A Comprehensive Model Development and its Evaluation for

Sustainability Assessment in High Speed Turning of Inconel 718

Ganesh S. Kadam1, Raju S. Pawade2
1 2
Research Scholar, Associate Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar Technological University, Lonere, Raigad 402103, M.S., India.
Emails: 1ganeshkadam2020@yahoo.com, 2raju_s_pawade@yahoo.com

Abstract: Conventional cutting fluids are widely used as coolants and lubricants in machining
operations even today. However, due to the severe urge for need of green and cleaner
machining techniques, various alternative cooling and lubrication approaches are being
continuously explored. Surface integrity of machined components play a crucial role; however
the same cannot be the only criteria for deciding on the machinability aspects as well as eco-
friendliness of specific machining approach. This paper proposes a model for sustainability
assessment of machining. A model has been developed considering surface integrity aspects
along with machining environment aspects for better understanding of sustainability in
machining. High speed turning of Inconel 718 at varying MRR levels depicting productivity
rates has been carried out under dry, flood coolant and water vapour machining environments,
and then sustainability assessment has been carried out using the developed model. The
results show that the use of water vapour as coolant and lubricant in machining gives highest
product sustainability index of 83.75%. Thus machining under water vapour environment
seems to be a novel eco-friendly machining techniques and hence a better green
manufacturing technology.

Keywords: Sustainability, modelling, green manufacturing, flood coolant, water vapour,

Inconel 718, surface integrity

1. INTRODUCTION cost, pollution, and hazards to operators health

Machining processes constitute a major
manufacturing activity that contributes to the
growth of global economy [1]. In turning, higher
values of cutting parameters offer opportunities
for increasing productivity but it also involves a
greater risk of deterioration in surface quality and
tool life due to generation of high cutting
temperatures [2]. Inconel 718 is the most
commonly employed nickel-based superalloy and
represents 25-45% of the annual volume
production [3]. The main properties which entail
Inconel 718 as an important superalloy are
excellent oxidation and corrosion resistance, high
temperature strength and low thermal conductivity
thus suiting it for service in extreme
environments. However, Inconel 718 is also
ranked among the class of difficult-to-cut
materials due to the characteristics like retained
strength during machining, high strain rate
sensitivity, higher work hardening, presence of
abrasive carbide particles in microstructure which
all lead to poor surface quality in machining
because of severe tool wear, higher cutting
temperatures, cutting forces and vibrations [4, 5].
Applying cutting fluids in metal cutting is an
important approach to enhance machining
performance and it is well applicable in case of
Inconel 718 also. However, the use of cutting
fluids has caused some problems such as high
which has urged researchers worldwide to search
for some alternatives to minimize or even avoid
the use of cutting fluids in machining operations
[6]. Hence various alternatives for cooling and
lubrication like MQL, compressed air cooling,
water vapour, etc. are being tried. Adopting
sustainable manufacturing practices offers metal
machining industries of all sizes a cost effective
route to improve their economic, environmental
and social performance [7]. Sustainable
production is defined as [8], the creation of
goods and services, using process and systems
that are non-polluting, conserving energy and
natural resources, economically viable,
communities, consumers and socially and
creatively rewarding for all working people, safe
and healthful for employees. With the
implementation of sustainability principles, the
machining companies of all sizes have potential to
save money and improve their environmental
performance even though the production stay on
the same size or reduces [9].
Various researchers have focussed attention
on sustainability aspects in machining. Pusavec et
al. [10] in turning of Inconel 718 reported that
cryo-lubrication machining process is a
sustainable machining alternative showing high
potential for enhancing the overall machining
performance and machined part quality.
Marksberry [11] in turning of SAE070Y steel
investigated and utilized micro-flood technology and approach towards sustainable machining
thus justifying it as a sustainable machining within green manufacturing regime.
approach through coolant-less and occupational
health friendly technology providing improved 2. DEVELOPMENT OF MODEL
machining performance without creating
undesirable spray mist entropy. Rajemi et al. [12] Achieving sustainability in manufacturing
through their work on sustainable machining of necessitates a keen focus not just on the product,
EN8 steel suggested that when seeking cutting but also on the manufacturing process involved.
conditions that satisfy both minimum energy and This requires improved models and metrics for
minimum cost criteria, it becomes necessary to sustainability evaluation at the product and
consider the energy footprint of cutting tools. process levels. Further, a good research work is
Pusavec et al [9] conducted a comparative life the one that not only leads to new significant
cycle assessment (LCA) of flood cooling based findings, but also its findings should be practically
conventional machining, cryogenic machining and implementable in industries, particularly in case
high pressure jet assisted machining (HPJAM). of manufacturing, and should be highly beneficial
Their results demonstrated that switching from and give noteworthy improved outcomes to the
oil-based CLFs to cryogenic machining leads to same. Keeping the above in mind, it was proposed
sustainable machining. They [13] further reported to develop a sustainability model for our research
that comparatively HPJAM is more efficient, work on machining which would be highly
however cryo-machining is completely clean and beneficial to industries.
has highest sustainability potential. Jagadish and Basically the high-speed turning experiments
Ray [14] devised a decision making integrated were conducted on Inconel 718 rings under three
theory model which considered the factors of different machining environment, viz. dry, flood
environmental impact, cost and maximizing the coolant and water vapour and the analysis of
quality all combined into the cutting fluid for surface integrity was done [19] and is not a part of
sustainable design. present paper. The experiments were conducted as
Linke et al. [15] reported that the achieved per the experimental test matrix given in Table 1.
product quality needs to be taken into account for The present paper is concerned with and discusses
a more accurate sustainability indicator in case of the modelling and analysis for sustainability
finishing operations. Ampara and Chuan [16] on assessment of high speed turning of Inconel 718.
their work on milling of Inconel 718 demonstrated
that cryogenic cooling is promising for Table 1 Experimental test matrix
machinability and sustainability improvement as
compared to conventional oil-based coolant and Expt. MRR Vc F ap ENV
dry cutting in terms of tool wear reduction, less No.
friction, lower energy consumption and 1 6000 80 0.15 0.5 D
contamination-free machined part. Deiab et al. 2 28125 150 0.25 0.75 D
[17] on their work on turning of Ti-6Al-4V alloy 3 77000 220 0.35 1 D
observed that use of vegetable oil as a machining 4 6000 80 0.15 0.5 FC
lubricant in MQL and MQCL configuration was a 5 28125 150 0.25 0.75 FC
more sustainable alternative to synthetic cooling 6 77000 220 0.35 1 FC
in terms of tool wear, surface quality and cutting 7 6000 80 0.15 0.5 WV
energy consumed. Yan et al. [18] proposed an 8 28125 150 0.25 0.75 WV
extension theory-based methodology for 9 77000 220 0.35 1 WV
evaluating sustainability performance of
machining process referring to a consistent set of MRR Material removal rate (mm3/min); Vc Cutting
economic, environmental, and social impacts. speed (m/min); f Feedrate (mm/rev); ap Depth of cut
It is hence understood that sustainability (mm); ENV Machining Environment; D Dry; FC
plays an important role in machining. Surface Flood Coolant; WV Water Vapour
integrity of a machined component cannot be
taken as the only criteria for deciding on Measures for the process evaluation chosen in
machinability aspects. Even the machining this study are:
environment and its associated aspects needs to be Quality of machined product through
considered for having a broad view on machined surface integrity,
sustainability. Thus considering the present era of Resources and energy consumption,
superalloys and especially the vitality of Inconel Waste production and their disposal,
718, it was decided to develop a model and Environmental performance,
evaluate it for sustainability assessment of Health and safety performance.
machining. It can be considered as an ideal effort
 The Product Sustainability Index (PSI) is where,
calculated taking into account mainly two PSIMENV = Product Sustainability Index for
sustainability components viz. machining machining environment component,
environment and machined product. Each of these IFMENV = influencing factor rated on a scale of 0-
components has its associated influencing factors 10 for the machining environment component,
as given in Table 2. The scoring criteria for the and
influencing factors of the sustainability n = number of influencing factors considered.
components for product sustainability evaluation (Note: n = 3 since we have considered three
have been represented in Fig. 1. influencing factors viz. generation and supply,
operator health and safety, emissions, and
Table 2 Sustainability components and its recycling and disposal. The scoring criteria for
associated influencing factors these influencing factors have been discussed in
detail in the next section.)
Machining Machined Similarly, the sustainability index for the
Environment Product machined product component can be calculated as
Generation and Part cleaning (see Eq. 2):
supply
IFMPRO
n
Operator health and Scrap disposal
safety, emissions PSI MPRO i 1 100%
n 10
Recycling and Surface roughness (2)
disposal
Residual stresses where,
PSIMPRO = Product Sustainability Index for the
machined product component,
IFMPRO = influencing factor rated on a scale of 0-
10 for the machined product component, and
n = number of influencing factors considered.
(Note: For overall surface integrity as the main
criteria, n = 4 since we have considered four
influencing factors viz. part cleaning, scrap
disposal, surface roughness and residual stresses.
The scoring criteria for these influencing factors
have been discussed in detail in the next section.)
Then the overall Total Product Sustainability
Index (PSIT) for a machined product can be
evaluated by averaging the PSIs of sustainability
components in the horizontal column and hence
can be calculated as (see Eq. 3):

PSI MENV PSI MPRO

Fig. 1. Representation of the scoring criteria for PSI T
2 (3)
the influencing factors of the sustainability
components for product sustainability evaluation
Further, it is to be understood that different
applications demand different surface integrity
For sustainability evaluation, a tabular matrix
requirements. Within the constraints, surface
has been formed, and the scores of the influencing
integrity in terms of surface roughness and
factors are recorded in each box of the matrix and
residual stresses is considered when evaluating
then the PSI (Product Sustainability Index) is
the model.
evaluated by proceeding across the matrix and
summing up the scores of all influencing factors
to calculate the percentage value. It is to be noted 3. EVALUATION AND DISCUSSION
that this percentage value depends on the
Based on the proposed strategy given before,
influencing factors of the sustainability
a model for sustainability assessment has been
components. For example the product
developed and evaluated. The scoring criteria for
sustainability index for machining environment
the influencing factors of the respective
component can be calculated as (see Eq. 1):
sustainability components have been explained
below. The scoring methodology confines to the
IFMENV
n
experimental test conditions; however suitability
PSI MENV i 1 100%
n 10 with actual industrial usage has been considered.
(1)
3.1. Machining environment sustainability
component
In this study, basically three machining
environments viz. dry, flood coolant and water
vapour have been considered.
3.1.1. Generation and supply
In dry environment, there is no lubricating
and cooling fluid (CLF) supplied. Hence
maximum score of 9 is given. In case of flood
coolant environment, lubricating and cooling fluid
(CLF) needs to be supplied. Before it, the fluid
needs to be prepared (generated) by mixing proper
quantity of oil and water in which energy is
expended. Again this fluid needs to be supplied to
the machining zone for which energy needs to be
expended. Further for supply, special accessories
like pumps, motors, pipes, hoses, nozzles, filters,
etc. are needed which incur costs. Thus
considering all this, a low score of 5 is given. As
far as water vapour environment is concerned, in
our case the steam (water vapour) has been
generated. However, in practical case it is
expected that the waste steam and exhaust steam
as like in sugar factories, power plants, food-
processing industries, etc. be used. However, for
supplying water vapour also, accessories like
pipes, hoses, nozzles, etc. are required and hence
a score of 8 is given.
3.1.2. Operator health and safety, emissions:
In case of dry machining, the operator can be
assumed to be totally safe since there is no
cooling and lubricating fluid (CLF) and as a result
no emissions. Hence a score of 9 is given.
However in case of flood coolant environment,
the operator comes in contact with the CLF which
is highly toxic to the human body. Long use of
same CLF may be a breeding ground for micro-
organisms which may create a nuisance and hence
harm operators health, cause infection and
allergies when in contact. Further the evaporation
of flood coolant generates fumes which when
inhaled by operator and people in vicinity of shop
floor, become prone to respiratory and other
diseases. Hence a score of 5 is given. In case of
water vapour environment, since water vapour is
composed of water particles in suspension of air,
it is not harmful to the operator. Also water
vapour escapes out into the atmosphere freely due
to low density. Hence a score of 9 is given.
3.1.3. Recycling and disposal:
Since dry machining does not use any CLF,
there is no problem of recycling and disposal.
Hence a score of 9 is given. In case of flood
coolant environment, generally the flood coolant
fluid is very costly and hence intended to be used
multiple times. For it, frequent cleaning and
filtering is required after each cycle. For it
accessories like filters, pumps, motors, etc. are
required. All this add extra costs and also time is
consumed. Further after the desired use of the
flood coolant fluid, when disposal is to be done
then special treatments are to be done to it so that
it becomes less harmful. The disposal requires
special procedures to be followed and also incurs
additional costs. Considering all this, a score of
5 is given. In case of water vapour environment,
there is no need of recycling and special disposal.
It is because the water vapour directly gets
exhausted out into the atmosphere. Hence a score
of 9 is given to the water vapour environment.
3.2. Machined product sustainability
component
3.2.1. Part cleaning
In case of dry machining, no part cleaning is
required and hence a score of 9 is given. In case
of flood coolant environment, thorough part
cleaning is required as it contains a deposition of
fluid over the part and hence a score of 7 is
given. In case of water vapour environment, since
water vapour escapes out into the atmosphere, the
part is clean and hence no cleaning is required due
to which a score of 9 is given.
3.2.2. Scrap disposal
In machining, the scrap is generated in the
form of chips. The scrap disposal basically means
handling, storing and recycling of scrap. Since
Inconel 718 is a very costly material, due
preference should be given to its scrap. In dry
machining, the scrap is free from the fluid and
hence a score of 9 is given. In case of flood
coolant environment, the scrap has deposition of
fluid over it. Hence special treatments like
washing and heating may be required to make it
fluid free which incurs heavy costs. Hence a score
of 6 is given. In case of water vapour
environment, as water vapour escapes out into the
atmosphere, the scrap is free from any fluid and
hence no special treatment is required. Hence a
score of 9 is given.
3.2.3. Surface roughness:
For the surface roughness, the values
obtained from experimental investigations have
been considered. The values have been graded
from low to high. Further the scoring has been
done conversely, i.e. low grades have been given
highest score and vice versa. Thus a low surface
Table 3 A framework for a comprehensive product sustainability evaluation considering overall surface
integrity

Condition Machining Environment PSIMENV Machined Product PSIMPRO PSIT

and

and
Operator health and

Surface Roughness

Residual Stresses
safety, emissions

Scrap disposal
Part cleaning
Generation

Recycling
disposal
supply

Dry 1 9 9 9 90 9 9 8 4 75 82.5
(#Expt.1)
Dry 2 9 9 9 90 9 9 6 3 67.5 78.75
(#Expt.2)
Dry 3 9 9 9 90 9 9 3 9 75 82.5
(#Expt.3)
FC 1 5 5 5 50 7 6 7 7 67.5 58.75
(#Expt.4)
FC 2 5 5 5 50 7 6 4 5 55 52.5
(#Expt.5)
FC 3 5 5 5 50 7 6 1 2 40 45
(#Expt.6)
WV 1 8 9 9 90 9 9 9 1 70 80
(#Expt.7)
WV 2 8 9 9 90 9 9 5 8 77.5 83.75
(#Expt.8)
WV 3 8 9 9 90 9 9 2 6 65 77.5
(#Expt.9)

roughness indicates a good surface finish giving Table 3. Further, the total product sustainability
high score and vice versa. index (PSIT) for the respective conditions
(experiments) has been systematically represented
3.2.4. Residual stresses in Fig. 2.

The residual stresses have been graded based

on its nature compressive or tensile.
Compressive stresses have been given high scores
while tensile stresses have been given low scores.
Further, under compressive regime high
compressive stresses have been given very high
scores while lower compressive stresses are given
relatively lower scores.

3.2.5. Overall surface integrity

For considering the overall surface integrity,
both the scores of surface roughness and residual
stresses have been considered.
Basically, the model has been formed and
evaluated based on surface integrity as the main
criteria considering the present need desired in
aerospace and other components. According to
this, the model has been formed considering both
surface roughness and residual stresses as it
encompasses overall surface integrity. The
appropriate scoring has been done and product
sustainability index is determined and is given in
Fig. 2. Total product sustainability index (PSIT)
for different conditions (experiments) for product
sustainability evaluation
From the above model, the conditions which
give higher values of total product sustainability
index (PSIT) are the best which support
sustainable manufacturing. It is highly
recommended to implement them in practice to
achieve sustainability in machining of Inconel
718. Further, as is evident from Table 3 and Fig.
2, the highest total product sustainability index
(PSIT) of 83.75% is found in case of water vapour
environment (#Expt. no. 8). Hence it is suggested
that machining of Inconel 718 under water vapour
environment at Vc = 150 m/min, f = 0.25 mm/rev,
ap = 0.75 mm be carried out as it is the best
operational condition under sustainable regime.
4. CONCLUSION
In general it can be concluded that
machining under water vapour
environment seems to be one of the best
practice towards sustainable
manufacturing with highly appreciating
results.
Hence water vapour as a coolant and
lubricant in machining of Inconel 718
may be followed as a practice by
machining firms who wish to achieve
sustainability in their operations.
The sustainability model can be
considered as an ideal approach to
evaluate the machining process for
sustainability rating by various
machining firms and other audit
organisations.
Further, various machining industries as
well as other manufacturing firms may
add various sustainability components in
the model to suit their processes and then
may evaluate their rating for
sustainability.
REFERENCES
[1] F. Pusavec et al., Achieving and
implementation of sustainability principles
in machining processes, Advances in
Production Engineering & Management 4
(2009) 3, 151-160.
[2] V.S. Sharma et al., Cooling techniques for
improved productivity in turning, Int. J.
Mach. Tools Manuf. 49 (2009) 435453.
[3] C. Courbon et al., Investigation of
machining performance in high-pressure jet
assisted turning of Inconel 718: An
experimental study, Int. J. Mach. Tools
Manuf. 49 (2009) 11141125.
[4] R.S. Pawade et al., Effect of machining
parameters and cutting edge geometry on
surface integrity of high-speed turned
Inconel 718, Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 48
(2008) 1528.
[5] D. Dudzinski et al., A review of
developments towards dry and high speed
machining of Inconel 718 alloy, Int. J.
Mach. Tools Manuf. 44 (2004) 439456.
[6] Y. Su et al., Refrigerated cooling air cutting
of difficult-to-cut materials, Int. J. Mach.
Tools Manuf. 47 (2007) 927933.
[7] J. Kopac et al., Concepts of sustainable
machining processes, Proceedings of 13th
International Research/Expert Conference
Trends in the Development of Machinery
and Associated Technology TMT 2009,
16-21 October 2009, Hammamet, Tunisia.
[8] J. Kopac, Achievements of sustainable
manufacturing by machining, J. Ach. Mat.
Manuf. Engg. 34/2 (2009) 180-187.
[9] F. Pusavec et al., Transitioning to
sustainable production Part I: application
on machining technologies, J. Cleaner Prod.
18 (2010) 174-184.
[10] F. Pusavec et al., Sustainable machining of
high temperature Nickel alloy Inconel
718: Part 1 Predictive performance
models, J. Cleaner Prod. 81 (2014) 255-
269.
[11] P.W. Marksberry, Micro-flood (MF)
technology for sustainable manufacturing
operations that are coolant less and
occupationally friendly, J. Cleaner Prod. 15
(2007) 958-971.
[12] M.F. Rajemi et al., Sustainable machining:
selection of optimum turning conditions
based on minimum energy considerations,
J. Cleaner Prod. 18 (2010) 1059-1065.
[13] F. Pusavec et al., Transitioning to
sustainable production Part II: evaluation
of sustainable machining technologies, J.
Cleaner Prod. 18 (2010) 1211-1221.
[14] Jagadish et al., Cutting fluid selection for
sustainable design for manufacturing: An
integrated theory, Procedia Materials
Science 6 (2014) 450-459.
[15] B. Linke et al., Sustainability Indicators for
finishing operations based on process
performance and part quality, Procedia
CIRP 14 (2014) 564-569.
[16] A. Aramcharoen et al., An experimental
investigation on cryogenic milling of
Inconel 718 and its sustainability
assessment, Procedia CIRP 14 (2014) 529-
534.
[17] I. Deiab et al., Analysis of lubrication
strategies for sustainable machining during
turning of Titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy,
Procedia CIRP 17 (2014) 766-771.
[18] J. Yan et al., Sustainability assessment of
machining process based on extension
theory and entropy weight approach, Int. J.
Adv. Manuf. Tech. 71 (2014) 1419-1431.
[19] G.S. Kadam, Analysis and modelling of
the effect of machining environment on
surface integrity in high speed turning of
Inconel 718, M.Tech.(Manufacturing)
Thesis, 2010-2011, Dr.Babasaheb
Ambedkar Technological University,
Lonere, Raigad, M.S., India.