Optimal machining conditions for turning Ti-6Al-4V using response surface methodology

Abstract

Machining titanium is one of ever-increasing magnitude problems due to its characteristics such as low thermal conductivity, modulus of elasticity and work hardening. The efficient titanium alloy machining involves a proper selection of process parameters to minimize the tangential force (F _z) and surface roughness (R _a). In the present work, the performance of PVD/TiAlN coated carbide inserts was investigated using response surface methodology (RSM) for turning Ti-6Al-4V. The effects of process parameters such as speed (v), feed (f), depth of cut (d) and back rake angle (γ _y) on F _z and R _a were investigated. The experimental plan used for four factors and three levels was designed based on face centered, central composite design (CCD). The experimental results indicated that F _z increased with the increase in d, f and decreased with the increase in v and γ _y, whereas R _a decreased with the increase in v and γ _y, and increased with d and v. The goodness of fit of the regression equations and model fits (R ²) for F _z and R _a were found to be 0.968 and 0.970, which demonstrated that it was an effective model. A confirmation test was also conducted in order to verify the correctness of the model.

Keywords

Ti-6Al-4V / Response surface methodology / Cutting force / Surface roughness

References

[1] Donachie MJ Jr ASM International Titanium: a technical guide, 2000, 2 Materials Park: Material Information Society 79-84.

[2] Ezugwu EO, Wang ZM. Titanium alloys and their machinability—a review. J Mater Process Technol, 1997, 68(3): 262-274.

[3] Komanduri R, Von Turkovich BF. New observations on the mechanism of chip formation when machining titanium alloys. Wear, 1981, 69(2): 179-188.

[4] Hong HATJM, Riga AT, Gahoon JM, Scott CG. Machinability of steels and titanium alloys under lubrication. Wear, 1993, 162: 34-39.

[5] Kramer BM, Hartung PD (1981) Theoretical considerations in the machining of nickel-based alloys. In: Cutting Tool Materials. ASM, Materials Park, Ohio, pp 57–74

[6] Noordin MY, Venkatesh VC, Sharif S, Elting S, Abdullah A. Application of response surface methodology in describing the performance of coated carbide tools when turning AISI 1045 steel. J Mater Process Technol, 2004, 145(1): 46-58.

[7] Montgomery DC. Design and analysis of experiments, 1997, 4 New York: Wiley.

[8] Thiele JD, Melkote S. Effect of cutting edge geometry and workpiece hardness on surface generation in the finish hard turning of AISI 52100 steel. J Mater Process Technol, 1999, 94(2): 216-226.

[9] Neşeli S, Yaldız S, Türkeş E. Optimization of tool geometry parameters for turning operations based on the response surface methodology. Measurement, 2011, 44(3): 580-587.

[10] Masounave J, Youssef YA, Beauchamp Y, Thomas M. An experimental design for surface roughness and built-up edge formation in lathe dry turning. Int J Qual Sci, 1997, 2(3): 167-180.

[11] Makadia AJ, Nanavati JI. Optimization of machining parameters for turning operations based on response surface methodology. Measurement, 2013, 46(6): 1521-1529.

[12] Choudhury IA, El-Baradie MA. Surface roughness prediction in the turning of high-strength steel by factorial design of experiments. J Mater Process Technol, 1997, 67(1): 55-61.

[13] Fnides B, Yallese MA, Mabrouki T, Rigal JF. Application of response surface methodology for determining cutting force model in turning hardened AISI H11 hot work tool steel. Sadhana, 2011, 36(1): 109-123.

[14] Saini S, Ahuja IS, Sharma VS. Influence of cutting parameters on tool wear and surface roughness in hard turning of AISI H11 tool steel using ceramic tools. Int J Precis Eng Manuf, 2012, 13(8): 1295-1302.

[15] Mandal N, Doloi B, Mondal B. Force prediction model of zirconia toughened alumina (ZTA) inserts in hard turning of AISI 4340 steel using response surface methodology. Int J Precis Eng Manuf, 2012, 13(9): 1589-1599.

[16] Tsourveloudis NC. Predictive modelling of the Ti6Al4V alloy surface roughness. J Intell Robot Syst, 2010, 60(3–4): 513-530.

[17] Ramesh S, Karunamoorthy L, Palanikumar K. Surface roughness analysis in machining of titanium alloy. Mater Manuf Process, 2008, 23(2): 174-181.

[18] Makadia AJ, Nanavati JI. Optimization of machining parameters for turning operations based on response surface methodology. Measurement, 2013, 46(1): 1521-1529.