International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET)

Volume 9, Issue 13, December 2018, pp. 1083–1090, Article ID: IJMET_09_13_113
Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/ijmet/issues.asp?JType=IJMET&VType=9&IType=13
ISSN Print: 0976-6340 and ISSN Online: 0976-6359

© IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed

USING TOPSIS METHOD TO OPTIMIZE THE

PROCESS PARAMETERS OF D2 STEEL ON
ELECTRO-DISCHARGE MACHINING
Sunita Singh Naik*
Assistant Professor, Dept. of Mechanical Engg.,VSSUT, Burla

Dr. Jaydev Rana

Professor, Dept. of Mechanical Engg.,VSSUT, Burla

Dr. Prasanta Nanda

Professor & Head, Training & Placement Cell ,VSSUT,Burla
*Corresponding Author-Email-id-naik.sunitasingh@gmail.com

ABSTRACT
There are various hard materials are used in the industry such as nickel-chromium
super alloy, nimonics, composites, ceramics, carbides and tool steels. So machining
on these materials in a very small dimension is a very tough work. So that Electro-
discharge machining process is used. In this process both the electrodes are
electrically conductive materials. This paper describes machining on D2 Steel with
copper electrode. So that the experiment was designed in a orthogonal array and
conduct the experiments in this way. Here input current, pulse on time, pulse off time,
flushing pressure are the input process parameters and Material removal rate, Tool
wear rate, and Surface roughness, percentage of radial overcut, Crack width, Surface
crack density are the opuput parameters. Optimize the process parameters of D2 steel
on EDM process using TOPSIS method. Then ANOVA test can be carried out and get
the most effective parameter. Finally the experimental results were validated by
confirmation tests. Lastly compare the experimental results and theoretical results.
Key words: TOPSIS, orthogonal array, ANOVA
Cite this Article: Sunita Singh Naik, Dr. Jaydev Rana, Dr. Prasanta Nanda, Using
TOPSIS Method to Optimize the Process Parameters of D2 Steel on Electro-Discharge
Machining, International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology 9(13),
2018, pp. 1083–1090.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/issues.asp?JType=IJMET&VType=9&IType=13

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 1083 editor@iaeme.com

 Sunita Singh Naik, Dr. Jaydev Rana, Dr. Prasanta Nanda

1. INTRODUCTION
The very small part, intricate shape, making of small holes of the hard materials like nickel-
chromium super alloy, tool steels, titanium,nimonics, temperature resistant alloys, fiber-
reinforced composites, stellite, ceramics is easily machined in the non-conventional process.
These materials are used in the various industries like automobiles, aerospace. In this process
the tool and workpiece are not directly connected to each other. There is having some distance
. Here the 3 types of energy are used to remove the materials from the workpiece. Electro-
discharge machining is one of the advanced machining process in which the gap about 0.5-
1mm is maintained between the tool and work piece by a servo system. Both tool and work
piece are electrically conducting materials and that are submerged in a dielectric fluid like
EDM 30 oil. This is the set up of EDM machine as shown in fig-1.

Figure 1 Set up of Electric Discharge Machining

In this process the tool and workpiece are connected in a DC power supply and the
electrodes are submerged in the dielectric fluid, the spark is produced and that spark is a
thermal energy which is used to remove the materials from the workpiece.
Sidhant Gupta and etc. [1] state that the pulse on time is more prompting factor than other
input parameters when machining on aluminium tool with the AISI D2 steel for evaluating the
surface roughness. For MRR, input current is more prompting factor and TWR, pulse off time
is more prompting factor. Sanjay kumar Majhi and etc.[2] told that, pulse current and pulse
on time increases the specific energy and MRR. Pulse current affects the surface roughness to
increase. Pulse off current causes the reduction of tool wear and surface roughness.
J.Jeykrishan and etc [3] stated that the significant process parameter is input current followed
by pulse off time , pulse on time on the response MRR. Praveen kumar singh and etc [4] told
that using the copper and brass electrode on D2 steel, the copper gives better MRR than brass
by increasing the current and when we change the gap voltage for both copper and brass,
MRR will decrease. Raman K and etc [5] concluded that the relation of the machining
parameters and the machinability factor when machining tool steel using EDM. It was
concluded that the best performance was given by electrode with the diameter of 20mm at a
current setting 6.5 amp having highest MRR and lowest TWR.Shubham Gupta and etc. [6]
reported the influence of machining parameters i.e, Discharge current, pulse on time, duty
cycle and voltage has been analysed on AISI D2 tool steel as a workpiece.

2. EXPERIMENTAL WORK

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 1084 editor@iaeme.com

 Using TOPSIS Method to Optimize the Process Parameters of D2 Steel on Electro-Discharge
Machining

Here the machining on D2 tool steel with copper electrode having 15mm diameter on Electro-
discharge machining process. Experiments were designed as a orthogonal array and in this
way it was conducted. The entire work can be carried out Electric Discharge Machine model
ECOWIN MIC-432CS CNC EDM. Input current, Pulse on time, Pulse off time, flushing
Pressure are the process parameters and the MRR-Material removal rate, TWR-tool wear rate,
SR-surface roughness, % ROC- Percentage of Radial overcut CW-crackwidth, SCD-Surface
crack density are the output parameters. Table-1 shows the input parameters and their levels
and Table-2 shows the orthogonal array design and the output parameters.

Table 1 Input Parameters and Their Levels

Machine Symbols Unit LEVELS

Parameters 1 2 3
INPUT Ampere 10 20 30
CURRENT(A)
PULSE ON µsec 200 500 1000
TIME (B)
PULSE OFF µsec 100 175 250
TIME (C)
FLUSHING 𝑘 ) 0.15 0.25 0.5
PRESSURE
(D)

Table-2: orthogonal array design and the output parameters:

Input
Curren (µ FP( TWR
Sl no (µs) MRR SR µm %ROC C.W µm SCD µm
t s) )
Amp)
1 10 200 100 0.15 4.4136 0.2465 2.432 1.84 1.5788 0.01486
2 10 500 175 0.25 4.1567 0.175 2.74 2.35 1.6546 0.01588
3 10 1000 250 0.5 3.3244 0.1345 2.87 1.4 1.9327 0.01786
4 20 200 175 0.5 5.221 0.3577 2.64 2.15 1.738 0.011515
5 20 500 250 0.15 8.027 0.608 2.93 1.737 1.8946 0.02434
6 20 1000 100 0.25 14.2859 0.2236 3.54 1.134 1.5079 0.01092
7 30 200 250 0.25 5.5327 0.5361 3.17 1.268 1.7826 0.01067
8 30 500 100 0.5 18.3638 0.3137 3.42 0.735 1.708 0.01784
9 30 1000 175 0.15 18.7795 0.2233 3.672 0.468 1.6982 0.0145

3. TOPSIS OPTIMIZATION METHOD

Topsis is a optimization method in which the process parameters can be optimized and get the
best result among other experiments. This method Technique for Order Preference by
Similarity to an Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) was stated by Hwang Yoon in 1981. It was based on
the principal of positive ideal solution and negative ideal solution. The Positive ideal solution
and negative ideal solution is a hypothetical solution for which all the experimental results
are present between maximum and minimum limit. It gives a solution that is not only closest
to the hypothetically maximum (best) result but also farthest from the hypothetically
minimum (worst) result. The basic thought is to find a solution according to the closeness-
coefficient between the feasible solution and the ideal solution. The steps of this method are
as follows:
Step 1: Development of Normalization the matrix by using the following equation

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 1085 editor@iaeme.com

 Sunita Singh Naik, Dr. Jaydev Rana, Dr. Prasanta Nanda

Where i=1,2,3…………mand j=1,2,3……….n

√∑

(1) 𝑋𝑖𝑗represents 𝑖𝑡hvalue of the 𝑗𝑡hexperimental run, 𝑖𝑗= corresponding normalized value.
Table-3 shows the normalized decision matrix value.
Step 2: Assignment of weight of each response variable such as MRR, TWR, SR and %ROC,
CW, SCD. Here the weightage value of MRR=0.46, TWR=0.25, SR=0.15,
%ROC=0.08, CW=0.04, SCD=0.02
Step 3: Development of weighted normalized decision matrix is obtained by multiplying the
normalized decision matrix with its related weights.
𝑉𝑖𝑗= × 𝑖𝑗 (2)
Where i = 1,2,3…….m and j = 1,2,3……n , Wij= weight of the jth attribute. 𝑉 =weighted
normalized value. Here Table-4 shows the weighted normalized decision matrix value.
Step 4: The positive ideal solution (𝑉+) which is for the best possible value and the negative
ideal solution (𝑉−) worst value of every attribute is calculated from the weighted decision
matrix.
For MRR, the positive ideal solution is the higher value whereas for TWR, SR and
%ROC, CW,SCD are the lower value. Similarly, for negative ideal solution MRR considers
the lower value and for TWR, SR and %ROC, CW, SCD are the higher value.
𝑉 =minimum/maximum (𝑉 𝑉 𝑉 𝑉 )
𝑉 = maximum/minimum (𝑉 𝑉 𝑉 𝑉 )

Step 5: The Separation distance of every solution i.e the positive ideal solution (𝑆+)and the
negative ideal solution (𝑆+) are calculated by following equation. Table-5 shows the positive
and negative ideal solution.

𝑆 =√∑ (𝑉 𝑉 ) (3)

𝑆 =√∑ (𝑉 𝑉 ) (4)

Where, i= 1, 2 , 3 ………m , j= 1, 2 , 3……….n

Step 6: The closeness co-efficient value (CCO) is determined as follows
CCO= (5)
Where 𝑆−= negative ideal solution, 𝑆+= positive ideal solution
Step 7 According to the ascending order of the closeness- coefficient value the CCO result is
ranked. The best combination of parameter is given by the higher CCO value among the
other.
According to the above mentioned the tables are as follows

Table 3 Normalised decision matrix:

SL NO Tij-MRR Tij-TWR Tij-SR Tij-%ROC Tij-CW Tij-SCD

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 1086 editor@iaeme.com

 Using TOPSIS Method to Optimize the Process Parameters of D2 Steel on Electro-Discharge
Machining

1 0.135301 0.235806 0.263828 0.390864 0.304811 0.311303

2 0.127426 0.167408 0.29724 0.499201 0.319445 0.332671
3 0.101911 0.128665 0.311343 0.297396 0.373136 0.37415
4 0.160053 0.342181 0.286392 0.456716 0.335546 0.241228
5 0.246072 0.581622 0.317852 0.368984 0.36578 0.5099
6 0.437942 0.213899 0.384025 0.240891 0.291122 0.228764
7 0.169608 0.512841 0.343887 0.269356 0.344157 0.223526
8 0.562953 0.30009 0.371008 0.156133 0.329755 0.373731
9 0.575696 0.213612 0.398345 0.099415 0.327862 0.303761

Table 4 Weighted normalized decision matrix:

SL
NO vij-MRR vij-TWR vij-SR vij-%ROC vij-CW vij-SCD
1 0.062239 0.058951 0.039574 0.031269 0.012192 0.006226
2 0.058616 0.041852 0.044586 0.039936 0.012778 0.006653
3 0.046879 0.032166 0.046701 0.023792 0.014925 0.007483
4 0.073624 0.085545 0.042959 0.036537 0.013422 0.004825
5 0.113193 0.145406 0.047678 0.029519 0.014631 0.010198
6 0.201453 0.053475 0.057604 0.019271 0.011645 0.004575
7 0.07802 0.12821 0.051583 0.021548 0.013766 0.004471
8 0.258958 0.075023 0.055651 0.012491 0.01319 0.007475
9 0.26482 0.053403 0.059752 0.007953 0.013114 0.006075

Table-5 Positive and Negative ideal solution:

SL NO si+ si- CCO S/N-CCO RANK
1 0.221403 0.038735 0.148901 -16.5421 7
2 0.231281 0.035856 0.134223 -17.4435 8
3 0.246495 0.01793 0.067808 -23.3744 9
4 0.201156 0.066305 0.247906 -12.1142 6
5 0.152464 0.133391 0.466639 -6.62037 4
6 0.113757 0.157482 0.580602 -4.72243 3
7 0.188757 0.102605 0.352157 -9.06529 5
8 0.075951 0.217036 0.740769 -2.60634 1
9 0.097507 0.219912 0.692812 -3.18769 2
AVG=0.381313
Here CCO and Their signal –to-noise ratio can be calculated.The Graph-1 state that how
the experimental number is related with higher the better of CCO. It shows that serial numer
8 has highest value. Then the response table is obtained and it gives the optimum level and
that is shown Table-6. Optimum Level is A3B2C1D1. Fig-2 shows the relation between
average response of TOPSIS and their levels.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 1087 editor@iaeme.com

 Sunita Singh Naik, Dr. Jaydev Rana, Dr. Prasanta Nanda

CCO
0.8
0.7
0.6
C 0.5
C 0.4
O 0.3 CCO
0.2
0.1
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
Experimental number

Graph 1 The experimental number with CCO

Table 6 Average response table For Topsis

LEVEL-1 LEVEL-2 LEVEL-3 MAX-MIN RANK
A 0.116977 0.431716 0.595246 0.478269 1
B 0.249655 0.44721 0.447074 0.197556 2
C 0.490091 0.358314 0.295535 0.194556 3
D 0.436118 0.35566 0.352161 0.083956 4

0.6
AVERAGE RESPONSE OF TOPSIS

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

A1 A2 A3 -- B1 B2 B3 -- C1 C2 C3 -- D1 D2 D3
LEVEL

Figure 2 Average response of TOPSIS and their level

Finally, an ANOVA table is prepared to determine the percentage of contribution of
various input parameters to the overall performance characteristics.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 1088 editor@iaeme.com

 Using TOPSIS Method to Optimize the Process Parameters of D2 Steel on Electro-Discharge
Machining

Table 7 Anova-Analysis Of Variance:

Source of Machining
variance parameter DOF SS MS FO %
A A 2 0.354544 0.177272 27.10374 70.17352
B B 2 0.078003 0.039002 5.963076 15.43883
C C ERROR 2 0.013081 0.006541 1 2.589072
D D 2 0.013534 0.006767 1.03463 2.678732
ERROR ERROR 0 0 0 0
TOTAL TOTAL 8 0.505239 100

4. CONFIRMATION TEST
γ= +( )=0.824725 and it matches with A3B2C1D3-0.740769

Table 8 The value of optimum and initial value.

Optimum INITIAL
experiment experiment
A3B2C1D1- A3B2C1D3-
0.824725 0.740769
MRR 20.1157 18.3638
TWR 0.39657 0.3137
SR 3.53478 3.42
OVERCUT 0.82478 0.735
CW 1.56489 1.708
SCD 0.017425 0.01784
CCO 0.751671 0.740769
S/N-CCO -2.47945 -2.60634

5. CONCLUSIONS
From the experiment, we get the optimum levelA3B2C1D1 and that value is 0.824725 and it
matches with A3B2C1D3=0.740769. The sequence is input current is 30 amp, pulse on time
is 500 µs, pulse off time is 100 µs, flushing pressure is 0.15 𝑘 . The CCO value is
increased in the optimum level and the signal-to-noise ratio is also increased. So this method
is optimized the process parameters significantly. Here the ANOVA table shows that input
current is more significant than other parameters.

REFERENCES
[1] Sidhant Gupta, Dr. S.K.Jain & Gurpinder Singh, Experimental study of MRR, TWR, SR
on AISI D2 Steel using Aluminium Electrode on EDM , Global journal of researches in
Engineering: AMechanical and Mechanics Engineering, Volume 17 Issue, Year 2017.

[2] Sanjay kumar majhi, T.K.Mishra, M.K.Pradhan and Hargovind soni, Effect of machining
parameters of AISI D2 tool steel on EDM, International journal of current Engineering
and technology

[3] J.Jeykrishnan, B. Vijaya Ramnath, A. Jude Felix, C. Rupan Pernesh and S.

Kalaiyarasan,Parameter optimization of Electro-Discharge Machining in AISI D2 Die

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 1089 editor@iaeme.com

 Sunita Singh Naik, Dr. Jaydev Rana, Dr. Prasanta Nanda

Steel using Taguchi Technique, Indian Journal of Science and Technology, Vol 9(43),
DOI:10.17485/ijst/2016/v9i43/101972, November 2016.

[4] Praveen kumar singh, Dinesh kumar Rao, Anshika Gupta, Experimental studies for mrr on
AISI D2 steel using EDM, international journal on emerging technology.

[5] Raman k, Sathiya G.K, saisujith k,mani p, Effect of machining parameters in Electric
discharge machining of D2 tool steel, international journal of science and research.

[6] Shubham Gupta, Harsh Pandey, Saurabh Sen, Experimental Investigation of Machining
Parameters for EDM using D2 tool steel, International Journal of Innovative Science,
Engineering & Technology, Vol.3 Issue 6, june 2016.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 1090 editor@iaeme.com