Materials Today Communications

Optimization of CO2 laser drilling process parameters of GFRP/Al2O3/Perlite

composites
--Manuscript Draft--

Manuscript Number:

Article Type: Full Length Article

Section/Category: Composites and hybrid materials

Keywords: Hybrid Composite; Delamination, Hole taper; CO2 Laser drilling; Genetic algorithm;
Response Surface Methodology

Corresponding Author: Jayakrishna Kandasamy, Ph.D.

Vellore Institute of Technology
Vellore, Tamil Nadu INDIA

First Author: G Guru Mahesh

Order of Authors: G Guru Mahesh

Jayakrishna Kandasamy, Ph.D.

Abstract: GFRP composite have excellent mechanical characteristics and are extensively used
in aerospace and marine applications. But drilling GFRP composite through
conventional methods lead to delamination and taperness causing quality loss and
precision. CO2 laser drilling an Unconventional method to drill GFRP composites is
adopted in this study to reduce the delamination and taperness. In this study, the
process parameters of CO2 laser drilling of hybrid S-glass/Al2O3/Perlite powder
composite has been conducted to reduce the hole delamination and taperness. The
laser drilling parameters Laser power (P), cutting speed (N), focal length (L) and hole
diameter(d) were studied to reduce the hole delamination and hole taperness. These
results were achieved through mathematical modelling and optimization using
Response Surface Methodology (RSM) and Genetic algorithm (GA) respectively. The
optimum process parameters were found by minimizing the objective function upon
considering the drilled holes economic features: deposition efficiency and its geometric
features: hole diameters at entrance and exit. The most critical output factors,
delamination, and taper responses had a deviation from the objective by less than 3%.
From the confirmation experimental study, the optimum process parameters were
found be effective in reducing the hole delamination and taperness.

Suggested Reviewers: Kamalakanta Muduli, Ph.D

Associate Professor, Papua New Guinea University of Technology
kamalakanta.muduli@pnguot.ac.pg
Works on nontraditional machining process

Chithirai Pon Selvan, Ph.D,

Associate Professor, Curtin University School of Civil and Mechanical Engineering
pon.selvan@curtindubai.ac.ae
Published articles on machining GFRP composites

Abdul Zubar Hameed, Ph.D.

Associate Professor, King Abdulaziz University
aahameed@kau.edu.sa
Works on sustainable machining of composites

Opposed Reviewers:

Powered by Editorial Manager® and ProduXion Manager® from Aries Systems Corporation
Cover Letter

Respected Editor

Editor-in-Chief – Materials Today Communications

RE: Submission of a research article

Dear Editor-in-Chief

Please, find attached a copy of our research article entitled “Optimization of CO2 laser
drilling process parameters of GFRP/Al2O3/Perlite composites – A multi objective
approach” for its consideration and possible publication in Materials Today
Communications. In the current research article, the authors introduce a novel methodology
by analyzing the process parameters of CO2 laser drilling for hybrid S-glass/Al2O3/Perlite
powder composite in order to address delamination and taperness problems.

We sincerely hope that you and the reviewers find this article suitable for publication
in Materials Today Communications as we are very sure it will be very relevant for its readers.
We further certify that proper citations to the previously reported work have been given and no
data/tables/figures have been quoted verbatim from other publications without giving due
acknowledgment and without the permission of the author(s).

Please, if you require further information about the article or anything else, do not hesitate in
contacting us as soon as possible.

Yours sincerely

All Authors
Highlights

Highlights

 Process parameters of CO2 laser drilling hybrid S-glass/Al2O3/Perlite were optimized.

 Used Response Surface Methodology and Genetic Algorithm to reduce delamination
and taperness.
 Deviation of less than 3 % deviation is observed in the confirmatory experiment.
 Improved deposition efficiency and mechanical characteristics were observed.
Graphical Abstract

Composite preparation Laser drilling Hole parameters measuring process

• Laser Power
• Cutting Speed
• Focal Distance

Optimum Processing
Parameters

Analysis and optimization Data collection

Graphical abstract
Manuscript File Click here to view linked References

Optimization of CO2 laser drilling process parameters of GFRP/Al2O3/Perlite

composites – A multi objective approach

Abstract

GFRP composite have excellent mechanical characteristics and are extensively used in aerospace
and marine applications. But drilling GFRP composite through conventional methods lead to
delamination and taperness causing quality loss and precision. CO2 laser drilling an
Unconventional method to drill GFRP composites is adopted in this study to reduce the
delamination and taperness. In this study, the process parameters of CO2 laser drilling of hybrid
S-glass/Al2O3/Perlite powder composite has been conducted to reduce the hole delamination and
taperness. The laser drilling parameters Laser power (P), cutting speed (N), focal length (L) and
hole diameter(d) were studied to reduce the hole delamination and hole taperness. These results
were achieved through mathematical modelling and optimization using Response Surface
Methodology (RSM) and Genetic algorithm (GA) respectively. The optimum process parameters
were found by minimizing the objective function upon considering the drilled holes economic
features: deposition efficiency and its geometric features: hole diameters at entrance and exit. The
most critical output factors, delamination, and taper responses had a deviation from the objective
by less than 3%. From the confirmation experimental study, the optimum process parameters were
found be effective in reducing the hole delamination and taperness.

Key Words: Hybrid Composite; Delamination, Hole taper; CO2 Laser drilling; Genetic algorithm;
Response Surface Methodology

1. Introduction

Glass Fiber Reinforced Polymers (GFRPs) composite materials [1,2] are trivial to utilize for
various applications due to its specific strength and other superior properties like corrosion
resistance, light in weight, higher fracture toughness, fatigue strength, lower thermal conductivity,
capability to resist biological, chemical treatments and tailor ability for specified applications.
However, GFRPs has its own limitations like poor stiffness, poor rigidity and its application
limited a below 300 °C temperature [3]. Other main problem with GFRPs is delamination. It is a
critical failure in GFRPs. It is a limiting factor and damage phenomenon which generally occurs
due to non-homogeneity, brittleness and anisotropy [4]. “Delamination is a critical challenge
related with the drilling of GFRP composite materials that, in addition to lowering structural
integrity, also results in poor assembly tolerance and the possibility for long-term performance
deterioration. Due to these reasons delamination influences must be mitigated. To control
delamination, it is important to focus on the pre-dominant independent controllable process
parameters [5]. Hole taperness is caused by delamination in which the cylindrical hole upon
drilling is replaced by tapered hole. Hole taperness is a deviation type error in the size and shape
dimensions and shape of hole to be produced. Due to the deviation in size and shape the product
produced will become defective under quality conformity tests hence it is important to mitigate
hole taperness, material deterioration to increase the structural integrity.”

S- Glass composites are less dense materials, durable and stiff. Hybridization of these materials
leads to attain superior mechanical properties. Al2O3 is not separately added, it is usually a
constituent material of S-Glass fibrous materials which is always present as impurity. Perlite acts
as water absorbent and makes the material sophisticated. It contains 70 –75% of silicon dioxide
(SiO2) and 12–15% aluminium oxide (Al2O3) were present as major constituents. Hence, pearlite
is used in this study to improve the drilling properties. Due to perlite nano powders, it will work
for high temperature applications also. Hence in this study, hybrid S-glass/Al2O3-Perlite powdered
composite material laminas were fabricated using the parent materials S-Glass, Al2O3 and Perlite
powder using hand layup process using epoxies and bonding agents. Hybrid S-glass/Al2O3-Perlite
powdered composite has good bonding strength between the layers and more tensile strength
compare regular S-glass fibre composite.

Table 1. Review on selection of materials and key findings

“Material Key findings Reference(s)
GFRPs: S-glass fiber Influence of perlite particle contents on delamination [6]
reinforced epoxy toughness were analyzed using Comparative studies
matrix composites
Nylon 6 Nano Nano fibers effect was found upon Mechanical Tests [7]
Fiber/E-Glass Fiber (Tensile, Flexural and Impact) and investigated on
Reinforced Epoxy mechanical properties.
Composites
GFRP composite Delamination phenomenon Studies, Quality of [8]
Machined Surface/Holes Produced.
Poly-Methyl Investigated the effect of laser power density and [9]
Methacrylate exposure time on hole quality characteristics: aspect
PMMAs ratio, circularity and taper.
CFRP Laminates Peel-up, Push-out delamination studies, Examination [10]
on circularity of holes produced and Tool Life
Examinations.
GFRP Composites/ Influence of machining parameters on the surface [11]
E-glass fiber integrity (kerf width, taper, and HAZ) was found
Glass Fiber Studies were made on Delamination using [12]
Reinforced Plastic Comparative studies upon Ultrasonic assisted Drilling,
Conventional Drilling
Glass fiber-reinforced Tensile strength, compressive strength and flexural [13]
polymer (GFRP); strength were predicted and analysed.
multiwall carbon
 “Material Key findings Reference(s)
nanotube (MWCNT);
nano-silica (NS);
nano-iron oxide
(NFe)

Table1 shows the review on material selection done by various authors in recent years.
From the literature review S-Glass/Al2O3/Pearlite were selected. Investigated the influence of
perlite particle contents on delamination toughness using comparative studies rather than
considering general mechanical parameters to study. mentioned that usage of fibrous materials
improves the mechanical properties as they blend with parent materials homogenously. Therefore,
in this study hybrid GFRP nano-composite laminates made up of S-Glass/Al2O3/Pearlite
nanoparticles using hand layup method.

There is a rapid shift in selection of drilling methods from conventional methods to non-
conventional methods due to their flexibility, productivity, easiness in operation and cost
effectiveness. Table 2 summarizes the delamination effect, and hole taperness produced by
different drilling methods in practice.

Table 2. Review on drilling methods adopted by researchers

“Drilling method Process parameters used Reference(s)
Ultrasonic vibration Delamination phenomenon Studies, Quality of Machined [14]
drilling Surface/Holes Produced.
Conventional Drilling Peel-up, Push-out delamination studies, Examination on [15]
Circularity of holes Produced and Tool Life
Examinations.
CO2 Laser Drilling Investigated the influence of laser power density and [16]
exposure time on quality characteristics: aspect ratio,
circularity and taper of hole.
Fiber laser processing Effects of machining parameters on surface integrity [17]
(taper, kerf width and HAZ) were found.
Laser Beam Micro- Laser Beam Micro Marking Parameters were analyzed in [18]
Marking order to decrease the Cost and consumption time.
Nd: YAG laser drilling Comparative studies on water jet Machining, Laser [19]
and Water jet Machining machining of composites and concluded that short beam
material interaction times, short pulse short wavelengths
and high scanning speed are necessary for minimization
of heat effects.

Controlling the process parameters of conventional drilling process is difficult as compared to the
controlling of advanced machining process variables where the human effort is less and stability
in results is more to get best feasible solutions. For drilling of composites non convention
machining processes were considered to a larger extent by many researchers. Table 3 presents the
key process parameters of drilling to reduce delamination and improve hole quality.
 “CO2 laser drilling is an eco-friendly drilling process that uses high power- density energy to
melt and vaporize the material. CO2 laser drilling is suitable for both metallic and non-metallic
materials with smaller incisions precisely with high speed and good surface quality. It is one of
the most efficient machining methods which reduce half of the operating costs when compare to
the other laser machining methods.CO2 laser drilling is a non-conventional machining method and
hence from the literature review in this study CO2 laser drilling is adopted.

The fabricated samples were drilled using CO2 Laser. The major CO2 Laser drilling process
parameters investigated in this study are focal distance, laser power and cutting speed. For getting
good quality hole with minimum delamination and minimum taperness of GFRP composite
material, it is necessary to investigate the process parameters of CO2 Laser drilling to improve the
quality of holes produced and reduce the delamination.”

Table 3. Review on process parameters of drilling to reduce delamination and improve hole quality.
“Key process parameters Reinforcement used Key findings Reference(s)
Cutting Velocity, Feed Multi walled carbon Delamination phenomenon Studies, Quality of [20]
Rate and addition of nanotubes Machined Surface/Holes Produced.
MWCNTs
Power, Time and Power Glass Fibers Investigated the effect of laser power density and [21]
density exposure time on hole quality characteristics: aspect
ratio, circularity and HAZ.
Laser irradiance, Cutting Stainless steel Thin Influence of machining parameters on the [22]
speed, Gas pressure Plates surface integrity (kerf width, taper, and HAZ) was
found
Spindle Speed, Feed, Glass Fibers Quality, Productivity Optimization and MRR [23]
Depth of cut and Differed
Environments
Feed rate, Tool material Multiple Materials Studies were made on Delamination using [24]”
and Cutting speed Comparative studies upon Ultrasonic assisted
Drilling, Conventional Drilling
Speed, feed, thickness, Glass Fibers Influence of thickness, feed rate on delamination was [25]
fiber orientation and found.
material thickness.

Table 4 lists the optimization techniques and statistical analysis and process parameters studied
by researchers. In modern era, optimization is driven from empirical correlations to the stochastic
processes and from single objective optimization to multi objective optimization (MOO) of
process variables with larger data interpretation.”
 Table 4. Review on optimization techniques and statistical analysis adopted in drilling
“Optimization Key Findings/Studies References
Technique/Statistical
Analysis used
Correlation and Regression Delamination phenomenon Studies, Quality of [26]
Techniques, ANOVA, RSM Machined Surface/Holes Produced.
Genetic Algorithm, Peel-up, Push-out delamination studies, [27]
Multivariable Linear Examination on Circularity of holes Produced
Regression Model and and Tool Life Examinations.
ANOVA
Response surface Effects of machining parameters on surface [28]
methodology, ANOVA integrity (taper, kerf width and HAZ) were found.
Genetic algorithm (GA), Experimental investigation and optimization of [29]
Correlation and Regression laser cutting parameters including cutting speed,
Techniques, Taguchi and assisted gas pressure, laser beam power and sheet
ANOVA thickness of PMMA Materials.
Genetic Algorithm, Particle Laser Beam Micro Marking Parameters were [30]
Swarm Optimization analyzed in order to decrease the Cost and Time
consumption.
Genetic Algorithm, ANN Comparative studies on Laser Trepan Drilling, [31]
Laser Percussion Drilling to produce better
quality holes in advanced materials.
ANOVA, ANFIS Influence of machining parameters on strength of [32]
3D printed objects.

Genetic Algorithm is an approach to solve the problems using meta-heuristic algorithms,

evolutionary algorithms in which natural selection is made from the population database or
possible solutions. The evolution starts with randomly generated solutions called initial
population. The “Survival of fittest” theory of Darwin theory is the basis for Genetic Algorithm.
It is one among stochastic approaches. Genetic algorithm is utilized due to its probabilistic nature
and requires less information regarding the problems to be solved. The Main advantage is Natural
selection, provides multiple solutions for any problem. It can explore large set of databases. More
than the above said advantages it is a multi-objective optimization technique and work well on
either on mixed discrete problems or continuous problems. Due to these reasons Genetic
algorithms were adopted in the present work.”

Response Surface Methodology (RSM) is a technique to optimize the response or responses where
two or more number of factors were involved. RSM is a multi-objective optimization (MOO)
approach and it is a collection of mathematical and statistical techniques for building empirical
model. The main objective of it is to optimize responses (output variables) which is influenced by
several independent variables (input variables). The independent variables or factors are primarily
known as the predictor variables in response surface methodology. It utilizes a specific set of
design of experiments in order to resolve the any problem. It minimizes the numbers of
experiments for specific number of factors and its levels. Also, its sequential nature, Exploration
of outputs/responses using less no of inputs and it necessitates a smaller number of experiments
are more advantageous over other techniques. Hence in this study RSM approach is adopted.

Considering the merits of Genetic Algorithm (GA) and Response Surface Methodology (RSM)
were adopted in this study. Combined investigation on the effect of delamination and the hole
taper of CO2 laser-drilled hybrid-GFRP composites are not reported yet. Hence, this research
examines the CO2 laser drilling of hybrid GFRP composites for minimal delamination, and
minimum hole taper by controlling the process parameters.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1 Materials

The materials for this study are S-glass fiber, epoxy, hardener, Al2O3 and perlite powder. The materials used in this
study and the details of the supplier are listed below in Table 5.

Table 5. Materials used in this study.

Materials Supplier
S-Glass M/s. Go Green Products, Chennai, India
Al2O3 M/s. Ultra-nanotech Private Limited, Bangalore, India
Pearlite nano powders M/s. Ultra-nanotech Private Limited, Bangalore, India
Epoxy M/s. Aryan Composites Private Limited, India
Hardener M/s. Aryan Composites Private Limited, India

2.2 Method

The proposed work is divided in to four phases. In first phase, the hybrid S-Glass/Al2O3/Pearlite
nanocomposite laminates were fabricated using hand layup method. In the second phase, the
prepared laminate samples were drilled using CO2 laser and the drilled hole diameters were
measured with the help of the toolmaker's microscope. In third phase using response surface
methodology (RSM) a mathematical expression was developed. In last phase (i.e., fourth
phase) the best optimum range of input process parameters were derived to achieve
minimal delamination and hole taper based on multi-objective genetic algorithm (MOGA). In
addition to deriving optimum range of input process parameters, conformity experiments were
carried out and evaluated the outcomes. Figure1 shows the methodology adopted in this study.
Figure 1. Methodology adopted in this study
2.1 Fabrication of hybrid S-Glass/Al2O3/Pearlite nanocomposite laminate

The fabrication procedure of hybrid S-Glass/Al2O3/Pearlite nanocomposite laminate is illustrated

in Figure 2. S-glass fibers were cut as per the mould dimensions (300 mm2). Further, the epoxy is
mixed with nanoparticles weighing 9 grams of Al2O3 and 3 grams of pearlite with the help of an
ultra-bath sonicator. Later, the hardener is mixed in the ration of 1:10. Finally, S-glass fiber is
placed on mould and the prepared epoxy solution is poured above the S-glass fiber laminas, and
the procedure is repeated for the layering the subsequent four layers fabrication. The laminate
undergoes curing process for 24 hours continuously at room temperature. Upon curing, the
composite laminate is removed from the mould.

Figure 2. Fabrication of hybrid S-Glass/Al2O3/Pearlite nanocomposite laminate

2.2 Experimentation
In this phase, drilling operation was carried out on the fabricated composite laminates using CO 2
laser drilling machine. The specifications of CO2 laser drilling machine are listed in Table 6. The
drilled holes were using CO2 laser drilling method and the diameters of the holes were measured
using a toolmakers microscope.

“Table 6. Specifications of CO2 laser drilling machine.

Parameter Specifications
Operating Mode Pulsed
Wavelength 1064 nm
Maximum - Average Power 10-100 W
Repetition Rate 0.5-20 MHz
Pulse Length 10 ps
 Parameter Specifications
Focal Length 330 mm
Feed Rate 1-100 mm/rev”

The actual experimental setup and the drilling process are presented schematically as shown in
Figure 3 and Figure 4 respectively.

Figure 3. CO2 laser drilling experimentation setup

 Figure 4. Laser drilling process

Figure 5 illustrates various defocus levels. From Figure 5, it can be observed that as focus
position varies, the size of spot landing on the material surface changes resulting in the shift of
laser energy density applied over the processing area.

Figure 5. Effect of defocus levels on size of plot landing and change in laser density.
 The designs of experiments (DoE) were prepared using Design-Expert V13. software
based on RSM. The input parameters considered in this study are listed in Table 7 with their
corresponding levels. The list of experiments, and corresponding delamination and hole taper
values were listed in Table 8.

Table 7. CO2 laser drilling parameters and their corresponding DoE levels
Symbol Parameter Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
A Power in (W) 50 2.0 -2
B Cutting speed (mm/sec) 70 5.0 0
C Focal distance (mm) 90 8.0 2

Table 8. Design of Experiments (DOE) and measured Outputs.

Laser Cutting Focal
Delamination Taper angle (TA)
S. No power speed distance
(FD) (radians)
(watt) (mm/sec) (mm)
1 50 2 -2 1.190 0.191
2 50 2 0 1.189 0.672
3 50 2 2 1.193 1.051
4 70 2 -2 1.196 0.292
5 70 2 0 1.188 0.762
6 70 2 2 1.197 1.152
7 90 2 -2 1.172 0.122
8 90 2 0 1.170 0.672
9 90 2 2 1.189 0.953
10 50 5 -2 1.131 0.293
11 50 5 0 1.141 0.575
12 50 5 2 1.152 1.056
13 70 5 -2 1.124 0.191
14 70 5 0 1.130 0.481
15 70 5 2 1.167 0.864
16 90 5 -2 1.122 0.294
17 90 5 0 1.102 0.674
18 90 5 2 1.171 0.954
19 50 8 -2 1.070 0.384
20 50 8 0 1.095 0.764
21 50 8 2 1.135 1.244
22 70 8 -2 1.090 0.294
23 70 8 0 1.129 0.674
24 70 8 2 1.147 1.056
25 90 8 -2 1.082 0.191
26 90 8 0 1.128 0.763
27 90 8 2 1.151 1.05

After completion of drilling, the mean hole diameter was measured by using Tool makers
microscope - by measuring the hole diameter at different locations of the hole as shown in Figure
6. After measuring the diameters of drilled at different point of the holes, the mean diameter of
the hole can be computed using Equation 1. Figure 6 (d) shows the delaminated region of a drilled
hole. The drilled hybrid S-Glass/Al2O3/Pearlite nanocomposite laminate work piece is shown in
Figure 7.
 𝐷1 + 𝐷2 + 𝐷3 + 𝐷4
𝐷𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑛 = − − − − − − − − − − 𝐸𝑞 − (1)
4

Figure 6. Drilled hole size measuring process

Figure 7. CO2 laser drilled hybrid S-Glass/Al2O3/Pearlite nanocomposite laminate

Delamination factor measurement

The delamination factor is computed by considering the diameter of drilled holes at entry and exit
of the workpiece using Equation 2.

𝐹𝑑 = 𝐷𝑚𝑎𝑥 ⁄𝐷𝑛 …………………………. Eq. (2)

Where, Dmax is the maximum diameter of affected (mm),

Dn is the nominal diameter (mm).
Taper angle measurement
The taper angle Ta is calculated is using Equation 3.
(𝐷−𝑑)
𝑇𝑎 = (tan−1 ) ∗ (𝜋/180)-----------Eq.(3)
2𝐿

The units are in radians.

where,
D is the larger diameter (mm),
d is the smaller diameter (mm),
L is the thickness of the laminate.

3. Development of mathematical model

In this section, mathematical model developed to establish the relationship among the
different CO2 laser drilling parameters to reduce delamination and hole taper are discussed.

3.1 Response models and validation

The empirical model to predict delamination and hole taper were developed by using
second-order polynomial regression analysis. Design-Expert software was used to obtain the
second-order regression models for delamination and taperness using the experimental data
obtained. The final response models of delamination and taper are presented by regression
Equations 5 and 6 respectively.

𝑌𝑖 = 𝑎0 + ∑𝑛𝑖−1 𝑎𝑖 𝑥𝑖 + ∑𝑛𝑖=1 𝑎𝑖𝑗 𝑥𝑖2 + ∑ ∑𝑖 𝑎𝑖𝑗 𝑥𝑖 𝑥𝑗 (𝑖 − 1,2 − 𝑛 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑗 = 1,2, −𝑛) − − − 𝐸𝑞. (4)
Where, n is the total number of process parameters, and yj is the response factor. The
regression coefficients were determined using the Least-square method, each aij and xij, ‘i’
representing the value of the respective control factor for the observed level and ‘j’ represents
levels. In this study, the values of i and j are considered to be 3 input parameters and 3 levels
respectively. From the data regression, the parameters were evaluated for each model and degree
of fitness (S-values) and coefficient of determination (R2 and adjusted R2) have been calculated.
The values of all the responses are tabulated in Table 9.

Table 9. Values of regression parameters for developed models

Regression parameters
Response S-value R2 (%) Adjusted R2 (%)
FD 0.0105 95.02 92.39
TA 0.2410 96.01 97.01

The importance of correlation coefficient (R2) for FD and TA are 0.95 and 0.942 respectively. It
can be observed that the R2 value for each model is within the acceptable range, i.e., more than 0.9
[13]. It indicates that developed models are proficient for data prediction with a higher degree of
fitness for delamination and hole taper.
“3.2 Analysis of variance (ANOVA)
“Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) has been performed to check the adequacy of developed models.
The results of ANOVA for delamination and hole taper are tabulated in Tables 10 and Table 11
respectively. 99% confidence level was considered in performing ANOVA, which indicates that
the P-value of developed models should be lower than 0.05 for an adequate and reliable response
model. P-value helps to decide the rejection or failure. From Tables 9 and Table 10 it can be
observed that calculated P-values for all developed mathematical models are lower than 0.05.
Therefore, it has been confirmed that the developed mathematical models have a higher degree of
fitness to predict the corresponding response values. The calculated F-values of response models
for delamination and hole taper were 35.49 and 40.67 respectively and they were pragmatic to be
within the acceptable range.”
The regression equation developed by Design Expert V13 software to predict the outcomes
is presented in Equation 5. The appropriate accuracy ratio is 19.8 and 20.1 which indicates that
the signal is sufficient. The signal-to-noise ratio, compares the range of values projected at design
points and when the mean-variance of the prediction is greater than four it is acceptable. The
validity of the model was also tested graphically by plotting the residual curve as shown in Figure
11(a).
The regression equation for delamination is:
𝐹𝑑 = 1.14 − 0.0005 P − 0.0365 N + 0.0181 F − 0.0085 P ∗ P + 0.0128N ∗ N
+ 0.0075 F ∗ F + 0.085 P ∗ N + 0.0038 P ∗ F + 0.0140 N
∗F − − − Eq. (5)

Table 10. Analysis of variance for delamination

Source DF MS F-Value P-Value
Model 9 0.0039 35.49 < 0.0001
A-Laser Power 1 0.00046 0.041 0.842
B-Cutting Speed 1 0.024 218.46 < 0.0001
C-Focal Distance 1 0.0059 53.46 < 0.0001
AB 1 0.0009 7.9 0.012
AC 1 0.0002 1.61 0.2221
BC 1 0.0024 21.94 0.0002
A² 1 0.0004 3.95 0.0633
B² 1 0.001 9.0 0.008
C² 1 0.0003 3.07 0.0975
Residual 17 0.0001
Cor Total 26

The regression equation for taper angle:

 𝑻𝑨 = 𝟎. 𝟓𝟗𝟕 − 𝟎. 𝟎𝟑𝟓 𝐏 + 𝟎. 𝟎𝟑𝟎𝟓 𝐍 + 𝟎. 𝟑𝟔𝟗𝟒𝐅 + 𝟎. 𝟎𝟐𝟐𝟔 𝐏 ∗ 𝐏 + 𝟎. 𝟎𝟖𝟔𝟐 𝐍 ∗ 𝐍
− 𝟎. 𝟎𝟐𝟓𝟐 𝐅 ∗ 𝐅 + 𝟎. 𝟎𝟏𝟖𝟎 𝐏 ∗ 𝐍 − 𝟎. 𝟎𝟏𝟎𝟎 𝐏 ∗ 𝐅
+ 𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟓𝟗 ∗ 𝐅 − −𝐄𝐪. (𝟔)

The regression equation for taper angle (Equation 6) is used to make predictions about the
responses for the given levels of each factor. In default, the highest level of the factors was coded
using +1, and the low levels were coded as -1. The coded Equation 6 helps to identify relative
impact of the factors by comparison of the coefficients of the factors.

Table 11. Analysis of variance of taper angle

Source DF Adj MS F-Value P-Value
Model 9 0.3242 40.67 < 0.0001
A-Laser Power 1 0.0167 2.09 0.166
B-Cutting Speed 1 0.0167 2.09 0.166
C-Focal Distance 1 2.83 354.74 < 0.0001
AB 1 0.0039 0.4853 0.4955
AC 1 0.0012 0.1505 0.7028
BC 1 0.0004 0.0526 0.8214
A² 1 0.0031 0.3836 0.5439
B² 1 0.0446 5.59 0.0302
C² 1 0.0038 0.4761 0.4995
Residual 17 0.008
Cor Total 26

3.2 Genetic algorithm (GA)

The Genetic Algorithm (GA) is a population-based search technique for addressing stochastic
optimization difficulties that are based on Darwin's theory of fittest survival models and the
biological advancement process. GA has an essential process that involves copying and
exchanging binary strings. The main benefits of GA technique are its computational efficiency
and easy to use. In this technique a collection of possible solutions was chosen randomly to
generate initial population. A basic GA consists of an encoding, a selection (to choose a better
fitness function value, minimization/maximization of problems), a reproduction, a crossover and
mutation mechanisms which selects a better fitness function value (controlling a particular bit of
a solution in order to obtain convergence in smart). Every fundamental operator merely makes
simple modifications to strings in a population. The flow of how the GA approach works while
optimizing a problem is depicted in Figure.8.

The following steps provides general overview of how GA works:

1. Initialization - a population of individuals or solutions is created consisting of random

individuals
 2. Objective function - a function/model measures performance of individuals and determines
the ability to reproduce and to survive
3. Fitness function - According to a fitness function individuals are ranked and the best/fittest
individuals are chosen to mate in pairs and then creates a population of individuals. Each
new person inherits genetic traits from both the parents. Slight mutation occurs with certain
probability from one generation to another. The diversion operators such as inversion can
be used for off-springs
4. Increased competition within the individuals will leads to "survival of the fittest" to satisfy
the objective function's criteria. As a result, each generation tends to have better features
that helps for survival. Individuals which have best features are best solutions to this problem
5. This procedure will be repeated till the convergence conditions were reached i.e., the
possible solutions will have best fitness or an optimum viable solution for a particular
problem [33].
6. As the next generation is formed it is evaluated and validated for conformation and to agree
the same through experimentation [34,35].”

“MATLAB toolbox was used in this study is to optimize using GA technique and in order to
reduce the dimensional deviation. The MOO problem in laser drilling can be formally defined as
follows. The output parameters delamination and hole taper are the essential parameters studied
in the present work. The output parameters are directly dependent on each other. In this study, the
response delamination and the hole taper need to be minimized. If the delamination is minimized,
the hole taper will tend to increase. Hence, it is necessary to establish a suitable range of input
parameters at which the output parameters together can be optimized simultaneously. For doing
so, in this study GA has been adopted.”
Figure 8. Flowchart of a GA-based algorithm.
4. Results and Discussion
The influence of input process parameters laser power, cutting speed and focal length, on the
delamination and taperness of the drilled hole diameter are studied at the entrance points of the
drilled hole and the key observations are discussed in this section.

4.1 Influence of laser power on hole diameter at the entrance

Figure 9 illustrates the influence of laser power on hole diameter at the entrance. It can be
observed that, as the lamp current increases, the hole diameter at the entrance decreases
significantly while the cutting speed and focal length remain constant. The delamination is
normal when the focal length (-2 mm) is longer at a specific lamp current level (90 v).

Figure 9. Hole diameter at entrance Vs Laser Power

4.2 Influence of cutting speed on hole diameter at the entrance
The influence of cutting speed on hole diameter at the entrance is as shown in Figure 10. The
diameter at the hole entrance is observed to decrease with increasing cutting speed up to some
extent and it continues to grows to its maximum. Also, with increase in cutting speed the hole
diameter at the entrance changes according to time variation.

Figure 10. Hole diameter at entrance Vs cutting speed

4.3 Influence of focal length on hole diameter at the entrance.

The influence of focal distance on entrance diameter is shown in Figure 11. The focal
distance in this study is the range of -2 to 2 mm. As the focal distance increases the entrance
diameter increases to its maximum and then decreases upon increasing focal distance.

Figure 11. Hole diameter at entrance Vs focal distance

4.4 Delamination analysis

Delamination is an essential characteristic which needs to be analysed in any drilling
process since it indicates the Material Removal Rate (MRR). The removal of material in laser
drilling is done by using high energy created by the concentrated laser beam which evaporates the
material along with the laser scanning path. If the surface quality of material is high then there will
less material loss and delamination will occur. If depth or thickness of the workpiece decreases the
absorption of laser energy also decreases with respect to depth and there is more delamination on
the upper surface than on the bottom surface during laser cutting.

Individual parameters, such as cutting speed, focal length and laser power have a
substantial impact on delamination according to ANOVA Table 9. The 3D surface plots in Figure
12 (b) to (d) represents the association between various drilling process parameters and
delamination. The laser cutting speed and focal length has a universally proportional relationship
with delamination according to the 3D surface plots. The delamination is enhanced by the laser
cutting speed and focal length. The delamination is indirectly affected by the laser power since it
lowers the laser power.
If the intensity of laser grows the absorption of energy will be more and thus more volume
of workpiece material will be burnt causing delamination to build up. However, it is observed that
increasing the cutting speed while lowering laser power results in less delamination. With increase
in cutting speed contact time in between laser beam, workpiece decreases reducing the
delamination. The cutting speed should be prudently chosen because less laser beam penetration
into the workpiece will results due to choosing of higher cutting speeds. The carbon dioxide aids
in ejection of the molten material from cutting zone, prevents significant thermal damages. Lower
pressure of carbon dioxide prevents ejection and then molten matrix solidifies making difficult to
drill the fibre. As a result, the cutting operation may be rendered ineffective across the material’s
thickness and the molten material is rapidly evacuated with high carbon dioxide pressure resulting
in increased delamination.

Figure 12. (a) Predicted vs. Actual, (b) surface plot of delamination with cutting speed and laser
power (at focal length = ̶ 2), (c) surface plot of delamination with focal length and laser power (at
cutting speed 8 mm/sec), and (d) 3D surface plot of delamination with cutting speed and focal length
(at laser power 50 W).
4.5 Hole taper Analysis
The hole taper describes the variation in diameter throughout the thickness of the work material
after machining and it determines geometric precision of drilled surface. With the specified inputs
to drill the material across its material thickness - a minimum hole taper is desirable as good quality
hole. The response surface plots for the change of hole taper for various input machining
parameters as shown in Figure 13 (b) to (d). At intermediate focal length, the hole taper varies
very small at lower laser power and cutting speed values. As previously stated, increased laser
cutting speed results in a broader drill diameter on top surface compared to the bottom resulting
in a high hole taper. Also, lower cutting speeds and lower laser power results in less taper because
the time spent exposing the laser beam to work surface is shorter when compared to higher cutting
speeds. It leads difference in diameter of hole at entrance, at the exit to minimum. Decreasing
focal distance removes larger amount of material from top surface resulting in a drill diameter,
whereas the bottom is unaffected.

Figure 13. (a) Normal probabilities of residuals for hole taper, (b) surface plot of hole taper with
cutting speed and laser power (at focal length = 0), (c) surface plot of hole taper with focal length and
laser power (at cutting speed 5 mm/sec), and (d) 3D surface plot of hole taper with cutting speed and
focal length (at laser power 70 W).
When increasing focal length -2 mm to 1 mm were better operating conditions for hole taper. If It
increased above 1mm as shown in Figure 13 (d) it is not recommended to obtain optimal results.
Laser power and cutting speed are not affecting hole taper at a focal length of at apex value. The
hole taper was less at low cutting speed, low laser power and minimum focal length. So, for a
better optimum condition for minimum hole taper operating conditions are -2mm focal distance,
2 mm/sec cutting speed, and 50w laser power.

4.6 Performance of the mathematical model

Before using a GA to optimize the process parameters involved in drilling S-Glass/Al2O3/Pearlite
composites, it is necessary to test the performance of the chosen RSM model. The common
delamination factor and hole taper were derived using Equations 2 and 3, and the experimental
output is shown in Figure.14 and Figure.15 respectively. The current model accurately predicts
the delamination factor and hole taper in the drilling of S-Glass/Al2O3/Pearlite composites.
Actual Value
Predicted value

1.20

Delamination
1.15

1.10

1.05
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
order No
Figure 14. Comparison of the experimental and predicted results of hole delamination

1.4
Actual Value
Predicted value
1.2

1.0
Hole Taper

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
order No

Figure 15. Comparison of the experimental and predicted results of hole taper
The trial with the most significant variation (3.4%) in the anticipated and measured values is run
order no. 16 in hole delamination. Aside from this one case the hole delamination factor model is
reasonably accurate with an overall average variation of only 0.86%. The trial with the most
significant variation (2.4%) in the anticipated and measured values is standard order no. 24 in hole
taper. Aside from this one case the hole taper model is reasonably accurate, with an overall average
variation of only 0.89%.

4.7 Predicting the optimal process parameters by RSM

Design Expert software was used to found the best input parameters using a RSM which
is MOO with the help of desirability function approach. It is one among the most often used
techniques for solving single and multiple response problems. Each response is transformed into
a quantity with no dimensions known as desirability, in which ranges from zero to one in this
manner (0: least desirable, 1: most desirable). The solution with most desirability of input process
parameters were considered to be optimal. Design Expert software was used in order to determine
combination of input process parameters, such as focal length, laser power and cutting speed that
meet the requirements of each response and process parameter.

Figure 16 (a). Bar histogram for desirability

 Figure 16 (b). Ramp representation for desirability

“By minimizing delamination, hole taper the optimum combination of given input parameters is
evaluated. Table 12 lists the input parameter constraints, the required response goals, and the
optimal solution. 90-Watt laser power, 7.677 mm/sec cutting speed, and -2mm focal length are the
optimum process parameters for minimum delamination and hole taper. Figure 16(a) and (b)
shows optimized bar histogram for desirability and ramp for desirability in overall for hole
delamination factor and hole taper respectively. Confirmatory experiments were conducted for
optimum combination of parameters to validate model with response and error values listed in
Table 8. The confirmatory results are in close agreement with the predicted values with error rates
of 1.85% and 0.46% for hole delamination factor and hole taper respectively.”

Table 12. Constraints and optimal solutions

Name Goal Lower Upper Lower Upper Importance Optimal
Limit Limit Weight Weight solution
A:Laser Power is in range 50 90 1 1 3 90
B:Cutting Speed is in range 2 8 1 1 3 7.677
C: Focal Distance is in range -2 2 1 1 3 -2
fd minimize 0 1.197 1 1 3 1.088
ta minimize 0.12 1.24091 1 1 3 0.261

Table 13. Experimental and predicted values of hole delamination, hole taper percentage.
Responses Predicted Experimental Percentage of error
Hole delamination factor 1.087 1.123 3.113
Hole taper 0.261 0.278 6.511
4.8 Predicting the optimal process parameters by GA

Delamination and hole taper were taken as objective functions and defined. Upon defining,
the objective function and its suitable fitness function for GA were adopted. The optimization
parameters considered are population type is double vector, population size is equal to 100, no. of
iterations is 200, crossover probability is 0.8, mutation probability is 0.8. The ranges of machining
parameters selected are 50 < P > 90; 2 <N > 8; -2 < F > 2. Various combinations of mutation,
crossover, probabilities were examined for current problem. This particular combination was the
most effective in enhancing the GA's exploitative and explorative traits.

“The high crossover allows the GA to keep the 'excellent structures' in 'fit people,' but the
low mutation prevents crucial genetic features from being lost while flipping a bit randomly." The
average fitness is excellent at the starting of generation compared to end of generation when within
the same generation is evaluated. It rapidly declines until generation 25, after which it zigzags
around the best fitness line. Though the GA randomly generates population for 100 individuals, it
is feasible that some of them will be significantly better than the others. As generations passes GA
compares in between the best so far individuals to the best of present generation and better of the
two is carried forwarded. The best solution from the first generation is replaced by a better solution
from the next generation until the 16th generation achieves a global best. Table 14 shows the
optimum combination parameters predicted by GA and expected minimum delamination factor
and hole taper.”

The major objective of (GA) multi-objective optimization is minimizing delamination and

to minimize hole taper. However, Table 15 indicates the optimum combination of parameters and
its predicted solutions generated using GA. Some of the investigators are using them to round off
these inputs so that they become feasible.

Table 14. Optimal solution produced from GA

S.No. Input parameters Output parameters
Laser Power Cutting Speed Focal Distance FD TA
(p) (N) (F) in (mm)
in (watt) in (mm/sec)
1 80.1975 7.9809 -1.9641 1.0879 0.1909
2 82.8277 4.8233 0.0898 1.1350 0.6681
3 50.0592 7.9986 -1.9988 1.0743 1.05
4 50.0592 7.9986 -1.9988 1.0743 0.2863
5 51.0032 7.8052 -1.9011 1.0784 0.7636
6 69.4801 7.9978 -1.9723 1.0878 1.1454
7 80.6864 6.9814 -1.3777 1.1009 0.1956
8 81.0306 7.8066 -1.2064 1.0969 0.6681
 9 82.2143 6.3083 -1.0319 1.1094 0.9545
10 64.2288 7.9447 -1.9379 1.0867 0.2863
11 81.0885 7.5093 -1.7905 1.0927 0.5727
12 79.6231 6.6398 0.0878 1.1213 1.05
13 81.8596 5.7909 -0.1777 1.1232 0.1909
14 54.1155 7.9150 -1.9473 1.0799 0.4772
15 80.1115 7.9184 -1.8547 1.0894 0.8590
16 50.4582 7.9451 -1.8856 1.0763 0.2863

Table 15. Optimum parameters predicted by GA

Genetic Algorithm
4.9 Speed Focal Distance Hole Delamination Hole Taper
Power (watt)
(mm/sec) (mm) Factor (radians)
80.1975 7.9809 -1.9641 1.087176 0.190909
Comparison of GA and RS models
When significantly non-linear behaviour is present, GAs performs much better than other
optimization approaches, particularly RSM. Modelling systems using RSM have a low tenacity
nature with a standard test site and a relatively small area due to the errors in a model building that
are compliant with data from unusual experimental regions. Furthermore, the key advantage of
RSM is the capacity to display contributions of factors from coefficients of regression models.
This skill can help minimize the complexity of an issue by detecting negligible primary
components, interaction factors or non-sequential quadratic terms in regression model. The RSM
technique requires detailed description of every field for each element in order to ensure the
responses considered were fluctuate predictably within the range. In addition to this a practical
model will be built with a lesser number of experiments. When this model is compared to a model
with more significant number of experiments it gives better results. If no further analysis is made
the GA provides lesser information about the design components and its impact on responses. The
generation of a GA model necessitates a vast number of repetitive calculations, whereas a response
surface model requires a single-step analysis. A GA model may have a significant computing cost
based on nonlinearity of problem and number of parameters. The GA model produces relatively
accurate hole delamination factor and hole taper predictions, despite being computationally more
expensive than a response model, as illustrated in Table 16. As compare to RSM optimum values;
the GA values are given better outputs.
Table 16. Comparison in between RSM and GA
 Model summary and prediction Delamination Factor Hole taper
errors Predicted Exact value Predicted Exact value
RSM Results 1.087 1.123 0.261 0.278
GA Results 1.0876 1.123 0.190909 0.205

4.10 Surface integrity of the drill hole surface

Laser power dispersion affect and carbon black adhering are the major reasons for
delamination and hole taper angle based on Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithm and RSM
experimental findings. The burnt material near the laser-drilled hole wall is visible in black colour
on scanning electron micrographs.
In case of 6.0 wt % carbon black distributed samples, the charred material was thicker. Its
concentration is increased with respect to the laser power. whereas in samples without any carbon
black, the heat transfers to glass fibers which results in the fibers bending at surfaces of the drilled
hole.

Figure 17. SEM Microscopic Views of the Work Piece

Figure17 shows SEM images of laser-drilling surfaces of GFRP+Al2O3+Perlite displaying varied

surface damages. Images shows melting or charring of resin due to the high temperature which is
insufficient to remove the material uniformly throughout the thickness as seen in Figure 17 (b).
The burned elements stick to the surface, lowering the quality of the surface. These attached
melted materials are primarily acquired with a more significant focal length Figure 17(c).
However, this causes matrix losses resulting in looser fibers and pull-out of the fibers. The image
shows signs of various interlayer fractures which diminish the component's service life. This could
be due to the rapid cooling rate after laser drilling and differences in the thermal characteristics of
the matrix and fibre which is consistent with the earlier study.

5. Conclusion
In this study, a comparison of multi-objective genetic algorithms and response surface approach
techniques for laser drilling optimization is made. The laser drilling parameters Laser power (P),
cutting speed (N), focal length (L) and hole diameter(d) were studied to reduce the hole
delamination and hole taperness. The optimum process parameters were found by minimizing the
objective function upon considering the drilled holes economic features: deposition efficiency and
its geometric features: hole diameters at entrance and exit. The most critical output factors,
delamination, and taper responses had a deviation from the objective by less than 3%.

The following findings were drawn based on the experimentation and statistical analysis.

 Delamination decreases as material thickness and cutting speed increases.

 The focal length is the essential component in hole taper, while the laser intensity has a
negligible effect.
 The most critical component in hole delamination is cutting speed. Cutting speed and focal
length will have a significant impact on output responses.
 The experimental findings are close to the RSM predictions (overall variation less than
3%), indicating that the empirical equation obtained can be utilized to forecast the response
effectively.
 GA locates the global optimum successfully.
 The GA recommends the following settings: Laser power 80.795 watts, cutting speed
7.9089 mm/sec, and focus length -1.9641 mm. The confirmatory experiments confirmed
the same. As a result, to select the level of drilling parameters, the proposed model can be
utilized. A noticeable time saving and reduction in cost will result upon using this model.

References
[1] Akshay Jain, BhaGAt Singh, Yogesh Shrivastava. Reducing the heat-affected zone during the laser beam drilling
of basalt-glass hybrid composite, Composites Part B: Engineering, 176 (2019). ,107294,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.107294.
[2] G. Guru Mahesh, K. Jaya Krishna Evaluation of Mechanical Properties of Nano Filled Glass Fiber Reinforced
Composites, Materials Today: Proceedings, 22 (2019), 3305-3311,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.03.293.
[3]. Ayyappa Atmakuri, Arvydas Palevicius, Andrius Vilkauskas, and Giedrius Janusas , Review of Hybrid Fiber-
Based Composites with Nanoparticles—Material Properties and Applications, Natural Fibres and their
Composites II, Polymers, 12(9),(20202), 2088; https://doi.org/10.3390/polym12092088.
[4] G. R. Chavhan and L. N. Wankhade, Improvement of the mechanical properties of hybrid composites prepared by
fibers, fiber metals, and nano-filler particles – A review, Materials Today: Proceedings, 27 (1), (2020),
72-82, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.08.240.
[5] Natarajan, E.; Markandan, K.; Sekar, S.M.; Varadaraju, K.; Nesappan, S.; Albert Selvaraj, A.D.; Lim, W.H.;
Franz, G., Drilling-Induced Damages in Hybrid Carbon and Glass Fiber-Reinforced Composite Laminate
and Optimized Drilling Parameters. J. Compos. Sci., 6, (2022), 310. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/jcs6100310.

[5] Mohamad Alsaadi, Ahmet Erkliğ, Effect of perlite particle contents on delamination toughness of S-glass fiber
reinforced epoxy matrix composites, Composites Part B: Engineering, 141, (2018), 182-190,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2017.12.059.
[6] Vinod Kumar, T., Chandrasekaran, M., Santhanam, V., et al, Materials Science and Engineering Conference
Series, 183, (2017), 012002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/183/1/012002.
[7] Marques, F.; Silva, F.G.A.; Silva, T.E.F.; Rosa, P.A.R.; Marques, A.T.; de Jesus, A.M.P. Delamination of Fibre
Metal Laminates Due to Drilling: Experimental Study and Fracture Mechanics-Based Modelling.
Metals,12, (2022), 1262, https:// doi.org/10.3390/met12081262.
[8] Kalita, K., Mallick, P. K., Bhoi, A. K., & Ghadai, K. R. Optimizing Drilling Induced Delamination in GFRP
Composites using Genetic Algorithm& Particle Swarm Optimisation. Advanced Composites Letters, 27,
(2018). (1), https://doi.org/10.1177/096369351802700101.
[9] T. Panneerselvam, S. Raghuraman, T.K. Kandavel, K. Mahalingam, Evaluation and analysis of delamination
during drilling on Sisal-Glass Fibres Reinforced Polymer, Measurement,154,(2020),107462,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2019.107462.
[10] Soroush Masoudi, Mostafa Mirabdolahi, Mohammad Dayyani, Farshid Jafarian, Ana Vafadar, and Mohammad
Reza Dorali, Development of an intelligent model to optimize heat-affected zone, kerf, and roughness in
309 stainless steel plasma cutting by using experimental results. Materials and Manufacturing
Processes,34(3), (2019), 345-356, https://doi.org/ 10.1080/10426914.2018.1532579.
[11] Shehab A A, Naemah I M, Al-Bawee A and Al-Ezzi A Hole characteristic of CO2 laser drilling of poly-methyl
methacrylate PMMA J. Mech. Eng. Res. Dev. 43, (2020) 186–97.
[12] Roberta Angelone, Alessandra Caggiano, Ilaria Improta, Luigi Nele, Roberto Teti, Characterization of hole
quality and temperature in drilling of Al/CFRP stacks under different process condition, Procedia
CIRP,79, (2019),319-324, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2019.02.074.
[13] Rao B SD, Sethi A, Das AK.. Fiber laser processing of GFRP composites and multi-objective optimization of
the process using response surface methodology. Journal of Composite Materials, 53(11), (2019) 1459-
1473. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021998318805139.
[14] Dongxi Lv, Mingda Chen, Youqiang Yao, Chun Yan, Gang Chen, Yingdan Zhu, High-frequency vibration
effects on the hole integrity in rotary ultrasonic drilling of carbon fiber-reinforced plastic composites,
Ultrasonics,115, (2021),106448, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultras.2021.106448.
[15] Karimi, Zarif N. and Heidary, H. and Yousefi, J. and Sadeghi, S. and Minak, G. Experimental investigation on
delamination in nanocomposite drilling, FME Transaction,46 (1), (2018), 62-69,
https://doi.org/10.5937/fmet1801062z.
[16] Solati, Ali & Hamedi, Mohsen & Safarabadi, Majid. A comprehensive investigation of surface quality and
mechanical properties in CO2 laser drilling of GFRP composites. The International Journal of Advanced
Manufacturing Technology, 102, (2019),791–808, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-018-3164-6.
[17] Jing Wang, Zhaorui Sun, Lianwang Gu, Hamidreza Azimy, Investigating the effect of laser cutting parameters
on the cut quality of Inconel 625 using Response Surface Method (RSM), Infrared Physics &
Technology,Volume 118, (2021),103866. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infrared.2021.103866.
[18] Kanak Kalita, Ishwer Shivakoti & Ranjan Kumar Ghadai, Optimizing process parameters for laser beam micro-
marking using genetic algorithm and particle swarm optimization, Materials and Manufacturing
Processes, 32, (2017) 1101-1108, https//doi.org/10.1080/10426914.2017.1303156.
[19] Doumbia, B.S., Yang, C., Ma, Y. Experimental analysis on waterjet-guided Nd: YAG laser thin wood
machining. SN Appl. Sci. 4, (2022), 181 https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-022-05054-4.
[20] Ayob Karimzad Ghavidel, Taher Azdast, Mohammad Reza Shabgard, Amir Navidfar, Sajjad Mamaghani
Shishavan, , Effect of carbon nanotubes on laser cutting of multi-walled carbon nanotubes/poly methyl
methacrylate nanocomposites, Optics & Laser Technology,67, (2015), 119-124,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2014.10.003.
[21] Akshay Jain, Bhagat Singh, Yogesh Shrivastava, Reducing the heat-affected zone during the laser beam drilling
of basalt-glass hybrid composite, Composites Part B: Engineering, Volume 176, (2019), 107294,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.107294.
[22] Buj-Corral, I.; Costa-Herrero, L.; Domínguez-Fernández, A Effect of Process Parameters on the Quality of
Laser-Cut Stainless Steel Thin Plates. Metals 11, .(2021) , 1224. https://doi.org/10.3390/met11081224.
[23] Rampal, Gaurav Kumar, Sanjay Mavinkere Rangappa, Suchart Siengchin, Sunny Zafar,(2022), A review of
recent advancements in drilling of fiber-reinforced polymer composites, Composites Part C,9,100312,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcomc.2022.100312.
[24] Gurmeet Singh, Atul Babbar, Vivek Jain, Dheeraj Gupta, Comparative statement for diametric delamination in
drilling of cortical bone with conventional and ultrasonic assisted drilling techniques, Journal of
Orthopaedics,25, (2021), 53-58, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jor.2021.03.017.
[25] K. Siva Prasad, G. Chaitanya, Analysis of delamination in drilling of GFRP composites using Taguchi Technique,
Materials Today: Proceedings,18,(7),(2001), 3252-3261,https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.07.201.
[26] Riyadh Benyettou, Salah Amroune, Mohamed Slamani, Yasemin Seki, Alain Dufresne, Mohammad Jawaid,
Salman Alamery, Assessment of induced delamination drilling of natural fiber reinforced composites: a
statistical analysis, Journal of Materials Research and Technology,21, (2022), 131-152,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2022.08.161.
[27] Avinash Sudam Shinde, Irulappasamy Siva, Yashwant Munde, Mohamed Thariq Hameed Sultan, Lee Seng Hua,
Farah Syazwani Shahar, Numerical modelling of drilling of fiber reinforced polymer matrix composite:
a review, Journal of Materials Research and Technology,20, (2022), 3561-3578,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2022.08.063.
[28] Shweta Singh, Neha Yaragatti, Mrityunjay Doddamani, Satvasheel Powar, Sunny Zafar, , Drilling parameter
optimization of cenosphere/ HDPE syntactic foam using CO2 laser,Journal of Manufacturing
Processes,80, (2022),28-42,https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2022.05.040.
[29] Ahmed B. Khoshaim, Ammar H. Elsheikh, Essam B. Moustafa, Muhammad Basha, Ezzat A. Showaib,
Experimental investigation on laser cutting of PMMA sheets: Effects of process factors on kerf
characteristics, Journal of Materials Research and Technology, 11 (2021), 235-246,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2021.01.012.
[30] Kanak Kalita, Ishwer Shivakoti & Ranjan Kumar Ghadai , Optimizing process parameters for laser beam micro-
marking using genetic algorithm and particle swarm optimization, Materials and Manufacturing
Processes, 32:10, (2017) , 1101-1108, https://doi.org/ 10.1080/10426914.2017.1303156.
[31] Shaik, J.H., J, S., Optimal selection of operating parameters in end milling of Al-6061 work materials using
multi-objective approach. Mech Adv Mater Mod Process 3, (2017). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40759-017-
0020-6.
[32] Rajesh N, Guru Mahesh G & P. Venkata Ramaiah , Study of Machining Parameters on Tensile strength and
Surface roughness of ABS samples printed by FDM, Advances in Materials and Processing
Technologies, 8, (2022), 1373-1385, https;//doi.org/ 10.1080/2374068X.2021.1946758.
[33] Venkateswaran, Santhanakrishnan Balakrishnan, Holger Seidlitz, Manoja Rao Yellur, Niklas Vogt, A study on
the influence of drilling and CO2 laser cutting in carbon/epoxy laminates, Journal of Materials Research
and Technology, 8 (2019) , 944-949, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2018.05.025.
[34] K.C. Yung, S.M. Mei, T.M. Yue, A study of the heat-affected zone in the UV YAG laser drilling of GFRP
materials, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 122 (2018), (2–3), 278-285,
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0924-0136(01)01177-3.
[35] Nima Zoghipour, Gökhan Atay, Yusuf Kaynak, Modeling and optimization of drilling operation of lead-free
brass alloys considering various cutting tool geometries and copper content, Procedia CIRP,102,(20121)
, 246-251, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2021.09.042.
[36] J. van der Geer, J.A.J. Hanraads, R.A. Lupton, The art of writing a scientific article, J. Sci. Commun. 163 (2010)
51–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.Sc.2010.00372.
Conflict of Interest

Declaration of interests

☒ The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships
that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

☐The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered
as potential competing interests:
Author Statement

CRediT author statement

G. Guru Mahesh: Writing - Original draft preparation, Software, Visualization. Jayakrishna
Kandasamy: Conceptualization, Methodology, Data curation, Investigation, Supervision,
Reviewing and Editing,