Skip to main content
Log in

A standardized model for the evaluation of machining coolant/lubricant costs

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

Abstract

Compliance with environmental regulations is becoming more and more costly for manufacturers as government scrutiny and global trade agreements become more stringent. Metal-cutting fluid use and disposal is a major concern as these environmental issues become more prominent. Gaining a clear understanding of the costs associated with machining coolant/lubricant use can be difficult. Many factors impact this cost, such as the original purchase price, maintenance costs, disposal management and fees, and performance factors related to the particular fluid. This paper develops a detailed cost and performance-based methodology for machining coolant/lubricant selection. A model by which to evaluate the relative impacts of coolant/lubricant decisions on the unit workpiece cost of production is described. At present, a widely accepted methodology is not available for this purpose. The model presented here will assist manufacturing companies of all types in making this critical decision.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ezugwu E, Bonney J, Olajire K (2002) The effect of coolant concentration on the machinability of nickel-base, C-263, alloy. Proc 6th International Tribology Conference, Perth, Western Australia, 515–520

  2. Nicolaou P, Thurston D, Carnahan J (2002) Machining quality and cost: estimation and tradeoffs. J Manuf Sci Eng 124:840–851

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Stidham J (1999) A predictive comparative model program to determine the effects of coolant/lubricant use and application methods on machined part cost. MS Thesis, University of Missouri-Rolla

  4. McClure T, Adams R, Gugger M (2004) Comparison of flood vs. microlubrication on machining performance. Unist Technical Paper

  5. El Baradie M (1996) Cutting fluids part two: recycling and clean machining. J Mater Process Technol 56(1):798–806

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Sheehan M (1999) Final report of the OSHA metalworking fluids standards advisory committee. Occupational Safety & Health Administration, Washington, DC

  7. Markert K, Corson A (1995) Metalworking fluids technical training manual, Dubois Inc.

  8. Quigley L (1992) Metalworking fluids - at the cutting edge of health and safety. ASTM Standard News, pp 40–43

  9. Silliman J (1992) Cutting and grinding fluids: selection and application. Soc Manuf Eng

  10. Sheng P, Oberwalleny S (1997) Life-cycle planning of cutting fluids—a review. J Manuf Sci Eng 119:791–800

    Google Scholar 

  11. Koelsh J (1997) Lubricity vs. the environment: cascades of cleanliness. Manuf Eng 118(5):50–58

    Google Scholar 

  12. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1983a) Treatability manual: cost estimating. Office of Research and Development, Publication Number EPA-600/2-82-001d

  13. Cozzens D, Rao P, Olson W, Sutherland J, Panetta J (1999) An experimental investigation into the effect of cutting fluid conditions on the boring of aluminum alloys. J Manuf Sci Eng 121(33):434–439

    Google Scholar 

  14. Upton D (1992) A flexible structure for computer-controlled manufacturing systems. Manuf Rev 5(1):58–74

    Google Scholar 

  15. Groover M (2000) Automation, production systems, and computer integrated manufacturing. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  16. DeGarmo E, Black J, Kohser R (2002) Materials and processes in manufacturing, 9th edn. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  17. Takakuwa S (1997) The use of simulation in activity-based costing for flexible manufacturing systems. Proc 1997 Winter Simulation Conference, INFORMS

  18. TechSolve, Inc. (1980) The machining data handbook. TechSolve, Inc., Cincinnati, Ohio

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kevin M. Hubbard.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hubbard, K.M., Callahan, R.N. & Strong, S.D. A standardized model for the evaluation of machining coolant/lubricant costs. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 36, 1–10 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-006-0806-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-006-0806-x

Keywords

Navigation