and brittle materials or Difficult to machine materials, which are difficult to
machine by traditional machining processes.
2. When the work piece is too flexible or slender to support the cutting or grinding forces [2].
3. When the shape of the part is too complex.
4. Complex shaped blind hole – e.g. square hole of 12 mm x12 mm with a depth of 25 mm.
5. Deep hole with small hole diameter – e.g. φ 1 mm hole with l/d ratio = 16
6. Machining of composite Materials.

1.3. Electrochemical Machining (ECM)

Electrochemical machining (ECM) is a modern machining process that depends on the

expulsion of work piece particles by electrochemical disintegration (ECD) as per the standards of
Faraday (1833) shown in Fig. 1. [2]. Gusseff presented the principal patent on ECM in 1929, and
the primary huge advancement happened during the 1950s, when the procedure was utilized for
machining high-quality and warmth safe amalgams. In the ECM process, a cathode (tool) is
advanced into an anode (workpiece). The pressurized electrolyte is injected at a set temperature
to the area being cut. The feed rate is the same as the rate of “liquification” of the material. The
electrolytic fluid carries away the metal hydroxide formed in the process [2].

2
 Fig. 1. Schematic Diagram of Electrochemical Machining [2]

1.4. Ultrasonic Machining (USM)

Ultrasonic machining (USM) is a mechanical material removal process used to erode holes
and cavities in hard or brittle work pieces by using shaped tools, high-frequency mechanical
motion and an abrasive slurry [3]. USM process does not thermally damage the work piece or
introduce significant levels of residual stress, which is important for the survival of materials in
service. For having improved machining execution and better-machined workpiece qualities,
usually, it's required to decide the ideal control parameter settings of a USM procedure as shown
in Fig. 2. and Fig. 3. [1].

Fig. 2. USM Components [1] Fig. 3. USM Elements [1]

1.5. Ultrasonically-assisted ECM

The Ultrasonic-assisted Electrochemical Machining (USMEC) was introduced by Clifton et

al. in 1993 [1]. It is one of the hybrid Non-Conventional Machining Processes for machining of
hard and brittle materials. Merging the ECM and USM processes has the advantage of combining
their virtues especially when tackling difficult-to-machine composite materials.

3
 During this process the dissolution phase depends upon the relative position of the tool and
work piece. When a pulsed voltage (AC) replaces the DC, it must be synchronized with the tool
oscillation in order to maintain an efficient Electrochemical Dissolution and avoid the formation
of spark discharges across the interelectrode gap [3]. The dissolution occurs along with the MA
caused by the ultrasonic impact of abrasive grains on the machined surface. Since the anodic
dissolution ph1ase is accompanied by the formation of a brittle or passive oxide layer that creates
hindrance for further dissolution, the abrasive grains are, therefore, expected to act mainly on the
brittle oxide layer itself. Under such conditions, the dissolution process is enhanced due to the
mechanical depassivation of the machined surface [1]. Therefore the efficiency of this combined
operation is improved in terms of higher machining speeds and lower tool wear, compared to
normal USM. The increment in current density enhances the machining productivity and reduces
the tool wear. The produced accuracy is reduced possibly due to the side-machining effect, which
leads to larger side-machining gaps than those expected in the case of pure USM [1].

Fig. 4. USMEC Setup Schematic [1] Fig. 5. USMEC Components [1]

2. Improvement of ECM Characteristics by Applying Ultrasonic Vibration

Electrochemical machining (ECM) is a machining strategy that uses the electrochemical

response of metallic materials. The main basic features of this machining method are high
processing speed and the absence of tool wear. Specifically, the provide details regarding the
principle of smaller scale ECM utilizing ultra-short voltage pulses by Schuster et al. [4]
represented a significant breakthrough leading to numerous helpful applications. However,
because the processing speed of ECM with ultra-short voltage pulses is quite slow, voltage
pulses with microsecond pulse on time [5] are still widely utilized. Nonetheless, irrespective of
the type of approach used, the accumulation of byproducts such as metallic and gaseous products
must be removed from the small gap area. If the byproducts generated in the interelectrode area
are not quickly removed, they can cause a short circuit between two electrodes.

4
 To improve the machining speed in ECM, an ultrasonic vibration is applied to the tool
electrode, the workpiece, or the working fluid. In particular, the ultrasonic vibration is frequently
applied to the electrolyte in ECM to obtain a 300μm deep micro hole with a semi cylindrical
tool. There is also a study on the influence of the frequency of the tool electrode vibration on the
ECM performance [6]. The effect of the vibration amplitudes and patterns (unidirectional or
multidirectional vibration) on the replicating accuracy and processing speed are discussed.

2.1. Effect of vibration amplitude and direction

To confirm the effectiveness of the byproduct removed using ultrasonic vibration,

machining experiments are carried out without tool feeding in the Z direction.

Four types of experiments are performed subject to an initial interelectrode gap of 20μm
and a processing time of 3 min [7]. As the tool electrode vibrates and the interelectrode gap
varies during processing, this gap is defined as the gap that exists when the tool electrode is the
closest to the workpiece surface. The four experiments were performed as follows:-
(1) Without ultrasonic vibration.
(2) With lateral ultrasonic vibration.
(3) With longitudinal ultrasonic vibration.
(4) With complex ultrasonic vibration (a combination of both longitudinal and lateral vibrations)

Fig. 5. Schematic of byproducts Fig. 6. Experimental Setup [7]

from the gap area [7]

Table. 1. Machining Conditions [7]

Tool electrode Ti (1 mm × 1 mm)

Workpiece SUS304 plate (t = 0.5 mm)
Electrolyte 10% NaNO3aq
High level voltage 10 V
Low level voltage 0V
Pulse width 100 µs
Pulse period 300 µs
Ultrasonic frequency Z direction: 24–32 kHz
X direction: 33–45 kHz

Comparing the experimental results of the lateral and longitudinal vibrations, shown in Fig.
7. and 8. [7], it was found that applying the lateral vibration results in a flat bottom surface, while
5
applying the longitudinal vibration changes the cross-sectional area. This means that the lateral
vibration mainly influences the flatness of the bottom surface, while the longitudinal vibration
influences the material removal amount. In addition, it is also found that the complex vibration is
effective not only for the processing speed, but also for the replicating accuracy [8]. Thus, we
can conclude that applying complex vibrations is a more effective way to remove the byproducts
from the inter-electrode area.

Fig. 7. Cross-sectional shape vs. Depth [7] Fig. 8. Cross-sectional area vs. vibration [7]

3. Influence of abrasive particle movement in micro USM

Micro USM is used to generate micro features in hard and brittle materials such as silicon,
glass and ceramics. In micro USM, material is removed using a tool that impacts abrasive
particles into the workpiece, chipping material away from the workpiece [9]. Abrasive particles
are distributed randomly in the machining area. Their movement affects the profile of the
machined surface.

There are two ways to generate micro features by micro USM. One is to use complex shape
tool to do simple up-and-down movement [10-11]. In this case, there is no tool rotation. The
final surface is expected to have a good surface quality. The other one is to control a simple
0shape tool moving along a designed tool path [11]. In each layer machining, the flat surface is
desired to form the final accurate 3D micro shape [12]. To improve the quality of machined
surface by micro USM, the material is removed by the impact of accelerated abrasives that are
excited by ultrasonic energy instead of direct impacts [13].

3.1. Effect of abrasive particle movement on machined surface

In micro-USM, the mechanism of material removal is that workpiece material is chipped off
under repeated impacts of abrasive particles at an ultrasonic frequency. It was confirmed that the
material removal and the tool wear occur only when both of ultrasonic vibration and abrasive
particles exist [14-15]. The profile of machined surface by micro USM has a closed relationship
with number of particles and its distribution in machining area. When abrasive particles are
uniformly distributed in working area, the material removal rate in the whole area is same,
resulting in a flat surface. The more the abrasive particles are, the more material is removed. The
generated surface turns to be concaved. Reversely, the surface is machined into convex shape
where there are less abrasive particles.

6
 Fig. 9. Structure of Micro USM equipment [10]

Table. 2. Machining Conditions [15]

Ultrasonic vibration frequency 35 kHz

Ultrasonic vibration amplitude 0.5μm, 1μm, 1.5μm
Abrasive particle material Polycrystalline diamond (PCD)
Abrasive particle concentration 3 wt% to water
Abrasive particle size 0.5μm, 1.5μm, 3μm
Tool material Tungsten
Workpiece material Silicon <100>
Tool rotation 0 rpm

Experiments under the conditions in Table. 2. [15] are carried out to study the relationship
between the bottom profile of micro-holes and tool diameter, amplitude of ultrasonic vibration
and tool feed depth. To study the influence of the tool feed depth on the profile of machined
surface, micro holes are drilled to different depths using tools with diameter of 200μm and
abrasive particles of different sizes. All results are summarized in Fig.10. [15].

Fig. 10. Heights of bottom profiles of micro holes with different feed depths using different
sizes of abrasive particles [15]

7
 In micro USM, the profile of machined surface has a closed relationship with the
distribution of abrasive particles, which suspends in slurry during machining. In this study, it was
found that the abrasive particles move towards the center of machining area during vibration and
the debris accumulated in the center of machining blocks the movement of abrasive particles,
resulting in convex or concave bottom shape of a micro hole [16-17]. The surface profiles are
convex. Under similar conditions, the bottom surface is produced to concave shape effectively
with the increase of molecular size [18]. At the point when the vibration increases, the moving
rate of particle increases, resulting in a concave bottom shape. Using a tool with a small
diameter, the time of a particle moving to the center is shorter than that using a large size tool,
leading to the concave bottom shape [19-20].

Fig. 11. Heights of bottom profiles of micro holes generated under different vibration
amplitudes [21]
To further investigate the influence of the vibration amplitude on the abrasive particle
movement, experiments under different vibration amplitudes are carried out. Fig. 11. [21] shows
the influence of vibration amplitude on the bottom profile of micro hole. Usually, the bottom
profile of a micro hole generated using small particles and small tool feed depth has a convex
shape as shown in Fig. 12. [22]. It can be seen that the surface profile changes from the convex
to concave with the increase of the vibration amplitude under same other machining conditions.
The bottom of a micro hole generated by large amplitude of 1.5μm is concave. It is further
confirmed that the increase of vibration amplitude accelerates the movement of abrasive particles
towards the center of the micro hole, resulting in the number of abrasive particles in the central
part of a micro hole increases [23-24].

Fig. 12. Heights of bottom profiles of micro holes [22]

8
 To investigate the machining time on the surface profile of machined micro hole, three holes
were drilled to different depth under small vibration amplitude of 0.7μm. The machining times
are 341 seconds, 389 seconds and 452 seconds, respectively. The heights of surface profiles are
shown in Fig. 13. [25] The number of abrasive particles in machining area is calculated as 59
[26]. Initially, the abrasive particles are distributed in the machining area randomly. The debris
in the center of micro hole blocks abrasive particles moving towards to the center [27]. The
surface profiles are convex. Even under large vibration amplitude of 1μm and the tool feed depth
of 70μm. As shown in Fig. 12. [28], the bottoms of micro holes are convex. When the tool was
fed into the workpiece to 80μm in depth, the machining time is long. The particles move to the
center of machining area. Therefore, the obtained profile of machined surface is concave [29-30].

Fig. 13. Heights of bottom profiles of micro holes generated with different tool feed depths
[25]

Conclusion

In micro USM, the profile of machined surface has a closed relationship with the distribution
of abrasive particles, which suspends in slurry during machining. In this study, it was found that
the abrasive particles move towards to the center of machining area during vibration and the debris
accumulated in the center of machining blocks the movement of abrasive particles, resulting in
convex or concave bottom shape of a micro hole.

The main conclusions that can be inferred from the above analysis, are-
1. ECM process can be substantially assisted by the ultrasonic intensification field, especially in
order to depassivate the workpiece surface during the machining.
2. The ultrasonic frequency has a real influence on the performance of EMC process; a greater
ultrasonic frequency results in a greater working current, and thus a higher mass-removal rate.
3. At the initial stage of machining, the debris accumulated in the center blocks the abrasive
particles move to the center. The surface profiles are convex.
4. Under the same conditions, the bottom surface is generated to concave shape easily with the
increase of particle size. When the vibration amplitude increases, the moving speed of particle
increases, resulting in concave bottom shape.
5. Using a tool with a small diameter, the time of a particle moving to the center is shorter than that
using a large size tool, leading to the concave bottom shape.

9
Reference
[1] El-Hofy H (2005) Advanced Machining Processes. New York: McGraw-Hill.

[2] McGeogh JA (1974) Principles of Electrochemical Machining. London: Chapman and Hall
Publishers.

[3] Kalpakjain S (1997) Manufacturing Processes for Engineering Materials. Menlo Park, CA:
Addison Wesley.

[4] Schuster R, Kirchner V, Allongue P and Ertl G (2000) Electrochemical Micromachining.

Science Journal 289(5476): 98-101.

[5] Chikamor K (1998) Possibilities of electrochemical micromachining. International Journal of

the Japan Society for Precision Engineering 32(1): 37-38.

[6] Bhattacharyya B, Malapati M, Munda J and Sarkar A (2007) Influence of tool vibration on
machining performance in electrochemical micro-machining of copper. International Journal of
Machine Tools and Manufacture 47(2): 335-342.

[7] Natsu W, Nakayama H and Yu Z (2012) Improvement of ECM Characteristics by Applying

Ultrasonic Vibration. International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing 13(7):
1131-1136.

[8] Wilson JF (1971) Practice and theory of electrochemical machining. New York: John Wiley
& Sons Publishers.

[9] Thoe TB, Aspinwall DK and Wise MLH (1998) Review on Ultrasonic Machining.
International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 38(4): 239-255.

[10] Yang Y and Li X (2003) Micro ultrasonic machining of ceramic MEMS with micro metallic
dies. Proceedings of ASME 2003 International Mechanical Engineering Congress and
Exposition, London, UK, 2003, pp. 93-95.

[11] Yu ZY, Rajurkar KP and Tandon A (2004) Study of 3D Micro-Ultrasonic Machining.

Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering 126(4): 727-732.

[12] Moronuki N, Saito Y, Kaneko A, Miura A and Aikawa C (2004) Vibration

Micromachining of Low-Melting-Temperature Glass. Proceedings of 7th international
symposium on advances in abrasive technology, New York, 2008, pp. 489-494.

[13] Ichida Y, Sato R, Morimoto Y and Kobayashi K (2005) Material Removal Mechanisms in
Non-contact Ultrasonic Abrasive Machining. International Journal on Wear 258(1-4): 107-114.

[14] Sundaram MM, Cherku S and Rajurkar KP (2008) Micro Ultrasonic Machining using Oil
Based Abrasive Slurry. Proceedings of the ASME 2008 International Manufacturing Science and
Engineering, London, UK, 2008, pp. 73-78.

10
[15] Pei W, Yua Z, Lia J, Maa C, Xu W, Wang X and Natsu X (2013) Influence of abrasive
particle movement in micro USM. The 17th CIRP Conference on Electro Physical and Chemical
Machining (ISEM), Beijing, China, 13 April 2013, pp. 551-555.

[16] Zarepour H and Yeo SH (2011) Enhancement of Surface Quality and Study on Material
Mechanism in Micro Ultrasonic Machining. Proceedings of the ASME 2011 International
Manufacturing Science and Engineering, London, UK, 2011, pp. 259-263.

[17] Zhixin J (1995) Study on Mechanical Pulse Electrodischarge Machining. Precision

Engineering 17(2): 89–93.

[18] Yu ZY, Ma CM, Anne CM, Li JZ and Guo DM (2012) Prediction of Tool Wear in Micro-
USM. Annals of the CIRP 61(1): 227-230.

[19] Wang MH and Zhu D (2009) Fabrication of multiple electrodes and their application for
micro-holes array in ECM. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology
41(1-2): 42-47.

[20] Munda J and Bhattacharyya B (2008) Investigation into electrochemical micromachining

(EMM) through response surface methodology based approach. The International Journal of
Advanced Manufacturing Technology 35(7-8): 821-832.

[21] Perusich SA and Alkire RC (2010) Ultrasonically induced cavitation studies of

electrochemical passivity and transport mechanism. International Theoretical Journal of
Electrochemical Society 138(3): 700–707.

[22] Rajurkar K, Zhu D, McGeough J, Kozak J and Silva AD (2009) New developments in
electro-chemical machining. CIRP Journal of Manufacturing science and Technology 48(2):
567–579.

[23] Singhal AK, Athavale MM, Li H and Jiang Y (2011) Mathematical basis and validation of
the full cavitation model. Journal of Fluids Engineering 124(3): 617–622.

[24] Skoczypiec S and Ruszaj A (2010) Discussion of cavitation phenomena influence on

electrochemical machining process. International Journal of Manufacturing, Science and
Technology 7(2): 27–32.

[25] Walker R and Perrins CJ (2011) The Hardness of Iron Electrodeposited with Ultrasound,
Plating and Surface Finishing. International Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering
129(2-4): 77-83.

[26] Brennen CE (2003) Cavitation and bubble dynamics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[27] Banks C and Compton RG (2004) Volta metric exploration and applications of ultrasonic
cavitation. International Theoretical Journal of Electrochemical Society 874(29): 169–178.

[28] Ruszaj A, Zybura M, Urek R and Skrabalak G (2003) Some aspects of the electrochemical
machining process supported by electrode ultrasonic vibration optimization. Journal of
Manufacturing Engineering 217(7): 1365–1371.

11
[29] Rumyantsev E and Davydov A (2009) Electrochemical Machining of Metals. Moscow: Mir
Publisher.

[30] Madigan F (2010) Deposition of Metals onto Electrode Surface by Sonication,

Sonochemical Stripping Voltammetry. Journal of Analytical Chemistry 67(1-2): 781-786.

12