International Journal of Mechanical JOURNAL OF MECHANICAL 0976 INTERNATIONAL Engineering and Technology (IJMET), ISSN 6340(Print), ISSN 0976

6 6359(Online) Volume 3, Issue 1, January- April (2012), IAEME

ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (IJMET)

ISSN 0976 6340 (Print) ISSN 0976 6359 (Online) Volume 3, Issue 1, January- April (2012), pp. 150-160 IAEME: www.iaeme.com/ijmet.html Journal Impact Factor (2011): 1.2083 (Calculated by GISI) www.jifactor.com

IJMET
IAEME

ENHANCEMENT OF SURFACE ROUGHNESS OF 316L STAINLESS STEEL AND TI-6AL-4V USING LOW PLASTICITY BURNISHING: DOE APPROACH
U. D. Gulhane1*, S. B. Mishra2, P. K. Mishra2 Research Scholar, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Motilal Nehru National Institute of Technology, Allahabad (U.P.)-211004, India 1 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Finolex Academy of Management and Technology, Ratnagiri (M. S.) -415639, India 2 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Motilal Nehru National Institute of Technology, Allahabad (U. P.)-211004, India *Corresponding author, Asst. Professor, Dept. of Mechanical Engg., Finolex Academy of Management and Technology, P-60/61, MIDC, Mirjole Block, RATNAGIRI- (M.S.) 415639, India, Tel.: +91-9226797252, Fax: +91-02352228436, E-mail ID: umesh_gulhane@yahoo.com ABSTRACT In the present work, effect of Low Plasticity Burnishing (LPB) parameters in improving surface roughness of 316L Stainless Steel and Ti-6Al-4V have been investigated. Full factorial design of experiment (DOE) have been used to visualize the effect of LPB process parameters such as speed, pressure, ball diameter and number of passes on surface roughness. The signal-to-noise (S/N) ratio and ANOVA was carried out to identify the significant LPB parameters. The percentage improvement in surface roughness is found to be 87 % and 85 % for Ti-6Al-4V and 316L Stainless Steel respectively. Empirical relations have been developed for LPB parameters and the surface roughness. Keywords: Low Plasticity Burnishing (LPB), Surface roughness, Design of experiment (DOE), 316 L Stainless Steel, and Ti-6Al-4V
1

150

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET), ISSN 0976 6340(Print), ISSN 0976 6359(Online) Volume 3, Issue 1, January- April (2012), IAEME

1. INTRODUCTION Artificial joints surgery is becoming more common in the younger to older age patients due to change in lifestyle [1]. Metallic Biomaterials like 316L Stainless Steel and Ti-6Al-4V alloy are commonly used for the implants of these artificial joints [2-3]. The life of such artificial joints is limited by failure due to wear [4]. Wear of the implants are influence by multiple factors such as material, contact stresses, surface hardness, surface roughness etc.[5]. Amongst these factors, surface roughness can be enhanced by various surface enhancement methods. Some of the recent and relevant methods are conventional burnishing, shot peening, laser peening, water peening, liquid jet peening, low stress grinding, surface coating, and LPB [6]. Out of these, LPB is a rapid and inexpensive surface enhancement method [7]. LPB technology enhances the surface roughness [8]. The principle of the burnishing process is based on plastic deformation of the surface of work piece by applying external force through a polished ball [9]. The extensive plastic flow during burnishing of the material leads to considerable improvement in the surface roughness [10]. According to Seemikeri et al. (2008) and Hassan (1997) the parameters that have greater influence on the surface roughness of the material are burnishing speed, pressure, ball diameter and number of passes[6][9]. Hassan (1997) investigated the effect of burnishing force and number of burnishing tool passes on the surface roughness of a commercially available aluminum and brass. He obtained 85 to 95 % improvement in surface roughness by the application of burnishing [9]. Hassan et al. (1998) established a mathematical model to relate the surface roughness with burnishing force and number of tool passes on brass material. With this mathematical model, they obtained 97 % improvement in surface roughness with burnishing force of 203 N and two passes of the burnishing [11]. Seemikeri et al. (2008) have developed a mathematical expression for surface roughness of AISI 1045 work material and obtained 87 % improvement in surface rougness [6]. The aim of the present work is to investigate the effect of LPB parameters such as burnishing speed (rotational speed of workpiece) (S), burnishing pressure (P), diameter of ball (D) and number of passes (N) on surface surface roughness of Ti-6Al-4V and 316L stainless steel. Other burnishing parameter such as feed being kept constant. 2. MATERIALS AND METHODS 2.1 Work material Nominal and actual compositions of as received 316L stainless steel and Ti-6Al4V are shown in Table 1 and 2 respectively. Cylindrical specimens of 9 mm diameter were prepared from the rods of the material. The initial average surface roughness of Ti6Al-4V and 316L stainless steel was 1.88 m (Ra) and 1.62 m (Ra) respectively. Table 1- Composition of 316L SS
SAE Designation 316L SS (Nominal) 316L SS (Actual) % Cr 1618 17.34 % Ni 1014 10.69 %C 0.03 Max 0.024 % Mn 2.0 Max 1.748 % Si 1.0 Max %P 0.045 Max %S 0.03 Max 0.018 Other %Mo 2.03.0 2.08

0.471 0.034

151

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET), ISSN 0976 6340(Print), ISSN 0976 6359(Online) Volume 3, Issue 1, January- April (2012), IAEME

Table 2- Composition of Ti-6Al-4V

SAE Designation Ti-6Al-4V (Nominal) Ti-6Al-4V (Actual) %Al 6.25 Max 6.24 %V 4.28 Max 3.87 %Fe 0.214 Max 0.192 %Ti 90 Max 88.9 % Sn 0.38 Max 0.367

2.2 Low Plasticity Burnishing Tool Low Plasticity Burnishing was carried out using a LPB tool as shown in Fig. 1. It is comprised of a ball supported in a ball-seat with an arrangement to float the ball of diameter 8 to 12 mm. The ball is loaded normal to the surface of a specimen. As the ball rolls over the surface of the specimen, plastic deformation occurs. The pressure is applied on the ball by pressurized cylinder. The LPB tool is held in the tool post of a lathe machine and specimen is held in a three-jaw chuck [12]. The rotational speed of specimen (burnishing speed) is controlled by controlling the speed of the chuck.

(a) Fig.1. (a) LPB tool (b) Schematic sketch of LPB process

(b)

2.3 Design of experiment Design of experiments (DOE) was done using full factorial [2k] where k is number of parameters at two level, to study the effect of LPB process parameters such as burnishing speed (S), burnishing pressure (P), diameter of ball (D) and number of passes (N) on surface roughness. The quality characteristic is measured by obtaining the S/N characteristics formulated for surface roughness i.e. Lower-the-better is given by. S/N= -10 log (1/n y2) ---------(1) Where, y is observed data, and n is number of observations [13].

152

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET), ISSN 0976 6340(Print), ISSN 0976 6359(Online) Volume 3, Issue 1, January- April (2012), IAEME

Analysis of variance (ANOVA) is carried out using ANOVA module of Minitab software to investigate design parameters that significantly affect the surface roughness. Correlations of surface roughness for both the materials have been obtained by developing regression models using Microsoft Analyze-it software. For this analysis, a log transformed response variable and process parameters were calculated by using the model suggested by Mahagaonkar et al., (2008). ln (Y) = 0 + 1 ln(S) + 2 ln (P) + 3 ln(D)+4 ln(N)---------------------(2) Where0, 1, 2, 3, and 4 are the regression coefficients to be determined and Y is the surface roughness [14]. 2.4 Measurement of surface roughness and SEM Analysis, The surface roughness (Ra, Arithmetic average) of all the specimens have been measured by Mitutoyo surface test SJ-400 with cut off value of 4.0 mm. An average of three measurements was taken for each specimen. SEM studies of the unburnished and burnished surfaces of 316L stainless steel and Ti-6Al-4V have been conducted using JEOL JSM-6380A analytical scanning electron microscope. 3. Results and discussion Preliminary experiments have been conducted to select the levels of each parameter by varying each parameter individually and keeping others at minimum level. The LPB parameters and their levels are shown in Table 3. Table 3-LPB parameters and their levels. LPB Parameter Level 1 Level 2 Burnishing speed (S) 50 rpm 900 rpm Burnishing pressure (P) 0.5 MPa 1.9 MPa Ball diameter (D) 8 mm 12 mm Number of passes (N) 1 2

3. 1 Design and Analysis of LPB process parameter Design of experiments has been used to study effect of four burnishing parameters at two levels on surface roughness. In this study, L16 orthogonal array is employed to obtain the experimental results for surface roughness of both the materials by varying speed(S), pressure (P), diameter of ball (D) and number of passes (N). Table 4 shows the experimental design matrix, response variables and calculated S/N ratio for surface roughness of Ti-6Al-4V and 316L SS.

153

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET), ISSN 0976 6340(Print), ISSN 0976 6359(Online) Volume 3, Issue 1, January- April (2012), IAEME

Table 4 Experimental design matrix, response variables and S/N ratio.

Low plasticity burnishing parameters Expt. No. Speed ( rpm) S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 900 900 900 900 900 900 900 900 Press. (MPa) P 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 Ball dia. (mm) D 8 8 12 12 8 8 12 12 8 8 12 12 8 8 12 12 No. of Passes N 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 0.53 0.52 0.42 0.39 0.59 0.31 0.35 0.30 0.56 0.50 0.42 0.38 0.52 0.31 0.49 0.24 0.55 0.50 0.41 0.40 0.58 0.32 0.36 0.31 0.54 0.51 0.42 0.38 0.53 0.30 0.48 0.25 0.54 0.51 0.41 0.39 0.59 0.31 0.34 0.32 0.54 0.49 0.43 0.39 0.53 0.30 0.49 0.24 0.540 0.510 0.413 0.393 0.587 0.313 0.350 0.310 0.547 0.500 0.423 0.383 0.527 0.303 0.487 0.243 0.54 0.51 0.46 0.41 0.52 0.42 0.39 0.38 0.53 0.41 0.43 0.37 0.49 0.25 0.41 0.35 0.53 0.52 0.45 0.43 0.54 0.43 0.40 0.39 0.52 0.42 0.44 0.38 0.50 0.24 0.42 0.34 0.54 0.51 0.47 0.41 0.53 0.42 0.41 0.38 0.54 0.42 0.43 0.36 0.48 0.25 0.41 0.35 0.537 0.513 0.460 0.417 0.530 0.423 0.400 0.383 0.530 0.417 0.433 0.370 0.490 0.247 0.413 0.347
Surface Roughness Ra (m) Ti-6Al-4V Surface Roughness Ra (m) 316L SS

R1

R2

R3

Ravg

R1

R2

R3

Ravg

Calculated S/N ratio for surface roughness using equation (1) Ti-6Al4V 5.351 5.847 7.673 8.104 4.632 10.079 9.116 10.170 5.244 6.019 7.466 8.328 5.569 10.361 6.255 12.274 316L SS 5.406 5.792 6.743 7.602 5.513 7.466 7.957 8.328 5.513 7.604 7.263 8.634 6.195 12.156 7.673 9.201

Optimum level of parameter for surface roughness is evaluated using S/N ratio of Table 4 and reported in Table 5. Optimum level of parameters for surface roughness of Ti-6Al4V in the decreasing order of importance are N2-D2-P2-S2 i.e. Number of passes (2), ball diameter (12mm), pressure (1.9 MPa), and speed (900rpm). Whereas that for 316L SS in decreasing order of importance are N2-P2-S2-D2.i.e. Number of passes (2), pressure (1.9 MPa), speed (900rpm) and ball diameter (12mm). Table 5 also indicates the higher values of delta for number of burnishing passes (N) for both the materials suggesting its significant contribution towards surface roughness. Table 5- Significance of LPB Parameters for surface roughness. Response table for S/N Lower is better
Ti-6Al-4V 316L SS

Parameters 1

Level 2

Delta

Rank

Level 1 2

Delta

Rank

S P D N

7.622 6.754 6.638 6.413

7.69* 0.068 4 6.851 8.557* 1.803 3 6.82 8.673* 2.035 2 6.956 8.898* 2.484 1 6.533 * Optimized level of parameter 154

8.03* 8.061* 7.925* 8.348*

1.179 1.242 0.97 1.815

3 2 4 1

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET), ISSN 0976 6340(Print), ISSN 0976 6359(Online) Volume 3, Issue 1, January- April (2012), IAEME

Table 6 and 7 show the ANOVA results for the surface roughness of Ti-6Al-4V alloy & 316L stainless steel respectively. Statistically, there is a tool called as F test named after Fisher to see which design parameter have a significant effect on quality characteristics [15]. Higher F-values of 21.93 and 13.08 for number of passes of Ti-6Al4V and 316L stainless steel respectively suggest its significant contribution on surface roughness. From Table 6, LPB process parameters for Ti-6Al-4V can be arranged in the decreasing order of importance as N-D-P-S. After number of passes, diameter of burnishing ball plays important role for improving surface roughness of Ti-6Al-4V. Larger ball diameter indicates the larger contact area between the LPB tool and the specimen surface, thus diminising burnishing pressure [10]. Burnishing pressure is the third important parameter and speed is fourth. This suggests that for Ti-6Al-4V to improve surface roughness higher number of passes is required with larger ball diameter. Whereas those for 316L stainless steel in the decreasing order of importance are N-P-S-D. After number of passes, pressure plays important role in improving surface roughness of 316L SS. This suggests that in improving surface roughness of 316L SS higher number of passes are required at higher pressure. These results obtained through ANOVA are in close agreement with Taguchi method. For Ti-6Al-4V, burnishing pressure and number of burnishing passes (P*N) indicate strong interaction. Whereas for 316L SS, burnishing speed and number of burnishing passes(S*N) show strong interaction. Table 6 ANOVA results for signal-to-noise ratio for surface roughness of Ti-6Al-4V. Source S P D N S*P S*D S*N P*D P*N D*N DF 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Seq. SS 0.0184 12.9997 16.573 24.6903 0.0091 0.2562 1.5754 0.2337 13.5925 0.618 5.6297 76.196 Adj SS 0.0184 12.9997 16.573 24.6903 0.0091 0.2562 1.5754 0.2337 13.5925 0.618 5.6297 Adj Ms 0.0184 12.9997 16.573 24.6903 0.0091 0.2562 1.5754 0.2337 13.5925 0.618 1.1259 F 0.02 11.55 14.72 21.93 0.01 0.23 1.40 0.21 12.07 0.55 P 0.903 0.019 0.012 0.005 0.932 0.653 0.290 0.668 0.018 0.492

5 Residual Error 15 Total

Table 7- ANOVA results for signal-to-noise ratio for surface roughness of 316L SS. Source DF Seq. SS Adj SS Adj Ms F P 1 5.5610 5.5610 5.5610 5.52 0.066 S 1 6.1663 6.1663 6.1663 6.12 0.056 P 1 3.7606 3.7606 3.7606 3.73 0.111 D 1 13.1727 13.1727 13.1727 13.08 0.015 N 1 0.3875 0.3875 0.3875 0.38 0.562 S*P 155

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET), ISSN 0976 6340(Print), ISSN 0976 6359(Online) Volume 3, Issue 1, January- April (2012), IAEME

S*D S*N P*D P*N D*N Residual Error Total

1 1 1 1 1 5 15

1.6581 3.4060 1.0502 1.6297 2.4510 5.0353 44.2785

1.6581 3.4060 1.0502 1.6297 2.4510 5.0353

1.6581 3.4060 1.0502 1.6297 2.4510 1.0071

1.65 3.38 1.04 1.62 2.43

0.256 0.125 0.354 0.259 0.179

3.2 Quantification of surface roughness Surface roughness and LPB process parameters from Table 4 were calculated to logscale. Correlations of surface roughness for both the materials have been obtained by developing regression models suggested by Mahagaonkar et al., (2008) as shown in equation(2) [14]. Intercepts and coefficients for surface roughness for Ti-6Al-4V and 316L SS are calculated using Microsoft Analyze-it software are shown in Table 8 and 9 respectively. Equation (3) and (4) gives approximate values of the surface roughness for the Ti-6Al-4V and 316L SS respectively. Table 8- Intercepts and coefficient for surface roughness for Ti-6Al-4V. Term Intercept ln(S) ln(P) ln(D) ln(N) Coefficient 0.5912 -0.0027 -0.1555 -0.5781 -0.4127 SE 0.4850 0.0281 0.0609 0.2004 0.1172 P 0.2483 0.9255 0.0268 0.0149 0.0048 95% CI of coefficient -0.4762 -0.0646 -0.2895 -1.0192 -0.6708 to 1.6586 to 0.0592 to -0.0215 to -0.1369 to -0.1547

Surface roughness (Ra) = 1.8061 (S)-0.0027 (P)-0.1555 (D)-0.5781 (N)-0.4127 -----------------(3) Table 9- Intercepts and coefficient for surface roughness for 316L SS. Term Intercept ln(S) ln(P) ln(D) ln(N) Coefficient 0.1252 -0.0470 -0.1071 -0.2754 -0.3014 SE 0.4094 0.0237 0.0514 0.1692 0.0990 P 0.7655 0.0734 0.0613 0.1318 0.0111 95% CI of coefficient -0.7760 -0.0992 -0.2202 -0.6479 -0.5193 to 1.0264 to 0.0053 to 0.006 to 0.097 to -0.0836
--------------

Surface roughness (Ra) = 1.1333 (S)-0.0470 (P)-0.1071 (D)-0.2754 (N)-0.3014

(4)

From above correlations, it is clear that higher number of passes is required with larger ball diameter to improve surface roughness of Ti-6Al-4V. Whereas for improving surface roughness of 316L SS number of passes are required at higher pressure. 156

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET), ISSN 0976 6340(Print), ISSN 0976 6359(Online) Volume 3, Issue 1, January- April (2012), IAEME

3.3 Experimental evaluation of Surface roughness Fig. 2 shows the surface roughness plots for burnished and unburnished alloys. The Burnished Ti-6Al-4V show surface roughness of 0.24m with burnishing parameter S2-P2-D2-N2 (i.e. Speed of 900 rpm, pressure of 1.9 MPa, Ball diameter of 12mm and 2 numbers of passes), whereas the burnished 316L SS shows surface roughness of 0.25m Ra with burnishing parameter S2-P2-D1-N2. (i.e. Speed of 900 rpm, pressure of 1.9 MPa, Ball diameter of 8mm and 2 numbers of passes).
Unburnished Ti-6Al-4V, Ra (1.88m) Burnished Ti-6Al-4V, Ra (0.24m) Burnished parameter S2-P2-D2-N2 Unburnished 316L SS, Ra (1.62m) Burnished 316L SS, Ra (0.25m) Burnished parameter S2-P2-D1-N2

Fig 2. The surface roughness plots for burnished and unburnished Ti-6Al-4V and 316L SS. SEM analyses of the unburnished and burnished samples have been carried out to understand the morphology of unburnished and burnished surfaces and the material redistribution mechanism. SEM micrographs of the initial turned surfaces (i.e. unburnished samples) of the materials 316L SS and Ti-6Al-4V are shown in Figs. 3 and 4 respectively. Turning directions are indicated by the arrow mark at the corner of the images. SEM images of the unburnished 316L SS and Ti-6Al-4V show the rough surface with machining marks, asperities and grooves. Marks 'A', 'E 'and 'D' (Figs. 3 and 4) indicates the sharp asperities that adhere to the surfaces during turning operation. Figure 5 and 6 are the SEM micrographs of the burnished samples of 316L SS and Ti-6Al-4V respectively. From the SEM images, it can be observed that the surfaces become smoother and uniform with the burnishing operation. Ball burnishing directions are shown by the arrow mark at the corner of images. Marks 'B' and 'G' in Figs. 5 and 6 show sharp machining marks deformed due to ball burnishing. According to Low and Wong (2011), when the surfaces are subjected to continuous compressive load during ball burnishing operation, the sharp asperities deforms, resulting in a smoother and more uniform surface [10]. SEM images of 316L SS and Ti-6Al-4V also show some of the undeformed asperities ('C' and 'F' in Figs. 5 and 6 respectively). According to Hassan

157

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET), ISSN 0976 6340(Print), ISSN 0976 6359(Online) Volume 3, Issue 1, January- April (2012), IAEME

(1997), engineering components are usually left with machining marks of irregular heights and spacing [9].

Fig. 3. SEM image of initial turned surfaces of 316L SS

Fig. 4. SEM image of initial turned surfaces of Ti-6Al-4V

Fig. 5. SEM image of 316L SS surface produced by ball burnishing at S=900rpm, P=1.9 Mpa, D=12 mm, N= 2

Fig.6. SEM image of Ti-6Al-4V surface produced by ball burnishing at S=900rpm, P=1.9 Mpa, D=12 mm, N= 2

CONCLUSIONS LPB is an effective process for improving the surface roughness of the Ti-6Al-4V. Following conclusions can be drawn under the considered burnishing conditions. (1) Ti-6Al-4V alloy has shown 87 % improvement in surface roughness over the initial surface roughness of 1.88 m whereas 316L Stainless steel has shown 85 % improvement in surface roughness over the initial surface roughness of 1.62 m using LPB tool. (2) For Ti-6Al-4V alloy, best process parameters in the decreasing order of importance are found to be N-D-P-S (i.e. number of passes-ball diameter-pressure-speed), whereas for 316L SS it is found to be N-P-S-D (i.e. number of passes-pressure-speed-ball diameter).

158

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET), ISSN 0976 6340(Print), ISSN 0976 6359(Online) Volume 3, Issue 1, January- April (2012), IAEME

(3) Number of burnishing passes has shown its significant contribution towards improvement of surface roughness of Ti-6Al-4V alloy and 316L stainless steel. (4) To improve surface roughness of Ti-6Al-4V higher number of passes is required with larger ball diameter, whereas for improving surface roughness of 316L SS higher numbers of passes are required at higher pressure. (5) Empirical correlations of surface roughness for both the studied materials have been developed. These correlations may serve as a useful guideline for selecting process parameters in obtaining desired surface roughness for the Ti-6Al-4V alloy and 316L stainless steel. Thus, it is suggested that the surface roughness of Ti-6Al-4V alloy and 316L stainless steel can be enhanced by LPB. Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank Dr. K. L. Asanare, Director, FAMT- Ratnagiri for providing the LPB tool and other facilities The authors are thankful to Adler Mediequip Pvt. Ltd., Ratnagiri for providing the materials and facility of surface roughness testing. The authors also wishes to thanks Vishweswaraya National Institute of Technology, Nagpur for extending the facility of SEM. REFERENCES [1] S. C. Scholes and A. Unsworth, Wear studies on the likely performance of CFRPEEK/CoCrMo for use as artificial joint bearing materials, J Mater Sci: Mater Med, Vol. 20, pp. 163-170, 2009. [2] D. Dowson, Friction and wear of medical implants and prosthetic devices, In: Blau, P. J. (Ed.), Friction, Lubrication, and Wear Technology, ASM Handbook, ASM International, USA, Vol. 18, pp. 656-664, 1992. [3] U. D. Gulhane, M. Roy, S. G. Sapate, S. B.Mishra, P. K. Mishra, Influence of surface treatment of high carbon steel on the reciprocating wear in comparison with the 316 stainless steel, Proceeding of ASME/STLE International joint Tribology conference IJTC2009. Memphis, Tennessee USA, October 19-21, 2009, pp. 55- 57. [4] S. C. Scholes and A. Unsworth, Pin-on-plate studies on the effect of rotation on the wear of metal-on-metal samples, Journal of materials science: Materials in medicine, Vol. 12, pp. 299-303, 2001 [5] A. Buford and T. Goswami, Review of wear mechanisms in hip implants: Paper I General, Materials and Designs, Vol. 25, pp. 385-393, 2004. [6] C. Y. Seemikeri, P. K. Brahmankar, S. B. Mahagaonkar, Investigations on surface integrity of AISI 1045 using LPB tool, Tribology International, Vol. 41, pp. 724 734, 2008. [7] P. S. Prevey, FOD resistance and fatigue crack arrest in low plasticity burnished IN718, Proceedings: 5th National turbine engine high cycle fatigue conference, Chandler, AZ, March 7-9, 2000. [8] M. A. Hassan and A. M.Maqableh, The effects of initial burnishing parameters on non-ferrous components, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, Vol. 102, pp. 115-121, 2000.

159

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET), ISSN 0976 6340(Print), ISSN 0976 6359(Online) Volume 3, Issue 1, January- April (2012), IAEME

[9] A. M. Hassan, The effects of ball- and roller-burnishing on the surface roughness and hardness of some non-ferrous metals, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, Vol. 72, pp. 385391, 1997. [10] K. O. Low and K. J. Wong, Influence of ball burnishing on surface quality and tribological characteristics of polymers under dry sliding conditions, Tribology International, Vol. 44, pp. 144-153, 2011. [11]A. M. Hassan, H. F. Al-Jalil, A. A. Ebied, Burnishing force and number of ball passes for the optimum surface finish of brass components, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, Vol. 83, pp. 176179,1998. [12] D. J. Hornbach, P. S. Prevey, E. F. loftus, Application of low plasticity burnishing (LPB) to improve the fatigue performance of Ti-6Al-4V femoral hip stems, Journal of ASTM International, Vol. 3, No. 5., 2006, [online] available: www.astm.org [Accessed Jan 14, 2010]. [13] B. M. Gopalswamy, B. Mondal, S. Ghosh, Taguchi method and ANOVA: An Approach for process parameters optimization of hard machining hardened steel, Journal of scientific and Industrial Research, Vol. 68, pp. 686-695, 2009 [14] S. B. Mahagaonkar, P. K. Brahmankar, C. Y. Seemikeri, Effect of shot peening parameters on micorhardness of AISI 1045 and 316L material: an analysis using design of experiment, Int J Adv Manuf Technol, Vol. 38, pp. 563-574, 2008. [15] W. H. Yang and Y. S. Tarng, Design optimization of cutting parameters for turning operations based on the Taguchi method, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, Vol. 84, pp. 122129,1998.

160