Minimum Quantity Lubrication System for Metal-Cutting Process: Sustainable Manufacturing Process

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect Materials Today: Proceedings 18 (2019) 5264–5269

www.materialstoday.com/proceedings

ICMPC-2019

Minimum Quantity Lubrication System for Metal-Cutting Process: Sustainable Manufacturing Process Anup A. Junankara*, Jayant K. Purohitb, Aamir R. Sayedc a,c b

Research Scholar, Poornima University, Jaipur Associate Professor, Poornima University, Jaipur

Abstract The purpose of this paper is to deliver a review of the implementation of the minimum quantity lubrication (MQL) system for manufacturing method, centring on the application of the MQL during the metal-cutting of workpiece. The application of MQL system was implemented & studied by various eminent investigators in last two decades. Thus, in this paper, experimental investigations of prior research work were discussed and analysed to light on review with significant facts for investigators and industries to optimize the metal-cutting process. During metal-cutting process, previous investigators considered three independent parameters like cutting speed, depth of cut and feed rate. Out of these parameters, feed rate was found to be most influencing parameter for response variables. But, for specific metal-cutting operation specific types of feed rate is required. Hence, the selection of optimum value & type of feed rate for specific machining operation is yet to investigated. This paper explored an evaluation of industry-socio based trial and error approaches and propose scope for improvement from both an economic and an environmental viewpoint. This paper delivers an outline of formerly conducted analysis to propose zones of enhancement in metal-cutting process employing minimum quantity lubrication system. © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the 9th International Conference of Materials Processing and Characterization, ICMPC-2019 Keywords: Minimum quantity lubrication, Metal-cutting process, Sustainable Manufacturing

1. Introduction The significant requirement for attaining eco-innovativeness in manufacturing is now recognized, demanding noteworthy investigation efforts are expected. Metal cutting is a vital type of manufacturing practice which has pointedly significance to product manufacturing. Due to commercial effect and life span of component, metal cutting is one of the most significant process in manufacturing industry [25]. Utilization of traditional flood metal working fluids supply system leads to the environmental, economic and operator health issues.

* Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] 2214-7853 © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the 9th International Conference of Materials Processing and Characterization, ICMPC-2019

A.A. Junankar et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 18 (2019) 5264–5269

5265

Cost contribution of metal working fluid to total manufacturing cost is found to be 5 to 16 percent [11]. Therefore, eminent researchers carried out lot of studies related to dry machining and minimum quantity lubrication metal cutting process, with the motivation for the development of sustainable manufacturing process. Metal cutting operations like turning, milling, drilling and grinding processes have basically been proficient in product manufacturing [26]. Out of these mentioned metal cutting processes, turning is most commonly used metal cutting process in which material removes form the surface of cylindrical work material by utilization of single point cutting tool [46]. The removed material is called as chips and it slides on rake face of single point cutting tool. Rough turning, straight turning, step turning, counter turning and taper turning are the basic types of turning. Many investigators stated in their experimental study that cutting speed, feed rate, depth of cut and type of cooling environment are the highly influencing input parameters for turning operation [44]. These four input parameters directly showed a significant effect on output response variables related to product quality like surface roughness, cutting temperature, cutting force and tool wear [56]. Most of the researchers concluded that, feed and type of cooling environment are the most highly significant input parameters followed by cutting speed and depth of cut [3]. Feed is defined as the movement of the single point cutting tool during metal cutting operation (turning) with respect to the revolution of work material in per unit time. It is generally considered as path of the single point cutting tool, measured in mm/rev. Different types of turning operation stated earlier and specific type of feed is required for each type turning operation. Different types of feeds are required for above mentioned operations are listed in table 1. Table 1. Types of Feeds Required During Actual Metal Cutting Operations (Turning) Type of Operation Types of Feed Tool Advancement Rough Turning

Lateral Feed

Tool path & job axis are parallel

Straight Turning

Lateral Feed

Tool path & job axis are parallel

Step Turning

Lateral &

Tool path & job axis are parallel

Cross Feed

Tool path & job axis are perpendicular

Counter Turning

Counter Feed

Tool path is curved

Taper Turing

Angular Feed

Tool path is inclined to job axis

The awareness of the effective utilization of cooling environment in metal cutting operations is of acute significance in order to increase the output of any type of turning process in terms of quality. The output can be assessed centred on certain output response parameters like surface roughness of work material, tool wear, cutting forces, cutting temperature developed at tool-work material interface and tool-chip interface [14, 22]. Conventionally, in flood cooling system various cutting fluids used during metal cutting operation to decrease the friction and cutting zone temperature generated. Neat cutting fluids and water based soluble fluids are the two main categories of cutting fluids. Along with this few more benefits were stated by various investigators – to removal of chips from toolworkpiece interface, less chemical diffusion, less tool wear, corrosion resistance of the machined product. Results of cutting fluids is depends on type of metal cutting operation, type of cutting methodology and type of work material. With the utilization of traditional cooling, flood cooling and near dry cooling also shows impact on the performance of cutting fluids. Conversely, few drawbacks linked to the utilization of the cutting fluids like cost, health, safety and environmental issues. The permitted exposure range for metal working fluid is 0.5 mg/cubic meter by National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health – USA and 5mg/cubic meter by Occupational Safety Health Administration –USA [12]. The consumption of metal working fluid is in 100 million gallons and 1.2millions operators were exposed to it during metal cutting operation each year in USA. This leads to hostile health side effects and safety concerns like skin diseases, noxiousness, lung disorders and cancer [12]. In the metal cutting operation, chips generated are wet and it is expected that chips must be dried before reprocessing, which reflects into surplus cost. These kinds of issues motivates the researchers to develop the new cutting fluids and cooling techniques. Dry machining, near dry machining, minimum quantity lubrication are the most promising techniques.

5266

A. A. Junankar et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 18 (2019) 5264–5269

For the development of eco-innovative metal cutting process, minimum quantity lubrication techniques is the most promising one among all other techniques. It is also known as near dry machining, utilizes very less quantity of cutting fluid fed to the cutting tool-work material interface during machining [13]. Approximately 10,000 times less volume of cutting fluid is consumed, mixed with compressed air, as compared to flood cooling system [14]. In minimum quantity lubrication system, mixture of air and cutting fluid formed a droplet known as aerosol and delivered to tool-work material & tool- chip interface under defined pressure. For the formation of micron-sized aerosol, atomizer is used as an ejector in which atomization process is completed in between cutting fluid and compressed air. Spray of aerosol gaseous suspension is produced also called as mist which solves the cooling and lubrication purpose. After MQL metal-cutting process, chips are also obtained in dried formed. So, the key issue of recycling of wet chips is resolved with the utilization of MQL metal-cutting process. Minimum quantity lubrication can be employed internally and externally as shown in fig.1 and fig.2 respectively. In internal minimum quantity lubrication, mist is delivered though the spindle, tool holder and tool. On the other hand for external minimum quantity lubrication, cutting fluid is mixed with the compressed air in a single external unit and is delivered via nozzle. Due to less volume requirement of cutting fluids, operator’s exposure towards cutting fluid is also less and it leads to minimization of health issues of operators. The large decrement of cutting fluid reduces health threats triggered by cutting fluid emanations both in the air and on the skin of machine operators. When done correctly, minimum quantity lubrication fluids do not spread all through the shop floor. They do not penetrate into the electrical parts of the machine nor dissolve the paint off of the exteriors. Due to which cleaner shop floor observed and machine life can be increases. All these facts, directly affects to environmental issues like air and soil pollution. In this perspective, there is a strong need to discover the capable for MQL within metal-cutting process, to make it eco-innovative and eco-friendly which leads to development of cleaner production method.

Fig. 1. Internal MQL System

Fig. 2. External MQL System

A.A. Junankar et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 18 (2019) 5264–5269

5267

2. Literature Review A summary of experimental research work on turning process under MQL environment is stated as shown in below Table 2Table 2 Summary of Published Experimental Research Work on Turning Process with MQL Authors Input Output Cooling Findings Parameters Parameters Environment Wen et al.

CS, DOC, FR

TW, SR, CT

MQL

FR is most significant parameter which affects TW, SR and CT.

Alberto et al.

CS, DOC, FR

SR, TW, CF

MQL

All input parameters influenced output parameters.

Ozimina et al.

CS, DOC, FR

TW

MQL

Lowers tool wear with optimum CS, DOC, FR value.

Kumar et al.

CS, DOC, FR

MRR, SR

MQL

All input parameters influenced MRR, SR

Sharma et al.

CS, DOC, FR

SR, CF, TW

MQL

FR, CS , DOC & NF influenced SR, CF and TW

Goindi et al.

CS, DOC, FR

CF, SR

MQL

FR, CS , DOC & Ionic liquid influenced CF & SR

Ali et al.

CS, DOC, FR

SR, TW

MQL

FR, CS & DOC influenced SR & TW

Rapeti et al

CS, DOC, FR

SR, TW, CF, CT

MQL

CS & FR influenced output variables

Talib et al.

CS, DOC, FR

SR, CF, CT

MQL

I.P. affects output parameters

Sharma et al.

CS, DOC, FR

CT, TW

MQL

I.P. with NP affected O.P.

Singh et al.

CS, DOC, FR

SR, CF

MQL

NF & I.P. parameters affects O.P.

Vasu et al.

CS, DOC, FR

SR, TW, CT

MQL

NF with I.P. affects O.P.

Beatrice et al.

CS, DOC, FR

SR

MQL

FR, CS, DOC influenced SR

Gupta et al.

CS, DOC, FR

SR, MRR

MQL

FR is more significant than CS, DOC

R Kumar et al.

CS, DOC, FR

SR

MQL

FR is more significant than CS, DOC

Mia et al.

CS, DOC, FR

SR

MQL

I.P. affects surface roughness

Mia et al.

CS, DOC, FR

CT

MQL

I.P. affects cutting temperature

Sarhan et al.

CS, DOC, FR

TW

MQL

FR and CS influenced TW

Asilturk et al.

CS, DOC, FR

SR

MQL

FR highly influenced on SR

Khalil et al.

CS, DOC, FR

TW

MQL

NF with I.P. influenced on O.P.

Abhang et al.

CS, DOC, FR

SR

MQL

I.P. affects output parameters

Rajendra et al.

CS, DOC, FR

MRR

MQL

FR influenced on MRR

Chetan at al.

CS, DOC, FR

CF, TW

MQL

NF with I.P. influenced on CF, TW

Viswanathan et al.

CS, DOC, FR

SR, CF, TW

MQL

FR influenced on SR, CF, TW

Pasam et al.

CS, DOC, FR

SR, CF, TW, CT

MQL

I.P. affects output parameters

Gunjal at al.

CS, DOC

SR, TW

MQL

CS affects output parameter

Kaynak at al.

CS, DOC, FR

CF, SR, TW

MQL

I.P. affects output parameters

Where, FR = Feed, DOC = Depth of Cut, CS = Cutting Speed, SR = Surface Roughness, TW = Tool Wear, CF = Cutting Force, CT = Cutting Temperature, MRR = Material Removal Rate, NF = Nanofluid, I.P. = Input Parameter, O.P. = Output Parameter

5268

A. A. Junankar et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 18 (2019) 5264–5269

3. Problem Faced by Industries The important problem faced by industries during metal cutting industry is the requirement to upgrade product quality and at same time to reduce manufacturing cost. The main variables such as machining input parameters, geometry of cutting tool, material of cutting tool, tool coating and type of cooling environment, etc. which affects quality and production costs of the product. Out of these main variables, various investigators did a novel research on the cooling environment effects and concluded that minimum quantity lubrication is the effective technique for turning operation. Also, many researcher stated that by the optimization of machining input parameters like feed rate, cutting speed and depth of cut problem faced by industries can be resolved. In this study, feed rate was found to be most influencing for output parameters. But, for specific metal-cutting operation specific types of feed rate is required. Hence, the selection of optimum value & type of feed rate for specific machining operation is yet to investigated. 4. Conclusion During past two decades, eminent investigators and industry technocrats have concentrated their courtesy in the pursuit for substitutions to the usage of tradition cutting fluids in metal-cutting processes, mostly due to the cost and ecological impression of the cutting fluids. In this insight, few options have been discovered and implemented like cryogenic, solid lubricants. For some metal cutting processes, elimination of cutting fluids cannot be possible without decreasing the product quality and productivity of metal cutting process. The implementation of the MQL upholds the key values and objectives of flood metal-cutting process, but creating as an approach, the decrement in the quantity of cutting fluid consumed. Therefore, 10,000 times lower flow rate is used in minimum quantity lubrication cooling system as compared to flood cooling system. This study delivers an assessment to the MQL system in Section 1, enlightening the need and importance of MQL as eco-innovative process. Section 2, provides brief literature review on the experimental implementation of MQL system during turning – metal cutting process. Due to less consumption of cutting fluids under minimum quantity lubrication system may provide excellent economical and technical assistances, together with operator body related diseases reduction, natural assets conservation and ecological control. The review of prior research work recognized how the MQL system support to increase the outcomes of the turning – metal cutting process with respect to tool life or surface roughness. Hence, the utilization of the minimum quantity lubrication system must be appropriately evaluated for every precise method. 5. Recommendation for future work At this moment, researchers have given high attention to implementation of minimum quantity lubrication system during turning process to determine optimum values of input parameters with respect to output parameters and can outspread their research on determination, selection of specific types of input parameters to increase metal-cutting process performance. In many experimental work stated in section 2, single nanoparticle colloidal mixture is used with minimum quantity lubrication system and it can be extended as mixture of various nanoparticle and base fluids during turning operation of work material. References [1] Kang, Z., Yonghong Fu, Yun C., Jinghu Ji, Hao Fu, Shulin W, Rui Li, Int. J. of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology 5 (2018) 583-591. [2] Wang, Yaogang, Changhe Li, Yanbin Zhang, Min Yang, BenKai Li, Lan Dong, Jun Wang, Int. J. of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology 2 (2018.) 327-339. [3] Huang, Shuiquan, Tao Lv, Minghuan Wang, Xuefeng Xu, International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology 2 (2018) 317-326. [4] Lian, Yunsong, Huifeng Chen, Chenliang Mu, Jianxin Deng, Shuting Lei, International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology 2 (2018) 219-230. [5] Wu, Tao, Tianjian Li, Xiaohong Ding, Hong Chen, Lei Wang, Int. J. of PEM-Green Tech. 2 (2018) 211-217.

A.A. Junankar et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 18 (2019) 5264–5269

5269

[6] Faga, Maria Giulia, Paolo C. Priarone, Matteo Robiglio, Luca Settineri, Vincenzo Tebaldo, International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology 2 (2018) 129-139. [7] Jang, Duk-yong, Jeehyun Jung, Jongwon Seok, Int. J. of Precision Engg and Manufacturing-Green Tech. 1 (2016) 5-12. [8] Pereira, Octavio, Adrián Rodríguez, Joaquín Barreiro, Ana Isabel Fernández-Abia, Luis Norberto López de Lacalle, International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology 1 (2017) 87-95. [9] Dureja, J. S., Ranjit Singh, Talwinder Singh, Pargat Singh, Manu Dogra, Manpreet S. Bhatti, International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology 2(2015) 123-129. [10] Nam, Jungsoo, Sang Won Lee, Int. Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology 1 (2018) 29-35. [11] Kurgin, S., M. Dasch, J., L. Simon, D., C. Barber, G. ,Zou, Q., Industrial Lubrication and Tribology, 66(1) (2014) 151-159. [12] Boubekri, N., Shaikh, V., Foster, P.R., Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 21(5) (2010) 556-566. [13] Kurgin, S., Dasch, J.M., Simon, D.L., Barber, G.C., Zou, Q., Industrial Lubrication and Tribology, 64(6) (2012)376-386. [14] Carou, D., Rubio, E.M., Davim, J.P., Industrial Lubrication and Tribology, 67(3) (2015) 256-261. [15] Siniawski, M., Bowman, C., Industrial Lubrication and tribology, 61(2) (2009) 60-66. [16] Uysal, A., Industrial Lubrication and Tribology, 68(4) (2016) 446-451. [17] Wen, G., Ge, Y., Zhendong, D., Gao, Z., Industrial Lubrication and Tribology, 67(5) (2015.) 402-406. [18] Bork, C.A.S., Gonçalves, J.F.S., Gomes, J.O., Industrial Lubrication and Tribology, 67(2) (2015) 181-195. [19] Han, R., Liu, J., Sun, Y., Industrial Lubrication and Tribology, 57(5) (2005) 187-192. [20] Makhesana, M.A., Patel, K.M., Industrial Lubrication and Tribology, 68(5) (2016) 591-596. [21] Ozimina, D., Madej, M., Kowalczyk, J., Ozimina, E., Plaza, S., Industrial Lubrication and Tribology, 70(9) (2018)1649-1656. [22] Abhishek, K., Datta, S., Sankar Mahapatra, S., Mandal, G. and Majumdar, G., J. of Mfg. Tech. Mngt., 24(6) (2013) 929-951. [23] Stanford, M., Lister, P.M., Kibble, K.A., Morgan, C., Sihra, T., Industrial Lubrication and Tribology, 65(4) (2013) 236-244. [24] Sharma, A.K., Tiwari, A.K., Singh, R.K., Dixit, A.R., Materials Today: Proceedings, 3(6) (2016) 2155-2162. [25] Goindi, G.S., Chavan, S.N., Mandal, D., Sarkar, P., Jayal, A.D., Procedia CIRP, 26 (2015) 341-345. [26] Ali, M.A.M., Khalil, A.N.M., Azmi, A.I., Salleh, H.M., AIP Conference Proceedings, Vol. 1885, No. 1, (2017) 020101). [27] Rapeti, P., Pasam, V.K., Gurram, K.M.R., Revuru, R.S., Journal of Cleaner Production, 172 (2018) 2862-2875. [28] Talib, N. and Rahim, E.A., Tribology International, 118 (2018) 89-104. [30] Sharma, A.K., Tiwari, A.K., Dixit, A.R., Singh, R.K., Singh, M., Tribology International, 119 (2018) 99-111. [31] Singh, R.K., Sharma, A.K., Dixit, A.R., Tiwari, A.K., Pramanik, A., Mandal, A., , Journal of cleaner production, 162 (2017) 830-845. [32] Vasu, V., Pradeep Kumar Reddy, G., Proceedings of the IME, J. of Nanoengineering and Nanosystems, 225(1) (2011) 3-16. [33] Beatrice, B.A., Kirubakaran, E., Thangaiah, P.R.J., Wins, K.L.D., Procedia Engineering, 97 (2014) 205-211. [34] Gupta, M., Kumar, S., Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal, 18(1) (2015) 70-81. [35] Kumar, R., Chauhan, S., Measurement, 65 (2015)166-180. [36] Mia, M., Dhar, N.R., Measurement, 92 (2016) 464-474. [37] Mia, M., Dhar, N.R., Journal of advanced research, 7(6) (2016)1035-1044. [38] Sarhan, A.A., IFAC-PapersOnLine, 48(1) (2015) 93-98. [39] Asiltürk, I., Çunkaş, M., Expert systems with applications, 38(5) (2011) 5826-5832. [40] Khalil, A.N.M., Ali, M.A.M., Azmi, A.I., Procedia Manufacturing, 2 (2015)130-134. [41] Ekinovic, S., Prcanovic, H., Begovic, E., Procedia engineering, 132 (2015) 608-614. [42] Abhang, L.B., Hameedullah, M., Procedia materials science, 6 (2014)1516-1523. [43] Rajendra, B., Deepak, D., Procedia Technology, 24, pp.399-405, 2016. [44] Behera, B.C., Ghosh, S., Rao, P.V., Tribology International, 101 (2016) 234-246. [45] Viswanathan, R., Ramesh, S., Subburam, V., Measurement, 120 (2018) 107-113. [46] Cetin, M.H., Ozcelik, B., Kuram, E., Demirbas, E., Journal of Cleaner Production, 19(17-18) (2011) 2049-2056. [47] Xavior, M.A., Adithan, M., Journal of materials processing technology, 209(2) (2009) 900-909. [48] Pasam, V.K., Revuru, R.S., Gugulothu, S., Materials Today: Proceedings, 5(2) (2018) 8016-8024. [49] Gunjal, S.U., Patil, N.G., Procedia Manufacturing, 20 (2018)18-23. [50] Kaynak, Y., Gharibi, A., Yılmaz, U., Köklü, U., Aslantaş, K., Journal of Manufacturing Processes, 34 (2018) 503-512. [51] Mia, M., Morshed, M.S., Kharshiduzzaman, M., Razi, M.H., Mostafa, M.R., Rahman, S.M., Ahmad, I., Hafiz, M.T., Kamal, A.M., Measurement, 118 (2018) 43-51. [52] Revuru, R.S., Pasam, V.K., Syed, I., Paliwal, U.K., CIRP J. of Manufacturing Science and Technology, 21 (2018.) 75-85. [53] Das, R.K., Sahoo, A.K., Mishra, P.C., Kumar, R., Panda, A., Design Engineering, 2351 (2018) 9789. [54] Taylor, F.W., American society of mechanical engineers, 1906. [55] Mehta, A., Hemakumar, S., Patil, A., Khandke, S.P., Kuppan, P., Oyyaravelu, R., Balan, A.S.S., 2017. [56] Musavi, S.H., Davoodi, B., Niknam, S.A., Journal of Manufacturing Processes, 32 (2018) 734-743. [57] Sakharkar, S.N., Pawade, R.S., CIRP Journal of Manufacturing Science and Technology, 2018. [58] Patole, P.B., Kulkarni, V.V., Materials Today: Proceedings, 5(1) (2018) 104-112. [59] Sivaiah, P., Chakradhar, D., CIRP Journal of Manufacturing Science and Technology, 21 (2018) 86-96. [60] Rabiei, F., Rahimi, A.R., Hadad, M.J., Ashrafijou, M., Journal of Cleaner Production, 86 (2015) 447-460.