Multi-objective Optimization of Parameters in Abrasive Water Jet Machining of Carbon-Glass Fibre-Reinforced Hybrid Composites

  • V. Durga Prasada RaoEmail author
  • M. Mrudula
  • V. Navya Geethika
Original Contribution


In the present work, first an attempt has been made to prepare carbon, glass and carbon-glass fibre-reinforced polymer composites, and later, machining of these composites is done on abrasive water jet machine (AWJM) to compare and optimize the machining parameters. Actually, the carbon fibre-reinforced polymer (CFRP) composites, glass fibre-reinforced polymer (GFRP) composites and carbon-glass fibre-reinforced polymer (CGFRP) composites are prepared through vacuum bagging process by using epoxy resin as the polymer matrix. The machining experiments are conducted to analyse the effects of the predominant machining parameters, i.e. cutting speed rate, feed rate and stand-off distance on the required machining characteristics, i.e. surface roughness (Ra), kerf top width (kw) and material removal rate (MRR). The range of values of each parameter is set at three different levels, and Taguchi’s L9 orthogonal array is used to design factors so that all the interactions between the response variables and machining variables can be investigated. Based on the experimental values, second-order regression equations are fitted between each of the response parameters and the machining parameters using Minitab 18 software. The equations are then optimized by defining the three equations of Ra, kw and MRR as the three objectives of a multi-objective optimization problem (MOOP) using a multi-objective optimization algorithm called Elitist Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm (NSGA-II). Single best compromise solutions with respect to the MOOPs of GFRP, CFRP and CGFRP composites are also determined from the Pareto optimal solutions obtained by NSGA-II. Finally, confirmation tests are conducted on specimens of GFRP, CFRP and CGFRP composites machined at their corresponding optimum parameters given by the GA. It is observed that the optimum values of Ra, kw and MRR of all the optimization problems are closer to the corresponding experimental values of confirmation tests.


CGFRP AWJM Surface roughness Kerf width MRR NSGA 



  1. 1.
    A. Masmoudi, M.B. Ouezdou, J. Bouaziz, New parameter design of GFRP RC beams. Constr. Build. Mater. 29, 627–632 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    S.A. Hussain, V. Pandurangadu, K. Palanikumar, Machinability of glass fiber reinforced plastic (GFRP) composite materials. Int. J. Eng. Sci. Technol. 3(4), 103–118 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    P. Banakar, H.K. Shivananda, Preparation and characterization of the carbon fiber reinforced epoxy resin composites. IOSR J. Mech. Civ. Eng. 1(2), 15–18 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    N.M. Nor, M.H.A. Boestamam, M.A. Yusof, Carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) as reinforcement for concrete beam. Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Adv. Eng. 3, 6–10 (2013)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    B.K. Lodhi, D. Verma, R. Shukla, Optimization of machining parameters in EDM of CFRP composite using Taguchi technique. Int. Mech. Eng. Technol. (IJMET) 5, 70–77 (2014)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    C.M. Parmar, P.K. Yogi, T.D. Parmar, Optimization of abrasive water jet machine process parameter for AL-6351 using Taguchi method. Int. J. Adv. Eng. Res. Dev. (IJAERD) 1, 1–8 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    D. Doreswamy, B. Shivamurthy, D. Anjaiah, N. Yagnesh Sharma, An investigation of abrasive water jet machining on graphite/glass/epoxy composite. Int. J. Manuf. Eng. 20, 1–12 (2014)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    G. Harinath Gowd, M. Gunasekhar Reddy, B. Sreenivasulu, M. Ravuri, Multi-objective optimization of process parameters in WEDM during machining of SS304. Procedia Mater. Sci. 5, 1408–1416 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    A. Tiwari, A. Mandal, K. Kumar, Multi-objective optimization of electro-chemical machining by non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm. Mater. Today Proc. 2(4–5), 2569–2575 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    A. Tripathi, B. Varshney, B. Dwivedi, Optimization of top kerf width produced on graphite filled glass fiber reinforced epoxy composite through abrasive water jet machining. Int. J. Eng. Res. Dev. 11, 33–41 (2015)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    K. Abhishek, S. Chatterjee, S. Datta, S.S. Mahapatra, Application of NSGA II for optimization of multi-performance characteristics during machining of GFRP (epoxy) composites. Mater. Today Proc. 2(4–5), 2353–2358 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    P.D. Unde, M.D. Gayakwad, N.G. Patil, R.S. Pawade, D.G. Thakur, P.K. Brahmankar, Experimental investigations into abrasive waterjet machining of carbon fiber reinforced plastic. J. Compos. 15, 1–11 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    A. Dhanawade, S. Kumar, R.V. Kalmekar, Abrasive water jet machining of carbon epoxy composite. Defence Sci. J. 66, 522–528 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    R. Shukla, D. Singh, Experimentation Investigation of Abrasive Water Jet Machining Parameters Using Taguchi and Evolutionary Optimization Techniques (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2016), pp. 1–17Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    R.P. Ravikanth, K.S. Shankar, Optimization of various process parameters for CFRP composite materials machining. IOSR J. Mech. Civ. Eng. 13, 35–40 (2016)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    T. Yamane, A. Todoroki, Analysis of electric current density in carbon fiber reinforced plastic laminated plates with angled plies. Compos. Struct. 166, 268–276 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    T. Vo-Duy, D. Duong-Gia, V. Ho-Huu, H.C. Vu-Do, T. Nguyen-Thoi, Multi-objective optimization of laminated composite beam structures using NSGA-II algorithm. Compos. Struct. 168, 498–509 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    B. Fengler, L. Kärger, F. Henning, A. Hrymak, Multi-objective patch optimization with integrated kinematic draping simulation for continuous–discontinuous fiber-reinforced composite structures. J. Compos. Sci. 2(2), 22 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    West system, Vacuum Bagging Techniques, 7th edn. (Gougeon Brothers, Bay, 2010), pp. 2–150Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Minitab Inc., Meet MINITAB Release, Ver. 18 (2017)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    K. Deb, A fast and elitist multi-objective genetic algorithm-II. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 6(2), 182–196 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    K. Deb, R.B. Agrawal, Simulated binary crossover for continuous search space. Complex Syst. 9(2), 115–148 (1995)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    K. Deb, M. Goyal, A combined genetic adaptive search (Gene AS) for engineering design. Comput. Sci. Inf. 26(4), 30–45 (1996)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    T. Chugh, N. Chakraborti, K. Sindhya, Y. Jin, A data-driven surrogate-assisted evolutionary algorithm applied to a many-objective blast furnace optimization problem. Mater. Manuf. Process. 32(10), 1172–1178 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    A.D. Belegundu, T.R. Chandrupatla, Concepts and Application in Engineering (Pearson Education Asia, First Indian Reprint 2002, 2002), pp. 379–380Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Institution of Engineers (India) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringS.R.K.R. Engineering CollegeBhimavaramIndia

Personalised recommendations