This article was downloaded by: [UQ Library]

On: 02 June 2013, At: 09:11

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer
House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of the Chinese Institute of Industrial

Engineers
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tjci20

Fabrication and turning of Al/SiC/B4C hybrid metal

matrix composites optimization using desirability
analysis
a

N. Muthukrishnan , T.S. Mahesh Babu & R. Ramanujam

Department of Automobile Engineering, Sri Venkateswara College of Engineering,

Pennalur, Sriperumbudur 602 105, Tamil Nadu, India
b

Department of Aeronautical Engineering, Sathyabama University, Jeppiaar Nagar, Rajiv

Gandhi Road, Chennai 600 119, Tamil Nadu, India
c

Department of Mechanical Engineering, School of Mechanical Engineering, Vellore

Institute of Technology, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India
Published online: 05 Oct 2012.

To cite this article: N. Muthukrishnan , T.S. Mahesh Babu & R. Ramanujam (2012): Fabrication and turning of Al/SiC/
B4C hybrid metal matrix composites optimization using desirability analysis, Journal of the Chinese Institute of Industrial
Engineers, 29:8, 515-525
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10170669.2012.728540

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to
anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions,
claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Journal of the Chinese Institute of Industrial Engineers

Vol. 29, No. 8, December 2012, 515525

Fabrication and turning of Al/SiC/B4C hybrid metal matrix composites

optimization using desirability analysis
N. Muthukrishnana*, T.S. Mahesh Babub and R. Ramanujamc
a
Department of Automobile Engineering, Sri Venkateswara College of Engineering, Pennalur,
Sriperumbudur 602 105, Tamil Nadu, India; bDepartment of Aeronautical Engineering, Sathyabama University,
Jeppiaar Nagar, Rajiv Gandhi Road, Chennai 600 119, Tamil Nadu, India; cDepartment of Mechanical
Engineering, School of Mechanical Engineering, Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India

Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 09:11 02 June 2013

(Received January 2012; revised April 2012; accepted August 2012)

This article presents the detailed discussions on fabrication of aluminumsilicon carbide (10% by
weight of particles) and boron carbide (5% by weight of particles) hybrid metal matrix composites
(Al/SiC/B4C MMCs) using stir casting method. The cylindrical rods of diameter 65 mm and length
200 mm are fabricated and subsequently machined using medium duty lathe to study the machinability
issues of hybrid MMC using polycrystalline diamond insert of 1600 grade. The optimum machining
parameters have been identified by a composite desirability value obtained from desirability function
analysis as the performance index, and significant contribution of parameters can then be determined
by analysis of variance. Confirmation test is also conducted to validate the test result. Experimental
results have shown that machining performance can be improved effectively through this approach.
Results show at higher cutting speeds, good surface finish is obtained with faster tool wear. Percentage
of error obtained between experimental value and predicted value is within the limit. Using the optimal
parameters, tool wear analysis also studied for the duration of 30 min.
Keywords: turning; cutting force; tool wear; PCD; surface roughness; desirability function; ANOVA

1. Introduction
Considerable research work in the field of material
science has been progressed toward the development of new light-weight, high performance engineering materials, such as composites. Metallic
matrix hybrid composites are one among them.
Metal matrix composites (MMCs) have become the
necessary materials in various engineering applications like aerospace, marine, and automobile engineering applications, because of their light-weight,
high-strength, stiffness, and resistance to high
temperature [32]. However, the final conversion of
these composites into engineering products is
always associated with machining, either by turning
or by milling. A continuing problem with hybrid
MMCs is that they are difficult to machine, due to
the hardness and abrasive nature of the reinforcing
particles [26,36]. The presence of hard ceramic
particles in the composites makes them extremely
difficult to machine as they lead to rapid tool wear
[2,14]. The hard SiC particles in Al/SiCMMCs
which intermittently come in contact with the tool
surface and acts as small cutting edges like those of
the grinding wheel. These particles act as an
abrasive between cutting tool and work piece and
resulting in formation of high tool wear and poor
surface finish [46,15,16]. Ramulu et al. [24]
*Corresponding author. Email: mk@svce.ac.in
ISSN 10170669 print/ISSN 21517606 online
2012 Chinese Institute of Industrial Engineers
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10170669.2012.728540
http://www.tandfonline.com

reported that the aluminum particulates caused

extremely rapid flank wear in cutting tools, when
machining Al2O3 particulate reinforced aluminumbased MMC. Optimum machining condition in
turning Al356/SiC/20p MMCs for minimizing the
surface roughness was determined using desirability
function approach [20]. Dabade et al. [3] have
reported an elaborative experimentation with the
help of Taguchi methods on Al/SiC MMC to
analyze the effects of size and volume fraction of
reinforcements in the composites on cutting forces
and surface roughness. Kremer et al. [10] conducted
the experiment to study the effect of SiC percentage
in the Al/SiC particulate MMCs on the machinability studies. Artificial neural network based
model for the prediction of surface roughness
during turning of composite material by back
propagation algorithm [21]. The effect of machining parameters on the surface roughness was
evaluated and optimum machining conditions for
maximizing the metal removal rate and minimizing
the surface roughness were determined using
response surface methodology in turning particulate MMC [19]. Rajmohan et al. [22,23] have
selected response surface methodology to predict
the thrust force and surface roughness in drilling
hybrid MMC using coated carbide drills. Tool wear

Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 09:11 02 June 2013

516

N. Muthukrishnan et al.

is excessive when carbide tipped tools were used for

turning Al/SiC/MMCs [13]. Coated carbide tools
perform better than uncoated carbide tools in terms
of tool wear for machining these materials. The
better performance of them can be attributed due
to the coating and larger and more stable built-upedge (BUE) on the tool [2,13]. Polycrystalline
diamond (PCD) tools are more suitable for
machining Al/SiCMMCs in terms of both tool
wear and surface finish because of the higher
hardness than SiC particles [11,12,28]. More
number of papers published in drilling of hybrid
composites of various reinforcements in polymer,
metals, and ceramics. Only limited number of
papers published in turning of Al/SiC/B4C hybrid
MMCs using multi-response optimization. Hsu [9]
proposed a four-phased procedure based on neural
network and principal component analysis to
resolve the parameter design problem with multiple
responses and concluded that the proposed procedure is relatively simple and could be implemented
easily using readymade statistical software. Chang
[1] reported that lot of skillful techniques parameter
design problems available; however, methods for
tackling the dynamic multi-response problems are
rare. He proposed an approach based on back
propagation neural networks and desirability functions to optimize parameter design of the dynamic
multi-response and concluded that the best parameter setting can be obtained by maximizing single
desirability index. Tsai [34] carried out a comparative study of optimizing the reflow thermal profiling parameters using a hybrid artificial
intelligence and desirability function approaches
without/with combining multiple performance
characteristics into a single desirability. He
reported that empirical evaluation results show
that the desirability function approach with combining the multiple performances into a single
desirability is superior to that obtained by the
hybrid artificial intelligence methods. In the view of
above problems, the main objective of this study is
to investigate the influence of different cutting
parameters on surface finish and cutting force
criterion. The Taguchi L27 orthogonal array is
utilized for experimental planning for turning of
AlSiCB4C hybrid MMC. The results are
analyzed to achieve optimal surface roughness
and cutting force. Desirability function analysis
(DFA) was performed to combine the multiple

performance characteristics into one numerical

score called composite desirability value to determine the optimal machine parameter settings.
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) is also performed
to investigate the most influencing parameters on
the surface finish and cutting force.

2. Taguchi technique
Taguchi technique is a powerful tool for the design
of high quality systems [25,30,31]. It provides a
simple, efficient, and systematic approach to optimize design for performance, quality, and cost. The
methodology is valuable when design parameters
are qualitative and discrete. Taguchi parameter
design can optimize the performance characteristics
through the setting of design parameters and
reduce the sensitivity of the system performance
to the source of variation [25,27]. This technique is
a multi-step process, which follow a certain
sequence for the experiments to yield an improved
understanding of product or process performance.
This design of experiment process made up of three
main phases: the planning, the conducting, and
analysis interpretation. The planning phase is the
most important phase; one must give a maximum
importance to this phase. The data collected from
all the experiments in the set are analyzed to
determine the effect of various design parameters.
This approach is to use a fractional factorial
approach and this may be accomplished with the
aid of orthogonal arrays. ANOVA is a mathematical technique, which is based on least square
approach. The treatment of the experimental
results is based on the analysis of average and
ANOVA [46,35].

3. Fabrication of hybrid MMC

The base metal ingot (Al 356) is cleaned using
acetone. Then, it is melted using electric arc furnace
(capacity 20 kg/melt). Temperature of the melting
process is 710725 C. At this stage, all cover flux is
added in the furnace. Once the base alloy is melted
completely, degassing process is carried out by
adding hexachloroethane tablets. This removes
nitrogen, carbon-dioxide and other gases absorbed
by the melt in the furnace. The silicon carbide and
boron carbide particles (SiC and B4C) ranges from

Table 1. Chemical composition of AlSiC (10%) B4C (5%) hybrid MMC.

Type of
hybrid MMC
Particulate MMC

Reinforcement

SiC
(%)

B4C
(%)

Si
(%)

Mg
(%)

Fe
(%)

Cu
(%)

Mn
(%)

Zn
(%)

Ti
(%)

Al
(%)

SiC and B4C (3065 mm)

10.00

5.00

7.85

0.68

0.25

0.14

0.07

0.07

0.16

Balance

Journal of the Chinese Institute of Industrial Engineers

30 to 65 mm are now preheated to a temperature of
790 C. The melted base alloy is stirred for about
56 min at 450 rpm. Silicon carbide, boron carbide,
and magnesium are continuously added to the melt.
The magnesium is added in order to compensate for
its losses during melting and for wetting purposes.
After this stirring process, the molten mixture is
poured into the steel molds of required diameter and
length. Figure 1 shows the stir casting setup and
Figure 2 shows the microstructure of the fabricated
specimen. Table 1 shows the chemical composition
of Al-SiC(10p) B4C (5P)- Hybrid MMC.

Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 09:11 02 June 2013

4. Experimental procedure
Commercially fabricated cylindrical bars having
10% of SiC particles and 5% of B4C on matrix of
Al 356, using stir casting method of diameter 65 mm
and 200 mm long are turned on self-centered three
jaw chuck, medium duty lathe of spindle power
2 kW. Figure 3 shows the experimental setup with

517

tool dynamometer integral with it. Parameters such

as surface roughness of machined component were
measured by Mitutoyo surftest (Make-Japan
Model SJ-301) measuring instrument with the
cut-off length 2.5 mm.
Cutting force was measured using Unitech lathe
tool dynamometer with digital indicator. The
cutting tool selected for machining AlSiCB4C
MMCs was PCD insert of fine grade (1600 grade).
The PCD inserts used were of ISO coding CNMA
120408 and tool holder of ISO coding PCLNR
2020M12. The specifications for PCD insert are as
follows: substrate for PCD is tungsten carbide,
nose radius 0.8 mm, shank height 25 mm, shank
width 25 mm, average particle size 4 mm, volume
fraction of diamond 90%, compressive strength
7.5 GPa, and elastic modulus 850 GPa. Table 2
presents the machining parameters and their levels.
Table 3 presents the experimental layout.
5. Desirability function analysis
One useful approach to optimization of multiple
responses is to use the simultaneous optimization
technique popularized by Naveen Sait [17]. Their
procedure introduces the concept of desirability
functions. The method makes use of an objective
function, D(X), called the desirability function and
transforms an estimated response into a scale free
value (di) called desirability. The desirable ranges
are from 0 to 1 (least to most desirable, respectively). The factor settings with maximum total
desirability are considered to be the optimal
parameter conditions.
Optimization steps using DFA

Figure 1. Stir casting set up.

Step 1: Calculate the individual desirability index

(di) for the corresponding response functions
according to the response characteristics using the
formula proposed Naveen Sait [17]. There are three
forms of the desirability functions according to the
response characteristics.
(a) The nominal-the-best: The value of b
y is
required to achieve a particular target T. when the b
y

Figure 2. Microstructure of Al 356 reinforced with 10%

SiC and 5% B4C.

Figure 3. Experimental set up.

518

N. Muthukrishnan et al.
Table 2. Machining parameter and their levels.
Symbol

Machining parameter

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

A
B
C

Cutting speed (m/min)

Feed (mm/rev)
Depth of cut (mm)

90
0.1
0.5

140
0.2
0.75

220
0.32
1.0

Table 3. Experimental layout using L27 orthogonal array and corresponding response values.
Machining parameters

Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 09:11 02 June 2013

Group no.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

Response

Cutting
speed (A)

Feed
(B)

Depth of
cut (C)

Surface roughness
(Ra) (mm)

Cutting force
in (F) (N)

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3

1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3

1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3

2.10
2.15
2.02
3.73
3.95
3.37
6.53
6.74
6.76
1.40
2.37
2.29
3.04
4.25
4.06
7.17
6.93
6.90
2.24
4.99
2.38
3.58
3.95
4.95
6.88
7.36
7.22

39.24
49.05
98.10
58.86
60.16
68.86
88.29
98.48
102.29
58.86
65.86
68.86
88.29
98.48
104.48
117.72
127.53
134.72
98.10
103.29
108.10
127.53
137.72
132.72
235.44
246.20
296.20

equals to T, the desirability value equals to 1; if the

departure of b
y exceeds a particular range from the
target, the desirability value equals to 0, and such
situation represents the worst case. The desirability
function of the nominal-the-best can be written as
given in Equation (1):
0


y^  ymin s
B T  ymin ,
B

B
di B y^  ymax t
B
@ T  ymax ,
0

ymin  y  T, s  0
T  y^  ymax , t  0

where, the ymax and ymin represent the upper and

lower tolerance limits of b
y, and s, and t represent
the weights.

(b) The larger-the-better: The value of b

y is
expected to be the larger the better. When the b
y
exceeds a particular criteria value, which can be
viewed as the requirement, the desirability value
equals to 1; if the b
y is less than a particular criteria
value, which is unacceptable, the desirability equals
to 0. The desirability function of the larger-thebetter can be written as given in Equation (2):
0
0,


B y^  ymin r
B
di @
,
ymax  ymin
1,
2
y^  ymin
ymin  y^  ymax , r  0
y^  ymin

519

Journal of the Chinese Institute of Industrial Engineers

where, the ymin represents the lower tolerance limit
of b
y, the ymax the upper tolerance limit of b
y and r
the weight.
The smaller-the-better: The value of b
y is
expected to be the smaller the better. When the b
y
is less than a particular criteria value, the desirability value equals to 1; if the b
y exceeds a
particular criteria value, the desirability value
equals to 0. The desirability function of the
smaller-the-better can be written as given in
Equation (3):
0
1,

r
B yy
^ max
di @ ymin
ymin  y  ymax , r  0
ymax ,
0,

Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 09:11 02 June 2013

y^  ymin
r0
y^  ymax
where the ymin represents the lower tolerance limit
y and r
of b
y, the ymax the upper tolerance limit of b
the weight. The s, t, and r in Equations (1)(3)
indicate the weights and are defined according to
the requirement of the user. If the corresponding
response is expected to be closer to the target, the
weight can be set to the larger value; otherwise, the
weight can be set to the smaller value. In this study,
the smaller-the-better characteristic is applied to
determine the individual desirability values for
surface roughness and cutting force since both are
to be minimized.
Step 2: Compute the composite desirability (dG).
The individual desirability index of all the
responses can be combined to form a single value
called composite desirability (dG) by the following
Equation (4):

1
4
dG dw1 1 dw2 2 . . . dwn n W
where, di is the individual desirability of the
property Yi, wi the weight of the property Yi in
the composite desirability, and W the sum of the
individual weights. In this investigation, weights for
each characteristic (such as surface roughness and
cutting force) are assigned equally as 0.5.
Step 3: Determine the optimal parameter and its
level combination. The higher the composite desirability value implies better product quality.
Therefore, on the basis of the composite desirability
(dG), the parameter effect and the optimum level for
each controllable parameter are estimated.
Step 4: Perform ANOVA for identifying the
significant parameters. ANOVA establishes the
relative significance of parameters. The calculated
total sum of square value is used to measure the
relative influence of the parameters.

Table 4. Evaluated
desirability.

individual

and

composite

Individual
desirability (di)
Exp.
no.

Surface
roughness
(Ra) (mm)

Cutting
force
(N)

Composite
desirability
(dG)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

0.88255
0.874161
0.895973
0.60906
0.572148
0.669463
0.139262
0.104027
0.100671
1
0.837248
0.850671
0.724832
0.521812
0.553691
0.031879
0.072148
0.077181
0.85906
0.397651
0.83557
0.634228
0.572148
0.404362
0.080537
0
0.02349

1
0.961823
0.770937
0.923646
0.918587
0.884729
0.809114
0.769458
0.754631
0.923646
0.896404
0.884729
0.809114
0.769458
0.746108
0.694583
0.656406
0.628425
0.770937
0.750739
0.732021
0.656406
0.61675
0.636208
0.236457
0.194583
0

0.939442
0.916945
0.831107
0.750037
0.72496
0.769606
0.335676
0.282921
0.275626
0.961065
0.866321
0.867533
0.765815
0.63365
0.642739
0.148804
0.217619
0.220233
0.813807
0.546381
0.782084
0.645222
0.59403
0.507207
0.137998
0
0

Table 4 shows the evaluated individual desirability and composite desirability for each experiment using L27 orthogonal array. The higher
composite desirability value represents that the
corresponding experimental result is closer to the
ideally normalized value. Since the experimental
design is orthogonal, it is then possible to separate
out the effect of each machining parameter on the
composite desirability values at different levels. The
response mean of the composite desirability for
each level of the machining parameter is summarized in Table 5. In addition, the total mean of the
composite desirability for 27 trials is also calculated
and listed in Table 5. Figure 4 shows the factor
effects for the composite desirability value for the
levels of the machining parameters.
Basically, the larger the composite desirability,
the better is the multiple performance characteristics. However, relative importance among the
machining parameters for the multiple performance
characteristics is still need to be known so that the
optimal combinations of the machining parameter
levels can be determined more accurately [33].

520

N. Muthukrishnan et al.
Table 5. Response table for the composite desirability.
Average composite desirability
Machining parameter

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Maximum
Minimum

Cutting speed (A)

Feed rate (B)
Depth of cut (C)
Total mean of composite
desirability 0.5621

0.6473
0.8360
0.6108

0.5915
0.6703
0.5314

0.4474
0.1798
0.5440

0.1999
0.6562
0.0794

Ma in Effe ct s P lo t fo r Co mp o s it e De s ir a b ilit y
cut t ing spe e d

Fe e d

Me a n o f Co mp o s it e De s ir a b ilit y

Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 09:11 02 June 2013

0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
1

2
De pt h of cut

0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2

Figure 4. Response graph for composite desirability.

Step 5: Calculate the predicted optimum condition. Once the optimal level of the design parameters has been selected, the final step is to predict
and verify the quality characteristics using the
optimal level of the design parameters.

multi-response parameter design problem. The

results are presented in Table 4.

6. Implementation of the methodology

Step 1: The individual desirability (di) is calculated for all the responses depending upon the type
of quality characteristics. Since all the responses are
possessing minimization objective, the equation
corresponding to smaller the better type is selected.
The computed individual desirability for each
quality characteristics using Equation (3) are
presented in Table 4.

Step 4: Using the composite desirability value,

ANOVA is formulated for identifying the
significant parameters. The result of ANOVA is
presented in Table 6.

Step 2: The composite desirability values (dG) are

calculated using Equation (4). The weightage for
responses are based on assumed weightage of 1:1
for surface roughness and machining force. Finally,
these values are considered for optimizing the

Step 3: From the value of composite desirability

in Table 4, the parameter effect and the optimal
level are estimated. The results are tabulated in
Table 5 and parameter effects are plotted in
Figure 4.

Step 5: Prediction of optimum condition: Using

the identified optimal parameter condition, the
quality characteristics are verified by conducting
confirmation experiments.

7. Analysis of variance
ANOVA is a method of apportioning variability of
an output to various inputs. Table 6 presents the
results of ANOVA analysis. The purpose of the

521

Journal of the Chinese Institute of Industrial Engineers

Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 09:11 02 June 2013

Table 6. ANOVA table for the composite desirability.

Source

Degrees
of freedom

SS

MS

FCAL

P (%)

A
B
C
AB
AC
BC
Error
Total

2
2
2
4
4
4
8
26

0.1916
2.0959
0.0328
0.0136
0.0123
0.0070
0.0426
2.3960

0.0958
1.0479
0.0164
0.0034
0.0030
0.0017
0.0053

17.95
196.40
3.08
0.64
0.58
0.33

7.99
87.48
1.37
0.56
0.53
0.29
1.78
100.00

ANOVA is to investigate which machining parameters significantly affect the performance characteristics. This is accomplished by separating the
total variability of the composite desirability value,
which is measured by the sum of the squared
deviations from the total mean of the composite
desirability value, into contributions by each
machining parameter and the error. First, the
total sum of the squared deviations SST from the
total mean of the composite desirability value m
can be calculated as:
SST

p
X

j  m 2

j1

where p is the number of experiments in the

orthogonal array and j the mean composite
desirability value for the jth experiment. The total
sum of the squared deviations SST is decomposed
in to two sources: the sum of the squared deviations
SSd due to each machining parameter and its
interaction effects and the sum of the squared error
SSe. The percentage contribution by each of the
machining parameter in the total sum of the
squared deviations SST can be used to evaluate
the importance of the machining parameter change
on the performance characteristic. In addition, the
Fishers F-test can also be used to determine which
machining parameters have a significant effect on
the performance characteristic. Usually, the change
of the machining parameters has a significant effect
on performance characteristic when F is large.
Results of ANOVA for composite desirability
value (Table 6) indicate that feed rate is the most
significant machining parameter for affecting the
multiple performance characteristics.
Based on the above discussion, the optimal
machining parameters are the cutting speed at
level 1, feed at level 1, and depth of cut at level 1.

8. Confirmation experiment
Once the optimal level of machining parameters is
selected the final step is to predict and verify the

improvement of the performance characteristics

using the optimal level of the machining parameters. The estimated composite desirability value
using the optimum level of the machining parameters can be calculated as
q
X
j  m
6
m
i1

where m is the total mean of the composite

desirability value, j the mean of the composite
desirability value at the optimum level, and q the
number of machining parameters that significantly
affects the multiple performance characteristics.
Based on Equation (6) [33], the estimated
composite desirability value using the optimal
machining parameters can then be obtained.
Table 7 presents the results of the confirmation
experiment.
Using the optimal machining parameters, surface roughness Ra is improved from 6.88 to
2.10 mm in experimentation and 1.83 mm in prediction, similarly the cutting force is greatly reduced
from 235.44 to 39.24 N in experimentation and
28.47 N in prediction. It is clearly shown that
multiple performance characteristics in the AlSiC
B4C machining process are greatly improved
through this study. From this analysis, it is found
that the percentage of error for surface roughness is
found (using Equation (7)) to be 12.85%, where s
the percentage of error for cutting force is found to
be 27.44%.
Percentage of error

Experimental Value  Predicted value

 100
Experimental value
7

9. Tool wear
From the above observations, best machining
parameter was determined as cutting speed
90 m/min, feed rate 0.1 mm/rev, and depth of cut
0.5 mm (experimental reading number 1). Now

522

N. Muthukrishnan et al.

Table 7. Results of confirmation experiment.

Optimal machining parameters

Initial
machining
parameters
Setting level
Surface roughness (Ra) (mm)
Cutting force (N)

A3B3C1
6.88
235.44
0.1379
Improvement in composite desirability value 0.8015

Prediction

Experiment

Percentage
of error

A1B1C1
1.83
28.47
0.9699

A1B1C1
2.10
39.24
0.9394

12.85
27.44
3.24

0.25
y = 0.007x-0.017
R = 0.960

Tool wear (mm)

Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 09:11 02 June 2013

0.2
0.15
0.1

PCD 1600 Grade

0.05

Linear (PCD 1600

Grade)

0
0
-0.05

10

15

20

25

30

35

250X

Time duration (sec)

Figure 6. SEM image of fresh PCD 1600 grade.

Figure 5. Time duration versus tool flank wear (30 min
duration).

setting this cutting condition as a constant parameter and machined the samples for a time duration of
30 min and the tool flank wear study was carried out
(Figure 5).
From Figure 5, it is clearly understood that, the
tool flank wear is increasing linearly and reaches
approximately 0.2 mm after 30 min duration. At
low cutting speed, worn flank encourages the
adhesion of work piece material on the tool insert
and formed BUE [7,8,15,32,35].
At lower cutting speed, formation of BUE
forms a protective cap and protects the cutting edge
from abrading [5,32]. Main wear pattern observed
on the cutting insert was the flank wear in the nose
region [29] two bodies and three body abrasive
wear are also observed. Three body abrasive wear is
caused by the released hard particles, entrapped
between the tool and the work piece [12,18,37]. The
BUE formation in aluminum machining in general
and in machining AlSiCB4C hybrid MMC in
particular adversely affects the surface formation.
Devoid of any fixed geometry, these BUEs result in
unacceptable surface finishes. During experiments,
the BUE formed at the cutting speed of 90 m/min
was dissolved using boiling concentrated NaOH
solution. This was carried out to continue the
machining process and to measure flank wear.

Al

Nose wear
Figure 7. SEM image of worn out insert after 30 min
duration.

Tool was monitored for normal types of wear

namely flank, crater, and nose using a tool makers
microscope. Tool flank wear was caused by abrasive nature of the hard silicon and boron carbide
particles presented in the work piece. Figure 6
shows the scanning electron microscope (SEM)
image of fresh insert. Figure 7 shows SEM image of
PCD 1600 grade insert after machining the work
piece for 30 min duration. It is proved that hard
silicon and boron carbide particles which have
higher hardness than diamond abrading the cutting
tool [5,8]. It is observed that the tool life of PCD

523

Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 09:11 02 June 2013

Journal of the Chinese Institute of Industrial Engineers

1600 grade is performing well in the chosen cutting
condition

year 2011, by International

Cambridge, England.

10. Conclusion

T.S. Mahesh Babu is working as an Associate Professor

in Aeronautical Engineering Department, Sathyabama
University. Currently, he is doing his Doctoral program
under the guidance of Dr N. Muthukrishnan in the area
of composite machining. His area of interest is metal
cutting/machining. He is having more than 10 years of
teaching experience.

(a) The use of orthogonal array with DFA to

optimize
the
AlSiC(10%)B4C(5%)
hybrid composites machining process with
multiple performance characteristics has
been reported in this article.
(b) The DFA of the experimental results of
surface roughness and cutting force can
convert optimization of the multiple performance characteristics into optimization
of the single performance characteristic
called the composite desirability value.
(c) As a result, optimization of the complicated
multiple performance characteristics can be
greatly simplified through this approach. It
is shown that the performance characteristics of the turning process of AlSiC(10%)
B4C(5%) hybrid composites such as surface
roughness and cutting force are improved
together using the proposed method in this
study.
(d) Confirmatory experiment proves that predicted and experimental values are very
close to each other.
(e) Percentage of error in predicted and experimental value was found to be less than
28%.
(f) The primary wear mode is in the nose
region of the flank. The wear is believed to
be the abrasive action of hard SiC and
Boron particles on the tool flank.
(g) It is also observed that two and three bodies
wear mechanisms play a major role in the
tool failure.

Notes on contributors
N. Muthukrishnan is a Professor and Head of
Automobile Engineering in Sri Venkateswara College
of Engineering, Sriperumbudur, Chennai, India. He has
more than 20 years of experience in academics and 7
years of research experience in Mechanical engineering.
His research interest is in Machining/Manufacturing. He
is acting as reviewer for Springer, Elsevier, Inderscience,
and Taylor & Francis Journals. He has published more
than 15 papers in the National and International peer
reviewed journals and more than 50 papers in National/
International Conference proceedings and has published
a number of papers in the areas of Materials,
manufacturing, and management. He is also acting as
Editorial Board Member of two International Journals.
His biography is listed in Marquis who is who in the
world and also in Marquis who is who in Science and
engineering. He is also listed in top 100 educators for the

biographical

center

R. Ramanujam is an Associate Professor in Mechanical

Engineering,
Vellore
Institute
of
Technology,
Tamilnadu, India. He has 10 years of experience in
teaching and 4 years in research. His current research
interests are in the field of quality engineering and
machining process optimization. He has published 15
papers in National and International Journals and
Conferences.

References
[1] Chang, H.-H., Dynamic multi-response experiments by back propagation networks and desirability functions, Journal of the Chinese Institute of
Industrial Engineers, 23(4), 280288 (2006).
[2] Ciftci, I., M. Turker and U. Sekar, Evaluation of
tool wear when machining SiC reinforced Al-2014
alloy matrix composites, Materials and Design, 25,
251255 (2004).
[3] Dabade, U.A., H.A. Sonawane and S. Joshi,
Cutting forces and surface roughness in machining
Al/SICP composites of varying composition,
Machining Science and Technology, 14, 258279
(2010).
[4] Davim, J.P., An experimental study of tribological
behaviour of the brass/steel pair, Journal of
Materials Processing Technology, 100, 273279
(2000).
[5] Davim, J.P., Design optimization of cutting
parameters for turning metal matrix composites
based on the orthogonal arrays, Journal of
Materials Processing Technology, 132, 340344
(2003).
[6] Davim, J.P., Study of drilling metal matrix composites based on the taguchi techniques, Journal of
Materials Processing Technology, 132, 250254
(2003).
[7] Deonath and P.K. Rohatgi, Cast aluminium alloy
composites containing copper-coated ground mica
particles, Journal of Materials Science, 16,
15991606 (1981).
[8] Gallab, M. and M. Sklad, Machining of Al/SiCp
metal matrix composites. Part II: workpiece integrity, Journal of Materials Processing Technology,
83, 277283 (1998).
[9] Hsu, C.-M., Solving multi-response problems
through neural networks and principal component
analysis, Journal of the Chinese Institute of
Industrial Engineers, 18, 4754 (2001).
[10] Kremer, A., S. Devillez, D. Dominiak, M.
Dudzinski and E.I. Mansori, Machinability of
Al/Sic particulate metal-matrix composites under
dry conditions with cvd diamond-coated carbide

524

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 09:11 02 June 2013

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

[21]

[22]

N. Muthukrishnan et al.
tools, Machining Science and Technology, 12,
214233 (2010).
Lin, J.T., D. Bhattacharya and V. Kecman,
Multiple regression and network analysis in composite machining, Composites Science and
Technology, 63(34), 539548 (2003).
Lin, J., D. Bhattacharyya and C. Lane,
Machinability of a silicon carbide reinforced aluminium metal matrix composite, Wear, 181182,
883888 (1995).
Manna, A. and B. Bhattacharya, A study of
machinability of Al-SiC-MMC, Journal of
Materials Processing Technology, 140, 711716
(2003).
Monaghan, J. and P. OReilly, The drilling of an
Al/SiC metal matrix composites, Journal of
Materials Processing Technology, 33, 469480
(1992).
Morscher, G.N., G. Ojard, R. Miller, Y. Gowayed,
U. Santhosh and J. Ahmad, Tensile creep and
fatigue of Sylramic-iBN melt-infiltrated SiC matrix
composites: retained properties, damage development, and failure mechanisms, Composites Science
and Technology, 68, 33053313 (2008).
Mubaraki, B., S. Bandyopadhyay, R.F. Fowle,
P. Mathew and P.J. Health, Drilling studies of
an Al203Al metal matrix composite. Part I.
Drill wears characteristics, Journal of Materials
Science, 30, 62736280 (1995).
Naveen Sait, A., S. Aravindan and A. Noorul Hag,
Optimisation of machining parameters of glassfibre reinforced plastic (GFRP) pipes by desirability function analysis using Taguchi technique,
International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing
Technology, 43, 581589 (2009).
Ozben, T., E. Kilickap and O. Cakir, Investigation
of mechanical and machinability properties of SiC
particle reinforced Al-MMC, Journal of Materials
Processing Technology, 198(13), 220225 (2008).
Palanikumar, K. and R. Karthikeyan, Assessment
of factors influencing surface roughness on the
machining of Al/SiC particulate composites,
Materials and Design, 28, 15841591 (2007).
Palanikumar, K., N. Muthukrishnan and K.S.
Hariprasad, Surface roughness parameters optimization in machining A356/sic/20p metal matrix
composites by PCD tool using response surface
methodology and desirability function, Machining
Science and Technology, 12, 529545 (2008).
Pendse, D.M. and S.S. Joshi, Modeling and
optimization of machining process in discontinuously reinforced aluminium matrix composites,
Machining Science and Technology, 8, 85102 (2004).
Rajmohan, T. and K. Palanikumar, Experimental
investigation and analysis of thrust force in drilling
hybrid metal matrix composites by coated carbide
drills, Materials and Manufacturing Processes, 26,
961968 (2011).

[23] Rajmohan, T. and K. Palanikumar, Optimization

of machining parameters for surface roughness and
burr height in drilling hybrid composites, Materials
and Manufacturing Processes, 27(3), 320328,
(2012), doi:10.1080/10426914.2011.58549.
[24] Ramulu, M., P.N. Rao and H. Kao, Drilling of
Al203 p /6061 metal matrix composite, Journal of
Materials Processing Technology, 124, 244254
(2002).
[25] Ross, P.J., Taguchi Techniques for Quality
Engineering, McGraw-Hill, NY (1998).
[26] Rouby, D. and P. Reynaud, Fatigue behaviour
related to interface modification during load cycling
in ceramic-matrix fibre composites, Composites
Science and Technology, 48, 109118 (1993).
[27] Roy, K.R., A Primer on Taguchi Method, Van
Nostrad Reinhold, NY (1990).
[28] Sahin, Y., M. Kok and H. Celik, Tool wear and
surface roughness of Al2O3 particlereinforced
aluminium alloy composites, Journal of Materials
Processing Technology, 128, 280291 (2002).
[29] Seeman, M., G. Ganesan, R. Karthikeyan and
A. Velayudam, Study on tool wear and
surface roughness in machining of particulate
aluminium metal matrix composite response
surface methodology approach, International
Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology,
48(58), 613624 (2010).
[30] Taguchi, G., Taguchi on Robust Technology
Development Methods, ASME Press, NY (1993).
[31] Taguchi, G. and S. Konishi, Taguchi methods,
orthogonal arrays and linear graphs. In: Tools for
Quality Engineering, American Supplier Institute
(1987).
[32] Tomac, N. and K. Tonnessen, Machinability of
particulate aluminum metal matrix composites,
Annals of the CIRP, 41, 5558 (1992).
[33] Tosun, N., Determination of optimum parameters
for multi-performance characteristics in drilling
using grey relational analysis, International
Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology,
28, 450455 (2006).
[34] Tsai, T.-N., Modeling and optimization of heat
flow thermal profiling operation: A comparative
study, Journal of the Chinese Institute of Industrial
Engineers, 26(6), 480492 (2009).
[35] Tsao, C.C. and H. Hocheng, Taguchi analysis of
delamination associated with various drill bits in
drilling of composite material, International
Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture, 44,
10851090 (2004).
[36] Weinert, K., A consideration of tool wear mechanism when machining metal matrix composites
(MMC), CIRP Annals, 42, 9598 (1993).
[37] Yaming, Q. and Z. Zehua, Tool wear and its
mechanism for cutting SiC particle reinforced aluminum matrix composites, Journal of Materials
Processing Technology, 100(13), 194199 (2000).

525

Journal of the Chinese Institute of Industrial Engineers

AL/SIC/B4C
N. Muthukrishnan
Professor and Head, Department of Automobile Engineering, Sri Venkateswara College of Engineering,
Pennalur, Sriperumbudur 602 105, Tamil Nadu, India
T.S. Mahesh Babu
Associate Professor, Department of Aeronautical Engineering, Sathyabama University, Jeppiaar
Nagar, Rajiv Gandhi Road, Chennai 600 119, Tamil Nadu, India
R. Ramanujam
Associate Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering, School of Mechanical Engineering,
Vellore Institute of Technology, Tamil Nadu, India

10%

5%

Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 09:11 02 June 2013

Al/SiC/B4C - MMC

65
MMC

200
1600

PCD
ANOVA

30
PCD
*

mk@svce.ac.in

ANOVA