Accepted Manuscript

Hard machining performance of indigenously developed green cutting fluid using

flood cooling and minimum quantity cutting fluid

Kishor Kumar Gajrani, P.S. Suvin, Satish Vasu Kailas, Mamilla Ravi Sankar

PII: S0959-6526(18)32907-X

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.09.178

Reference: JCLP 14313

To appear in: Journal of Cleaner Production

Received Date: 06 November 2017

Accepted Date: 21 September 2018

Please cite this article as: Kishor Kumar Gajrani, P.S. Suvin, Satish Vasu Kailas, Mamilla Ravi
Sankar, Hard machining performance of indigenously developed green cutting fluid using flood
cooling and minimum quantity cutting fluid, Journal of Cleaner Production (2018), doi: 10.1016/j.
jclepro.2018.09.178

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to
our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo
copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form.
Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the
content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Hard machining performance of indigenously developed green

cutting fluid using flood cooling and minimum quantity cutting
fluid

Kishor Kumar Gajrani1, P.S. Suvin2, Satish Vasu Kailas3, Mamilla Ravi Sankar1*
1Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati, Guwahati-781039, India
2Centrefor Product Design and Manufacturing, Indian Institute of Science Bangalore, Karnataka-560012, India
3Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Science Bangalore, Karnataka-560012, India

*Corresponding author E-mail: evmrs@iitg.ernet.in

Abstract

Cutting fluids play a vital part in turning process. Basically, these cutting fluids are made up

of mineral oil (MO) and performance enhancing additives that are produced chemically.

However, MO has adverse environmental effects and causes health hazards. Therefore, MO

is gradually replaced by green cutting fluid (GCF). Indigenously developed environmental

friendly vegetable based GCF with minimum quantity cutting fluid (MQCF) can serve as a

viable solution to make current work a cleaner process. In this present study, vegetable-based

GCF was synthesised and characterized. Emulsion stability and anti-corrosion properties of

GCF were investigated. MQCF machining process parameters such as cutting fluid emulsion

composition, stand-off distance and nozzle spray angle were experimentally optimized to

extract better output. Hard machining experiments were performed with developed GCF

using flood cooling (FC) and MQCF techniques during turning of hardened AISI H-13 steel.

For comparison, dry machining experiments were also carried out. Cutting force, feed forces,

centre line average (CLA) surface roughness of workpiece were measured and the coefficient

of friction was calculated. After machining, cutting tool rake face morphology and wear

characteristics were studied using field emission scanning electron microscope, optical

microscope and non-contact 3D surface profilometer. Result shows that cutting force, feed

force, coefficient of friction and CLA surface roughness of workpiece were reduced using

1
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

optimized MQCF process parameters. Also, machining performance was improved with

MQCF technique using GCF as compared to flood cooling and dry machining.

Keywords: Hard machining; Green cutting fluid (GCF); Minimum quantity cutting fluid

(MQCF); Hardened AISI H-13 steel; Turning; Tool wear

Abbreviations and Nomenclature

ANN Artificial neural network

ASTM American society for testing materials
CAOoW Cryogenic air with oil-on-water
CCRD Central composite rotatable design
CLA Centre line average
COF Coefficient of friction
CryoMQL hybrid cryogenic and MQL
DM Dry machining
EDM Electrical discharge machining
EOoW External oil-on-water
EDS Energy dispersive spectroscopy
FC Flood cooling
FESEM Field emission scanning electron microscope
GCF Green cutting fluid
LAM Laser assisted machining
MO Mineral oil
MQCF Minimum quantity cutting fluid
MQL Minimum quantity lubrication
NDM Near dry machining
RSM Response surface methodology
γo Rake angle
Kr Angle of approach
λs Inclination angle
αo Clearance angle
rε Nose radius
f Feed
v Cutting speed
d Depth of cut
Fc Cutting force
Ra Surface roughness
R2 Coefficient of determination

1. Introduction

In recent years, hard materials such as AISI H-13 steel, Titanium alloy, Haynes 25

superalloy, Inconel 718, Al/SiC metal matrix composite, cold work steel, etc. are having

2
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

numerous applications in different industries like aerospace, automobile, die, turbines, etc.

due to their excellent strength at the higher temperature and high corrosion resistance.

However, these materials have poor machinability due to low heat transfer coefficient and

high toughness [1]. Previous attempt has been made to machine hard materials like Al/SiC

metal matrix composite using a wire EDM process [2]. Further, the EDM process was also

used to fabricate cylinders of SPK cold work steel [3]. However, the main concerns during

the machining of these hard materials are to obtain high-quality tolerances and better surface

finish because of high heat generated and higher temperature [4]. Apart from these

requirements, machining of these materials should be economical. Therefore, necessary

measures are required to lower temperature for reducing cutting tool wear and to achieve

better surface finish [5, 6].

Researchers have studied several ways to reduce cutting temperature, cutting tool

wear and to attain better surface finish such as coating of the cutting tool [7], use of micro-

textured tool [8, 9], use of solid lubricant filled micro-textured tool [10, 11], addition of solid

lubricants in cutting tool material [12], liquid nitrogen cooling [13], high pressure water jet

[14], etc. However, various issues influence the machining of hard materials; still, the cutting

fluid and its application technique are considered the most noticeable factor [15].

In general, two types of cutting fluids are used during machining; neat oils and

straight oils. They consist of mineral oils and other performance enhancer additives.

Commonly available additives used are sulphurized oils, free sulphur, chlorinated paraffin,

phosphorus compounds and fatty material [16]. These additives react with the cutting tool

and workpiece materials, which form sulphides, phosphates as well as metal chlorides [17].

Presence of chlorides and sulphides are hazardous to human health. These cutting fluids often

have a detrimental effect on operators, workpiece material and environment [18]. Study also

showed that prolong exposure to cutting fluids emissions can cause severe respiratory

3
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

diseases and skin cancer [19]. Due to severe health hazards and environmental pollution

caused by mineral oil (MO) based cutting fluid; use of vegetable-based eco-friendly

biodegradable cutting fluid came into existence [18]. They consist of organic long fatty acid

chains generally triglycerides [20]. Vegetable-based cutting fluids have high viscosity index

[21], higher flash point [22], greater molecular weight and higher boiling point [23] that helps

in better lubrication and reducing misting as well as vaporization. Vegetable-based cutting

fluids are less toxic, sustainable, eco-friendly and highly biodegradable. Therefore, vegetable-

based cutting fluids have the potential to substitute petroleum-based mineral oils for

industrial use.

Conventionally, cutting fluids are applied using flood coolant (FC) system. FC

machining is expensive and can cost upto 17 % of total product cost [24, 25]. Also, cutting

fluids are unable to fully reach the machining region because of the obstruction provided by

chips. Therefore, application of near-dry-machining (NDM) also known as minimum quantity

lubrication (MQL) [26] or minimum quantity cutting fluid (MQCF) [27] is an alternate

technique used for cutting fluid application. Very less amount of cutting fluid having high

heat convective coefficient is used at a flow rate of 5–600 mL/h during machining using

MQCF technique. In this technique, a mixture of high pressurized air as well as cutting fluid

is atomized and produced mist or aerosol is supplied in between the tool-chip interface of the

machining region [28]. MQCF is known to reduce the quantity of cutting fluid, hazards to

operators, long-term cost and it also address environmental issues [29].

During turning, the positive effects of MQCF are shown by various studies.

Sohrabpoor et al. [30] used soluble oil as the cutting fluid in wet and MQL turning while

comparing four different cooling conditions (dry, air cooling, wet and MQL technique)

during turning of AISI 4340 stainless steel. They observed that MQL outperformed others in

terms of the cutting tool flank wear and workpiece surface roughness. Dhar et al. [31]

4
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

confirm similar results during machining for both AISI 1040 and AISI 4340 steel. Heat

reduction at the tool-chip interface because of MQL mist is considered as one of the main

reason to reduce the growth of the flank wear as MQL mist penetration ability in between

tool-chip interface is higher as compared to wet cooling. MQL machining studies related to

difficult-to-machine materials have also shown great potential to reduce generated heat, tool

wear and to improve the surface finish of the workpiece. Park et al. [32] compared electric

power consumption by dry machining (DM), FC, cryogenic machining (liquid nitrogen),

MQL machining and laser-assisted machining (LAM) during face milling operation of Ti-

6Al-4V. Results showed that FC consumes the maximum electrical power of 2.75 kW,

whereas it was followed by LAM, cryogenic, DM and MQL machining technique (only 1.53

kW) [33]. In the case of MQL, lower tool wear was the main factor that leads to the least

electrical power consumption among all. Sharma and Sidhu [34] used vegetable oil with

NDM during machining of AISI D2 steel. Comparison of DM and NDM was done and it was

found that workpiece surface roughness was reduced because of lower tool-chip interface

temperature with NDM. Sarikaya and Gullu [35] studied workpiece surface roughness and

tool wear by optimising MQL process parameters during machining of Haynes 25 (cobalt-

based superalloy). Based on the results, Taguchi-based grey relational analysis successfully

optimizes cutting fluid flow rates and cutting speed to attain better surface finish and to

reduce tool notch as well as flank wear. Artificial neural network (ANN) was successfully

implemented by Beatrice et al. [36] to predict the workpiece surface roughness during MQL

machining of AISI H-13 steel. Khandekar et al. [37] compared workpiece surface roughness

after dry machining, flood cooling and nano-cutting cutting. Result shows that surface

roughness of machined workpiece using nano-cutting fluid was least among all. This is

attributed to its better wetting as well as lubricating properties at machining region as

compared to dry machining and flood cooling. Also, nano-cutting fluids dissipate more heat

5
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

due to its higher thermal conductivity. Because of better thermal conductivity and wetting

characteristics of nano-cutting fluids, smooth machining and less tool wear was achieved.

Therefore, workpiece machined using nano-cutting fluid had least surface roughness among

all [37].

Sharma et al. [38] reviewed effects of MQL in the machining process. They

concluded that MQL mist is efficient to penetrate in-between tool-chip interface that results

in reduction of friction coefficient. Saberi et al. [39] used the hybrid technique by combining

cold air from vortex tube and MQL named CAMQL during grinding of CK45 soft steel.

Results showed that cooling limitation of MQL can be enhanced by using pressurized

refrigerated air with respect to room temperature pressurized air. Moreover, Pereira et al. [40]

have also studied hybrid cryogenic and MQL (CryoMQL) during turning of AISI 304. The

life cycle assessment of several lubri-coolant techniques are carried out and compared with

each other. Machining using CryoMQL is termed as best as compared to DM, wet machining,

CO2 and LN2 environments in terms of cutting fluid environmental impacts. Wang et al. [41]

investigated tool wear after machining of compacted graphite cast iron with MQL using

internal oil-on-water, external oil-on-water (EOoW) and cryogenic air with oil-on-water

(CAOoW) droplets. Result shows that the machining using CAOoW was able to reduce tool

wear up to three times compared to machining using EOoW. In case of EOoW, due to less

cooling ability the thermal softening of cutting tool may be observed and leads tool wear.

However, the enhanced cooling ability of cryogenic fluid in case of CAOoW helps the

cutting tool to retain its original hardness compared to EOoW. Thus, tool wear is less in

CAOoW compared to EOoW.

As per the literature, types of cutting fluid and cutting fluid application techniques

have a great effect on machining performance. MQCF technique has shown several

advantages during machining. Even after these studies, researchers have not formed specific

6
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

guidelines to optimize MQCF input parameters (cutting fluid emulsion composition, air

pressure, stand-off distance between the nozzle and machining zone as well as nozzle spray

angle) that affects the efficiency of MQCF machining technique.

In this study, vegetable-based green cutting fluid (GCF) was developed. The

properties of GCF were measured. Storage stability and anti-corrosion properties of GCF

were studied. GCF is used with MQCF technique during machining. MQCF machining

process parameters such as cutting fluid emulsion composition, stand-off distance and nozzle

spray angle were optimized. Machining experiments were carried out using DM, FC and

MQCF machining technique. Results are compared for three different machining

environments in terms of cutting force, feed force, coefficient of friction (COF) and centre

line average (CLA) surface roughness of the workpiece.

2. Material and Methods

Cutting fluid application methods play a vital role in machining performance. FC and MQCF

mist were applied on the rake face of the cutting tool using a nozzle. Therefore, coated flank

face and uncoated rake face tungsten carbide tool was chosen for this study. Hardened AISI

H-13 steel was chosen as workpiece material due to its various application and high hardness.

Physical and mechanical properties of workpiece and tool material are shown in Table 1.

[Insert Table 1 here]

2.1. Synthesis of green cutting fluid

Biodegradable, non-toxic, environment-friendly base materials were used for the synthesis of

GCF [42]. Raw coconut oil (without chemical refining) was used as base oil. To stabilize the

cutting fluid emulsion, three commercially available anionic food grade emulsifiers (TN 85,

TN 80 and TEA, 99.98 % purity) were also added. Two essential eco-friendly oils extracted

from Azadirachta indica and Cymbopogon citratus (99.98% purity), respectively were

obtained from Falex International Export and Import, Bangalore, India for GCF. Another
7
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

green additive extracted from stem and leaf of Centella asiatica was added. To improve the

corrosion resistance of GCF, commercially obtained syrup of jaggery was also added. Mixing

of various cutting fluid ingredient was carried out at room temperature i.e., 25 ± 2 °C

(above pour point of all ingredients) using a magnetic stirrer. The mixing continued for a

stipulated time period until the proper mix was achieved. The proper mix of cutting fluid

was ensured by the visual colour inspection and observed no separation among its

ingredients. Figure 1 shows the flowchart for the synthesis of GCF.

[Insert Figure 1 here]

2.2. Characterization of green cutting fluid

Natural renewable sources were used for the preparation of GCF. Its ingredients ratio was

optimized to obtain the desired cutting fluid properties [42]. Density, viscosity, pH and flash

point of GCF were measured and shown in Table 2.

[Insert Table 2 here]

2.2.1. Storage stability of emulsion (ASTM D 3707)

Cutting fluids are used in the form of emulsion to reduce generated heat and friction during

machining. Ten different compositions (1:2−1:20, 1 part of oil for 2 to 20 part of water) of

cutting fluid emulsions were tested for storage stability. ASTM D 3707 standard was

followed to perform a storage stability test for cutting fluid emulsions [43]. As per the

guidelines, emulsions were prepared and 50 ml of each sample was kept in glass graduated

cylinder as shown in Figure 2 (a). Test samples were kept inside convection oven for 48 h at

85 ± 1 ºC. Afterwards, samples were withdrawn from the oven and allowed to stand at room

temperature for one hour. After incubation, the samples were measured for the amount of

separated oil, water and the remaining emulsion (Figure 2 b).

[Insert Figure 2 here]

8
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

2.2.2. Corrosion tests (ASTM D 4627)

ASTM D 4627 standard was followed to perform corrosion test for the cutting fluids [44].

Gray cast iron chips were sieved on the 18 mesh screen. The glass fiber filter paper (1.5 µm

particle retention rating, 47 mm diameter) was placed in the bottom half of the petri dish as

shown in Figure 3 (a). Diluted cutting fluid having a concentration of 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4,

5, 7 and 10 % were prepared with synthetic hard water (calcium chloride dehydrate in

distilled water). 4 g of chips were weighed and sprinkled into each dish (Figure 3 b). 25 ml of

diluted cutting fluid of each concentration was poured into the ten different dishes (Figure 3

c). The dish was covered with its lid and left for 24 hours incubation time. Cutting fluid was

drained and chips were removed. The filter paper was rinsed. Anti-corrosion properties of

cutting fluids were correlated to the amount of rusting stain on the filter paper and breakpoint

is identified. As per ASTM D4627, the breakpoint is defined as the weakest concentration

tested that left no rust stain on the filter paper. Chips were cleaned by sonication using

acetone for 20 minutes and dried. Chip weight loss due to corrosion was calculated.

[Insert Figure 3 here]

2.3. Optimum minimum quantity cutting fluid process parameters

MQCF process parameter majorly includes cutting fluid emulsion concentration, nozzle

standoff distance and nozzle spray angle position. Optimizing MQCF process parameter is

essential. Figure 4 shows a fishbone diagram [45] for optimum MQCF process parameters.

[Insert Figure 4 here]

2.3.1. Cutting fluid emulsion concentration

Selection of optimum emulsion concentration is necessary to extract the best lubrication and

cooling properties from the cutting fluid. Emulsions with more oil provide better lubrication,

whereas emulsions with more water provide better cooling. Ten different emulsions

9
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

(1:2−1:20, 1 part of oil 2 to 20 part of water) were prepared with varying water content.

Thermal conductivity and the specific volumetric heat of emulsions were measured using

KD2 Pro Thermal Property Analyser.

2.3.2. Nozzle standoff distance

The vertical distance between nozzle outlet and machining zone is known as nozzle standoff

distance. Atomization and dispersion of MQCF mist (aerosol) mainly depend upon nozzle

standoff distance. MQCF mist covers less area if the standoff distance is less leading to

improper cooling. However, if standoff distance is too high, MQCF mist may spread out.

Diverging MQCF mist results in lesser applied force by aerosol in the machining zone.

Therefore, mist faces difficulty in penetrating between tool-chip interfaces, which in turn

results in reduced effectiveness of MQCF. Thus, optimization of nozzle standoff distance is

necessary to improve the efficiency of the MQCF system.

Three factors are important while optimizing standoff distance. High-temperature

affected area, area covered by MQCF mist and force exerted by MQCF mist. Standoff

distance was varied from 10 mm to 100 mm (with 10 mm interval). The high-temperature

affected area was measured using Infratech® VarioCam hr infrared camera. The area covered

by MQCF mist was measured using an indigenously developed setup as shown in Figure 5.

Force exerted by the mist was measured using Kistler® 9272B piezoelectric quartz

dynamometer.

[Insert Figure 5 here]

2.3.3. Nozzle angle position

Due to continuous rotation of the workpiece, a stiff peripheral air boundary layer formed

along its rotation axis. Nozzle angle should ensure ease of mist to penetrate into the

machining zone while overcoming surrounding air boundary by the cutting fluid. Nozzle

10
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

angle position was varied from 15º to 90º (with 15º interval). Machining experiments were

carried out with constant cutting speed, feed and depth of cut, whereas MQCF nozzle angles

were varied and cutting force were measured. Nozzle angle position was selected on the

assumption that cutting force will be least at the optimum nozzle angle position.

2.4. Design of experiments

Experiments are planned in such a way that useful inferences could be obtained by

performing the minimum number of experiments using the central composite rotatable design

(CCRD). Total numbers of experiments in CCRD technique is equal to 2k + 2k + central runs,

where k is the number of input variable factors [46]. In the present work, number of variables

are 2 (cutting speed and feed). The total experiments required to be performed for one type of

machining environment is 4+4+5=13. Five central runs were selected for better assessment of

repeatability and to reduce error. Based on preliminary experiments, cutting speed was varied

in the range of 55–125 m/min and feed in the range of 0.04–0.28 mm/rev with a constant

depth of cut of 0.5 mm. All these experiments were carried out with FC and MQCF cooling

techniques as well as DM (Total experiments = 39, each repeated thrice). The coded and

original value of the input parameter as per CCRD is listed in Table 3. Influence of control

variables on the output response was also determined.

[Insert Table 3 here]

2.5. Machining test

Machining experiments were conducted on a lathe (Make: HMT®, Model: NH 26) fitted with

a PTGNR 2525 M 22 (Make: Sandvik Coromant®) commercial tool holder. Tool holder has

rake angle (γo) of −6°, angle of approach (Kr) of 91°, inclination angle (λs) of −6°, clearance

angle (αo) of 0° and nose radius (rε) of 1.2 mm. FC and MQCF cooling technique were used.

For comparison, DM experiments are also performed. Cutting force and feed force were

measured using a piezoelectric quartz dynamometer (Make: Kistler®, Model: 9272 B). After

11
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

machining, surface morphologies of the cutting tools were observed using field emission

scanning electron microscopy (FESEM; Make: Zeiss®, Model: Sigma), optical microscope

(Make: Zeiss®, Model: AxioCam MRc) and non-contact laser surface profilometer (Make:

Taylor Hobson®, Model: Talysurf CCI 6000). Elemental composition analysis of the tool

rake face was carried out using energy dispersive spectroscopy (EDS). Figure 6 (a) shows the

schematic of MQCF machining setup. Figure 6 (b) shows details of MQCF nozzle parts and

Figure 6 (c) shows an overview of the experimental setup. Table 4 illustrates machining

conditions.

[Insert Figure 6 here]

[Insert Table 4 here]

3. Results and Discussion

In this section, emulsion stability, anti-corrosion properties and hard machining performance

of GCF were evaluated. All experiments were performed thrice and the average values of

results are reported and discussed.

3.1. Emulsion stability of green cutting fluid

Emulsion stability of GCF was measured by oven test as per ASTM D 3707 standard [43].

To assess the thermal stability of the various composition of GCF, the separation of emulsion

into oil and water after heating at 85±1°C for 48 h in a thermostatically controlled oven was

measured. Storage stability of the emulsion composition was determined by measuring

separation of oil and water from the emulsion. Separation of oil, water and the remaining

emulsion was observed after 48 h of oven test. The amount of separated oil and water were

measured by a graduated cylinder and the remaining fluid is considered as an intact emulsion.

Figure 7 shows an assessment of storage stability of emulsion composition by oven test. After

48 h of oven test, with the increase in water content, the remaining emulsion increases up to

1:16 emulsion composition, whereas it starts decreasing afterwards. The emulsion

12
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

composition showing least separation (most remaining emulsion) after oven test is considered

as the most stable composition. Therefore, based on the measured parameters, the storage

stability of 1:16 GCF emulsion composition is proved to be better among others.

[Insert Figure 7 here]

3.2. Anticorrosion of cutting fluid emulsion

Chip weight loss and ASTM D 4627 standard were used to rate corrosion of cutting fluid,

which is graded from 1 to 10, where one is non-corrosive, five being medium and ten being

highly corrosive [44].

[Insert Figure 8 here]

Figure 8 shows the corroded filter paper after test with various concentrations of

different cutting fluids. It is observed that with an increase in the concetration of GCF in the

emulsion, amount of rusting decreases. GCF showed less corrosion with the grade of 3,

whereas in general corrosion grade of petroleum-based mineral oil cutting fluid emulsion

varies in between 8−9 [47]. Therefore, it can be said that GCF has better anti-corrosion

properties as compared to MO-based cutting fluid emulsion.

[Insert Figure 9 here]

[Insert Figure 10 here]

After the corrosion test, the weight of the cast iron chips was measured and calculated

for the weight loss on corrosion as shown in Figure 9. Figure 10 (a−c) shows chips tested

with 0.5 %, 1.5 % and 10 % emulsions of GCF, respectively after 2 hours of the test. The

result shows that with the increase in the concentration of GCF, weight loss of chips and

corrosion rate reduces. It is due to the anti-corrosion properties of GCF, which is able to

prevent rust in chips when present in higher concentration. GCF contains Triethanolamine

(TEA) and jaggery which are corrosion inhibitors. The inhibition efficiency of TEA is due to

the presence of a terminal amine with higher electron density that binds more strongly to the

13
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

metal surface. Moreover, jaggery contains 50−60 % sucrose which helps in inhibition. The

lone pair of electrons present in oxygen helps the sucrose adsorption to the metal surface.

Therefore, the vacant adsorption site is filled by sucrose instead of oxygen. Thus, GCF shows

better anti-corrosion properties.

3.2 Optimum emulsion concentration

Ten different emulsions with varying water concentration were prepared and their thermal

conductivity, as well as the specific heat, was measured. Figure 11 shows the effect of water

concentration (in the emulsion) on its thermal conductivity. It is observed that thermal

conductivity of emulsion increases with increase in water concentration. The thermal

conductivity of emulsion having 1 part of GCF and 2 part of water (1:2) was 0.44 W/(m ºC).

It increases till 0.54 W/(m ºC) for 1:16 emulsion concentration. After 1:16 emulsion

concentration, saturation level is reached, which is because the thermal conductivity of water

is around 0.6 W/(m ºC).

[Insert Figure 11 here]

[Insert Figure 12 here]

Specific heat of emulsions plays a vital role in extracting heat from tool-chip

interfaces. Figure 12 shows the effect of water concentration in the emulsion on its specific

heat. Water is known as the best coolant. Therefore, with the increase in water content in

emulsion its specific heat increases to a point before coming to saturation which may have

almost similar specific heat value as water. Specific heat of 1:20 emulsion concentration was

3.71 MJ/(m3ºC). After observing the trend for thermal conductivity, specific heat and

emulsion stability with varying water content, 1:16 emulsion concentration was selected to

achieve proper cooling as well as lubrication.

3.3 Optimum nozzle standoff distance

14
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Figure 13 shows force exerted by MQCF spray, which was recorded using piezoelectric

dynamometer at varying nozzle standoff distance. At 10 mm nozzle standoff distance,

maximum force is observed. However, with the increase in nozzle standoff distance, force

exerted by MQCF spray reduces gradually. This is due to the fact that with the increase in

standoff distance, MQCF mist diverges and its velocity reduces.

[Insert Figure 13 here]

[Insert Figure 14 here]

Although exerted force by MQCF mist is important, the area covered by it also need

to be considered to cool the entire area where temperature is high. Figure 14 shows the high-

temperature area during dry machining test using infrared camera (L = 26.42 mm). It is

observed that machining high-temperature zone profile is elliptical (Figure 14). Therefore,

MQCF nozzle head having a rectangular slit (1 × 5 mm2) as spray opening was chosen to

generate mist in an elliptical shape. The minor axis of the ellipse is considered as

measurement length by spray to cover the entire high-temperature zone in all direction during

machining. Figure 15 shows the variation in length (minor axis) covered by MQCF spray

with respect to varying standoff distance measured using the experimental setup as shown in

Figure 5.

At 10 mm, standoff distance, length covered by mist is 24 mm. With the increase in

standoff distance, length covered by mist increases due to its diverging nature. However,

further increase in standoff distance beyond 30 mm results in flaring of MQCF mist causes a

reduction of the length covered by the aerosol. It is observed that the minimum length of mist

to cover entire high-temperature zone should be more than 26.5 mm (Figure 14). Therefore,

30 mm standoff distance is selected as optimum to cover the entire area as well as to have

higher penetration force of MQCF mist. The area covered by MQCF mist at 10 mm, 30 mm

and 50 mm standoff distance is shown in Figure 16.

15
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

[Insert Figure 15 here]

[Insert Figure 16 here]

3.3 Selection of nozzle spray angular position

Continuous rotation of workpiece forms a peripheral air boundary layer near its

circumference. Penetration of MQCF mist jet ability passing through air boundary into the

machining zone depends upon nozzle angular position from the workpiece. Machining

experiments were carried out using 1:16 emulsion composition at 30 mm standoff distance

(cutting speed of 90 m/min, feed of 0.16 mm/rev and depth of cut of 0.5 mm). Variation of

cutting force with respect to varying nozzle angle position is shown in Figure 17. It is

observed that cutting force reduces with the increase in nozzle angle position from horizontal

axis up to 45º. However, with further increase in nozzle angle position causes an increase in

cutting forces. Initially, when nozzle position is at 15º, machined chips block MQCF spray to

penetrate into the machining zone efficiently causing high cutting force. However, with the

increase in nozzle angular position, 45º is found to be best for reducing cutting force. Further

increase in nozzle angular position deteriorates machining performance with MQCF.

[Insert Figure 17 here]

3.4 Machining performance

Machining experiments were carried out at three different machining environments (DM, FC

and MQCF). All experiments are repeated thrice and average values are reported and

discussed.

3.4.1. Cutting and feed force

Central composite rotatable design (CCRD) was used to design and optimize the number of

experiments performed. Table 5 illustrates the obtained cutting force responses with

corresponding input parameters for DM, FC and MQCF cooling environment. Afterwards,

response surface methodology (RSM) was used to obtained empirical models relating input

16
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

parameters and output responses. As per CCRD, empirical equations for cutting force are as

follows:

Fc  DM = 529.18  1302.57 f  7.45v  2.48vf  644.81 f 2  0.03v 2 (1)

Fc  FC =  56.05  2589.38 f  1.12v  5.40vf  2867.864 f 2  0.0041v 2 (2)

Fc  MQCF =  22.79  1727.219 f  0.73v  3.41vf  975.044 f 2  0.0003v 2 (3)

Similarly, empirical equations for feed force are as follows:

Ff  DM = 18.61  637.72 f  0.55v  0.695vf  643.79 f 2  0.004v 2 (4)

Ff  FC = 34.12  302.43 f  0.44  0.287 f  2.18 f 2  0.003 2 (5)

Ff  MQCF = 30.31  296.28 f  0.408v  0.307 f  4.426 f 2  0.00315v 2 (6)

where f, v represents the feed (mm/rev) and cutting speed (m/min), respectively. Fc and Ff

represents the cutting as well as feed forces. Subscripts represent the type of machining

environment. ANOVA analysis for cutting force with MQCF machining is shown in Table

6. Observation shows that the significant term A and A2 (feed) has the highest contribution

(65.68%) followed by B and B2 (cutting speed; 34.23%) for cutting force. The coefficient of

determination (R2) was found to be 0.9820. R2 value for DM and FC machining was also

found to be more than 0.95 for all output responses.

[Insert Table 5 here]

[Insert Table 6 here]

[Insert Figure 18 here]

[Insert Figure 19 here]

Figure 18 and 19 illustrate the comparative cutting forces and feed forces between

DM, FC and MQCF machining at varying cutting speed as well as feed. With the increase in

cutting speed the cutting and feed force decreases. Also, with the increase in feed, the cutting

and feed force increases as expected in turning. In the case of dry machining, highest cutting

17
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

and feed forces are observed (Figure 18 and 19). This is due to high friction, temperature and

absence of cooling and lubrication in the machining region. Figure 20 (a−d) shows surface

morphology and 3D surface profile of the cutting tool rake face after 15 minutes of DM.

During DM, crater wear is observed on the rake face of the cutting tool (Figure 20 b). Also,

micro-cracks and adhered chip particles are witnessed (Figure 20 c) on the rake face of the

cutting tool. Shredded particles of the cutting tool materials are seen (Figure 20 d) in the case

of DM. Therefore, particularly for hard turning alternates of DM are required.

[Insert Figure 20 here]

In case of machining with FC, the cutting force with varying cutting speed (Figure 18

a) and feed (Figure 18 b) have a larger value as compared with MQCF machining. This is due

to insufficient lubricating effect in-between tool-chip interface as FC machining is more

focused on cooling. It is observed that feed have the highest influence on the cutting and feed

forces, which is due to increase in the chip contact area with the cutting tool surface.

Initially, at low cutting speed, MQCF mist easily penetrate into the tool-chip

interface. Oil droplets with MQCF mist have easy access in the machining zone. Thus, the

lubricating effect of MQCF causes reduction of feed force as shown in Figure 19 (a).

However, with the increase in cutting speed, the feed force differences between FC and

MQCF machining reduces. This is because of lower penetration of the MQCF mist in

between the tool-chip interface due to less time (Figure 19 a). Similar observations are made

by Leppert [48] regarding the reduction of resultant cutting and feed forces during machining

with MQL compared to DM.

Further, the viscosity of MO is 3.30 × 105 m2/s [27] and GCF is 4.18 × 105 m2/s.

GCF possesses marginally high viscosity as compared to MO. Also, GCF is mainly made of

the oils that consist of triglycerides, oleic acid and fatty acids which possess excellent

lubricating properties. Therefore, GCF can lubricate better than MO. Apart from high

18
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

viscosity, GCF also possess a higher flash point. Thus, GCF can be applied at high machining

temperature without catching fire compared to MO.

3.4.2. Coefficient of friction

Experimental values of cutting and feed forces were used to calculate tool-chip interface

temperature. The COF is given as follows [49]:

Fc sin   Ff cos 
µ (7)
Fc cos   Ff sin 

where Ff is the feed force, Fc is the cutting force, α is the rake angle and µ is the COF. The

average COF at the tool-chip interface for different machining environments is illustrated in

Figure 21.

[Insert Figure 21 here]

It is observed that FC machining using GCF exhibits less tool-chip interface COF as

compared to DM, irrespective of the feed. In the case of DM, severe crater wear is observed

on the rake face of the cutting tool. However, in the case of FC machining using GCF,

adhesion of workpiece material on the cutting tool rake face is observed (Figure 22). Figure

22 (b-c) illustrates 3D surface profile as well as surface micrograph of cutting tool rake face

after 15 minutes of FC machining that shows adhered workpiece material. Figure 22 (d)

shows the interface between workpiece adhered material and the parent cutting tool. Figure

22 (e) shows the elemental composition analysis of Area A as shown in Figure 22 (a).

Elemental analysis of area A shows the presence of 98 % of Fe, which is present in the

workpiece material. It validates the adhesion of workpiece material on the cutting tool rake

face.

19
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

[Insert Figure 22 here]

[Insert Figure 23 here]

Machining with MQCF using GCF has least tool-chip interface COF as compared to

FC and DM. MQCF pressurized mist is able to flush away chip debris with ease and reduces

adhesion of workpiece material due to high temperature. MQCF also results in chip uncurling

leading towards lesser tool-chip contact length. Figure 23 illustrates the length of sticking and

sliding region, measured on the rake face of the cutting tool using optical microscope after 15

minutes of machining (v = 90 m/min, f = 0.16 mm/rev and d = 0.5 mm). High pressurized

MQCF mist can cool and lubricate in between tool-chip sliding region. Contact lengths

(sticking + sliding region) are reduced using MQCF as compared to DM and FC machining

environments. Tasdelen et al. [50] also observed the reduction of sticking and sliding zones

on cutting tool rake surface during machining with MQCF as compared to DM. Therefore,

lower COF is observed using MQCF machining.

3.4.3. Centre line average surface roughness of workpiece

The CLA surface roughness of the machined product is best measure to ensure better

machinability. Figure 24 (a-b) illustrates the variation of surface roughness of workpiece with

respect to cutting speed and feed for DM, FC and MQCF machining. The empirical equation

models of surface roughness for DM, FC and MQCF machining are as follows:

Ra  DM =1.3231  4.439 f  0.00291v  0.055vf  30.39 f 2  0.000076v 2 (8)

Ra  FC =1.19  8.32 f  0.017v  0.027vf  29.17 f 2  0.000108v 2 (9)

Ra  MQCF =1.22  2.69 f  0.015v  0.0036vf  29.28 f 2  0.00008v 2 (10)

where Ra represents the surface roughness of the workpiece and subscripts in the Ra denotes

the type of machining environment.

20
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

[Insert Figure 24 here]

It is observed that cutting speed has a low effect, however, the feed has a profound

effect on the surface roughness of the workpiece, irrespective of the type of machining

environment as expected. In the case of MQCF machining, workpiece surface roughness is

least (better surface finish) with respect to FC and DM. It is mainly due to reduced tool-chip

contact length, COF and less adhesion of workpiece material on the cutting tool rake face.

Figure 25 shows the cutting tool rake face after 15 minutes of MQCF machining using GCF.

Figure 25 (b-c) shows 3D surface profile and surface morphology of the cutting tool rake

face. Figure 25 (d) illustrates the workpiece adhered material on the cutting tool rake face.

From Figure 25 (b), it is observed that adhesion of the workpiece material on the cutting tool

rake face is least for MQCF machining as compared to DM (Figure 20 b) and FC (Figure 22

b). MQCF mist supplied to the tool-chip interface prevents adhesion of workpiece material on

the cutting tool rake face. Less adhered workpiece on the cutting tool rake face assists flow of

chips that lead to lesser machining forces, which in turns reduce the surface roughness of

workpiece. Similarly, in another study, the average surface roughness of the machined

workpiece with MQCF using GCF is decreased compared to FC and DM during machining

of AISI H-13 steel [51].

[Insert Figure 25 here]

As discussed above, 1:16 emulsion composition of GCF was selected based on its

thermal conductivity, specific heat as well as stability. Then, 30 mm nozzle standoff

distance was experimentally optimized based on the exerted force by MQCF mist and its

covering region. Moreover, optimum nozzle spray angular position was found to be 45º. It

was also observed that MQCF using GCF with optimum parameters possesses several

21
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

advantages over machining with FC and DM. Machining with MQCF using GCF reduces

cutting force, feed force, coefficient of friction and workpiece average surface roughness.

4. Conclusion

Mineral oil based cutting fluids possess various detrimental environmental effects and health

hazards to the operator and surroundings. These can be reduced by using MQCF technique

and replacing conventional MO-based cutting fluid with indigenously developed vegetable

based GCF to make machining a sustainable and cleaner process. GCF was synthesized using

biodegradable, non-toxic, environment-friendly base materials. Properties of GCF were

characterized and storage stability of emulsions, as well as corrosion tests, was performed.

MQCF input parameters are optimized to conduct hard machining experiments. The salient

findings are as follows:

 1:16 emulsion composition of developed GCF was found to be optimum in terms of

its better thermal conductivity, specific heat as well as its storage stability as per

ASTM D 3707 standard.

 GCF showed less corrosion with the grade of 3; whereas in general corrosion grade

of MO-based cutting fluid varies in between 8−9. This is attributed to its ingredients

such as triethanolamine (TEA) and jaggery which act as corrosion inhibitors.

Therefore, GCF has excellent anti-corrosion properties.

 30 mm MQCF nozzle stand-off distance was found to be optimum by considering

mist coverage region and cutting forces exerted by mist at tool-chip interface.

 With 45 º nozzle angle, MQCF mist could penetrate better into the air boundary

periphery that is generated by the rotating workpiece.

 Relative to DM and FC machining, MQCF showed better performance in terms of

the cutting force, feed force, coefficient of friction, and workpiece average surface

22
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

roughness. Cutting force, feed force and coefficient of friction got reduced in the

range of 19−46 %, 14−24 % and 10−21% respectively, as compared to DM.

 With MQCF machining, sticking and sliding zones length were reduced as compared

to DM and FC machining.

MQCF machining with indigenously developed vegetable based GCF has several

merits compared to FC and DM. However, all vegetable based cutting fluids are not

appropriate. Each ingredient of vegetable based cutting fluid need to be studied clearly and

optimized based on individual requirements. Moreover, the initial cost of MQCF equipment

is higher, which also need to be further reduced. Furthermore, hybridization of MQCF with

cold air, cryogenic, nanofluids, ionic liquids etc. can be attempted to create sustainable and

clean machining process.

Acknowledgement

The authors are thankful for the financial support provided by Board of Research in Nuclear

Sciences (Project Number: ME/P/MRS/02), Department of Science and Technology for their

TSDP (DST/TSG/AMT/2015/619), Defence Research Development & Development

Laboratory (CARS Project). Authors are also thankful to Central Instrumentation Facility, IIT

Guwahati for providing FESEM and EDS facility for this work.

References

1. Singh, G., Sharma, V.S., 2017. Analyzing machining parameters for commercially
pure titanium (Grade 2), cooled using minimum quantity lubrication assisted by a
Ranque-Hilsch vortex tube. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing
Technology. 88(9−12), 2921−2928.
2. Azhiri, R.B., Teimouri, R., Baboly, M.G., Leseman, Z., 2014. Application of Taguchi,
ANFIS and grey relational analysis for studying, modeling and optimization of wire
EDM process while using gaseous media. International Journal of Advanced
Manufacturing Technology, 71, 279−295.

23
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

3. Teimouri, R., Baseri, H., 2013. Experimental study of rotary magnetic field-assisted
dry EDM with ultrasonic vibration of workpiece. International Journal of Advanced
Manufacturing Technology, 67(5−8), 1371−1384.
4. Deiab, I., Raza, S.W., Pervaiz, S., 2014. Analysis of lubrication strategies for
sustainable machining during turning of titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy. Procedia CIRP, 17,
766−771.
5. Gajrani, K.K., Reddy, R.P.K., Sankar, M.R., 2016. Experimental comparative study
of conventional, micro-textured and coated micro-textured tools during machining of
hardened AISI 1040 alloy steel. International Journal of Machining and Machinability
of Materials, 18(5/6), 522−539.
6. Gajrani, K.K., Sankar, M.R., 2018. Sustainable machining with self-lubricating coated
mechanical micro-textured cutting tools. Reference Module in Materials Science and
Materials Engineering, Elsevier. (DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-803581-8.11325-6).
7. Klocke, F., Eisennblatter, G., 1999. Coated tools for metal cutting-features and
applications. CIRP Annals: Manufacturing Technology, 48(2), 515–525.
8. Gajrani, K.K., Sankar, M.R., 2017. State of the art on micro to nano textured cutting
tools. Materials Today: Proceedings, 4(2A), 3776−3785.
9. Gajrani, K.K., Suresh, S., Sankar, M.R., 2018. Environmental friendly hard
machining performance of uncoated and MoS2 coated mechanical micro-textured
tungsten carbide cutting tools, Tribology International, 125, 141−155.
10. Gajrani, K.K., Sankar, M.R., Dixit, U.S., 2018. Tribological performance of MoS2-
filled microtextured cutting tools during dry sliding test. ASME Journal of Tribology,
140(2), 021301 (1−11).
11. Gajrani, K.K., Sankar, M.R., Dixit, U.S., 2018. Environmentally friendly machining
with MOS2 filled mechanically micro-textured cutting tools, Journal of Mechanical
Science and Technology, 32(8), 3797−3805.
12. Muthuraja, A., Senthilvelan, S., 2015. Abrasive wear performance of tungsten carbide
based self-lubricant cutting tool material. International Journal of Refractory Metals and
Hard Materials, 51, 91–101.
13. Tazehkandi, A.H., Shabgard, M., Pilehvarian, F., 2015. Application of liquid nitrogen
and spray mode of biodegradable vegetable cutting fluid with compressed air in order
to reduce cutting fluid consumption in turning Inconel 740. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 108(A), 90−103.
14. Mazurkiewicz, M., Kubala, Z., Chow, J., 1989. Metal machining with high pressure
water-jet cooling assistance-a new possibility. Journal of Engineering for Industry,
111(1), 7–12.
15. Gupta, M.K., Singh, G., Sood, P.K., 2015. Modelling and optimization of tool wear in
machining of EN24 steel using taguchi approach. Journal of The Institution of
Engineers: Series C, 96(3), 269−277.
16. Dixit, U.S., Sarma, D.K., Davim, J.P., 2012. Environmentally friendly machining.
Springer Science & Business Media, NewYork, USA.
17. Trent, E.M., 2000. Metal cutting, 2nd edition Butterworths & Co., London, U.K.
18. Gajrani, K.K., Sankar, M.R., 2017. Past and current status of eco-friendly vegetable
oil based metal cutting fluids. Materials Today: Proceedings, 4(2A), 3786−3795.

24
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

19. Sankar, M.R., Gajrani, K.K., 2017. Cutting fluid emissions and eco-friendly cutting
fluid for sustainable machining. Proceedings of the National Conference on
Sustainable Mechanical Engineering: Today and Beyond (SMETB), March 25−26,
2017 at Tezpur University, India, 157−162.
20. Fox, N.J., Stachowiak, G.W., 2007. Vegetable oil based lubricants – A review of
oxidation. Tribology International, 40(7), 1035–1046.
21. Krahenbuhl, U., 2002. Vegetable oil-based coolants improve cutting performance
(Cutting Fluids). Tooling & Production, Nelson Publishing.
22. Woods, S., 2005. Going green, Cutting Tool Engineering, 57(2), 48–51
23. Khan, M.M.A., Dhar, N.R., 2006. Performance evaluation of minimum quantity
lubrication by vegetable oil in terms of cutting force, cutting zone temperature, tool
wear, job dimension and surface finish in turning AISI-1060 steel. Journal of Zhejiang
University-Science A, 7(11), 1790–1799.
24. Amiril, S.A.S., Rahim, E.A., Syahrullail, S., 2017. A review on ionic liquids as
sustainable lubricants in manufacturing and engineering: Recent research,
performance, and applications. Journal of Cleaner Production, 168, 1571–1589.
25. Hamdan, A., Sarhan, A.A.D., Hamdi, M., 2012. An optimization method of the
machining parameters in high-speed machining of stainless steel using coated
carbide tool for best surface finish. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing
Technology, 58(1−4), 81–91.
26. Goindi, G.S., Sarkar, P., 2017. Dry machining: A step towards sustainable machining-
challenges and future directions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 165, 1557−1571.
27. Gajrani, K.K., Ram, D., Sankar, M.R., 2017. Biodegradation and hard machining
performance comparison of eco-friendly cutting fluid and mineral oil using flood
cooling and minimum quantity cutting fluid techniques. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 165(C), 1420−1435.
28. Sankar, M.R., Choudhury, S.K., 2015. Experimental study and modeling of
machining with dry compressed air, flood and minimum quantity cutting fluid cooling
techniques. Procedia CIRP, 31, 228−233.
29. Chetan, Ghosh, S., Rao, P.V., 2015. Application of sustainable techniques in metal
cutting for enhanced machinability: A review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 100,
17–34.
30. Sohrabpoor, H., Khanghah, S., Teimouri, R., 2015. Investigation of lubricant
condition and machining parameters while turning of AISI 4340. International Journal
of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 76(9−12), 2099–2116.
31. Dhar, N.R., Ahmed, M.T., Islam, S., 2007. An experimental investigation on effect of
minimum quantity lubrication in machining AISI 1040 steel. International Journal of
Machine Tools and Manufacture, 47(5), 748–753.
32. Park, K.H., Suhaimi, M.A., Yang, G.D., Lee, D.Y., Lee, S.W., Kwon, P., 2017.
Milling of titanium alloy with cryogenic cooling and minimum quantity lubrication
(MQL). International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing, 18(1), 5–
14.

25
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

33. Park, K.H., Yang, G.D., Lee, M.G., Jeong, H., Lee, S.W., Lee, D., 2014. Eco-friendly
face milling of titanium alloy. International Journal of Precision Engineering and
Manufacturing, 15(6), 1159–1164.
34. Sharma, J., Sidhu, B.S., 2014. Investigation of effects of dry and near dry machining
on AISI D2 steel using vegetable oil. Journal of Cleaner Production, 66, 619–623.
35. Sarıkaya, M., Gullu, A., 2015. Multi-response optimization of minimum quantity
lubrication parameters using Taguchi-based grey relational analysis in turning
of difficult-to-cut alloy Haynes 25. Journal of Cleaner Production, 91, 347–357.
36. Beatrice, B.A., Kirubakaran, E., Jeba Thangaiah, P.R., Dev Wins, K.L., 2014. Surface
roughness prediction using artificial neural network in hard turning of AISI H13 steel
with minimal cutting fluid application. Procedia Engineering, 97, 205−211.
37. Khandekar, S., Sankar, M.R., Agnihotri, V., Ramkumar, J., (2012). Nano cutting fluid
for enhancement of metal cutting performance. Materials and Manufacturing
Processes, 27, 963−967.
38. Sharma, A.K., Tiwari, A.K., Dixit, A.R., 2016. Effects of minimum quantity
lubrication (MQL) in machining processes using conventional and nanofluid based
cutting fluids: A comprehensive review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 127, 1–18.
39. Saberi, A., Rahimi, A.R., Parsa, H., Ashrafijou, M., Rabiei, F., 2016. Improvement of
surface grinding process performance of CK45 soft steel by minimum quantity
lubrication (MQL) technique using compressed cold air jet from vortex tube. Journal
of Cleaner Production, 131, 728–738.
40. Pereira, O., Rodriguez, A., Fernandez-Abia, A.I., Barreiro, J., Lopez de Lacalle, L.N.,
2016. Cryogenic and minimum quantity lubrication for an eco-efficiency turning of
AISI 304. Journal of Cleaner Production, 139, 440–449.
41. Wang, C., Lin, H., Wang, X., Zheng, L., Xiong, W., 2017. Effect of different oil-on-
water cooling conditions on tool wear in turning of compacted graphite cast iron.
Journal of Cleaner Production, 148, 477–489.
42. Somashekaraiah, R., Suvin, P.S., Gnanadhas, D.P., Kailas, S.V., Chakravortty, D.,
2016. Eco-friendly, non-toxic cutting fluid for sustainable manufacturing and
machining processes. Tribology Online, 11(5), 556−567.
43. ASTM D 3707, 2010. Test method for storage stability of water-in-oil emulsions by
the oven test method, ASTM International.
44. ASTM D 4627, 2012, Test method for iron chip corrosion for water-dilutable metal
working fluids, ASTM International.
45. Meyer, R.A., Cannon, D.F., Kent, W.E., 1996. The fishbone (Ishikawa) diagram: A
dynamic learning tool. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Educator, 8(1), 45−47.
46. Cochran, W.G., Cox, G.M., 1968. Experimental designs, 2nd edition, John Wiley &
Sons Inc.
47. Gajrani, K.K., Sankar, M.R., 2018. Sustainable cutting fluids: Thermal, rheological,
biodegradation, anti-corrosion, storage stability studies and its machining
performance”, Reference Module in Materials Science and Materials Engineering,
Elsevier. (DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-813195-4.11152-X).

26
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

48. Leppert, T., 2011. Effect of cooling and lubrication conditions on surface topography
and turning process of C45 steel. International Journal of Machine Tools &
Manufacture, 51, 120−126.
49. Ernst, H., Merchant, M.E., 1941. Chip formation, friction and high quality machine
surfaces in surface treatment of metals. Transaction of ASME, 29, 299−378.
50. Tasdelen, B., Thordenberg, H., Olofsson, D., 2008. An experimental investigation on
contact length during minimum quantity lubrication (MQL) machining. Journal of
Materials Processing Technology, 203(1−3), 221−231.
51. Gajrani, K.K., Ram, D., Sankar, M.R., Dixit, U.S., Suvin, P.S., Kailas, S.V., 2017.
Machining of hardened AISI H-13 steel using minimum quantity eco-friendly cutting
fluid, International Journal of Additive and Subtractive Materials Manufacturing,
1(3/4), 240−256.

Table captions

Table 1. Properties of tungsten carbide tool material and hardened AISI H-13 steel
workpiece

Table 2. Properties of green cutting fluid

Table 3. CCRD coded and actual values of input parameters for the machining process

Table 4. Machining conditions

Table 5. CCRD table with input parameters and output responses (cutting force) for all
machining environment

Table 6. ANOVA for cutting force (Fc-MQCF) with minimum quantity cutting fluid machining
technique

Figure captions

Figure 1. Flow chart for the synthesis of green cutting fluid

Figure 2. Green cutting fluid emulsion (1:16) for the storage stability test (a) before (b) after
48 h @85ºC

Figure 3. Overview of corrosion test method setup (a) filter paper with petri dish, (b) gray
cast iron chips on the filter paper and (c) cutting fluid poured into petri dish

Figure 4. Fishbone diagram for optimum minimum quantity process parameters

27
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Figure 5. (a) Experimental setup for measuring the area covered by mist using minimum
quantity cutting fluid technique and (b) area covered by mist with 30 mm standoff distance

Figure 6. (a) Schematic of minimum quantity cutting fluid setup, (b) details of MQCF nozzle
parts and (c) overview of the experimental setup

Figure 7. Assessment of storage stability of the emulsion composition by oven test

Figure 8. Corroded filter paper after corrosion test with various concentration of green
cutting fluid emulsions

Figure 9. Effect of the cutting fluid emulsion concentration on weight loss of chips due to
corrosion

Figure 10. Tested chips with various concentration of cutting fluid emulsions: (a) 0.5 %, (b)
1.5 % and (c) 10 %

Figure 11. Effect of the emulsion composition on its thermal conductivity

Figure 12. Effect of the emulsion composition on its specific heat

Figure 13. Effect of the nozzle stand-off distance on force exerted by MQCF mist

Figure 14. Infrared micrograph of the machining region with the maximum length of high-
temperature zone

Figure 15. Effect of the nozzle stand-off distance on minor axis length covered by MQCF
mist

Figure 16. Minor axis length (L) covered by MQCF mist at the standoff distance of (a) 10
mm (b) 30 mm and (c) 50 mm

Figure 17. Effect of the MQCF nozzle angle position on the cutting force

Figure 18. Effect of varying (a) cutting speed and (b) feed on cutting force under dry, flood
coolant and minimum quantity cutting fluid machining

Figure 19. Effect of varying (a) cutting speed and (b) feed on feed force under dry, flood
coolant and minimum quantity cutting fluid machining

Figure 20. Rake face of cutting tool after 15 minutes of dry machining (a) surface
morphology, (b) rake face having crater wear, (c) micro-cracks and adhered particles and (d)
shredding of tool materials (v = 90 m/min, f = 0.12 mm/rev, d = 0.5 mm)

Figure 21. Effect of the feed on coefficient of friction under dry, flood coolant and minimum
quantity cutting fluid machining

28
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Figure 22. Rake face of cutting tool after 15 minutes of flood cooling machining (a) surface
morphology, (b) 3D surface profile showing adhered material, (c) adhered material and
parent tool material (d) interface between adhered material and parent tool and (e) elemental
composition of Area A as shown in Figure 22 (a) (v = 90 m/min, f = 0.12 mm/rev, d = 0.5
mm)

Figure 23. Variation of the sticking and sliding zone on the rake face under dry, flood
coolant and minimum quantity cutting fluid machining (v = 90 m/min, f = 0.16 mm/rev, d =
0.5 mm)

Figure 24. Effect of the varying (a) cutting speed and (b) feed on workpiece surface
roughness under dry, flood coolant and minimum quantity cutting fluid machining

Figure 25. Rake face of cutting tool after 15 minutes of MQCF machining (a) surface
morphology, (b) 3D surface profile showing adhered material, (c) abrasion marks (d) adhered
material (v = 90 m/min, f = 0.12 mm/rev, d = 0.5 mm)

29
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Figure with captions

Emulsifiers (E1 + E2 + E3)

Add

Azadirachta indica oil

Add

Cymbopogon citratus oil

Add

Centella asiatica additive

Add

Jaggery syrup (diluted)

Add

Coconut oil

Add

Green cutting fluid

Figure 1. Flow chart for the synthesis of green cutting fluid

 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

(a) (b)

Separated oil
(85ºC)
(48 hours)

Emulsion

Free water

Figure 2. Green cutting fluid emulsion (1:16) for the storage stability test (a) before (b) after
48 h @85ºC

(a) (b) (c)

Filter paper Chips Green cutting fluid

emulsion

Figure 3. Overview of corrosion test method setup (a) filter paper with petri dish, (b) gray
cast iron chips on the filter paper and (c) cutting fluid poured into petri dish
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Green cutting fluid Nozzle angle position

pH
Density Cutting force
Viscosity
Flash point
MQCF process parameters

Thermal conductivity
Specific heat Force exerted by MQCF spray
Storage stability High temperature zone
Anti-corrosion Area covered by MQCF spray

Emulsion composition Nozzle standoff distance

Figure 4. Fishbone diagram for optimum minimum quantity process parameters

(a) (b)

Emulsion pipe MQCF nozzle

Air pipe
Adjustable stand
Standoff distance Area covered

Dynamometer

Figure 5. (a) Experimental setup for measuring the area covered by mist using minimum
quantity cutting fluid technique and (b) area covered by mist with 30 mm standoff distance
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

(a)
Cutting fluid valve
Cutting
fluid Nozzle head
reservoir Cutting fluid
Atomiser

Workpiece
Mixing chamber

Pressure gauge
Tool
Air valve
Air compressor
Pressurised air

Pressurised air inlet Cutting fluid inlet Pressurised air

Cutting fluid
Mixing chamber

MQCF nozzle

Workpiece
Air outlet
Di Cutting Cutting tool
sc
& fluid
(b) rin (c) Tool holder
g outlet

Figure 6. (a) Schematic of minimum quantity cutting fluid setup, (b) details of MQCF nozzle
parts and (c) overview of the experimental setup
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

45
Seperated oil
40
Seperated water
35 Remaning emulsion
30
Quantity (ml)

25
20
15
10
5
0
0 2 4 Emulsion
6 8 composition
10 12 14(1:W)
16 18 20 22

Figure 7. Assessment of storage stability of the emulsion composition by oven test

3.0 % 4.0 % 5.0 % 7.0 % 10.0 %

0.5 % 1.0 % 1.5 % 2.0 % 2.5 %

Figure 8. Corroded filter paper after corrosion test with various concentration of green
cutting fluid emulsions
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

0.20

Weight loss (g)

0.16

0.12

0.08

0.04

0.00
0 Cutting
2 fluid
4 concentration
6 8 (%) 10 12

Figure 9. Effect of the cutting fluid emulsion concentration on weight loss of chips due to
corrosion

(a) 0.5 % (b) 1.5 % (c) 10 %

Highly corroded Moderately corroded No corrosion

Figure 10. Tested chips with various concentration of cutting fluid emulsions: (a) 0.5 %, (b)
1.5 % and (c) 10 %
Thermal conductivity (W/(mºC))

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
2 4 6 8 composition
Emulsion 10 12 (1:X)
14 16 18 20

Figure 11. Effect of the emulsion composition on its thermal conductivity

 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Volumetric specific heat (MJ/(m3ºC))

4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 composition
Emulsion 10.00 12.00 14.00
(1:X)16.00 18.00 20.00

Figure 12. Effect of the emulsion composition on its specific heat

1.2
Force exerted by spray (N)

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Nozzle stand-off distance from stationary plates
(mm)
Figure 13. Effect of the nozzle stand-off distance on force exerted by MQCF mist
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Machining region
Workpiece

Tool
holder

20 mm

Figure 14. Infrared micrograph of the machining region with the maximum length of high-
temperature zone

30

25
Minor axis (mm)

20

15

10

0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Nozzle stand-off distance from stationary plate (mm)

Figure 15. Effect of the nozzle stand-off distance on minor axis length covered by MQCF
mist
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

(a) (b)
L
L

(c)

Figure 16. Minor axis length (L) covered by MQCF mist at the standoff distance of (a) 10
mm (b) 30 mm and (c) 50 mm

290

280 α
Cutting force (N)

270

260

250

240

230
0 15Nozzle30 45 horizontal
angle from 60 75 (º)
axis 90 105

Figure 17. Effect of the MQCF nozzle angle position on the cutting force
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

450
f = 0.12 mm/rev DM
d = 0.5 mm FC
400
Cutting force (N) MQCF

350

300

250
(a)
200
50 60 Cutting
70 speed
80 (m/min)
90 100 110 120 130

450
DM v = 90 m/min
FC d = 0.5 mm
MQCF
Cutting force (N)

350

250

150

50 (b)
0

3
99

99

99

99

99

99

99

99
99

99

99

99

99

99

99

99

Feed (mm/rev)
99

99

99

99

99

99

99

99
03

07

11

15

19

23

27

31
0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

Figure 18. Effect of varying (a) cutting speed and (b) feed on cutting force under dry, flood
coolant and minimum quantity cutting fluid machining
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

120
DM
FC
110
Feed force (N) MQCF

100

90

80
f = 0.12 mm/rev
(a) d = 0.5 mm
70
50 60 Cutting
70 speed
80 (m/min)
90 100 110 120 130

150
DM v = 90 m/min
FC d = 0.5 mm
130 MQCF
Feed force (N)

110

90

70
(b)
50
0.00 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16
Feed (mm/rev) 0.20 0.24 0.28 0.32

Figure 19. Effect of varying (a) cutting speed and (b) feed on feed force under dry, flood
coolant and minimum quantity cutting fluid machining
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

(a) (b)

Crater wear

(c) (d)

Adhered particles Shredding of tool

Micro cracks material

Figure 20. Rake face of cutting tool after 15 minutes of dry machining (a) surface
morphology, (b) rake face having crater wear, (c) micro-cracks and adhered particles and (d)
shredding of tool materials (v = 90 m/min, f = 0.12 mm/rev, d = 0.5 mm)

0.7
DM v = 90 m/min
0.6 FC d = 0.5 mm
Coefficient of friction

MQCF
0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0.04 Feed
0.08(mm/rev)
0.16 0.24 0.28

Figure 21. Effect of the feed on coefficient of friction under dry, flood coolant and minimum
quantity cutting fluid machining
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

(a) (b)

Adhered
A material

(c) (d)

Interface between adhered

Adhered material material and parent tool

Parent tool

(e)

Figure 22. Rake face of cutting tool after 15 minutes of flood cooling machining (a) surface
morphology, (b) 3D surface profile showing adhered material, (c) adhered material and
parent tool material (d) interface between adhered material and parent tool and (e) elemental
composition of Area A as shown in Figure 22 (a) (v = 90 m/min, f = 0.12 mm/rev, d = 0.5
mm)
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1800
one DM

Sticking and sliding zone width (µm)

1600 ngz
icki FC
1400 St
ne MQCF
1200 g zo
in
id
1000 Sl
800
Parent tool
600
400
200
0
Sticking zone Sliding zone

Figure 23. Variation of the sticking and sliding zone on the rake face under dry, flood
coolant and minimum quantity cutting fluid machining (v = 90 m/min, f = 0.16 mm/rev, d =
0.5 mm)
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

3.3
f = 0.12 mm/rev DM
3.1 d = 0.5 mm FC
Surface roughness (µm) 2.9
MQCF

2.7
2.5
2.3
2.1
1.9
1.7
1.5
50 Cutting
70 speed (m/min)
90 110 130

6
DM v = 90 m/min
FC d = 0.5 mm
Surface roughness (µm)

5 MQCF

0
0.00 0.04 0.08 0.12
Feed 0.16 0.20 0.24 0.28 0.32

Figure 24. Effect of the varying (a) cutting speed and (b) feed on workpiece surface
roughness under dry, flood coolant and minimum quantity cutting fluid machining
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

(a) (b)

Adhered
material

(c) (d) Adhered

material

Abrasion
marks

Figure 25. Rake face of cutting tool after 15 minutes of MQCF machining (a) surface
morphology, (b) 3D surface profile showing adhered material, (c) abrasion marks (d) adhered
material (v = 90 m/min, f = 0.12 mm/rev, d = 0.5 mm)
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Highlights

 Eco-friendly vegetable based green cutting fluid is developed

 pH, density, flash point and viscosity of green cutting fluid are investigated
 Storage stability and anti-corrosion properties of green cutting fluid are tested
 Input parameters for machining with minimum quantity cutting fluid are optimised
 Machining tests are performed using minimum quantity cutting fluid and flood
cooling
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table with captions

Table 1. Properties of tungsten carbide tool material and hardened AISI H-13 steel
workpiece
Material AISI H-13 steel WC+CO
Density (g/cm3) 7.8 14.5
Poisson’s Ratio 0.3 0.23
Young's modulus (GPa) 210 550
Flexural strength (MPa) 950 2000
Co-efficient of thermal expansion (µm/m./C) 7.42 4.51
Hardness (HRC) 56 ± 2 89 ± 3

Table 2. Properties of green cutting fluid

Cutting fluid pH Density (g/cm3) Flash point (°C) Viscosity@40 °C (m2/s)
Green 8.55 0.9530 325340 4.18 × 105

Table 3. CCRD coded and actual values of input parameters for the machining process

Coded values Cuting speed (m/min) Feed (mm/rev)

−1.414 55 0.04
−1 65 0.08
0 90 0.16
1 115 0.24
1.414 125 0.28

Table 4. Machining conditions

Cutting speed Feed Depth of cut Machining MQCF Air pressure
(m/min) (mm/rev) (mm) environments flow rate (MPa)
55−125 0.04−0.28 0.5 Dry, FC and 35 ml/h 0.5
MQCF (5 bar)
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 5. CCRD table with input parameters and output responses (cutting force) for all
machining environment

Exp. Feed Speed

Fc-DM Fc-FC Fc-MQCF
No (mm/rev) (m/min)
1 0.24 115.00 421.73 331.62 316.13
2 0.16 90.00 324.79 274.91 243.73
3 0.16 90.00 324.61 273.66 241.17
4 0.16 125.00 303.72 247.36 251.03
5 0.28 90.00 464.28 374.33 366.1
6 0.08 115.00 204.57 149.79 158.07
7 0.24 65.00 526.83 358.42 327.51
8 0.16 90.00 322.48 275.53 240.95
9 0.04 90.00 184.31 108.47 92.89
10 0.16 55.00 407.31 310.33 235.47
11 0.16 90.00 323.97 273.32 245.67
12 0.08 65.00 289.81 133.32 142.12
13 0.16 90.00 324.82 274.46 243.56

Table 6. ANOVA for cutting force (Fc-MQCF) with minimum quantity cutting fluid machining
technique
Source F Value p-value Prob>F Percentage contribution
Model 8.32 0.0008
A-Feed 33.19 0.0076 33.19
B-Speed 17.92 0.0039 17.93
AB 0.09 0.7737 0.09
A2 32.48 0.0003 32.49
B2 16.30 0.0052 16.30
Lack of Fit 1.22 0.4133