- Email: [email protected]
Optimization of Process Parameters in Surface Finishing of Al6061 by using Magnetic Abrasive Finishing Process
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect Materials Today: Proceedings 18 (2019) 3365–3370
www.materialstoday.com/proceedings
ICMPC-2019
Optimization of Process Parameters in Surface Finishing of Al6061 by using Magnetic Abrasive Finishing Process D. Sai Chaitanya Kishorea*, S.M. Jameel Bashab a
Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering, Srinivasa Ramanujan Institute Of Technology, Rotarypuram, BK Samudram, Anantapur, 515701, Andhra Pradesh, India. b Professor & Head of Mechanical Engineering, Srinivasa Ramanujan Institute Of Technology, Rotarypuram, BK Samudram, Anantapur, 515701, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Abstract Magnetic Abrasive Finishing (MAF) categorized under advanced finishing process by which workpiece surface may achieve nano level surface finish. In the present paper, the experiments were planned by Taguchi method. The experiments were carried out on Al-6061 mainly by varying process parameters like voltage, working gap, and rotational speed. From the experimental results, it was investigated that the surface roughness is optimum at the higher voltage, lower working gap, and higher rotational speed. © 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: MAF; FMAB; surface roughness; Taguchi method; MAPs;
1. Introduction Development of the manufacturing process has been a critical aspect of today's engineering. With the demand for precision engineering evolution of ultra-precision finishing became an obvious need for manufacturing engineers. The traditional finishing processes have various limitations such as to finish complex shapes, small sizes, etc. The deficiencies in the conventional finishing processes led to the exploitation of advanced finishing process like magnetic abrasive finishing (MAF). In MAF, the workpiece kept between the two poles of a magnet. Magnetic particles (MAPs) introduced between the workpiece and the magnet, composed of ferromagnetic particles and
* Corresponding author. Tel.:91-9959545688. 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
3366
D.S.C. Kishore et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 18 (2019) 3365–3370
abrasive powder. Bonded or unbonded MAPs can be used during the finishing process. The sintering process is used for preparing bonded MAPs which were made by sintering of ferromagnetic particles and abrasive powder whereas unbonded MAPs are produced by mechanical mixing of ferromagnetic particles and abrasive powder with a small quantity of lubricant. Lubricants provide holding strength between the ingredients of MAPs. The magnetic abrasive particles conjoin along the imaginary magnetic force lines for forming flexible brush between the workpiece and the electromagnet which is known as a flexible magnetic abrasive brush (FMAB). This brush acts as a multi-point cutting tool during the finishing operation. When the electromagnet starts rotating the flexible brush turns like a grinding wheel and performs the finishing operation. MAF owns many attractive advantages, like self-sharpening, self-adaptability, controllability, and the finishing tool requires neither compensation nor dressing [1]. Yamaguchi et al. [2] developed magnetic field assisted finishing, for finishing of the inner surfaces of alumina ceramic components. They did experiments on alumina ceramic tubes to examine the effects of the volume of lubricant, ferrous particle size, and abrasive grain size on the finishing characteristics. They find out that the finished surface is highly dependent on the volume of lubricant, which affects the abrasive contact against the surface, which changes the finishing force acting on the abrasive and on the abrasive grain size, which controls the depth of cut. Jain et al. [3] investigate the effects of the working gap and circumferential speed on material removal, change in surface finish and percent improvement in surface finish. They analyzed that in general, material removal decreases by increasing the working gap or decreasing the circumferential speed of the workpiece. Change in surface finish increases by increasing the circumferential speed of the workpiece. Chang et al. [4] has done the investigation on Iron grit and steel grit of various particle sizes and find out that the higher-up hardness of steel grit and its polyhedron shape makes the steel grit more appropriate for magnetic abrasive finishing process [5]. Mori [6] et al. studied that magnetic properties of the abrasives and hardness and roughness of the polished material mainly influence the polishing mechanism of the magnetic abrasive particles. Shaohui et al. [7] developed vertical vibration-assisted magnetic abrasive finishing process. They did experiment on magnesium alloy. They find out that the removal volume per unit time of magnesium alloy is larger than that of other materials such as brass and stainless. Kodacsy et al. [8] investigated that the surface roughness decreases if finer grains are used. Dhirendra et al. [9] examine the microscopic changes in the surface texture resulting from the MAF process to characterize the behavior of abrasive particles during finishing. They find out that the surface roughness value decreases with increasing field strength. Jayswal et al. [10] studied the theoretical investigations of the MAF process. They developed a finite element model to evaluate the distribution of magnetic forces on the workpiece surface. They also developed a model for material removal and surface roughness by considering a uniform surface profile without statistical distribution. Sai et al. investigated that surface roughness is decreased with the increase in cutting speed [11]. Dhirendra et al. [12] did experimentation on forces acting during MAF, and they developed mathematical models for magnetic force, tangential cutting force, and change in Ra. Moreover, they also find out that both forces and average surface roughness increase with the increase in current and decrease in the working gap. Sai et al. used L27 orthogonal array to plan the experiments, and the results are analyzed by using Taguchi’s lower the best signal to noise ratio [13]. In this paper, the experiments planned by L9 orthogonal array to achieve optimum surface roughness by using MAF. 2. Experimental setup In MAF when the power is given to electromagnet, the electromagnet gets magnetized. The working gap between the workpiece and the magnet is filled with magnetic abrasive particles. Due to the magnetization, the electromagnet attracts magnetic-abrasive powder and forms a flexible magnetic abrasive brush (FMAB). The MAF setup was shown in Fig. 1. After the formation of magnetic abrasive brush, the spindle is rotated. The flexible brush turned by the rotation of the spindle, during the finishing process the working table also moved to perform the finishing operation. The experimental setup details are given in Table 1. The flux density of the magnet is varied by increasing and decreasing the voltage. The experimentation is carried by varying the parameters voltage, working gap, and rotational speed.
D.S.C. Kishore et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 18 (2019) 3365–3370
3367
Fig. 1. MAF Experimental setup
3. Experimental Plan An orthogonal array L9 for a three-level factor is selected in the present paper. This array has nine rows, and each row represents a trial condition with factor levels indicated by the numbers in the row. The vertical columns correspond to the factors specified in the study and each parameter contains three levels they are level1, level2, and level3 (a total of nine conditions) for the factor assigned to the column. Each column (factor) has nine possible combinations like (1, 1), (1, 2), (1, 3), (2, 1), (2, 2), (2, 3), (3, 1), (3,2), and (3, 3). The process parameters are shown in Table 2. Table 1. Experimental details of MAF setup. Parameter
Specification
Silicon carbide powder size
280 mesh
Iron powder(Fe) size
300 mesh
Applied voltage
24 v
Input current
0.5 A
Weight ratio (Fe: Sic: Oil)
70: 25: 5
Work piece material
Al-6061
Table 2. Planning of Experiments. Parameter
Specification
Voltage
20v- 22v- 24v
Working gap
1.25mm- 1.5mm-2 mm
Rotational speed
100 rpm- 140 rpm- 240 rpm
3368
D.S.C. Kishore et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 18 (2019) 3365–3370
The experimentation is done according to the planned L9 orthogonal array on Magnetic Abrasive Finishing setup. The experimental results are shown in Table 3. Table 3. Experimental results. Specimen No
Voltage (A) 20 20 20 22 22 22 24 24 24
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Working gap (B) 1.25 1.5 2 1.25 1.5 2 1.25 1.5 2
Rotational speed (C) 100 140 240 140 240 100 240 100 140
Ra (µm) 0.225 0.185 0.18 0.135 0.115 0.165 0.08 0.165 0.155
Table 4. Response table for Mean. Factor
Level
A B C
1
2
3
0.1966 0.1466 0.185
0.1383 0.155 0.1583
0.13 0.1666 0.125
Table 5. Response table for S/N Ratio. Factor
Level
A B C
Optimum value
1
2
3
14.17 17.43 14.75
17.28 16.36 16.08
17.93 15.58 18.54
3 1 3
Fig. 2. Signal to noise ratio Vs Operating parameters
4. Analysis of Means and S/N Ratios Taguchi's Signal-to-Noise ratios (S/N), serve as objective functions for optimization, which are log functions of the desired output, help in data analysis and prediction of optimum results [14]. In the present study to obtain a good surface finish, the smaller, the better category is considered.
D.S.C. Kishore et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 18 (2019) 3365–3370
⁄ = −10 log 1
∑ 2
3369
(1)
Where n= number of measurements in trial/row and yi is the ith measured value in a row. The means of the surface roughness and S/N ratotio's at each level are shown in Table 4 and Table 5. The plot obtained for average S/N ratio is as shown in Fig. 2. From the graphs obtained it was investigated that the optimum surface roughness is obtained at a voltage of 24 volts. This is due to as the voltage increases the current through the electromagnet increases, which increases the flux density of the electromagnet, which results in the formation of a more rigid brush. The graph also shows that the better surface finish is obtained at 1.25mm working gap. This is due to if the working gap decreases the contact of brush with workpiece increases. This results in a better surface finish. The signal to ratio is high at a higher voltage, lower working gap, and higher rotational speed. 5. Analysis of Variance The purpose of the analysis of variance (ANOVA) is to determine the percentage contribution of each factor. The ANOVA is used to analyze the experimental data based on S/N ratio values. Equations 2-7 were used to find out percentage contribution of each process parameter. DOF= No of Trials – 1 (2) . = (3) = =1 − (4) = ((A 12/nA1) + (A 22/nA2) + (A 32/nA3) − CF (5) == SSPA / DOF (6) = 100 × SSPA / SST (7) Table 6. ANOVA table for surface roughness Factor
Degree of freedom
A B C Error Total
2 2 2 3 9
Sum of squares (SSP) 24.44 5.5052 22.4748 2 54.42
Mean Sum of Squares (VP) 12.22 2.7526 11.2374
Percentage Contribution 40.498 6.3259 36.94 16.2361 100
The correction factor (CF) is used for calculation of all sums of squares. It remains constant for all factors, where T is the sum of S/N ratio and n is the total number of S/N values. PA is the percentage contribution of factor A. The percentage contribution of each factor was given in Table 6, which shows that the contribution of voltage is more than other parameters. 6. Conclusions The experimental design and analysis of results were performed by using the Taguchi method. The result shows that the optimum surface finish is achieved at a higher voltage (24 V), the lower working gap (1.25 mm) and higher rotational speed (240 rpm). From the ANOVA results, it was investigated that the percentage contribution of voltage and rotational speeds is high when compared to the working gap. Acknowledgements The authors are grateful to the management of Srinivasa Ramanujan Institute of Technology, Rotarypuram Village, B K Sumudram Mandal, Ananthapuramu for the encouragement and support for publishing this work.
3370
D.S.C. Kishore et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 18 (2019) 3365–3370
References [1] Vishwanath Patil, Jaydeep Ashtekar, IJIER., 2015. [2] Hitomi Yamaguchi, Takeo Shinmura, Wear., 1999, 225, pp. 246–255. [3] V.K. Jain, Prashant Kumar, P.K. Behera, S.C. Jayswal., Wear, 2001, 250, pp. 384-390. [4] Geeng-Wei Chang, Biing-Hwa Yan, Rong-Tzong., 2002, International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture, 42, pp. 575–583. [5] R.Gill, Sehijpal Singh., International Journal of Engineering Research and General Science, 2015, 3, pp. 655-665. [6] T. Mori, K. Hirota, Y. Kawashima., Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 2003, 143–144, pp. 682–686. [7] Shaohui Yin, Takeo Shinmura., International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture, 2004, 44, 1297–1303. [8] Janos Kodacsy., Machinery & Materials Hong Kong, 2002. [9] Dhirendra K. Singh, V.K. Jain, V. Raghurama, R. Komanduri., Wear, 2005, 259, pp. 1254–1261. [10] S.C. Jayswal, V.K. Jain, P.M. Dixit., International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2005, 26, 477–490. [11] Sai Chaitanya Kishore D, Prahlada rao K, Mahamani A., Procedia Materials Science, 2014, 5, 1574 – 1583. [12] Dhirendra K. Singh, V. K. Jain, V. Raghuram, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2006, 30, 652–662. [13] D. Sai Chaitanya Kishore, K. Prahlada Rao, S.M. Jameel Basha, B. James Prasada Rao., Materials Today: Proceedings, 2018, 5, 18070– 18079. [14] S V Sapakal, M T Telsang., International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Studies, 2012, 28-30.
ScienceDirect Materials Today: Proceedings 18 (2019) 3365–3370
www.materialstoday.com/proceedings
ICMPC-2019
Optimization of Process Parameters in Surface Finishing of Al6061 by using Magnetic Abrasive Finishing Process D. Sai Chaitanya Kishorea*, S.M. Jameel Bashab a
Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering, Srinivasa Ramanujan Institute Of Technology, Rotarypuram, BK Samudram, Anantapur, 515701, Andhra Pradesh, India. b Professor & Head of Mechanical Engineering, Srinivasa Ramanujan Institute Of Technology, Rotarypuram, BK Samudram, Anantapur, 515701, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Abstract Magnetic Abrasive Finishing (MAF) categorized under advanced finishing process by which workpiece surface may achieve nano level surface finish. In the present paper, the experiments were planned by Taguchi method. The experiments were carried out on Al-6061 mainly by varying process parameters like voltage, working gap, and rotational speed. From the experimental results, it was investigated that the surface roughness is optimum at the higher voltage, lower working gap, and higher rotational speed. © 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: MAF; FMAB; surface roughness; Taguchi method; MAPs;
1. Introduction Development of the manufacturing process has been a critical aspect of today's engineering. With the demand for precision engineering evolution of ultra-precision finishing became an obvious need for manufacturing engineers. The traditional finishing processes have various limitations such as to finish complex shapes, small sizes, etc. The deficiencies in the conventional finishing processes led to the exploitation of advanced finishing process like magnetic abrasive finishing (MAF). In MAF, the workpiece kept between the two poles of a magnet. Magnetic particles (MAPs) introduced between the workpiece and the magnet, composed of ferromagnetic particles and
* Corresponding author. Tel.:91-9959545688. 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
3366
D.S.C. Kishore et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 18 (2019) 3365–3370
abrasive powder. Bonded or unbonded MAPs can be used during the finishing process. The sintering process is used for preparing bonded MAPs which were made by sintering of ferromagnetic particles and abrasive powder whereas unbonded MAPs are produced by mechanical mixing of ferromagnetic particles and abrasive powder with a small quantity of lubricant. Lubricants provide holding strength between the ingredients of MAPs. The magnetic abrasive particles conjoin along the imaginary magnetic force lines for forming flexible brush between the workpiece and the electromagnet which is known as a flexible magnetic abrasive brush (FMAB). This brush acts as a multi-point cutting tool during the finishing operation. When the electromagnet starts rotating the flexible brush turns like a grinding wheel and performs the finishing operation. MAF owns many attractive advantages, like self-sharpening, self-adaptability, controllability, and the finishing tool requires neither compensation nor dressing [1]. Yamaguchi et al. [2] developed magnetic field assisted finishing, for finishing of the inner surfaces of alumina ceramic components. They did experiments on alumina ceramic tubes to examine the effects of the volume of lubricant, ferrous particle size, and abrasive grain size on the finishing characteristics. They find out that the finished surface is highly dependent on the volume of lubricant, which affects the abrasive contact against the surface, which changes the finishing force acting on the abrasive and on the abrasive grain size, which controls the depth of cut. Jain et al. [3] investigate the effects of the working gap and circumferential speed on material removal, change in surface finish and percent improvement in surface finish. They analyzed that in general, material removal decreases by increasing the working gap or decreasing the circumferential speed of the workpiece. Change in surface finish increases by increasing the circumferential speed of the workpiece. Chang et al. [4] has done the investigation on Iron grit and steel grit of various particle sizes and find out that the higher-up hardness of steel grit and its polyhedron shape makes the steel grit more appropriate for magnetic abrasive finishing process [5]. Mori [6] et al. studied that magnetic properties of the abrasives and hardness and roughness of the polished material mainly influence the polishing mechanism of the magnetic abrasive particles. Shaohui et al. [7] developed vertical vibration-assisted magnetic abrasive finishing process. They did experiment on magnesium alloy. They find out that the removal volume per unit time of magnesium alloy is larger than that of other materials such as brass and stainless. Kodacsy et al. [8] investigated that the surface roughness decreases if finer grains are used. Dhirendra et al. [9] examine the microscopic changes in the surface texture resulting from the MAF process to characterize the behavior of abrasive particles during finishing. They find out that the surface roughness value decreases with increasing field strength. Jayswal et al. [10] studied the theoretical investigations of the MAF process. They developed a finite element model to evaluate the distribution of magnetic forces on the workpiece surface. They also developed a model for material removal and surface roughness by considering a uniform surface profile without statistical distribution. Sai et al. investigated that surface roughness is decreased with the increase in cutting speed [11]. Dhirendra et al. [12] did experimentation on forces acting during MAF, and they developed mathematical models for magnetic force, tangential cutting force, and change in Ra. Moreover, they also find out that both forces and average surface roughness increase with the increase in current and decrease in the working gap. Sai et al. used L27 orthogonal array to plan the experiments, and the results are analyzed by using Taguchi’s lower the best signal to noise ratio [13]. In this paper, the experiments planned by L9 orthogonal array to achieve optimum surface roughness by using MAF. 2. Experimental setup In MAF when the power is given to electromagnet, the electromagnet gets magnetized. The working gap between the workpiece and the magnet is filled with magnetic abrasive particles. Due to the magnetization, the electromagnet attracts magnetic-abrasive powder and forms a flexible magnetic abrasive brush (FMAB). The MAF setup was shown in Fig. 1. After the formation of magnetic abrasive brush, the spindle is rotated. The flexible brush turned by the rotation of the spindle, during the finishing process the working table also moved to perform the finishing operation. The experimental setup details are given in Table 1. The flux density of the magnet is varied by increasing and decreasing the voltage. The experimentation is carried by varying the parameters voltage, working gap, and rotational speed.
D.S.C. Kishore et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 18 (2019) 3365–3370
3367
Fig. 1. MAF Experimental setup
3. Experimental Plan An orthogonal array L9 for a three-level factor is selected in the present paper. This array has nine rows, and each row represents a trial condition with factor levels indicated by the numbers in the row. The vertical columns correspond to the factors specified in the study and each parameter contains three levels they are level1, level2, and level3 (a total of nine conditions) for the factor assigned to the column. Each column (factor) has nine possible combinations like (1, 1), (1, 2), (1, 3), (2, 1), (2, 2), (2, 3), (3, 1), (3,2), and (3, 3). The process parameters are shown in Table 2. Table 1. Experimental details of MAF setup. Parameter
Specification
Silicon carbide powder size
280 mesh
Iron powder(Fe) size
300 mesh
Applied voltage
24 v
Input current
0.5 A
Weight ratio (Fe: Sic: Oil)
70: 25: 5
Work piece material
Al-6061
Table 2. Planning of Experiments. Parameter
Specification
Voltage
20v- 22v- 24v
Working gap
1.25mm- 1.5mm-2 mm
Rotational speed
100 rpm- 140 rpm- 240 rpm
3368
D.S.C. Kishore et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 18 (2019) 3365–3370
The experimentation is done according to the planned L9 orthogonal array on Magnetic Abrasive Finishing setup. The experimental results are shown in Table 3. Table 3. Experimental results. Specimen No
Voltage (A) 20 20 20 22 22 22 24 24 24
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Working gap (B) 1.25 1.5 2 1.25 1.5 2 1.25 1.5 2
Rotational speed (C) 100 140 240 140 240 100 240 100 140
Ra (µm) 0.225 0.185 0.18 0.135 0.115 0.165 0.08 0.165 0.155
Table 4. Response table for Mean. Factor
Level
A B C
1
2
3
0.1966 0.1466 0.185
0.1383 0.155 0.1583
0.13 0.1666 0.125
Table 5. Response table for S/N Ratio. Factor
Level
A B C
Optimum value
1
2
3
14.17 17.43 14.75
17.28 16.36 16.08
17.93 15.58 18.54
3 1 3
Fig. 2. Signal to noise ratio Vs Operating parameters
4. Analysis of Means and S/N Ratios Taguchi's Signal-to-Noise ratios (S/N), serve as objective functions for optimization, which are log functions of the desired output, help in data analysis and prediction of optimum results [14]. In the present study to obtain a good surface finish, the smaller, the better category is considered.
D.S.C. Kishore et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 18 (2019) 3365–3370
⁄ = −10 log 1
∑ 2
3369
(1)
Where n= number of measurements in trial/row and yi is the ith measured value in a row. The means of the surface roughness and S/N ratotio's at each level are shown in Table 4 and Table 5. The plot obtained for average S/N ratio is as shown in Fig. 2. From the graphs obtained it was investigated that the optimum surface roughness is obtained at a voltage of 24 volts. This is due to as the voltage increases the current through the electromagnet increases, which increases the flux density of the electromagnet, which results in the formation of a more rigid brush. The graph also shows that the better surface finish is obtained at 1.25mm working gap. This is due to if the working gap decreases the contact of brush with workpiece increases. This results in a better surface finish. The signal to ratio is high at a higher voltage, lower working gap, and higher rotational speed. 5. Analysis of Variance The purpose of the analysis of variance (ANOVA) is to determine the percentage contribution of each factor. The ANOVA is used to analyze the experimental data based on S/N ratio values. Equations 2-7 were used to find out percentage contribution of each process parameter. DOF= No of Trials – 1 (2) . = (3) = =1 − (4) = ((A 12/nA1) + (A 22/nA2) + (A 32/nA3) − CF (5) == SSPA / DOF (6) = 100 × SSPA / SST (7) Table 6. ANOVA table for surface roughness Factor
Degree of freedom
A B C Error Total
2 2 2 3 9
Sum of squares (SSP) 24.44 5.5052 22.4748 2 54.42
Mean Sum of Squares (VP) 12.22 2.7526 11.2374
Percentage Contribution 40.498 6.3259 36.94 16.2361 100
The correction factor (CF) is used for calculation of all sums of squares. It remains constant for all factors, where T is the sum of S/N ratio and n is the total number of S/N values. PA is the percentage contribution of factor A. The percentage contribution of each factor was given in Table 6, which shows that the contribution of voltage is more than other parameters. 6. Conclusions The experimental design and analysis of results were performed by using the Taguchi method. The result shows that the optimum surface finish is achieved at a higher voltage (24 V), the lower working gap (1.25 mm) and higher rotational speed (240 rpm). From the ANOVA results, it was investigated that the percentage contribution of voltage and rotational speeds is high when compared to the working gap. Acknowledgements The authors are grateful to the management of Srinivasa Ramanujan Institute of Technology, Rotarypuram Village, B K Sumudram Mandal, Ananthapuramu for the encouragement and support for publishing this work.
3370
D.S.C. Kishore et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 18 (2019) 3365–3370
References [1] Vishwanath Patil, Jaydeep Ashtekar, IJIER., 2015. [2] Hitomi Yamaguchi, Takeo Shinmura, Wear., 1999, 225, pp. 246–255. [3] V.K. Jain, Prashant Kumar, P.K. Behera, S.C. Jayswal., Wear, 2001, 250, pp. 384-390. [4] Geeng-Wei Chang, Biing-Hwa Yan, Rong-Tzong., 2002, International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture, 42, pp. 575–583. [5] R.Gill, Sehijpal Singh., International Journal of Engineering Research and General Science, 2015, 3, pp. 655-665. [6] T. Mori, K. Hirota, Y. Kawashima., Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 2003, 143–144, pp. 682–686. [7] Shaohui Yin, Takeo Shinmura., International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture, 2004, 44, 1297–1303. [8] Janos Kodacsy., Machinery & Materials Hong Kong, 2002. [9] Dhirendra K. Singh, V.K. Jain, V. Raghurama, R. Komanduri., Wear, 2005, 259, pp. 1254–1261. [10] S.C. Jayswal, V.K. Jain, P.M. Dixit., International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2005, 26, 477–490. [11] Sai Chaitanya Kishore D, Prahlada rao K, Mahamani A., Procedia Materials Science, 2014, 5, 1574 – 1583. [12] Dhirendra K. Singh, V. K. Jain, V. Raghuram, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2006, 30, 652–662. [13] D. Sai Chaitanya Kishore, K. Prahlada Rao, S.M. Jameel Basha, B. James Prasada Rao., Materials Today: Proceedings, 2018, 5, 18070– 18079. [14] S V Sapakal, M T Telsang., International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Studies, 2012, 28-30.