Investigation and modeling of cutting forces and surface roughness when hard turning of AISI 52100 steel with mixed ceramic tool: cutting conditions optimization

  • I. MeddourEmail author
  • M. A. Yallese
  • R. Khattabi
  • M. Elbah
  • L. Boulanouar


The increasing industrial demand for hard materials and their wide range of applications requires significant investigations to improve their machinability. Therefore, the current study addresses cutting forces and surface roughness during hard turning of AISI 52100 steel (59 hardness Rockwell C (HRC)) using ceramic tool. Turning experiments were held out by varying cutting speed, depth of cut, feed rate, and tool nose radius. For so doing, a central composite design (CCD) was adopted including 30 tests. Cutting forces and surface roughness were modeled using response surface methodology (RSM). The effects of each input parameter on output responses were investigated using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and response surface graphics. The findings of this study demonstrated that the force components were significantly influenced by depth of cut, followed by feed rate with a lower degree. Likewise, the negative result of the small undeformed chip thickness on surface roughness was reduced by the employment of large nose radius. Conclusively, a correlation between cutting force behavior and surface roughness was established and confirmed by the three-dimensional topographic maps of the machined surfaces. The RSM was utilized to define the optimal machining parameters.


Hard turning ANOVA RMS Surface roughness Cutting force Optimization 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Smith S, Melkote SN, Lara-Curzio E, Watkins TR, Allard L, Riester L (2007) Effect of surface integrity of hard turned AISI 52100 steel on fatigue performance. Mater Sci Eng, A 459(1–2):337–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Benga GC, Abrao AM (2003) Turning of hardened 100Cr6 bearing steel with ceramic and PCBN cutting tools. J Mater Process Technol 143:237–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kacal A, Yildirim F (2013) Application of grey relational analysis in high-speed machining of hardened AISI D6 steel. Proc IMechE part C: J Mec Eng Sci 227(7):1566–1576CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Aslan E, Camuscu N, Birgoren B (2007) Design optimization of cutting parameters when turning hardened AISI 4140 steel (63 HRC) with Al2O3 + TiCN mixed ceramic tool. Mater Des 28:1618–1622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dureja JS, Gupta VK, Sharma VS, Dogra M (2009) Design optimization of cutting conditions and analysis of their effect on tool wear and surface roughness during hard turning of AISI-H11 steel with a coated–mixed ceramic tool. J Eng Manuf 223(B):1441–1453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ozel T, Karpat Y, Figueira L, Davim JP (2007) Modeling of surface finish and tool flank wear in turning of AISI D2 steel with ceramic wiper inserts. J Mater Process Technol 189:192–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bartarya G, Choudhuryb SK (2012) Effect of cutting parameters on cutting force and surface roughness during finish hard turning AISI52100 grade steel. Procedia CIRP 1:651–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Paiva AP, Campos PH, Ferreira JR, Lopes LGD, Paiva EJ, Balestrassi PP (2012) A multivariate robust parameter design approach for optimization of AISI 52100 hardened steel turning with wiper mixed ceramic tool. J Refract Met Hard Mater 30:152–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Satyanarayana K, Gopal AV, Babu PB (2014) Analysis for optimal decisions on turning Ti-6AI-4 V with Taguchi-grey method. Proc IMechE Part C: J Mec Eng Sci 228(1):152–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Thiele JD, Melkote SN (1999) Effect of cutting edge geometry and workpiece hardness on surface generation in the finish hard turning of AISI 52100 steel. J Mater Process Technol 94:216–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Neseli S, Yaldız S, Türkes E (2011) Optimization of tool geometry parameters for turning operations based on the response surface methodology. Measurement 44:580–587CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Elbah M, Yallese MA, Aouici H, Mabrouki T, Rigal J (2013) Comparative assessment of wiper and conventional ceramic tools on surface roughness in hard turning AISI 4140 steel. Measurement 46:3041–3056CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Guddat J, M’Saoubi R, Alma P, Meyer D (2011) Hard turning of AISI 52100 using PCBN wiper geometry inserts and the resulting surface integrity. Procedia Eng 19:118–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Meng L, Jun-ichiro T, Akira T (2004) Effect of tool nose radius and tool wear on residual stress distribution in hard turning of bearing steel. J Mater Process Technol 150:234–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zhou JM, Andersson M, Stahl JE (2003) The monitoring of flank wear on the CBN tool in the hard turning process. J Adv Manufact Technol 22:697–702CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tönshoff HK, Arendt C, Ben Amor R (2000) Cutting of hardened steel. CIRP Annals–Manufact Technol 49(2):547–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yallese MA, Chaoui K, Zeghib N, Boulanouar L, Rigal J (2009) Hard machining of hardened bearing steel using cubic boron nitride tool. J Mater Process Technol 209:1092–1104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nakayama K, Arai M, Kanda T (1988) Machining characteristic of hard materials. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 37:89–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Astakhov VP (2010) Geometry of single-point turning tools and drills. Fundamentals and practical applications. Springer, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bouacha K, Yallese MA, Mabrouki T, Rigal J (2010) Statistical analysis of surface roughness and cutting forces using response surface methodology in hard turning of AISI 52100 bearing steel with CBN tool. J Refract Met Hard Mater 28:349–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chou YK, Song H (2004) Tool nose radius effects on finish hard turning. J Mater Process Technol 148(2):259–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kurt A, Seker U (2005) The effect of chamfer angle of polycrystalline cubic boron nitride cutting tool on the cutting forces and the tool stresses in finishing hard turning of AISI 52100 steel. Mater Des 26:351–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bagawade AD, Ramdasi PG, Pawade RS, Bramhankar PK (2012) Evaluation of cutting forces in hard turning of AISI 52100 steel by using Taguchi method. J Eng Res Technol 1(6):2278–0181Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kishawy HA, Elbestawi MA (1999) Effects of process parameters on material side flow during hard turning. J Mach Tools Manuf 39:1017–1030CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • I. Meddour
    • 1
    Email author
  • M. A. Yallese
    • 1
  • R. Khattabi
    • 1
  • M. Elbah
    • 1
  • L. Boulanouar
    • 2
  1. 1.Mechanics and Structures Research Laboratory (LMS)May 8th 1945 UniversityGuelmaAlgeria
  2. 2.Research Laboratory of Advanced Technology in Production Engineering (RLATPE)Badji Mokhtar UniversityAnnabaAlgeria

Personalised recommendations