CHAPTER - 3

EXPERIMENTATION

&

RESULTS AND DISCUSSON

The present investigation is to find out the optimum turning parameters during

machining of 6061 aluminium alloy of using Taguchi method.

Steps involved in the experimentation process:

 Selection of factors.

 Selection of levels and level values.

 Fixing the orthogonal array.

 Fixing the Response Characteristics.

 Conducting Experiment.

 Analysis of Results.

3.1) Selection of factors:

The factors concerned to the experiment are selected based on their relative

impact on the surface roughness. The factors considered in the experimentation are

i) Tool nose radius: The nose radius was identified as the most significant

parameter. The surface roughness value decreases with increase in nose radius.

ii) Spindle speed: As the speed increases the surface roughness produced on the

machined component will be less and it also depends on the feed rate.

iii) Feed: Surface roughness increases with increase in feed rate at lower spindle

speeds and vice versa.

iv) Depth of cut: As the speed is more and feed is less, but with increase in

depth of cut the surface roughness value will increase.

40
 v) Coolant: Use of high pressure coolant improves the surface

finish considerably. As it is evident during machining heat is produced which tends

to affect the surface properties of the work-piece making the surface rough. Use

of coolant take away this heat as well as the chips formed.

3.2) Selection of levels and level values:

The factors are also considered at different levels for generalization and more

accurate results. The number of levels considered for each factor is three to have

considerable range of variations.

For tool nose radius the levels considered are of different nose radius like

( 2mm,3mm and 4mm) for high speed steel.

For spindle speed levels chosen are 450, 710 and 1120 for the material.

Similarly the feeds considered for the experimentation are 0.2, 0.4, and 0.63mm,

the depth of cuts are taken as 0.4, 0.6, 0.8mm.

Regarding coolants as they differ from the material because of their

material properties, the levels we have taken are soluble oil and kerosene are

taken.

The various levels of various factors are selected with reference to the literature.

The medium precision turning lathe machine used for the experimentation

purpose as shown in fig 3.1 and the specifications of the machine are mentioned

below as shown,

41
Specifications:

Length Of Bed 4.5 to 6 Feet

Size 4.5 to 6 Feet

Height of Centre 8 to 10 Inches

Material Cast iron

Automatic Grade Manual

Fig: 3.1 Medium precision turning lathe machine

3.3) Surface roughness instrument:

The surface roughness measurement is done using the talysurf instrument. Which

measures the surface roughness in micron meters (μm).

We are considering the roughness values as RMS values.

The instruments which are shown in fig:3.2 & 3.3 are the instruments used to

determine the surface roughness value.

42
 Fig: 3.2 Talysurf instrument Fig: 3.3 Probe of the roughness
measuring device

Then the surface roughness measuring instrument is set and the roughness values

of the machined specimen is measured and noted.

3.4) Fixing the orthogonal array:

As per the taguchi methodology, depending up on the number of factors an

orthogonal array should be chosen as an inner array. In the present experiment, L18

array is chosen as the orthogonal array.

The orthogonal array has 10 degrees of freedom (no.of levels - 1).

The orthogonal array with five factors and three levels are taken as shown below

in table 3.1 and with its actual levels and factors as shown in table 3.2.

43
 1 2 3 4 5

1 1 1 1 1 1

2 1 2 2 2 2

3 1 3 3 3 3

4 2 1 1 2 2

5 2 2 2 3 3

6 2 3 3 1 1

7 3 1 2 1 3

8 3 2 3 2 1

9 3 3 1 3 2

10 1 1 3 3 2

11 1 2 1 1 3

12 1 3 2 2 1

13 2 1 2 3 1

14 2 2 3 1 2

15 2 3 1 2 3

16 3 1 3 2 3

17 3 2 1 3 1

18 3 3 2 1 2

Table 3.1 Orthogonal array

44
 Nose radius Speed Feed Depth of cut coolant

1 2 450 0.2 0.4 Sol oil

2 2 710 0.4 0.6 Kerosene

3 2 1120 0.63 0.8 kerosene

4 3 450 0.2 0.6 kerosene

5 3 710 0.4 0.8 kerosene

6 3 1120 0.63 0.4 Sol oil

7 4 450 0.4 0.4 Kerosene

8 4 710 0.63 0.6 Sol oil

9 4 1120 0.2 0.8 kerosene

10 2 450 0.63 0.8 kerosene

11 2 710 0.2 0.4 kerosene

12 2 1120 0.4 0.6 Sol oil

13 3 450 0.4 0.8 Sol oil

14 3 710 0.63 0.4 Kerosene

15 3 1120 0.2 0.6 Kerosene

16 4 450 0.63 0.6 kerosene

17 4 710 0.2 0.8 Sol oil

18 4 1120 0.4 0.4 kerosene

Table 3.2 L18 orthogonal array with its actual levels and factors

45
 3.5) Response characteristics (surface roughness):

In this we are going to measure the surface roughness of the machined specimen.

We are considering the roughness values as RMS values.

Nose radius Speed Feed Depth of cut coolant Ra1 Ra2

1 2 450 0.2 0.4 Sol oil 13.108 12.982

2 2 710 0.4 0.6 Kerosene 20.631 22.269

3 2 1120 0.63 0.8 kerosene 27.266 28.209

4 3 450 0.2 0.6 kerosene 12.97 12.846

5 3 710 0.4 0.8 kerosene 27.334 27.001

6 3 1120 0.63 0.4 Sol oil 28.998 29.503

7 4 450 0.4 0.4 Kerosene 27.719 26.132

8 4 710 0.63 0.6 Sol oil 29.301 28.520

9 4 1120 0.2 0.8 kerosene 12.741 12.908

10 2 450 0.63 0.8 kerosene 29.859 28.035

11 2 710 0.2 0.4 kerosene 12.452 13.069

12 2 1120 0.4 0.6 Sol oil 27.934 28.532

13 3 450 0.4 0.8 Sol oil 25.765 25.023

14 3 710 0.63 0.4 Kerosene 29.349 29.946

15 3 1120 0.2 0.6 Kerosene 12.132 11.833

16 4 450 0.63 0.6 kerosene 27.352 28.309

17 4 710 0.2 0.8 Sol oil 12.593 11.849

18 4 1120 0.4 0.4 kerosene 27.342 27.439

Table 3.3 Roughness values for each operation

46
Roughness values for each operation as shown in table 3.3

Nose radi Speed Feed Depth of cut coolant MSD S/N

us

1 2 450 0.2 0.4 Sol oil 176.88 -22.476

2 2 710 0.4 0.6 Kerosene 438.39 -26.418

3 2 1120 0.63 0.8 kerosene 780.47 -28.923

4 3 450 0.2 0.6 kerosene 172.38 -22.364

5 3 710 0.4 0.8 kerosene 727.44 -28.617

6 3 1120 0.63 0.4 Sol oil 848.8 -29.288

7 4 450 0.4 0.4 Kerosene 712.81 -28.529

8 4 710 0.63 0.6 Sol oil 837.31 -29.228

9 4 1120 0.2 0.8 kerosene 166.84 -22.223

10 2 450 0.63 0.8 kerosene 837.53 -29.230

11 2 710 0.2 0.4 kerosene 164.27 -22.155

12 2 1120 0.4 0.6 Sol oil 792.81 -28.991

13 3 450 0.4 0.8 Sol oil 622.23 -27.939

14 3 710 0.63 0.4 Kerosene 854.63 -29.317

15 3 1120 0.2 0.6 Kerosene 150.06 -21.762

16 4 450 0.63 0.6 kerosene 773.43 -28.884

17 4 710 0.2 0.8 Sol oil 148.82 -21.726

18 4 1120 0.4 0.4 kerosene 745.68 -28.725

Table 3.4 MSD AND S/N VALUES

47
 The roughness values of the each operation are shown as below, After measuring

the surface roughness of the component, then we need to calculate the Mean Square

Displacement (MSD) and Signal to Noise ratio (S/N) analysis for each operation.

Formula’s used:

MSD = (Ra12 +Ra22 +……+Ran2)/n

S/N = -10log(MSD)

Hence the values for the each operation is done as shown in table 3.4.

3.6) Response graphs:

i) Influence of tool nose radius:

The surface roughness of the machined component is less at level 1 when

compared to the other two levels as shown in fig 3.4.

Fig:3.4 Influence of tool nose radius on surface roughness

48
ii) Influence of speed:

The surface roughness of the machined component is less at level 2 when

compared to the other two levels as shown in fig 3.5.

Fig:3.5Influence of speed on surface roughness

49
iii) Influence of feed:

The surface roughness of the machined component is less at level 1 when

compared to the other two levels as shown in fig 3.6

The feed is the most important factor, which influences on the surface

roughness of the material.

Fig:3.6 Influence of feed on surface roughness

50
iv) Influence of depth of cut:

The surface roughness of the machined component is less at level 1

when compared to the other two levels as shown in fig 3.7

Fig:3.7 Influence of depth of cut on surface roughness

51
v) Influence of coolant:

The surface roughness of the machined component is less at level 2 when

compared to the other two levels as shown in fig 3.8

Fig:3.8 Influence of coolant on surface roughness

52
3.7) Optimum condition obtained:

Optimum condition obtained are

i) Tool nose radius at level 1: 2mm

ii) Speed at level 2: 710 RPM

iii) Feed at level 1: 0.2mm

iv) Depth of cut at level 1:0.4mm

v) Coolant at level 2: Kerosene.

It is observed that feed is the significant parameter affecting surface finish.

53
 CHAPTER 4

CONCLUSION:

Taguchi method has been used to optimize the turning process parameters of

6061 Aluminium alloy for better surface finish. It is observed that Feed is the most

significant factor.

Optimum condition obtained

Tool nose radius at level 1: 2mm

Speed at level 2: 710 RPM

Feed at level 1: 0.2mm

Depth of cut at level 1:0.4mm

Coolant at level 2: Kerosene.

54
REFERENCES:

1). J.D. Thiele, S.N. Melkote, Effect of cutting edge geometry and work piece

hardness on surface generation in the finish hard turning of AISI 52100 steel,

J. Mater. Process. Technol. 94 (1999) 216–226.

2). A. Mittal, M. Mehta, Surface finish prediction models for fine turning, Int. J. Prod.

Res. 26 (12) (1988) 1861–1876.

3). R.M. Sundaram, B.K. Lambert, Mathematical models to predict surface finish in

fine turning of steel, Part 1, Int. J. Prod. Res. 19 (1981) 547–556.

4). R.M. Sundaram, B.K. Lambert, Mathematical models to predict surface finish in

fine turning of steel, Part 2, Int. J. Prod. Res. 19 (5) (1981) 557–564.

5). M.Y. Noordin, V.C. Venkatesh, S. Sharif, S. Elting, A. Abdullah, Application of

response surface methodology in describing the performance of coated carbide tools

when turning AISI 1045 steel, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 145 (2004) 46–58.

6). P.V.S. Suresh, P.V. Rao, S.G. Deshmukh, A genetic algorithmic approach for

optimization of surface roughness prediction model, Int. J. Mach. Tools & Manuf. 42

(2002) 675–680.

7). W.H. Yang, Y.S. Tarng, Design optimization of cutting parameters for turning

operations based on Taguchi method, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 84 (1998) 112–129.

8). I.A. Choudhury, M.A. El- Baradie, Tool life prediction model by design

of experiments for turning high strength steel, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 77 (1998)

319–326.

9). P.M. Escalona, Z. Cassier, Influence of critical cutting speed on the surface finish

of turned steel, Wear 218 (1998) 103–109.

55
10). C.X. (Jack) Feng, X. Wang, Development of empirical models for surface

roughness prediction in finish turning, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 20 (2002)

348–356.

11). J.P. Davim, A note on the determination of optimal cutting conditions for surface

finish obtained in turning using design of experiments, J. Mater. Process. Technol.

116 (2001) 305–308.

56