Experimental Investigations and Multi-Objective Optimization of Friction Drilling Process On AISI 1015

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF APPLIED ENGINEERING RESEARCH, DINDIGUL
Volume 2, No 2, 2011
Copyright 2010 All rights reserved Integrated Publishing Association
REVIEW ARTICLE
ISSN - 0976-4259
Experimental investigations and multi-objective optimization of friction

drilling process on AISI 1015
Pantawane. P.D, Ahuja. B.B
Department of Production Engineering, College of Engineering,
Pune-411005, Maharashtra, India
pdpantawane.prod@coep.ac.in
ABSTRACT
Friction drilling is the novel method of hole making in sheet materials using the principle of
hot forming. Herein the sheet material is extruded by conical carbide tool rotating at high
speed and feed to form the bush which is used as bearing surface or tapped in another
operation. In this paper authors have investigated the effect of friction drilling input
parameters viz. rotational speed, feed and tool diameter on the responses viz. dimensional
error and surface roughness of the bush. Standard geometry friction drilling tools have been
used to produce the holes in hollow workpiece of AISI 1015. The statistical analysis tool
Response Surface Method (RSM) has been used to develop an empirical model for the
responses in terms of drilling parameters. Finally the optimization based on multiple response
method which makes use of an objective function called as Desirability Function has been
used to optimize the machining conditions.
Keywords: Friction Drilling, Response Surface Method, Central Composite Design,
Desirability Function.
1. Introduction
Joining of the sheet material is always a problem in conventional manufacturing method.
Some of the methods currently being employed are J nuts, Weld nuts, Clench nuts and other
threaded inserts. These methods suffer with drawbacks like material wastage, more cycle
time, addition of external elements and therefore more weight and costs with compromising
quality. Friction drilling is the best solution to all these problems of joining sheet materials in
simple, efficient and most economical way. Friction drilling, also known as thermal drilling,
flow drilling, form drilling, or friction stir drilling, is a nontraditional hole making method.
The Flowdrill comes into contact with the material using relatively high axial pressure and
rotational speed. The generated heat makes the material soft and malleable enough to be
formed and perforated. As the Flowdrill indents into the material, some of the displaced
material forms a collar around the upper surface of the workpiece. The rest of the material
forms a bushing in the lower surface of the workpiece; (Formdrill, 2009). The process does
not disturb the materials internal structure. As a result the formed bush is remarkably strong
and can be used for bearing sleeves or, when threaded in a separate process, can provide high
torque threaded surfaces with very high pull out strength specifications. Flowdrill process can
be used in any application where the material thickness does not provide support for a
threaded surface or a sleeve bearing application. When welded or riveted nut or a special
inserts are required thermal drilling can be used with improvement in quality and saving of
time and money, (Flowdrill, 2008). Commercially available tools having standard geometry
and made of tungsten carbide (WC) in a Cobalt (Co) matrix is as shown in Figure 1. These
448

REVIEW ARTICLE
ISSN - 0976-4259
tools have distinct regions (a) Point or Centre (b) Conical (c) Cylindrical (d) Shoulder (d)
Shank. The centre or point has very short length and blunt angle (900) to generate the initial
frictional heat and avoids the tool from early penetration. The conical section has sharper
angle (300-400) and generates more heat and helps the tool to penetrate by progressively
pushing the material sideward. The final shape and size of bushing is determined by the
cylindrical section. The shoulder section is incorporated for either trimming of upwardly
extruded material or rounding off to form the collar. Extended shank is provided to hold the
tool in standard holders; (Miller S.F., Shih A.J., 2007). The typical tool geometry is shown in
Figure 1.
Figure 1: Geometry of Friction Drilling Tool

Friction drilling has been existence for over 20 years, yet in manufacturing, it is in its nascent
stage due to lack of research and awareness about the process. The mechanics of friction
drilling process in which the force model based on pressure and contact area to predict the
thrust force and torque reported by (Miller S.F., Wang H., Li R., Shih A.J., 2006). The
theoretically developed model has been applied to predict the yield stress and contact
pressure between the tool and workpiece and to calculate the thrust force and torque. Thermo
mechanical finite element modeling of the friction drilling process to understand the material
flow, temperature, stresses and strains which are difficult to measure experimentally has been
done by (Miller S.F., Shih A.J., 2007). This research demonstrated the application of the 3D
finite element modeling (ABAQUS/EXPLICIT FEM) to model the large plastic strain and
high temperature work-material deformation inherent in friction drilling process. Work
material is subjected to the large deformation and high temperature during the friction drilling
process which causes alteration in macrostructure and material properties, these findings have
been reported by (Miller S.F., Blau P., and Shih A. J., 2005). Authors in this work described
that the quality of hole is affected by magnitude of friction forces and heat produced during
friction drilling process which in turn depending on thermal conductivities of materials
involved. The bushings generated in the friction drilling of brittle cast materials, exhibit
cracks or petals. This problem illustrated and methods like high spindle speed and workpiece
preheating has been suggested to obtain better results, (Miller S.F., Tao J., Shih A.J., 2006)
The performance of coated (TiAlN and AlCrN) and uncoated tungsten carbide drills for the
friction drilling of austenitic stainless steel AISI 304 have been investigated by, (Lee S M,
Chow H. M., Huang F. Y. and Yan B. H., 2008). This work explored the changes in
relationship between drill surface temperature, tool wear and axial thrust force. The process
characterization of friction drilling process for Austenite stainless steel AISI 304 with
sintered carbide tool has been reported by (Chow H., Lee S., Yang L., 2008). This work
demonstrated the effect of input parameters such as drill shape and friction angle, friction
449

REVIEW ARTICLE
ISSN - 0976-4259
contact area ratio, feed rate, and drilling speed using Taguchi method. The research works on
the applications of commercially available standard friction drilling tools and the optimum
setting of the process parameters viz. speed, feed, tool diameter etc. are lacking and hence the
aim of this work. In this work experiments are carried out with two standard geometry
friction drill (M8 and M10) on AISI 1015. The responses dimensional error and surface
roughness have been measured and analyzed. Finally multi-objective optimization using
desirability function has been demonstrated.
2. Experimental Details
2.1 Experimental Set Up
The experiments are carried on three axes CNC vertical machining center PVM 40 having
speed range of 60-6000 RPM. The material selected for this study is AISI 1015 mild steel
which has chemical composition as C 0.15%, Mn 0.48%, P 0.030, Si 0.28, S 0.035%. This
material being widely used in fabricated structures and is good candidate for friction drilling.
The square pipe of 36 x 36 x 1 mm thickness and 250 mm length has been selected to drill the
holes. Two friction drilling tools 7.3 mm (M8) and 9.2 mm (M10) made of Tungsten Carbide
in Cobalt matrix have been selected for experimentations. The tools have the standard
geometry viz. point, conical section, cylindrical section, shoulder and the shank. Also four
parallel lobes have been grounded on cylindrical and conical sections in order to provide the
primary contact area to reduce tool wear. The sharp edges at progressions of tool from point
to conical and from conical to cylindrical are rounded to protect the tool from initial wear and
to increase the tool life. Small amount of parting paste is applied on tool prior to the friction
drilling operation in order to prevent the material transfer from workpiece to the tool and to
protect the tool from early wear. The friction drilling set up with the workpiece is shown in
Figure 2.
Figure 2: Friction Drilling set up on Vertical Machining Center
450

REVIEW ARTICLE
ISSN - 0976-4259
2.2 Design of Experiment

Table 1: Input Parameters and their respective levels.
Factor
Name
Unit
A
B
C
Speed
Feed
Tool Diameter
rpm
mm/min
mm
-1.41
-1
2086
71.36
--
2500
90
7.30
Levels
0
3500
135
---
+1
+1.41
4500
180
9.20
4914
198.64
---
Table 2: Coded and real values of the input parameters and measured responses
Std.
Order
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
A
rpm
-1
1
-1
1
-1.41
1.41
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-1
1
-1
1
-1.41
1.41
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Coded Values
B
mm/min
-1
-1
1
1
0
0
-1.41
1.41
0
0
0
0
0
-1
-1
1
1
0
0
-1.41
1.41
0
0
0
0
0
C
mm
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
A
rpm
2500
4500
2500
4500
2085
4914
3500
3500
3500
3500
3500
3500
3500
2500
4500
2500
4500
2085
4914
3500
3500
3500
3500
3500
3500
3500
Actual Values
B
mm/min
90
90
180
180
135
135
71.36
198.64
135
135
135
135
135
90
90
180
180
135
135
71.36
198.64
135
135
135
135
135
C
mm
7.3
7.3
7.3
7.3
7.3
7.3
7.3
7.3
7.3
7.3
7.3
7.3
7.3
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
Responses
DE
SR
m
m
440
0.460
410
0.251
480
0.523
480
0.337
460
0.542
460
0.325
420
0.342
480
0.396
460
0.329
470
0.450
450
0.365
450
0.375
450
0.321
500
0.523
470
0.350
510
0.612
500
0.412
520
0.562
510
0.402
490
0.506
490
0.462
480
0.490
480
0.436
530
0.562
490
0.521
490
0.421
A statistical technique, using response surface method and analysis of variance has been
employed to investigate the influence of process parameters on quality of friction drilled hole.
The quality of drilled holes is widely judged by Dimensional Error (DE) and all the efforts
are required to produce the desired size holes. Also the Surface Roughness (SR) which is
thought to be affected by all the input parameters is widely used to optimize the process.
Therefore these two quality indices are used to study the effect of input variables in friction
drilling experimentations. Independent process parameters viz. Speed (A), Feed (B) and
451

REVIEW ARTICLE
ISSN - 0976-4259
Diameter of the tool (C) have been selected. Central composite design (rotatable =
1.414) in which two continuous factors viz. Speed (A) and Feed (B) have been varied over
five levels and Tool Diameter (C) have been varied over two levels is used for the
experimentation. Two replications of factorial points (8), two replications of axial points (8)
and centre points (10) are selected. The input parameters and their respective levels used for
the study are shown in the Table 1. The coded and real values of the input parameters are
shown in Table 2.
3. Statistical Analysis
3.1 Response Surface Modeling (RSM)
In most RSM problems, the form of relationship between the response and the independent
variables is unknown. Thus the first step in RSM is to find a suitable approximation for the
true functional relationship between (Y) and the set of independent variable. Usually, a low
order polynomial in some region of the independent variables is employed. If the reponse is
well modeled by a linear function of the independent varaible, then the approximating
function is the first order model as given in equation 1.
(Y ) = 0 + 1 x1 + 2 x 2 + + k x k +
(1)
Where represents the noise or error observed in the reponse. If there is curvature in the
system, then the polynomial of higher degree must be used, such as the second order model
and given in equation 2.
k
(Y ) = 0 + i xi + ii xi2
i =1
i =1
ij
xi x j +
( 2)
i, j
Almost all RSM problems use one or both of these models. Of course, it is unlikely that the
polynomial model will be resonable approximation of the true functional relationship over the
entire space of the independent variables, but for relatively small region they usually work
well, (Montgomery D.C., 2001).
3.2 Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) for Dimensional Error (DE)
Tolerance and precision are obviously important factors when choosing friction drilling for
making the holes in sheet metal. The drilled holes are normally tapped for various
applications viz. pipe connections in furniture, ventilation equipment, car bodies etc. Friction
drilled holes are mainly tapped by Form tapping. The threads obtained by form tapping is
characterized by the appearance of a split crests at the top of the thread, which are responsible
for less strength and early failure of bolted joints. The rate of formation of split crest,
depends on the hole diameter before tapping, (Agapiou J. S., 1994). Therefore to control the
dimensional error within the permissible limit is one of the most important criterions in
friction drilling process. In this study the hole diameters are precisely measured by 3D CMM.
To obtain the desired accuracy three reading have been taken at same depths with reference
top flat surface. Average values given in Table 2 have been used to analyze the effect of input
452

REVIEW ARTICLE
ISSN - 0976-4259
parameters on dimensional error. The analysis is performed using the statistical software
Designexpert V8. The ANOVA table for dimensional error is shown in table 3. In this case
feed (B), Speed (C), and their interaction( BC) are significant.
Table 3: ANOVA for Dimensional Error (DE).
Sum of
Squares
df*
Mean
Square
F
Value
p-value
Source
Model
A-Speed
B-Feed
C-Tool Dia.
AB
AC
BC
Residual
Lack of Fit
0.015
0.000
0.003
0.010
0.000
0.000
0.001
0.003
0.001
6
1
1
1
1
1
1
19
11
0.003
0.000
0.003
0.010
0.000
0.000
0.001
0.000
0.000
17.390
2.630
21.598
67.852
2.067
0.121
10.073
< 0.0001
0.1214
0.0002
< 0.0001
0.1668
0.7320
0.0050
Significant
0.559
0.8168
Not
Significant
Pure Error
Total
0.002
0.018
8
25
0.000
*df: degrees of freedom

From the ANOVA table it is eveident that the two factor interaction Model fits well the
response data of dimensional error (DE). The regression equations in terms of Coded factors
and Actual factors after deleting the insignificant interactions terms are given here. Equation
(3) gives dimensional error in terms of coded factors.
Log 10 (DE ) = 2.68 0.00488 A + 0.014 B + 0.019C 0.00955( B C )
(3)
Equation (4) gives dimensional error in terms of actual factors.

Log10 (DE ) = 2.234 0.000005 A + 0.00215B + 0.0506C 0.000223( B C )
(4)
The effects of individual factors on the dimensional error are shown in Figure 3, 4 and 5.
From the graphs it is evident that the speed has the little effect on dimensional error. As the
speed increases from 2500 RPM to 4500 RPM there is decrease in DE from 480 m to 470
m. This decreasing trend indicates that increase in speed generates more frictional heat
therefore more plasticity and hence better movement of the material resulting in lower
dimensional error. From the graph of feed vs. dimensional error it is clear that as the feed
increases from 71.36 mm/min to 198.64 mm/min there is increase in DE from 452 m to 497
m. The increase in feed causes the less plasticity and less time available to produce the
sufficient heat for plastic deformation resulting more dimensional error. Also from the graph
of tool diameter vs. dimensional error it is clear that the material thickness and tool diameter
ratio plays important role in the dimensional accuracy of the friction drilling process and
optimum ratio should be maintained to obtain the better results. As the diameter changes
453

REVIEW ARTICLE
ISSN - 0976-4259
from 7.3 mm to 9.2 mm there is linear increase in DE from 452 m to 495 m. The contour
plot (Figure 6) indicates significant interactions between tool diameter and feed and suggests
that the optimum DE up to 440 m can be achieved with the feed ranging from 71.36
mm/min to 103.18 mm/min and tool diameter up to 7.8 mm.
Figure 3: Variation of Dimensional Error with Speed
Figure 4: Variation of Dimensional Error with Feed
454

REVIEW ARTICLE
ISSN - 0976-4259
Figure 5: Variation of Dimensional Error with Tool Diameter
Figure 6: Contour plot showing variation of Dimensional Error with Tool Diameter and Feed
3.2 Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) for Surface Roughness (SR)
Average roughness (Ra) which is most popular parameter among the researcher fraternity to
assess the surface roughness is used for analysis. This parameter is also known as the
Arithmetic Mean Roughness Value, Arithmetic Average (AA) or Centerline Average (CLA)
and recognized universally as the commonest roughness parameter. The surface roughness of
holes has been measured by Surftest SJ201 Mitutoyo make with the sampling length of 0.8
mm. While measuring the surface roughness due care has been taken to maintain the axis of
travel of sliding unit parallel to the hole axis. The readings are taken at two positions 1800
apart. Five readings have been taken at each location. The average values of surface
roughness are given in Table 2 and the ANOVA results are tabulated in table 4. Based on the
analysis of designed experiment it is eveident that the linear Model fits well the response
data of surface roughness. The log transformation has been utilised to satisfy the normality
455

REVIEW ARTICLE
ISSN - 0976-4259
assumption.The regression equations in terms of Coded factors and Actual factors after
deleting the insignificant interactions terms are given here. Equation (5) gives Surafce
Roughness in terms of coded factors.
Log 10 (SR ) = 0.37 0.082 A + 0.022 B + 0.050C 0.013( A C )
(5)
Equation (6) gives Surafce Roughness in terms of actual factors.

Log10 (SR ) = 0.180 0.0002 A + 0.0005B + 0.0034C + 0.000014( A C )
(6)
Friction drilling is a metalworking process that occurs above the recrystallization temperature
of the material. After the grains deform during processing, they recrystallize, which maintains
an equiaxed microstructure and prevents the metal from excessive work hardening. The heat
generation is the function of surface speed which imparts more plasticity and hence grain
refinement near the boundary which is obvious from the Figure 7 indicating that speed has
major effect on surface roughness. As the speed increases from 2500 RPM to 4500 RPM
there is decrease in surface roughness from 0.536 m to 0.341 m. The rapid feed increase
results in distorted grain boundary and hence affecting the surface roughness as shown in
Figure 8. There is increase in surface roughness from 0.342 m to 0.446 m with increase in
feed from 71.36 mm/min to 198.64 mm/min. The surface roughness variation with the tool
diameter is shown in Figure 9 indicating that surface roughness changes from 0.353 m to
0.452 m as the tool diameter changing from 7.30 mm to 9.20 mm. The contour graph,
Figure 10 indicates very weak interaction between Speed and Tool diameter which is obvious
form the straight contour lines.
Table 4: ANOVA for Surface Roughness (SR).
Source
Sum of
Squares
df*
Mean
Square
F
Value
p-value
Model
A-Speed
B-Feed
C-Tool Dia.
AB
AC
BC
Residual
Lack of Fit
Pure Error
Total
0.188
0.109
0.008
0.065
0.001
0.003
0.002
0.042
0.018
0.025
0.230
6
1
1
1
1
1
1
19
11
8
25
0.031
0.109
0.008
0.065
0.001
0.003
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.003
14.069
48.835
3.547
29.438
0.304
1.293
0.998
< 0.0001
< 0.0001
0.0751
< 0.0001
0.5876
0.2696
0.3303
Significant
0.523
0.8422
Not Significant
*df: degrees of freedom
456

REVIEW ARTICLE
ISSN - 0976-4259
Figure 7: Variation of Surface Roughness with Speed
Figure 8: Variation of Surface Roughness with Feed
Figure 9: Variation of Surface Roughness with Tool Diameter
457

REVIEW ARTICLE
ISSN - 0976-4259
Figure 10: Contour plot of Surface Roughness with Speed and Tool Diameter
4. Prediction Performance and Optimization
4.1 Prediction Performance of the RSM model
In order to test the model against new input data and to validate it, another set of experiments
has been conducted. The experimental conditions for this set used are different from one used
for developing the RSM model. The experimental test data set and corresponding RSM
model prediction are shown in Table 5. It is found that the prediction errors are not high and
the prediction performance of the model is quite satisfactory. Prediction error in the table is
defined as,
Pr edicted Error =
Experimental Re sult Pr edicted Re sult

100
Experimental Re sult
(7 )
Table 5: Prediction Performance of the RSM model

Too
l
Dia.
Speed
Fee
d
mm
mm/mi
n
2400
3300
4900
2400
3300
4900
7.3
9.2
DE
Predicte
d
DE
Variation
SR
Experi
mental
SR
Predicte
d
SR
Variati
on
mm
DE
Exper
iment
al
m
95
145
185
95
145
185
426.23
458.26
468.98
495.54
502.54
498.25
438.15
460.65
474.77
498.29
498.90
494.48
2.7951
0.5229
1.2351
0.5541
0.7228
0.7561
0.48
0.42
0.31
0.51
0.49
0.40
0.46
0.39
0.29
0.54
0.49
0.40
5.31
6.03
7.06
4.98
0.19
1.12
458

REVIEW ARTICLE
ISSN - 0976-4259
4.2 Optimization by the desirability approach

The desirability function approach is one of the most widely used methods in industry for the
optimization of multiple response processes. It is based on the idea that the "quality" of a
product or process that has multiple quality characteristics, with one of them outside of some
"desired" limits, is completely unacceptable. The method finds operating conditions x that
provide the "most desirable" response values. For each response Yi(x), a desirability function
di(Yi) assigns numbers between 0 and 1 to the possible values of Yi, with di(Yi) = 0
representing a completely undesirable value of Yi and di(Yi) = 1 representing a completely
desirable or ideal response value. The individual desirabilities are then combined using the
geometric mean, which gives the overall desirability D:
1
D = [d 1 (Y1 ) d 2 (Y2 ) ................... d k (Yk )]k
(8)
With k denoting the number of responses. Notice that if any response Yi is completely
undesirable (di(Yi) = 0), then the overall desirability is zero. In practice, fitted response values
Yi are used in place of the Yi. Depending on whether a particular response Yi is to be
maximized, minimized, or assigned a target value, different desirability functions di(Yi) can
be used, (Derringer G., Suich R., 1980). The response optimization by desirability function is
quite popular and harnessed by most standard softwares packages like Design Expert,
Minitab etc. The desirability approach essentially consists of a systematic procedure to
conduct experiments and fit response models for all k responses. After fitting the model the
next step consists of defining individual desirability functions for each response by setting the
constraints. Finally maximization of the overall desirability D with respect to the
controllable factors carried out using the described method. In the present study tool diameter
has been set as discrete parameters since tools are available in particular discrete range. Two
tool diameters viz. M8 and M10 are used for the study therefore attempt has been made to
optimize the process parameters viz. Speed and Feed based on two responses viz.
Dimensional Error and Surface Roughness. The constraints are set as shown in the table 6.
The simultaneous optimization of dimensional error and surface roughness has been sought.
Table 6: Constraint setting for optimization problem
Name
Unit
Goal
is in range
is in range
is equal to 7.30/9.20
minimize
Lower
Limit
2500
71.36
7.3
410
Upper
Limit
4500
198.64
9.2
530
Speed (A)
Feed (B)
Tool Dia. (C)
Dimensional Error
(DE)
Surface
Roughness (SR)
RPM
mm/min
mm
m
m
minimize
0.25
0.61
The results obtained for the friction drilling of AISI 1015 having thickness of 1mm using two
tools 7.30 mm (M8) and 9.20 mm (M10) along with their desirability are presented in table 6.
From the table 6 it is clear that the friction drilling of AISI 1015 sheet having 1 mm thickness
can be best done using M8 tool having the process parameters as speed 4500 RPM and feed
459

REVIEW ARTICLE
ISSN - 0976-4259
71.36 mm/min resulting in desirability of 0.98. The desirability of 0.55 for M10 tool indicates
poor performance of M10 tool for 1mm thick sheet of AISI 1015 hence this tool is not
recommended.
Table 7: Set of solutions and their desirability
Tool
Dia.
Speed
Feed
Dimensional
error
Surface
Roughness
Desirability
mm
7.30
(M8)
9.20
(M10)
rpm
4500.00
mm/min
71.36
m
408.70
m
0.26
%
0.98
4500.00
71.36
473.38
0.38
0.55
5. Conclusion
The experimental study involves the 26 different conditions to drill holes in AISI 1015 sheet
material 1 mm thick using friction drilling. Mathematical models were developed to find the
relationship among commonly used input variables and their interaction on the quality of the
hole produced in form drilling process. All the input parameters and only significant
interactions are considered in the model. The ANOVA tables are presented and the model
adequacy has been carried out. It is evident from the analysis that the speed has the less effect
on dimensional error though it has considerable effect on surface roughness. The speed
increases the frictional heat causing more plasticity and hence better movement of the
material resulting in lower dimensional error whereas surface roughness found to be
considerably varying with the speed. With the increase of speed from 2500-4500 RPM the
surface roughness surface roughness decreases from 0.536 m to 0.341 m. Dimensional
error found to be proportionally increasing from 452 m to 497 m, when feed varies linearly
from 71.36 to 198.64 mm/min. The surface roughness observed to be linearly increasing from
0.342 m to 0.446 m when feed increased from 71.36 to 198.64 mm/min. Tool diameter
affects both the dimensional error as well as surface roughness negatively indicating proper
selection of tool diameter. The interaction effect of tool diameter and feed found to have
significant effect on dimensional error. There is no significant interaction term found for
surface roughness. Validity of proposed model has been carried out by conducting another set
of experiments suggesting that the percent variations from the predicted model are less than
10% and the models presented here can be used to navigate the design space. Optimization
using Desirability Function has been used to optimize the machining conditions for the
friction drilling of AISI 1015 sheet 1 mm thick. The optimum setting which results in
maximum desirability of 0.98 found to be as speed 4500 rpm, feed 71.36 mm/min and tool
diameter equals to 7.3 mm.
6. References
1. Agapiou, J.S (1994), evaluation of the effect of high speed machining on tapping,
Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering Technology, 116, pp 457462.
2. Derringer, G., Suich R (1980), simultaneous Optimization of Several Response
variables, Journal of Quality Technology, 12(4), pp 214-219.
460

REVIEW ARTICLE
ISSN - 0976-4259
3. Flowdrill, (2008), http://www. flowdrill.com, accessed during September, 2011.

4. Formdrill, (2009), http://www.formdrill.eu, , accessed during September, 2011.
5. Chow H.M., Lee S.M., Yang L.D (2008), machining characteristic study of friction
drilling on AISI 304 stainless steel, Journal of materials processing technology, 207,
pp 180186.
6. Montgomery D.C (2001), design and Analysis of Experiment, Fifth edition, Wiley
publications New Delhi.
7. Miller S.F., Blau, P., and Shih, A. J (2005), microstructural Alterations Associated
with Friction Drilling of Steel, Aluminum, and Titanium, Journal materials
Engineering and performance, 14(5), pp 647653.
8. Miller S.F., Wang H., Li R., Shih A.J (2006), experimental and numerical analysis
of the friction drilling process, ASME Journal of Manufacturing Science and
Engineering, 128, pp 803-810.
9. Miller S.F.,Tao J., Shih A.J (2006), friction drilling of cast metals, International
Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture, 46 (12-13), pp 1526-1535.
10. Miller S.F., Shih A.J (2007), tool wear in friction drilling, International Journal of
Machine Tools and Manufacture, 47 (10), pp 1636-1645.
11. Miller S.F., Shih A.J (2007), thermo-Mechanical Finite Element Modeling of the
Friction Drilling Process, Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering, 129,
pp 532 -538.
12. Lee S. M., Chow H. M., Huang F. Y. and Yan B. H (2008), friction drilling of
austenitic stainless steel by uncoated and PVD AlCrN- and TiAlN coated tungsten
carbide tools, International Journal of Machine Tools and manufacture, 49, pp 8188
461

Experimental Investigations and Multi-Objective Optimization of Friction Drilling Process On AISI 1015

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Experimental Investigations and Multi-Objective Optimization of Friction Drilling Process On AISI 1015

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF APPLIED ENGINEERING RESEARCH, DINDIGUL