See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/328011864

Influence of powder-mixed dielectric on MRR and TWR in EDM process

Conference Paper  in  AIP Conference Proceedings · September 2018

DOI: 10.1063/1.5058258

CITATION READS
1 49

5 authors, including:

Vishal N. Sulakhe Nitin Seth

Sandip Institute Of Technology & Research Center Indian Institute of Foreign Trade
1 PUBLICATION   1 CITATION    59 PUBLICATIONS   1,628 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Pravin O. Sharma
The LNM Institute of Information Technology
2 PUBLICATIONS   3 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Lean in construction, engineer to order and high mix low volume projects View project

Product Visibility View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Pravin O. Sharma on 02 July 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Influence of powder-mixed dielectric on MRR and TWR in EDM process
Vishal N. Sulakhe, Rajendra Dalu, Nitin Seth, Pravin Sharma, and Neha Sanghai

Citation: AIP Conference Proceedings 2018, 020021 (2018); doi: 10.1063/1.5058258

View online: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5058258
View Table of Contents: http://aip.scitation.org/toc/apc/2018/1
Published by the American Institute of Physics

Articles you may be interested in

A review on heat transfer enhancement with turbulators
AIP Conference Proceedings 2018, 020007 (2018); 10.1063/1.5058244

Preface: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Mechanical & Materials Science Engineering:
Innovation and Research-2018 (ICMMSE:IR 2018)
AIP Conference Proceedings 2018, 010001 (2018); 10.1063/1.5058237

An experimental study of contemporary material in brake linings

AIP Conference Proceedings 2018, 020004 (2018); 10.1063/1.5058241

Analysis of different heat treated materials for fatigue failure

AIP Conference Proceedings 2018, 020020 (2018); 10.1063/1.5058257

Technical overview on tool coatings

AIP Conference Proceedings 2018, 020019 (2018); 10.1063/1.5058256

QFD for sustainability and improved product (spring) design

AIP Conference Proceedings 2018, 020014 (2018); 10.1063/1.5058251
 Influence of powder-mixed dielectric on MRR and TWR in
EDM process
Vishal N. Sulakhe1a), Rajendra Dalu2), Nitin Seth3), Pravin Sharma4), Neha
Sanghai5)
1)
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Sandip Institute of Technology and Research Centre, Nashik 422213, Maharashtra-India
2)
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Government College of Engineering, Amravati 444604, Maharashtra-India
3)
Indian Institute of Foreign Trade, New Delhi 110016, India
4)
Department of Mechanical-Mechatronics Engineering,
LNM Institute of Information Technology, Jaipur 302031, India
5)
Department of Electrical Engineering,
K. K. Wagh Institute of Engineering Education & Research, Nashik 422003, Maharashtra-India
a)
Corresponding author: vishal.sulakhe1989@gmail.com

Abstract: Electrical Discharge Machining (EDM) is a non-conventional machining process, which is popular to make
dies and moulds in manufacturing industry. This paper presents the machining work of powder mixed EDM on HcHcr
D2 tool steel, which produces better results than conventional process. MMC electrodes are widely used in the industry
therefore attempt has been made to see the effect of Al SiC composite in PMEDM. Nickel and chromium powders were
used as additives in dielectric fluid. Pulse on time, current, voltage and duty cycle of EDM were chosen as design
variables to see the effect on response factors in terms of Material Removal Rate (MRR) and Tool Wear Rate (TWR).
Full factorial design and ANOVA has been used to plan and analyse the experiment. The most important variables
affecting selected response measures are identified and effects of additive variations have been observed. Result shows
the positive influence of the Nickel and Chromium powders for the improvement of material removal rate and tool were
rate. The parametric optimization’s results from this study will be useful for EDM industry to select appropriate design
parameters and levels.

INTRODUCTION
EDM is a non-conventional machining process, mainly used for hardened material based on removing material with
series of repetitive electrical sparks by electrical pulse generator at a very short interval of time between electrode
and work piece. When both are submerged into the dielectric fluid. Dielectric fluid plays an important role of
insulator & helps to control the arc discharge. Flushing system uses dielectric fluid to flush the debris from work
gap. This non-traditional technique widely used to manufacture moulds and dies of harder materials for automotive,
aerospace and surgical industry [1-5]. Wong et al. coined the term PMD-EDM (powder mixed EDM) by using semi
conductive particles in the dielectric medium [6]. This new technique is having prominent future by improving
machining rate and surface finish by adding semi conductive solid particles in the dielectric medium. This particles
improves the dielectric fluid’s characteristics of breakdown and increases the spark gap [7]. Under the sparking area
powder particles comes closer to form a chain like structure that helps to bridge discharge gap between electrodes.
Uniform flushing removes debris from enlarge spark gap. Therefore, process becomes stable and improves the
machining rate and surface finish [8-10]. EDM process is slow and consumes lot of time. Research is going on to
improve the machining rate of EDM. The several published papers on PMEDM tried graphite, aluminium, nickel,
silicon, silicon carbide and chromium semi conductive powders in dielectric mediums [10-15]. Here attempt has
been made to see the effect PMEDM on MRR and TWR of HcHcr D2 tool steel with Al SiC MMC electrode.

Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Mechanical and Materials Science Engineering
AIP Conf. Proc. 2018, 020021-1–020021-9; https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5058258
Published by AIP Publishing. 978-0-7354-1736-6/$30.00

020021-1
 EXPERIMENT SET-UP
This section includes a brief description of the equipment’s and materials that are used to carry out the EDM
experiment. It also contains the selected design factors and response parameter and details of experimentation for
this study.
Equipment’s used in the Experiment
Electronica Electra puls S-50 Z axis Numerical Control machine, India has been used for the experiment on HcHcr
D2 tool steel. FIGURE 1 shows the photograph of this equipment. It has equipped with ‘EZ Guru’, a simple 4 step
smart ZNC programming. Also full function hand held remote control and gives higher MRR due to the equi-energy
pulse discharge. In addition to that adequate flushing have been used in the work gap to remove debris. To calculate
the response parameters, weighing machine having least count 0.001 gm has been used.

FIGURE 1. Electronica Electra puls S-50 ZNC machine (India)

Materials Used In the Experiment

The HcHcr D2 tool steel used as a work piece (w/p) material having air hardening high carbon, high chromium with
the sample size of 120 x 100 x 6 mm. High chromium percentage improves the corrosion resisting properties and
used for long run tooling application, where resistant is important such as forming dies and thread rolling dies. [16].
The selected electrode Aluminium Silicon Carbide (AlSiC) MMC was brought from N. B. enterprises, Bilaspur,
India with a size of 60 x 10 x 10 mm. This composite contains 75 % volume of Aluminium Alloy and 25 % volume
of Silicon Carbide. The thermal conductivity of composite has recorded 150 w/mk. The experiment has been
performed for the 2 mm depth of cut on HcHcr D2 tool steel. Conventional grade EDM oil is used as working fluid.
A 4 g/lit metal powder of chromium, nickel and mixture of nickel-chromium were suspended in CGO for PMEDM
to see the effect of PMEDM on MRR and TWR.

Design and Response Factors

In EDM there are various factors who play vital role in machining process. This design factors are classified in to
two types; Electrical factors and Non- Electrical factors. Both factors are having their significant role on response
parameters [17]. In the present study four electrical design factors are selected namely, pulse on time (Ton), current
(I), voltage (V) and duty cycle (δ). Duty cycle can be calculated with the ratio of pulse on time to total time
[Ton/(TON+TOff)] for one cycle perform of spark.

ௐ௘௔௥௪௘௜௚௛௧௢௙ௐ௢௥௞௣௜௘௖௘ሺ௚ሻ௫ଵ଴଴଴
‫ܴܴܯ‬ሺ݉݉ଷ Ȁ݉݅݊ሻ ൌ  ೒ (1)
஽௘௡௦௜௧௬ቀ ቁ௫்௜௠௘௢௙ெ௔௖௛௜௡௜௡௚
೎೘య

ௐ௘௔௥௪௘௜௚௛௧௢௙்௢௢௟ሺ௚ሻ௫ଵ଴଴଴
ܹܴܶሺ݉݉ଷ Ȁ݉݅݊ሻ  ൌ (2)
஽௘௡௦௜௧௬ሺ௚Ȁ௖௠య ሻ௫்௜௠௘௢௙ெ௔௖௛௜௡௜௡௚
This ZNC provides a scale starting from unit 1-10, which indicates percentage ratio of duty cycle therefore scale has
been preferred. In EDM process, machining rate and tool wear are the most crucial factors, therefore Material

020021-2
Removal Rate and Tool Wear Rate are selected as a response parameters. MRR has been defined as the weight
difference of the work piece before and after machining (01).Similarly, TWR has been defined as the ratio of wear
weight of the electrode to machining time (02) [18].

DESIGN OF EXPERIMENT (DOE)

DOE is a series of experiment tests where intentional changes are made in the design factors of the process, so that
change in output responses can be identified and recorded for further study [19, 20]. Factorial designs allows the
simultaneous study of several factors and their effect on a process.

TABLE 1. Design factors and their levels

Design Level
Sr. Unit Ranges
Factors -1 0 1
1 Ton μs 50-100 50 75 100
2 Current amp 16-Dec 12 14 16
3 Voltage volt 40-60 kkjjhnhn40 50 60
4 Duty cycle Scale 7-9 7 8 9

Number of Factor = 04, Levels = 02, 24 = 16, Center point = 1,

No. of readings = 16+1 = 17, No. of sets = 4
Total experimental readings = 17 x 4 = 68

A full factorial design of experiment with four factors and two levels (2 4) with centre point has been employed.
Based on previous studies, identified gaps and machine capacity all design factors and levels are selected. In the
present studyMinitab-2017 statistical software has been used for all designs, plots and analysis. TABLE 1
summarized the design factors and there levels. TABLE 3 shows the design matrix result for the performance
parameters.

TABLE 2. ANOVA test for MRR

Source DF Adj SS Adj MS F-Value P-Value
Model 10 328.477 32.848 294.500 0.000
Ton 1 13.029 13.029 116.810 0.000
Current 1 169.027 169.027 1515.430 0.000
Voltage 1 95.932 95.932 860.080 0.000
Duty Cycle 1 50.363 50.363 451.530 0.000
Ton*Current 1 0.011 0.011 0.100 0.753
Ton*Voltage 1 0.041 0.041 0.370 0.545
Ton*Duty cycle 1 0.029 0.029 0.260 0.614
Current*Voltage 1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.966
Current*Duty cycle 1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.954
Voltage*Duty cycle 1 0.045 0.045 0.400 0.528
Error 57 6.358 0.112
Total 67 334.835
R- R-
Model Summary S R-sq
sq(adj) sq(pred)
0.33197 98.13% 97.77% 97.28%

020021-3
 TABLE 3. DOE matrix with MRR and TWR results
Response Response
Process Parameters Process Parameters
parameters parameters
Run (Ranges) Run (Ranges)
(mm3/min) (mm3/min)
order order
Dielectric Medium: Commercial grade oil Dielectric Medium: CGO with Chromium
(CGO) powder(4 gm/lit)
Ton I V δ MRR TWR Ton I V δ MRR TWR
1 100 12 60 7 8.182 4.220 35 100 12 60 7 8.597 4.365
2 100 12 60 9 9.766 6.809 36 100 12 60 9 10.091 6.348
3 100 16 60 7 11.416 6.844 37 100 16 60 7 11.714 6.299
4 100 16 60 9 13.000 8.014 38 100 16 60 9 13.416 8.156
5 50 12 60 7 7.321 4.078 39 50 12 60 7 7.442 4.291
6 50 12 60 9 8.951 5.603 40 50 12 60 9 9.143 5.461
7 50 16 60 7 10.455 7.021 41 50 16 60 7 10.766 6.773
8 50 16 60 9 12.039 7.533 42 50 16 60 9 12.468 7.128
9 75 14 50 8 8.909 5.213 43 75 14 50 8 9.208 5.284
10 100 12 40 7 5.768 3.594 44 100 12 40 7 5.948 3.404
11 100 12 40 9 7.364 5.192 45 100 12 40 9 7.649 4.823
12 100 16 40 7 9.013 5.982 46 100 16 40 7 9.273 5.780
13 100 16 40 9 10.597 6.348 47 100 16 40 9 10.974 6.099
14 50 12 40 7 4.949 2.872 48 50 12 40 7 5.000 3.121
15 50 12 40 9 6.703 3.865 49 50 12 40 9 7.156 3.865
16 50 16 40 9 9.836 5.248 50 50 16 40 9 10.026 5.106
17 50 16 40 7 8.052 5.603 51 50 16 40 7 8.325 5.284

Run Dielectric Medium: CGO with Run Dielectric Medium: CGO with Ni + Cr powder
Orde Nickel powder (4 gm/lit) Orde (4 gm/lit)
r Ton I V δ MRR TWR r Ton I V δ MRR TWR
18 100 12 60 7 8.455 4.255 52 100 12 60 7 8.958 4.113
19 100 12 60 9 10.286 6.348 53 100 12 60 9 10.680 6.277
20 100 16 60 7 11.636 6.560 54 100 16 60 7 12.390 6.180
21 100 16 60 9 13.468 8.085 55 100 16 60 9 14.208 7.801
22 50 12 60 7 7.571 4.078 56 50 12 60 7 8.026 4.007
23 50 12 60 9 9.416 5.816 57 50 12 60 9 9.722 5.952
24 50 16 60 7 10.753 6.950 58 50 16 60 7 11.286 6.631
25 50 16 60 9 12.584 7.234 59 50 16 60 9 13.169 7.057
26 75 14 50 8 9.286 5.567 60 75 14 50 8 9.670 5.142
27 100 12 40 7 5.987 3.475 61 100 12 40 7 6.323 3.398
28 100 12 40 9 7.818 5.000 62 100 12 40 9 8.181 4.787
29 100 16 40 7 9.247 5.887 63 100 16 40 7 9.605 5.496
30 100 16 40 9 11.000 6.277 64 100 16 40 9 11.623 5.957
31 50 12 40 7 5.104 3.050 65 50 12 40 7 5.359 2.908
32 50 12 40 9 6.935 3.723 66 50 12 40 9 7.340 3.652
33 50 16 40 9 10.208 5.142 67 50 16 40 9 10.765 4.894
34 50 16 40 7 8.286 5.284 68 50 16 40 7 8.701 5.106

ANALYSIS OF MRR
In order to investigate the effect of design factors on response factors, Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) has been
performed using Minitab 2017. To analyse the experimental data, model accuracy play important and vital role. It
includes checking of significance of the regression model and their coefficients.
First order model was preferred for MRR (TABLE 2), but due to variance analysis for the proposed curvature test it
was rejected. The second order model explains 98.23% of the variation in the MRR. The adjusted R is 97.80% and
R (pred) is 97.32 %, which indicates that the model explains 97.32% of the variation when you use it for prediction.
The regression equation for MRR has been given below.

020021-4
MRR (mm3/min) = -17.28 + 0.0164 Ton + 0.767 I + 0.1352 Voltage + 1.066 δ + 0.000296 Ton*I
+ 0.000095 Ton*Voltage - 0.00091 Ton*δ + 0.00017 I*Voltage + 0.0020 I*δ - 0.00281 Voltage*δ (3)

The significant parameters are identified for MRR of D2 tool steel machined by AlSiC composite. The model has
been considered as a statistically significant When obtained p values of design factors are lower than 0.05 (i.e. 95 %
confident level). This second order model shows that, all the design parameters are significant except all
interactions. (p value > 0.05). Increase in value of current and voltage, maximizes MRR, therefore these are the most
influencing parameters. Also, it can be observed that current and voltage are having higher F values 1515.43 and
860.08 with the % contribution 51.47 % and 29.21 % respectively. The second order model for material removal
rate suited very well with the experimental data.
Main effects plot (FIGURE 2) clearly indicates that MRR increases with the increase in discharge current.
This was an expected tendency, a priory as higher values of current leads to increase the intensity of spark.
Therefore increase in discharge energy, increases the rate of evaporation and melting of targeted area of work piece.
It can be seen that MRR increases slowly with the -1 level of Ton but at +1 level of Ton, it increases rapidly. Also it
has been observed that an increase in the current and voltage leads to increase the machining rate.

3
FIGURE 2. Main Effects plot for MRR (mm /min)

FIGURE 3. Comparison of MRR with varying dielectric medium (4 sets of 17 each)

FIGURE 3 shows the comparison between MRR of HcHcr D2 tool steel with four dielectric mediums. It was
observed that with addition of 4 g/l of metal powder lowered the breakdown voltage and improves the spark
initiation. Therefore, MRR has been increased with addition of either nickel or chromium metal powder in the
dielectric fluid. It was reported from the Figure 3 that as an additive, Nickel powder shows prominent and positive
results in comparison with chromium powder. Although, mixture of Nickel+Chromium (Ni+Cr) powder into
dielectric fluid appears to be the best to maximise the MRR. The experiment results (Table 2) shows that the more
MRR were achieved, when mixture of Nickel & Chromium (Ni+Cr) powders were suspended in the CGO. The
lowest values of MRR were obtained when CGO used as working fluid.

020021-5
 ANALYSIS OF TOOL WEAR RATE (TWR)
An EDM electrode should be capable of resisting self-erosion due to continuous impingement of electrons also
removes maximum amount of material from the work piece. Tool wear occurs mainly due to temperature variation,
continuous vibrations and imperfections in the microstructure of electrode material [21]. ANOVA test was
performed to examine the behaviour of design factors on quality characteristics. A second order model were
proposed for the response factor TWR (TABLE 4), which gives the values of 0.9842 and 0.9814 for the R squared
statistics and adjusted R squared statistics respectively. Interactions of Ton & current is non-significant whereas all
the remaining process parameters and their interactions are statistically significant. Moreover the equation for this
model is shown below.
Regression equation of TWR,
TWR (mm3/min) = -11.49 - 0.0159 Ton + 1.387 I - 0.0952 Voltage + 0.642 δ - 0.000716 Ton*I -
0.000482 Ton*Voltage + 0.007652 Ton*δ + 0.00272 I*Voltage - 0.1241 I*δ + 0.02065 Voltage*δ (4)

TABLE 4. ANOVA test for TWR

Source DF Adj SS Adj MS F-Value P-Value
Model 10 123.323 12.332 354.530 0.000
Ton 1 4.972 4.972 143.140 0.000
Current 1 58.227 58.227 1673.880 0.000
Voltage 1 3.204 33.204 954.530 0.000
Duty Cycle 1 16.689 16.689 479.770 0.000
Ton*Current 1 0.086 0.086 2.460 0.122
Ton*Voltage 1 0.941 0.941 27.060 0.000
Ton*Duty cycle 1 2.340 2.340 67.260 0.000
Current*Voltage 1 0.191 0.191 5.480 0.023
Current*Duty cycle 1 3.923 3.923 112.780 0.000
Voltage*Duty cycle 1 2.749 2.749 79.030 0.000
Error 57 1.983 0.035
Total 67 125.306
Model Summary S R-sq R-sq(adj) R-sq(pred)
0.187 98.42% 98.14% 97.75%

The main effect plots reveals (FIGURE 4) that current (I) is the most significant parameter at 95% confidence level.
It also indicates that TWR increases linearly with current (I) at all levels. Voltage provides the strength to energize
the metal particles between electrode tool and work piece. The fast and relevant sparking from tool within a work
gap causes tool erosion that leads to increase in TWR. Pulse on time and duty cycle are having negligence effect on
tool wear rate. FIGURE 5 shows the comparison of TWR with different dielectric mediums. In this PMEDM
process additive semi-conductive nickel and chromium powder resulted in better TWR in comparison with
conventional EDM. This happens due to the powder particles which increases the spark gap between work piece and
electrode tool as mentioned earlier. When these metal powders are used, the polishing time has been greater effect
on decreasing the tool wear rate. Normally, when MRR increases it also increases tool wear rate because of straight
contact between tool and work piece [14]. Many research papers reported that PMEDM process improves surface
roughness of work piece [22]. Generally it observed that as MRR increases TWR also increases and vice-versa.
PMEDM helps to prevent tool wear but it totally depends on levels of discharge current, applied voltage and tool’s
prevention of self-erosion.

020021-6
 FIGURE 4. Main Effects Plot for TWR (mm3/min)

FIGURE 5. Comparison of TWR with varying dielectric medium (4 sets of 17 each)

EXPERIMENTAL VERIFICATION
Regression analysis investigates and models the relationship between a response and predicted values. Experimental
verification has been required to validate conducted experiments. Predicted values of performance parameters are
calculated with regression equations generated by ANOVA test. It has been observed that, experimental (Expt.) and
predicted (Pred.) values of performance parameters are nearly same with average + 5 % error therefore this model
has validated. FIGURE 6 (a) and FIGURE 6 (b) notice that the errors are normally distributed by observing residuals
are falling on a straight line. This implies that the proposed model is adequate to illustrate the pattern of MRR and
TWR.

(a) (b)
FIGURE 6. Fitted Line Plot for Experimental and Predicted Values of MRR & TWR

020021-7
 PARAMETRIC OPTIMIZATION
Parametric optimization has been introduced to optimize levels of response parameters. PMEDM reduces machining
time that leads to increase MRR, as MRR increases self-erosion of tool also increases. Parametric optimization is the
action of making the best or effective use of design factors to improve the machining performance. Generally,
optimization has an essential step to improve the efficiency or productivity of the machining process [23]. The aim
of the machining process was to maximize the MRR and minimises TWR. Statistical software Minitab 17 suggests
the optimum values for MRR and TWR in all dielectric mediums and relevant levels of design factors. The optimum
values from the optimization are summarised below in TABLE 5.

TABLE 5. Optimal value in design space

Response parameters
Process parameters
Sr. Dielectric Medium (mm3/min)
Ton (I) (V) (δ) MRR TWR
1 CGO 50 14.44 60 7 9.246 5.432
2 CGO with Ni Powder 50 16 40 9 10.173 5.104
3 CGO with Cr Powder 50 16 40 9 10.147 4.922
CGO with (Ni+Cr)
4 50 16 40 9 10.759 5.228
Powder

CONCLUSIONS
On the basis of experimental results and ANOVA test following conclusions are drawn.
Machining the D2 tool steel by adding conductive powder particles in the CGO dielectric has shown improvement in
MRR as well as TWR. The use of Nickel and chromium powders suspended on the dielectric under conventional
EDM conditions enhances the polishing process performance. Experiment revealed that MRR has been increased
either Nickel or Chromium powder used as an additives in conventional EDM. Hence it can be concluded powder-
mixed EDM process improves the MRR. In comparison with conventional dielectric for additives like Nickel
powder, Chromium powder and mixture of Nickel+Chromium powder, MRR has been increased by 3.60 %, 3.10 %
and 8.24 % and TWR has been improved by 1.39 %, 2.61 % and 4.98 % respectively. In particular, for 4 g/lit Ni+Cr
powder concentration appeared to be the best additives to maximise MRR. It also reported that MRR and TWR are
directly proportional to each other.
The analysis of variance revealed that the current (I) and voltage (V) are the most influencing design
factors followed by duty cycle (δ) and pulse on time (Ton). The full factorial design technique with multiple linear
regressions can be successfully applied. An optimum parametric level has been found as suggested by software for
different dielectric fluids.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors would like to express their deep gratitude to Indo Germen Tool Room (IGTR) and Mikronix
Laboratory, Aurangabad, India for providing the laboratory facility. They are also grateful to TEQIPII UGC
program of Mechanical Engineering department of GCOE, Amravati (INDIA).

REFERENCES
1. Li. Li, Y. S. Wong, J. Y. H. Fuh, L. Lu, “EDM performance of TiC/Copper based sintered electrodes”, Materials
and design, 22,669-678 (2001).
2. K. H. Ho, S.T. Newman, “State of the art electrical discharge machining (EDM)”, International journal of
machine tools and manufacture, 43, 1287-1300 (2003).
3. W. S. Zhao, Q. G. Meng, Z. L. Wang, “The application on research on powder-mixed EDM in rough
machining”, Journal of material process technology, 129, 30-33 (2002).
4. Saravanan R. Arunachalam, Sarah E. Galyon Dorman, Richard T. Buckley, N. Aidan Conrad, Scott A. Fawaz,
Effect of electrical discharge machining on corrosion and corrosion fatigue behavior of aluminum alloys,
International Journal of Fatigue, Volume 111, June, Pages 44-53 (2018).
5. V. V. Lyubimov, V. M. Volgin, I. V. Gnidina, M. S. Salomatnikov, Formation of the Workpiece Shape and
Surface Finish During Electrical Discharge Machining, Procedia CIRP, Volume 68, Pages 319-324 (2018).
6. Y. S. Wong, L. c. Lim, I. Rahuman, W. M. Tee, Near mirror finish phenomenon in edm using powder mixed
dielectric, Journal of Materials Processing Technology 79, 30-40 (1998).

020021-8
 7. Y. F Tzeng, C. Y. Lee, “Effect of powder characteristics on electro discharge machining efficiency”,
International journal of advancing manufacturing technology, 17, 586-592 (2001).
8. Y. S. Wong, L. C. Lim, I. Rahiman, W. M. Tee, “Near mirror finish phenomenon in EDM using powder-mixed
dielectric “, International journal of advancing manufacturing technology, 79, 30-40 (1998).
9. Davis J. R., “Metals handbook”, desk edition 2nd USA: ASM International 506 (1998).
10. ASM Handbook properties and selection: Nonferrous alloys and special purpose materials 2. USA: ASM
International, 216 (1990).
11. H. Narumiya, et al., “EDM by powder suspended working fluid”, in: Proceedings of the 9th ISEM, pp. 5–8,
(1989).
12. M.L. Jeswani, “Effects of the addition of graphite powder to kerosene used as the dielectric fluid in electrical
discharge machining”, Wear 70, 133–139 (1981).
13. Y. Uno, A. Okada, Y. Hayashi and Y. Tabuchi, “Surface integrity in EDM of aluminum bronze wit nickel
powder mixed fluid”, J. Jpn. Soc. Elec. Mach. Eng. 32 (70), 24–31 (in Japanese), (1998).
14. H.M. Chow, B.H. Yan, F.Y. Huang and J.C. Hung, “Study of added powder in kerosene for the micro-slit
machining of titanium alloy using electro-discharge machining”, J. Mater. Process. Technol,, 101, 95–103
(2000).
15. Wang, C.H., Lin, Y.C., Yan, B.H., Huang, F.Y., “Effect of characteristics of added powder on electrical
discharge machining”, J. Jpn. Inst. Light Met., 42(12), 2597-2604, (2001).
16. Hadi, Mostafa, and Reza Atefi. "Effect of Minimum Quantity Lubrication with Gamma-Al2O3 Nanoparticles on
Surface Roughness in Milling AISI D3 Steel", Indian Journal of Science and Technology, (2015).
17. R. K. Garg, K. K. Singh, Anish Sachdeva, Vishal S. Sharma, Kuldeep Ojha, Sharnjeet Singh, “Review of
research work in sinking EDM and WEDM on metal matrix composite materials”, International journal of
advancing manufacturing technology, 50, 611-624 (2010).
18. H. K. Kansal et al., “Technology and research developments in powder mixed electric discharge machining.”,
Journal of materials processing technology 184 32-41 (2007).
19. D. C. Montgomery, “Design and analysis of experiments”, 5th edition, Wiley, New York, 2001.
20. C. J. Luis Perez, Surface roughness modeling considering uncertainty measurements, International Journal of
Production Research, 40(10), 2245–2268 (2002).
21. S. Singh et. Al., “Some investigations into the electric discharge machining of hardened tool steel using different
electrode material”, J of material processing technology, 149, 272-277, (2002).
22. K. H. Ho, S T Newman, “State of the art electrical discharge machining”, Int j of machine tool & manufacture,
43, 1287-1300, (2003).
23. P. Prasanna, Tallapragada V. S. S. P. Sashank, Bhavirisetti Manikanta, Pruthvi Aluri,“Optimizing the Process
Parameters of Electrical Discharge Machining on AA7075 - SiC Alloys, Materials Today: Proceedings, Volume
4, Issue 8, Pages 8517-8527, ( 2017).

020021-9
View publication stats