International Journal of Mechanics and Solids.

ISSN 0973-1881 Volume 12, Number 2 (2017), pp. 267-277

© Research India Publications
http://www.ripublication.com/ijms.htm

Comparison of Steel, Cast Iron and Alluminium

when subjected to HSS tool on Vertical Milling
Machine using Taguchi Method

Sonal C Yogi
Ph.D. Scholar, Rai University, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India.

Dr. Pragnesh K Bhrambhatt

Principal, Government Engineering College
Dahod, Gujarat, India.

Abstract
This work involves the experimental analysis of three materials i.e Cast iron,
Mild steel, and aluminum. The experiment is conducted under three different
cutting parameters, the feed rate, the depth, and the spindle speed. The cutting
tool which is taken is HSS. The parameters setting in this experiment was
done using the Taguchi method. The importance of tool life in machining was
found out by ANOVA(Analysis of Variance). The exact combination of
machining parameters was obtained by signal-to-noise ratio (SN/ Ratio). From
the results we conclude that the spindle speed had the most significant effect
on tool life followed by feed and depth of cut. Here we obtain the relation
between the tool life and cutting parameters.
Keywords: Taguchi Method, Cutting Parameters, VMC Milling, Surface
Roughness, Cutting Tools

1. INTRODUCTION
Steel has high tensile strength and low cost. It is an alloy of iron. Iron is the base
metal in steel. Stainless steel has minimum 10.5% cr which produces a thin layer of
oxide on the surface of steel. This layer is called passive layer. The passive region
prevents the corrosion on the surface. When the amount of chromium is increased
corrosion resistance also increases.
Cast iron is an alloy of iron, si, and carbon. It is cast in a mould and is brittle, non-
malleable, and hard. It is capable of being hammered. It has carbon content more than
2%. The alloys present in iron affects its colour when it is fractured. Ductile iron has
268 Sonal C Yogi and Dr. Pragnesh K Bhrambhatt

spherical graphite in it in form of “nodules” which stop the cracks from progressing.
Grey cast iron contains graphite flakes and white cast iron contains carbide impurities.
Alluminium is a chemical element. It has a silvery white colour. It is soft, non
magnetic and ductile. It is the third most abundant material in the earth’s crust.
Bauxite is the chief ore of Alluminium. It is non metallic and doesn’t ignite easily.
We can use a fresh film of aluminium as a good reflector of visible light and an
excellent reflector of medium and far infra red radiation. Its pure form has yield
strength of 7-11 Mpa. Alloys of aluminium have yield strength between 200- 600
Mpa. Alluminium can be extruded, machined, cast and drawn in different shapes. It
has excellent corrosion resistance because of thin surface layer of aluminium oxide. In
acidic solutions aluminium reacts with water and forms hydrogen. It gets oxidised by
water at temperature below 200º C and produces hydrogen aluminium hydroxide and
heat.

2. DATA COLLECTION AND EXPERIMENT

Using Taguchi L9 orthogonal array the experiments were designed. MINITAB is the
software used for design of experiment. The experiment has three phases. The
planning phase, the conducting phase and the analysis phase. In the experimental
analysis, one input variable was varied keeping the other two variables constant at a
fixed value. The effect of the change of variable on the output was studied. ie the
surface roughness and material removal rate was recorded.

Table 1: The cutting parameters and their cutting levels.

Symbol Parameter Level
1 2 3
N Spindle speed N (rpm) 2000 2500 3000
F Feed rate mm/min 800 1200 1500
D Depth of cut D (mm) 1.5 1.8 2.0

Surface roughness measure is measured in µm and was done three times on

respective readings using the Mitutoyo surface tester SJ-201P instrument. The
specification of the instrument is given below:
Comparison of Steel, Cast Iron and Alluminium when subjected to HSS tool… 269

Fig 1: MITUTOYO surface tester SJ-201P

Table 2: Specification of surface tester

Detection method Differential Inductance Method
Measurement Range 350µm-13780 µm
Stylus material Diamond
Tip radius 5 µm, 2µm, 0.75mN
Measuring force 4mN, 0.75mN
Radius of skid curvature 40mm

Drive unit
Table 3: Measurement Range and resolution
Measurement Range Resolution
Auto 0.01 µm to .04 µm depending on measurement range
350 µm 0.4 µm
100 µm 0.1 µm
50 µm 0.05 µm
10 µm 0.01 µm
270 Sonal C Yogi and Dr. Pragnesh K Bhrambhatt

Table 4: Steel when subjected to HSS Tool

No. Speed (rpm) Feed (mm/min) Depth(mm) Surface Finish (µm)
1 2000 800 1.5 1.05
2 2500 1200 1.8 1.02
3 3000 1500 2.0 1.04
4 2000 800 1.8 1.07
5 2500 1200 2.0 1.02
6 3000 1500 1.5 1.02
7 2000 800 2.0 1.04
8 2500 1200 1.5 1.06
9 3000 1500 1.8 1.02

Table 5: Alluminium when subjected to HSS Tool

No. Speed (rpm) Feed (mm/min) Depth(mm) Surface Finish (µm)
1 2000 800 1.5 1.02
2 2500 1200 1.8 1.02
3 3000 1500 2.0 1.01
4 2000 800 1.8 1.05
5 2500 1200 2.0 1.03
6 3000 1500 1.5 1.02
7 2000 800 2.0 1.03
8 2500 1200 1.5 1.05
9 3000 1500 1.8 1.02

Table 6: Cast Iron when subjected to HSS Tool

No. Speed (rpm) Feed (mm/min) Depth(mm) Surface Finish (µm)
1 2000 800 1.5 1.02
2 2500 1200 1.8 1.02
3 3000 1500 2.0 1.01
4 2000 800 1.8 1.05
5 2500 1200 2.0 1.03
6 3000 1500 1.5 1.02
Comparison of Steel, Cast Iron and Alluminium when subjected to HSS tool… 271

7 2000 800 2.0 1.03

8 2500 1200 1.5 1.05
9 3000 1500 1.8 1.02

3. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
Taguchi Design
Design Summary
Taguchi Array L9(3^3)
Factors: 3
Runs: 9
Columns of L9(3^4) array: 1 2 3
Taguchi Analysis: SR versus A, B, C
Linear Model Analysis: SN ratios versus A, B, C
Estimated Model Coefficients for SN ratios

Term Coef SE Coef T P

Constant -2.71031 0.5834 -4.646 0.043
A1 0.03431 0.8250 0.042 0.971
A2 0.11824 0.8250 0.143 0.899
B1 -0.97414 0.8250 -1.181 0.359
B2 0.29376 0.8250 0.356 0.756
C1 -0.35230 0.8250 -0.427 0.711
C2 0.11824 0.8250 0.143 0.899

Model Summary
S R-Sq R-Sq(adj)
1.7501 45.86% 0.00%
272 Sonal C Yogi and Dr. Pragnesh K Bhrambhatt

Analysis of Variance for SN ratios

Source DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F P
A 2 0.1153 0.1153 0.05764 0.02 0.982
B 2 4.4945 4.4945 2.24724 0.73 0.577
C 2 0.5787 0.5787 0.28933 0.09 0.914
Residual Error 2 6.1255 6.1255 3.06274
Total 8 11.3139

Linear Model Analysis: Means versus A, B, C Estimated Model Coefficients for

Means
Term Coef SE Coef T P
Constant 1.37778 0.09493 14.513 0.005
A1 -0.01111 0.13426 -0.083 0.942
A2 -0.01111 0.13426 -0.083 0.942
B1 0.15556 0.13426 1.159 0.366
B2 -0.04444 0.13426 -0.331 0.772
C1 0.05556 0.13426 0.414 0.719
C2 -0.01111 0.13426 -0.083 0.942

Model Summary
S R-Sq R-Sq(adj)
0.2848 45.11% 0.00%

Analysis of Variance for Means

Source DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F P
A 2 0.002222 0.002222 0.001111 0.01 0.986
B 2 0.115556 0.115556 0.057778 0.71 0.584
C 2 0.015556 0.015556 0.007778 0.10 0.913
Residual Error 2 0.162222 0.162222 0.081111
Total 8 0.295556
Comparison of Steel, Cast Iron and Alluminium when subjected to HSS tool… 273

Response Table for Signal to Noise Ratios

Smaller is better
Level A B C
1 -2.676 -3.684 -3.063
2 -2.592 -2.417 -2.592
3 -2.863 -2.030 -2.476
Delta 0.271 1.655 0.586
Rank 3 1 2

Response Table for Means

Level A B C
1 1.367 1.533 1.433
2 1.367 1.333 1.367
3 1.400 1.267 1.333
Delta 0.033 0.267 0.100
Rank 3 1 2

Fig :2 Main effect plots for mean

274 Sonal C Yogi and Dr. Pragnesh K Bhrambhatt

Fig :3 Main effect plots for mean

Table 7: For Response and S-N Ratio

Spindle Feed rate Depth of Surface S-N Ratio
speed (mm/min) cut (mm) roughness (dbi)
(µm)
(rpm)
1 2000 800 1.5 1.05 -2.74502
2 2500 1200 1.8 1.02 -5.10371
3 3000 1500 2.0 1.07 -6.45441
4 2000 800 1.8 1.02 -2.24561
5 2500 1200 2.0 1.02 -2.03541
6 3000 1500 1.5 1.04 -1.04064
7 2000 800 2.0 1.06 -9.10754
8 2500 1200 1.5 1.02 -5.75684
9 3000 1500 1.8 1.02 -2.3123

In all the cases we have always taken a rough cut before and then a finish cut after
that. So that we can get a proper result. For steel, first of all we had taken feed into
consideration by keeping the other two parameters constant .As the feed was changed
each time the surface finish was bad as shown in the figure. At the first the surface
finish was rough at the first cut. But as soon as we increased the value of feed the
surface finish was becoming worse. So we conclude that on increasing the feed value
for machining the mild steel the surface does not get a proper finish. Now on the
second step we have kept the feed and depth constant. We have changed the speed
now. As soon as we have taken a cut with changing the speed, we see that at the first
value of speed the surface finish was good. When we changed the speed with a large
value the surface finish started becoming bad. As we changed the speed to a third
Comparison of Steel, Cast Iron and Alluminium when subjected to HSS tool… 275

value it was concluded that the surface finish was still getting bad. When we took the
last cut with the fourth value of speed the noise was increased and there was a big
vibrating effect seen. So it is concluded that a constant speed is required for a good
surface finish. And a speed of low value gives a good surface finish. We can see that
depth of cut with such a small value of cut doesn’t affect the surface finish. As we
kept changing the value of depth cut the surface finish was not affected much but the
noise kept increasing. As soon as we took the value of depth at the last value the
vibration and noise had increased to a large value.
Now for cast iron, when we took the first value of feed the cutting occurred with the
great difficulty. As soon as we changed the feed there was no process occurring. The
cast iron which was taken in this category was very hard to machine as it contained a
big amount of carbon content. And its composition was such that the machining of
this cast iron was totally impossible. When the depth was changed keeping the other
two parameters constant it was observed that tool started getting blunt. While
machining the noise occurred. As we continued machining the noise kept increasing
and if we would have not stopped machining the tool would have been damaged. So
we have changed the cast iron composition and taken a cast iron which had low
carbon content and the following result was observed. As we take the first cut with
the depth value the finish was good. As we changed the depth the surface finish was
increased. It was seen that the surface finis was best as the depth changed. So we
conclude that moderate feed value and high speed and depth give good surface finish
for a cast iron when it is subjected to the HSS tool.
Now for aluminium, keeping the speed and depth constant at first cut at the feed rate
800 there was a smooth finish good MRR. No noise occurred at all and it was
working smoothly. As we increased the feed to 1200 the surface finish improved. But
when we changed the feed to 1500 the finish got spoilt and the surface finish
decreased. When the feed and depth were kept constant and there was a change in the
speed, at 2000rpm there was a good surface finish. It was observed that as we
increased the speed, there was no major change in the surface finish. As we take the
first cut with the depth value the finish was good. As we changed the speed the
surface finish was increased. As the depth was changed now the surface increased
was smoother. As depth increased the finish was best. It was seen that the surface
finish was best as the depth changed. So we conclude that moderate feed value and
high speed and depth give good surface finish for aluminium when it is subjected to
the HSS tool.

4. CONCLUSION
Taguchi’s method is suitable for the analysis of metal cutting problems. In milling
process increase in spindle speed decrease in feed rate, with an increase in depth of
cut will decrease the SR range which is specified in the range during the experiment.
Low feed rate and high spindle speed with high depth of cut are optimized parameters
for surface roughness within the range which is specified. The feed rate is the most
dominant factor in the experiment.
276 Sonal C Yogi and Dr. Pragnesh K Bhrambhatt

REFERENCES
[1] Erason Aslon a, Necip Camuscu a, Burak Birg ren, “Design optimization of
cutting parameters when turning hardened AISI 4140 steel (63 HRC) with
Al2O3+ TiCN mixed ceramic tool; Materials and Design”, 1618-1622, 28,
2007.
[2] R.W.Lanjewar, U.Datta, P.Saha, A.J. Banarjee, S.Jain and S.Sen; “Evaluation
of machining parameters for turning of AISI 304 austenitic stainless steel on
auto sharpening machine”, Journal of scientific and industrial research; Vol.67,
PP 282-287, 2008.
[3] Sandeep Salodkar,Alakesh Manna, “Optimization of machining conditions
for effective turning of EO300 alloy steel”, Journal of material processing
technology, 147-153, 203, 2008.
[4] J.A.Ghani, G.Akhyar, C.H. Che Haron, “Application of Taguchi method in the
optimization of turning parameters for surface roughness”, International
journal of science engineering and Technology; Vol.1, No.3,60-66, 2008.
[5] Davim J.P., “Design of optimization of cutting parameters for turning metal
matrix composites based on the orthogonal arrays”, Journal of materials
processing Technology, 340-344, 132, 2003
[6] Sijo M. T., Biju N., “Taguchi method for optimization of cutting parameters in
turning operation”, Proceedings of the International conference on Advances
in Mechanical Engineering, 2010.
[7] Dr. S.S. Mahapatra, Amar Patnaik, Prabina Ku. Patnaik, “Parametric analysis
and optimization of cutting parameters for turning operations based on
Taguchi method”, Proceedings of the International conference on Global
Manufacturing and Innovaton, 27-29, 2006.
[8] Farhad Kolahan, Mohsen Manoochehri, Abbas Hosseini, “Simultaneous
optimization of machining parameters and tool geometry specifications in
turning operation of AISI1045 steel”, World academy of science, Engineering
and Technology, 74, 2011.
[9] E. Daniel Kirby, “A parameter design study in a turning operation using the
Taguchi method”, ARPN journal of engineering and applied sciences,PP 1-14,
2006.
[10] V.B. Magdum, V.R. Naik, “Evaluation and optimization of machining
parameters for turning on EN 8”, International journal of engineering trends
and technology, Vol.4, Issue 5, 1564-1568, 2013.
[11] Yassin M. Y. Hasan and Lina J. Karam, “Morphological Text Extraction from
Images”, IEEE Transactions On Image Processing, vol. 9, No. 11, 2000
[12] Eftychios A. Pnevmatikakis, Petros Maragos “An Inpainting System For
Automatic Image Structure-Texture Restoration With Text Removal”, IEEE
trans. 978-1-4244-1764, 2008
Comparison of Steel, Cast Iron and Alluminium when subjected to HSS tool… 277

[13] S.Bhuvaneswari, T.S.Subashini, “Automatic Detection and Inpainting of Text

Images”, International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 – 8887)
Volume 61– No.7, 2013
[14] Aria Pezeshk and Richard L. Tutwiler, “Automatic Feature Extraction and
Text Recognition from Scanned Topographic Maps”, IEEE Transactions on
geosciences and remote sensing, VOL. 49, NO. 12, 2011
[15] Xiaoqing Liu and Jagath Samarabandu, “Multiscale Edge-Based Text
Extraction From Complex Images”, IEEE Trans., 1424403677, 2006
[16] Nobuo Ezaki, Marius Bulacu Lambert , Schomaker , “Text Detection from
Natural Scene Images: Towards a System for Visually Impaired Persons” ,
Proc. of 17th Int. Conf. on Pattern Recognition (ICPR), IEEE Computer
Society, pp. 683-686, vol. II.
278 Sonal C Yogi and Dr. Pragnesh K Bhrambhatt