MIN-400B (B.

Tech Project 2018-19)

Machinability and Engineering Simulation of

Al - 4.5% Cu - 3% TiB2 Composite

Members Advisor
Eklavya Koshta (15119015) Dr Pradeep Kumar Jha
Md Tabrez Alam (15119030) Associate Professor, MIED
Vinod Kumar (15119060) IIT Roorkee
 Motivation
•Research work in the field of advance material to develop lightweight, high
performance Metal Matrix Composite (MMC)

•Aluminium as matrix material because of its unique combination of good

corrosion resistance, low electrical resistance and excellent mechanical
properties

•TiB2 emerging as outstanding reinforcement because of high melting point, high

hardness, high elastic modulus & good thermal stability

•Experimental work is expensive and time consuming

•Simulation Model eases the task

Fig: Microstructure of Al-TiB2 powder particle

Objectives
1. To investigate the influence of different cutting parameters on Cutting Force during Turning Process of Al - 4.5%
Cu – TiB2 composite material
2. To develop simulation models of the Turning experiments
 Detailed Work Plan
•Fabrication of Composite: addition of two salts (K2TiF6 and KBF4) to Aluminum -
Copper (Al - Cu alloy) that reacts to produce required composite using stir casting
method
(Al - Cu + KBF4 + K2TiF6 Al + Al2Cu + TiB2 + KAlF4 + Heat)

•Experimental work: Turning operation on lathe machine using ceramic tool to

determine cutting forces and surface roughness under varying range of cutting
speed, feed rate and depth of cut (DOC) by using dynamometer convergence

•CAD modeling and simulation: Performing the turning simulation on ANSYS

Workbench to create a simulation model
Comparison of Results

•Comparison of results from the two methods

Work Flow Diagram of Project

Fabrication Process of Composite Material

Two salts (K2TiF6 and KBF4 ) Pure Copper Chips

Cutting of Al- Block Pure Aluminum Pieces Mold

Fabrication of Composite Material

Place the Mold Mold Preheating

PID Furnace Controller Place the crucible

Fabrication of Composite Material

Adding salts Stirring

Pouring Final composite material

 Cost Analysis

S.N. Material Name Quantity (Grams) Price (Rs. per Kg) Total (Rs.)

1 KBF4 1000 3500 3500

2 K2TiF6 1000 3700 3700

3 Cryolite 50 1000 50

4 Degasser 40 800 40

5 Cutting Tool 1 box of 12 tool bits Rs.1000 per piece 12000/-

Approx Total Cost (Rs.) 19290/-

Fabrication Process of Composite Material: Ingredients Composition

S.N. Materials Total Quantity (gm) 3% TiB2 (gm)

1 Aluminum 4000 1000

2 Copper 180 45

3 KBF4 1000 110.74

4 K2TiF6 1000 104.74

5 Cryolite 50 10 to 12

6 Degasser 50 6 to 8
 Turning Experiment of Al - 4.5%Cu - 3%TiB2 on a Lathe Machine

Turning Operation (Front View)

Turning Operation (Top View) Tool bit after Turning Turned Workpiece
Turning Experiment of Al - 4.5%Cu - 3%TiB2 on a Lathe Machine

Levels

Parameters Units
Low Medium High

Cutting Speed m/min 25 75 125

Feed rate mm/rev 0.05 0.10 0.14

Depth of Cut mm 0.50 0.75 1.00

Machining parameters and their levels

 Dynamometer and Computer Operation

Collection of data from computer system using Dynoware Software and Dynamometer
 Data of Experiments (Al - 4.5%Cu - 3%TiB2)
Run Cutting Speed Feed rate Depth of cut F(z) F(y) F(x)
Order (m/min) (mm/rev) (mm) (N) (N) (N)

1 25 0.05 0.50 80.36 12.7 -9.96

2 25 0.05 0.75 87.92 16.8 -9.97

3 25 0.05 1.00 98.38 33.93 -9.89

4 25 0.10 0.50 95.51 27.59 -10.24

5 25 0.10 0.75 104.78 18.11 -10.49

6 25 0.10 1.00 113.32 77.66 -10.16

7 25 0.14 0.50 122.03 44.43 -10.32

8 25 0.14 0.75 118.87 63.63 -10.33

9 25 0.14 1.00 127.54 14.34 -10.25

10 75 0.05 0.50 78.65 5.05 -10.39

11 75 0.05 0.75 89.2 22.3 -10.32

12 75 0.05 1.00 92.38 23.08 -10.32

13 75 0.10 0.50 90.27 9.48 -10.43

14 75 0.10 0.75 99.38 8.29 -10.49

 Data of Experiments (Al - 4.5%Cu - 3%TiB2)
Run Cutting Speed Feed rate Depth of cut F(z) F(y) F(x)
Order (m/min) (mm/rev) (mm) (N) (N) (N)

15 75 0.10 1.00 108.08 13.18 -10.38

16 75 0.14 0.50 106.45 2.9 -10.48

17 75 0.14 0.75 115.94 1.74 -10.46

18 75 0.14 1.00 124.52 18.22 -10.44

19 125 0.05 0.50 72.74 19.58 -10.41

20 125 0.05 0.75 81.49 11.24 -10.43

21 125 0.05 1.00 86.39 24.06 -10.42

22 125 0.10 0.50 83.47 26.35 -10.45

23 125 0.10 0.75 93.88 2.017 -10.5

24 125 0.10 1.00 102.72 3.91 -10.46

25 125 0.14 0.50 100.61 5.84 -10.51

26 125 0.14 0.75 110.14 13.41 -10.53

27 125 0.14 1.00 119.84 15.7 -10.5

 Behaviour of Cutting Force w.r.t. Cutting Speed

Cutting force vs cutting speed at constant feed rate (0.05 mm/rev) & constant depth of cut (0.75mm)
 Behaviour of Cutting Force w.r.t. Feed rate

Cutting force vs feed rate at constant cutting speed (25 m/min) & depth of cut (0.5mm)
 Behaviour of Cutting Force w.r.t. Depth of Cut

Cutting force vs depth of cut at constant cutting speed (75 m/min) & feed rate (0.05mm/rev)
 Chips Formation

Condition 1: N = 203 RPM (LOW) Condition 2: N = 585 RPM (MEDIUM)

Condition 3: N = 995 RPM (HIGH)

 CAD Modelling

Fig: CAD Assembly (Side View)

Fig: CAD Assembly (Isometric View)
 Simulation Settings

Module Selection on ANSYS Properties of Tool Bit Properties of Trial Workpiece Selection of Material for W/P

Selection of Material for Tool Coordinate System Addition to W/P Displacement Constraint on W/P
 Simulation Settings

Displacement Constraint on Tool Body Mesh Generation of W/P and Tool

Body Interactions Settings Trial Result: Chip Formation (Isometric View) Trial Result: Chip Formation (Front View)
 Material Properties and Failure Criterion
STRESS- STRAIN CURVE OF SAMPLE

UTM Testing Sample

S. No. Parameters Value

1 Extension at Break [mm] 2.54

UTM Testing Machine

2 Maximum Load [kN] 3.079

3 Yield Stress [MPa] 224.28

4 Tensile Strength [MPa] 326.73

5 Tensile strain % [%] 3.56

6 Area Reduction -284.47

7 Modulus (E-modulus) [MPa] 78134.58

8 Diameter [mm] 5.10

9 Rate 1 [mm/min] 1.00000

 Model 1:Parameter Settings

Parameters Values

Velocity 203 RPM

Feed 0.14 mm/rev

Depth of Cut 1.5mm

Mesh Size 0.8mm

Analysis Time 1.47s

Fig: Meshed Assembly

 Model 1:Results (Chip Formation)

Parameter Remarks

Chip Continuous Chip

Fig:Chip Formation (Front Orientation)

Fig:Chip Formation (Isometric Orientation)

 Model 1:Results (Cutting Force Graph)

Experimental Force Simulation Force Error

127.54 N 250.11 N +96.10%

Graph: Force vs Time

 Model 2:Parameter Settings

Parameters Values

Velocity 203 RPM

Feed 0.14 mm/rev

Depth of Cut 1.5 mm

Mesh Size 0.4 mm

Analysis Time 1.47 s

Fig: Meshed Assembly

 Model2:Results(Chip Formation)

Parameter Remarks

Chip Continuous curly chip

Fig:Chip Formation (Front Orientation)

Fig: Chip Formation (Back Orientation)

 Model 2:Results(Cutting Force Graph)

Experimental Force Simulation Force Deviation

127.54 N 190.55 N +49.40%

Graph: Force vs Time

 Model 3:Parameter Settings

Parameters Values

Velocity 585 RPM

Feed 0.14mm/rev

Depth of Cut 1.5mm

Mesh Size 0.8mm

Analysis Time 0.72s

Fig: Meshed Assembly

 Model 3:Results(Chip Formation)

Parameter Remarks

Chip Continuous chip

Fig: Chip Formation (Front Orientation)

Fig: Chip Formation (Back Orientation)

Model 3:Results(Cutting Force Graph)

Experimental Force Simulation Force Error

124.52 N 188.03 N + 51.00%

Graph: Force vs Time

 Model 4:Parameter Settings

Parameters Values

Velocity 585 RPM

Feed 1 rev/sec

Depth of Cut 1.5mm

Mesh Size 0.4mm

Analysis Time 0.52s

Fig: Meshed Assembly

 Model 4:Results(Chip Formation)

Parameter Remarks

Chip Continuous straight chip

Fig:Chip Formation (Front Orientation)

Fig:Chip Formation (Isometric Orientation) Fig: Shear Zone

Model 4:Results (Cutting Force Graph)

Experimental Force Simulation Force Error

124.43 141.43 +13.66

Graph: Force vs Time

 Model 5:Parameter Settings

Parameters Values

Velocity 995 RPM

Feed 0.14mm/rev

Depth of Cut 1.5mm

Mesh Size 0.8mm

Analysis Time 1.47s

Fig: Meshed Assembly

 Model 5:Results (Chip Formation)

Parameter Remarks

Chip Discontinuous Chip

Fig: Chip Formation (Front Orientation)

Fig: Chip Formation (Back Orientation)

Model 5:Results(Cutting Force Graph)

Experimental Force Simulation Force Error

119.84 N 203.37 N +69.70%

Graph: Force vs Time

 Model 6:Parameter Settings

Parameters Values

Velocity 995 RPM

Feed 0.14 mm/rev

Depth of Cut 1.5mm

Mesh Size 0.4mm

Analysis Time 1.47s

Fig: Meshed Assembly

 Model 6:Results(Chip Formation)

Parameter Remarks

Chip Discontinuous Chip

Fig: Chip Formation (Front Orientation)

Fig: Chip Formation (Back Orientation)

Model 6:Results(Cutting Force Graph)

Experimental Force Simulation Force Error

119.84 N 161.76 N +34.97%

Graph: Force vs Time

 Convergence of Cutting Force

Cutting Forces

Machining Cutting Speed (V) = 995 RPM Cutting Speed (V) = 585 RPM Cutting Speed (V) = 203 RPM
Parameters Feed (f) = 0.14 mm/rev Feed (f) = 0.14 mm/rev Feed (f) = 0.14 mm/rev
DOC = 1.5 mm DOC = 1.5 mm DOC = 1.5 mm

Meshing Values Force Value (N) % Deviation Force Value (N) % Deviation Force Value (N) % Deviation

Coarse (0.8 mm) 203.37 188.03 250.10

Medium (0.4 mm) 161.76 -20.46 141.43 -24.78 190.55 -23.81

Fine (0.2 mm) - - - - - -

Experimental 119.84 124.77 127.54

Values
 Future Prospects

1. Ongoing simulations of Turning to derive “Reaction Forces” for Fine (0.2mm ) Al - 4.5%Cu - 3%
TiB2 Composite

2. Report Writing
 References
1. R. Suresh, S. Basavarajappa, G.L. Samuel. Predictive modeling of cutting forces and tool wear in hand turning using responses surface
methodology.Procedia Engineering 38(2012)73-81

2. R. Rosmamuhamadani, S. Sulaiman, M. A. Azmah Hanim, M.I.S. Ismail, M. K. Talari, and Sabrina M. Yahaya. Corrosion Characterisation of
Al - Cu Reinforced In - Situ TiB2. MATEC Web of Conferences 7 01001 (2016) TiB2

3. Rityuj Singh Parihar, Raj Kumar Sahu, G Srinivasu. Finite element Analysis of Cutting Forces Generated in Turning Process using Deform 3D
Software. 5th International & 26th All India Manufacturing Technology, Design and Research Conference (AIMTDR 2014) December
12th–14th, 2014, IIT Guwahati, Assam, India

4. M.Kumara Swamy, B.Padma Raju, B.Ravi Teja. Modeling and Simulation of Turning Operation. IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil
Engineering (IOSR-JMCE) ISSN: 2278-1684 Volume 3, Issue 6 (Nov-Dec. 2012), PP 19-26

5. Jin-feng NIE, Fang WANG,Yu-sheng Ll, Yan-fang LIU, Xiang-fa LIU, Yong-hao ZHAO. Microstructure and mechanical properties of
Al−TiB2/TiC in situ composites improved via hot rolling. Trans. Nonferrous Met. Soc. China 27(2017) 2548−2554

6. Fei CHEN, Tong-min WANG, Zong-ning CHEN, Feng MAO, Qiang HAN, Zhi-qiang CAO. Microstructure, mechanical properties and wear
behaviour of Zn−Al−Cu−TiB2 in situ composites. Trans. Nonferrous Met. Soc. China 25(2015) 103−111
 References
7. Mechiri Sandeep Kumar, Rajasekhar Reddy S, V. Vasu.Assistant Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering, NIT Warangal,
Telangana-506004. A 3-D Simulation and Experimental Study of Cutting Forces in Turning Inconel-718. Proceedings 4 (2017) 9942–9945.

8. F. Salvatore, S. Saad, H. Hamdi. Modeling and simulation of tool wear during the cutting process. 14th CIRP Conference on Modeling of
Machining Operations (CIRP CMMO).

9. Rajiv Kumar Yadav, Kumar Abhishek, Siba Sankar Mahapatra. A simulation approach for estimating flank wear and material removal rate in
turning of Inconel 718. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory 52 (2015) 1–14.

10. Mingyang Wu, Yongbin Gao, Yaonan Cheng, Bo Wang, Tingyu Huo. Carbon fiber composite materials finite element simulation analysis of
cutting force. 9th International Conference on Digital Enterprise Technology -DET2016 -”Intelligent manufacturing in Knowledge Economy
Era.

11. CHEN Zhuo, QIN Lu-fang, and YANG Li-juan. Cutting Force Simulation of Titanium based on DEFORM-3D. 3rd International Conference on
Material, Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering (IC3ME 2015).

12. Ahmad Lutfi Anis, Rosmamuhammadani Ramli, Widyani Darham, Azlan Zakaria and Mahesh Kumar Talari. Microstructure and mechanical
properties investigation of in situ TiB2 and ZrB2 reinforced Al-4Cu composites. IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 114
(2016) 012120.
THANK YOU !!