Advertisement

Analysis of EN24 steel in turning process with copper nanofluids under minimum quantity lubrication

  • M. Naresh BabuEmail author
  • V. Anandan
  • N. Muthukrishnan
Technical Paper
  • 17 Downloads

Abstract

Minimum quantity lubrication (MQL) is a method which consumes lubricant at a minimum level. In this research work, the usage of copper nanofluids with MQL in turning on EN24 steel is presented. The experiments were performed based on L18 orthogonal arrays by varying the cutting speed, feed rate and environment such as oil with flood lubrication (Oil + FL), oil with minimum quantity lubrication (Oil + MQL) and nanofluids with minimum quantity lubrication. To evaluate the effect of process parameters, the responses, namely, surface roughness and tool wear, were examined. In this study, complex proportional assessment method is used to determine the optimal combination in reducing the surface roughness and tool wear. The results showed that suggested method is appropriate in deciding the best cutting conditions and that nanofluid is the most significant parameter on reducing the surface roughness and tool wear. Further, scanning electron microscope was used to examine the tool wear and chip morphology. Atomic force microscope was also used to observe the three-dimensional view of the machined surface.

Keywords

Minimum quantity lubrication COPRAS Nanofluids Tool wear 

Abbreviations

MQL

Minimum quantity lubrication

FL

Flood lubrication

COPRAS

Complex proportional assessment

AFM

Atomic force microscope

SEM

Scanning electron microscope

AISI

American iron and steel institute

BUE

Built up edges

Al2O3

Aluminium oxide

MoS2

Molybdenum disulphide

SiO2

Silicon dioxide

CuO

Copper oxide

TiO2

Titanium dioxide

Ra

Average surface roughness

VB

Average flank wear

µm

Microns

W/mK

Watt per metre kelvin

CNC

Computer numerical control

ANOVA

Analysis of variance

Vc

Cutting speed

Nm

Nanometer

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

References

  1. 1.
    Sahoo AK, Mishra PC (2014) A response surface methodology and desirability approach for predictive modeling and optimization of cutting temperature in machining hardened steel. Int. J. Ind Eng Comput 5:407–416Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Badami VG, Hege RE, Patterson SR (2003) A novel method for forming fine-pitch threads in superinvar. Precis Eng 27:87–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sharma VS, Dogra M, Suri NM (2009) Cooling techniques for improved productivity in turning. Int J Mach Tool Manuf 49:435–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Muthuvel S, Naresh Babu M, Muthukrishnan N (2018) Copper nanofluids under minimum quantity lubrication during drilling of AISI 4140 steel. Aust J Mech Eng.  https://doi.org/10.1080/14484846.2018.1486694
  5. 5.
    Stephenson DA, Skerlos SJ, King AS, Supekar SD (2014) Rough turning Inconel 750 with supercritical CO2-based minimum quantity lubrication. J Mater Process Technol 214:673–680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Su Y, Gong L, Li B, Liu Z, Chen D (2016) Performance evaluation of nanofluid MQL with vegetable-based oil and ester oil as base fluids in turning. Int J Adv Manuf Techn 83:2083–2089CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sharma P, Sidhu BS, Sharma J (2015) Investigation of effects of nanofluids on turning of AISI D2 steel using minimum quantity lubrication. J Clean Prod 108:72–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Naresh Babu M, Anandan V, Muthukrishnan Gajendiran M (2018) Experimental process to evaluate the minimum quantity lubrication technique using copper nanofluids in turning process. Int J Mach Mach Mater 20:497–512Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Khandekar S, Ravi Sankar M, Agnihotri V, Ramkumar J (2012) Nano-cutting fluid for enhancement of metal cutting performance. Mater Manuf Process 27:963–967CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sharma AK, Tiwari AK, Dixit AR, Singh RK, Singh M (2018) Novel uses of alumina/graphene hybrid nanoparticle additives for improved tribological properties of lubricant in turning operation. Tribol Int 119:99–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sharma AK, Tiwari AK, Singh RK, Dixit AR (2016) Tribological investigation of TiO2 nanoparticle based cutting fluid in machining under minimum quantity lubrication (MQL). Mater Today Proc 3:2155–2162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Padmini R, VamsiKrishna P, Krishna Mohana Rao G, Rukmini Srikant R (2017) Performance evaluation of vegetable oil based nano cutting fluids in machining using grey relational analysis—a step towards sustainable manufacturing. J Clean Prod 172:2862–2875Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Singh RK, Sharma AK, Dixit AR, Tiwari AK, Pramanik A, Mandal A (2017) Performance evaluation of alumina-graphene hybrid nano-cutting fluid in hard turning. J Clean Prod 162:830–845CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Amrita M, Srikant RR, Sitaramaraju AV (2014) Performance evaluation of nanographite-based cutting fluid in machining process. Mater Manuf Process 29:600–605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Setti D, Sinha MK, Ghosh S, Venkateswara Rao P (2015) Performance evaluation of Ti–6Al–4 V grinding using chip formation and coefficient of friction under the influence of nanofluids. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 88:237–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jiaa D, Lia C, Zhanga Y, Yanga M, Wanga Y, Guoa S, Cao H (2017) Specific energy and surface roughness of minimum quantity lubrication grinding ni-based alloy with mixed vegetable oil-based nanofluids. Precis Eng 50:248–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sharma AK, Singh RK, Dixit AR, Tiwari AK (2016) Characterization and experimental investigation of Al2O3 nanoparticle based cutting fluid in turning of AISI 1040 steel under minimum quantity lubrication (MQL). Mater Today Proc 3:1899–1906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Singh RK, Sharma AK, Dixit AR, Mandal A, Tiwari AK (2017) Experimental investigation of thermal conductivity and specific heat of nanoparticles mixed cutting fluids. Mater Today Proc 4:8587–8596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sharma AK, Tiwari AK, Dixit AR (2016) Rheological behavior of nanofluids: a review. Renew Sustain Rev 53:779–791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Srikant RR, Rao DN, Subrahmanyam MS, Vamsi Krishna P (2010) Applicability of cutting fluids with nanoparticle inclusion as coolants in machining. Proc Inst Mech Eng J-J Eng Tribol 223:221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sharma AK, Singh RK, Dixit AR, Tiwari AK (2017) Novel uses of alumina-MoS2 hybrid nanoparticle enriched cutting fluid in hard turning of AISI 304 steel. J Manuf Process 30:467–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sharma AK, Tiwari AK, Dixit AR, Singh RK (2017) Investigation into performance of SiO2 nanoparticle based cutting fluid in machining process. Mater Today Proc 4:133–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Amrita M, Srikant RR, Sitaramaraju AV, Prasad MMS, Vamsi Krishna P (2013) Experimental investigations on influence of mist cooling using nanofluids on machining parameters in turning AISI 1040 steel. Proc Insy Mech Eng J-J Eng Tribol 227:1334–1346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Padmini R, Vamsi Krishna P, Rao GKM (2014) Performance assessment of micro and nano solid lubricant suspensions in vegetable oils during machining. Proc Inst Mech Eng B-J Eng Eng Manuf 229:1–9Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ali MAM, Azmi AI, Khalil ANM, Leong KW (2017) Experimental study on minimal nanolubrication with surfactant in the turning of titanium alloys. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 88:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Raju RA, Andhare A, Sahu NK (2017) Performance of multiwalled carbon nanotube-based nanofluid in turning operation. Mater Manuf Process 32:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zhang X, Li C, Zhang Y, Jia D, Li B, Wang Y, Yang M, Hou Y, Zhang X (2016) Performances of Al2O3/SiC hybrid nanofluids in minimum-quantity lubrication grinding. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 86:3427–3441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Pashmforoush F, Bagherinia RD (2018) Influence of water-based copper nanofluid on wheel loading and surface roughness during grinding of Inconel 738 superalloy. J Clean. Prod.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.003
  29. 29.
    Ganesan K, Naresh Babu M, Santhanakumar M, Muthukrishnan N (2018) Experimental investigation of copper nanofluid based minimum quantity lubrication in turning of H 11 steel. J Braz Soc Mech Sci Eng 40:160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Naresh Babu M, Muthukrishnan N (2018) Experimental analysis in drilling of AA 5052 using copper nanofluids under minimum quantity lubrication. Aust J Mech Eng.  https://doi.org/10.1080/14484846.2018.1455267
  31. 31.
    Krishnaiah K, Shahabudeen P (2012) Applied design of experiments and taguchi methods, 1st edn. PHI Learning Pvt Ltd, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Zavadskas EK, Kaklauskas A, Turskis Z, Tamo saitien J (2008) Selection of the effective dwelling house walls by applying attributes values determined at intervals. J Civil Eng Manage 14:85–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Maity SR, Chatterjee P, Chakraborty S (2012) Cutting tool material selection using grey complex proportional assessment method. Mater Des 36:372–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Naresh Babu M, Muthukrishnan N (2015) Investigation of multiple process parameters in abrasive water jet machining of tiles. J Chin Inst Eng 38:692–700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Behera BC, Ghosh S, Rao PV (2016) Application of nanofluids during minimum quantity lubrication: a case study in turning process. Tribol Int 101:234–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Khan MMA, Mithu MAH, Dhar NR (2009) Effects of minimum quantity lubrication on turning AISI 9310 alloy steel using vegetable oil-based cutting fluid. J Mater Process Technol 209:5573–5583CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Pervaiz S, Deiab I, Rashid A (2017) Minimal quantity cooling lubrication in turning of Ti6Al4V: influence on surface roughness, cutting force and tool wear. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part B: J Eng Manuf 231:1542–1558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Zhang S, Li JF, Wang YW (2012) Tool life and cutting forces in end milling Inconel 718 under dry and minimum quantity cooling lubrication cutting conditions. J Clean Prod 32:81–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Manimaran R, Palaniradja K, Alagumurthi N, Sendhilnathan S, Hussain J (2014) Preparation and characterization of copper oxide nanofluid for heat transfer applications. Appl Nanosci 4:163–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kuzu AT, Bijanzad A, Bakkal M (2015) Experimental investigations of machinability in the turning of compacted graphite iron using minimum quantity lubrication. Mach Sci Technol 19:559–576CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Naresh Babu M, Manimaran G, Muthukrishnan N (2017) Experimental estimation of minimum quantity lubrication in turning on AISI 410 stainless steel. Int J Mach Mach Mater.  https://doi.org/10.1504/ijmmm.2017.088894 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Jhodkar D, Amarnath M, Chelladurai H, Ramkumar J (2018) Experimental investigations to enhance the machining performance of tungsten carbide tool insert using microwave treatment process. J Braz Soc Mech Sci Eng.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40430-018-1096-6
  43. 43.
    Bashir MA, Mia M, Dhar NR (2016) Investigations on surface milling of hardened AISI 4140 steel with pulse jet MQL applicator. J Inst Eng India Ser C.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40032-016-0277-2
  44. 44.
    Huang WT, Wu DH, Chen JT (2016) Robust design of using nanofluid/MQL in micro-drilling. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 85:2155–2161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Anthony Xavior M, Adithan M (2009) Determining the influence of cutting fluids on tool wear and surface roughness during turning of AISI 304 austenitic stainless steel. J Mater Process Technol 209:900–909CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Zohoor M, Yousefi S (2018) Experimental investigation of the effect of processing parameters on the surface roughness operation for using as expert system database. J Braz Soc Mech Sci Eng.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40430-018-1187-4
  47. 47.
    Sohrabpoor H, Khanghah SP, Teimouri R (2015) Investigation of lubricant condition and machining parameters while turning of AISI 4340. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 76:2099–2116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Gajrani KK, Ram D, RaviSankar M (2017) Biodegradation and hard machining performance comparison of eco-friendly cutting fluid and mineral oil using flood cooling and minimum quantity cutting fluid techniques. J Clean Prod 165:1420–1435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    WangY Li C, Zhang Y, Li B, Yang M, Zhang X, Guo S, Liu G (2016) Experimental evaluation of the lubrication properties of the wheel/workpiece interface in MQL grinding with different nanofluids. Tribol Int 99:198–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Sartori S, Ghiotti A, Bruschi S (2017) Hybrid lubricating/cooling strategies to reduce the tool wear in finishing turning of difficult-to-cut alloys. Wear 376–377:107–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Liu ZY, Guo YB, Sealy MP, Liu ZQ (2016) Energy consumption and process sustainability of hard milling with tool wear progression. J Mater Process Technol 229:305–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringSaveetha Engineering CollegeChennaiIndia
  2. 2.Department of MathematicsSaveetha Engineering CollegeChennaiIndia
  3. 3.Department of Mechanical EngineeringSri Venkateswara College of EngineeringSriperumbudurIndia

Personalised recommendations