Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Holistic sustainability assessment of hybrid Al–GnP-enriched nanofluids and textured tool in machining of Ti–6Al–4V alloy

  • ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • Published:
The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 04 December 2020

This article has been updated

Abstract

There is a need to replace non-sustainable conventional coolant (emulsion) with eco benign high-performance cutting fluids such as biodegradable nanofluids that exhibit sufficient lubrication and cooling properties. Also, the sustainability performance of titanium-based alloys can be improved with the geometric alteration on the tool rake zone and by the proper cooling-lubrication mechanism. In the present study, the holistic sustainability of external turning of titanium (Ti–6Al–4V) alloy under two different cutting environments (Al–GnP nanoparticle–based minimum quantity lubrication (MQL) with textured carbide tools and conventional emulsion) is investigated. Novel empirical models for cycle time, machining power, embodied and electrical energy consumption carbon emission, and production cost were developed. For both environments, machining experiments were performed until the cutting tool reaches its life. All sustainable indicators were measured and compared with the conventional process. Results showed that textured carbide cutting tools in the presence of Al–GnP nanoparticle–based MQL-assisted machining (hybrid process) are sustainable environmentally and economically. At the very-high (130 m/min) cutting speed, the sustainable hybrid machining process consumed 1.50% less specific cumulative energy (S_CEC), emitted 5.96% less specific CO2, and incurred 4.33% less specific production cost (S_PC) compared with flood-assisted machining. Finally, it is concluded that the presence of hybrid Al–GnP nanofluids in line texture has the potential to act as lubricant/coolant in turning processes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Not applicable

Change history

  • 04 December 2020

    An Erratum to this paper has been published: <ExternalRef><RefSource>https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-020-06436-x</RefSource><RefTarget Address="10.1007/s00170-020-06436-x" TargetType="DOI"/></ExternalRef>

Abbreviations

3E:

Energy, environment, and economy

ANOVA:

Analysis of variance

PPC:

Portable power clamp

CE:

Carbon emission

CES:

Carbon emission signatures

CF:

Carbon factor

CEC:

Cumulative energy consumption

LCM:

Low carbon manufacturing

MQL:

Minimum quantity lubrication

TMR:

Total material removed

MVR:

Material removal volume

NMQL:

Nanofluid-assisted MQL

CNC:

Computer numerical control

S _ CEC:

Specific cumulative energy consumption

T (c) :

Cycle time

t (i) :

Idle time

t (a) :

Air-cutting time

l (c) :

Cutting length

t (tc) :

Tool change time

t (TF) :

Texture fabrication time

P (t) :

Total power

P (i) :

Idle power

P (a) :

Air-cutting power

P (tc) :

Tool change power

y (Wp) :

Embodied energy of the workpiece

y (CT) :

Embodied energy per cutting edge

y (nF) :

Embodied energy of the lubricating nanofluid

y (Cp) :

Energy for cleaning operation

TMR:

Total material removed

V (Wp) :

Volume of workpiece removed

V (nF) :

Volume of nanofluid consumed

V (TF) :

Embodied energy due to tool fabrication

V (Fp) :

Volume of prepared fluid

SCE( hybrid):

Specific carbon emission (hybrid)

CE(m) :

Carbon emission due to electrical energy emission

CF(Wp) :

Carbon footprints of workpiece

CF(CT) :

Carbon footprints of cutting tools

CF(nF) :

Carbon footprints of nanofluid

CF(F) :

Carbon footprints of emulsion (flood)

C (e) :

Energy cost

C m :

Machining cost

C (nf) :

Cost of nanofluid

Q (V) :

Volume of cutting fluid used

C (F) :

Cost of emulsion (flood)

C (d) :

Disposal (fluid) cost

SPC(flood) :

Specific production cost (flood)

t (sb) :

Standby time

t (c) :

Cutting time

t (l/c) :

Lubrication/coolant time

l (a) :

Air-cutting length

T (L) :

Tool life

P (sb) :

Standby power

P (su) :

Setup power

P (c) :

Power during cutting

P (l/c) :

Compressor/coolant pump power

E (m) :

Machining energy

y (d) :

Energy for disposal operation

\( {y}_{\left({\mathrm{LN}}_2\right)} \) :

Embodied energy of LN2

y (MQL) :

Embodied energy of MQL oil

S:

Emulsion consumption

y (F) :

Embodied energy of emulsion (flood)

Q (F) :

Coolant flow rate

S _ CEC (flood):

Specific cumulative energy consumption (flood)

S _ CEC (hybrid):

Specific cumulative energy consumption (hybrid)

V (d) :

Disposed volume of cutting fluid

SCE( flood):

Specific carbon emission (flood)

CE(total) :

Total CO2 emitted for unit tool life

CF(TF) :

CO2 emissions due to tool texturing process

CF(Fp) :

Carbon footprints of nanofluid preparation

CF(d) :

Carbon footprints of disposal activities

CE(m) :

Carbon emission in the machining process

C (CT) :

Cutting tool cost

C (Wp) :

Workpiece cost

C (TF) :

Texture fabrication cost

C (env) :

Environmental cost

C (Cp) :

Cost due to cleaning (workpiece)

PC:

Production cost

S _ PC(hybrid):

Specific production cost (hybrid)

References

  1. Jamil M, Khan AM, Hegab H, Gong L, Mia M, Gupta MK, He N (2019) Effects of hybrid Al2O3-CNT nanofluids and cryogenic cooling on machining of Ti–6Al–4V. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 102.9-12(2019):3895–3909. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-019-03485-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Said Z, Gupta M, Hegab H, Arora N, Khan AM, Jamil M, Bellos E (2019) A comprehensive review on minimum quantity lubrication (MQL) in machining processes using nano-cutting fluids. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 105:2057–2086. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-019-04382-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Khan AM, He N, Li L, Zhao W, Jamil M (2020) Analysis of productivity and machining efficiency in sustainable machining of titanium alloy. Procedia Manuf 43:111–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2020.02.122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Jamil M, Khan AM, Gupta MK, Mia M, He N, Li L, Sivalingam V (2020) Influence of CO2-snow and subzero MQL on thermal aspects in the machining of Ti-6Al-4V. Appl Therm Eng 177:115480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2020.115480

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Gupta MK, Sood PK, Singh G, Sharma VS (2018) Investigations of performance parameters in NFMQL assisted turning of titanium alloy using TOPSIS and particle swarm optimisation method. Int J Mater Prod Technol 57(4):299–321. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMPT.2018.095116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Zhang N, Yang F, Liu G (2020) Cutting performance of micro-textured WC/Co tools in the dry cutting of Ti-6Al-4V alloy. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 107:3967–3979. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-020-05161-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Darshan C, Jain S, Dogra M, Gupta MK, Mia M, Haque R (2019) Influence of dry and solid lubricant-assisted MQL cooling conditions on the machinability of Inconel 718 alloy with textured tool. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 105:1835–1849. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-019-04221-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hao X, Chen X, Xiao S, Li L, He N (2018) Cutting performance of carbide tools with hybrid texture. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 97(9-12):3547–3556. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-018-2188-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Ma F, Zhang H, Cao H, Hon KKB (2017) An energy consumption optimization strategy for CNC milling. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 90(5-8):1715–1726. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-016-9497-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Khan AM, He N, Zhao W, Jamil M, Xia H, Meng L et al (2020) Cryogenic-LN 2 and conventional emulsion assisted machining of hardened steel: Comparison from sustainability perspective. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part B J Eng Manuf. https://doi.org/10.1177/0954405420971992

  11. Huo T, Ren H, Zhang X, Cai W, Feng W, Zhou N, & Wang X (2018) China's energy consumption in the building sector: A Statistical Yearbook-Energy Balance Sheet based splitting method. J Clean Prod 185:665–679

  12. Omer AM (2008) Energy, environment and sustainable development. Renew Sust Energ Rev 12(9):2265–2300

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Hegab H, Umer U, Deiab I, Kishawy H (2018) Performance evaluation of Ti–6Al–4V machining using nano-cutting fluids under minimum quantity lubrication. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 5(9-12):4229–4241. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-017-1527-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Singh GR, Sharma VS, Gupta MK (2018) Sustainable drilling of aluminium 6061-T6 alloy by using nano-fluids and Ranque-Hilsch vortex tube assisted by MQL: an optimisation approach. Int J Mach Mach Mater 20(3):252–273. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMMM.2018.093547

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Khan AM, Jamil M, Salonitis K, Sarfraz S, Zhao W, He N et al (2019) Multi-objective optimization of energy consumption and surface quality in nanofluid SQCL assisted face milling. Energies 12(4):710

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Priarone PC, Robiglio M, Settineri L (2018) On the concurrent optimization of environmental and economic targets for machining. J Clean Prod 190:630–644. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Branker K, Adams D, Jeswiet J (2012) Initial analysis of cost, energy and carbon dioxide emissions in single point incremental forming - producing an aluminium hat. Int J Sustain Eng 5:188–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/19397038.2011.634033

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. OECD (2017) Investment in climate, investing in growth. OECD Publishing, Paris

    Book  Google Scholar 

  19. Al-Ghamdi KA, Hussain G (2017) On the CO2 characterization in incremental forming of roll bonded laminates. J Clean Prod 156:214–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.04.047

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Tipnis VA Product Life Cycle Economic models — towards a comprehensive framework for evaluation of environmental impact and competitive advantage. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 40:463–466. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-8506(07)62030-7

  21. Kalpakjian S, Schmid S (1995) Manufacturing engineering and technology, 6th eddition edn. Addision-Wesley Publishing Company Inc (1992). https://www.academia.edu/38175528/Manufacturing_Engineering_and_Technology_6th_Edition_Serope_Kalpakjian_Stephen_Schmid_pdf

  22. Khan AM, Gupta MK, Hegab H et al (2020) Energy-based cost integrated modelling and sustainability assessment of Al-GnP hybrid nanofluid assisted turning of AISI52100 steel. J Clean Prod 257:120502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Khan AM, Jamil M, Mia M, He N, Zhao W, Gong L (2020) Sustainability-based performance evaluation of hybrid nanofluid assisted machining. J Clean Prod 257:120541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120541

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Yan J, Li L (2013) Multi-objective optimization of milling parameters-the trade-offs between energy, production rate and cutting quality. J Clean Prod 52:462–471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.02.030

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Jeswiet J, Kara S (2008) Carbon emissions and CESTM in manufacturing. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 57:17–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2008.03.117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Mia M, Gupta MK, Lozano JA, Carou D, Pimenov DY, Królczyk G, Dhar NR (2019) Multi-objective optimization and life cycle assessment of eco-friendly cryogenic N2 assisted turning of Ti-6Al-4V. J Clean Prod 210:121–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Sugihara T, Enomoto T (2017) Performance of cutting tools with dimple textured surfaces: a comparative study of different texture patterns. Precis Eng 49:52–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Gupta MK, Song Q, Liu Z, Sarikaya M, Jamil M, Mia M, Krolczyk GM (2021) Experimental characterisation of the performance of hybrid cryo-lubrication assisted turning of Ti–6Al–4V alloy. Tribol Int. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.triboint.2020.106582

  29. Chinchanikar S, Choudhury SK (2014) Hard turning using HiPIMS-coated carbide tools: wear behavior under dry and minimum quantity lubrication (MQL). Meas J Int Meas Confed 153:106582. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2014.06.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Singh R, Dureja JS, Dogra M, Gupta MK, Mia M (2019) Influence of graphene-enriched nanofluids and textured tool on machining behavior of Ti-6Al-4V alloy. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 105(1-4):1685–1697. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-019-04377-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Rajemi MF, Mativenga PT, Aramcharoen A (2010) Sustainable machining: selection of optimum turning conditions based on minimum energy considerations. J Clean Prod 18:1059–1065. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.01.025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Gupta MK, Sood PK, Sharma VS (2016) Optimization of machining parameters and cutting fluids during nano-fluid based minimum quantity lubrication turning of titanium alloy by using evolutionary techniques. J Clean Prod 135:1276–1288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.184

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are also thankful to Nanjing University of Aeronautics & Astronautics, PR China, and the GIK Institute, Pakistan, for technical assistance and resource provision. The authors would like to acknowledge the efforts made by Dr. Munish Kumar Gupta and Mr. Mozammel Mia for their valuable suggestion to improve the manuscript.

Funding

The authors received funding from the Raytheon Chair for Systems Engineering.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Key Laboratory of High Efficiency and Clean Mechanical Manufacture, Ministry of Education, School of Mechanical Engineering, Shandong University, Jinan, People’s Republic of China

    Aqib Mashood Khan

  2. College of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing, 210016, China

    Aqib Mashood Khan & Ning He

  3. Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, GIK Institute of Engineering Sciences & Technology, Topi, 23460, Pakistan

    Ghulam Hussain

  4. Industrial Engineering Department, College of Engineering, King Saud University, Riyadh, 11421, Saudi Arabia

    Mohammed Alkahtani & Ayoub Alzabidi

  5. Advanced Manufacturing Institute, King Saud University, Riyadh, 11421, Saudi Arabia

    Mohammed Alkahtani & Mustufa Haider Abidi

Authors
  1. Aqib Mashood Khan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ghulam Hussain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mohammed Alkahtani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ayoub Alzabidi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mustufa Haider Abidi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ning He
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization: AMK, MHA, and AA; methodology: AMK, AA, and GH; software: AMK, GH, and AA; data curation: AMK, MA, and MHA; writing—original draft preparation: AMK and MA; visualization: AMK and MA; investigation: AMK, AA, and GH; supervision: NH and GH; validation: AA, MHA, and GH; writing—reviewing and editing: NH and GH; funding: NH.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Aqib Mashood Khan or Mohammed Alkahtani.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval and consent to participate

Not applicable

Consent of publication

The copyright permission has been taken, and consent to submit has been received explicitly from all authors.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Khan, A.M., Hussain, G., Alkahtani, M. et al. Holistic sustainability assessment of hybrid Al–GnP-enriched nanofluids and textured tool in machining of Ti–6Al–4V alloy. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 112, 731–743 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-020-06371-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-020-06371-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation