Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
93-105, 2014
Available online at http://www.ijsrpub.com/ijsrce
ISSN: 2345-6787; 2014; Author(s) retain the copyright of this article
http://dx.doi.org/10.12983/ijsrce-2014-p0093-0105
Abstract. Electrochemical Machining is one of the major alternatives to conventional methods of machining difficult to cut
materials and generating complex contours, without inducing residual stress and tool wear. Electrochemical machining process
is a metal machining technology based on electrolysis where the product is processed without both contact with the tool and
thermal influence. The metal workpiece is partially machined through electricity and chemistry i.e. electrochemical until it
reaches the required end shape. The shape accuracy of the end product depends on the size of the gap. In the present study, the
influences of ECM cutting parameters such as supply voltage, tool feed rate, electrolyte concentration and current, keeping
other parameters constant, on the material removal rate and surface roughness were presented. In addition Taguchi approach
and analysis of variance (ANOVA) are used to optimize ECM process. Among the four process parameters, supply voltage
(46%) influences highly the material removal rate, followed by tool feed rate (19%), current (6%) and the electrolyte
concentration by (3%).The contribution that have significant for surface roughness are current (53%) influences highly,
followed by tool feed rate (21%), supply voltage (11.5%) and the electrolyte concentration by (0.2%). A comparative study of
material removal rate and surface roughness mathematically and experimentally basis has been carried out.
Keywords: Electrochemical machining (ECM), material removal rate, surface roughness, Taguchi approach and analysis of
variance (ANOVA)
1. INTRODUCTION
Recent developments in different methods of
machining have significantly increased the potential
for widespread industrial applications of electro
chemical machining (ECM) as a non-traditional
machining process. Although an increase of material
removal arte and a high surface quality has been
achieved in earlier investigations, widespread
industrial application of electrochemical technology
has necessitated a better understanding of the effects
of process parameters on material removal rate and
surface quality (Swift and Booker, 1997).
Electro chemical machining processe has some
unique advantages over other conventional and nontraditional machining processes but its use required
relatively higher initial investment cost, operating
cost, tooling cost, and maintenance costs (McGeough,
1998). When using ECM process parameters
optimally, it can significantly reduce the ECM
operating, tooling, and maintenance costs and thus, it
will increase the accuracy of components produced
which is important in some applications such as
93
Habib
Experimental Investigation of Electrochemical Machining Process using Taguchi Approach
SKD11) with standard name called (GB/ T 12992000). It is cold-working die steel, steel hardenability,
quenching and tempering the hardness, wear
resistance and strength than that of high Cr12. Cross
section used in the manufacture large, complex shape,
with a variety of die and tools, such as die punching,
piping die, deep drawing steel mold, circular saws,
standards, tools and gauges, thread rolling die. Table 2
shows chemical composition of SKD11 alloy tool
steel.
2.2. Laboratory determinations
Experiments were performed using Metatech
(ECMAC) made electrochemical die sinking
machining equipment. The electrochemical machine
setup consists of machining tank, control panel and
electrolyte circulation system. Figure 1 shows
schematically the experimental set-up. A fixture
inside the machining tank fixes the workpiece and the
cathode (tool) is attached to the main screw, which is
driven by a stepper motor. The tool is made up of
copper with diameter of 10 mm. In this work, the
electrolyte used is NaCl with different concentrations.
Based on preliminary experiments conducted by using
one variable at a time approach, the feasible range for
the machining parameters was defined. Table 1 shows
the machining parameters used in the process.
To determine the value of material removal rate the
work piece is weighed before and after each
experiment using an electric balance with a resolution
of 0.01 mg. Material removal rate is calculated as,
94
International Journal of Scientific Research in Chemical Engineering, 1(6), pp. 93-105, 2014
10, 20 and 30
0.2, 0.6 and 1.0
10, 15 and 20
20, 40 and 60
NaCl
0.4
Alloy Tool Steel (Cr12MoV/D2/SKD11)
Copper
Si
0.3
Mn
0.3
S
0.02
P
0.02
Cr
12
Ni
0.2
Cu
0.2
V
0.2
Mo
0.5
St
Rem.
Table 3: Design factors and their levels for alloy tool steel SKD11 workpiece
Control parameters
Coding
1
Minimum
10
0.2
10
20
A
B
C
D
Level
2
Intermediate
20
0.6
15
40
3
Maximum
30
1.0
20
60
95
Electrolyte
concentration (%)
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
2
2
2
3
3
3
1
1
1
3
3
3
1
1
1
2
2
2
Current (A)
1
2
2
1
2
3
1
2
3
3
3
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
Habib
Experimental Investigation of Electrochemical Machining Process using Taguchi Approach
MRR
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.6
0.6
0.6
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.6
0.6
0.6
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.6
0.6
0.6
1.0
1.0
1.0
10
15
20
10
15
20
10
15
20
10
15
20
10
15
20
10
15
20
10
15
20
10
15
20
10
15
20
20
40
60
40
60
20
60
20
40
40
60
20
60
20
40
20
40
60
60
20
40
20
40
60
40
60
20
0.1782
0.2975
0.3898
0.4269
0.5776
0.5592
0.7105
0.5822
0.6297
0.5587
0.6732
0.6665
0.6923
0.5889
0.6743
0.6822
0.7111
0.7891
0.8051
0.7349
0.7559
0.6733
0.7297
0.7934
0.8289
0.9108
0.7706
S/N
ratio
-14.9818
-10.5303
-8.1832
-7.3935
-4.7675
-5.0487
-2.9687
-4.6986
-4.0173
-5.0564
-3.4371
-3.5240
-3.1941
-4.5992
-3.4229
-3.3218
-2.9614
-2.0574
-1.8830
-2.6754
-2.4307
-3.4358
-2.7371
-2.0102
-1.6300
-0.8115
-2.2634
Ra
5.982
5.157
4.348
4.932
4.678
4.875
3.624
4.822
4.491
5.238
4.371
5.673
3.922
4.7
4.422
4.48
4.212
3.82
3.541
4.992
4.621
4.829
4.313
4.029
4.122
3.34
4.624
S/N
ratio
-15.5369
-14.2479
-12.7658
-13.8605
-13.4012
-13.7595
-11.1838
-13.6645
-13.0469
-14.3833
-12.6895
-15.0763
-11.8702
-13.4420
-12.9124
-13.0256
-12.4898
-11.6413
-10.9825
-13.9655
-13.2947
-13.6771
-12.6956
-12.1039
-12.3022
-10.4749
-13.3004
Supply voltage
Tool feed rate
Electrolyte concentration
Current
Level 1
-6.954
-5.856
-4.874
-4.950
Level 2
-3.508
-4.068
-4.135
-4.464
Level 3
-2.209
-2.748
-3.662
-3.257
Max. Min.
Rank
4.746
3.108
1.212
1.693
1
2
4
3
Max. Min.
Rank
0.96
1.31
0.12
2.04
3
2
4
1
Supply voltage
Tool feed rate
Electrolyte concentration
Current
Level 2
-13.06
-13.08
-13.01
-13.25
Level 3
-12.53
-12.35
-13.10
-11.90
96
International Journal of Scientific Research in Chemical Engineering, 1(6), pp. 93-105, 2014
-2
M e an o f SN r at io s
-4
-6
10
20
30
0.2
-2
0.6
1.0
Current
-4
-6
10
15
20
20
40
60
Fig. 2: Main effects plot for S/N ratios of each factor on material removal rate
97
Habib
Experimental Investigation of Electrochemical Machining Process using Taguchi Approach
Fig. 3: Main effects plot for S/N ratios of each factor on surface roughness
Fig. 4: Interaction plot for material removal rate of SN ratios between supply voltage and
(a) tool feed rate, (b) electrolyte concentration and (c) current
98
International Journal of Scientific Research in Chemical Engineering, 1(6), pp. 93-105, 2014
Parameters
Supply voltage
Tool feed rate
Electrolyte
concentration
Current
Interaction
Interaction
Interaction
Residual error
D
A*B
A*C
A*D
E
Total
Dof
2
2
2
Seq SS
108.263
43.797
6.715
Adj MS
54.1316
21.8986
3.3575
F
58.89
23.82
3.65
Contribution %
45.91
18.571
2.847
2
4
4
4
6
26
13.678
48.197
5.883
3.783
5.516
235.833
6.8392
12.0492
1.4709
0.9458
0.9193
7.44
13.11
1.60
1.03
5.8
20.437
2.495
1.6
2.34
Parameters
Supply voltage
Tool feed rate
Electrolyte
concentration
Current
Interaction
Interaction
Interaction
Residual error
D
A*B
A*C
A*D
E
Total
Dof
2
2
2
Seq SS
4.1879
7.7879
0.0709
Adj MS
2.09396
3.89395
0.03547
F
6.95
12.93
0.12
Contribution %
11.46
21.3
0.2
2
4
4
4
6
26
19.3213
1.7402
1.2237
0.4111
1.8066
36.5496
9.66064
0.43504
0.30593
0.10277
0.30109
32.09
1.44
1.02
0.34
52.86
4.76
3.35
1.13
4.94
S
0.075866
0.267350
R-squared
82.2%
83.9%
Max. MRR
Min. SF
30
30
Optimal combination
Tool feed rate
Electrolyte
(mm/min)
concentration %
1.0
20
1.0
10
Current
(A)
60
60
Table 12: Verification experimental results & calculation of various response factors
Verification exp. for
MRR
SF
Max. MRR
Min. SF
0.992
0.856
3.969
3.218
99
Habib
Experimental Investigation of Electrochemical Machining Process using Taguchi Approach
Fig. 5: Interaction plot for surface roughness of SN ratios between supply voltage and
(a) tool feed rate, (b) electrolyte concentration and (c) current
100
Vc f hg..hgInternational Journal of Scientific Research in Chemical Engineering, 1(6), pp. 93-105, 2014
Fig. 6: Contour plot of material removal rate versus (a) supply voltage and tool feed rate
(b) electrolyte concentration and current
Fig. 7: Contour plot of surface roughness versus (a) supply voltage and tool feed rate
(b) electrolyte concentration and current
101
Habib
Experimental Investigation of Electrochemical Machining Process using Taguchi Approach
Material removal rate (mm3/min) = 0.040551 + 0.014728 Supply voltage (V) + 0.216014 Tool feed rate (mm/min)
+ 0.005249 Electrolyte concentration (%) + 0.002516 Current (A)
(4)
Surface roughness (m) = 6.55086 - 0.02499 Supply voltage (V) - 0.87875 Tool feed rate (mm/min)
+ 0.00259 Electrolyte concentration (%) - 0.02601 Current (A)
(5)
102
International Journal of Scientific Research in Chemical Engineering, 1(6), pp. 93-105, 2014
4. CONCLUSION
This study investigates electrochemical machining on
tool steel SKD11 workpiece using Taguchi approach.
The following conclusions are arrived:
(1) Among the four process parameters, supply
voltage (46%) influences highly the material removal
rate response characteristic, followed by tool feed rate
(19%), current (6%) and the concentration of
electrolyte by (3%).
(2) Current (53%) influences highly the surface
roughness response characteristic, followed by tool
feed rate (21%), supply voltage (11.5%) and the
concentration of electrolyte by (0.2%).
(3) From the S/N curves drawn it is observed that
the optimum level, of the factors selected, which will
produce maximum material removal rate is
A3B3C3D3 and the value obtained is 0.992 mm3/min.
In addition, the optimum level for surface roughness
is A3B3C1D3 and the value obtained is 3.218 m.
(4) Mathematical models are developed for
material removal rate and surface roughness using
linear regression approach with the help of software
program used in this work.
REFERENCES
Swift KG, Booker JD (1997). Process Selection from
Design to Manufacture. John Wiley & Sons,
New York.
McGeough, JA (1998). Advanced methods of
machining. Chapman and Hall, New York.
Benedict GF (1987). Nontraditional Manufacturing
Processes, Marcel Dekker, New York.
Sameh SH (2014). Parameter optimization of
electrical discharge machining process by using
Taguchi approach. Journal of Engineering and
Technology Research, 6 (3): 27 42.
Krishankant, Jatin Taneja, Mohit Bector, Rajesh
Kumar (2012). Application of Taguchi Method
for Optimizing Turning Process by the effects
of Machining Parameters. International Journal
of Engineering and Advanced Technology
(IJEAT), 2 (1): 263 - 274.
Chinnamuthu Senthilkumar, Gowrishankar Ganesan,
Ramanujam Karthikeyan, Optimization of ECM
Process Parameters Using NSGA-II, Journal of
Minerals and Materials Characterization and
Engineering, Vol. 11, 2012, pp. 931-937.
Rao RV, Pawar PJ, Shankar R (2008). Multi-objective
optimization of electrochemical machining
process parameters using a particle swarm
optimization algorithm. Proceedings of the
Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B:
Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 222(8):
949-958.
103
Habib
Experimental Investigation of Electrochemical Machining Process using Taguchi Approach
104
International Journal of Scientific Research in Chemical Engineering, 1(6), pp. 93-105, 2014
105