Sci Eng Compos Mater 2018; 25(2): 213–228
Review
Ashish Kumar Srivastava*, Amit Rai Dixit and Sandeep Tiwari
A review on the intensification of metal matrix
composites and its nonconventional machining
DOI 10.1515/secm-2015-0287
Received August 6, 2015; accepted May 13, 2016; previously published
online October 18, 2016
Abstract: Metal matrix composites (MMCs) are the new-
generation advanced materials that have excellent
mechanical properties, such as high specific strength,
strong hardness, and strong resistance to wear and corro-
sion. All these qualities make MMCs suitable material in
the manufacture of automobiles and aircraft. The machin-
ing of these materials is still difficult due to the abrasive
nature of the reinforced particles and hardness of MMCs.
The conventional machining of MMCs results in high tool
wear and slow removal of materials, thereby increasing the
overall machining cost. The nonconventional machining
of these materials, on the contrary, ensures much better
performance. This paper reviews various research works
on the development of MMCs and the subsequent hybrid
composites and evaluates their performances. Further, it
discusses the influence of the process parameters of con-
ventional and nonconventional machining on the perfor-
mance of MMCs. At the end, it identifies the research gaps
and future scopes for further investigations in this field.
Keywords: abrasive water jet (AWJ) machining; laser beam
machining; metal matrix composite (MMCs); titanium
metal matrix composite (TiMMCs); wire-EDM.
1 Introduction
The automobile industry has been facing a growing
demand for fuel-efficient vehicles to reduce energy con-
sumption and air pollution. In this context, the devel-
opment of metal matrix composites (MMCs) has been
a major step forward. The upgraded features of MMCs,
*Corresponding author: Ashish Kumar Srivastava, Indian Institute
of Technology (ISM) Dhanbad, Jharkhand 826004, India; and Noida
Institute of Engineering and Technology, G.B. Nagar 201306, India,
e-mail: ashish7185@gmail.com
Amit Rai Dixit: Indian Institute of Technology (ISM) Dhanbad,
Jharkhand 826004, India
Sandeep Tiwari: Amity University, G.B. Nagar 201306, India
such as light weight, high strength, and better corrosion
resistance, make them highly suitable for use in nuclear,
electronics, automobile, and aviation industries. As a
result of their better performance due to their light weight
and greater fuel efficiency, MMCs have replaced heavier
materials (steel or copper) [1, 2]. Due to their high demand
in the global market, the production of MMCs becomes
2700 metric tons approximately in the year 2008 and it
increases continuously in the automobile and aerospace
industries [3]. Figure 1 shows the average volume produc-
tion of MMCs and its value in the global market [3].
MMCs require the embedding of reinforcing fibers
into a metallic matrix. This has to be carried out either
by melting of the matrix materials or by hot pressing of
matrix into fibers [4]. Metallic matrices are reinforced with
high strength and through highly modulus phases, such
as carbides, nitrides, and oxides. Particulate MMCs have
displayed improvements in strength, wear resistance,
structural efficiency, reliability, and control of physical
properties, such as density. In the process, they ensured
improved engineering performance in comparison to the
unreinforced matrix [5]. The selection of the composites
for the production of MMCs depends on the homogeneous
distribution of the particles in the matrix alloy [6]. The
addition of two or more reinforcing materials to the base
metal in the required proportion makes hybrid MMCs. The
reinforcing materials are selected based on the required
properties in MMCs for their application. However, MMCs
perform poorly as far as the machinability is concerned
[7]. The machinability of such composite material is a very
difficult process due to the abrasive nature of the parti-
cles, hardness, as well as high tool wear. All these factors
result in high machining cost.
Conventional tool materials, such as high-speed
steel, cannot be used for the machining of hybrid MMCs,
as the cutting tool wears out rapidly. Carbides, either
plain or coated, also suffer from a significant level of tool
wear within a very short period of machining [8]. Several
researchers have observed that polycrystalline diamond
(PCD) is the only tool material that can ensure a useful
tool life during the machining of MMCs. The PCD is harder
than Al2O3 and SiC and does not have a tendency to chemi-
cally react with the work piece material. A PCD cutting tool
214      A.K. Srivastava et al.: Intensification of metal matrix composites
Figure 1: Distribution of mass and value of MMCs in the global
market. Reproduced with permission from Hindawi Publications [3].
consists of a sintered layer of micrometer-sized diamond
particles bonded with a tungsten carbide substrate.
However, the main disadvantage of a PCD tool is its high
cost due to the bonded diamond particles [9]. The overall
machining cost with the PCD tools is still high in compari-
son to any of the conventional machining methods.
The nonconventional machining methods provide
better machining properties compared to the conventional
machining methods [10]. However, most of these noncon-
ventional machining processes need further investigation
to attain the “optimal” machining conditions and cost effi-
ciency along with high process reliability and reproduc-
ibility [10]. The optimization of the cutting parameters is
the key component in the planning of the machining pro-
cesses [11]. For this purpose, quantitative methods have
been developed, which would ensure the minimization of
cost or the maximization of profit. In this respect, different
techniques have been proposed, such as differential cal-
culus, regression analysis, linear programming, geometric
and stochastic programming, and computer simulation
[11]. This paper undertakes a survey of the development
process of MMCs since the last decade and gives an account
of the evolution in the machining process of these materi-
als. At the end, this paper points out the lacunas that still
remain in achieving optimal machining of MMCs [10].
2 Materials and methods
The development of MMCs with their unique character-
istics has brought about revolutionary changes in the
research on advanced materials. The most common matrix
materials for MMCs are aluminum and its alloys. The fab-
rication of aluminum-based MMCs is basically done by
the liquid metallurgy or PM route such as stir casing and
sintering. To a slighter extent, the other materials such
as titanium, magnesium, and copper are also used to
develop lightweight MMCs. The production of MMCs with
the particulate ceramic reinforcement such as SiC, B4C,
Al2O3, TiB2, TiB, and MgO is comparatively less expensive
than ­continuous fiber-reinforced MMCs. However, some
authors have reported low mechanical and other physi-
cal properties of ceramic MMCs compared to fiber MMCs.
From the last two decades, a new class of MMCs, such as
titanium MMCs (TiMMCs), is introduced in the automobile
and aircraft industries due to its excellent properties, such
as high fatigue and tool wear resistance, higher rigidity,
and temperature capability, compared to other materi-
als [12]. The most common method to develop TiMMCs
is the PM route in which the ceramic, fiber, or whisker
reinforcement is homogeneously mixed with titanium
powder matrix and sintered at a temperature range of
800°C–1200°C. Tong et al. [13] have reported the process
to develop the fully dense and compact SiC particulate-
reinforced TiMMC by consolidation through shock waves.
Their result emphasizes the effect of process variables
such as mixing of SiC particulates, impurity level, and
powder size in the newly developed Ti-MMC. Saito et al.
[14] have developed a β-TiMMC using TiB particles as rein-
forcement through the powder metallurgy (PM) route and
reported its mechanical properties such as fatigue and
tensile strength, wear resistance, and young modulus.
They also stated that the production of TiMMC through
the PM route has been done at lower cost compared to
titanium alloys. The comparative viscoplastic response
of A359/SiCp and pure A359 has been investigated by Li
et al. [15]. Hashim [16] produced MMC by a modified stir
casting method, in which he used a two-step stirring
method to upgrade the wettability of the molten metal in
the inert atmosphere. Chawla and Shen [17] studied the
behavior of MMCs in an experimental and computational
environment and compared the outcome to the results of
other researches. Further, Hashim et al. [18] also explored
the distribution of particles in MMCs. The results of their
research revealed that there are several factors in the
process of casting, such as mixing of reinforcement, inter-
action of the particles, and distribution of the particles
during solidification, which greatly influence the distri-
bution of reinforcement. Hashim et al. [19] again investi-
gated the distribution of particles by computational fluid
dynamics and finite element method. They also simulated
the fluid flow and distribution of particles in the base
metal. Kanga and Youn [20] compared the mechanical
properties of MMCs by mechanical and electromagnetic
stirring along with the reheating process for thixoforming
with various percentages of reinforcements. Feng et al. [21]
have produced a TiMMC by spark plasma sintering method
under 20 MPa pressure at 1200°C temperature by adding
 A.K. Srivastava et al.: Intensification of metal matrix composites      215

10% TiB as a reinforcement. They reported the effect of fraction of reinforcement with a reduction in the per-
sintering temperature and percentage of reinforcement centage elongation and area. The load versus elongation
volume over the mechanical properties of the developed curves for MMC Al/20% SiCp 220, 300, and 400 mesh sizes
Ti-MMC. Hamouda et  al. [22] developed an MMC of LM6 are shown in Figure 2.
alloy and observed that the tensile strength of the fabri- Altinkok et  al. [31] described the dry-sliding wear
cated composite decreases with the increasing percent- behavior of hybrid aluminum MMCs reinforced with Al2O3
age of quartz particulate reinforcement. Babu et  al. [5] and SiC particles and reported a decreased weight loss when
applied shear stress technique on the cluster of reinforced SiC powder of large grain size was added to it. Dharmpal
particles to overcome the cohesive forces and to fabricate et  al. [32] reported a significant increment of hardness in
MMC. Tjong and Mai [23] have presented an overview on the fabrication of Al 5083/SiC produced by friction stir pro-
the processing, development, and application of TiMMCs cessing. Kumar et al. [33] fabricated A359/Al2O3 MMC by the
in automotive industries. They also revealed the effect of electromagnetic stir casting method and reported increased
reinforcement type such as particulate and whiskers on hardness and tensile strength of the fabricated MMCs by
the different mechanical and microstructural properties adding the weight fraction of Al2O3. Zakaria [34] investi-
of the TiMMCs. Puviyarasan and Praveen [24] found a 30% gated the microstructural and corrosion properties of pure
increment in the microhardness of MMCs compared to aluminum/SiC composite by PM. The schematic diagram of
the base material when it was developed by friction stir cold compaction die used in their work to fabricate com-
processing with the addition of micron-sized SiC parti- posite by the PM route is shown in Figure 3. They reported
cles to A6063. Arora et  al. [25] studied the development that the composite of Al/SiC has higher density and better
process of the friction stir technology to produce the com- corrosion resistance compared to pure aluminum.
posites. They found a good processed surface at a rota- Rebba and Ramanaiahb [35] reported the fabrication
tion speed 500 rpm and transverse speed of 60 mm/min. of MMC Al2024/MOS2 by the stir casting route and carried
Asif [26] developed an aluminum composite for automo- out the scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and X-ray dif-
bile brakes. His study revealed that the aluminum-based fraction (XRD) analysis to compare its results to the base
brake pads have lower wear rate for the same coefficient alloy. The SEM images of MMC Al2024/MOS2 of their study
of friction compared to the conventional brakes. In the are shown in Figure 4.
past few years, the research and development of materi- Canakci et al. [36] used the PM technique to develop
als have been focused on the composite materials due to the composite of bronze-Cr-Ni. They reported that, while
their low fuel consumption and less emission as reported increasing the percentage of nickel, the density of com-
by Rana et al. [27]. Kumar and Venkataramaiah [28] used posite decreased, whereas high compact pressure led to
the fuzzy logic and Taguchi’s orthogonal array to develop increase in density at low porosity. Dong et al. [37] worked
MMC through friction stir casting. During the process, on the strengthening mechanism of MMCs at different
they added different proportions of reinforcements, such grain sizes reinforced with carbon nanotube. Jahedi et al.
as Al2O3, SiC, and Al3C4 in the base metals Al6063, Al6061, [38] examined the homogeneity in the microstructure of
and Al7075. The metallurgical and microstructure prop­ newly developed composite of copper and SiC under high
erties of Al7075/4% B4C were examined by Ramesh and pressure-torsion process of plastic deformation. They
Murugan [29]. Meena et  al. [30] developed Al/SiC MMC observed that the crystallographic texture was found
through stir casing in which tensile strength, hardness weaker in the composite compared to monolithic copper
(HRB), density, and impact strength increased in weight under the same working conditions. Sahraeinejad et  al.

Load (kgf) vs extension (mm) AL/20 wt% 300 Load (kgf) vs extension (mm) AL/20 wt% 400
Load (kgf) vs extension (mm) AL/20 wt% 220
mesh Sicp-MMC mesh Sicp-MMC
mesh Sicp-MMC 1200 1200
1500
1000 1000
Tensile force kgf

Tensile force kgf

Tensile force kgf

1000 800 800

600 600
500 400 400
200 200
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
Extension (mm) Extension (mm) Extension (mm)

Figure 2: Load versus elongation curve for MMC Al/20% SiCp. Reproduced with permission from Science and Education Publishing [30].
216      A.K. Srivastava et al.: Intensification of metal matrix composites
Figure 3: Schematic diagram of the cold compaction die used for
the preparation of Al/SiC composites. Reproduced with permission
from Ain Shams University (ScienceDirect) [34].
[39] developed MMC of Al5059 by the repeated friction
stir process. They used reinforcement as Al2O3, SiC, and
B4C and compare their microstructural and mechanical
­properties under different testing conditions.
2.1 E
 xpansion of MMCs
It has been observed that the addition of reinforcements
in the base metal decreases the quantity of valuable prop-
erties in the materials. To make up for the reduced prop-
erties of the composites, additional reinforced materials
are added to make it hybrid composites. Guo and Tsao
[40] used the powder densification method to develop a
hybrid MMC of aluminum reinforced with graphite and
SiC particles. An estimation of fatigue life of hybrid MMCs
by the Monte Carlo simulation model was attempted by
Achutha et  al. [41]. Reddy et  al. [42] developed a hybrid
Figure 4: SEM images of Al2024/MOS2 MMC. Reproduced with permission from Elsevier (ScienceDirect) [35].
MMC of copper-TiC-graphite by microwave processing
and concluded that the microwave processed composites
possess higher sintered and relative density as well as
higher hardness compared to the conventional methods.
Asif et  al. [43] developed hybrid aluminum MMC rein-
forced with graphite and SiC. They also investigated the
behavior of this MMC under dry sliding. In course of their
experiment, a comparison to other materials indicated a
low friction coefficient and temperature rise along with
a nominally higher wear rate. Farshad and Mahdavi [44]
fabricated a hybrid MMC of Al/Gr/SiC by the PM method.
Their study indicated that the addition of graphite reduces
the coefficient of friction along with a decrease in the
mechanical properties. On the contrary, the presence of
SiC particles increases the tensile strength and hardness,
thereby recompensing the desired properties of the com-
posite. Rino et  al. [45] reported the feasibility of hybrid
reinforcements to MMCs by the stir casting process and
indicated that they are greatly influenced by factors, such
as stirring time and speed, stirrer design, temperature
of the molten metal, and reinforcements as well as size
of the particles. Kammer et  al. [46] conducted a tensile
and compression test on Al7075 hybrid MMC reinforced
with e-glass short fibers and fly ash. Boopathi et al. [47]
developed a hybrid MMC of Al2024/SiC/fly ash and com-
pared its physical properties in the presence of SiC, fly
ash, and its mixture. Gopi et  al. [48] did a comparative
study of heat-treated Al6061/zircon sand/graphite hybrid
composite and cast Al6061. They reported a significant
improvement in its hardness and resistance from wearing.
Arun et al. [49] added SiC and fly ash in Al6061 to fabri-
cate hybrid MMC. They observed a 23.26% increment in
the ultimate tensile strength with the addition of fly ash
compared to the base metal only. Iacob et al. [50] studied
the properties of hybrid composites Al/Al2O3/graphite
and observed reduced density of the composite due to the
addition of graphite. Dora et al. [51] stirred RHA and SiC
 A.K. Srivastava et al.: Intensification of metal matrix composites      217
particles in the aluminum base metal in volume fractions
of 2, 4, 6, and 8 wt% by means of the double stir casting
process. They reported an increase in the ultimate tensile
strength, porosity, and hardness along with a decrease in
the density while increasing the volume fraction of rein-
forcement. Montalba et al. [52] produced a hybrid MMC of
AlMg5 reinforced with SiC and piezoelectric lead lantha-
num zirconate titanate (PLZT) by means of sintering and
hot extrusion at 630°C and 500°C, respectively. They con-
firmed that hot extrusion is a valid route of fabrication of
MMC and the use of piezoelectric particles enhanced the
damping properties. Shivashankar and Basavarajappa
[53] have developed a hybrid MMC of Al2219 by the stir
casting route. Boron carbide and molybdenum disulfide
were used as reinforcement in their study.
It is evident from the above review that different
MMC production techniques have been developed by
various authors since the last three decades. These
techniques have their own advantages and limitations.
The widely acceptable fabrication process for the mass
production was the stir casting of liquid metallurgy.
The composite produced with this method has compa-
rably improved the mechanical and physical properties
at high density and low cost. However, it has certain
limitations such as high interfacial reactions between
the matrix and reinforcement, cluster formation, and
settlement of reinforcement at the bottom of a cast. To
overcome these defects, double stirring was employed to
the stir casting process, which increases the wettability
of the molten slurry and stirring time to require for the
proper settlement of reinforcement and avoids cluster-
ing. Due to the increased stirring time and wettability,
some defects such as phase changes and the addition of
impurities due to stirrer material, blow holes, and poros-
ity were reported. The process was further modified and
used the electromagnetic way of stir casting with degas-
ser, which allows reinforcement to directly pour into the
vortex form in the molten slurry due to electromagnetic
stirring. The process helped to reduce the defects such as
no addition of impurities (due to the no use of mechani-
cal stirrer) and degasser helps to reduce blow holes and
porosity. Another acceptable ways of producing MMCs
are thixoforming and rheocasting route of semisolid
state. Thixoforming is similar to injection molding in
which material is heated below liquidus temperature in
the form of small chips under inert gas atmosphere. The
process has the capability of making higher accuracy
products and complex shapes but has high initial cost
and limited to low production. In the case of rheocast-
ing, the matrix material was used in the form of molten
alloy, which turns to the formation of semisolid state and
go after the high-pressure die-casting. It has excellent
properties of casting such as low cracks and shrinkages
with homogeneous microstructure and is also capable to
cast complex shapes but at high initial cost. Some of the
researchers have reported the squeeze casting method to
develop MMCs, which uses male and female die to com-
press the molten slurry. The process is capable to control
the essential parameters of casting such as fiber spacing,
pressure, and temperature of the molten material and
produces high-quality casting at low porosity and
shrinkage. The widely used solid-state way of produc-
ing MMCs is the PM route in which the blended powder
mixture of raw materials is sintered in the furnace at
temperature below the melting point of the matrix mate-
rial. The process is effectively sufficient to improve the
bonding between the matrix and the reinforcement
material, which turns to dense composite at low poros-
ity. The main disadvantage of the method is the heating
direction from outside to inside, which results in poor
microstructural and surface properties. To overcome
these defects, the microwave processing is introduced
for sintering the green compact of composite with both
magnetic and electric fields applied together. Microwave
sintering is capable to achieve high-density composite
and has better microstructural and surface property of
MMCs compared to the conventional sintering process.
The major drawback of the process is high initial cost
and very low production rate. In the solid-state route,
friction stir processing is another route to develop MMCs,
especially for aluminum, from the last few years.
2.2 Machining of MMCs
To accommodate the current demand of new, lightweight,
and hard materials in the manufacturing industries, MMCs
are being used with the help of machining by conven-
tional and nonconventional methods. The machining of
these MMCs is still an area of extensive research, as inves-
tigation is continuing for cost-efficient machining and
optimum output. Conventional techniques cause greater
tool wear due to greater hardness and abrasive nature
of the reinforced particles in MMCs. Nonconventional
machining, in this respect, provides better results and is
capable to generate complex and intricate shapes with
better surface finish and high accuracy. A various range of
nonconventional machining processes have been involved
in the machining of such type of materials depending
on the application such as thermal, mechanical, electri-
cal, and chemical energies. Prasad and Chakraborty [54]
have reported a framework shown in Figure 5 to select the
218      A.K. Srivastava et al.: Intensification of metal matrix composites

Non-traditional machining processes

Energy type Mechanical Electrochemical Chemical Thermo-electrical

Basic mechanism Erosion Ion dispacement Ablative action Vapourization Fusion

Source of Pneumatic High current Chemically High Amplified Ionized

immediate energy or hydraulic reactive voltage light material
pressure reagent

Transfer energy High High Electrolyte Environment Dielectric Vaccum Radiation Hot gases
medium velocity velocity
particles liquids

Processes USM WJM ECM CHM EDM EBM PAM

Micro-EDM
AJM AWJM ECG CNC EDM LBM
AFM ECH Die-sinking EDM Laser milling
MAF Rotary EDM Laser micro machining
ECDM Dry EDM
Electrochemical dissolution and WEDM
electrochemical erosion CNC WEDM
Micro-WEDM

Figure 5: Decision guidance framework of nontraditional processes. Reproduced with permission from Ain Shams University
(­ScienceDirect) [54].

nontraditional machining process based on the applica-
tion of material.
The following are some of the research findings on
the machining of composite materials, which will explain
the qualitative differences between the conventional and
various nonconventional machining methods.
2.2.1 Conventional machining of MMCs
The conventional machining means the method of
turning, milling, drilling, grinding, and edge trimming
applied to improve the machining performance of MMCs
under operation. Various researchers have reported the
work on the machining of composites by conventional
methods. Manna and Bhattacharyya [55] optimized the
input variables, such as feed rate and cutting speed, to
achieve a better surface finish in Al/SiC MMC during the
turning operation. Ozben et  al. [56] examined the influ-
ence of cutting speed and feed rate during the turning
operation of aluminum MMC and reported a high tool
wear rate (TWR) during the machining. The machinabil-
ity of Al2024/Al2O3 composite with coated TiN (K10) and
uncoated HX carbide tools was studied by Matin [4] to
evaluate the surface roughness, tool wear, and tool life.
Sasimurugan and Palanikumar [9] analyzed the surface
roughness of the hybrid MMC, Al6061/SiC/Al2O3, in terms
of its influence on the depth of cut and speed during
the cutting operation with lathe machines. Vignesh and
Sanjeev [57] studied the surface quality of Al/SiC/B4C
hybrid composites during the conventional machining
and concluded that the abrasive nature of the reinforced
particles is the main cause behind the tool wear. Srini-
vasan et  al. [58] evaluated the machining performance
through response surface methodology (RSM) on stir cast
in  situ LM25/Al2O3 MMC. Basavarajappaa and Davim [59]
examined the influence of graphite and SiC particles on
the chip formation and surface quality during the turning
process of Al2219/15SiC/graphite hybrid composite by dif-
ferent cutting tools. The results established better surface
finish for using coated carbide tools as against the tra-
ditional carbide tools and minimum surface roughness
for using the PCD tools. Duong et al. [60] have proposed
a new mathematical model named “chaotic tool wear”
based on the chaos theory to better understand the initial
cutting conditions, tool wear progression, and tool life
during the machining of TiMMCs. They reported that the
initial cutting speed was the most significant parameter
in deciding the tool life. Gatto et  al. [61] analyzed the
machined surface during the turning operation of MMCs.
They described the changes in the behavior of reinforce-
ment in the depth of machined surface. Boswell et al. [62]
described the effect of end milling dry cutting parameters
on MMC of Al alloy reinforced with B4C and reported that
 A.K. Srivastava et al.: Intensification of metal matrix composites      219
the better surface finish can be achieved by increasing the
feed rate and minimizing the cutting speed.
2.2.2 E
 lectrodischarge machining (EDM) and wire-EDM
machining of MMCs
In the field of nonconventional machining, EDM and wire-
EDM are the widely used methods for the machining of
hard electrically conducted materials such as MMCs due
to its tremendous potential of making intricate shapes,
holes, cavities, and external shapes. During the machin-
ing process, the controlled high-frequency electric dis-
charge is used to melt or vaporize the work material to
erode the material. Most of the authors have reported this
process as a best suitable machining process to machined
MMCs. However, the main function is to control the output
responses, because still it is a keen area of research to find
the optimized value. Muller and Monaghan [10] compared
the effect of machining parameters of EDM, abrasive water
jet (AWJ) machining, and laser cutting of MMCs. Their
study established that laser cutting is suitable for high
feed rate up to 3000 mm/min with narrow kerf width, but
the quality proves to be poor. AWJ machining is suitable
for rough cuts with no thermal damage, whereas EDM
produces craters in surface, which get bigger with an
increase in the discharged energy. Petrofes and Gadalla
[63] reviewed the shaping of advanced materials through
machining of die-sinking EDM and wire-EDM. The surface
damage of NBC and ZrO2 ceramic composites during the
EDM process was studied by Nakamura et  al. [64]. Scott
et al. [65] analyzed the input variables of machining para-
metric combinations in wire-EDM. The selection of param-
eters was based on nondominated point concept. Ho and
Newman [66] studied the EDM process performance in
terms of development and optimization analysis. Liao
et al. [67] reported a study of surface finish in wire-EDM.
Mahapatra and Amar [68] applied genetic algorithm
(GA) along with Taguchi’s orthogonal array to understand
the multiobjective parametric optimization of the EDM
process. Yan and Lai [69] reported about the upgraded
characteristic of the surface quality by fine-finish supply
of power in wire-EDM. Debabrata et al. [70] proposed the
neural network and GA optimization technique for the
complex EDM process. The machining of aluminum oxide-
based ceramic by wire-EDM was explored by Kung and
Chiang [71]. In their study, surface roughness and mate-
rial removal rate (MRR) were analyzed in terms of input
machining parameters by central composite design (CCD)
and RSM. Liu et  al. [72] carried out a comparative study
of the EDM and electrochemical machining (ECM) process
on Al6061 composite reinforced with Al2O3 particles to
achieve the highest MRR. The optimization of machin-
ing parameters of an abrasive mixed EDM process using
Taguchi’s orthogonal array and grey relational analysis
was reported by Kumar et  al. [73]. Following their inves-
tigations, Garg et al. [74] concluded that the EDM process
is capable of machining complex shapes with high pre-
cision. The machining of polycrystalline silicon with
resistivity of 2 to 3 cm through wire-EDM was performed
by Yu  et  al. [75]. Kumar and Agarwal [76] reported the
multiobjective optimization of the wire-EDM machining
parameters. Jabbaripour et  al. [77] carried out the EDM
machining of Ti-6Al-4V and analyzed the effect of inputs
on TWR and MRR. They also studied surface properties
with energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) and
XRD analyses. Garg et  al. [78] studied the EDM machin-
ing of hybrid MMCs of aluminum (Al/SiC/graphite and Al/
Si10Mg/fly ash/graphite).
Baraskar et al. [79] reported the application of the non-
dominating sorting GA-II technique for the multiobjective
optimization of the machining parameters through EDM.
The effect of microhardness on titanium alloy (Ti-6Al-4V)
during the EDM process was reported by Ndaliman et al.
[80]. Garg et  al. [81] studied the effect of machining of
Al/Zr2 particulate composite through the wire-EDM process
parameters. Yeh et  al. [82] worked on the wire-EDM of
polycrystalline silicon with phosphorous as dielectric.
They also carried out a comparative study of dielectrics,
such as pure water and pure water with sodium pyroph-
osphate, to examine their effect over the cutting speed,
surface integrity, and kerf loss. Dhobe et  al. [83] opti-
mized the wire-EDM parameters on cryotreated tool steel
to improve the surface quality. The results of wire-EDM
parameters on high-strength low-alloy (HSLA) steel with
the help of Taguchi and grey relation analysis were inves-
tigated by Khan et al. [84]. Gostimirovic et al. [85] applied
the neuro-fuzzy and GA to study the surface rough-
ness generated through the EDM process. Laxman and
GuruRaj [86] optimized the machining parameters with
grey relational analysis on titanium alloys. It was based
on an orthogonal array for the multiresponse process.
Singh et al. [87] studied the effect of the EDM machining
on Al-7075 MMCs and analyzed the response in terms of
surface roughness and recast layer. Udaykiran et al. [88]
reported their investigations on the surface integrity of
aluminum and die steel using copper tool in the sink EDM
process. Their focus was on a comprehensive study of the
surface roughness.
Balasubramaniam et al. [89] applied the RSM to opti-
mize the process parameters of EDM during the cutting of
MMC Al6061/SiC. They reported the mathematical model
220      A.K. Srivastava et al.: Intensification of metal matrix composites
to optimize the best output parameters such as surface
roughness, electrode wear rate, MRR, and cylindricity.
Motorcu et  al. [90] investigated the effect of wire-EDM
parameters during the machining of hybrid MMC Al/B4C/
graphite. They applied Taguchi’s L27 orthogonal array
along with RSM to examine the effect of control param-
eters over output parameters such as MRR and surface
finish. Liu et al. [91] described the effect of gap distance
and process medium during the EDM of MMC. Emulsified
oil and air was used as a medium in their study to compare
the effect on MRR and surface roughness. Bhuyan et  al.
[92] have optimized the process parameters of EDM by
the TOPSIS method of optimization during the machin-
ing of aluminum alloy reinforced with 24% SiC. In their
study, flushing pressure, peak current, and pulse on time
were the selected input parameters to check the output
response on TWR, MRR, and surface roughness.
2.2.3 AWJ machining of MMCs
It is a method of cutting the different materials using
abrasive particles entrained with water jet at very high
velocity. This is the most suitable method to machined
hard materials such as steels, super alloys, metal matrix,
and ceramic composites with a separate advantage that
it does not induce any thermal deformation to the mate-
rial during machining and are capable to cut any mate-
rial with low cutting forces and without rough edges.
A variety of work has been reported by the authors on
AWJ machining from the last few years. Hamatani and
Ramulu [93] conducted slot cutting and piercing opera-
tions by AWJ machining on ceramic TiB2/SiC and Al/SiC
to understand the machining characteristics. Jain and
Jain [94] applied the neural network optimization tech-
nique to optimize the input machining parameters for
abrasive flow machining. Hloch et al. [95] discussed the
average roughness of 10-mm-thick cast aluminum cut by
AWJ machining. The effects of parameters such as abra-
sive mass flow rate, feeding direction, flow pressure, J/T
abbreviation, and transverse rate were selected with full
factorial design (FFD) at two levels. Bello et al. [96] exam-
ined the dry and wet abrasive machining of hybrid com-
posites containing carbon nanotubes, micron-diameter
continuous fibers, and polymer matrices. Azmira and
Ahsanb [97] observed surface roughness and kerf taper
ratio in the machining of glass/epoxy composite lami-
nate by AWJ machining. They concluded that the type
of abrasive material and hydraulic pressure influenced
the output parameters significantly. Chandra and Singh
[98] examined the increase in top and bottom surface
diameters of a hole by an increase of the nozzle tip dis-
tance in AWJ machining. The AWJ machining technique is
not only limited to the machining of structural materials,
but some of the work has describe its importance in other
useful applications such as cutting of porcine bones,
bone cements, and coal. Sharma et al. [99] have reported
the experimental results to optimize and improve the
depth of cut and cutting width in the coal cutting process
by water jet technology. Taguchi-fuzzy logic optimization
technique was selected to optimize the process param-
eters to increase the productivity of coal mines. In two
separate studies, Zain et al. [100, 101] optimized the input
machining parameters of AWJ machining by two differ-
ent methods, namely, artificial neural network and simu-
lated annealing (ANN-SA) and simulated annealing and
GA (SA-GA). Metin et al. [102] studied the AWJ machining
of Al7075/Al2O3 MMCs using genetic expression program-
ming (GEP) to predict the roughness of the cut surface.
Nagdeve et  al. [103] applied Taguchi’s orthogonal array
to optimize the process parameters of the AWJ machin-
ing and predicted the surface roughness and MRR. Their
results established that the stand-off distance signifi-
cantly affects the MRR, whereas the abrasive flow rate
highly affects the surface roughness. J­agannatha et  al.
[104] conducted AWJ machining by means of hot air jet
on glasses. They also applied Taguchi’s modified robust
design to determine the optimized process parameters.
Alberdi et  al. [105] discussed the effect of the machin-
ing process parameters on surface roughness and taper
cut during the machining of two different carbon fiber-
reinforced polymer (CFRP) composites. Gupta and
Vaishya [106] applied hybrid abrasive flow machining
with rotational mechanism to produce centrifugal force.
Conducted with the assistance of a rod, this process con-
tinuously rotated the abrasive medium. In their study, the
rotation of the rod and its diameter were considered to be
variable parameters along with the abrasive grit size and
abrasive concentration. Padhy and Nayak [107] carried
out a drilling experiment on a glass by AWJ machin-
ing with Al2O3 as abrasive powder. Parmar et  al. [108]
carried out AWJ machining of Al6351. Using Taguchi’s
method, they established the influence of process param-
eters in determining surface roughness. Kalirasu et  al.
[109] studied the process parameters of AWJ machin-
ing on banana/polyester composite. An L9 orthogonal
array was selected to optimize the kerf taper and width
in their study. Thirumalai et  al. [110] reported the study
of AWJ machining on hybrid MMC Al6351/SiC/B4C. The
grey relation technique has been used to optimize the
process parameters. Hloch et  al. [111] have described
the ultrasonic pulsating-assisted water jet machining
 A.K. Srivastava et al.: Intensification of metal matrix composites      221
of bone cements. Six types of polymethyl methacrylate
bone cements were used in their study to disintegrate the
interfaces between trabecular bone tissue and cemented
femoral stem. The same technique may also be used for
machining the composites.
2.2.4 Laser-assisted machining (LAM) of MMCs
LAM stands for the concept of using laser as an assisting
heating source to the conventional cutting process. During
the process, the work piece is first heated and softened by
a laser beam after that cutting tool is applied. Recently,
this method has been applied to machine hard materials
such as steels, alloys, and composite.
LAM on 10 wt% YSiAlON glass containing silicon
nitride was carried out by Lei et al. [112]. They performed
SEM of chips to predict the MRR. Wang et  al. [113] con-
ducted LAM of MMC reinforced with Al2O3 particles and
reported a 50% reduction in cutting forces, 30% reduction
in tool wear, and an improved surface quality compared
to the conventional cutting methods. Meijer [114] studied
the behavior of short and ultra-short lasers in laser beam
machining. Skvarenina and Shin [115] investigated the
effect of process parameters, such as depth of cut, feed rate,
and material removal temperature on the cutting forces,
surface roughness, and tool wear under LAM. Grabowski
et al. [116] examined LAM of AlSi alloy/SiC composites and
reported a large consumption of laser energy absorbed per
unit depth of the composites by the change of absorptive
by 0.1. Chang and Kuo [117, 118] applied Taguchi’s orthog-
onal array to predict surface roughness under LAM of
Al2O3 ceramics. Their findings indicated that the rotation
speed has greater significance in affecting surface rough-
ness compared to pulse frequency, depth of cut, and feed.
Further, they studied the aspects of tool wear and surface
integrity of the work piece and used the lattice Boltzmann
method to measure the temperature distribution inside a
work piece. Dubey and Yadava [119] presented a review of
Nd:YAG laser beam machining. They discussed the role
of various parameters on the performance evaluation.
The first time Bejjani et al. [120] have done the turning of
TiMMCs through LAM and reported a increased tool life of
180% by the analysis of microstructure and chip morphol-
ogy. Adalarasan et al. [121] optimized the CO2 laser cutting
parameters by grey-based response surface technique on
the machining of hybrid MMC Al6061/SiCp/Al2O3. Cutting
speed, pulsing frequency, assisted gas pressure, and laser
power were selected as the process parameters to evaluate
the output responses such as surface finish, kerf width,
and cut edge slope.
2.2.5 ECM of MMCs
ECM has been widely used to machine hard materials in the
manufacturing industries from the last few years due to its
significant advantage, such as no tool wear and thermal
damage. In this method, the removal of material depends
on the controlled anodic dissolution progression. The work
piece acts as anode and tool acts as cathode in the electro-
lyte solution. In the field of MMCs, it is used continuously
from the last few decades. Senthilkumar et al. [122] con-
ducted ECM of MMCs and optimized the effect of process
parameters, such as electrolyte concentration, percentage
reinforcement, feed rate, and applied voltage, to predict
the maximum MRR by Taguchi’s L27 orthogonal array.
Datta and Das [123] optimized the process parameters of
ECM using GA. They were able to achieve optimum output
of MRR and surface roughness. Senthilkumar et al. [124]
worked on the optimum selection of process parameters
of ECM using NSGA-II and RSM to obtain the maximum
MRR and minimum surface roughness. Phipon and
Pradhan [125] optimized the process parameters of EDM
for minimum radial overcut and minimum heat-affected
zone. They also worked to attain the desired output
through RSM and GA. Senthilkumar et  al. [126] again
developed an empirical relationship of the process param-
eters of ECM to optimize the output responses. Analysis of
variance (ANOVA) was applied to check the significance
of the process parameters and the mathematical model.
Mukherjee and Chakraborty [127] applied biogeography-
based optimization (BBO) a ­lgorithm for the optimum
selection of the process parameters of a wire electro-
chemical turning process and the ECM process. Bisht et al.
[128] attained the optimization of the process parameters
for ECM of mild steel and aluminum by signal-to-noise
ratio (S/N) and also for the determination of the MRR and
surface roughness. Rao and Padmanabhan [129] applied
the linear modeling of FFD to optimize the process param-
eters, such as electrolyte concentration and voltage and
feed rate, and to obtain the product parameter percent-
age of the reinforcements. Sankar et al. [130] reported the
abrasive-assisted ECM of hybrid composite Al6061/B4C/Gr.
SiC of size 50 μm was used as an abrasive mixed with NaCl
electrolyte. They also reported the comparison of machin-
ing with and without abrasive assistance. Figure 6 shows
the ECM machined surface of Al6061/B4C/Gr with and
without abrasive of their study. Rajkumar et al. [131] have
done the electrochemical abrasive-assisted machining of
Al/B4C composite. In their study, abrasive concentration
was selected as one of the main influencing parameters
to predict the optimized value of surface roughness and
MRR using RSM.
222      A.K. Srivastava et al.: Intensification of metal matrix composites
A B
Figure 6: ECM surface of Al6061/B4C/Gr (A) with abrasive and (B) without abrasive. Reproduced with permission from Elsevier
(­ScienceDirect) [130].
2.2.6 Ultrasonic vibration cutting (UVC) of MMCs
Ultrasonic vibration is an effective cutting process to
machine hard materials such as steels, glasses, ceramics,
and carbides and difficult to machine MMCs compared to
the conventional machining. This method improves the
productivity by saving the machining time; hence, overall
machining cost is reduced. The schematic diagram of
UVC is shown in [132]. A piezoelectric transducer (PZT) is
applied to stimulate the tool in any desired direction.
Significant research work has been carried out
using this method. Majeed et al. [133] performed drilling
­operation on composite Al2O3/LaPO4 through ultrasonic
machining using low carbon steel tools. Their results
indicated the significance of adding LaPO4 in MRR, acous-
tic ­emission, and geometry of the drilled hole. Nath and
Rahman [132] concluded that UVC ensures better surface
finish and less tool wear at a low cutting speed. More-
over, they observed that the tool-work piece contact ratio
(TWCR) is a significant factor to evaluate the cutting speed
and the tool wear. Kumar and Khamba [134] reported
the effect of process parameters, such as tool material,
abrasive size and material, and grit size of slurry on the
ultrasonic machining of pure titanium. Liu et  al. [135]
determined the optimum condition of process parameters
of ultrasonic vibration machining on SiC monocrystals.
Singh and Gianender [136] discussed the effect of process
parameters on MRR and surface roughness for the ultra-
sonic machining of hard and brittle materials, such as
ceramics, glass, and composites. Chakravorty et  al. [137]
compared sets of past experiment data to the recently
obtained experiment response of ultrasonic machining
for the optimization of process parameters. Zhou et  al.
[138] reported the machinability of Al/45% SiCp compos-
ite by rotary ultrasonic face grinding. They examined the
effect of ultrasonic vibration on cutting force, abrasive
chip shape, tool wear, and surface quality. The tool wear
is mainly due to the grain breakage and grain fall-off but
not the observed grinding wheel blockages and grinding
burn.
3 Discussion
From the review of a wide range of published works, it has
cleared that the synthesis of MMCs and conventional/non-
conventional machining of composite materials has been
a subject of extensive research over the years. One of the
primary reasons for this interest is the fact that MMCs have
attracted the industry due to their remarkable properties.
From the past data, it is found that most of the works have
been reported about the characterization of developed
MMCs and their improved mechanical properties. Table 1
shows the common MMCs and their mechanical proper-
ties reported based on past research work by the different
authors.
Table 2 shows the evaluation of development of
MMCs. It indicates that, although many of the research-
ers have worked on the fabrication of the composites with
the stir casting techniques, there has been little research
on squeeze casting, compo-casting, PM, and microwave
processing. Nowadays, some of the newer techniques,
such as hot extrusion in the PM route and friction stir
processing of surface casting, were also used to fabricate
MMCs. Hybrid MMCs were fabricated to enhance certain
desired properties in the materials related to the fatigue
life, sliding behavior, hardness, and specific strength.
However, these materials have not been produced on a
large scale due to the uneven distribution of reinforce-
ments in the matrix phase. Table 3 shows the evaluation
of hybrid MMCs.
 A.K. Srivastava et al.: Intensification of metal matrix composites      223

Table 1: Some common MMCs and their mechanical properties.

S.No.  Metal matrix composite  Ultimate Tensile  Young Modulus  Elongation (%)  Density
strength (Mpa) (Gpa) (gm/cm3)

1   AA2124/17% SiC   610.5  100  7.2  2.85

2   AL2014/10% SiC   493.2  100.4  2.6  2.75
3   AL2014/10% Al2O3   531  84.1  8  2.78
4   AA8090/17% SiC   540.8  103.2  4.5  2.66
5   AL7075/10% SiC   601  94.9  3.7  2.88
6   AL6061/10% SiC   364  91.5  3.2  2.72
7   AL6061/10% Al2O3   352  81.4  10  2.85
8   AA6013/20% SiC   520.5  104  5.6  2.82
9   A357/15%SiC   370  105  6.2  2.85
10   Al-7Si-0.3Mg/15% B   545  104  8  2.58
11   Al 7075/10% basalt   179  87  8.5  2.66
12   A359/8% B4C   371  104  5.4  2.84
13   Al7075/4% B4C   325  95  6.7  2.74
14   A359/8%Al2O3   310  103  7.5  2.80
15   Al7075/ 10% Gr.   248  87.5  9.2  2.65

Table 2: Evaluation of metal matrix composite.

S.No.  Authors   Process   Material   Contribution

1   Tong et al. [13]   Shock wave consolidation  Titanium/SiC   Mechanical properties

2   Li et al. [15]   Compressive visco-plastic   A359/SiCp   Stress and strain analysis
response
3   Hashim [16, 18, 19]   Fabrication by modified   A359 alloy   Analysis of matrix melt
stir casting method
4   Kanga and Youn [20]   Mechanical and   Al MMC   Comparison of mechanical
Electromagnetic stirring properties
5   Feng et al. [21]   Spark plasma sintering   Titanium/TiB   Mechanical properties
6   Hamouda et al. [22]   Mechanical stirring   LM6   Tensile strength
7   Puviyarasan et al. [24]   Friction stir processing   A6063   Micro hardness
8   Kumar and   Friction stir casting   A6063,6061,7075   compare results by fuzzy logic and
Venkataramaiah [28] Taguchi’s method
9   Ramesh and Murugan [29]  Mechanical stirring   Al7075/4% B4C   Metallurgical and microstructure
properties
10   Meena et al. [30]   Mechanical stirring   Al/SiC   Mechanical properties and
percentage elongation
11   Dharmpal et al. [32]   Friction stir processing   Al 5083/SiC   Hardness testing
12   Kumar et al. [33]   Electromagnetic stirring   A359/Al2O3   Mechanical properties
13   Zakaria [34]   Powder metallurgy   Pure Al/SiC   Density and corrosion study
14   Canakci et al. [36]   Powder metallurgy   bronze-Cr-Ni   Density and mechanical properties
15   Sahraeinejad et al. [39]   Friction stir processing   Al5059   Compare the effect of
reinforcement

Based on past studies, few results have been gener-
ated as shown in Figures 7–9. Figure 7 conveys that most of
the nonconventional machining works have been done by
EDM and wire-EDM processes, whereas other nonconven-
tional machining processes, such as AWJ machining, laser
cutting, ECM, and ultrasonic machining, of MMCs have
been largely set aside. Figure 8 indicates the percentage
contribution of research on reinforced materials. Most of
the research has been done by adding SiC as reinforcement
to the base metals. However, many researchers choose
Al2O3 and hybrid reinforcements as well. Very little work
has been reported on other reinforcement materials, such
as B4C, graphite, and fly ash. Figure 9 shows the capability
of the different machining methods to cut the maximum
thickness of different types of materials. AWJ machin-
ing is the most effective way of cutting high thickness
material without any thermal deformations and at low
power consumption, whereas EDM and wire-EDM are the
224      A.K. Srivastava et al.: Intensification of metal matrix composites

Table 3: Evaluation of hybrid metal matrix composite.

S.No.  Authors   Process   Material   Contribution

1   Guo and Tsao [40]   Powder densification method   Al/graphite/SiC   Mechanical Properties
2   Achutha et al. [41]   Monte-Carlo simulation model  Aluminum composite   Estimation of fatigue life
3   Reddy et al. [42]   Microwave processing   Copper–TiC–graphite   Estimation of hardness and density
4   Asif et al. [43]   Mechanical stirring   Aluminum/graphite/SiC  Dry sliding behavior
5   Farshad and   Powder metallurgy method   Al/Gr./SiC   Mechanical properties and
Mahdavi [44] coefficient of friction
6   Kammer et al. [46]   Mechanical stirring   Al7075/ e-glass short   Tensile and compression test
fibres/ fly ash
7   Boopathi et al. [47]   Mechanical stirring   Al2024/SiC/fly-ash   Compared the physical properties
8   Gopi et al. [48]   Mechanical stirring   Al6061/Zircon sand/   Comparative study of hardness and
graphite wear resistance
9   Arun et al. [49]   Mechanical stirring   Al6061/SiC/ flyash   Ultimate tensile strength
10   Dora et al. [51]   Double stirring   Aluminum/ RHA/ SiC   Mechanical properties
11   Montalba et al. [52]  Hot extrusion   AlMg5/SiC/(PLZT)   Validity of process
12   Shivashankar and   Mechanical stirring   Al2219 /B4C/ MOS2   Mechanical properties
Basavarajappa [53]

70
USM Steel
Non-conventional machining

60
Thickness of material (mm)

ECM
50 Carbon
Lasser cutting
method

steel
40
AWJM
30 Composites
Wire-EDM
20
EDM Titenium
10
and nikil
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 alloys
0
Contribution (%)
EDM WEDM AWJ LBM USM ECM CONV.
Machining method
Figure 7: Contribution of research of nonconventional machining.
Figure 9: Comparison of cutting methods in terms of material
thickness.

machining output response, such as MRR and surface

roughness, still it is problematic to find optimum and eco-
nomical responses of nonconventional machining.

4 Conclusion and future scope

Figure 8: % Contribution of research on reinforcements.
next applicable methods that are mostly used. However,
these processes may be used only for conductive materi-
als only. Table 4 summarizes the features of the noncon-
ventional machining of the composites. Although most of
the researchers have worked on the optimization of the
In conclusion, one may sum up the major gaps in research
on this field as evident from the published works by dif-
ferent authors. It has been observed that MMCs are one
of the most demanding materials in the automobile and
electronics industries due to its excellent properties.
From the past study, it is revealed that most of the
work has been reported on the development of MMCs
from the last 15  years with different processing routes.
Each process has its own importance depending on the
desired properties in MMCs. MMCs of aluminum with
 A.K. Srivastava et al.: Intensification of metal matrix composites      225

Table 4: Evaluation of non conventional machining of metal matrix composite.

No.  Authors   Process   Material   Optimization process/   Evaluation of output response

analysis

1   Mahapatra and Patnaik [68]  EDM   Al MMC   GA, Taguchi’s Method   Surface roughness, MRR
2   Debabrata et al. [70]   EDM   Al MMC   ANN, GA   Surface roughness, MRR
3   Kung and Chiang [71]   wire-EDM  Al2O3 /ceramic   CCD, RSM   Surface roughness, MRR
4   Jabbaripour et al. [77]   EDM   Ti–6Al–4V   EDS, XRD   TWR, MRR, surface quality
5   Motorcu et al. [90]   Wire EDM  Al/B4C/Gr.   Taguchi’s L27/RSM   Surface roughness, MRR
6   Liu [91]   EDM   Al/SiC MMC   Effect of gap and medium  Surface roughness, MRR
7   Bhuyan et al. [92]   EDM   Al/24% SiC   TOPSIS method   TWR, MRR and Surface
roughness
8   Hamatani and Ramulu [93]   AWJ   TiB2 /SiC and Al/SiC   Slot cutting and piercing   Surface roughness, MRR
9   Zain et al. [100, 101]   AWJ   Composite   ANN-SA,SA–GA   Surface roughness, MRR
10   Metin et al. [102]   AWJ   Al7075/Al2O3   GEP   Surface roughness
11   Parmar et al. [108]   AWJ   Al6351   Taguchi’s method   Surface roughness
12   Kalirasu et al. [109]   AWJ   banana/polyester composite  Taguchi’s method   Kerf taper and width
13   Thirumalai et al. [110]   AWJ   A6351/SiC/B4C   Grey relation analysis   Surface roughness, MRR
(GRA)
14   Lei et al. [112]   LAM   YSiAlON glass   SEM of chips   MRR
15   Wang et al. [113]   LAM   Al/ Al2O3   Effect of cutting forces   Tool wear, surface quality
16   Chang and Kuo [117, 118]   LAM   Al/ Al2O3   Taguchi’s method   Tool wear, surface integrity
17   Adalarasan et al. [120]   LAM   Al6061/SiCp/Al2O3   pulsing frequency, assist   surface finish, kerf width, cut
gas pressure, edge slope.
18   Senthilkumar et al. [122]   ECM   Metal matrix composite   Taguchi’s method   MRR
19   Phipon and Pradhan [125]   ECM   Metal matrix composite   RSM   Radial overcut, heat affected
zone
20   Rajkumar et al. [131]   ECM   Al/B4C   RSM   Surface roughness, MRR
21   Majeed et al. [132]   USM   Al2O3/LaPO4   Vibration cutting   MRR, Acoustic emission,
drilled hole geometry.
22   Liu et al. [135]   USM   SiC Monocrystals   Vibration cutting   MRR
23   Zhou et al. [138]   USM   Al/45%SiCp   Vibration cutting   cutting force, chip shape, tool
wear, surface quality

reinforcement Al2O3, SiC, B4C, fly ash, and graphite are
drawing more attention compared to others due to their
lightweight and improved properties. Few studies using
titanium, magnesium, and copper as matrix metal and
reinforcement agents, such as SiO2, AlN, ZrB2, BN, Si3N4,
and MSO2, are also reported and successfully developed
MMCs, but they need further investigation for their
importance in the industries. The machining of MMCs is
one of the challenging tasks due to the presence of hard
abrasive particle, which in turn causes high machining
cost, poor surface quality, and rapid tool wear during
the conventional machining method. The nonconven-
tional machining processes such as EDM, wire-EDM,
AWJ machining, LAM, ECM, and USM have improved
machining performances compared to conventional
methods. However, the selection of an economical
machining method and the setting of optimum operat-
ing parameters still need a thorough investigation. Most
of the research works have been carried out for the EDM/
wire-EDM and AWJ machining process. Hence, there
is ample scope to investigate the responses of other
machining processes and present comparative results
in the machining of MMCs. Along these outcomes, some
of the shortcomings also need to be identified, which
give us an indication about the areas where the future
course of researches should be focused. Very few studies
have been reported on the nonconventional machining
of TiMMCs. Therefore, a detailed study of the behav-
ior of these materials under different nonconventional
machining routes is still a scope for future researchers.
Very few studies have been reported on the design and
mechanism of the fabrication process of MMCs, such as
stirrer design, particle size, distribution of reinforce-
ments, stirrer speed, and solidification time. A theo-
retical model of the simulation of composites based on
their process parameters, such as fluid flow, still needs
detailed investigation. Very few studies have been
reported on the surface quality analysis of the machined
work piece as well as on the surface properties of mate-
rials after machining. Therefore, a detailed surface
integrity related research is needed for the machined
composite materials.
226      A.K. Srivastava et al.: Intensification of metal matrix composites
Acknowledgments: This work was supported by the Indian
Institute of Technology (ISM), Dhanbad, India. The authors
also acknowledge the assistance of IIT Kanpur, IIT Delhi,
and Noida Institute of Engineering and Technology, Greater
Noida, India, in carrying out part of the research work.
References
[1] Miller WS, Zhuang L, Bottema J, Wittebrood AJ, De’smet P,
Haszler A, Vieregge A. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2000, 280, 37–49.
[2] Bacciarini C, Mathier V. J. Metall. 2014, 2014, 10 pages.
[3] Swift C. Market Research Report. BBC Research, 2009.
[4] Matin K. Prakt. Metallogr. 2009, 11, 580–597.
[5] Babu NH, Tzamtzis S, Barekar N, Patel JB, Fan Z. Solid State
Phenom. 2008, 141–143, 373–378.
[6] Premnath AA, Alwarsamy T, Rajohan T, Prabhu R. J. Mech. Sci.
Technol. 2014, 11, 4737–4744.
[7] Gopalakannan S, Senthilvelan T. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol.
2013, 67, 485–493.
[8] Blickwedel H, Guo NS, Haferkamp H, Louis H. Jet. Cutting
­Technol. 1991, 1, 163–179.
[9] Sasimurugan T, Palanikumar K. J. Miner. Mater. Charact. Eng.
2011, 13, 1213–1224.
[10] Muller F, Monaghan J. Int. J. Mach. Tool. Manuf. 2000, 40,
1351–1366.
[11] Zuperl U, Cus F. Rob. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 2003, 19,
189–199.
[12] Gofrey TMT, Goodwin PS, Ward-Close CM. Adv. Eng. Mater.
2000, 3, 85–91.
[13] Tong W, Ravichandran G, Christman T, Vreeland Jr T. Acta Met-
all. Mater. 1995, 1, 235–250.
[14] Saito T, Takamiya H, Furuta T. J. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 1998, 1–2,
273–278.
[15] Li Y, Ramesh KT, Chin ESC. Int. J. Solids Struct. 2000, 37,
7547–7562.
[16] Hashim J. J. Technol. 2001, 35a, 9–20.
[17] Chawla N, Shen YL. Adv. Eng. Mater. 2001, 6, 357–370.
[18] Hashim J, Looney L, Hashmi MSJ. J. Mater. Process. Technol.
2002, 123, 251–257.
[19] Hashim J, Looney L, Hashmi MSJ. J. Mater. Process. Technol.
2002, 123, 258–263.
[20] Kanga CG, Youn SW. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2004, 147,
10–22.
[21] Feng H, Zhou Y, Jia D, Meng Q. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2004, 16,
2495–2500.
[22] Hamouda AMS, Sulaiman S, Vijayaram TR, Sayuti M, Ahmad
MHM. J. Achieve. Mater. Manuf. Eng. 2007, 2, 11–16.
[23] Tjong SC, Mai YW. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2008, 3–4,
583–601.
[24] Puviyarasan M, Praveen C. World Acad. Sci. Eng. Technol. 2011,
10, 672–676.
[25] Arora HS, Singh H, Dhindaw BK. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol.
2012, 9–12, 1043–1055.
[26] Asif M. Plast. Polym. Technol. 2012, 1, 9–14.
[27] Rana RS, Purohit R, Das S. Int. J. Sci. Eng. Res. 2012, 6, 1–16.
[28] Kumar GV, Venkataramaiah P. Elixir Mech. Eng. 2012, 53,
11905–11909.
[29] Ramesh R, Murugan N. Int. J. Adv. Mater. Manuf. Charact. 2013,
1, 301–306.
[30] Meena KL, Manna A, Banwait SS, Jaswanti. Am. J. Mech. Eng.
2013, 1, 14–19.
[31] Altinkok N, Ozsert I, Findik F. Acta Phys. Pol. A 2013, 124, 11–19.
[32] Dharmpal D, Sidhu RS, Gupta VK. Int. J. Mech. Eng. 2013, 1,
1–11.
[33] Kumar A, Lal S, Kumar S. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2013, 3,
250–254.
[34] Zakaria HM. Ain Shams Eng. J. 2014, 5, 831–838.
[35] Rebba B, Ramanaiahb N. Procedia Mater. Sci. 2014, 6,
1161–1169.
[36] Canakci A, Varol T, Cuvalci H, Erdemir F, Ozkaya S. Sci. Eng.
Compos. Mater. 2015, 4, 425–432.
[37] Dong S, Zhou J, Hui D, Wang Y, Zhang S. Composites Part A
2015, 68, 356–364.
[38] Jahedi M, Paydar MH, Knezevic M. Mater. Charact. 2015, 104,
92–100.
[39] Sahraeinejad S, Izadi H, Haghshenas M, Gerlich AP. Mater. Sci.
Eng. A 2015, 626, 505–513.
[40] Guo MLT, Tsao CYA. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2000, 1, 65–74.
[41] Achutha MV, Sridhara BK, Budan A. Int. J. Adv. Des. Manuf.
Technol. 2008, 2, 14–21.
[42] Reddy GC, Rajkumar K, Aravindan S. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol.
2010, 48, 645–653.
[43] Asif M, Chandra K, Mishra PS. J. Miner. Mater. Charact. Eng.
2011, 14, 1337–1344.
[44] Farshad A, Mahdavi S. Adv. Mater. Res. 2011, 264–265,
1878–1886.
[45] Rino JJ, Chandramohan D, Sucitharan KS. Int. J. Sci. Res. 2012,
3, 196–203.
[46] Kammer P, Shivanand HK, Kumar SS. Int. J. Mech. Ind. Eng.
2012, 4, 111–115.
[47] Boopathi MM, Arulshri KP, Iyandurai N. Am. J. Appl. Sci. 2013,
3, 219–229.
[48] Gopi KR, Mohandas KN, Reddappa HN, Ramesh MR. Int. J. Eng.
Adv. Technol. 2013, 5, 340–344.
[49] Arun LR, Hussain SB, Kumar S, Kulkarni N. Int. J. Innov. Res. Sci.
Eng. Technol. 2013, 6, 2501–2506.
[50] Iacob G, Popescu G, Buzatu M. UPB Sci. Bull. Ser. B 2013, 2,
117–126.
[51] Dora SP, Chintada S, Nallu R. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2014, 1,
79–85.
[52] Montalba C, Ramam K, Eskin DG, Ruiz-Navas EM, Prat O. Mater.
Des. 2015, 69, 213–218.
[53] Shivashankar GS, Basavarajappa S. Adv. Mater. Res. 2015,
1101, 28–31.
[54] Prasad K, Chakraborty S. Ain Shams Eng. J. 2015. doi:10.1016/j.
asej.2015.10.013.
[55] Manna A, Bhattacharyya B. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2004,
9–10, 658–665.
[56] Ozben T, Kilickap E, Cakır O. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2008,
198, 220–225.
[57] Vignesh S, Sanjeev C. Int. Conf. Therm. Mater. Mech. Eng. 2012,
126–130.
[58] Srinivasan A, Arunachalam RM, Ramesh S, Senthilkumaar JS.
Am. J. Appl. Sci. 2012, 4, 478–483.
[59] Basavarajappaa S, Davim JP. Mater. Res. 2013, 5, 990–996.
[60] Duong XT, Balazinski M, Mayer R. Proc. ASME Adv. Manuf.
2014. V02BT02A018; 9 pages.
 A.K. Srivastava et al.: Intensification of metal matrix composites      227
[61] Gatto A, Iuliano L, Atzeni E, Minetola P, Salmi A. J. Compos.
Mater. 2015, 50, 2487–2494.
[62] Boswell B, Islam MN, Davies IJ, Pramanik A. Proc. Inst. Mech.
Eng. Pt. B 2015. doi: 10.1177/09544054155 83776.
[63] Petrofes NF, Gadalla AM. Mater. Manuf. Processes 1988, 1,
127–153.
[64] Nakamura M, Kanayama K, Hirai Y. Mater. Manuf. Processes
1989, 3, 425–437.
[65] Scott D, Boyina S, Rajurkar KP. Int. J. Prod. Res. 1991, 11,
2189–2207.
[66] Ho KH, Newman ST. Int. J. Mach. Tool. Manuf. 2003, 43,
1287–1300.
[67] Liao YS, Huang JT, Chen YH. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2004,
149, 165–171.
[68] Mahapatra SS, Amar P. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2007, 9–10,
911–925.
[69] Yan MT, Lai YP. Int. J. Mach. Tool. Manuf. 2007, 47, 1686–1694.
[70] Debabrata M, Pal SK, Saha P. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2007,
186, 154–162.
[71] Kung KY, Chiang KT. Mater. Manuf. Processes 2008, 23, 241–250.
[72] Liu JW, Yue TM, Guo ZN. Mater. Manuf. Processes 2009, 4,
446–453.
[73] Kumar A, Maheshwari S, Sharma C, Beri N. Mater. Manuf.
Processes 2010, 10, 1041–1047.
[74] Garg RK, Singh KK, Sachdeva A, Sharma VS, Ojha K, Singh S.
Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2010, 50, 611–624.
[75] Yu PH, Lee HK, Lin YX, Qin SJ, Yan BH, Huang FY. Mater. Manuf.
Processes 2011, 26, 1443–1450.
[76] Kumar K, Agarwal S. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2012, 62,
617–633.
[77] Jabbaripour B, Sadeghi MH, Faridvand SH, Shabgard MR.
Mach. Sci. Technol. 2012, 3, 419–444.
[78] Garg HK, Verma K, Manna A, Kumar R. Int. J. Latest Res. Sci.
Technol. 2012, 1, 36–44.
[79] Baraskar SS, Banwait SS, Laroiya SC. Mater. Manuf. Processes
2013, 4, 348–354.
[80] Ndaliman MB, Khan AA, Ali MY. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Pt. B
2013, 3, 460–464.
[81] Garg SK, Manna A, Jain A. J. Eng. Res. 2013, 1, 145–160.
[82] Yeh CC, Wu KL, Lee JW, Yan BH. Mater. Manuf. Processes 2014,
2, 146–152.
[83] Dhobe MM, Chopde IK, Gogte CL. Mater. Manuf. Processes
2014, 11–12, 1381–1386.
[84] Khan NZ, Khan ZA, Siddiquee AN, Chanda AK. Prod. Manuf.
Res. 2014, 1, 501–518.
[85] Gostimirovic M, Rodic D, Kovac P, Pucovsky V, Savkovic B. Ann.
Fac. Eng. Hunedoara 2014, 1, 137–140.
[86] Laxman J, GuruRaj K. Int. J. Eng. Res. 2014, 5, 344–348.
[87] Singh R, Jawalkar CS, Mishra RR, Sharma AK, Kumar P. Int. J.
Recent Adv. Mech. Eng. 2014, 1, 53–62.
[88] Udaykiran KL, Reddy GC, Prasad AMK, Rajendra R. Int. J. Curr.
Eng. Technol. 2014, 2, 236–241.
[89] Balasubramaniam V, Baskar N, Narayanan CS. Sci. Eng.
­Compos. Mater. 2014, 23, 145–154.
[90] Motorcu AR, Ekici E, Kus A. Sci. Eng. Compos. Mater. 2015, 23,
435–445.
[91] Liu JW, Yue TM, Guo ZN, Zhang YJ. Mater. Res. Innov. 2015, S5,
137–141.
[92] Bhuyan RK, Routara BC, Parida AK. Mater. Today Proc. 2015,
4–5, 3116–3124.
[93] Hamatani G, Ramulu M. J. Eng. Mater. Technol. 1990, 4,
381–386.
[94] Jain RK, Jain VK, J. Mater. Process. Technol.2000, 108, 62–67.
[95] Hloch S, Gombar M, Valicek J. Int. J. Precis. Technol. 2007, 1,
1–10.
[96] Bello D, Wardle BL, Yamamoto N, Devilloria RG, Garcia EJ, Hart
AJ, Ahn K, Ellenbecker MJ, Hallock M. J. Nanopart. Res. 2009,
1, 231–249.
[97] Azmira MA, Ahsanb AK, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2009, 209,
6168–6173.
[98] Chandra B, Singh J. Int. J. Eng. Sci. Technol. 2011, 1, 504–513.
[99] Sharma V, Chattopadhyaya S, Hloch S. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Tech-
nol. 2011, 56, 1019–1025.
[100] Zain AM, Haron H, Sharif S. Expert Syst. Appl. 2011, 38,
8316–8326.
[101] Zain AM, Haron H, Sharif S. Appl. Soft Comput. 2011, 11,
5350–5359.
[102] Metin K, Erdogan K, Omer E. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2011,
55, 955–968.
[103] Nagdeve L, Chaturvedi V, Vimal J. Int. J. Instrum. Controls
Autom. 2012, 3–4, 9–13.
[104] Jagannatha N, Hiremath SS, Sadashivappa K. Int. J. Mech.
Mater. Eng. 2012, 1, 9–15.
[105] Alberdi A, Suarez A, Artaza T, Palafox GAE, Ridgway K. Proc.
Eng. 2013, 63, 421–429.
[106] Gupta R, Vaishya RO. Int. J. Sci. Eng. Res. 2013, 6, 2719–2723.
[107] Padhy JP, Nayak KC. Int. J. Eng. Res. Appl. 2014, 3, 598–604.
[108] Parmar CM, Yogi PK, Parmar TD. Int. J. Adv. Eng. Res. Dev.
2014, 5, 1–8.
[109] Kalirasu S, Rajini N, Bharathsagar N, Mahesh KD, Sankar GA.
Appl. Mech. Mater. 2015, 787, 573–577.
[110] Thirumalai KS, Uthayakumar M, Kiran KVS, Sundaram AM,
Rajaselvam EM. Appl. Mech. Mater. 2015, 766–767, 38–43.
[111] Hloch S, Foldyna J, Pude F, Kloc J, Zelenak M, Hvizdos P,
Monka P, Smolko I, Scucka J, Kozak D, Sedmak A, Mihalcinova
E. Tech. Gaz. 2015, 6, 1609–1615.
[112] Lei S, Shin YC, Incropera FP. Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 2000,
40, 2213–2233.
[113] Wang Y, Yang LJ, Wang NJ. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2002,
129, 268–272.
[114] Meijer J. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2004, 149, 2–17.
[115] Skvarenina S, Shin YC. Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 2006, 46, 7–17.
[116] Grabowski A, Nowaka M, Sleziona J. J. Achiev. Mater. Manuf.
Eng. 2006, 17, 1–2.
[117] Chang CW, Kuo CP. Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 2007, 47,
141–147.
[118] Chang CW, Kuo CP. Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 2007, 47,
452–461.
[119] Dubey AK, Yadava V. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2008, 195,
15–26.
[120] Bejjani R, Shi B, Attia H, Balazinski M. CIRP Ann. Manuf. Tech-
nol. 2011, 60, 61–64.
[121] Adalarasan R, Santhanakumar M, Rajmohan M. Measurement
2015, 73, 596–606.
[122] Senthilkumar KL, Sivasubramanian R, Kalaiselvan K, Port.
Electrochim. Acta 2009, 4, 477–486.
[123] Datta D, Das AK. SEAL Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. 2010, 6457,
485–493.
[124] Senthilkumar C, Ganesan G, Karthikeyan R. J. Miner. Mater.
Charact. Eng. 2012, 11, 931–937.
228      A.K. Srivastava et al.: Intensification of metal matrix composites
[125] Phipon R, Pradhan BB. IOSR J. Eng. 2012, 9, 106–115.
[126] Senthilkumar C, Ganesan G, Karthikeyan R. Int. J. Appl. Sci.
Eng. 2013, 1, 13–24.
[127] Mukherjee R, Chakraborty S. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2013,
64, 781–791.
[128] Bisht B, Vimal J, Chaturvedi V. Int. J. Mod. Eng. Res. 2013, 4,
1999–2006.
[129] Rao SR, Padmanabhan G. J. Adv. Mech. Eng. 2013, 1, 13–23.
[130] Sankar M, Gnanavelbabu A, Rajkumar K. Proc. Eng. 2014, 97,
381–389.
[131] Rajkumar K, Poovazhgan L, Saravanamuthukumar P, Ibrahim
SJS, Santosh S. Appl. Mech. Mater. 2015, 787, 523–527.
[132] Nath C, Rahman M. Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 2008, 48,
965–974.
[133] Majeed AM, Vijayaraghavan L, Malhotra SK, Krishnamurthy R.
Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 2008, 48, 40–46.
[134] Kumar J, Khamba JS. J. Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. 2008, 3,
231–238.
[135] Liu Y, Zhao Z, Li S, Li Y. Proc. Eng. 2011, 15, 777–782.
[136] Singh N, Gianender. Int. J. Appl. Eng. Res. 2012, 11, 1642–1647.
[137] Chakravorty R, Gauri SK, Chakraborty S. Int. J. Ind. Eng. Com-
putations 2013, 4, 285–296.
[138] Zhou M, Wang M, Dong G. Mater. Manuf. Processes 2016, 5,
673–678.