Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2008) 37:523–533
DOI 10.1007/s00170-007-1002-3
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Modeling and analysis of the effects of machining
parameters on the performance characteristics
in the EDM process of Al2O3+TiC mixed ceramic
Ko-Ta Chiang
Received: 25 November 2006 / Accepted: 6 March 2007 / Published online: 31 March 2007
# Springer-Verlag London Limited 2007
Abstract Electric discharge machining (EDM) has
achieved remarkable success in the manufacture of con-
ductive ceramic materials for the modern metal industry.
Mathematical models are proposed for the modeling and
analysis of the effects of machining parameters on the
performance characteristics in the EDM process of
Al2O3+TiC mixed ceramic which are developed using the
response surface methodology (RSM) to explain the
influences of four machining parameters (the discharge
current, pulse on time, duty factor and open discharge
voltage) on the performance characteristics of the material
removal rate (MRR), electrode wear ratio (EWR), and
surface roughness (SR). The experiment plan adopts the
centered central composite design (CCD). The separable
influence of individual machining parameters and the
interaction between these parameters are also investigated
by using analysis of variance (ANOVA). This study
highlights the development of mathematical models for
investigating the influences of machining parameters on
performance characteristics and the proposed mathematical
models in this study have proven to fit and predict values of
performance characteristics close to those readings recorded
experimentally with a 95% confidence interval. Results
show that the main two significant factors on the value of
the material removal rate (MRR) are the discharge current
and the duty factor. The discharge current and the pulse on
time also have statistical significance on both the value of the
electrode wear ratio (EWR) and the surface roughness (SR).
K.-T. Chiang (*)
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Hsiuping Institute of Technology,
No. 11, Gungye Rd.,
Dali City, Taichung, Taiwan 41280, Republic of China
e-mail: kota@mail.hit.edu.tw
Keywords Electric discharge machining (EDM) . Ceramic .
Performance characteristics . Response surface methodology
(RSM)
1 Introduction
Ceramic materials are extensively used in the industrial
fields that produce cutting tools, self-lubricating bearings,
nozzles, turbine blades, internal combustion engines, and
heat exchangers [1]. Because the ceramic materials possess
exceptional mechanical and chemical properties such as
high compression strength, high hardness, low ductility,
high corrosion resistance, low specific weight, and a high
strength even at very high temperatures [2], they have a
wide range of applications. The typical processes of
engineering ceramic components are compacting tech-
niques of powder metallurgy and high-temperature sinter-
ing. However, producing complex shapes in ceramics with
high dimensional accuracy is very difficult to achieve
through these conventional machining techniques and they
are expensive to produce. The use of traditional cutting
machinery to machine hard and brittle ceramic materials
can cause cracks on the machined surface [3]. Electric
discharge machining (EDM) is the best choice for the
manufacture of conductive ceramic materials becasue there
is no contact between the tool and workpiece during the
EDM process. In the EDM process, the surface layer of a
workpiece can be rapidly melted and removed by an arc of
8,000–12,000°C at each charge point. EDM takes advan-
tage of spark-erosion manufacturing to machine the hard-
to-cut material which efficiently produces the required
shapes and sizes, finer surface characteristics, and better
dimensional accuracy. Over the past few years, EDM has
been widely applied in the modern metal industry for
524
producing intricate and complex shapes required for
conductive ceramic materials that are difficult to manufac-
ture by conventional machining [4].
Ajmal [5] first carried out the optimum process
parameters for a high removal rate and a good surface
quality for the ceramic material SiC. Martin et al. [6]
proposed increasing the electrical conductivity of SiC by
adding particles of TiB2, and of Si3N4 by adding particles
of TiN in the EDN process. Lee and Lau [7] investigated
the EDM process of Al2O3 doped with TiC to improve its
electrical conductivity. Matsuo and Oshima [8] proposed
the optimum carbide contents including TiC, NbC, and
Cr3C2 on the ceramics ZrO2 and Al2O3 in order to improve
removal rates and produce a fine surface finish. Zhang et al.
[9] studied electro-discharge machining of a hot pressed
aluminum-oxide-based ceramic. Sanchez et al. [10] pro-
posed the optimum sinking and wire EDM technology for
the manufacture of two ceramics with a promising future,
B4C and SiSiC, in order to acquire a high removal rate and
excellent surface finish. Lauwers et al. [11] investigated the
material removal mechanisms of composite ceramic materi-
als in the EDM process. Luis et al. [12] investigated the
influence of machining parameters on the material removal
rate and electrode wear of siliconised or reaction-bonded
silicon carbide (SiSiC) in the die-sinking EDM.
The literature above reveals that the additive particle can
greatly improve the machinability of ceramic materials.
However, very little is reported on the modeling of the
effects of machining parameters on the performance
characteristics in the EDM process of ceramic materials.
Therefore the DEM process is examined for machining
ceramic materials with the goal of achieving mathematical
models to enhance the machining performance. The
technology of the EDM process in practical application is
very complicated, and the main performance characteristics
include the material removal rate, the electrode wear ratio,
and surface roughness, etc. These performance character-
istics are correlated with the machining parameters such as
workpiece polarity, open discharge voltage, pulse current,
pulse duration, dielectric fluid, and duty factor, etc.
Therefore it is difficult to acquire the accurate quantifica-
tion of these performance characteristics because there are
various uncertain factors and non-linear terms. This study
details the results of an experimental investigation on the
influence of machining parameters for the manufacture of
Al2O3+TiC ceramic material using the EDM process. The
Al2O3+TiC ceramic material is a mixed-alumina (Al2O3)-
based ceramic with titanium carbide (TiC). This material is
frequently used for cutting tools. The proper setup of the
various machining parameters is crucial inobtaining high-
quality mechanical properties for the manufacturing of
ceramic components. The objective of this paper presents
the mathematical models for modeling and analysis of the
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2008) 37:523–533
effects of machining parameters on the performance
characteristics in the EDM process of Al2O3+TiC mixed
ceramic. The mathematical models are developed using the
response surface methodology (RSM) to explain the
influences of machining parameters on the performance
characteristics in the EDM process. The RSM is an
empirical modeling approach for determining the relation-
ship between various process parameters and responses
with the various desired criteria, and searching the
significance of these process parameters on the coupled
responses. It is a sequential experimentation strategy for
building and optimizing the empirical model. Therefore,
RSM is a collection of mathematical and statistical
procedures that are useful for the modeling and analysis
of problems in which response of demand is affected by
several variables and the objective is to optimize this
response [13]. By using experiments and applying regres-
sion analysis, the modeling of the desirted response to
several independent input variables can be obtained.
Consequentially, the RSM is utilized to accurately describe
and identify the influence of the interactions of different
independent variables on the response when they are varied
simultaneously. In addition, it is one of the most widely
used methods to solve the optimization problem in the
manufacturing environments [14–17]. Accordingly, the
quantitative mathematical models have been carried out
on the influence of discharge current, pulse on time, duty
factor and open discharge voltage on the performance
characteristics of material removal rate (MRR), electrode
wear ratio (EWR) and surface roughness (SR) using the
RSM.
2 Experimental procedure
2.1 Equipment and workpiece material
A series of experiments were performed on a die-sinking
CNC EDM machine of type OMEGA-CM43. The electro-
lytic copper of a transverse area 10×10 mm2 was used as an
electrode. The physical and mechanical properties of
electrolytic copper are a melting point of 1,360 K, density
of 8.94 g/cm3, thermal conductivity of 226 W/m K and
electrical resistivity of 17.1 nΩm. Commercial-grade
mineral oil (TOTAL EDM44) with a flash point of 85°C
was used as the dielectric fluid and the side injection of
dielectric fluid was adopted. A jet flushing system was
employed to assure adequate flushing of the EDM process
debris from the gap zone. The electro-conductive ceramic
Al2O3+TiC was selected as the workpiece, which com-
posed approximately with (70%) of Al2O3 and (30%) of
TiC. Each experimental specimen was cut as a rectangular
block of 100×100×10 mm3. The physical and mechanical
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2008) 37:523–533 525

properties of the Al2O3+TiC mixed ceramic material are a Table 1 The EDM operating conditions
melting point of 2,473 K, density of 3.98 g/cm3, thermal Working conditions Description
conductivity of 21 W/m K, electrical resistivity of 102 Ωcm,
tensile strength of 90 kg/mm2 and hardness of 3,000 Hv. Electrode material Electrolytic copper
Electrode polarity Negative
Specimen material Al2O3+TiC mixed ceramic
2.2 Machining performance evaluations
Working area (mm2) 50×50
discharge current (IP, A) 1.5–4.5
The machining performance evaluations selected for this pulse on time (te, μs) 50–350
study were based on performance characteristics such as Duty factor(η) 0.25–0.75
material removal rate (MRR), electrode wear ratio (EWR), open discharge voltage (U, V) 90–110
and surface roughness (SR). MRR and EWR refer to the Dielectric fluid Mineral oil
machining efficiency of the EDM process and the wear of Fluid pressure (kg/mm2) 0.7
copper electrode, respectively and are defined as follows: Working time (min) 15

wear weight of workpiece

MRRðg=minÞ ¼ ð1Þ
time of machining

machining parameters were chosen as the independent

wear weight of electrode
EWRð%Þ ¼
100% ð2Þ
wear weight of workpiece
The surface roughness measurements for the machined
surface are performed with a Mitutoyo SurfTest-402. The
maximum surface roughness (Rmax, μm) was used to
evaluate the surface roughness of machined surface. For
the efficient evaluations of the EDM process, the larger
MRR and the smaller EWR and Rmax are regarded as the
best machining performance. Therefore, the MRR is
regarded as a "larger-the-better" characteristic, and both
the EWR and the Rmax are regarded as "smaller-the-better
characteristics" in this study.
2.3 Experimental design
In the EDM process, the most significant machining
parameters include the workpiece polarity, pulse on time,
pulse off time, open discharge voltage, discharge current,
dielectric fluid, and duty factor. Here the duty factor is
defined as follows:
pulse on time
Duty factorðηÞ ¼ ð3Þ
pulse on time þ pulse off time
Table 1 shows the experimental parameters in the EDM
process of Al2O3+TiC mixed ceramic. Moreover, the
settings were the most stable and recommended way to
carry out the EDM process of Al2O3+TiC mixed ceramic
material according to the bibliography in the EDM filed. In
this study, the discharge current (Ip, A), pulse on time (te,
μs), duty factor (η) and open discharge voltage (U, V) were
only taken into account as design factors for the finishing
stages. The reason why these four factors have been chosen
is that they are the most widely used among EDM
researchers [5–12]. At this moment, the electrode used in
this study was subjected to a negative polarity due to
promotion of good surface quality [5–12]. These four
input variables in the analysis of RSM.
In this study, the experimental plans were designed on
the basis of the central composite design (CCD) technique.
The factorial portion of CCD is a full factorial design with
all combinations of the factors at two levels (high, +1 and
low, −1) and composed of the eight star points, and six
central points (coded level 0), which is the midpoint
between the high and low levels. The star points are at
the face of the cube portion on the design that corresponds
to an α value of 1, and this type of design is commonly
called the “face-centered CCD”. In the present investiga-
tion, the experimental plans were conducted using the
stipulated conditions according to the face-centered CCD
and involved 30 experimental observations at four inde-
pendent input variables. Each combination of experiments
was carried out two times under the same conditions at
different times to acquire a more accurate result in the EDM
process.
The low and high levels selected for the discharge
current (Ip, A), pulse on time (te, μs), duty factor (η) and
open discharge voltage (U, V) were: 1.5 and 4.5 A, 50
and 350 μs, 0.25 and 0.75, and finally, 90 and 110 V,
respectively. Table 2 shows both coded and actual values
of the four machining parameters and their possible
ranges. The experimental matrix that was adopted in this
study in the coded form is shown in Table 3. The coded
values Xi;i¼1;2;3;4 of the processing parameter used in
Tables 2 and 3 are obtained from the following trans-
formable equations:
IP  IP0
X1 ¼ ð4Þ
ΔIP
te  te 0
X2 ¼ ð5Þ
Δte
526 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2008) 37:523–533

Table 2 Design scheme of machining parameters and their levels where X1, X2, X3 and X4 are the coded values of parameters
Parameters Unit Levels Ip, te, η and U, respectively. Ip0, te0, η0 and U0 are the values
of Ip, te, η and U at zero level. ΔIp, Δte, ΔDF and ΔU are
−1 0 +1 the intervals of variation in Ip, te, η and U, respectively.
Discharge current (IP), X1 A 1.5 3 4.5
Pulse on time (te), X2 μs 50 200 350
Duty factor (η), X3 0.25 0.5 0.75 3 Response surface modeling
Open discharge voltage (U), X4 V 90 100 110
RSM was employed for modeling and analysis of machin-
ing parameters in the EDM process in order to obtain the
relationship to the material removal rate (MRR), electrode
h  h0 wear rate ratio (EWR) and surface roughness (SR). In the
X3 ¼ ð6Þ
Δh RSM, the quantitative form of relationship between desired
response and independent input variables can be repre-
sented as following
U  U0
X4 ¼ ð7Þ Y ¼ f ðIP ; te ; h; U Þ ð8Þ
ΔU

Table 3 Design layout and experimental results

Run Coded factors Actual factors Response variables

X1 X2 X3 X4 IP te η U MRR g/min) EWR (%) SR (μm)

1 −1 −1 +1 −1 1.5 50 0.75 90 0.00412 23.3 27.4

2 −1 −1 +1 +1 1.5 50 0.75 110 0.00678 27.2 30.4
3 −1 +1 −1 +1 1.5 350 0.25 110 0.00421 23.1 35.4
4 −1 0 0 0 1.5 200 0.5 100 0.00428 21.1 17.6
5 +1 +1 −1 +1 4.5 350 0.25 110 0.00573 32.7 16.2
6 0 0 0 0 3 200 0.5 100 0.00436 22.7 15.3
7 +1 0 0 0 4.5 200 0.5 100 0.00563 23.8 12.2
8 +1 +1 −1 −1 4.5 350 0.25 90 0.00562 28.7 23.4
9 −1 −1 −1 +1 1.5 50 0.25 110 0.00326 21.7 29.4
10 −1 +1 +1 +1 1.5 350 0.75 110 0.00538 23.5 35.8
11 +1 −1 +1 −1 4.5 50 0.75 90 0.00614 28.7 16.6
12 +1 −1 +1 +1 4.5 50 0.75 110 0.00683 30.2 24.4
13 0 +1 0 0 3 350 0.5 100 0.00421 24.7 22.6
14 0 −1 0 0 3 50 0.5 100 0.00243 26.3 19.4
15 0 0 +1 0 3 200 0.75 100 0.00672 25.3 13.2
16 +1 +1 +1 +1 4.5 350 0.75 110 0.00589 32.9 17.2
17 0 0 0 0 3 200 0.5 100 0.00435 22.6 15.4
18 0 0 −1 0 3 200 0.25 100 0.00648 21.6 20.6
19 0 0 0 0 3 200 0.5 100 0.00435 22.6 15.3
20 +1 +1 +1 −1 4.5 350 0.75 90 0.00635 31.2 23.8
21 1 −1 −1 +1 4.5 50 0.25 110 0.00652 29.7 13.4
22 −1 +1 +1 −1 1.5 350 0.75 90 0.00621 26.9 32.4
23 −1 +1 −1 −1 1.5 350 0.25 90 0.00367 26.7 27.3
24 0 0 0 +1 3 200 0.5 110 0.00582 26.1 19.8
25 0 0 0 0 3 200 0.5 100 0.00435 22.6 15.4
26 0 0 0 0 3 200 0.5 100 0.00434 22.5 15.4
27 +1 −1 −1 −1 4.5 50 0.25 90 0.00452 23.2 11.4
28 0 0 0 −1 3 200 0.5 90 0.00537 24.9 22.2
29 0 0 0 0 3 200 0.5 100 0.00435 22.5 15.2
30 −1 −1 −1 −1 1.5 50 0.25 90 0.00247 20.7 16.4
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2008) 37:523–533
where Y is the desired response and f is the response
function (or response surface). In the procedure of analysis,
the approximation of Y was proposed using the fitted
second-order polynomial regression model, which is called
the quadratic model. The quadratic model was exactly
suitable for studying carefully the interactive effects of
combinative factors on the performance evaluations [13–
17]. The quadratic model of Y can be written as follows:
X
4 X
4 X
4
Y ¼ a0 þ ai Xi þ aii Xi2 þ aij Xi Xj
i¼1 i¼1 i<j
where a0 is constant, a1, aii and aij represent the coefficients
of linear, quadratic and cross product terms, respectively. Xi
reveals the coded variables corresponding to the studied
machining parameters. The material removal rate (MRR),
electrode wear ratio (EWR), and surface roughness (SR),
indicated as Y1, Y2 and Y3, respectively, were analyzed.
Using the quadratic model of f in this study not only aims
to investigate the response over the entire factor space but
also aims to locate the region of the desired target where the
response approaches its optimum or near-optimal value.
RSM is a sequential procedure and its procedure for
modeling and analysis of the effects of machining param-
eters on the performance characteristics in the EDM process
of Al2O3+TiC mixed ceramic including six steps which are
focused on:
(1) Defining the independent input variables and desired
responses with the design constraints.
(2) Adopting the face-centered CCD to plan the experi-
mental design.
(3) Performing regression analysis with the quadratic
model of RSM.
(4) Calculating the statistical analysis of variance
(ANOVA) for the independent input variables and to
find which parameter significantly affects the desired
response.
(5) Determining the situation of the quadratic model of
RSM and to decide whether the model of RSM needs
screening variables or no.
(6) Conducting confirmation experiment and verify the
predicted performance characteristics.
4 Results and discussion
The 30 experimental runs were conducted in duplicate, and
the average values of material removal rate (MRR),
electrode wear ratio (EWR), and surface roughness (SR)
along with the design matrix are listed in Table 3.
527
4.1 Mathematical model for the MRR, EWR and SR
The quadratic mathematical models were proposed for the
response variables MRR, EWR, and SR, where these were
evaluated by the F-test of ANOVA shown in Table 4. The
fit summary reveals that the fitted quadratic model is
statistically significant to analyze the values of Y1, Y2 and
Y3. The values of “Prob. > F” in Table 4 for the term of
models are less than 0.05 (i.e. α=0.05, or 95% confi-
ð9Þ dence) indicates that the obtained models are considered
to be statistically significant, which is desirable as it
demonstrates that the terms in the model have a
significant effect on the responses. The other important
coefficient R2, called the determination coefficient in the
resulting ANOVA table, is defined as the ratio of the
explained variation to the total variation and is a measure
of the degree of fit. When R2 approaches unity, the better
the response model fits the actual data. It exists the less
the difference between the predicted and actual values.
Furthermore, the value of adequate precision (AP) in this
model, which compares the range of the predicted value
at the design point to the average prediction error, is well
above 4. The value of the ratio is greater than 4, which
presents the adequate model discrimination. These mod-
els obtained present higher values of the determination
coefficients (R2) and adequate precision (AP) at the same
time.
These values were obtained as follows: R2=0.963003 and
AP=12.478213 for MRR; R2=0.956514 and AP=12.830537
for EWR; R2=0.987850 and AP=10.908320 for SR.
Consequently, these obtained mathematical models of
MRR, EWR and SR can be regard as significant effect
for fitting and predicting the experimental results and
meantime the test of lack-of-fit also displays to be
insignificant.
Table 5 shows that the values of “F-value”’ and “Prob. >
F” for each term on the performances of MRR, EWR and
SR, respectively. In the case of Y1 (MRR), the X1(Ip), X2(te),
X3(η), X4(U), X12 , X22 , X32 , X1X3 and X2X4 can be regard as
significant term due to their “Prob. > F” value being less
than 0.05. Similarly, the X1(Ip), X2(te), X3(η), X4(U), X12 , X22 ,
X42 , X1X4 and X2X4 for the Y2 (EWR), and the X1(Ip), X2(te),
X3(η), X4(U), X22 , X42 , X1X4, X2X3 and X2X4 for the Y3 (SR)
are the significant terms. The backward elimination process
eliminates the insignificant terms to adjust the fitted
quadratic models. These insignificant model terms can be
removed and the test of lack-of-fit also displays to be
insignificant. Through the backward elimination process,
the final quadratic models of response equation in terms of
coded factors are presented as follows:
528 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2008) 37:523–533

Table 4 The ANOVA table for the fitted models

Source Sum of squares Degrees of freedom Mean square f-value Prob. >F

(a) For MRR

Model 3.99292E-05 14 2.85208E-06 8.9422231 <0.0001 Significant
Residual 4.78418E-06 15 3.18946E-07
Lack of fit 4.78398E-06 10 4.78398E-07 11959.96126 0.673237 Not significant
Pure error 2E-10 5 4E-11
Cor. total 4.47133E-05 29
Standard deviation=0.000564 R2=0.963003
Mean=0.005024 R2 Adjusted=0.923139
Coefficient of variation=11.239605 Predicted R2=0.415017
Predicted residual error of sum of squares (PRESS)=2.61565E-05 Adequate precision (AP)=12.478213
(b) For EWR
Model 323.157336 14 23.082666 323.157336 <0.0001 Significant
Residual 29.436330 15 1.962422 29.436330
Lack of fit 29.407997 10 2.940799 29.407997 0.873262 Not significant
Pure error 0.02833333 5 0.005666 0.028333
Cor. total 352.593666 29 352.593666
Standard deviation=1.400864 R2=0.956514
Mean=25.323333 R2 Adjusted=0.838595
Coefficient of variation=5.531912 Predicted R2=0.459486
Predicted residual error of sum of squares (PRESS)=190.581612 Adequate precision (AP)=12.830537
(c) For SR
Model 1240.062171 14 88.575869 1240.062171 <0.0001 Significant
Residual 156.639495 15 10.442633 156.6394956
Lack of fit 156.606162 10 15.660616 156.606162 1.345722 Not significant
Pure error 0.033333 5 0.006666 0.033333
Cor. total 1396.701667 29 1396.701667
Standard deviation=3.231506 R2=0.987850
Mean=20.683333 R2 Adjusted=0.8831774
Coefficient of variation=15.623721 Predicted R2=0.332552

Predicted residual error of sum of squares (PRESS)=932.224604Adequate precision (AP)=10.908320

Table 5 Results of the analysis of variance for the each term on the performances MRR, EWR and SR

Symbol Degree of freedom MRR EWR SR

F-value Prob. > F F-value Prob. > F F-value Prob. > F

X1(IP) 1 28.761868 <0.0001* 62.270273 <0.0001* 46.509396 <0.0001*

X2(te) 1 6.772623 0.0213* 10.654634 0.0052* 10.917265 0.0048*
X3(η) 1 24.832445 0.0002* 12.603756 0.0029* 4.682037 0.0416*
X4(U) 1 6.166585 0.0253* 4.638259 0.0479* 5.368549 0.0446*
X12 1 10.000715 0.0790* 6.772472 0.0233* 0.599459 0.4508
X22 1 21.965598 0.0003* 6.893908 0.0191* 5.126574 0.0388*
X32 1 21.731873 0.0003* 0.072965 0.7907 0.049267 0.8273
X42 1 3.230448 0.0924 6.893908 0.0191* 5.126574 0.0388*
X1X2 1 2.082564 0.1695 1.304510 0.2713 0.935168 0.3489
X1X3 1 7.196289 0.0170* 0 1.0000 0.000059 0.9939
X1X4 1 0.131762 0.7217 7.950634 0.0129* 5.938696 0.0277*
X2X3 1 1.224738 0.2859 3.714797 0.0731 5.715371 0.0202*
X2X4 1 9.007883 0.0089* 6.421911 0.0229* 4.725879 0.0461*
X3X4 1 0.373182 0.5504 0.561805 0.4651 0.412312 0.5305
Residual 15
Total 29

* indicates the significant term

Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2008) 37:523–533
– the material removal rate (MRR, g/min)
Y1 ¼ 0:004700 þ 0:000713X1 þ 0:000233X2
þ 0:000663X3 þ 0:000331X4
þ 0:000176X12  0:001458X22
þ 0:001821X32  0:000378X1 X3
 0:000423X2 X4
– the electrode wear ratio (EWR, %)
Y2 ¼ 22:915151 þ 2:605555X1 þ 1:077777X2
þ 1:172222X3 þ 0:711111X4
 0:695454X12 þ 2:354545X22
þ 2:354545X42 þ 0:9875X1 X4
 0:8875X2 X4
– the surface roughness (SR, μm)
Y3 ¼ 15:786559  5:194444X1 þ 2:516666X2
þ 1:538888X3 þ 1:172222X4
þ 4:080645X22 þ 4:080645X42
 1:96875X1 X4  1:33125X2 X3
 1:75625X2 X4
In terms of actual factors the final quadratic models of
response equation are as follows:
– the material removal rate (MRR, g/min)
Y1 ¼  0:003432 þ 0:000509IP þ 5:57268
105 te
 0:023467η þ 8:95556
105 U
þ 7:86364
105 Ip2  6:4803
108 te2
þ 0:029150η  0:00101Ip η
2
 2:825
107 te U
– the electrode wear ratio (EWR, %)
Y2 ¼ 251:586700  2:991750IP þ 0:024493te
þ 4:688888η  4:717146U  0:309090IP2
þ 0:000104te2 þ 0:023545U 2
þ 0:065833IP U  0:000591te U
529
– the surface roughness (SR, μm)
Y3 ¼ 356:997222 þ 9:662037lp þ 0:079066te
þ 13:255555η  7:416151U
þ 0:000181te2 þ 0:040806U 2
 0:13125lp U  0:0355te η
ð10Þ  0:001170te U ð15Þ
The above mathematical model can be used to predict
the values of MRR, EWR, and SR within the limits of the
factors studied. The differences between the measured and
predicted response are illustrated in Figs. 1, 2, and 3. The
results of comparison were proven to predict the values of
MRR, EWR, and SR close to those readings recorded
experimentally with a 95% confidence interval.
ð11Þ
4.2 The effect of processing parameters on the MRR
According to the results of ANOVA in Table 4, a sensitivity
analysis used for identifying the factors significantly
affecting the performance evaluation is performed and
shown in Fig. 4. From the results of percent contribution
for each significant machining parameters, the first two
significant factors on the MRR are the discharge current (IP)
and the duty factor (η) with the contribution of 20.05 and
ð12Þ 17.31%, respectively. As for the EDM process, the electrical
spark-erosion process occurred successively, and then the
removal of melt resulted in the form of crater on the
machined surface. The amount of melt removal determines
the degree of MRR. The general trend of increase in the
diameter and the depth of craters with increase in the
discharge current are clearly observed. The increase of
discharge current causes an increase in the discharge energy
0.010
The material removal rate (MRR, g/min)
measured
0.008
predicted
0.006
ð13Þ
0.004
0.002
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Experimental run
Fig. 1 Comparison of measured and predicted value for material
ð14Þ removal rate (MRR, g/min)
530 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2008) 37:523–533

40
chopping on the gap between the workpiece and the
Measured
electrode, and hence it creates a short circuit and decreases
35
The electrode wear rate (EWR, %)

predicted the efficiency of electrical spark-erosion.

30
25
20
15
10
2 4 6 8
Experimental run
Fig. 2 Comparison of measured and predicted value for electrode
wear rate (EWR, %)
at the discharge point to improve the rate of melting and
evaporation. At this moment, increasing the spark energy
has resulted in a larger amount of melt removal due to more
craters formed on the machined surface.
The influences of machining parameters on the perfor-
mance of MRR have been analyzed based on the above
proposed mathematical model in section 4.1. Figure 5
depicts the effects of discharge current (IP) and pulse on
time (te) on the value of MRR under the duty factor of 0.5
and open discharge voltage of 100 V. The MRR is shown to
continually increase with an increase of discharge current
since the higher spark energy produces more and bigger
craters on the machined surface, resulting in higher material
removal. In Fig. 5, the value of MRR is shown to generally
increase with an increase of pulse on time, up to 200 μs,
and then decreases with a further increase in the pulse on
time. This event has been attributed to the increase of input
energy in the high pulse on time, which results in more
40
35
The surface roughness (SR, µm)
Figure 6 shows the effects of duty factor (η) and open
discharge voltage (U) on the value of MRR under the
discharge current of 3.0 A and pulse on time of 200 μs. In
general, both the duty factor and the open discharge voltage
determine the status of input energy in the EDM process.
From Fig. 6, it can be seen that an increase in both the duty
factor and the open discharge voltage leads to an increase
of the MRR. The increase of open discharge voltage means
that the electric field becomes stronger and the spark
10 12 14 16 18 20
discharge occurs more easily under the same gap. The
increase of the duty factor means applying the spark
discharging time for a long time and this will cause an
increase in the discharge times and machining efficiency,
and subsequently an increase in the amount of melted
material removal.
4.3 The effect of processing parameters on the EWR
The electrode wear of EDM process includes corner wear,
side wear, and end wear. The status of electrode wear affects
the dimensional accuracy of machined components due to
the die-sinking EDM process is the projection manufacture.
From the results of Fig. 4, the first two significant factors on
the EWR are the discharge current (IP) and the pulse on time
(te) with the contribution of 37.12 and 18.46%, respectively.
Figure 7 shows the effects of discharge current (IP) and
pulse on time (te) on the value of EWR under the duty factor
of 0.5 and open discharge voltage of 100 V. The value of
EWR is shown to quickly decrease with an increase of pulse
on time. However, the increase is diminished after 200 μs
and the value of EWR stays constant. In Fig. 7, it can also
can be seen that the value of EWR decreases with an
increase of the discharge current.
The effects of duty factor (η) and open discharge voltage
(U) on the value of EWR under the discharge current of
3.0 A and pulse on time of 200 μs are presented in Fig. 8,
which shows that the value of EWR generally increases with

30
increases of the duty factor and open discharge voltage.
25 Machining at the higher open discharge voltage and long
spark discharging time lead to generation of higher spark
20
energy, which causes an increase of electrode wear.
15

Measured
4.4 The effect of processing parameters on the SR
10
predicted
5 It can be apparently shown that the most significant factor
on the SR is discharge current (IP), which explains 48.39%
0
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 contribution of the total variation in the results of Fig. 4.
Experimental run The next contribution comes from the pulse on time (te)
Fig. 3 Comparison of measured and predicted value for surface with a contribution of 11.36%. From Fig. 5 in the
roughness (SR, μm) section 4.2, it can be seen that the diameter and the depth
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2008) 37:523–533 531

Fig. 4 Sensitivity analysis of 60

processing parameters on the
55
MRR, EWR, and SR the material removal rate (MRR)
50 the electrode wear rate (EWR)
45 the surface roughness (SR)
40

Contribution (%)
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

IP te η U IP
2 2
te η2 U2 I P te IPη IP U t eη teU ηU

of craters on the SEM micrograph of EDM machined discharge current of 3.0 A and pulse on time of 200 μs.
surface increase with an increase in the discharge current, The increase of open discharge voltage increases the
and hence the surface roughness consequently increases. surface roughness as shown in Fig. 10, due to the increase
Therefore, the increase of discharge current increases the of discharge energy, as discussed above. Furthermore, it can
surface roughness, as shown in Fig. 9, due to an increase of be seen that the value of SR decreases with the duty factor.
the diameter and the depth of craters. However, the SR The increase of duty factor leads to a decrease in the plus
value first decreases with an increase of pulse on time off time, which shortens the duration time. The duration
before 150 μs and then increases with a further increase in time represents the status of cycle time. Therefore a
the pulse on time. This result has been attributed to the decrease in the duration time allows applying the heat
lower discharge energy, which does not explode the energy for a shorter cycle time and containing lower
machined surface at the low value of pulse on time. For pressure energy. The machined surface has more fine
the higher melting point and lower electric conductivity of pockmarks, which also decrease the surface roughness.
ceramic material, the higher discharge energy is sufficient
to damage the electric insulation and create the energy
dissolution. Hence the machined surface is impacted and 5 Conclusions
results in higher surface roughness at the high value of
pulse on time. Mathematical models of the material removal rate (MRR),
Figure 10 shows the effects of duty factor (η) and open electrode wear ratio (EWR), and surface roughness (SR)
discharge voltage (U) on the value of SR under the were carried out to correlate dominant machining parame-

0.006 0.008
η=0.5, U=100V IP=3.0A,te=200µs
The material removal rate (MRR, g/min)

The material removal rate (MRR, g/min)

0.007 Open discharge voltage (U)

0.005
110V
0.006 100V
90V

0.004 0.005

Discharge current (IP) 0.004

0.003
4.5A
3.0A 0.003
1.5A

0.002 0.002
50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 0.25 0.35 0.45 0.55 0.65 0.75
Pulse on time (te, µsec) Duty factor (η)
Fig. 5 The effects of discharge current (IP) and pulse on time (te) on Fig. 6 The effects of duty factor (η) and open discharge voltage (U)
the value of MRR under the duty factor of 0.5 and open discharge on the value of MRR under the discharge current of 3.0 A and pulse
voltage of 100 V on time of 200 μs
532 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2008) 37:523–533

30 30
Discharge current (IP) η=0.5, U=100V
Discharge current (IP ) η=0.5, U=100V 28
28 4.5A
The electrode wear rate (EWR, %)

1.5A 26

The surface roughness (SR, µm)

3.0A
3.0A
24 1.5A
4.5A
26
22
20
24
18
16
22
14

20 12
10
18 8
50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Pulse on time (te, µs) Pulse on time (te, µs)
Fig. 7 The effects of discharge current (IP) and pulse on time (te) on Fig. 9 The effects of discharge current (IP) and pulse on time (te) on
the value of EWR under the duty factor of 0.5 and open discharge the value of SR under the duty factor of 0.5 and open discharge
voltage of 100 V voltage of 100 V

ters, including the discharge current, pulse on time, duty factor (η). The discharge current (IP) and the pulse on
factor, and open discharge voltage, in the EDM process of time (te) have statistical significance on both the value
Al2O3+TiC mixed ceramic. An experimental plan of a face- of EWR and SR.
centered CCD based on the RSM was employed to carry (3) The value of MRR first increases with an increase of
out the experimental study. The influences of machining pulse on time up to 200 μs, and then decreases with a
parameters on the performance characteristics in the EDM further increase in the pulse on time. The value of
process of Al2O3+TiC mixed ceramic were analyzed based MRR increases with an increase of discharge current,
on the developed mathematical model to yield the follow- duty factor, and open discharge voltage.
ing conclusions: (4) The value of EWR quickly decreases with an increase
of pulse on time and then tends to stabilize. The value
(1) The results of ANOVA and comparisons of experimen- of EWR decreases with an increase of the discharge
tal data represent that the mathematical models of the current, but the value of EWR increases with an
value of MRR, ERW, and SR are fairly well fitted with increase of duty factor and open discharge voltage.
the experimental values with a 95% confidence interval. (5) The value of SR first decreases with an increase of
(2) The two main significant factors affecting the value pulse on time before 150 μs and then increases with a
of the MRR are the discharge current (IP) and the duty further increase in the pulse on time. The value of SR

29 24
Open discharge voltage (U) IP=3.0A,te=200µs IP=3.0A,te=200µs
28 110V
22
The electrode wear rate (EWR, %)

100V
The surface roughness (SR, µm)

27 90V
20
26

25 18

24
16
Open discharge voltage (U)
23
14 110V
22 100V
90V
21 12
0.25 0.35 0.45 0.55 0.65 0.75 0.25 0.35 0.45 0.55 0.65 0.75
Duty factor (η) Duty factor (η)
Fig. 8 The effects of duty factor (η) and open discharge voltage (U) Fig. 10 The effects of duty factor (η) and open discharge voltage (U)
on the value of EWR under the discharge current of 3.0 A and pulse on the value of SR under the discharge current of 3.0 A and pulse on
on time of 200 μs time of 200 μs
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2008) 37:523–533
increases with an increase of discharge current and
open discharge voltage, but, decreases with an increase
of duty factor.
References
1. Schwartz MM (1995) Engineering applications of ceramic
materials. Am Soc Metals, Metals Park, Ohio
2. Klocke F (1997) Modern approaches for the production of
ceramic components. J Eur Ceram Soc 17:457–465
3. Allor RL, Jahanmir S (1996) Current problems and future
directions for ceramic machining. Am Soc Bull 75(7):40–43
4. McGeough JA (1988) Advanced methods of machining. Chapman
& Hall, New York
5. Ajmal AJ (1981) The electrical discharge machining of silicon
carbide. MSc Thesis, UMIST, UK
6. Martin C, Cales B, Vivier P, Mathieu P (1989) Electrical discharge
machinable ceramic composites. Mater Sci Eng A 109:352–356
7. Lee TC, Lau WS (1991) Materials manufacturing processes.
Chapman & Hall, New York, pp 635–648
8. Matsuo T, Oshima E (1992) Investigation on the optimum carbide
content and machining condition for wire EDM of zirconia
ceramics. Ann CIRP 41(1):231–234
533
9. Zhang JH, Lee TC, Lau WS (1997) Study on the electro-discharge
machining of a hot pressed aluminum oxide based ceramic. J
Mater Process Technol 63:908–912
10. Sanchez JA, Cabanes I, Lopez de Lacalle LN, Lamikiz A (2001)
Development of optimum electrodischarge machining technology
for advanced ceramics. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 18:897–905
11. Lauwers B, Kruth JP, Liu W, Eeraerts W, Schacht B, Bleys P (2004)
Investigation of material removal mechanisms in EDM of composite
ceramic materials. J Mater Process Technol 149:347–352
12. Luis CJ, Puertas I, Villa G (2005) Material removal rate and
electrode wear study on the EDM of silicon carbide. J Mater
Process Technol 164–165:889–896
13. Myers RH, Montgomery DH (1995) Response surface methodol-
ogy. Wiley, New York
14. Grum J, Slab JM (2004) The use of factorial design and response
surface methodology for fast determination of optimal heat
treatment conditions of different Ni-Co-Mo surface layers. J
Mater Process Technol 155–156:2026–2032
15. Ozcelik B, Erzurmlu T (2005) Determination of effecting
dimensional parameters on warpage of thin shell plastic parts
using integrated response surface method and genetic algorithm.
Int Commun Heat Mass Transf 32:1085–1094
16. Kansal HK, Singh S, Kumar P (2005) Parametric optimization of
powder mixed electrical discharge machining by response surface
methodology. J Mater Process Technol 169:427–436
17. Oktem H, Erzurmlu T, Kurtaran H (2005) Application of response
surface methodology in the optimization of cutting conditions for
surface roughness. J Mater Process Technol 170:11–16