0 views

Original Title: 23.IJMPERDAPR201923

Uploaded by TJPRC Publications

- quizz 5
- Multiple Regression Review
- SPSS[module 2_instructor_Aug2016].pdf
- The Role of Personality Traits in the Choice and Use of the Compensation Category of English Language Learning Strategies
- TestB
- 25 Factors Influencing the Students Choi
- HW2.doc
- Linear Regression Model
- 2013
- multiple regression
- Final Review Solns
- Projek Akhir Semester Agust 2018
- STATS 250 Notes
- journal-14-2012
- فصل 10
- Tute Exercise 11 Solutions1
- Classnotes2-ANOVATable
- metronidazol plasma
- Chapter 09 W12 L1 Multiple Regression Analysis 2015 UTP C10.pdf
- Anova

You are on page 1of 16

ISSN (P): 2249-6890; ISSN (E): 2249-8001

Vol. 9, Issue 2, Apr 2019, 237-252

© TJPRC Pvt. Ltd.

1

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Raghu Engineering College, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India

2

Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Andhra University, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India

ABSTRACT

The paper focus on preparation of AA 6061 composites with nanoSiC dispersed at varying weight fractions.

AA 6061 billets are extruded by varying extrusion ratio, die included angle, ram speed and %SiC, considering Force

required for extrusion, hardness, tensile strength and surface roughness as output responses. Design of experiments

based Response Surface Method (RSM) is adopted and 31 experiments are performed as per Central Composite Design

(CCD). Empirical mathematical equations are developed for the output responses and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) is

carried out at 95% confidence level. Main effect plots are drawn to understand the variation of input parameters with

respect to output responses. Contour plots are drawn to find the most influenced parameter. Surface plots are drawn to

Original Article

identify the optimum input parameters.

KEYWORDS: Extrusion, AA 6061, Nano Sic, Response Surface Method, Contour Plots & Surface Plots

Received: Dec 28, 2018; Accepted: Jan 18, 2019; Published: Feb 20, 2019; Paper Id.: IJMPERDAPR201923

INTRODUCTION

Extrusion is one of the major metal forming processes used in transforming the size and shape of the

materials from the casts structure of an ingot to a useful product. Extrusion is a flexible manufacturing process, as a

single extrusion press may be used for multiple materials and can produce infinite number of shapes by simply

changing the die and the tooling associated with it. Aluminium is the most widely used material for extrusion

process because of its considerable strength and also easily deformable properties. At present, the extrusion process

parameters are selected on the basis of experience and the trial runs. Extrusion is a very complicated process which

requires proper process parameters to be used to get optimum settings to produce a quality product. Therefore,

most of the researchers are inclined towards the selection of optimum parameters which gives the best quality

product.

Cunsheng Zhang et al. [1] opted for Taguchi’s design of experiments and s/n ratio analysis to obtain

uniform flow velocity distribution and to minimize the extrusion force in direct extrusion of Al 6063 aluminium

alloy by using billet diameter, container temperature, billet preheated temperature, ram speed and die temperature

as process parameters. Four levels of each parameter were used for the investigation of process. The minimum

velocity distribution was obtained at higher ram speed and tooling temperatures, whereas minimum extrusion force

was obtained with lower ram speed and higher tooling temperature. Billet diameter had the maximum effect on

velocity distribution followed by ram speed and die temperature, whereas ram speed was the most influencing

parameter for extrusion force followed by billet diameter and die temperature. Billet temperature and container

238 A. Vijay Kumar, Ch. Ratnam & V. V. S. Kesava Rao

temperature had the least effect on the response parameters. Abdul Kareem et. al.[2] investigated effect of initial billet

temperature, ram speed, extrusion ratio, profile average thickness and number of die cavities on the profile exit temperature

using statistical design of experiments for Al 6063 aluminium alloy. A five actor and two levels design for each factor is

considered for the experimentation purpose. Extrusion ratio has the strongest effect on the profile exit temperature

followed by ram speed, initial billet temperature, profile average thickness and then the number of cavities. F. Fereshteh

Sanieeet. al. [3] used Taguchi method to investigate the effects of three die profiles and three extrusion ratios on the

extrusion force. L9 orthogonal array was selected for analysing the experimental results.

The objective of the present work is to develop empirical mathematical models for extrusion force required,

hardness, tensile strength and surface finish. Analyse the effect of input parameters on output responses.

EXPERIMENTATION

The experimental setup for the fabrication of MMNCs is shown in Figure-1. The equipment includes melting

furnace, ultrasonic transducer probe (1 kW, 20 KHz), temperature controller and inert gas protection nozzles. An electrical

resistance heating unit is used for melting of AA6061 in a graphite crucible of a 1 kg capacity. Nanosized SiC particles are

fed into melt during the ultrasonic processing. The aluminium melt is protected from oxidation by creating an inert

atmosphere with argon gas. Argon gas cylinder (max. pressure=220bar) with a pressure regulator and pressure gauge is

used to supply shielding gas to the molten metal A mechanical stirrer is also used in the process to stir the melt before

sonication.

Round bars of dimensions of 30 mm diameter and 200 mm length are produced by using the permanent mould

made of mild steel. Specimens are cut from the as cast bars to a size of 37.5mm and turned to 25 mm.

A graphite crucible is used for preheating the SiC particles and a skimmer coated with graphite is used to remove

slag after complete melting. The base metal AA6061 is taken in a graphite crucible. The melting temperature is maintained

at approximately 100°C above the alloy melting point i.e., 650°C. This enables the flowability of molten metal into the

mould [4]. SiC nano particles are added to the molten metal at 0.1 wt.% gradually into the molten metal. As nanoparticles

being lighter in weight try to float on the surface of the molten metal. Therefore before sonication process, stirring is done

using mechanical stirrer at a speed of 1500 rpm for 6 minutes. Then an ultrasonic probe with 1 kW output is used to

generate adequate sonication power inside the crucible. The probe is made of niobium (Nb), which can withstand high

processing temperatures and bubble burst pressures. Sonication time is fixed as 6 minutes for 0.1 wt.% and it is increased

by 6 minutes for every 0.1wt.% increment. After ultrasonic processing, the Aluminium melt is cast into a preheated steel

Impact Factor (JCC): 7.6197 SCOPUS Indexed Journal NAAS Rating: 3.11

Optimizing Process Parameters of Nano SiC Reinforced AA6061 239

Cold Extrusion using Response Surface Method

permanent mould, a thin layer of graphite powder is applied to the inner walls of the mould for easy removal of the

solidified casting from the mould. The steel mould was preheated to 350°C with a gas torch. AA6061 nanocomposites with

various weight percentages (0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5 wt.%) of nano sized SiC are fabricated. The above procedure is repeated

for fabrication of all the composites.

The billets considered for the experimentation are of initial diameter 25 and height 37.5 mm respectively In order

to eliminate the problem of buckling of the billet, the height to diameter ratio is kept at 1.5for all the cases. The billets were

subjected to annealing treatment to eliminate any residual stresses present prior to extrusion. This consists of heating the

billets to 300oC in a muffle furnace soaking at this temperature for 15 minutes followed by gradually cooling in air to room

temperature. The fabricated billets are presented in Figure-2.

These % wt. wise nano SiC reinforced Al 6061 billets are extruded through dies of various combinations of

included angle and extrusion ratios at various ram speeds. For all these combinations extrusion force is measured using

Electronic Compression testing machine, Hardness (Rockwell) is measured with Brinell hardness tester, Surface roughness

with Talysurf and Ultimate tensile strength (UTS) using electronic universal testing machine.

(0.1% To 0.5% Sic Weight Wise)

An extrusion tool designed for the analysis consists of mainly three parts the punch, container and die. The dies

are designed in accordance with K. Geethalakshmi [5]. Dies are made with included angles of 12o, 14o, 16o, 18o, 20oand

each die having the exit diameters 18mm, 19mm, 20mm, 21mm and 22mm. The land length is kept constant as 4mm. The

die is made of high carbon high chromium steel. The die is heat treated to increase hardness and finished. Figure-3

indicates the dies used for extrusion. Figure 3 represents some of the critical dimensions of drawing die.

240 A. Vijay Kumar, Ch. Ratnam & V. V. S. Kesava Rao

DESIGN OF EXPERIMENTS

Based on trial experiments, the levels of each individual input variable are decided. The level of each variable is

decided by varying its value from minimum to maximum keeping other variables constant and based on visual inspection

ranges of each variable are fixed [6]. The following observations are made while conducting trial experiments.

The upper limit of a factor was coded as +2 and the lower limit as -2, the coded values being calculated from

Equation-1.

where Xiis the required coded value of a variable X, varying from Xmin to Xmax.

For four factors and five levels, as per RSM, CCD design 31 experiments need to be performed. Parameters and

their levels are presented in Table-1 and experimental values are presented in Table-2.

Levels

Factors

-2 -1 0 +1 +2

Extrusion ratio 1.04 1.14 1.25 1.39 1.56

Included angle 12 14 16 18 20

Ram speed (mm/min) 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

% SiC Nanoparticles 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4

Input Output (Experimental)

Exp. DieIncluded Extrusion Surface

Extrusion Ram Speed Hardness UTS

No Angle %SiC Force Roughness

Ratio (mm/min) (Rockwell) (MPa)

(Deg.) (KN) (Microns)

1 1.14 14 1.5 0.1 184 112 171 0.249

2 1.39 14 1.5 0.1 189 114 176 0.259

3 1.14 18 1.5 0.1 188 113 166 0.247

4 1.39 18 1.5 0.1 187 115 174 0.252

5 1.14 14 2.5 0.1 189 114 173 0.242

6 1.39 14 2.5 0.1 189 116 174 0.252

7 1.14 18 2.5 0.1 185 115 163 0.238

8 1.39 18 2.5 0.1 189 116 174 0.243

9 1.14 14 1.5 0.3 188 114 172 0.247

10 1.39 14 1.5 0.3 190 115 174 0.256

11 1.14 18 1.5 0.3 192 116 173 0.247

12 1.39 18 1.5 0.3 194 117 174 0.251

13 1.14 14 2.5 0.3 192 115 184 0.25

14 1.39 14 2.5 0.3 194 116 186 0.258

15 1.14 18 2.5 0.3 195 117 181 0.249

16 1.39 18 2.5 0.3 196 118 186 0.252

17 1.04 16 2 0.2 181 114 172 0.24

18 1.56 16 2 0.2 198 116 180 0.253

19 1.25 12 2 0.2 186 114 182 0.256

20 1.25 20 2 0.2 194 117 173 0.247

21 1.25 16 1 0.2 186 114 172 0.255

22 1.25 16 3 0.2 193 116 180 0.247

23 1.25 16 2 0 179 111 165 0.244

24 1.25 16 2 0.4 198 117 186 0.255

25 1.25 16 2 0.2 186 116 176 0.25

Impact Factor (JCC): 7.6197 SCOPUS Indexed Journal NAAS Rating: 3.11

Optimizing Process Parameters of Nano SiC Reinforced AA6061 241

Cold Extrusion using Response Surface Method

Exp. DieIncluded Extrusion Surface

Extrusion Ram Speed Hardness UTS

No Angle %SiC Force Roughness

Ratio (mm/min) (Rockwell) (MPa)

(Deg.) (KN) (Microns)

26 1.25 16 2 0.2 190 116 175 0.253

27 1.25 16 2 0.2 192 116 172 0.253

28 1.25 16 2 0.2 190 115 175 0.246

29 1.25 16 2 0.2 191 115 176 0.25

30 1.25 16 2 0.2 188 115 175 0.253

31 1.25 16 2 0.2 190 115 173 0.251

In RSM design, mathematical models are developed using polynomial equations. The type of polynomial equation

depends on the problem.

In most RSM problems [7,8], the type of the relationship between the response (Y) and the independent variables

is unknown. Thus the first step in RSM is to find a suitable approximation for the true functional relationship between the

response and the set of independent variables.

Usually, a low order polynomial is some region of the independent variables is employed to develop a relation

between the response and the independent variables. If the response is well modeled by a linear function of the independent

variables then the approximating function in the first order model is

where bo, bi are the coefficients of the polynomial and ∈ represents noise or error.

If interaction terms are added to main effects or first order model, then the model is capable of representing some

curvature in the response function, such as

A curve results from Equation -3 by twisting of the plane induced by the interaction term bijxixj.

There are going to be situations where the curvature in the response function is not adequately modeled by

Equation-3. In such cases, a logical model to consider is

where biirepresent pure second order or quadratic effects. Equation-4 represents a second order response surface

model.

Using MINITAB Ver.14, a statistical software, the significant coefficients are determined and final models are

developed incorporating these coefficients to estimate drawing die force, hardness, UTS and surface finish.

–31.1745X42+1.5625X2X3

242 A. Vijay Kumar, Ch. Ratnam & V. V. S. Kesava Rao

-79.618X1X4+58.750X3X4

–0.0049X1X2 -0.00037X2X3+0.050X3X4

where X1, X2, X3, X4 for the coded values of Extrusion ratio, Included angle, ram speed, %SiC

The adequacy of the developed models is tested using the ANOVA. As per this technique, if the calculated value

of the Fratio of the developed model is less than the standard Fratio (F-table value 7.87) value at a desired level of confidence

of 99%, then the model is said to be adequate within the confidence limit. ANOVA test results are presented in Table 3 for

all the models of extrusion. From Table 3, it is understood that the developed mathematical models are found to be

adequate at 95% confidence level. Coefficient of determination ‘R2’ is used to find how close the predicted and

experimental values lie. The value of ‘R2’ for the above developed models is found to be about 0.92, which indicates a

good correlation to exist between the experimental values and the predicted values.

Analysis of Variance for Extrusion Force (KN)

Source DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F P

Regression 14 462.693 462.693 33.0495 4.05 0.005

Linear 4 433.400 3.495 0.8737 0.11 0.978

Square 4 3.700 3.700 0.9250 0.11 0.976

Interaction 6 25.592 25.592 4.2653 0.52 0.783

Residual Error 16 130.727 130.727 8.1704

Lack-of-Fit 10 107.013 107.013 10.7013 2.71 0.188

Pure Error 6 23.714 23.714 3.9542

Total 30 593.419

Analysis of Variance for Hardness (Rockwell)

Source DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F P

Regression 14 63.057 63.057 4.5041 14.03 0.000

Linear 4 56.569 2.055 0.5137 1.60 0.223

Square 4 3.449 3.449 0.8623 2.69 0.069

Interaction 6 3.039 3.039 0.5065 1.58 0.217

Residual Error 16 5.136 5.136 0.3210

Lack-of-Fit 10 3.422 3.422 0.3422 1.20 0.430

Pure Error 6 1.714 1.714 0.2857

Total 30 68.194

Analysis of Variance for UTS (MPa)

Source DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F P

Regression 14 920.960 920.960 65.783 18.47 0.000

Linear 4 725.181 26.338 6.585 1.85 0.169

Square 4 8.673 8.673 2.168 0.61 0.662

Interaction 6 187.106 187.106 31.184 8.76 0.000

Residual Error 16 56.975 56.975 3.561

Lack-of-Fit 10 43.261 43.261 4.326 1.89 0.225

Pure Error 6 13.714 13.714 2.286

Total 30 977.935

Analysis of Variance for Surface Roughness (Microns)

Source DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F P

Regression 14 0.000724 0.000724 0.000052 17.22 0.000

Linear 4 0.000525 0.000114 0.000028 9.46 0.000

Square 4 0.000063 0.000063 0.000016 5.21 0.007

Impact Factor (JCC): 7.6197 SCOPUS Indexed Journal NAAS Rating: 3.11

Optimizing Process Parameters of Nano SiC Reinforced AA6061 243

Cold Extrusion using Response Surface Method

Table 3: Contd.,

Interaction 6 0.000136 0.000136 0.000023 7.55 0.001

Residual Error 16 0.000048 0.000048 0.000003

Lack-of-Fit 10 0.000009 0.000009 0.000001 0.14 0.996

Pure Error 6 0.000039 0.000039 0.000006

Total 30 0.000772

where SS = Sum of Squares, MS = Mean Squares, DF = Degree of Freedom, F = Fisher’s ratio, P = probability

ratio.

Main plots are drawn for each output response, it is understood that

• Force required for extrusion increasess with the increase in extrusion ratio, die included angle, ram speed and

%SiC.

• Workpiece hardness increase with increase in extrusion ratio, die included angle, ram speed and %SiC.

• Tensile strength increases with extrusion ratio, ram speed and %SiC, where as it increases with increase in

included angle

• Surface roughness value decreases with die angle and ram speed, where as it increases with extrusion ratio and

%SiC.

Main Effects Plot (data means) for Extrusion Force (KN) Main Effects Plot (data means) for Hardness(Rockwel)

Ext rusion ratio Include Angle(Degree) Extrusion ratio Include Angle(Degree)

200 117.0

195 115.5

Mean of Extrusion Force (KN)

Mean of Hardness(Rockwel)

190 114.0

185 112.5

180 111.0

1.04 1.14 1.25 1.39 1.56 12 14 16 18 20 1.04 1.14 1.25 1.39 1.56 12 14 16 18 20

Ram speed(mm/min % Sic Ram speed(mm/min % Sic

200 117.0

195 115.5

190 114.0

185 112.5

180

111.0

1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4

Figure 4: Main Effect Plot for Force Required Figure 5: Main Effect Plot for Hardness

Main Effects Plot (data means) for UTS(MPa) Main Effects Plot (data means) for Surface Roughness(Microns)

Extrusion ratio Include Angle(Degree) Extrusion ratio Include Angle(Degree)

185 0.256

Mean of Surface Roughness(Microns)

180 0.252

175 0.248

Mean of UTS(MPa)

170 0.244

165 0.240

1.04 1.14 1.25 1.39 1.56 12 14 16 18 20 1.04 1.14 1.25 1.39 1.56 12 14 16 18 20

Ram speed(mm/min % Sic Ram speed(mm/min % Sic

185 0.256

180 0.252

175 0.248

170 0.244

165 0.240

1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4

Figure 6: Main Effect Plot for UTS Figure 7: Main Effect Plot for Surface Finish

244 A. Vijay Kumar, Ch. Ratnam & V. V. S. Kesava Rao

Contour Plots for Force Required For Extrusion

Contour plots are drawn to identify the most influencing input parameter on output response. If the contour lines

are circular in shape, it represents both the parameters has each influence. If the contour lines are elliptical in shape, the

most influencing parameter is one where the contour lines are focusing. Figures 8a to 8c represents the contour plots for

force required for extrusion.

From Figure 8a, it is understood that extrusion ratio is dominating die included angle.

From Figure 8b, it is understood that extrusion ratio is dominating ram speed.

Extrusion 3.0

192 Extrusion

184 Force 215 Force

19.0 (KN)

(KN)

220

180

205 190

184

195

Include Angle(Degree)

188 2.5

200

Ram speed(mm/min

17.5 192

205

Hold Values 210

Ram speed(mm/min 0 215

16.0 % Sic 0

2.0 220

Hold Values

Include A ngle(Degree) 0

% Sic 0

14.5 195

210

1.5

13.0

180 188 200

1.0

1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5

Extrusion ratio Extrusion ratio

Figure 8a: Contour Plot for Force Required Figure 8b: Contour Plot for Force Required

(Extrusion Ratio Vs Included Angle) (Extrusion Ratio Vs Ram Speed)

0.4

Extrusion

170

160 Force

(KN)

160

0.3 170

180

190

Hold Values

% Sic

Include A ngle(Degree) 0

0.2 Ram speed(mm/min 0

190

0.1

180

0.0

1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5

Extrusion ratio

(Extrusion Ratio Vs %SiC)

Contour Plot for Hardness

From Figure 9a, it is understood that extrusion ratio is dominating die included angle.

From Figure 9b, it is understood that extrusion ratio is dominating ram speed.

Impact Factor (JCC): 7.6197 SCOPUS Indexed Journal NAAS Rating: 3.11

Optimizing Process Parameters of Nano SiC Reinforced AA6061 245

Cold Extrusion using Response Surface Method

Hardness(Rock well) 3.0

Hardness(Rock well)

107 109 104 116 120

110

19.0 105

112

106

114

107

2.5 116

Include Angle(Degree)

108

Ram speed(mm/min

118

17.5 109

120

110

Hold Values

Hold Values Include Angle(Degree) 0

16.0 105 Ram speed(mm/min 0 2.0 118 % Sic 0

% Sic 0

112

14.5

1.5

13.0

106 108 110

114

1.0

1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5

Extrusion ratio Extrusion ratio

Figure 9a: Contour Plot For Hardness Figure 9b: Contour Plot For Hardness

(Extrusion Ratio Vs Included Angle) (Extrusion Ratio Vs Ram Speed)

0.4

106 Hardness(Rock well)

104

106

108

0.3 110

112

Hold Values

110 Include A ngle(Degree) 0

% Sic

Ram speed(mm/min 0

0.2

0.1

108

0.0

1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5

Extrusion ratio

(Extrusion Ratio Vs %SiC)

Contour Plot for Ultimate Tensile Strength (UTS)

From Figure 10a, it is understood that extrusion ratio is dominating die included angle.

From Figure 10b, it is understood that ram speed is dominating extrusion ratio.

UTS(MPa) 3.0

180 190 175 UTS(MPa)

227.5 222.5 220.0

19.0 180

185 222.5

175 225.0

190

Include Angle(Degree)

2.5 227.5

17.5 Hold Values

Ram speed(mm/min

230.0

Ram speed(mm/min 0 232.5

% Sic 0 235.0

Hold Values

16.0 2.0 232.5 Include A ngle(Degree) 0

% Sic 0

14.5

1.5

13.0

185 230.0 225.0 220.0

1.0

1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5

Extrusion ratio Extrusion ratio

Figure 10a: Contour Plot For UTS Figure 10b: Contour Plot For UTS

(Extrusion Ratio Vs Included Angle) (Extrusion Ratio Vs Ram Speed)

246 A. Vijay Kumar, Ch. Ratnam & V. V. S. Kesava Rao

0.4

165 UTS(MPa)

150

165

180

0.3 195 195

210

225

180

Hold Values

% Sic

Include Angle(Degree) 0

0.2 Ram speed(mm/min 0

0.1

225

210

0.0

1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5

Extrusion ratio

(Extrusion Ratio Vs %SiC)

Contour Plot for Surface Finish

From Figure 11a, it is understood that die included angle is dominating die extrusion ratio.

From Figure 11b, it is understood that ram speed is dominating extrusion ratio.

Surface 3.0

0.265 Surface

Roughness(Microns) 0.26 0.28 Roughness(Microns)

19.0 0.260

0.25

0.265

0.26

0.270

0.27

Include Angle(Degree)

0.275 2.5

Ram speed(mm/min

0.280

0.29

0.285

0.275 0.30

Hold Values 0.31

16.0 Ram speed(mm/min 0

2.0 Hold Values

% Sic 0

Include Angle(Degree) 0

% Sic 0

14.5

1.5

13.0

0.270 0.280 0.27 0.29 0.31

1.0

1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5

Extrusion ratio Extrusion ratio

Figure 11a: Contour Plot for Surface Finish Figure 11b: Contour Plot for Surface Finish

(Extrusion Ratio Vs Included Angle) (Extrusion Ratio Vs Ram Speed)

0.4

Surface

0.24 Roughness(Microns)

0.22

0.24

0.3 0.26

0.28 0.28

0.30

0.32

% Sic

Hold Values

0.2 Include Angle(Degree) 0

Ram speed(mm/min 0

0.26

0.1

0.30

0.0

1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5

Extrusion ratio

(Extrusion ratio Vs %SiC)

Impact Factor (JCC): 7.6197 SCOPUS Indexed Journal NAAS Rating: 3.11

Optimizing Process Parameters of Nano SiC Reinforced AA6061 247

Cold Extrusion using Response Surface Method

For extrusion force, Hardness, Tensile strength and surface finish, extrusion ratio is the most dominating input

parameter, followed by ram speed and included angle.

Surface Plot for Force Required For Extrusion

From Figure 12a, it is understood that extrusion force is minimum at extrusion ratio of 1.1 and included angle of

12°.

From Figure 12b, it is understood that extrusion force is minimum at extrusion ratio of 1.1 and ram speed of

1mm/min.

From Figure 12c, it is understood that extrusion force is minimum at extrusion ratio of 1.1 and %SiC of 0.4%.

From Figure’s 12a to 12c, it is clear that for minimum extrusion force the optimal input values, extrusion ratio of

1.1, die included angle of 12°, ram speed of 1 mm/min and %SiC of 0.4 %.

195 2 30

190 2 20

185 2 10

2 00

180

20 3 .0

18 1 90 2 .5

175 16 2 .0

14 Include A ngle(Degree) 1 .5 Ram speed( mm/min

1 .1 1 .2 1 .1 1 .2

1 .3 1 .4 12 1 .3 1 .4 1 .0

1 .5 1 .5

Extr usion r atio Extr usion r atio

Figure 12a: Surface Plot for Forced Required Figure 12b: Surface Plot for Forced Required

(Extrusion Ratio Vs Included Angle) (Extrusion Ratio Vs Ram Speed)

200

190

Extrusion Force(KN)

180

170

160 0 .4

0 .3

0 .2 % Sic

1 .1 0 .1

1 .2 1 .3 0 .0

1 .4 1 .5

Extr usion r atio

(Extrusion Ratio Vs %Sic)

Contour Plots for Hardness

From Figure 13a, it is understood that hardness is maximum at extrusion ratio of 1.5 and included angle of 20°.

From Figure 13b, it is understood that hardness is maximum at extrusion ratio of 1.5 and ram speed of 3mm/min.

From Figure 13c, it is understood that hardness is maximum at extrusion ratio of 1.4 and %SiC of 0.4%.

248 A. Vijay Kumar, Ch. Ratnam & V. V. S. Kesava Rao

From Figures. 13a to 13c, it is clear that for maximum hardness the optimal input values, extrusion ratio of 1.4,

die included angle of 20°, ram speed of 3 mm/min and %SiC of 0.4%.

11 1

1 2 0 .0

10 9

1 1 7 .5

Hardness(Rockwell) Hardness(Rockwell)

10 7 1 1 5 .0

1 1 2 .5

10 5

20 1 1 0 .0 3 .0

18 2 .5

10 3 16 2 .0

14 Include A ngle(Degr ee) 1 .5 Ram speed(mm/min

1 .1 1 .1 1 .2

1 .2 1 .3 12 1 .3 1 .4 1 .0

1 .4 1 .5 1 .5

Extr usion r atio Extr usion r atio

Figure 13a: Surface Plot for Hardness Figure 13b: Surface Plot for Hardness

(Extrusion Ratio Vs Included Angle) (Extrusion Ratio Vs Ram Speed)

Surface Plot of Hardness(Rockwell)

112

110

Hardness(Rockwell)

108

106

0 .4

104 0 .3

0 .2 % Sic

1 .1 0 .1

1 .2 1 .3 0 .0

1 .4 1 .5

Extr usion r atio

(Extrusion Ratio Vs %Sic)

Surface Plots for UTS

From Figure 14a, it is understood that UTS is maximum at extrusion ratio of 1.1 and included angle of 20°.

From Figure 14b, it is understood that UTS is maximum at extrusion ratio of 1.1 and ram speed of 1 mm/min.

From Figure 14c, it is understood that UTS is maximum at extrusion ratio of 1.1 and %SiC of 0%.

From Figures. 14a to 14c, it is clear that for maximum hardness the optimal input values, extrusion ratio of 1.4,

die included angle of 20°, ram speed of 3 mm/min and %SiC of 0.4%.

195 236

190 232

UTS(MPa)

180 224

18 2.5

16 2.0

14 Include A ngle(Degree) 1.1 1.5 Ram speed(mm/min

1.1 1.2 1.2 1.3

1.3 1.4 12 1.4 1.5 1.0

1.5

Extrusion ratio Extrusion ratio

Figure 14a: Surface Plot for UTS Figure 14b: Surface Plot for UTS

(Extrusion Ratio Vs Included Angle) (Extrusion Ratio Vs Ram Speed)

Impact Factor (JCC): 7.6197 SCOPUS Indexed Journal NAAS Rating: 3.11

Optimizing Process Parameters of Nano SiC Reinforced AA6061 249

Cold Extrusion using Response Surface Method

250

225

UTS(MPa) 200

175

0.4

150 0.3

0.2 % Sic

1.1 0.1

1.2 1.3 0.0

1.4 1.5

Extrusion ratio

(Extrusion Ratio Vs %Sic)

Surface Plots for Surface Finish

From Figure 15a, it is understood that surface roughness is minimum at extrusion ratio of 1.1 and included angle

of 12°.

From Figure 15b, it is understood that surface roughness is minimum at extrusion ratio of 1.1 and ram speed of 3

mm/min.

From Figure 15c, it is understood that surface roughness is minimum at extrusion ratio of 1.1 and %SiC of 0.4%.

From Figures 15a to 15c, it is clear that for maximum hardness the optimal input values, extrusion ratio of 1.4, die

included angle of 20°, ram speed of 3 mm/min and %SiC of 0.4%.

Surface Plot of Surface Roughness (Microns) Surface Plot of Surface Roughness (Microns)

0 .2 8 8 0 .3 2

0 .2 8 0 0 .3 0

Surface Roughness(Microns) Surface Roughness(Microns)

0 .2 7 2 0 .2 8

0 .2 6 4 0 .2 6

20 3 .0

18 0 .2 4 2 .5

0 .2 5 6 2 .0

16

14 Include A ngle(Degr ee) 1 .5 Ram speed( mm/min

1 .1 1 .2 1 .1 1 .2

1 .3 1 .4 12 1 .3 1 .4 1 .0

1 .5 1 .5

Extr usion r atio Extr usion r atio

Figure 15a: Surface Plot For Surface Finish Figure 15b: Surface Plot For Surface Finish

(Extrusion Ratio Vs Included Angle) (Extrusion Ratio Vs Ram Speed)

250 A. Vijay Kumar, Ch. Ratnam & V. V. S. Kesava Rao

0 .3 3

0 .3 0

Surface Roughness(Microns)

0 .2 7

0 .2 4

0 .4

0 .2 1 0 .3

0 .2 % Sic

1 .1 0 .1

1 .2 1 .3 0 .0

1 .4 1 .5

Extr usion r atio

(Extrusion Ratio Vs %SiC)

1 Extrusio Included Ram Spee %SiC

Hi 1.560 20.0 3.0 0.40

D Cur [1.040] [12.0] [2.4499] [0.0004]

0.98850 Lo 1.040 12.0 1.0 0.0

Force re

Minimum

y = 180.3126

d = 0.98263

Hardness

Maximum

y = 122.3478

d = 1.0000

UTS(Kilo

Maximum

y = 185.3196

d = 0.97165

Surface

Minimum

y = 0.2312

d = 1.0000

From Figure-16, it is understood that the optimal input parameters combination of Extrusion ration 1.040,

Included angle 12°, Ram speed 2.4499 mm/minute, %SiC 0.0004% the output responses obtained are Force required

180.3126 N, Hardness 122.3478 , UTS 185.3196 MPa and surface finish of 0.2312 microns.

CONCLUSIONS

• AA6061 nanocomposites are fabricated with ultrasonic assisted cavitation by reinforcing various weight

percentages (0.1wt%, 0.2wt%,0.3wt%,0.4wt%,0.5wt%) of SiC nano particles.

• The specimens are extruded at different combinations of input parameters namely extrusion ratio, die angle, ram

speed and %SiC. Output responses like Extrusion force required, hardness, tensile strength and surface finish are

computed.

• Design of Experiments is adopted and Response Surface Method is used in designing the experiments. 31

experiments are performed using Central Composite Design (CCD).

Impact Factor (JCC): 7.6197 SCOPUS Indexed Journal NAAS Rating: 3.11

Optimizing Process Parameters of Nano SiC Reinforced AA6061 251

Cold Extrusion using Response Surface Method

• Empirical Equations are developed for the output responses by considering second order polynomial equation at

95% confidence level.

• ANOVA analysis was carried out and Fishers test was performed.

• Main plots are drawn for each output response, it is understood that

• Extrusion Force and billet hardness increases with increase in extrusion ratio, die angle, ram speed and % SiC.

• Tensile strength increases with extrusion ratio, ram speed and % SiC. Whereas it decreases with Die Included

Angle., this is due to ductile nature of the workpiece.

• Surface roughness increase with increase in extrusion ration and % SiC. Whereas it decrease with increase in Ram

speed and included angle due to low stress and smaller contact area.

• Contour plots are drawn to identify the most influencing input parameter on output response. For extrusion force,

Hardness, Tensile strength and surface roughness, extrusion ratio is the most dominating input parameter,

followed by ram speed,%SiC and included angle.

• Surface plots are drawn to identify the optimalvalues and the following observations are made:

• From Figure’s. 12a to 12c, it is clear that for minimum extrusion force the optimal input values, extrusion ratio of

1.1, die included angle of 12°, ram speed of 1 mm/min and %SiC of 0.4 %.

• From Figures. 13a to 13c, it is clear that for maximum hardness the optimal input values, extrusion ratio of 1.4,

die included angle of 20°, ram speed of 3 mm/min and %SiC of 0.4%.

• From Figures. 14a to 14c, it is clear that for maximum hardness the optimal input values, extrusion ratio of 1.4,

die included angle of 20°, ram speed of 3 mm/min and %SiC of 0.4%.

• From Figures. 15a to 15c, it is clear that for maximum hardness the optimal input values, extrusion ratio of 1.4,

die included angle of 20°, ram speed of 3 mm/min and %SiC of 0.4%.

• From response optimizer, it is understood that optimal input parameters combination of Extrusion ratio 1.040,

Included angle 12°, Ram speed 2.4499mm/minute, %SiC 0.0004% the output responses obtained are Extrusion

force 180.3126KN, Hardness 122.3478, UTS 185.3196 MPa and surface roughness of 0.2312 microns.

REFERENCES

1. Cunsheng Zhang, Guoqun Zhao, Hao Chen, Yanjin Guan, and Hengkui Li, Optimization of an Aluminium Alloy Extrusion

Process based on Taguchi’s Method with S/N Analysis, International Journal of Manufacturing Technology, 60, 2012, pp.589-

599.

2. Abdul Kareem, Abdul-Jawwad and Adnan Bashir, A Comprehensive Model for Predicting Profile Exit Temperature of

Industrially Extruded 6063 Aluminum Alloy, Journal of materials and manufacturing processes, 96, 2011, pp.193-201.

3. F. Fereshteh-Saniee, N. Fakhar and M. Karimi, Experimental, Analytical, and Numerical Studies on the Forward Extrusion

Process, Journal of materials and manufacturing processes, 28, 2013, pp.265-270.

4. Y. Yong, L. Jie, L. Xiaochun, study on bulk aluminium matrix nano composite fabricated by ultrasonic dispersion of nano sized

SiC particles in molten aluminum alloy” Material Science and engineering A380, 2004, pp.378-383.

252 A. Vijay Kumar, Ch. Ratnam & V. V. S. Kesava Rao

5. K Geetha Lakshmi and K Srinivasan, Finite element analysis of open die extrusion of Al 5Zn – 1 Mg alloy, Engineering

Modelling 22(1-4), 2009, pp.81-88.

6. Kondapalli Siva Prasad, Ch. Srinivasa Rao, D. Nageswara Rao, Optimization of fusion zone grain size, hardness and ultimate

tensile strength of pulsed current micro plasma arc welded Inconel 625 sheets using genetic algorithm, International Journal

of Advanced Manufacturing Technology (Springer), Volume.85, Issue 8-12, 2016, pp.2287-2295.

7. Kondapalli Siva Prasad, Ch. Srinivasa Rao, D. Nageswara Rao, Application of Design of Experiments to Plasma Arc

Welding: A Review, Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering, Volume 35, No.1, 2012, pp.75-

81.

8. Kondapalli Siva Prasad, Ch. Srinivasa Rao, D. Nageswara Rao, Review on application of Response Surface Method based

Design of Experiments to Welding processes, Journal of Manufacturing Science & Production (De Gruyter), Volume12, Issue

1, 2012, pp.17-24.

9. C Ratnam, KA Vikram, BS Ben, BSN Murthy-Process monitoring and effects of process parameters on responses in Turn-

Milling operations based on SN ratio and ANOVAMeasurement 94, 221-232

10. ED Francis, NE Prasad, D MILAC-nbn, C Ratnam, PS Kumar, VV Kumar-Synthesis of nano alumina reinforced magnesium-

alloy composites, Synthesis 27

Impact Factor (JCC): 7.6197 SCOPUS Indexed Journal NAAS Rating: 3.11

- quizz 5Uploaded byBibliophilioManiac
- Multiple Regression ReviewUploaded byakirank1
- SPSS[module 2_instructor_Aug2016].pdfUploaded byAndy Tan WX
- The Role of Personality Traits in the Choice and Use of the Compensation Category of English Language Learning StrategiesUploaded byThe Annual International Conference on Languages, Linguistics, Translation and Literature
- TestBUploaded byVincent Casem
- 25 Factors Influencing the Students ChoiUploaded byLeslie Ann Daganio
- HW2.docUploaded byRuth Limbo
- Linear Regression ModelUploaded byJesús Yepez
- 2013Uploaded byrusug
- multiple regressionUploaded byarmailgm
- Final Review SolnsUploaded byMorgan Sanchez
- Projek Akhir Semester Agust 2018Uploaded bykristina sipayung
- STATS 250 NotesUploaded byZelin Wang
- journal-14-2012Uploaded byRita Farida
- فصل 10Uploaded byOmid
- Tute Exercise 11 Solutions1Uploaded byTushar Mehta
- Classnotes2-ANOVATableUploaded byhammoudeh13
- metronidazol plasmaUploaded byHenry Carter
- Chapter 09 W12 L1 Multiple Regression Analysis 2015 UTP C10.pdfUploaded byJesse Oh
- AnovaUploaded bysitinurhaniza
- Rss Grad Diploma As2 2004Uploaded byQuame Enam Kunu
- 5.OptimizationUploaded byHenry Lopez
- Production of InulinasaUploaded byJudi Pariona Cahuana
- Job Involvement and Job Satisfaction- An Empirical InvestigationUploaded byarcherselevators
- 17. LAMPIRAN.docxUploaded byKojiro Fuuma
- Usda Kristina Tassariya - 105040101111010 - Output Lpm Dan LogitUploaded byTassariya
- 4 cheps.docxUploaded byNagireddy Kalluri
- final ya rab (1)Uploaded byMega Pop Locker
- Improving actuarial reserves analysis through claim-level predictive analyticsUploaded bymatty_yomo
- Assignment IV ProbabilityUploaded bykamaranj

- 22IJASRJUN201922Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 6.IJHRMRJUN20196Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 4IJBMRJUN20194Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 182.IJMPERDJUN2019182Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 181.IJMPERDJUN2019181Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 180.IJMPERDJUN2019180Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 178.IJMPERDJUN2019178Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 177.IJMPERDJUN2019177Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 175.IJMPERDJUN2019175Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 174.IJMPERDJUN2019174Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 173.IJMPERDJUN2019173Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 172.IJMPERDJUN2019172Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 171.IJMPERDJUN2019171Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 170.IJMPERDJUN2019170Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 169.IJMPERDJUN2019169Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 168.IJMPERDJUN2019168Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 166.IJMPERDJUN2019166Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 165.IJMPERDJUN2019165Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 164.IJMPERDJUN2019164Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 163.IJMPERDJUN2019163Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 160.IJMPERDJUN2019160Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 159.IJMPERDJUN2019159Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 158.IJMPERDJUN2019158Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 157.IJMPERDJUN2019157Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 156.IJMPERDJUN2019156Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 155.IJMPERDJUN2019155Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 154.IJMPERDJUN2019154Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 153.IJMPERDJUN2019153Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 152.IJMPERDJUN2019152Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 151.IJMPERDJUN2019151Uploaded byTJPRC Publications

- Module 1- IntroductionUploaded byFidhez Tan
- Watertank GSUploaded byVedha Nayaghi
- 69243318 Solved Problems in ThermodynamicsUploaded byfarshidian
- Machine DesignUploaded byCharles Nunez
- Black Oil DefinitionsUploaded bymanish.7417
- BS EN 12201-3-2003Uploaded byarvint_1999
- METHOD OF TESTS FOR MECHANICAL AND WELDEDUploaded byuhu_plus6482
- 9.3 Hess’s Law(1)Uploaded byHaspreet Gill
- Duplex Stainless Steel Welding - Best PracticesUploaded byjosemiguelzu
- Chap14prac.pdfUploaded bygermangsilva
- POZZOLITH 80Uploaded byDoby Yuniardi
- Ch07_Lecture - Periodic Table (Edited)Uploaded byElijah Punzalan
- Introduction to Impression MaterialsUploaded byMuhammad Anshar Shaccu
- Herrero & Sons CatalogUploaded byJose Castellon
- Qualities of ConcreteUploaded bysui1981
- Optimization of Support System for Desilting Chambers of NJPC using Discontinuum ModelingUploaded byR. Venugopala Rao
- Compact Sections Ratio Check.pdfUploaded byjtai1983
- DIN 30670 2012 .pdf.pdfUploaded byOMAR FREITES
- ViscosityUploaded bygood.lil.kid
- Ball ValveUploaded byhussainfaizal
- NAIMA GUIDEUploaded byJebús Eduardo Meneses
- Design for RC Flat SlabsUploaded byAil Aafaaq
- Hoffman ThesisUploaded byAnimesh Sen
- Suntech Multi 280WUploaded byAlok Chaudhary
- Nanophysics 1Uploaded byApu
- Flexural Study on Slab Specimens of Modified Concrete using Light Weight Silica Fume Aggregate, Sintered Fly-ash Aggregate and Penta Blended Cement with Pozzolanic and Nano MaterialsUploaded byIJRASETPublications
- Petroleum OccurrenceUploaded byMicaiah Das
- Boiler InstallationUploaded byJessie Mitchell
- Cyanide DetoxificationUploaded byEdwar Villavicencio Jaimes
- Bruno, S., Decanini, L., Mollaioli, F., (2000). Seismic Performance of Pre-code Reinforced Concrete BuildingsUploaded byEmanueleFreddoMastrangelo