The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology (2018) 97:1779–1786

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-018-2011-0

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

The optimal cutting times of multipass abrasive water jet cutting

Xiaojin Miao 1 & Zhengrong Qiang 1 & Meiping Wu 1 & Lei Song 1 & Feng Ye 1

Received: 20 December 2017 / Accepted: 4 April 2018 / Published online: 2 May 2018
# Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2018

Abstract
Cutting is one of the most important applications of abrasive water jet. However, there are always some quality defects in the
cross section cut by abrasive water jet. It is found that multipass abrasive water jet cutting can effectively improve the cutting
quality. In this paper, two types of multipass water jet cutting were summarized and redefined clearly first. Then, taking AISI 304
stainless steel as the workpiece, the cross sections after cutting with different cutting times were analyzed and compared with that
after single cutting. The overall roughness and the overall taper of the section were obtained by a reasonable method. Besides, in
order to give consideration to both the cutting quality and the processing time, the concept of quality improvement rate was put
forward. On this basis, with the improvement rate as the index, the optimal cutting times for cutting AISI 304 stainless steel with
multipass abrasive water jet were analyzed from two aspects of surface quality and kerf taper, and the optimal cutting times of
cutting other materials by multipass abrasive water jet can be studied according to the same idea. The study of this paper provides
important reference for the application of multipass abrasive water jet cutting.

Keywords Abrasive water jet . Multipass cutting . Optimal cutting times . Surface quality . Kerf taper

1 Introduction of the work of removing materials is the high-speed particles.

With the rapid development of technology, products are re-
quired to develop towards high precision, high power, and
miniaturization. The materials used are more and more diffi-
cult to process. It is difficult to process these materials with
high precision and flexibility only by traditional processing
technology. High-pressure abrasive water jet is a new process-
ing technology developed on the basis of pure water jet at the
beginning of the 1980s [1]. It is a liquid-solid two-phase jet
formed by a mixture of abrasive and high-pressure water.
Abrasive particles are accelerated by high-pressure water after
the mixture of the abrasive particles and the high-pressure
water. Then, the accelerated particles are ejected from the
nozzle together with the high-pressure water. The high-speed
jet ejected from the nozzle is the so-called abrasive water jet.
High-speed particles have strong energy. The main undertaker
* Xiaojin Miao
miaoxiaojin126@126.com
1
Key Laboratory of Advanced Food Manufacturing Equipment &
Technology, School of Mechanical Engineering, Jiangnan
University, Wuxi 214122, China
Compared with traditional machining methods such as laser
and electric discharge machining (EDM), abrasive water jet is
the only cool procession technique. It has many advantages
such as no heat effect, small reaction force, high flexibility,
and environmental protection [2–6]. Nevertheless, the cross
section cut by abrasive water jet has unavoidable defects.
Therefore, abrasive water jet cutting technology is difficult
to extend from the field of rough machining and semi fine
machining to the field of fine machining. The further devel-
opment of the technology is greatly limited [7, 8].
The most important application of abrasive waterjet
technology is cutting. However, there are some defects in
the cross section cut by abrasive water jet, such as stria-
tions, kerf taper, and cutting residue. Among these defects,
striations and kerf taper have the most serious effects on
the cutting quality. In order to improve the cutting quality
of abrasive water jet so that accelerate the transition course
of abrasive water jet from the field of rough machining and
semi fine machining to the field of fine machining, many
experts have done a lot of researches.
Generally, the cross section cut by abrasive water jet can be
divided into several zones according to the quality of the sur-
face, mainly including initial zone, smooth zone, and rough
zone [9–12]. The range of the initial zone is very small. The

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

1780
initial zone is mainly formed by the initial contact of the jet
and the workpiece. It exists at the top end of the cross section
[11]. The energy of the jet decreases in the direction of depth,
so the ability of the jet to remove the material at the lower part
of the workpiece is insufficient. Thus, the striations are
formed. Whether the striations exist or not is an important
reference for the division of the smooth zone and the rough
zone. Among these zones, the surface quality of the smooth
zone is the best, while the surface quality of the rough zone is
the worst due to the existence of striations. Therefore, in order
to achieve the purpose of improving the surface quality of the
section, the striations must be eliminated as many as possible.
Chen [13] and Lemma [14] found that the cutting depth is the
largest when the incident angle is 80–85°. Therefore, they
proposed and adopted the cutting method of nozzle oscillation
to improve the range of the smooth zone. With the expansion
of the range of the smooth zone, the overall quality of the
surface is improved. The range of the smooth zone can be
improved by 30% with the method of nozzle oscillation. The
optimum oscillation angle is 15–20°, and the best oscillating
frequency depends on the cutting speed. Zeng [15] and Hlaváč
[16] use the cutting method of nozzle tilt compensation to cut
the workpiece. It is found that this cutting method can effec-
tively reduce the striations caused by the deflection of the jet.
The cutting method of nozzle oscillation and the cutting meth-
od of nozzle tilt compensation are the two most widely recog-
nized cutting methods which can effectively eliminate
striations.
The kerf taper is formed in the process of water jet cutting,
which is influenced by many process parameters. Through the
study, Matsui [17] found that the process parameter that has
the greatest influence on the kerf taper is the traverse speed.
Besides, Hashish [18] and Wang [19] found that, on the pre-
mise of the other process parameters remain unchanged, the
shape of the kerf changes from “Λ” to “V” with the increase of
the traverse speed. Obviously, the kerf taper decreases first
and then increases during this change. Therefore, the kerf
taper can be effectively reduced by adjusting the traverse
speed. In addition to adjusting the process parameters, the kerf
taper can also be reduced by using the cutting method of
nozzle oscillation. Through the study, Xu [20] found that the
cutting quality would be reduced if the cutting parameters
were not selected properly by using the cutting method of
nozzle oscillation. With the best combination of cutting pa-
rameters, the kerf taper can be reduced by 54%.
In addition to the above existing and widely recognized
methods that can effectively improve the cutting quality of
abrasive water jet, Hashish [21] and Wang [22] believe that
multipass abrasive water jet cutting can also effectively im-
prove the cutting quality. But at present, multipass abrasive
water jet cutting has been rarely studied. In this paper, the
cutting of AISI 304 stainless steel with multipass abrasive
water jet was taken as an example. By weighing the
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2018) 97:1779–1786
processing time and cutting quality, the optimal cutting times
of multipass abrasive water jet were explored. With the opti-
mal cutting times, the quality of the section can be improved
most efficiently.
2 Experimental design
2.1 Operation forms
There are two types of multipass abrasive water jet cutting.
The first type is shown in Fig. 1. The workpiece is cut off after
the first cutting, and the subsequent cutting can be considered
to be “trimming” to a greater extent. Therefore, this type can
be called “multipass trimming-cutting”. The second type is
shown in Fig. 2. The workpiece is cut off after the multipass
cutting is completed, that is, the cutting of the workpiece is
completed by multiple cutting. As shown in Eq. 1, in the ideal
case, the cutting depth of each cutting of this cutting scheme is
the same. The workpiece is just cut off after the cutting is
completed. Therefore, this type can be referred to as
“multipass deepening-cutting”.
d
dD ¼ ð1Þ
N
Where, dD is the cutting depth of each cutting of deepen-
ing-cutting, d is the thickness of the workpiece, and N is the
total number of cutting times.
Some experts have studied multipass deepening-cutting,
but have not given the evaluation criteria of the optimal cut-
ting times. And in the aspect of multipass trimming-cutting,
almost no research paper has been found at present. That is to
say, the multipass abrasive water jet cutting studied by prede-
cessors mostly refers to the deepening-cutting. In this paper,
the generalized induction and redefinition of multipass abra-
sive water jet cutting is made.
The common point of the two types of multipass cutting is
to remain other process parameters except the traverse speed
unchanged. The difference is that the multipass trimming-
cutting is to keep the traverse speed unchanged after the first
cutting. Then, the cutting is repeated many times. This type of
multipass cutting obviously increases a lot of processing time.
The processing time increased by multipass trimming-cutting
is shown in Eq. 2.
T tΔ ¼ ðN −1Þ⋅T ð2Þ
Where, TtΔ is the processing time increased by multipass
trimming-cutting, and T is the processing time required for the
single cutting.
The multipass deepening-cutting is to cut off the workpiece
after multiple cutting. In ideal case, the depth of each cutting is
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2018) 97:1779–1786 1781

First cutting Second cutting Third cutting 10

Workpiece AWJ
8

depth of cut (mm)

6

4
Striations Cutting direction
Fig. 1 Multipass trimming-cutting
2

almost the same. That is, the traverse speed of each cutting 0
140 190 240 290 340 390 440
remains unchanged, but it is several times than that of the
Traverse speed (mm/min)
single cutting (Eq. 3).
Fig. 3 The relationship between the cutting depth and the traverse speed
d (standoff distance = 7 mm; abrasive flow rate = 0.6 kg·min−1; pressure =
v2i ¼ ⋅v ð3Þ 280Mpa)
N
Where, v2i is the ideal traverse speed of the multipass deep-
ening-cutting, and v is the traverse speed of the single cutting. Where, TdΔ is the processing time increased by multipass
In theory, multipass deepening-cutting does not increase deepening-cutting, dw is the width of workpiece, vΔd is the
the processing time. But in fact, there is no linear relationship speed compensation of traverse speed to the nonlinear influ-
between the cutting depth and the traverse speed. Figure 3 is ence of cutting depth, and vΔD is the speed compensation for
the relationship between the cutting depth and the traverse actual standoff distance.
speed. It can be seen from the figure that the decline rate of Thus, it can be seen that both the two types of multipass
the cutting depth decreases with the increase of the traverse cutting are to improve the quality of the cutting section by
speed. This means that the traverse speed required for each sacrificing a certain processing efficiency.
cutting is slower than that of the ideal condition.
In addition, as shown in Eq. 4, the actual standoff distance
of the next cutting is one cutting depth longer than the previ- 2.2 Experimental planning
ous one after each cutting. The increase of the standoff dis-
tance leads to the decrease of the cutting capacity of the jet. In The factors that affect the cutting quality of abrasive wa-
order to achieve the desired cutting depth, it is also necessary ter jet mainly include pressure, abrasive flow, standoff
to reduce a certain traverse speed. distance, traverse speed, nozzle diameter, impact angle,
and abrasive property [23, 24]. The purpose of this paper
d is to study the effect of multipass abrasive water jet cut-
Dn ¼ D þ ⋅ðn−1Þ ð4Þ
N ting times on cutting quality. Therefore, according to the
research characteristics of this paper, other process param-
Where, Dn is the actual standoff distance of the nth cutting,
eters except traverse speed must remain unchanged. The
and D is the standoff distance of the first cutting.
specific setting of the process parameters is shown in
Therefore, the processing time increased by multipass
Table 1.
deepening-cutting is as follows:
60⋅n⋅d w Table 1 Experiment conditions
T dΔ ¼ −T ð5Þ
v2i −vΔd −vΔD Parameters Value

Nozzle diameter (mm) 0.7

First cutting Second cutting Third cutting Standoff distance (mm) 7
Traverse speed (mm/min) 140, 240, 320, 400
AWJ
Abrasive flow rate (kg/min) 0.6
Impact angle (°) 90
Pressure (MPa) 280
Abrasive mesh number (#) 100
Workpiece thickness (mm) 10
Workpiece Cutting direction
Workpiece width (mm) 100
Fig. 2 Multipass deepening-cutting

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

1782 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2018) 97:1779–1786

a Third cutting 3 Results and discussion

Second cutting
First cutting
Workpiece
Striations
b Third cutting
Second cutting
First cutting
Workpiece
Striations
Fig. 4 Multipass cutting direction. a Single direction. b Alternate
direction
In addition, as shown in Fig. 4, the multipass cutting
direction can be single or alternate. In single direction
cutting, after every passage, the nozzle needs to return
to the origin, which will waste a certain time and affect
the experimental results. Therefore, this paper adopts al-
ternate direction cutting.
As shown in Table 2, in order to facilitate a better
understanding of the experimental scheme, the overall ex-
perimental layout is presented in the form of a table.
In this paper, the AISI 304 stainless steel was used as
the workpiece, and other materials refer to the same re-
search idea.
3.1 Surface quality
Figure 5 shows the cross section after abrasive water jet single
cutting. The workpiece was just cut off. It can be seen from the
figure that if the traverse speed is high or the cutting power is
small, the range of the smooth zone will be very small. In
addition to the common smooth and rough zones, there is also
a reflection zone below the rough zone of the section. The
reflection zone has a lot of erosion pits, and the surface quality
of this zone is the worst. Besides, there is a large triangular
cutting residue at the cutting exit. In general, there are many
defects in the cross section. The surface quality of the cross
section is bad.
Figure 6 shows the cross section after multipass trimming-
cutting. It can be seen from the figure that the range of the
smooth zone expands with the increase of the number of cut-
ting. Compared with the single cutting, the surface quality of
the section after two times trimming-cutting was greatly im-
proved. The range of the smooth zone is more than half of the
section, and the sizes of the striations were reduced a lot. Only
a few of the erosion pits were left, and the scopes of the
erosion pits are small. Even so, the rough zone on the cross
section is still large, and the striations are obvious. There is
also a small scope of triangular cutting residue on the cross
section. Compared with the section after two times trimming-
cutting, the surface quality of the section after three times
trimming-cutting was greatly improved. The range of the
rough zone was further reduced, and the striations were re-
duced a lot. There is little cutting residue at the cutting exit.
Compared with the section after three times trimming-cutting,
the surface quality of the section after four times trimming-
cutting was further improved. The striations are almost no
longer existed. The smooth zone almost occupies the whole
section.
Figure 7 shows the cross section after multipass deepening-
cutting. As can be seen from the figure, the stratification of the
section after two times deepening-cutting is obvious. The

Table 2 Experimental layout

Cutting scheme Total The cutting times Traverse speed (mm/ Cutting
cutting when the workpiece is cut min) direction
times off

Single cutting 1 1 140 /

Trimming-cutting 2 1 140 Alternate
3 1 140 Alternate
4 1 140 Alternate
Deepening-cutting 2 2 240 Alternate
3 3 320 Alternate
4 4 400 Alternate

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2018) 97:1779–1786 1783

Striations Smooth zone Rough zone

(a) Two times deepening-cutting

Erosion pit Reflection zone Cutting residue

Fig. 5 Cross section after single cutting
(b) Three times deepening-cutting

surface quality of the upper layer is good, while, the surface

quality of the lower layer is quite bad. The erosion pits in the
lower layer are not only large but also deep, and the striations
of it are obvious. In addition, there is still a certain cutting
residue at the cutting exit. The stratification of the section after
three times deepening-cutting is also obvious, and the surface
quality of the three layers decreases gradually from top to
bottom. There is a lot of erosion pits at the bottom layer, but
compared with the erosion pits on the section after two times
deepening-cutting, the sizes and depths of the erosion pits are
smaller. After four scours, the first and second layers of the
upper part of the section are almost integrated into one, and the
surface quality of the part is better. Erosion pits also exist in
the lower part of the section, but the sizes and depths of the
erosion pits are much smaller than that of the erosion pits on
the section after three times deepening-cutting.
As shown in Eq. 6, in order to further analyze the improve-
ment of the surface quality of various cutting schemes, the
roughness of each zone of each cross section is measured
respectively. The average value of the roughness obtained by
multiple measurements is taken as the average roughness of
the zone. Then, the average roughness of each zone is multi-
plied by the proportion of the zone, and the sum of the prod-
ucts is taken as the overall roughness of the cross section.
 
x di
Ra ¼ ∑ Rai ⋅ ð6Þ
i¼1 d can be seen from the figure that trimming-cutting can effec-
Where, Ra is the overall roughness of the section, Rai is the
average roughness of each zone, di is the depth of a certain
zone on the section, x is the number of the zones on the
section.
(c) Four times deepening-cutting
Fig. 7 Cross section after deepening-cutting. a Two times deepening-
cutting. b Three times deepening-cutting. c Four times deepening-cutting
By measurement and calculation, the overall roughness of
each cutting scheme is as follows:
As can be seen from Table 3, each time the cutting times of
multipass trimming-cutting and deepening-cutting is in-
creased, the surface quality of the cross section has a certain
increase, but the extent of improvement is decreasing. In ad-
dition, under the same cutting times, the improvement of the
cutting quality by multipass trimming-cutting is better than
that by multipass deepening-cutting.
3.2 Kerf taper
With the exception of surface quality, kerf taper is also an
important index to judge the quality of the cutting section of
abrasive water jet.
Figure 8 shows the side of the cross section after single
cutting. It can be seen that the kerf taper and the size of the
cutting residue after single cutting are very large. Figure 9
shows the side of the cross section after trimming-cutting. It
tively improve the taper of the kerf. With the increase of cut-
ting times, the taper is getting smaller and smaller. Figure 10
shows the side of the cross section after deepening-cutting. It
can be found from the figure that the taper after deepening-
cutting is not a constant. It was segmented into several parts
corresponding to different layers. In general, with the increase
of the number of cutting, the taper is also getting smaller and
smaller.

(a) Two times trimming-cutting Table 3 Roughness of

cross section after cutting Scheme Ra/μm
with different schemes
Single cutting 11.95
(b) Three times trimming-cutting
Two times trimming-cutting 3.59
Three times trimming-cutting 2.89
Four times trimming-cutting 2.85
Two times deepening-cutting 9.80
(c) Four times trimming-cutting Three times deepening-cutting 9.26
Fig. 6 Cross section after trimming-cutting. a Two times trimming- Four times deepening-cutting 9.05
cutting. b Three times trimming-cutting. c Four times trimming-cutting

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

1784
Fig. 8 Kerf taper after single cutting
Likewise, in order to further analyze the improvement of
the kerf taper of various cutting schemes, the kerf taper of each
cross section is measured. In order to reduce the measurement
error, the kerf taper of each section is measured three times,
and the average value is regarded as the kerf taper of the
section. For the multistage cone angle, the overall kerf taper
is calculated by referring to the idea of calculating the overall
roughness. The results after measurement and calculation are
shown in Table 4.
As can be seen from Table 4, both trimming-cutting and
deepening-cutting can effectively improve the kerf taper. With
the increase of the cutting times, the kerf taper gradually de-
creases, and it is reduced to a lower level after three times
cutting.
3.3 Optimal cutting times
Through the preceding analysis, it can be found that after the
same cutting times, the surface quality of the cross section after
trimming-cutting is much better than that after deepening-
(a) Two times (b) Three times
(c) Four times
Fig. 9 Kerf taper after trimming-cutting. a Two times. b Three times. c
Four times
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2018) 97:1779–1786
(a) Two times (b) Three times
(c) Four times
Fig. 10 Kerf taper after deepening-cutting. a Two times. b Three times. c
Four times
cutting. That is to say, without considering the processing effi-
ciency, trimming-cutting is better than deepening-cutting if the
quality improvement effect is considered as the main index. In
this case, the more the number of cutting times are, the better
surface quality can be obtained. Therefore, trimming-cutting is
a good choice in the presence of high cutting quality require-
ments. However, if the requirement for cutting quality is not
very strict, it is impossible for enterprises to improve the cutting
quality by sacrificing processing efficiency without limitation.
Therefore, the cutting quality and processing efficiency must be
weighed.
As mentioned before, both trimming-cutting and
deepening-cutting can effectively improve the surface quality
and the kerf taper. With the increase of cutting times, the
cutting quality is gradually improved. However, the improve-
ments of cutting quality are at the cost of adding some pro-
cessing time. That is to say, it is unreasonable to improve the
cutting quality by increasing cutting times blindly. This will
waste a lot of time. Therefore, it is necessary to choose the
optimal cutting times by weighing the processing time and
cutting quality (Table 5). Only in this way can the best cutting
Table 4 Kerf taper of cross section after cutting with different schemes
Scheme Kerf taper
Single cutting 6.18°
Two times trimming-cutting 4.16°
Three times trimming-cutting 0.76°
Four times trimming-cutting 0.48°
Two times deepening-cutting 5.62°
Three times deepening-cutting 1.99°
Four times deepening-cutting 1.18°
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2018) 97:1779–1786 1785

Table 5 Cutting time of different schemes K 1 −K n

I Kn ¼ ð8Þ
T n −T
Scheme Cutting time/s
Where, IRn is the surface quality improvement rate of nth
Single cutting 42.86
cutting, Tn is the time needed for n times cutting, Rn is the
Two times trimming-cutting 85.72
surface roughness after nth cutting, R1 is the surface roughness
Three times trimming-cutting 128.58
after single cutting, IKn is the taper improvement rate of nth
Four times trimming-cutting 171.44
cutting, Kn is the kerf taper after nth cutting, and K1 is the kerf
Two times deepening-cutting 50
taper after single cutting.
Three times deepening-cutting 56.25
The experimental data are brought into Eqs. 7 and 8, and
Four times deepening-cutting 60 the line charts are drawn according to the results.
Obviously, the number of cutting times corresponding to
the highest quality improvement rate is the optimal cutting
times. As can be seen from Fig. 11a, with the increase of the
quality be obtained at the least processing time, thus maximiz- number of cutting, the surface quality improvement rates of
ing the benefit. The processing time required for each scheme both trimming-cutting and deepening-cutting are gradually
is as follows: reduced. That is to say, the two kinds of multipass cutting all
As shown in Eqs. 7 and 8, in order to weigh the processing achieve the best surface quality improvement rate when the
time and cutting quality, the ratio of the reduction of surface number of cutting times is two. Therefore, as far as the surface
roughness to the increase of processing time is taken as the quality is concerned, the optimal cutting times of the two
surface quality improvement rate, and the ratio of the reduc- kinds of multipass cutting are both two. From Fig. 11b, it
tion of kerf taper to the increase of processing time is taken as can be found that with the increase of cutting times, the taper
the taper improvement rate. improvement rates of trimming-cutting and deepening-cutting
R1 −Rn increase first and then decrease. When the number of cutting
I Rn ¼ ð7Þ times is three, the taper improvement rate is the highest.
T n −T
Therefore, as far as the kerf taper is concerned, the optimal
cutting times of the two kinds of multipass cutting are both
three. In addition, as a whole, the quality improvement rate of
a 0.35 deepening-cutting is always better than that of trimming-
Improment of roughness(μm/s)

Trimming-cutting cutting.
0.3
Deepening-cutting
0.25

0.2
4 Conclusion
0.15

0.1 There are some defects in the cutting section of abrasive water
jet. In addition to several widely accepted methods, multipass
0.05
abrasive water jet cutting can also effectively improve these
0 defects. In this paper, AISI 304 stainless steel was used as a
2 3 4
Cutting times workpiece, the surface quality and kerf taper of the section
b after multipass abrasive water jet cutting with different cutting
0.35 times were analyzed. On this basis, the concept of quality
Improment of kerf taper(deg/s)

0.3 improvement rate was put forward, and the optimal cutting
0.25 times for surface quality and kerf taper were determined by
weighing the cutting quality and processing efficiency. The
0.2 Trimming-cutting
conclusions are as follows:
0.15 Deepening-cutting

0.1 (1) Two types of multipass abrasive water jet cutting were
clearly summarized and redefined. Both the two types of
0.05
multipass abrasive water jet cutting are to improve the
0 quality of the cutting by sacrificing some processing ef-
2 3 4
Cutting times ficiency. The section quality after trimming-cutting can
Fig. 11 Quality improvement rate. a Surface roughness improvement be greatly improved, but the processing time will be
rate. b Taper improvement rate multiplied. The improvement of section quality of

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

1786
deepening-cutting is relatively small, while it consumes
fewer processing time than the former.
(2) The calculation method of the overall roughness and the
overall taper was used to meet the stratification of the
cutting section. Through the study of the change of
whole roughness and whole taper, the quality improve-
ment of the section was analyzed. The analysis results
show that with the increase of cutting times, the section
surface quality of both trimming-cutting and deepening-
cutting was getting better, and the kerf taper was reduced
to a lower level after three times cutting.
(3) Trimming-cutting is a good choice without considering
the processing efficiency. Otherwise, the cutting quality
and processing efficiency need to be weighed. The weigh
between cutting quality and processing efficiency was
achieved through the quality improvement rate. With
the quality improvement rate as the index, the optimal
cutting times for cutting AISI 304 stainless steel with
multipass abrasive water jet are obtained. For surface
quality, the optimal cutting times of both trimming-
cutting and deepening-cutting are two, and for kerf taper,
the optimal cutting times of both trimming-cutting and
deepening-cutting are three. In addition, as a whole,
deepening-cutting is always better than trimming-
cutting in the case of not neglecting the processing
efficiency.
Funding information This work is supported by, The National Natural
Science Foundation of China (51575237), The joint fund of Ministry of
education of China (6141A0221) and Postgraduate Research & Practice
Innovation Program of Jiangsu Province.
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdic-
tional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
References
1. Liang GF (1997) Cutting technical manual, Beijing: China Machine
Press
2. Begic-Hajdarevica D, Cekica A, Mehmedovic M (2015)
Experimental study on surface roughness in abrasive water jet cut-
ting. Procedia Eng 100:394–399
3. Kim J, Song J (2015) Abrasive water jet cutting methods for reduc-
ing blast-induced ground vibration in tunnel excavation. Int J Rock
Mech Min 75:147–158
4. Bouda F, Carpenter C, Folkes J (2010) Abrasive waterjet cutting of
a titanium alloy: the influence of abrasive morphology and mechan-
ical properties on workpiece grit embedment and cut quality. J
Mater Process Tech 210:2197–2205
5. Haghbin N, Spelt JK, Papini M (2015) Abrasive waterjet micro-
machining of channels in metals: model to predict high aspect-ratio
channel profiles for submerged and unsubmerged machining. J
Mater Process Tech 222:399–409
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2018) 97:1779–1786
6. Gupta TVK, Ramkumar J, Tandon P (2015) Application of artificial
neural networks in abrasive water jet milling. Procedia CIRP 37:
225–229
7. Valíček J, Hloch S, Kozak D (2009) Surface geometric parameters
proposal for the advanced control of abrasive waterjet technology.
Int J Adv Manuf Technol 41:323–328
8. Hloch S, Valíček J, Simkulet V (2009) Estimation of smooth zone
maximal depth at surfaces created by abrasive waterjet. Int J Surf
Sci Eng 3:347–359
9. Chen FL, Siores E (2003) The effect of cutting jet variation on
surface striation formation in abrasive water jet cutting. J Mater
Process Tech 135:1–5
10. Çaydas U, Hasçalõk A (2008) A study on surface roughness in
abrasive waterjet machining process using artificial neural networks
and regression analysis method. J Mater Process Tech 202:574–582
11. Hloch S, Valíček J (2012) Topographical anomaly on surfaces cre-
ated by abrasive waterjet. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 59:593–604
12. Zhao W, Guo CW (2014) Topography and microstructure of the
cutting surface machined with abrasive waterjet. Int J Adv Manuf
Technol 73:941–947
13. Chen L, Siores E, Wong WCK (1998) Optimising abrasive waterjet
cutting of ceramic materials. J Mater Process Tech 74(1–3):251–
254
14. Lemma E, Chen L, Siorcs E, Wang J (2002) Optimising the AWJ
cutting process of ductile materials using nozzle oscillation tech-
nique. Int J Mach Tool Manu 42(7):781–789
15. Zeng J, Olsen J, Olsen C, Guglielmetti B (2005) Taper free abrasive
waterjet cutting with a tilting head. In: 2005 WJTA American
waterjet conference. Houston, pp 7A-2
16. Hlaváč LM (2009) Investigation of the abrasive water jet trajectory
curvature inside the kerf. J Mater Process Tech 209(8):4154–4161
17. Matsui S, Matsumura H, Ikemoto Y, Tsujita K, Shimizu H (1990)
High precision cutting method for metallic materials by abrasive
waterjet. In: Proceedings of the 10th international symposium on jet
cutting technology. Amsterdam, pp 263–278
18. Hashish M (2004) Precision cutting of thick materials with AWJ.
In: BHR group 2004 water jetting 33–46
19. Wang S, Zhang S, Wu Y, Yang F (2017) Exploring kerf cut by
abrasive waterjet. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 93:2013–2020
20. Xu S, Wang J (2006) A study of abrasive waterjet cutting of alumi-
na ceramics with controlled nozzle oscillation. Int J Adv Manuf
Technol 27(7–8):693–702
21. Hashish M, Plessis MPD (1979) Prediction equations relating high
velocity jet cutting performance to stand off distance and
multipasses. J Manufa Sci Eng 101(3):311–318
22. Wang J, Guo DM (2003) The cutting performance in multipass
abrasive waterjet machining of industrial ceramics. J Mater
Process Tech 133(3):371–377
23. Dittrich M, Dix M, Kuhl M, Palumbo B, Tagliaferri F (2014)
Process analysis of water abrasive fine jet structuring of ceramic
surfaces via design of experiment. Procedia CIRP 14:442–447
24. Alberdi A, Artaza T, Suárez A (2017) An experimental study on
abrasive waterjet cutting of CFRP/Ti6Al4V stacks for drilling op-
erations. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 86(1–4):691–704
Terms and Conditions
Springer Nature journal content, brought to you courtesy of Springer Nature Customer Service Center GmbH (“Springer Nature”).
Springer Nature supports a reasonable amount of sharing of research papers by authors, subscribers and authorised users (“Users”), for small-
scale personal, non-commercial use provided that all copyright, trade and service marks and other proprietary notices are maintained. By
accessing, sharing, receiving or otherwise using the Springer Nature journal content you agree to these terms of use (“Terms”). For these
purposes, Springer Nature considers academic use (by researchers and students) to be non-commercial.
These Terms are supplementary and will apply in addition to any applicable website terms and conditions, a relevant site licence or a personal
subscription. These Terms will prevail over any conflict or ambiguity with regards to the relevant terms, a site licence or a personal subscription
(to the extent of the conflict or ambiguity only). For Creative Commons-licensed articles, the terms of the Creative Commons license used will
apply.
We collect and use personal data to provide access to the Springer Nature journal content. We may also use these personal data internally within
ResearchGate and Springer Nature and as agreed share it, in an anonymised way, for purposes of tracking, analysis and reporting. We will not
otherwise disclose your personal data outside the ResearchGate or the Springer Nature group of companies unless we have your permission as
detailed in the Privacy Policy.
While Users may use the Springer Nature journal content for small scale, personal non-commercial use, it is important to note that Users may
not:

1. use such content for the purpose of providing other users with access on a regular or large scale basis or as a means to circumvent access
control;
2. use such content where to do so would be considered a criminal or statutory offence in any jurisdiction, or gives rise to civil liability, or is
otherwise unlawful;
3. falsely or misleadingly imply or suggest endorsement, approval , sponsorship, or association unless explicitly agreed to by Springer Nature in
writing;
4. use bots or other automated methods to access the content or redirect messages
5. override any security feature or exclusionary protocol; or
6. share the content in order to create substitute for Springer Nature products or services or a systematic database of Springer Nature journal
content.
In line with the restriction against commercial use, Springer Nature does not permit the creation of a product or service that creates revenue,
royalties, rent or income from our content or its inclusion as part of a paid for service or for other commercial gain. Springer Nature journal
content cannot be used for inter-library loans and librarians may not upload Springer Nature journal content on a large scale into their, or any
other, institutional repository.
These terms of use are reviewed regularly and may be amended at any time. Springer Nature is not obligated to publish any information or
content on this website and may remove it or features or functionality at our sole discretion, at any time with or without notice. Springer Nature
may revoke this licence to you at any time and remove access to any copies of the Springer Nature journal content which have been saved.
To the fullest extent permitted by law, Springer Nature makes no warranties, representations or guarantees to Users, either express or implied
with respect to the Springer nature journal content and all parties disclaim and waive any implied warranties or warranties imposed by law,
including merchantability or fitness for any particular purpose.
Please note that these rights do not automatically extend to content, data or other material published by Springer Nature that may be licensed
from third parties.
If you would like to use or distribute our Springer Nature journal content to a wider audience or on a regular basis or in any other manner not
expressly permitted by these Terms, please contact Springer Nature at

onlineservice@springernature.com