The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-019-04564-7

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Machinability of titanium alloy through laser machining: material

removal and surface roughness analysis
Naveed Ahmed 1,2 & Shafiq Ahmad 2 & Saqib Anwar 2 & Amjad Hussain 1 & Madiha Rafaqat 1 & Mazen Zaindin 3

Received: 27 June 2019 / Accepted: 4 October 2019

# Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Abstract
Laser milling is a competent precision process especially when the work material is hard-to-machine such as titanium alloys.
While performing the laser milling, a slight change in one of the laser parameters results in an abrupt change in the machining
outcomes. A close match between the designed and the machined geometries is the essence of precision machining. A precise
control over the material removal rate per laser scan is highly desirable but difficult to achieve. The difficulty level becomes
higher if high surface finish is desired alongside the precision machining. In this research, the objective was set to perform the
laser milling on titanium alloy (Ti-6Al-4V) with 100% control over material removal rate (MRR) per laser scan and minimum
surface roughness (SR). Influence of the five laser parameters (laser intensity, pulse frequency, scan speed, layer thickness, and
track displacement) on MRR and SR has been deeply investigated. Significance of each laser parameter is evaluated through
ANOVA. Mathematical models for both the responses are developed to estimate the resulting responses at any parametric setting.
Models have also been validated through confirmatory tests. Optimization of laser parameters is of great importance to remove
the material exactly equal to the desired depth with minimum surface roughness. Therefore, the optimized combinations of laser
parameters have been proposed which ensure the conformance of 100% MRR and minimum surface roughness with composite
desirability > 0.9. Confirmatory experiments revealed that the optimized parameters are capable to produce the laser milling
results as per the models’ predicted results. Additionally, the microstructure of the subsequent layers below the milled area has
also been examined and compared with the microstructure of the bulk Ti-6Al-4V. By the use of optimized parameters, micro-
structure of the sub-layers remains unchanged as compared with the microstructure of the base metal. No evidence has been
found altering the microstructure of the sub-layers.

Keywords Laser milling . Titanium alloy . Material removal rate (MRR) . Surface roughness (SR) . Mathematical model .
Optimization

1 Introduction sectors such as aeronautics, biomedical, chemicals, shipbuild-

ing, and automobile. Titanium alloys have remarkable prop-
Titanium and its variants are considered as the materials of the erties including high strength-to-weight ratio, low thermal
present and future because of their use in numerous industrial conductivity, low density, better toughness, and excellent

* Naveed Ahmed Mazen Zaindin

anaveed@ksu.edu.sa zainudin@ksu.edu.sa

Shafiq Ahmad 1
Department of Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering, University
ashafiq@ksu.edu.sa of Engineering and Technology, Lahore, Pakistan
2
Saqib Anwar Department of Industrial Engineering, College of Engineering, King
sanwar@ksu.edu.sa Saud University, Riyadh 11421, Saudi Arabia
3
Amjad Hussain Department of Statistics and Operations Research, College of
chamjad@gmail.com Science, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Madiha Rafaqat
madiharafaqat@yahoo.com

corrosion resistance as compared with other materials. Due to
these properties, machining of titanium is considered as cum-
bersome especially through conventional processes in which
rapid tool wear and serious adhesion are the significant issues
[1]. Non-conventional machining practices are therefore used
to deal with such difficult-to-machine alloys. Such practices
include electric discharge machining (EDM) [2, 3], ultrasonic
machining [4], electrochemical machining [5, p., 60], laser-
assisted machining [6], plasma-assisted machining [7], and
ultrasonic-assisted machining [8]. Laser cladding is also stated
as an alternate of machining to develop 3D parts by avoiding
the material wastage as experienced during machining in the
form of chips [9]. In this process, laser energy is used to
generate a melt pool in the substrate and filler metal is added
to get the desired geometry of the part [10].
Laser beam machining (LBM) is another promising choice
to fabricate macro- as well as micro-machining features in
titanium and other difficult-to-cut alloys such as Inconel alloys
[11]. LBM is approximately a force-free machining process
capable of producing 2D and 3D features in a wide variety of
materials. It involves several parameters including pulse ener-
gy, lamp current, pulse repetition rate, scanning style, scan-
ning speed, spot overlap, layer thickness, and a number of
laser passes. [12]. Thus, the involvement of these parameters,
acting simultaneously, makes the LBM process complex in
nature. The rate of material erosion, crater size, and the
resulting surface integrity depend on these parameters and
can severely be affected by a slight change in one or the other
laser parameters.
The influence of LBM process parameters on different ma-
chining characteristics, material removal rate, and surface
roughness in particular is reviewed in this paragraph. The
purpose of this review is to capture the work done in the
context of MRR and SR. Majority of the cited work have
reported on either maximizing or improving the MRR during
LBM. Not even a single study could be found in which the
objective is set to achieve the desired rate of material removal
according to the designed feature geometry. This is the re-
search gap and motive of the present research. For example,
during the micro-milling of Inconel 718 through fiber laser, it
has been reported that scanning speed, pulse frequency, and
laser power significantly affect the surface roughness as well
as the material removal rate [13]. Umer et al. [14] investigated
the effects of Nd:YAG laser parameters on milling quality.
Achieving maximum material removal rate and minimum sur-
face roughness was the main objective. High laser intensity
and pulse overlap are reported as the most significant factors
affecting the MRR and surface roughness of the milled alumi-
na ceramic. The results presented in [15] indicate that high
pulse rate increases the surface roughness in laser-machined
ceramic surfaces. Study to achieve high MRR during
Nd:YAG fiber LBM of carbon fiber–reinforced composites
can also be seen in [16]. Yang et al. [17] studied the effect of
Int J Adv Manuf Technol
ultraviolet nano-second laser parameters on the oxidation lay-
er thickness formed on the titanium alloy (Ti-6Al-4V). Closer
hatching distance between the successive laser scans along
with low scan speed causes a thermal accumulation which
ultimately develops aggressive MRR. Thus, the combination
of low scan speed and closer hatch distance could be another
alternate to improve the MRR. In another research [18], it has
been stated that low pulse frequency, high current, and high
scanning speed results in intense machining impressions, thus
leading towards high MRR. Temperature distribution caused
by laser intensity is the important aspect contributing to
achieve high MRR. In addition to laser peak power, pulse
width and pulse frequency have also been reported as the
dominant factors affecting the MRR for aluminum [19].
Puoza et al. [20] used laser micro-machining to produce
micro-dimples in different steel grades and reported that the
quality and the geometry of the micro-dimples depend on the
laser absorption rate of targeted material. The diameter and
depth of laser-produced dimples are mainly influenced by
laser power. Pulse time has also been reported as a source of
heat accumulation which affects the depth of the ablated ma-
terial. Ghosal and Pital [21] studied the machining parameters
of ytterbium fiber laser during machining of aluminum-based
composite. They developed mathematical models to achieve
maximum material removal rate and minimum taper angle.
High aspect ratio machining through LBM may require low
MRR as the melt ejection becomes difficult, especially if the
feature is of micro nature. Therefore, high laser fluence might
result in low MRR during deep machining. Microstructure of
the laser-machined surfaces also plays important role during
MRR and material ejection [22]. Roughness of the laser-
machined surface is a function of pulse overlap and pulse
frequency whereas the laser intensity mainly controls the
MRR. Higher laser intensity results in high MRR [23].
Schille et al. [24] evaluated the influence of laser parameters
while machining stainless steel, copper, and aluminum sub-
strates through femtosecond LBM. Ablation rate, surface
roughness, MRR, and wall angle have considered as the pro-
cess responses. High MRR has been reported under the influ-
ence of high pulse repetition rates. Ultrashort laser pulses are
also promising candidates for precision machining [25].
Likewise, in another study, the micro-machining efficiency
with femtosecond and picosecond lasers is compared and
found that femtosecond lasers can result significantly in
higher MRR as compared with picosecond lasers. Optimum
set of laser parameters has also been proposed to achieve
maximum MRR and quality of micro-machining [26].
Williams et al. [27] employed ytterbium fiber laser on alumi-
num substrate to investigate the effects of laser parameters in
order to achieve highest MRR with low surface roughness.
They developed an optimal parametric combination for low
surface roughness and highest MRR. While LBM of 7075
aluminum alloy through Nd:YVO4, it has been revealed that
Int J Adv Manuf Technol
the surface roughness has a direct relationship with laser beam
power whereas inverse relationship with scanning speed [28].
Wee et al. [29] performed laser micro-machining on stainless
steel inserts to investigate the parametric effects on dimen-
sional accuracy (laser-ablated depth) and surface finish.
Insert quality, in terms of dimensional accuracy and surface
finish, was analyzed under varying levels of laser power, pulse
frequency, hatch-track spacing, scanning speed, and number
of laser passes. Likewise, Ogawa et al. [30] performed deep
laser milling on hardened die steel to evaluate the laser track-
ing irradiation effects on LBM accuracy.
Almost all the non-traditional machining processes offer
low material removal rate (MRR). Therefore, an extensive
research data can be found in literature discussing different
approaches to maximize or to improve the material removal
rates of unconventional machining processes like LBM. In
this connection, optimum search of parametric combination
is the most widely studied approach to maximize MRR and
minimize surface roughness for different materials [21, 24, 27,
31]. For example, Yu et al. [32] developed a correlation be-
tween picosecond laser parameters and the corresponding
micro-groove features fabricated in Ti-6Al-4V. Ghosal and
Manna [33] investigated the effects of laser parameters on
MRR and tapering phenomenon and developed mathematical
models to achieve maximum MRR with minimum taper.
Hossain et al. [34] studied the kerf width generated during
LBM and stated that it is difficult to develop a precise func-
tional relationship between input and output variables of
LBM.
From the above literature, it can be inferred that the
investigation of laser parametric effects on material re-
moval rate, surface roughness and dimensional accuracy
is remained the researchers’ interest. With reference to
the laser milling performance, those process conditions
are being sought which are capable of resulting highest
possible rate of material removal. However, maximizing
the material removal rate is not always desired. There
are many applications where a machinist requires to
produce machining features with targeted depths or ma-
chined volume. Such applications include the develop-
ment of cavities and other machining features in dies
and molds. In this perspective, the control of the mate-
rial removal experienced after each of the scanning cy-
cle (thickness of the layer of the removed material after
once scanning cycle) is essential in order to get the
precise geometry (depth and roughness) of the profile.
Thus, the factors affecting the control over the material
removal have been sought and the optimized range of
parameters is recommended which is the novel aspect of
the present research. By utilizing the mathematical
models developed after a long list of experiments, the
actual ablated depth of the machined feature along with
minimum surface roughness can be estimated and
compared with the theoretical depth. In this way, a huge
effort of the laser machinist can be significantly allevi-
ated which otherwise needs to spare for reaching at the
suitable laser parameters capable of producing the pre-
cise depth of the machined feature.
2 Problem formulation and research
objectives
Obtaining the actual depth of the machined feature (especially
micro-feature) exactly equal to the designed depth is not easy.
The issue becomes more challenging during laser beam ma-
chining (LBM) since a slight change in a process parameter
results in different ablation behaviors and a huge variation in
the amount of material removed. The erratic rate of material
removal consequently yields the imprecise machining geom-
etry, milling depth in particular. Therefore, a solution to max-
imize the MRR of laser machining is not always a valid op-
tion. Rather, a precise control over the material removal after
each scanning cycle could be a more practical solution of laser
machining inaccuracies. This is the research gap and novelty
of the current research with respect to LBM for the targeted
material removal rate per laser scan with minimum surface
roughness. Hence, in this research, LBM of titanium alloy
(Ti-6Al-4V) has been carried out and the effects of five im-
portant laser parameters on material removal rate and surface
roughness are analyzed. The following objectives are defined
to deal with the said problem:
i. Understanding the behavior of different process parame-
ters in relation to MRR and the attained surface roughness.
ii. Achieving the depth of the micro-machined surfaces ex-
actly equal to the designed depth.
iii. Minimizing the surface roughness of the micro-
impressions.
iv. Developing the mathematical models to predict the ma-
terial removal rate and surface roughness.
v. Seeking for the optimized parametric combinations capa-
ble of producing precise machining (minimum difference
between the actual and the designed milling depth) with
minimum surface roughness.
Moreover, the microstructure of the sub-machined layers is
studied to evaluate the effect of the optimized parameters. By
the use of optimized parameters, the microstructure of sub-
layers remains unchanged as compared with the microstruc-
ture of the base metal. No evidence has been found altering the
microstructure of sub-layers. The research outcomes are fur-
ther employed to produce micro-feature with geometry other
than the geometry from which the conclusions are drawn. In
this way, the generalization of the presented results is also
ensured.

3 Experimental details
3.1 Experimental setup
Laser milling has been performed on titanium alloy (Ti-
6Al-4V) substrates having an average surface roughness
of Ra 6.38 μm prior to laser machining. A Q-switched
Nd:YAG pulsed laser with beam diameter of 20 μm and
wavelength of 1064 nm was used as a source of energy
for machining Ti-6Al-4V. Lasertec 40 provided by
DMG Mori Sieki is used during the experimentation.
It has two options to select the laser beam diameter,
i.e., 20 μm and 70 μm. The beam diameters were mea-
sured through 1/e2 method. It should be noticed that the
calibration of the setup is carried out on annual bases.
During the calibration of the machine, the laser param-
eters including the average power, peak power, pulse
width, scanning, and associated errors are measured
and corrected. A graph has been developed between
the actually measured power and the input lamp current
intensity. The proportion between the two variables
(power and lamp current intensity) remains the same.
It is also noticeable that the relative movement between
the laser beam and the workpiece is carried out by two
ways. If the machining feature is of 60 mm × 60 mm
(length × width); then, the worktable moves under the
action of CNC code. However, if the machining feature
is of dimension less than the said range, a galvanometer
adjusts the mirrors to complete the scanning cycle.
During the feature designing and the part programming,
the scanning path is defined using the machine’s built-in
software LPSWin. By following the part program, the
galvanometer adjusts the mirrors to perform the laser
scanning. In the present research, the relative movement
between the laser beam and workpiece is accomplished
by following the second option as stated above, i.e.,
with the help of the galvanometer and the positioning
of the mirrors.
Slots of rectangular cross section with 5 mm length and
3 mm width were machined. The experimental setup, sche-
matic, and actual machined slots are presented in Fig. 1. Since
the material removal during LBM follows a localized melting
and crater formation, therefore, the accumulation of craters
across the scanned surface generates the machined surface.
Since the depth of a crater is of micro- and nano-sized, there-
fore, very thin layer of the material is removed after each laser
scan. If the roughness of the substrate before LBM is greater
than 2 μm, it has been noticed that the micro-milling depth of
2 μm or less is not possible. Therefore, the milling depth has
been selected as approximately twofold the roughness of the
substrate before machining. Hence, keeping in view the pre-
machined surface roughness of the substrates, i.e., 6.38 μm,
the milled slots were designed to have a 12-μm depth.
Int J Adv Manuf Technol
4 Materials and methods
Titanium alloys such as Ti-6Al-4V are being widely used in
several industries including aerospace, automotive, and bio-
medical ones. Various forms of geometrical features (macro
and micro dimension) are desired in the said applications for
which the machining is required to perform. Ti-6Al-4V is a
well-known material which is universally considered as a
challenging material in the area of conventional machining.
High hardness of Ti-6Al-4V causes the frequent tool wear and
rupture. Laser beam machining offers a competitive alternate
in which the machining is performed through the use of high-
intensity laser light, thus eliminating the fear of tool wear and
ruptures. However, there are numerous factors involved dur-
ing laser machining which can affect the material removal and
roughness of the machined surface. The main categorical fac-
tors include the type of laser, properties of the laser beam, type
and properties of substrate material, type of debris extraction
system, and laser process parameters. Each of these major
factors has further sub-factors as presented in Fig. 2
(Ishikawa diagram). In this study, the process parameters are
taken as the variables while keeping all the other factors as
constants. The range of each variable is selected based on the
trial runs and the machine manufacturer’s guidelines. The ma-
chine can produce 30 W power by utilizing the lamp current
(I) at 100 % intensity. Thus, various levels of lamp current
intensities were employed to analyze the milling performance
and finally the intensity ranging within 75–85% of the maxi-
mum intensity was found to be a promising range. Hence, a
large number of pilot experiments were performed to identify
the other important laser parameters affecting the milling per-
formance. The range of each parameter is broadly recom-
mended by the manufacturer of Lasertec 40 for certain classes
of materials such as steels, ceramics, and alloys. However, for
a particular material, the machinist has to decide the range by
its own. Thus, initially wider ranges were employed to test the
behavior on milling performance and later on those ranges are
selected which ensured meaningful machining results. For
example, the scanning speed was tested between 20 and 700
mm/s with an increment of 20 mm/s. Very low scan speeds, <
100 mm/s, caused excessive melting due to which the molten
debris were stuck inside the slots as shown in Fig. 3a. Very
high scan speeds, > 500 mm/s, just imparted printing impres-
sions rather to create milling depth (see Fig. 3b). Therefore,
the range of scan speed for mature experimentation was se-
lected between 200 and 400 mm/s. Similarly, the effective
ranges of all the other parameters were identified. In this
way, 5 out of 11 parameters were selected as the input vari-
ables, namely lamp current intensity (I), pulse frequency ( f ),
laser scanning speed (V), track displacement between two
successive laser tracks (TD), and thickness of the substrate
layer to be removed per laser scan (LT). The remaining pa-
rameters were kept constant. The lists of fixed parameters and
Int J Adv Manuf Technol

Nd:YAG laser Reflecting mirror

(Resonator)
Focusing lens
Galvanometer head

Laser beam

Substrate
Z

Y
X

CNC work table

Machine body

Fig. 1 Experimental setup: schematic and actual machined samples

variables with their levels are shown in Tables 1 and 2, respec-
tively. Material removal rate and surface roughness of the
milled area were considered as the machinability indicators.
Response surface methodology (RMS)–based full factorial
face-centered central composite design (FCCCD) was used as
design of experiments. Minitab 17 has been used to develop
design of experiment and to perform further analysis. With the
inclusion of 5 factors having 3 levels of each, a design of
experiments (DOE) was obtained with 32 cube points, 8 cen-
ter points in cube, 10 axial points, and 4 center points in axial
resulting in 54 base experimental runs (details are shown in
Table 3).
As the designed depth of machined slot was kept 12 μm;
therefore, the number of laser scanning passes over the milled
area was 12 when layer thickness (or depth of cut) of 1 μm
was selected. Likewise, when the layer thicknesses of 2 μm
and 3 μ were employed, the numbers of laser passes over the
entire milled surface were 6 and 4, respectively. In this way,
the milling time was solely relying on the number of laser
passes. The depth of each milled slot was measured at three
different locations through the depth-measuring probe of
Lasertec 40 and an average depth of each slot was recorded.
It is important to notice that during laser machining when laser
scanning completes its scanning cycle in one laser pass then

Laser type Laser beam

Microsecond Mode of operation Beam dia Spot dia

Pulsed Beam profile Focal distance

Nanosecond
Focus position
Picosecond Wavelength
Continuous wave Power
Femtosecond Pulse duration
Laser Beam Machining
Targeted MRR
Melting point Extraction type Pulse repetition rate Minimum Surface roughness
Lamp current
Thermal conductivity External gas Number of passes Scan speed
Type
Absorptivity Vacuum suction Scan strategy Layer thickness
Surface state Extraction pressure Focus position Laser track displacement
Reflectivity

Substrate material Debris extraction Process parameters

Fig. 2 Possible factors affecting the laser beam machining performance (material removal rate and surface roughness)
 Int J Adv Manuf Technol

(a) (b)
Melt accumulaon

milling Impression with

proper melt ejecon

Milling slot filled with

re-solidified debris No milling depth

Fig. 3 Milling results of trial experiments for selecting the effective range of parameters: a milling under very low scan speed 20 mm/s and b milling
under very high scan speed 700 mm/s

the thickness of the material removed over the entire surface Distance between the successive laser scanning tracks
layer should be equal to the input parameter of layer thickness is nominated as the track displacement which plays a
(LT) or depth of cut. If the actual material removed surpasses significant role during LBM. Due to the Gaussian mode
or remains below the value of input layer thickness (LT), then and energy distribution around the laser spot, the extent
there always exists a difference in theoretical and actual ma- of melt crater varies. In the center of the spot, the energy
terial removal rates of laser machining which is a crucial phe- is high as compared with the outer ring of the spot. If the
nomenon. Thus, the material removal rate is assessed in three laser spots are not overlapped, then the machining region
different ways as presented in Eqs. 1, 2, and 3. follows a circular pattern of craters. Thus, the setting of
track displacement (TD) allows the leading laser spot to
overlap with the preceding spot. Three levels of TD are
Theoratical Material Removal Rate ¼ MRRth selected, i.e., 1 μm, 2 μm, and 3 μm. The corresponding
ðDepth  width  lengthÞtheoratical cases are nominated as the excessive overlapping, mod-
¼ ð1Þ erate overlapping, and low overlapping. Moreover, the
ðMachining timeÞ
overlapping occurs along traverse as well as lateral di-
rection as depicted in Fig. 4. The focus of the laser spot
is kept at the topmost surface of the substrate as sche-
Actual Material Removal Rate ¼ MRRact matically presented in Fig. 4d. Material removal rate in
ðDepth  width  lengthÞactual the form of percentage is considered an important mea-
¼ ð2Þ sure in this research. The objective was to achieve the
ðMachining timeÞ
slot of exact 12-μm depth, meaning that the ratio of
actual and theoretical MRR is 1 (MRR% = 100) which
is highly difficult to achieve. The actual machined depth
Percent Material Removal Rate ¼ MRR% is not always equal to the theoretical or designed ma-
MRRact chined depth. Three possible cases were experienced,
¼  100 ð3Þ i.e., (1) the actual machined depth was less than designed
MRRth
depth (%MRR < 100%), (2) the actual depth was greater
than the designed depth (%MRR > 100%), and (3) the
Table 1 List of fixed parameters actual depth was nearly equal to the designed depth
(%MRR = 100%). A schematic of such cases is present-
Factor name Selected value
ed in Fig. 5. Roughness of the milled surfaces was care-
Wavelength (λ) 1064 nm fully measured and evaluated by Talysurf. An evaluation
Pulse duration 10 μs length of 4 mm was maintained for all the measurements.
Beam diameter (ϕ) 20 μm For each milled surface, the roughness was recorded at
Scan direction (X) Mixed/random three different locations and an average was computed.
Number of passes (N) 12, 6, 4 Experimental results of the material removal rates
Focal point (d) 0 (on top surface) (MRR th, MRRact , and MRR %) and surface roughness
are selectively presented in Table 4.
Int J Adv Manuf Technol
Table 2 Variables, actual setting
values with levels, and response No. Machining parameters
indicators
1 Lamp current intensity (I)
2 Pulse frequency ( f )
3 Scanning speed (V)
4 Track displacement (TD)
5 Layer thickness (LT)
5 Results and discussion
The results reveal that there is a huge variation in the percent-
age of material removal rate and surface roughness. The ma-
terial removal rates range from 0 to 383 % under the experi-
mental conditions of experimental runs number 31 and 32,
respectively. Under experiment 31, the milling is performed
with the lowest level of current intensity (I = 75%) and highest
levels of other parameters (f = 20 kHz, V = 400 mm/s, TD = 12
μm, and LT = 3 μm). High level of track displacement means
that the laser spot overlapping is wider and high scan speed
means that the less amount of time is available for a particular
spot to interact with the localized point. As a result, no ma-
chining depth is observed. The reverse phenomenon takes
place when the machining conditions consist of high level of
current intensity and the lowest levels of other four variables.
On the other end, the roughness, in terms of Ra, of the milled
slots ranges from 0.9 to 3.83 μm. Hence, there is a need to
understand the parametric effects and to get optimized para-
metric combinations to achieve the percentage of MRR close
of 100% and the roughness at an optimal level. Some of the
selected micrographs of the milled surfaces are presented in
Fig. 6. It is worth noting that when there is a very slight
material removal the roughness texture of the machined sur-
face matches with the texture of un-machined surface as can
be seen from Fig. 6e. As the laser-ablated depth crosses the
roughness value of the un-machined surface (~ 6 μm), then an
entirely new surface is exposed. That is why the milled depth
is taken as twofold the roughness of the un-machined samples
so that the results related to the surface roughness can be
considered as the pure outcome of laser milling. After
conducting the laser milling experimentation on titanium alloy
(Ti-6Al-4V), the effects of each of the laser parameters on
machinability performance (MRR and surface roughness)
were evaluated to understand the machining behavior of Ti-
6Al-4V under the influence of Nd:YAG laser milling. Finally,
the regression modeling has been developed and validated in
order to get the optimized laser parameters for the desired
Table 3 Basic details of full factorial RSM-based face-centered central composite design (FCCCD)
Design method Factors Levels Base runs Base blocks Cube points
RSM full factorial 5 3 54 2 32
Units Levels Machinability indicators Units
A (%) 75 80 85 Material removal rate (MRR) μm3/s
kHz 10 15 20 Surface roughness (Ra) μm
mm/s 200 300 400
μm 8 10 12
μm/scan 1 2 3
material removal rate and surface roughness. In order to iden-
tify and segregate the severity of laser parameters, analysis of
variance has been performed for each of the two machining
responses. Scanning electron microscopic analysis has been
performed to reveal the laser irradiation effects on the ma-
chined surfaces obtained after employing optimum values of
laser parameters. Microstructures of the bulk material as well
as the layers below the machined surfaces were also exam-
ined. In order to further strengthen the research findings, a
micro-feature of depth other than 12 μm depth is designed
and machined by the use of optimized set of laser parameters.
The actual depth of the laser milled feature and the corre-
sponding MRR are measured and compared with the theoret-
ically designed depth and MRR. The difference of just 2.25%
in the percent MRR reveals that the research findings can be
utilized to produce any desired feature. Thus, by controlling
the material removal rate resulted after each scanning cycle,
the difference between the actual machined depth and the
designed machined depth can be minimized which is the main
novelty and contribution of the present research.
5.1 Effects of laser parameters
Effects of laser parameters on machinability indicators (mate-
rial removal rate and surface roughness) are initially evaluated
by the main effects plots and then detailed effects of each of
the laser parameters on each of the said responses are studied
in a pairwise fashion. The main effects plots are presented in
Fig. 7 depicting that for both the responses the trends of each
of the laser factors are similar to each other whether it is in an
increasing or decreasing order. An increase in laser intensity
(I) from 75 to 85% the available energy for the laser spot, to
irradiate the substrate, increases and the resulting amount of
material to be removed gets increased. As a result, the rough-
ness of the milled surface also increases. On the other end, the
remaining parameters have inverse relationships with the ma-
terial removal rate and surface roughness, i.e., by increasing
the pulse frequency, scan speed, track displacement, and layer
Center points in cube Axial points Center points in axial α
8 10 4 1
 Int J Adv Manuf Technol

(a) (b) (c) (d)

Excessive transverse overlap Moderate transverse overlap Low transverse overlap Lens
Laser spot Lateral overlap
Transverse overlap Laser Beam

Focus Area
Z0
+ 15 µm

Top Surface
- 15 µm

TD = 8 TD = 10 µm
µm TD = 12 µm
Track Displacement (TD)

Fig. 4 Schematic of track displacement and laser spot over lapping: a excessive traverse overlap, b moderate traverse overlap, c low traverse overlap, and
d focusing of laser spot with respect to substrate surface

thickness, the resulting material removal rate and surface
roughness decrease.
5.1.1 Effects of laser intensity vs other parameters
The effects of laser intensity (I) in combination with other
laser parameters are presented in Fig. 8. High pulse frequen-
cies (15–20 kHz) at each level of current intensity give
lesser amount of ablated material. Pairwise effects of current
intensity (I) and laser scanning speed (V) are depicted in Fig.
8b showing that at each level of scanning speed the laser
intensity directly controls the MRR and surface roughness.
However, at low scanning speed (200 mm/s), the MRR
reaches close to the desired value of 100% MRR when the
current intensity is at 75–80%. But at the low scanning
speed with high current intensity (85%), the resulting depth
of the milled slot gets twofold (24 μm) and offers 200%
MRR which is totally undesired value of MRR. Similarly,
lower current intensity (75–80%) offers good surface rough-
ness (Ra ~ 1.25 μm) at all the levels of scanning speed. The
effects of track displacement along with laser intensity are
shown in Fig. 8c revealing that at higher level of current
intensity (85%) the displacement among the successive laser
spots is more vigilant for both the responses (MRR and Ra).
The lesser is the track displacement, the higher is the per-
centage increase in MRR which is mainly because of exces-
sive number of overlapping of the laser spots per unit area.
Excessive overlapping ensures high energy density on the
specified area and resulting wide and deep craters which
ultimately leads towards over-sized milling slot with poor
surface integrity. Thus, track displacement of 10 μm can
give the best surface finish with desired MRR (at 100%
value). With respect to the effect of layer thickness per laser
scan (LT) along with laser intensity, the results are displayed
in Fig. 8d. At each level of current intensity, the less amount
of layer thickness offers higher MRR than the anticipated
value of the theoretical MRR. For example, at any current
intensity, the layer thicknesses (depth of cut in other words)
of 2 μm and 3 μm offer the actual MRR well below than
100% MRR. In order to have the material removal rate
exactly at the desired amount of 100%, a layer thickness
of 1 μm with current intensity of 75% fits well. On the other
end, all the values of layer thickness give the same surface
roughness at 75–80% current intensity but the roughness is
severely affected by the layer thickness when the current
intensity reaches to higher level.

(a) < 100 % (b) > 100 % (c) = 100 %

Actual machined Actual machined Actual machined

depth; depth; depth;

Theoretical or designed Theoretical or designed Theoretical or designed

machined depth; machined depth; machined depth;
Difference in depth; Difference in depth; Difference in depth;

-ve difference +ve difference No difference

Fig. 5 Actual machined depth with reference to designed depth: a %MRR < 100%, b %MRR > 100%, and c %MRR = 100%
Int J Adv Manuf Technol

Table 4 RSM FCCCD and the

selected experimental results Run I f V TD LT MRRth MRRact MRR% Ra
order (%) (kHz) (mm/s) (μm) (μm/scan) (μm3/s) (μm3/s) (%) (μm)

1 75 20 200 12 1 24.00 18.00 75% 1.00

2 75 20 200 8 1 16.36 20.45 125% 1.13
3 80 15 300 10 2 66.67 33.33 50% 1.27
4 75 10 400 8 1 30.51 38.14 125% 1.17
5 80 15 300 10 2 66.67 33.33 50% 1.14
- - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - -
50 80 15 400 10 2 85.71 42.86 50% 1.12
51 80 20 300 10 2 66.67 27.78 42% 1.06
52 80 15 300 10 2 66.67 44.44 67% 1.11
53 80 15 300 10 3 112.50 37.50 33% 1.11
54 80 15 300 10 2 66.67 33.33 50% 1.28

5.1.2 Effects of pulse frequency vs other parameters
Pairwise effects of pulse frequency with other laser parameters
are graphically presented in Fig. 9. All the graphs show that as
the frequency of laser pulses increases, the material removal
rate and surface roughness of the milled surfaces decrease
significantly. Graph shown in Fig. 9a shows that whatever
the pulse frequency is, MRR is above 100% value at laser
intensity of 85%, whereas the surface roughness is also high
at the highest intensity as compared with those obtained at

Fig. 6 Selected results of laser beam machining of Ti-6Al-4V. LBM machined and un-machined surfaces of run no. 25, and f comparison of
under the experimental conditions of a run nos. 13 and 14, b run nos. machined and un-machined surfaces of run no. 13
17 and 18, c run nos. 25 and 26, d run nos. 29 and 30, e comparison of
 Int J Adv Manuf Technol

Fig. 7 Main effects plots of laser (a)

parameters for MRR (a) and Ra Main Effects Plot for MRR
(b) Fitted Means
I f v TD LT
160

Mean of MRR
120

80

40

0
75 80 85 10 15 20 200 300 400 8 10 12 1 2 3

(b)
Main Effects Plot for Ra
Fitted Means
I f v TD LT
2.0
Mean of Ra

1.5

1.0

0.5
75 80 85 10 15 20 200 300 400 8 10 12 1 2 3

lower levels of intensities. With respect to the combination of with pulse frequency of 20 kHz really offers the required
pulse frequency ( f ) and scanning speed (V), MRR is well milling depth, thus giving 100% MRR. But, this combination
below than the desired 100% MRR when scanning speed is is not good for surface roughness as can be seen in Fig. 9b. To
kept 300–400 mm/s. However, scanning speed of 200 mm/s achieve the best surface finish, the pulse frequency could be at

(a) (MRR, Ra) v /s (I, f) (b) (MRR, Ra) v /s (I, V)

75 80 85 75 80 85
MRR Ra f MRR Ra V
3.0
3.0 10 200
150 15 150 300
20 2.5 400
125 2.5
Mean

Mean

100 100 2.0

2.0
75
1.5 1.5
50 50
1.0 1.0
75 80 85 75 80 85
I I

(c) (MRR, Ra) v /s (I, TD) (d) (MRR, Ra) v /s (I, LT)
75 80 85 75 80 85
MRR Ra TD MRR Ra LT
3.0
3.0 8 1
150 10 200 2
12 2.5 3
2.5
Mean

Mean

150
100 2.0 2.0
100

1.5 1.5
50
50
1.0 0 1.0
75 80 85 I 75 80 85 I

Fig. 8 Pairwise effects of laser intensity and other parameters on MRR and surface roughness. a (MRR, Ra) vs (I, f). b (MRR, Ra) vs (I, V). c (MRR, Ra)
vs (I, TD). d (MRR, Ra) vs (I, LT)
Int J Adv Manuf Technol

(a) (MRR, Ra) v /s (f, I) (b) (MRR, Ra) v /s (f, V)

10 15 20 10 15 20
MRR Ra I MRR Ra V
150 2.5
3.0 75 200
150 80 300
85 125 400
125 2.5 2.0
Mean

Mean
100 100
2.0
75 75 1.5
1.5
50
50
1.0 1.0
10 15 20 10 15 20
f f

(c) (MRR, Ra) v /s (f, TD) (d) (MRR, Ra) v /s (f, LT)
10 15 20 10 15 20
MRR Ra TD MRR Ra LT
150 8 200 1
2.5
2.5 10 2
125 12 3
150
Mean

Mean
2.0 2.0
100
100
75 1.5 1.5
50
50
1.0 0 1.0
10 15 20 f 10 15 20 f

Fig. 9 Pairwise effects of pulse frequency and other parameters on MRR and surface roughness. a (MRR, Ra) vs (f, I). b (MRR, Ra) vs (f, V). c (MRR, Ra)
vs (f, TD). d (MRR, Ra) vs (f, LT)

15 kHz for all the levels of scanning speed. Similar outcomes
are seen in the case of frequency and track displacement com-
bination, i.e., 8-μm track displacement with 20 kHz benefits
for 100% MRR, whereas 15 kHz is found to be suitable for
minimum surface roughness on all the values of track dis-
placement. Figure 9 d depicts that the layer thicknesses of
2 μm and 3 μm do not allow to have the desired amount of
MRR as the corresponding percentage of MRR is well below
than 100%. Whereas a layer thickness of 1 μm per laser scan
allows to have excessive MRR as at all the levels of pulse
frequency, the material removal rate is well above than
100% MRR which is again highly undesirable.
5.1.3 Effects of scanning speed vs other parameters
The effects of laser parameters (pairwise combinations of
scanning speed and other parameters) are presented in Fig.
10. From all the graphs, it can be seen that the surface rough-
ness, as a whole, is always minimum when scanning speed is
kept at 300 mm/s irrespective of the settings of other laser
parameters. Since the objective is to have the percent MRR
at 100%, therefore, different combinations give different per-
centages of MRR. For example, MRR reaches above 100%
when the laser intensity is at its highest level. At any level of
scanning speed, the lower pulse frequency is, the lower the
percent MRR is. Irrespective of the scanning speed levels,
track displacement of 8 μm offers high MRR as compared
with 10-μm and 12-μm track displacements. From Fig. 10d,
it can be seen that the lower is the layer thickness, the higher is
the MRR. However, at layer thickness of 1 μm per laser scan,
the percent MRR reaches above 200% value meaning that the
machined depth of slot was more than 24 μm instead of the
designed depth of 12 μm. A layer thickness of 2 μm along
with the scanning speed of 200 mm/s could give an approxi-
mately 100% MRR.
5.1.4 Effects of track displacement vs other parameters
The effects of laser parameters in a pairwise fashion (track
displacement vs other parameters) are presented in Fig. 11.
As an overview, it can be seen that by the increase in track
displacement, within the successive laser spots, the corre-
sponding MRR and surface roughness decrease. However,
in a categorical sense at each level of track displacement, the
percent MRR and surface roughness are higher at high value
because of the high energy available to irradiate and melt the
substrate surface. Likewise, irrespective of the levels of TD,
the lower pulse frequency (10 kHz) results in higher percent-
age of MRR and the surface roughness value. Figure 11 c
depicts that at any level of TD, high scanning speed (400
mm/s) offers less MRR as compared with low scanning speed,
whereas a track displacement of 10 μm is found to be suitable
to get the minimum surface roughness at all the levels of
scanning speed. From Fig. 11d, it can be observed that the
 Int J Adv Manuf Technol

(a) (MRR, Ra) v /s (V, I) (b) (MRR, Ra) v /s (V, f)

200 300 400 200 300 400
MRR Ra I MRR Ra f
3.0 150 2.5
75 10
150 80 15
2.5 85 125 20
2.0
Mean

Mean
100
100 2.0

75 1.5
1.5
50
50
1.0 1.0
200 300 400 200 300 400
V V

(c) (MRR, Ra) v /s (V, TD) (d) (MRR, Ra) v /s (V, LT)
200 300 400 200 300 400
MRR Ra TD MRR Ra LT
150 2.5
2.5 8 200 1
10 2
125 12 3
150 2.0
Mean

Mean
2.0
100
100
1.5 1.5
75
50
50 1.0 1.0
200 300 400 V 200 300 400 V

Fig. 10 Pairwise effects of scanning speed and other parameters on MRR and surface roughness. a (MRR, Ra) vs (V, I). b (MRR, Ra) vs (V, f). c (MRR,
Ra) vs (V, TD). d (MRR, Ra) vs (V, LT)

(a) (MRR, Ra) v /s (TD, I) (b) (MRR, Ra) v /s (TD, f)

8 10 12 8 10 12
MRR Ra I MRR Ra f
3.0 75 150 10
150 80 2.5 15
85 125 20
2.5
Mean

Mean

100 2.0
100 2.0
75 1.5
1.5
50
50
1.0 1.0
8 10 12 8 10 12
TD TD

(c) (MRR, Ra) v /s (TD, V) (d) (MRR, Ra) v /s (TD, LT)

8 10 12 8 10 12
MRR Ra V MRR Ra LT
150 200 200 2.5 1
2.5
300 2
125 400 3
150
2.0
Mean

Mean

2.0
100
100
1.5 1.5
75
50
50 1.0 1.0
8 10 12 TD 8 10 12 TD

Fig. 11 Pairwise effects of track displacement and other parameters on MRR and surface roughness. a (MRR, Ra) vs (TD, I). b (MRR, Ra) vs (TD, f). c
(MRR, Ra) vs (TD, V). d (MRR, Ra) vs (TD, LT)
Int J Adv Manuf Technol

less amount of layer thickness (LT) offers exceptionally higher
percentage of MRR, reaching even above 200%, whereas high
layer thickness (2 μm and 3 μm) gives less than 100% MRR
which is against the set objectives of the laser milling.
5.1.5 Effects of layer thickness vs other parameters
The laser parametric effects in terms of combinations of layer
thickness with the remaining laser parameters are plotted as
shown in Fig. 12. It reveals a mix of trends. For example, Fig.
12 a shows that as the current intensity increases, the MRR
also increases. Difference in percent MRR is relatively wide at
LT of 1 μm, whereas at LT of 3 μm, the trend is converged and
the difference becomes negligible. Very similar trend for
MRR can be seen in the case of combinations of layer thick-
ness with other parameters (pulse frequency, scanning speed,
and track displacement), i.e., percent MRR is higher and dif-
ference is wide when the layer thickness is at 1 μm but MRR
significantly lowers down and the difference becomes negli-
gible when the layer thickness acquires a value of 3 μm. It
means that whatever the level of other laser parameters is
opted, high layer thickness of 3 μm is insufficient for the laser
energy to melt and remove the desired depth of material and
consequently MRR decreases. Low value of layer thickness (1
μm) ensures that there is always 12 numbers of laser scanning
passes and the material thickness to be melted and removed
underneath the laser spot is high enough to generate deeper
slots and computationally increases the percentage of MRR.
Laser milling performance in terms of surface roughness is
found to be more promising when layer thickness is kept at
2 μm as can be evidenced from all the four plots of surface
roughness presented in Fig. 12.
5.1.6 Surface plot analysis
Surface plot analysis has also been performed to capture the
further insight into parametric effects. 2D surface plots asso-
ciated with the material removal rate and surface roughness
are presented in Figs. 13 and 14, respectively. The plots are
developed by keeping the middle levels of variables as the
hold values (constant value). In each subset of the contour
plot, two variables are taken at a time to anticipate the impact
on the response characteristic. With five variables, considering
two variables at a time, 10 combinations are developed in each
surface plot. The intensity of the response characteristic is
explicitly presented using different colors. Each color corre-
sponds to a certain range of the response. Figure 13 shows the
measure of percent MRR under the influence of several com-
binations of variables. It can be observed that the high level of
current intensity along with low levels of pulse frequency
(If), scan speed (VI), and track displacement (TDI) yields
the MRR% ranging within 100–150% as can be observed
from first three graphs lying in the top row of Fig. 13.
Similar range of MRR% can be witnessed when the low level

(a) (MRR, Ra) v /s (LT, I) (b) (MRR, Ra) v /s (LT, f)

1 2 3 1 2 3
MRR Ra I MRR Ra f
3.0
75 200 10
2.5
200 80 15
2.5 85 20
150
Mean

Mean

150 2.0
2.0 100
100
1.5
1.5 50
50

0 1.0 0 1.0
1 2 3 1 2 3
LT LT

(c) (MRR, Ra) v /s (LT, V) (d) (MRR, Ra) v /s (LT, TD)

1 2 3 1 2 3
MRR Ra V MRR Ra TD
2.5
200 200 200 2.5 8
300 10
400 12
150 2.0 150
2.0
Mean

Mean

100 100
1.5 1.5

50 50
1.0 1.0
1 2 3 LT 1 2 3 LT

Fig. 12 Pairwise effects of layer thickness and other parameters on MRR and surface roughness. a (MRR, Ra) vs (LT, I). b (MRR, Ra) vs (LT, f). c (MRR,
Ra) vs (LT, V). d (MRR, Ra) vs (LT, TD)

Fig. 13 Surface plots (2D contour) pertaining to the parametric effects on percentage of material removal rate
of laser intensity makes a combination with low level of layer
thickness (LTI). It can be observed from the 4th graph of the
top row. Layer thickness of 3 μm is absolutely not suitable to
result in the actual MRR to be close to the designed MRR. Red
color code represents that at any level of laser intensity, the
said value of LT (3 μm) yields inefficient milling results
(MRR% < 50%). The suitable combination of pulse frequency
and scan speed (Vf) consists of lower levels of both of these
variables capable of producing milled slots with MRR ranging
within 100–150%. Getting the similar range of milling output,
the combination of pulse frequency with layer thickness
(LTf) consists of opposite levels of each of these two factors.
From the 4th graph in middle row of Fig. 13, it can be noticed
that the track displacement of 10 μm and 12 μm with any
combination of scan speed results in MRR% falling within
50–100% region, whereas low levels of I and TD can give
MRR% between 100 and 150%. High level of current inten-
sity along with low overlapping of laser spots (TD = 12 μm)
produces milling depths less than 6 μm and the corresponding
MRR% remains below than 50%. The behavior of material
removal follows similar trend when layer thickness makes a
combination with scan speed and track displacement (LTV
and LTTD) as can be seen from the graphs lying at the
bottom row of Fig. 13. Lower range of LT along with higher
Int J Adv Manuf Technol
ranges of scan speed and track displacement could be capable
of giving MRR% close to the desired level.
The response surface plots associated with the surface
roughness are shown in Fig. 14. The interpretation of these
graphs can be made exactly in a similar fashion as did in the
case of material removal rate. The red colored regions corre-
spond the roughness value of the milled surface below than 1
μm. The diluted yellow colored areas represent the parametric
combinations capable of producing milling surface having the
roughness within 1–1.5 μm. A noticeable point in Fig. 14 is
that the yellow region is more prominent in all the plots
depicting that the possibility of getting the roughness of 1–
1.5 μm is relatively high. In particular, the combined effect of
track displacement with the scan speed (TDV) and the layer
thickness (LTTD) cannot produce surface roughness of val-
ue less than 1 μm (see the 4th graph in the middle row and 2nd
graph in the bottom row of Fig. 14). Getting the roughness
well above than 2 μm can also be evidenced against some
parametric combinations. For example, the higher level of
laser intensity coupled with the lower level of track displace-
ment produces the coarse surface (Ra > 2.5 μm) as can be
observed from the 3rd graph of the top row of Fig. 14. The
reason behind this is the high amount of laser energy aggres-
sively accumulated on the unit area due to the excessive
Int J Adv Manuf Technol
Fig. 14 Surface plots (2D contour) pertaining to the parametric effects on surface roughness
overlapping of the laser spots under the setting of 8-μm track
displacement. Excessive melting and re-deposition are taken
place due to which the roughness of the machined surface
becomes worse.
The whole discussion of laser parametric effects clearly
shows that there are lots of combinations to results in the
desired amount of material removal rate with good surface
roughness and in many cases either the MRR or the surface
roughness is compromised. Therefore, in this context, it is
necessarily required to optimize the laser parameters to have
exactly required amount of MRR with good surface finish
(minimum Ra) during laser milling of titanium alloy (Ti-6Al-
4V).
5.2 Analysis of variance
Since the effects of five controlling factors are taken into ac-
count in this study, so in order to segregate the control factors
into the significant and insignificant factors affecting the set
responses, analysis of variance (ANOVA) is carried out.
ANOVA is performed at 95% confidence interval, meaning
that a variable having p value less than 0.05 would be consid-
ered as the significant, otherwise it would be insignificant
variable. The results of ANOVA for material removal rate of
laser milling on Ti-6Al-4V are provided in Table 5. From the
results, it can be seen that all the five laser parameters in their
linear mode (I, f, V, TD, and LT) significantly affect the mate-
rial removal rate, whereas only two variables, i.e., scanning
speed and later thickness, are found to be significant in their
quadratic mode (VV and LTLT). ANOVA results also re-
flect that the laser parameters strongly interact with each other
(2-way interaction) and have significant effect on MRR except
for laser intensity and scanning speed (IV) which is found to
be insignificant.
Similarly, the results of ANOVA for determining the sig-
nificance of laser parameters on surface roughness are present-
ed in Table 6. With respect to linear terms, it can be noticed
that all the laser parameters investigated in this research sig-
nificantly affect the machining performance in terms of sur-
face quality except layer thickness (LT) whose p value is
found to be 0.052 which is less than the set criteria of p value
of 0.05. In respect of quadratic effects of parameters, the track
displacement (TD) has been seen to be the only parameter
significantly affecting the surface roughness of the milled ar-
ea. However, many parameters in their interaction mode affect
the surface roughness significantly which can be observed
from Table 6 (from 2-way interactions). The interactions of
layer thickness (LT) with scanning speed and track
 Int J Adv Manuf Technol

Table 5 ANOVA for material

removal rate (MRR) Source DF Adj SS Adj MS F value p value Significance

Model 15 326967 21798 205.48 0.000 Significant

Linear 5 254230 50846 479.32 0.000 -
I 1 53603 53603 505.31 0.000 -
f 1 16179 16179 152.51 0.000 -
V 1 16914 16914 159.44 0.000 -
TD 1 13072 13072 123.23 0.000 -
LT 1 154463 154463 1456.09 0.000 -
Square 2 26079 13039 122.92 0.000 -
VV 1 440 440 4.15 0.049 -
LTLT 1 4754 4754 44.81 0.000 -
2-way interaction 8 46658 5832 54.98 0.000 -
IV 1 313 313 2.95 0.094 Non-significant
ITD 1 1701 1701 16.04 0.000 Significant
ILT 1 19175 19175 180.76 0.000 -
fTD 1 1050 1050 9.90 0.003 -
fLT 1 5868 5868 55.32 0.000 -
VTD 1 703 703 6.63 0.014 -
VLT 1 10035 10035 94.60 0.000 -
TDLT 1 7813 7813 73.65 0.000 -
Error 38 4031 106 -
Lack-of-fit 27 3690 137 4.40 0.007 -
Pure error 11 341 31 -
Total 53 330998 -

displacement can be stated as the interacting parameters which
are insignificant towards imparting noticeable change in sur-
face roughness.
5.3 Modeling and parametric optimization
From the above results of parametric effects, surface plots, and
analysis of variance, it has been experienced that the influence
of laser parameters, their interaction, and degree of signifi-
cance collectively leads the laser milling process towards a
complex machining process. The same can be evidenced from
the experimental results. A slight change in a single laser
parameter or in combination of two or more parameters results
in an entirely different machining performance, especially
with respect to the material removal rate. Therefore, a mathe-
matical model for a machining response may help the machin-
ist to pre-calculate the resulting response prior to do actual
machining. In this context, a second-order response surface
model for each of the two responses (percent material removal
rate (MRR%) and surface roughness (SR)) is proposed. In
general, a second-order response surface mathematical model
can be represented as shown in Eq. 4.
wherein the terms β o and β i are considered as the
second-order coefficients and βiiand βij are known as the
pure second-order terms or quadratic effects. Interactive
terms are symbolized by xi and xj yielding interactive ef-
fects of process parameters. The number of machining pa-
rameters opted for the response analysis is represented by
k. Corresponding response of the machining characteristic
is well-known as the dependent variable generally symbol-
ized as y in the model, whereas ε is an error term. Thus,
utilizing the above generalized model and experimental
results obtained under RSM-based FCCCD design of ex-
periments, mathematical models for material removal rate
(MRR) and surface roughness (SR) are developed as pre-
sented in Eqs. 5 and 6, respectively.
MRR ð%Þ ¼ −989 þ 26:90 ðI Þ−15:51ð f Þ−0:967ðV Þ


þ 17:3ðTDÞ þ 8:7ðLTÞ þ 0:00109 V 2


þ 35:93 LT2 −0:0063ðI  V Þ−0:729ðI  TDÞ
− 4:896ðI  LTÞ þ 0:573ð f  TDÞ
þ 2:708ð f  LTÞ þ 0:0234ðV  TDÞ

y ¼ β o þ ∑ki¼1 β i x1 þ ∑ki¼1 βii x21 þ ∑∑i< j β ij xi x j þ ε ð4Þ þ 0:177ðV  LTÞ þ 7:812ðTD  LTÞ ð5Þ
Int J Adv Manuf Technol

Table 6 ANOVA for surface

roughness (Ra) Source DF Adj SS Adj MS F value p value Significance

Model 15 42.7760 2.8517 9.05 0.000 Significant

Linear 5 20.8338 4.1668 13.22 0.000 -
I 1 11.4299 11.4299 36.26 0.000 -
f 1 3.7026 3.7026 11.75 0.001 -
V 1 1.4854 1.4854 4.71 0.036 -
TD 1 2.9451 2.9451 9.34 0.004 -
LT 1 1.2708 1.2708 4.03 0.052 Non-significant
Square 1 4.4466 4.4466 14.11 0.001 Significant
TDTD 1 4.4466 4.4466 14.11 0.001 -
2-way interaction 9 17.4955 1.9439 6.17 0.000 -
If 1 3.0918 3.0918 9.81 0.003 -
IV 1 1.5961 1.5961 5.06 0.030 -
ITD 1 3.3887 3.3887 10.75 0.002 -
ILT 1 2.1632 2.1632 6.86 0.013 -
fTD 1 1.6501 1.6501 5.24 0.028 -
fLT 1 1.8689 1.8689 5.93 0.020 -
VTD 1 1.5783 1.5783 5.01 0.031 -
VLT 1 0.8624 0.8624 2.74 0.106 Non-significant
TDLT 1 1.2961 1.2961 4.11 0.050 Non-significant
Error 38 11.9768 0.3152
Lack-of-fit 27 11.8914 0.4404 56.74 0.000
Pure error 11 0.0854 0.0078
Total 53 54.7527

Ra ðμmÞ ¼ −38:6 þ 0:866 ðI Þ þ 0:605ð f Þ
þ 0:0193ðV Þ−1:39ðTDÞ þ 1:74ðLTÞ

ters is carried out to maintain the MRR with a target of 100%
þ 0:1486 TD2 −0:0124ðI  f Þ−0:00044ðI  V Þ
− 0:03254ðI  TDÞ−0:0520ðI  LTÞ
þ 0:0227ð f  TDÞ þ 0:0483ð f  LTÞ
þ 0:0011ðV  TDÞ þ 0:0016ðV  LTÞ
þ 0:101ðTD  LTÞ ð6Þ
From the literature, it has been noticed that in almost all the
machining processes the objective is usually focused to
achieve the highest amount of material removal rate. In the
case of laser beam milling, this is not always required. In order
to have a desired amount of machining depth, the rate of
material ablation per laser scan is essential to control; other-
wise, the ablated depth significantly varies from the desired
depth. Thus, a sound gap in laser beam machining exists
regarding the control of material removal per laser scan.
Therefore, in this research, the optimization of laser parame-
conformance along with minimum possible surface rough-
ness. This is the novelty and the main purpose of this research.
Thus, as per the optimization selection criteria (optimization
goal), the percent MRR is targeted at 100%, whereas the sur-
face roughness was set at minimum value. Table 7 shows the
details of optimization including the optimization goal, lower
and upper limits of each response, fitted values, standard error
fits, and the values of both the responses within 95% confi-
dence interval. Furthermore, the optimization plot is illustrated
in Fig. 15 showing the optimum values of laser parameters
along with the responses (MRR and SR). Red colored values
on the top of the plot represents the optimum setting of each of
the five laser parameters whereas blue colored values on the
left column represent response values. Under the combination
of optimum parameters, the resulted percent MRR is 100%
with the surface roughness of Ra 0.965 μm. Composite

Table 7 Optimization selection

criteria and other details Response Goal Lower Target Upper Fit SE fit 95% CI

MRR Target 0 100.00 383.333 100.00 6.12 87.62, 112.38

Ra Minimum 0.967 7.753 0.965 0.318 0.321, 1.610
 Int J Adv Manuf Technol

Fig. 15 Optimization plot for Optimal I f v TD LT

material removal rate and surface High
D: 1.000 Cur
85.0 20.0 400.0 12.0 3.0
roughness of laser machining of [75.0] [10.3382] [249.5786] [12.0] [1.1188]
Predict Low 75.0 10.0 200.0 8.0 1.0
Ti-6Al-4V

Composite
Desirability
D: 1.000

Ra
Minimum
y = 0.9652
d = 1.0000

MRR
Targ: 100.0
y = 100.0
d = 1.0000

desirability of 1.00 has been achieved which strongly supports surfaces examined through a scanning electron microscope
the authenticity of optimization. (SEM) for both the confirmatory tests are presented in Fig.
The robustness of the developed models as well as of the 16 revealing that the machined surface of Ti-6Al-4V through a
optimization is considered to be important. Therefore, valida- Nd:YAG laser with optimized parameters are highly fine (Ra ~
tion of the results is essential. The validation becomes further 1 μm). High-magnification SEM images are further added to
authentic if the confirmatory experiments are performed and see the roughness and surface texture pattern over the ma-
the machined results are compared with the theoretical results. chined region. After a close examination of the ablated sur-
Thus, in order to validate the robustness of mathematical faces through the high-magnification SEM analysis, a uniform
models (presented in Eqs. 5 and 6), response prediction is arrayed structure has also been observed on the ablated sur-
performed for multiple times so that the possibility of inaccu- faces as can be seen from Fig. 16. Evaluation as well as a
rate prediction can be avoided. The results of five predictions, precise control of such arrayed structures could also be an
as a sample, are presented in Table 8. In all of the five solu- interesting direction which is expected to be deeply explored
tions predicted by the models, the composite desirability of in future studies.
both the responses is always well above than 0.9, reflecting Thermal processes usually alter the microstructure of the
that the models and the optimization are highly valid and substrate especially on the areas lying close to the machined
robust. Additionally, the validation of mathematical models surfaces (sub-layers). In order to see the effects of laser ma-
and optimization is further authenticated by performing two chining especially on the layers close to the machined sur-
confirmatory experiments using the set of parameters obtained faces, the microstructure analysis has also been performed
through response prediction tests. Ablation rate and the sur- and the etched surface is shown in Fig. 17. Revealing the
face roughness were measured and found highly close to the microstructure is carried out by following the standard proce-
predicted values with percent error less than 5%. Ablated dure of metallography. After grinding and polishing, the etch-
ing was performed for 20 s through cotton swab dipped in
Table 8 Response prediction and solutions obtained from mathematical Kroll’s reagent having composition of 92 ml distilled water,
models 6 ml nitric acid (HNO3), and 2 ml hydrofluoric acid (HF). The
surface of the bulk material and the sub-machined surfaces
Sol. I f V TD LT Ra fit MMR fit CD
were compared together in terms of microstructure.
1 75 10.3 249.58 12 1.12 0.965 100.00 1.000 Immediate layers beneath the machined surface were ob-
2 75 10.7 400 8.66 1.07 0.975 110.13 0.981 served to have the same microstructure as of bulk material.
3 75 20 212.18 8.29 1.06 0.971 114.98 0.972 Thus, no evidence of microstructure alteration has been found
4 77.63 18.05 390.79 8.11 1.07 1.022 95.39 0.972 under the use of optimal set of laser parameters.
5 75.98 20 306.95 8 1 0.966 93.18 0.965 Since the main purpose of this research was to seek those
laser parameters capable of generating the actual material
Int J Adv Manuf Technol
Fig. 16 Surface integrity and SEM analysis of Ti-6Al-4V machined through LBM performed under a–c prediction solution 1 and d–f prediction solution
2. Prediction solutions can be seen in Table 8
removal rate (MRRact) close to the designed material removal
rate (MRRth), the utilization of the present research is mainly
to produce milling features with high degree of precision and
to reduce the machinist effort for searching the appropriate
combinations of laser parameters. In this context, a micro-
feature of designed depth 400 μm is produced by the use of
the proposed optimal parametric combinations. The cross sec-
tion of the laser milled micro-slot is presented in Fig. 18. The
micro-slot is found to be 391.48 μm deep after actual laser
milling. The difference between the actual and the designed
depths is found to be of 8.52 μm which in response returns a
percent MRR of value 97.75%. The percentage error between
the designed MRR and the actual MRR is approximately
2.25%. Hence, it can be stated that the proposed combinations
of the optimized parameters can be used to generate different
Fig. 17 Microstructure of Ti-6Al- (a)
4V: a bulk material and b close
vicinity of machined surface
Bulk material surface
micro-milling features in Ti-6Al-4V with high degree of
precision.
6 Conclusions
Laser milling of titanium alloy (Ti-6Al-4V) has been carried
out to investigate the effects of laser parameters on material
removal rate and surface roughness. To achieve the desired
amount of material removal rate is important in laser milling in
order to have the machined depth exactly equal to the de-
signed depth. The effect of five laser parameters, i.e., laser
intensity, pulse frequency, scanning speed, layer thickness
per laser scan, and track displacement of successive laser
tracks, has been investigated on material removal rate and
(b) Machined surface Machined surface
(boom)
(side wall)
Un-machined surface
(sub-surface)

Fig. 18 Micro-slot produced under the optimized laser parameters with
percent error of 2.25% with respect to MRR%
surface roughness of the machined surfaces. Based on the
statistical analysis, mathematical modeling, optimization of
laser parameters, and SEM analysis, the following conclu-
sions may possibly be inferred:
i. Different combinations of laser intensity, pulse frequency,
scanning speed, and layer thickness per laser scan remove
the material from substrate with different layer thick-
nesses. Cumulatively, the actual volume of the material
removed differs from theatrical volume, the result of
which is the variation in milling results.
ii. During LBM of Ti-6Al-4V, three types of machined
depths are possible; machined depth is less than, greater
than, or equal to the designed depth. Consequently, actual
MRR could be less than, greater than, or equal to the
theoretical MRR. The ratio of actual MRR to theoretical
MRR equals to 1 (MRR% = 100%) is very difficult to
achieve.
iii. Irrespective to the amount of material removed and sur-
face roughness, each of the laser parameters has inverse
relationship with both the responses (MRR and SR) ex-
cept laser intensity. Increase in laser intensity increases
the surface roughness as well as MRR, whereas by in-
creasing the values of remaining four parameters (f, V, LT,
and TD), MRR and SR decrease. In this way, the percent
MRR reaches less than 100% meaning that the depth of
the machined slot would be less than the desired depth.
iv. All the five parameters (i.e., I, f, V, LT and TD) in their
linear effects have been found significant for percent
MRR whereas scanning velocity and layer thickness in
their quadratic effects are the only significant parameters
with respect to MRR.
v. Surface roughness of the milled areas has insignificantly
affected by the layer thickness whereas significantly af-
fected by the remaining four laser parameters (i.e., I, f, V,
Int J Adv Manuf Technol
and TD). Track displacement (TD) is the only parameter
which significantly affects the surface roughness in its
quadratic mode (TD2).
vi. Mathematical models (as presented in Eqs. 5 and 6) have
been developed which can effectively be used to estimate
the percent of material removal rate and the resulting
surface roughness at any setting of laser parameters. A
noticeable saving of cost and time can be made using the
proposed models.
vii. Optimization of laser parameters has revealed that the
actual material removal rate exactly equal to the de-
signed material removal rate (MRR% = 100 %) can be
achieved by the use of optimal settings proposed in this
research. The milled surface having minimum surface
roughness of Ra 0.965 μm can be achieved. The optimal
combination of laser parameters includes laser intensity,
I = 75%; pulse frequency, f = 10.33 kHz; scanning speed,
V = 250 mm/s; track displacement, TD = 12 μm; and
layer thickness, LT = 1.11 μm.
viii. Results of confirmatory experiments and predic-
tion of solutions jointly strengthened the scope
of mathematical models and optimization.
Composite desirability > 0.9 for all the solution
predictions reveals that the modeling and optimi-
zation are valid and robust.
ix. Sub-layers beneath the milling area have the same micro-
structure as that of bulk material. Thus, no evidence of
any microstructural change in the sub-layers of Ti-6Al-
4V has been observed when laser milling is carried out
under the optimized laser parameters.
Acknowledgements The authors extend their appreciation to the
Deanship of Scientific Research at King Saud University for funding this
work through research group no. (RG- 1438-089).
References
1. Yang Y, Su Y, Li L, He N, Zhao W (2015) Performance of cemented
carbide tools with microgrooves in Ti-6Al-4V titanium alloy cut-
ting. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 76(9):1731–1738
2. Mhatre MS, Sapkal SU, Pawade RS (2014) Electro discharge ma-
chining characteristics of Ti-6Al-4V alloy: a grey relational optimi-
zation. Procedia Mater Sci 5:2014–2022
3. Nourbakhsh F, Rajurkar KP, Malshe AP, Cao J (2013) Wire electro-
discharge machining of titanium alloy. Procedia CIRP 5:13–18
4. Churi NJ, Pei ZJ, Treadwell C (2006) Rotary ultrasonic machining
of titanium alloy: effects of machining variables. Mach Sci Technol
10(3):301–321
5. Xu Z, Chen X, Zhou Z, Qin P, Zhu D (2016) Electrochemical
machining of high-temperature titanium alloy Ti60. Procedia
CIRP 42:125–130
6. Venkatesan K, Ramanujam R, Kuppan P (2014) Laser assisted
machining of difficult to cut materials: research opportunities and
future directions - a comprehensive review. Process Eng 97:1626–
1636
Int J Adv Manuf Technol
7. de Lacalle LN L’p, Sa’nchez JA, Lamikiz A, Celaya A (2004)
Plasma assisted milling of heat-resistant superalloys. J Manuf Sci
Eng 126(2):274–285
8. Roy A, Silberschmidt VV (2014) Ultrasonically assisted machining
of titanium alloys. In: Davim JP (ed) Machining of titanium alloys.
Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, pp 131–147
9. Tabernero I, Lamikiz A, Martínez S, Ukar E, Lacalle LNLD (2012)
Geometric modelling of added layers by coaxial laser cladding.
Phys Procedia 39:913–920
10. Tabernero I, Lamikiz A, Martínez S, Ukar E, López de Lacalle LN
(2012) Modelling of energy attenuation due to powder flow-laser
beam interaction during laser cladding process. J Mater Process
Technol 212(2):516–522
11. Darwish SMH, Ahmed N, Al-Ahmari AMA (2017) Laser beam
micro-milling of micro-channels. In: Aerospace alloys. Springer,
Singapore
12. Büttner H, Hajri M, Roth R, Wegener K (2018) High aspect ratio
microstructuring of copper surfaces by means of ultrashort pulse
laser ablation. Procedia CIRP 68:190–195
13. Borse SC, Kadam MS (2018) Experimental study in micromilling
of Inconel 718 by fiber laser machining. Proc Manuf 20:213–218
14. Umer U, Mohammed MK, Al-Ahmari A (2017) Multi-response
optimization of machining parameters in micro milling of alumina
ceramics using Nd:YAG laser. Measurement 95:181–192
15. Vora HD, Santhanakrishnan S, Harimkar SP, Boetcher SKS,
Dahotre NB (2013) One-dimensional multipulse laser machining
of structural alumina: evolution of surface topography. Int J Adv
Manuf Technol 68(1–4):69–83
16. Genna S, Tagliaferri F, Papa I, Leone C, Palumbo B (2016)
Experimental investigation on CFRP milling by low power Q-
switched Yb:YAG laser source. AIP Conference Proceedings
1736(1):020159
17. Yang C-C et al (2017) Laser-induced coloring of titanium alloy
using ultraviolet nanosecond pulses scanning technology. J Alloys
Compd 715:349–361
18. Kalita K, Shivakoti I, Ghadai RK (2017) Optimizing process pa-
rameters for laser beam micro-marking using genetic algorithm and
particle swarm optimization. Mater Manuf Process 32(10):1101–
1108
19. Mishra S, Yadava V (2013) Prediction of material removal rate due
to laser beam percussion drilling in aluminium sheet using the finite
element method. Int J Mach Mach Mater 14(4):342
20. Puoza JC, Hua X, Liu Q, Kang Z, Zhang P (2018) Manufacturing of
micro-textures on metals by nanosecond laser micromachining.
Adv Mater Process Technol 4(1):86–99
21. Ghosal A, Patil P (2017) Machining parameters optimization during
machining of Al/5 wt% alumina metal matrix composite by fiber
laser. AIP Conference Proceedings 1851(1):020082
22. Lim GC, Tan MAC, Tan CW, Zhong HY (2010) Effects of laser
fluence on the micro-structure formation and material removal rate
in ablation of silicon carbide. ICALEO 2010(1):799–805
23. Mohammed MK, Umer U, Al-Ahmari A (2017) Optimization of
laser micro milling of alumina ceramic using radial basis functions
and MOGA-II. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 91(5–8):2017–2029
24. Schille J et al (2011) Micro processing of metals using a high rep-
etition rate femtosecond laser: from laser process parameter study to
machining examples. ICALEO 2011(1):773–782
25. Zhu H, Zhang Z, Xu J, Xu K, Ren Y (2018) An experimental study
of micro-machining of hydroxyapatite using an ultrashort picosec-
ond laser. Precis Eng 54:154–162
26. Schille J, Schneider L, Loeschner U (2015) Process optimization in
high-average-power ultrashort pulse laser microfabrication: how
laser process parameters influence efficiency, throughput and qual-
ity. Appl Phys A Mater Sci Process 120(3):847–855
27. Williams E, Brousseau EB, Rees A (2014) Nanosecond Yb fibre
laser milling of aluminium: effect of process parameters on the
achievable surface finish and machining efficiency. Int J Adv
Manuf Technol 74(5):769–780
28. Mandal KK, Kuar AS, Mitra S (2018) Experimental investigation
on laser micro-machining of Al 7075 Alloy. Opt Laser Technol 107:
260–267
29. Wee LM, Lim GC, Zheng HY (2011) Dimensional analyses and
surface quality of pulsed UV laser micro-machining of STAVAX
stainless steel mold inserts. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 57(9):1011–
1027
30. Ogawa K, Nakagawa H, Imada T, Tanabe H (2018) Laser irradia-
tion method for high-efficiency pulsed laser milling integrated die/
mold machining: effects of laser-tracking irradiation on laser mill-
ing accuracy. Adv Mater Process Technol 4(1):158–165
31. Kumar J, Khamba JS (2010) Modeling the material removal rate in
ultrasonic machining of titanium using dimensional analysis. Int J
Adv Manuf Technol 48(1):103–119
32. Yu Z, Yang G, Zhang W, Hu J (2018) Investigating the effect of
picosecond laser texturing on microstructure and
biofunctionalization of titanium alloy. J Mater Process Technol
255:129–136
33. Ghosal A, Manna A (2013) Response surface method based opti-
mization of ytterbium fiber laser parameter during machining of Al/
Al2O3-MMC. Opt Laser Technol 46:67–76
34. Hossain A et al (2016) A fuzzy logic-based prediction model for
kerf width in laser beam machining. Mater Manuf Process 31(5):
679–684
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdic-
tional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.