Journal of
Journal
Effect of Silicon Powder Mixed EDM on
Machining Rate of AISI D2 Die Steel
H.K. Kansal, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, SLIET, Longowal, India. E-mail: shaarut@yahoo.com
Sehijpal Singh, Dept. of Mechanical and Production Engineering, GND Engineering College, Ludhiana, India.
E-mail: sehijgnec@yahoo.co.in
Pradeep Kumar, Dept. of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, IIT Roorkee, 247672 India.
E-mail: kumarfme@iitr.ernet.in
Abstract
In this paper, the effect of silicon powder mixing into the
dielectric fluid of EDM on machining characteristics of AISI
D2 (a variant of high carbon high chrome) die steel has been
studied. Six process parameters, namely peak current, pulse-
on time, pulse-off time, concentration of powder, gain, and
nozzle flushing have been considered. The process perfor-
mance is measured in terms of machining rate (MR). The
research outcome will identify the important parameters and
their effect on MR of AISI D2 in the presence of suspended
silicon powder in a kerosene dielectric of EDM. The study
indicated that all the selected parameters except nozzle flush-
ing have a significant effect on the mean and variation in MR
(S/N ratio). Optimization to maximize MR has also been un-
dertaken using the Taguchi method. The ANOVA analysis
indicates that the percentage contribution of peak current
and powder concentration toward MR is maximum among
all the parameters. The confirmation runs showed that the
setting of peak current at a high level (16 A), pulse-on time at
a medium level (100 µs), pulse-off time at a low level (15 µs),
powder concentration at a high level (4 g/l), and gain at a low
level (0.83 mm/s) produced optimum MR from AISI D2 sur-
faces when machined by silicon powder mixed EDM.
Keywords: Silicon Powder, EDM, Machining Rate, Optimi-
zation, Taguchi Method
Introduction
Electrical discharge machining (EDM) is one of the
extensively used nonconventional material removal
processes. It can be successfully employed to ma-
chine electrically conductive parts regardless of their
hardness and toughness. In spite of remarkable pro-
cess capabilities, limitations such as low volumetric
material removal and poor surface quality are associ-
ated with EDM. In the recent past, powder mixed EDM
(PMEDM) has emerged as one of the advanced tech-
niques in the direction of the enhancement of the ca-
pabilities of EDM (Zhao, Meng, and Wang 2002;
Wong, Lim, and Tee 1998). In this process, a suitable
13
Manufacturing
of Manufacturing
ProcessesProcesses
Vol. 9/No.
Vol.
1 9/No. 1
2007 2007
material in fine powder form (aluminum, chromium,
graphite, copper, or silicon carbide, etc.) is mixed into
the dielectric fluid of EDM. The spark gap is filled up
with additive particles. The added powder significantly
affects the performance of EDM process. The electri-
cally conductive powder reduces the insulating
strength of the dielectric fluid and increases the spark
gap distance between the tool electrode and workpiece.
As a result, the process becomes more stable, thereby
improving machining rate (MR) and surface finish.
The principle of PMEDM is shown in Figure 1. In
this process, the material in powder form is mixed
into the dielectric fluid either in the same tank or in a
separate tank. When a voltage of 80-320 V is applied
to both the electrodes, an electric field in the range
5 7
10 to 10 V/m is created. The spark gap is filled up
with additive particles, and the gap distance between
tool and the workpiece increases from 25 µm to 50
µm to many times larger (Figure 1). The powder par-
ticles get energized and behave in a zig-zag fashion.
The grains come close to each other under the spark-
ing area and gather in clusters. Under the influence of
electric forces, the powder particles arrange them-
selves in the form of chains at different places under
the sparking area (refer to Figure 1). The chain for-
mation helps in bridging the gap between both the
electrodes. Due to the bridging effect, the gap voltage
and insulating strength of the dielectric fluid decreases.
The easy short-circuit takes place, which causes early
explosion in the gap. As a result, the ‘series discharge’
starts under the electrode area. Due to the increase in
the frequency of discharging, the faster sparking within
a discharge takes place, which causes faster erosion
from the workpiece surface. At the same time, the
added powder modifies the plasma channel. The
plasma channel gets enlarged (Zhao, Meng, and
Journal of Manufacturing Processes
Vol. 9/No. 1
2007

Literature Review
(Tool) Erden and Bilgin (1980) studied the effect of sus-
Powder mixed pended powder particles (copper, aluminum, iron,
(+)
Bridging dielectric
and carbon) on the machining rate of a mild steel
workpiece. It was found that the added powder im-
Discharge proves the breakdown characteristics of the dielec-
column Discharge gap tric fluid, and the machining rate increases with an
increase in the concentration of the added powder.
Crater Debris
It was further observed that the machining becomes
(Workpiece) unstable at an excessive powder concentration due
(-) to the occurrence of short-circuits. Thereafter,
Jeswani (1981) investigated the effect of the addi-
tion of fine graphite powder into kerosene oil on the
Figure1: The principle of PMEDM
Figure 1 process machining of tool steels. It was reported that the ad-
Principle of PMEDM Process
dition of 4 g/l of fine graphite powder increased the
interspace for electric discharge initiation and low-
Wang 2002). The electric density decreases; hence,
ered the breakdown voltage. The machining process
sparking is uniformly distributed among the powder
stability was improved, which caused around a 60%
particles. As a result, even and more uniform distri-
increase in material removal rate and 28% reduction
bution of the discharge takes place, which causes
in wear ratio. Mohri, Saito, and Higash (1991) re-
uniform erosion (shallow craters) on the workpiece.
ported the effect of silicon powder addition into di-
This results in improvement in surface finish.
electric fluid on the surface finish of H-13 die steel.
The literature available on PMEDM is very lim-
The fine and corrosion-resistant surfaces having
ited. It can be easily observed from the available
roughness of the order of 2 µm were produced. How-
literature (presented in next section) that consider-
ever, this performance could only be achieved at
able efforts have been directed to improve the sur-
controlled machining conditions (even distribution
face quality by suspending powder particles in the
of powder into dielectric, short discharge time,
dielectric of EDM. However, very little work has been
workpiece composition, etc.). It was further reported
reported on the improvement of machining efficiency
by Narumiya et al. (1989) that under specific work-
of PMEDM. The reduction of machining time espe-
ing conditions aluminum and graphite powders yield
cially for machining of some hard and tough materi-
a better surface finish than the silicon powder. The
als like AISI D2 die steel with nonconventional
best results (Ra less than 2 µm) are obtained for alu-
machining processes is one of the most important
minum and graphite powder particles having diam-
requirements of modern industry. The major appli-
eters less than 15 µm and concentration ranges from
cations of AISI D2 steel are in the manufacturing of
2 to 15 g/l.
high-efficiency cutting tools (dies and punches),
Kobayashi et al. (1992) investigated the effects of
woodworking tools, shear blades for cutting thin
suspended powder in dielectric fluid on surface
materials, cold rolls for multiple roller stands, gauges,
roughness. It was reported that the surface finish of
plastic molds, and so on. The aim of the present re-
SKD-61 material is improved with the use of silicon
search work was to set the optimum process param-
powder. Yan and Chen (1993) studied the effect of
eters of the PMEDM process to maximize the MR of
suspended aluminum and silicon carbide powders
AISI D2 die steel. The MR is estimated by calculat-
on EDM of SKD11 and Ti-6Al-4V. Considerable
ing the difference between the initial weight and the
improvement in MR was observed, but at the cost of
final weight of the workpiece after processing at a
surface finish. Ming and He (1995) reported that the
specified set of conditions by EDM or PMEDM as:
additives (conductive and inorganic oxide particles)
(
MR mm 3 / min. = ) increase the MR, decrease the tool wear rate, and
improve the surface quality of the workpiece quite
Workpiece weight loss (gm ) (1) effectively, especially in mid-finish machining and
( )
Density gm / mm × Machining time ( min.)
3
finish machining phases. Uno and Okada (1997)

14

investigated the effect of silicon powder mixing on
the surface generation mechanism. The EDM with
silicon powder mixed fluid produced glossier sur-
faces as compared to those produced by conven-
tional EDM with kerosene fluid. It was argued that
EDM with silicon powder mixed fluid led to smaller
undulation of a crater because the impact force act-
ing on the workpiece is smaller. This results in the
stable machining without a short-circuit between the
electrode and the workpiece. In another study, Uno
et al. (1998) observed that nickel powder mixed
working fluid modifies the surface of aluminum
bronze components. Nickel powder was purposely
used to deposit a layer on an EDM surface to make
the surface abrasion-resistant.
Wong, Lim, and Tee (1998) observed that ma-
chining of SKH-54 tool steel in the presence of
graphite powder particles produces higher MR and
better discharge dispersion. Takawashi et al. (1983)
reported that nature of carbon (free or combined
form) present in the workpiece material has a sig-
nificant effect on its surface finish. Chow et al.
(2000) studied the EDM process by adding SiC
and aluminum powders into kerosene for the mi-
cro-slit machining of titanium alloy. The addition
of both SiC and aluminum powder to the kero-
sene enhanced the gap distance, resulting in higher
debris removal rate and material removal depth.
The effect of various powder characteristics on
EDM of SKD-11 material were recently reported
by Tzeng and Lee (2001).
Very recently, Pecas and Henriques (2003) in-
vestigated the influence of silicon powder mixed
dielectric on conventional EDM. The surface qual-
ity is assessed through quality surface indicators
and process time measurements over a set of dif-
ferent processing areas. The results show that by
the addition of 2 g/l silicon powder, the operating
time and surface roughness decrease. The aver-
age surface roughness depends on machining area
and machining time. The surface roughness var-
ies from 0.09 to 0.57 µm for the area range of 1
2 2
cm to 64 cm .
It can be easily concluded from the available lit-
erature that only fundamental research work has
been carried in the past decade. Several issues such
as the mechanism of material removal, optimization
of process parameters, application of PMEDM for
machining of various workpiece materials, and so
on, need the attention of researchers.
15
Journal of Manufacturing Processes
Vol. 9/No. 1
2007
Experimental Detail
Experiments were conducted on an EZNC fuzzy
logic die-sinking EDM machine manufactured by
Electronica Machine Tools Ltd. (EMTL) India. It is
energized by a PS fuzzy logic 50-Ampere pulse gen-
erator and a controller to produce rectangular-shaped
current pulses. The existing dielectric circulation
system of the EMTL EDM machine needs about 60
liters of dielectric fluid (kerosene) in circulation. The
mixing of powder with the whole of the dielectric
fluid is avoided. This is because different levels of
concentration of powders were to be mixed into di-
electric for experimentation. Moreover, it is also not
possible to circulate the powder-mixed dielectric
through the existing circulation system because the
filter might clog due to the presence of powder par-
ticles and debris. Therefore, there was a need to de-
velop a new powder-mixed dielectric circulation
system for the experimentation. To fulfill this require-
ment, a new experimental setup for PMEDM was
designed and developed in the laboratory. The sche-
matic of the kinematic configuration of the PMEDM
setup is shown in Figure 2a and is photographed as
shown in Figure 2b.
The new PMEDM system was designed for 7 li-
ters of dielectric fluid for experimentation. The sys-
tem consists of a transparent bath-like container,
called the machining tank. It is placed in the work
tank of the EDM, and the machining is performed in
this container. To hold the workpiece, a workpiece
fixture assembly is placed in the machining tank.
The machining tank is filled up with dielectric fluid
(kerosene oil). To avoid particle settling, a stirring
system is incorporated. A small dielectric circula-
tion pump is installed for proper circulation of the
powder-mixed dielectric fluid into the discharge gap
(power rating is 0.3 hp, flow rate is 2 l/min., and the
diameter of the ejector nozzle is 4 mm). The pump
and the stirrer are placed in the same tank in which
machining is performed. The distance between the
powder-mixed dielectric suction point and the nozzle
outlet is made as short as possible (10 inches) to
ensure the complete suspension of powder in the
discharge gap. Magnetic forces are used to separate
the debris from the dielectric fluid. For this purpose,
two permanent magnets are placed at the bottom of
machining tank (see Figure 2a).
AISI D2 die steel in fully annealed condition is
selected as the workpiece material. The average hard-
ness of the material was found to be 59 HRC. Cop-
Journal of Manufacturing Processes
Vol. 9/No. 1
2007

Tool
electrode R
Stirrer
Nozzle
Machining tank
Powder mixed
D.C.
kerosene
Power
Pure kerosene C Supply

Work-piece
Work-piece
holding fixture
Circulating Pump
Magnets

(a)

(b)

Figure 2: Experimental setup for PMEDM:

(a) Schematic line diagram
Figure 2 (b) Photograph
Experimental Setup for PMEDM, (a) schematic line diagram, (b) photograph

per electrodes with diameter 25 mm have been se- acteristics. These are: higher is best (HB), lower is
lected as a tool. The machining is performed in com- best (LB), and nominal is best (NB). The S/N ratios
mercially available kerosene oil. It was decided to are calculated by using the following equations
add the silicon powder (average particle size 30 µm) (Logothetis 2000):
into the kerosene oil. The chemical composition of
⎡1 n ⎤
work material, properties of kerosene oil, and other HB : S / N ratio = − 10 log10 ⎢ ∑ yi−2 ⎥ (2)
experimental settings are given in Table 1. ⎣ n i =1 ⎦

Experimental Design ⎡1 n ⎤
LB : S / N ratio = − 10 log10 ⎢ ∑ yi2 ⎥ (3)
A simple, efficient, and systematic Taguchi method ⎣ n i =1 ⎦
was used for the design of the experiment. The
Taguchi method uses signal-to-noise (S/N) ratio to ⎡y2 ⎤
quantify the variation in data. There are three cat- NB : S / N ratio = 10 log10 ⎢ 2 ⎥ (4)
⎣s ⎦
egories of S/N ratios depending on the response char-

16
 Journal of Manufacturing Processes
Vol. 9/No. 1
2007

Table 1 Table 2
Chemical Composition of AISI D2 Die Steel, Properties of Process Parameters and Their Levels
Kerosene Oil, and Experimental Settings
Levels
Chemical Composition of AISI D2 Die Steel Designation Process Parameter 1 2 3
Element C Si Mn W V Mo Cr A Nozzle flushing Yes No –
% 1.52 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.10 0.8 12 B Peak current (A) 3 6 10
Properties of Kerosene Oil C Pulse-on time (µs) 50 100 150
Dielectric constant, k 2 D Pulse-off time (µs) 15 20 25
Electrical conductivity, ␭ 1.6 × 10–14 S/m E Powder concentration 0 2 4
Mobility, µ 2.2 × 10–8 m2/Vs (g/l)
Electric field, EF 16.6 MV/m F Gain (mm/s) 0.83 0.84 0.85
Dynamic viscosity, ␩ 0.92 mPas
Mass density, ␳ 728 kg/m3
Experimental Settings EDM with zero powder concentration while the other
Polarity +ve levels designated as PMEDM. The nozzle flushing
Electrode lift time 0.2 sec. is considered as a qualitative parameter and it has
Dielectric flow rate 2 l/min. two levels. Each of the other parameters is varied at
Dielectric pressure 0.5 kg/cm2
Machining time 30 min.
three levels. The range of process parameters, their
levels, and symbols are given in Table 2. The ex-
where y is the sample mean and s is the sample periments were conducted according to the trial con-
1
standard deviation of n observations in each trial. ditions as specified in standard Taguchi OA L18 (2 ×
7
The process parameters of PMEDM are shown in 3 ). The selected response characteristic in the
the Ishikawa cause-effect diagram (Figure 3). Six present work is machining rate and will be consid-
parameters, namely nozzle flushing, peak current, ered as ‘higher the best.’
pulse-on time, pulse-off time, concentration of sili-
con powder, and gain (rate of advancement of tool
toward workpiece), have been selected for the present Results and Discussion
study. The ranges of these parameters were selected Because the experimental design is orthogonal, it
on the basis of preliminary experiments conducted is possible to separate out the effect of each process
by using the ‘change one variable at a time approach.’ parameter at different levels. The mean or average
The concentration of the silicon powder has three values and S/N ratio of the MR for each trial run (1
levels, with the first level denoted as conventional through 18) have been calculated from experimen-

Electrical Powder
parameters parameters

Pulse on time Powder type

Peak current
Powder concentration
Supply voltage
Pulse off time Shape & size

PMEDM process
Performance
Flushing Material (MR)

Lift Size
Gain time

Non-electrical Electrode
parameters parameters

Figure 3
Figure 3: TheIshikawa
IshikawaCause-Effect
cause-effectDiagram
diagram

17
Journal of Manufacturing Processes
Vol. 9/No. 1
2007

Table 3
Machining Rate Values (Raw Data) and S/N Ratio Data
Trial No. R1 (mm3/min.) R2 (mm3/min.) R3 (mm3/min.) Average MR (mm3/min.) S/N Ratio (dB)
1 1.82 1.60 1.38 1.60 4.08
2 1.64 1.70 1.82 1.72 4.71
3 2.20 2.01 1.76 1.99 5.98
4 2.67 2.76 2.70 2.71 8.66
5 4.34 4.54 4.05 4.31 12.69
6 3.00 2.10 1.20 2.10 6.44
7 4.55 4.69 4.32 4.52 13.10
8 5.27 5.83 6.57 5.89 15.40
9 7.24 7.38 7.58 7.40 17.38
10 1.96 1.90 2.08 1.98 5.93
11 1.56 1.68 1.62 1.62 4.19
12 1.55 1.85 1.70 1.70 4.61
13 3.60 4.30 3.95 3.95 11.93
14 1.99 2.05 2.08 2.04 6.19
15 2.54 3.07 2.76 2.79 8.91
16 5.19 4.81 5.06 5.02 14.01
17 7.38 8.30 7.90 7.86 17.91
18 4.20 4.00 4.16 4.12 12.30
R1, R2, and R3 are repetitions of experiments

tal data and are summarized in Table 3. The mean Table 4

Mean and S/N Values of Significant Parameters for
response refers to the average value of the perfor- Machining Rate
mance characteristic on each parameter at different Mean
levels. The average value of MR (raw data) and Machining
those of the S/N ratios for each parameter at levels Process Rate S/N Ratio
1, 2, and 3 are calculated from Table 3 and are given Parameters Levels (mm3/min.) (dB)
in Table 4. Peak current (A) 1 1.77 4.92
2 2.98 9.14
The individual effects of the six parameters on the 3 5.80 15.02
average value of MR and S/N ratios are shown in Fig- Pulse-on time (µs) 1 3.30 9.62
ure 4. From the trend of variation of the MR at differ- 2 3.91 10.18
ent levels of the factors, it can be observed that with 3 3.35 9.27
Pulse-off time (µs) 1 3.99 10.19
an increase in peak current, the MR improves (refer
2 3.38 9.89
to Figure 4a). This is because the peak current has a 3 3.17 8.99
large impact on input energy. Input energy represents Powder concentration 1 2.67 7.72
the energy per pulse expended in the spark gap re- (g/l) 2 3.31 9.38
gion and thus controls the rate of erosion of the mate- 3 4.58 11.97
Gain (mm/s) 1 3.85 10.06
rial. This result is in line with the findings of Zhao, 2 3.33 9.19
Meng, and Wang (2002). With an increase in current, 3 3.38 9.81
the carriers (ions and electrons) are accelerated to-
ward their respective electrodes more vigorously. The pulse-on time is another factor that shows the
They accumulate more energy while moving and col- variation in mean and S/N ratio, as shown in Figure
lide with the suspended powder particles. The sus- 4b. With an increase in pulse-on time, MR first in-
pended powder particles get energized and act as creases and then decreases. This can be attributed to
carriers, which on further collision with the ions and the fact that very short pulse duration causes less
electrons gather more energy and release more carri- vaporization on the workpiece surface, whereas
ers, resulting in an avalanche of ions and electrons. longer pulse duration makes the machining process
This causes more discharges per unit time (frequency) unstable due to the increased probability of short-
on the workpiece surface. The faster sparking takes circuiting. It is noticed from Figure 4c that the varia-
place within a discharge, the faster the erosion from tion in pulse-off time affects the machining rate in a
the workpiece surface, and hence higher MR. large way. An increase in pulse-off time decreases

18
 Journal of Manufacturing Processes
Vol. 9/No. 1
2007

It can be further observed

6 20 6 20
from Figure 4d that when silicon
5 5
powder is suspended into the di-
16 16 electric fluid of EDM, there is a
MR (mm /min.)

MR (mm /min.)
S/N ratio (dB)

S/N ratio (dB)

4 4 considerable increase in MR. This
3

3
12 12 trend also highlights the compari-
3 3 son of MR in EDM and PMEDM,
8 8 as Level 1 indicates the case of
2 2
(b) conventional EDM, while levels
(a)
1 4 1 4
2 and 3 represent powder-mixed
3 6 10 50 100 150
EDM. This observation suggests
that the addition of an appropri-
Peak Current (A) Pulse on time (us)
ate amount of powder into the
6 20 6 20 dielectric fluid of EDM causes
greater erosion of the material.
5
16
5
16 The reason for the enhancement
MR (mm /min.)
MR (mm /min.)

S/N ratio (dB)

S/N ratio (dB)

of MR is mainly attributed to the

4 4
lower breakdown strength of the
3
3

12 12
3 dielectric fluid when conductive
3
powder particles are added to it.
8 8
2 2 The spark gap distance is in-
(d) creased many-fold over normal
(c)
1 4
1 4 EDM. It is expected that the in-
0 2 4
15 20 25 crease in gap may have caused
Concentration (g/l) wider discharge passages. The
Pulse off time (us)
powder particles get energized
6 20 6 20
and behave in a zig-zag fashion.
5 5
The grains come close to each
16 16 other under the sparking area and
MR (mm /min.)

MR (mm /min.)
S/N ratio (dB)

S/N ratio (dB)

4 4 gather in clusters. The powder

3
3

12 12 particle tries to bridge the dis-

3 3 charge gap between both the elec-
8 8 trodes. This facilitates the
2 2
(f)
dispersion of discharge into sev-
(e)
1 4 1 4 eral increments (discharging fre-
Yes No 1 2 3 quency increases) and hence
Nozzle Flushing Gain (mm/s) enhances the MR. The maximum
MR was produced at a 4 g/l con-
Figure 4: The effect of process parameters on MR and S/N data centration of silicon powder. This
(■- Mean MR; ▲—S/N ratio)
indicates that an optimal gap size
was obtained at this concentration
Figure 4
Effect of Process Parameters on Machining Rate and S/N Data
that produced the best paramet-
ric combination of powder den-
sity, particle striking, and
the MR. This may be because machining time in- discharge transitivity in the EDM process. Nozzle
creases with an increase in pulse-off time. However, flushing seems to have a negligible effect on MR
this is an integral part of the EDM process and must (Figure 4e). The reason may be that with nozzle
exist. An insufficient off-time leads to erratic cycling flushing there are fewer chances for the powder par-
and retraction of the advancing servo, slowing down ticles to remain in the discharge gap for a longer
the operation cycle and hence MR. time period. It is further noticed from the response

19
Journal of Manufacturing Processes
Vol. 9/No. 1
2007

curves for gain (Figure 4f) that the gain (rate of ad-
vancement of the tool toward the workpiece) does
not produce a pronounced effect on MR.
MR is the ‘higher the better’ type of quality charac-
teristic. Therefore, greater values of MR are consid-
ered to be optimal. From Figure 4, it can be observed
that parameters B (peak current), C (pulse-on time),
D (pulse-off time), E (powder concentration), and F
(gain) affect both the mean and variation in MR val-
ues (S/N ratio). The trend of variation of the response
curves further suggested that the third level of param-
eters B (B3) and E (E3), second level of parameter C
(C2), and first level of parameters D (D1) and F (F1)
might provide maximum MR from the workpiece sur-
face when machined by PMEDM. It can be further
noticed that for all parameters the highest value of
average response corresponds to the highest value of
S/N ratio. To determine which parameters significantly
affect the performance characteristics, analysis of vari-
ance (ANOVA) was performed. The ANOVA results
for mean as well as for S/N data are given in Tables 5
and 6, respectively. These tables indicate that the pa-
rameters B (peak current), C (pulse-on time), D (pulse-
off time), E (powder concentration), and F (gain) are
significant at a 95% confidence interval for both the
mean and S/N ratio of the MR values. The percentage
contribution of parameters in Tables 5 and 6 indicate
that the parameters B (peak current) and E (powder
concentration) are most significant in controlling the
average values as well as the S/N ratio of the MR
values. Their contribution toward improvement in MR
is maximum among all the parameters. The reasons
behind these observations have been explained ear-
lier. The parameters C (pulse-on time) and D (pulse-
off time) have a small contribution toward the mean
and S/N ratio. The parameter A (nozzle flushing) does
not contribute any significant effect toward MR.
From Figure 4 as well as from ANOVA results for
mean and S/N data of MR, it seems that B3, E3, C2,
D 1 , and F 1 might produce optimum MR from

Table 5
Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) for Raw Data (Machining Rate)
Degrees of Percentage
Source Freedom Sum of Squares Mean Square F-Value Prob > F Contribution
A 1 0.07 0.07 1.00 0.357 0.10
B 2 51.37 25.69 342.01* 0.001 74.81
C 2 1.37 0.68 9.12* 0.015 2.02
D 2 2.20 1.10 14.68* 0.005 3.24
E 2 11.41 5.70 75.95* 0.001 16.80
F 2 1.09 0.51 6.67* 0.030 1.60
Residual 6 0.45 0.08 – – 1.43
Model 11 67.45 3.91 18.57 – –
Cor. total 17 67.90 3.99 – – 100
The Model F-value of 18.57 implies the model is significant. There is only a 0.05% chance that a “Model F-Value” this large could occur
due to noise.
*Significant at 95% confidence level.

Table 6
Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) for S/N Data
Degrees of Percentage
Source Freedom Sum of Squares Mean Square F-Value Prob > F Contribution
A 1 0.34 0.34 1.53 0.262 0.00
B 2 308.86 154.42 700.40* 0.001 79.91
C 2 2.54 1.27 5.75* 0.040 1.01
D 2 4.65 2.32 10.53* 0.011 2.02
E 2 55.10 27.55 124.94* 0.001 15.10
F 2 2.40 1.20 5.42* 0.040 1.03
Residual 6 1.32 0.22 – – 0.84
Model 11 373.86 21.86 14.01 – –
Cor. total 17 375.18 22.08 – – 100
The Model F-value of 14.01 implies the model is significant. There is only a 0.05% chance that a “Model F-Value” this large could occur
due to noise.
*Significant at 95% confidence level.

20
 Journal of Manufacturing Processes
Vol. 9/No. 1
2007

Table 7 Table 8
Optimum Levels of Process Parameters Confirmation Tests and Their Comparison with Results
Process Parameter Optimum Experimental Predicted
Parameter Designation Level Machining Machining
Peak current (A) B3 10 Trial Optimum Rate Rate
Pulse-on time (µs) C2 100 No. Conditions (mm3/min.) (mm3/min.) Error
Pulse-off time (µs) D1 15 1 B3, C2, D1, E3, F1 8.15 8.05 1.22%
Powder concentration (g/l) E3 4 2 B3, C2, D1, E3, F1 8.55 8.05 5.85%
Gain (mm/s) F1 0.83 3 B3, C2, D1, E3, F1 8.21 8.05 1.94%

workpieces when machined by silicon powder mixed Here,

EDM. The parameters and their selected optimum
levels are given in Table 7.
The optimum value of MR is predicted at selected
levels of significant parameters. The estimated mean
of the response characteristic (MR) can be computed
as follows (Roy 1990):
MRopt = Average performance + Contribution of
significant facctors at optimum levels
= T + ( B3 − T ) + (C2 − T ) + ( D1 − T ) +
(E 3 − T ) + ( F1 − T )
= B3 + C2 + D1 + E3 + F1 − 4T
where T = average results of MR (Table 3); B3 is
the average value of MR at the third level of peak
current; C 2 is the average value of MR at the sec-
ond level of pulse-on time; D1 is the average value
of MR at the first level of pulse-off time; E3 is the
average value of MR at the third level of silicon pow-
der concentration; and F1 is the average value of
MR at the first level of gain.
Substituting the values from Table 4 into the vari-
ous terms in Eq. (5):
MRopt = 5.80 + 3.91 + 3.99 + 4.58 + 3.85 − 4 × 3.52
= 8.05 mm 3 / min.
The 95% confidence interval of population (CI) was
computed by using the following equation (Ming
and He 1995):
F (1, n2 , α ) × Ve
CI = ±
Ne
where F(1,n2,␣) is the F-ratio required for ␣ = risk,
confidence = 1–risk, n2 is the degrees of freedom
(d.o.f.) of error, Ve is the pooled error variance, and
Ne is the effective number of replications.
N
Ne = (7)
d.o.f. of all factors used
1+
in the estimate of mean
where N is the total number of trials.
For MR, at confidence interval 95%, F (1,7,5%) =
5.59, Ve = 0.074, and the effective number of replica-
tions is Ne = 1.64. Thus, the computed CI = 0.50. The
95% CI of the predicted optimum MR is given as:
(5) 7.54 mm 3 / min. < 8.05 mm 3 / min. < 8.55 mm 3 / min .
To verify the improvement in MR using the opti-
mal level of cutting parameters, three confirmation
experiments were performed, and the data from the
confirmation runs and their comparisons with the
predicted value for MR is listed in Table 8. The maxi-
mum deviation of predicted results from experimental
results is about 6%.
Conclusions
Electric discharge machining (EDM) has been
found to be a promising machining technique for
obtaining desired dimensional accuracy and intri-
cacy from hard and tough die steels like high car-
bon high chrome materials. Powder mixing into the
dielectric fluid of EDM is one of the innovative de-
velopments that ensures better machining rates at
desired surface quality. The result of the present work
identifies the significant process parameters and op-
timizes the machining conditions in the presence of
silicon powder in the dielectric fluid to get maxi-
mum machining rate from AISI D2 die steel. Within
(6)
the range of parameters selected for the present work,
the following conclusions are drawn:
1. Peak current, concentration of the silicon
powder, pulse-on time, pulse-off time, and
gain significantly affect the MR in PMEDM.

21
Journal of Manufacturing Processes
Vol. 9/No. 1
2007
2. Peak current and concentration of silicon
powder are the most influential parameters
for causing material removal. The suspen-
sion of silicon powder into the dielectric fluid
of EDM appreciably enhances material re-
moval rate.
3. The nozzle flushing when applied at the in-
terface of tool electrode and workpiece does
not significantly affect the MR.
4. The optimum levels of various process pa-
rameters obtained in this work are:
Peak current = 10 A Powder concentration = 4 g/l
Pulse-on time = 100 µs Pulse-off time = 15 µs
Gain = 1 mm/s
References
Chow, H.M.; Yan, B.H.; Huang, F.Y.; and Hung, J.C. (2000). “Study
of added powder in kerosene for the micro-slit machining of
titanium alloy using electro-discharge machining.” Journal of
Materials Processing Technology (v101), pp95-103.
Erden, A. and Bilgin, S. (1980). “Role of impurities in electric dis-
charge machining.” Proc. of 21st Int’l Machine Tool Design and
Research Conf., pp345-350.
Jeswani, M.L. (1981). “Effects of the addition of graphite powder to
kerosene used as the dielectric fluid in electrical discharge ma-
chining.” Wear (v70), pp133-139.
Kobayashi, K.; Magara, T.; Ozaki, Y.; and Yatomi, T. (1992). “The
present and future Developments of electrical discharge machin-
ing.” Proc. of 2nd Int’l Conf. on Die and Mould Technology,
Singapore, pp35-47.
Logothetis, N. (2000). Managing for Total Quality, Deming to Taguchi
and SPC, 3rd ed. New Delhi: PHI.
Ming, Q.Y. and He, L.Y. (1995). “Powder-suspension dielectric fluid
for EDM.” Journal of Materials Processing Technology (v52),
pp44-54.
Mohri, N.; Saito, N.; and Higash, M. (1991). “A new process of finish
machining on free surface by EDM methods.” Annals of the CIRP
(v40, n1), pp207-210.
Narumiya, H.; Mohri, N.; Saito, N.; Otake, H.; Tsnekawa, Y.;
Takawashi, T.; and Kobayashi, K. (1989). “EDM by powder sus-
pended working fluid.” Proc. of 9th ISEM, pp5-8.
Pecas, P. and Henriques, E.A. (2003). “Influence of silicon powder
mixed dielectric on conventional electrical discharge machin-
ing.” Int’l Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture (v43),
pp1465-1471.
Roy, R.K. (1990). A Primer on the Taguchi Method. New York: Van
Nostrand Reinhold.
Takawashi, T.; Kobayashi, K.; Ito, H.; Sakakibara, T.; and Saito, N.
(1983). “Study of the mirror surface finishing by planetary EDM.”
Proc. of Int’l Symp. on Electro-Machining (ISEM-7), pp137-146.
22
Tzeng, Y.F. and Lee, C.Y. (2001). “Effects of powder characteristics
on electro discharge machining efficiency.” Int’l Journal of Ad-
vanced Mfg. Technology (v17), pp586-592.
Uno, Y. and Okada, A. (1997). “Surface generation mechanism in
electrical discharge machining with silicon powder mixed fluid.”
Int’l Journal of Electro Machining (v2), pp13-18.
Uno, Y.; Okada, A.; Hayashi, Y.; and Tabuchi, Y. (1998). “Surface
integrity in EDM of aluminum bronze with nickel powder mixed
fluid.” Journal of Japanese Society of Electrical Machining Engi-
neers (v32, n70), pp24-31.
Wong, Y.S.; Lim, L.C.; and Tee, R.I. (1998). “Near mirror finish
phenomenon in EDM using powder mixed dielectric.” Journal of
Materials Processing Technology (v79), pp30-40.
Yan, B.H. and Chen, S.L. (1993). “Effects of dielectric with sus-
pended aluminum powder on EDM.” Journal of the Chinese So-
ciety of Mechanical Engineers (v14, n3), pp307-312.
Zhao, W.S.; Meng, Q.G.; and Wang, Z.L. (2002). “The application of
research on powder mixed EDM in rough machining.” Journal of
Materials Processing Technology (v129), pp30-33.
Authors’ Biographies
H.K. Kansal is a lecturer in the Dept. of Mechanical Engineering
at SLIET, Longowal India. He received his BE in mechanical engi-
neering from Punjabi University, Patiala, India, in 1996 and his M.
Tech in mechanical engineering from Punjab Technical University,
Jalandhar (India) in 2001. Kansal is currently pursuing his PhD from
PTU Jalandhar. He has published more than 25 papers in journals and
conference proceedings. His area of research is nonconventional
machining, design of experiments, production engineering, welding,
and quality control. He is a life member of ISTE, PSA, IWS, and IE
(India).
Sehijpal Singh is a professor and head in the Dept. of Mechanical
and Production Engineering at GND Engineering College, Ludhiana,
India. He received his BE (mechanical engineering) in 1991, ME
(mechanical engineering) in 1994 from GND Engineering College,
Ludhiana, and PhD in 2002 from IIT Roorkee, India. His research
interests are in the fields of nonconventional machining, ergonomics
and method engineering, and metal cutting. He has contributed ap-
proximately 30 research papers in various journals and conferences
at national and international level. He is a life member of ISTE,
ISME, IE (India), and IIPE.
Pradeep Kumar is a professor and head in the Dept. of Mechanical
and Industrial Engineering at IIT Roorkee, (formerly University of
Roorkee), India. He received his BE (industrial engineering) in 1989,
ME (production engineering) in 1991, and PhD in 1994, all from the
University of Roorkee (now IIT Roorkee), India. He has also served
with DRF Industries and Steel Authority of India Ltd. as a production
engineer for four years. His research interests include quality engi-
neering, reliability analysis, product and process design, optimiza-
tion, nonconventional machining processes, and metal casting. Kumar
has published more than 100 papers in national and international
journals and conferences proceedings. He is a life member of ISME
and ISIAM.