Modeling of chip–tool interface temperature using response surface methodology and artificial neural network in HPC-assisted turning and tool life investigation

  • M. Kamruzzaman
  • Saadman Sakib RahmanEmail author
  • Md. Zurais Ibne Ashraf
  • Nikhil Ranjan Dhar


This study focuses on chip–tool interface temperature modeling of C-60, 17CrNiMo4, and 42CrMo4 steel alloys in dry-cut and high-pressure coolant (HPC)-assisted turning at various cutting speed-feed rates with SNMG and SNMM inserts. Improvement of tool life in turning C-60 steel under the application of jet at elevated pressure over dry machining is investigated. Scanning electron microscope (SEM) views of principal and auxiliary flank worn out tip (48-min) of cutting inserts divulge the effectiveness of high-pressure coolant emulsion over dry and conventional wet cooling. The experimental runs were conducted in full factorial orientation and response surface methodology (RSM) has been employed for subsequent modeling to formulate mathematical equations to devise accurate predictions of chip–tool interface temperature. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) is conducted to perceive the effects of each individual factors and their interactions terms and measure the significance of the proposed model. Later, optimization with desirability function concluded factor settings (cutting speed = 93 m/min, feed rate = 0.10 mm/rev, environment = HPC, material = C-60, and insert = SNMM) that minimize the response within the experimental domain satisfying desired goals. Further, artificial neural network (ANN) model has been developed and the prediction performance was compared with the cubic equations of RSM. It was observed that during testing phase MAPE and coefficient of determination (R 2) for RSM is 1.947 and 94.48 %, respectively; and the corresponding values for ANN (4-22-1) is 2.669 and 93.25 %. Results also reveal that cutting speed and environment have ∼38.82 and ∼37.82 % contribution on chip–tool interface temperature formation during machining. In addition, the results showed that HPC-assisted machining reduces chip–tool interface temperature significantly as well as prolong tool life.


Chip–tool interface temperature HPC-assisted machining Scanning electron microscope Response surface methodology Analysis of variance Artificial neural network 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Dhar N, Kamruzzaman M (2007) Cutting temperature, tool wear, surface roughness and dimensional deviation in turning AISI-4037 steel under cryogenic condition. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 47(5):754–759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kamruzzaman M, Dhar N (2008) The effect of applying high-pressure coolant (HPC) jet in machining of 42CrMo4 steel by uncoated carbide inserts. J Mech Eng 39(2):71–77Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Çakıroğlu R, Acır A (2013) Optimization of cutting parameters on drill bit temperature in drilling by Taguchi method. Measurement 46(9):3525–3531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sun S, Brandt M, Palanisamy S, Dargusch MS (2015) Effect of cryogenic compressed air on the evolution of cutting force and tool wear during machining of Ti–6Al–4V alloy. J Mater Process Technol 221:243–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sales WF, Diniz AE, Machado ÁR (2001) Application of cutting fluids in machining processes. J Braz Soc Mech Sci 23(2):227–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wertheim R, Rotberg J, Ber A (1992) Influence of high-pressure flushing through the rake face of the cutting tool. CIRP Ann-Manuf Technol 41(1):101–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Raynor PC, Cooper S, Leith D (1996) Evaporation of polydisperse multicomponent oil droplets. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 57(12):1128–1136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Umbrello D, Micari F, Jawahir I (2012) The effects of cryogenic cooling on surface integrity in hard machining: a comparison with dry machining. CIRP Ann-Manuf Technol 61(1):103–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Islam AK, Mia M, Dhar NR (2016) Effects of internal cooling by cryogenic on the machinability of hardened steel. Int J Adv Manuf Technol:1–10. doi: 10.1007/s00170-016-9373-y
  10. 10.
    Dhar N, Islam M, Islam S, Mithu M (2006) The influence of minimum quantity of lubrication (MQL) on cutting temperature, chip and dimensional accuracy in turning AISI-1040 steel. J Mater Process Technol 171(1):93–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Amini S, Paktinat H (2014) Ceramic tools with ordinary and wiper inserts in near dry machining with high speed on super alloy Monel K500. Mater Manuf Process 29(5):579–584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mia M, Dhar NR (2016) Optimization of surface roughness and cutting temperature in high-pressure coolant-assisted hard turning using Taguchi method. Int J Adv Manuf Technol:1–15. doi: 10.1007/s00170-016-8810-2
  13. 13.
    Sharman A, Hughes J, Ridgway K (2008) Surface integrity and tool life when turning Inconel 718 using ultra-high pressure and flood coolant systems. Proc Inst Mech Eng B J Eng Manuf 222(6):653–664CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bermingham M, Palanisamy S, Kent D, Dargusch M (2012) A comparison of cryogenic and high pressure emulsion cooling technologies on tool life and chip morphology in Ti–6Al–4V cutting. J Mater Process Technol 212(4):752–765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ezugwu E (2005) Key improvements in the machining of difficult-to-cut aerospace superalloys. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 45(12):1353–1367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wright P, Horne J, Tabor D (1979) Boundary conditions at the chip-tool interface in machining: comparisons between seizure and sliding friction. Wear 54(2):371–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ezugwu E, Da Silva R, Bonney J, Machado A (2005) Evaluation of the performance of CBN tools when turning Ti–6Al–4V alloy with high pressure coolant supplies. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 45(9):1009–1014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Braham-Bouchnak T, Germain G, Morel A, Furet B (2015) Influence of high-pressure coolant assistance on the machinability of the titanium alloy Ti555-3. Mach Sci Technol 19(1):134–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Naves V, Da Silva M, Da Silva F (2013) Evaluation of the effect of application of cutting fluid at high pressure on tool wear during turning operation of AISI 316 austenitic stainless steel. Wear 302(1):1201–1208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Karkalos N, Galanis N, Markopoulos A (2016) Surface roughness prediction for the milling of Ti–6Al–4V ELI alloy with the use of statistical and soft computing techniques. Measurement 90:25–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bouzid L, Yallese MA, Chaoui K, Mabrouki T, Boulanouar L (2015) Mathematical modeling for turning on AISI 420 stainless steel using surface response methodology. Proc Inst Mech Eng B J Eng Manuf 229(1):45–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rajmohan T, Sathishkumar S, Palanikumar K, Ranganathan S (2015) Modeling and analysis of cutting force in turning of AISI 316L Stainless Steel (SS) under nano cutting environment. Appl Mech MaterGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Berkani S, Bouzid L, Bensouilah H, Yallese MA, Girardin F, Mabrouki T (2015) Modeling and optimization of tool wear and surface roughness in turning of austenitic stainless steel using response surface methodology. S09d Procédés d’usinageGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Nayak M, Sehgal R (2015) Effect of tool material properties and cutting conditions on machinability of AISI D6 steel during hard turning. Arab J Sci Eng 40(4):1151–1164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gosai M, Bhavsar SN (2016) Experimental study on temperature measurement in turning operation of hardened steel (EN36. Procedia Technol 23:311–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Abhang L, Hameedullah M (2010) Chip-tool interface temperature prediction model for turning process. Int J Eng Sci Technol 2(4):382–393Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sharma MD, Sehgal R (2015) Modelling of machining process while turning tool steel with CBN tool. Arab J Sci Eng:1–22Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Çalışkan H, Kurbanoğlu C, Panjan P, Kramar D (2013) Investigation of the performance of carbide cutting tools with hard coatings in hard milling based on the response surface methodology. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 66(5–8):883–893Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Amini S, Fatemi M, Atefi R (2014) High speed turning of Inconel 718 using ceramic and carbide cutting tools. Arab J Sci Eng 39(3):2323–2330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Özel T, Karpat Y (2005) Predictive modeling of surface roughness and tool wear in hard turning using regression and neural networks. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 45(4):467–479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rao KV, Murthy B, Rao NM (2014) Prediction of cutting tool wear, surface roughness and vibration of work piece in boring of AISI 316 steel with artificial neural network. Measurement 51:63–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kumar R, Chauhan S (2015) Study on surface roughness measurement for turning of Al 7075/10/SiCp and Al 7075 hybrid composites by using response surface methodology (RSM) and artificial neural networking (ANN. Measurement 65:166–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Jayakumar K, Mathew J, Joseph M (2013) An investigation of cutting force and tool–work interface temperature in milling of Al–SiCp metal matrix composite. Proc Inst Mech Eng B J Eng Manuf 227(3):362–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Adesta EYT, Al Hazza MH, Suprianto M, Riza M (2012) Prediction of cutting temperatures by using back propagation neural network modeling when cutting hardened H-13 steel in CNC end milling. In: Advanced Materials Research. Trans Tech Publ:91–94Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Tanikic D, Manic M, Devedzic G, Cojbasic Z (2010) Modelling of the temperature in the chip-forming zone using artificial intelligence techniques. Neural Network World 20(2):171Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kara F, Aslantaş K, Çiçek A (2016) Prediction of cutting temperature in orthogonal machining of AISI 316L using artificial neural network. Appl Soft Comput 38:64–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Korkut I, Acır A, Boy M (2011) Application of regression and artificial neural network analysis in modelling of tool–chip interface temperature in machining. Expert Syst Appl 38(9):11651–11656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    DeChiffre L (1981) Lubrication in cutting—critical review and experiments with restricted contact tools. Asle. Transactions 24(3):340–344Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Debnath S, Reddy MM, Yi QS (2014) Environmental friendly cutting fluids and cooling techniques in machining: a review. J Clean Prod 83:33–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Allen DM (1974) The relationship between variable selection and data agumentation and a method for prediction. Technometrics 16(1):125–127MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Saglam H, Yaldiz S, Unsacar F (2007) The effect of tool geometry and cutting speed on main cutting force and tool tip temperature. Mater Des 28(1):101–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Myers RH, Montgomery DC, Anderson-Cook CM (2016) Response surface methodology: process and product optimization using designed experiments. John Wiley & Sons, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Box GE, Draper NR (1987) Empirical model-building and response surfaces, vol 424. Wiley, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Kamruzzaman M, Dhar N (2009) The influence of high pressure coolant on temperature tool wear and surface finish in turning 17CrNiMo6 and 42CrMo4 steels. J Eng Appl Sci 4(6):93–103Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Mia M, Khan MA, Rahman SS, Dhar NR (2016) Mono-objective and multi-objective optimization of performance parameters in high pressure coolant assisted turning of Ti-6Al-4V. Int J Adv Manuf Technol:1–10. doi: 10.1007/s00170-016-9372-z
  46. 46.
    Hornik K, Stinchcombe M, White H (1989) Multilayer feedforward networks are universal approximators. Neural Netw 2(5):359–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Beale MH, Hagan MT, Demuth HB (2010) Neural network toolbox 7. User’s Guide, MathWorksGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Mia M, Dhar NR (2016) Prediction of surface roughness in hard turning under high pressure coolant using artificial neural network. Measurement 92:464–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    MacKay DJ (1992) A practical Bayesian framework for backpropagation networks. Neural Comput 4(3):448–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Foresee FD, Hagan MT (1997) Gauss-Newton approximation to Bayesian learning. In: Neural Networks, 1997, International Conference on. IEEE:1930–1935Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Haykin SS, Haykin SS, Haykin SS, Haykin SS (2009) Neural networks and learning machines, vol 3. Pearson Education Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Mia M, Dhar NR (2016) Response surface and neural network based predictive models of cutting temperature in hard turning. J Adv ResGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Groover MP (2012) Fundamentals of modern manufacturing: materials, processes, and systems, 5th edn. Wiley Global EducationGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Trent EM, Wright PK (2000) Metal cutting. Butterworth-HeinemannGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Kamruzzaman M, Dhar N Performance evaluation of carbide inserts in turning C-60 steel and 42crmo4 steel under high-pressure coolant (Hpc) conditionGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    da Silva RB, Machado ÁR, Ezugwu EO, Bonney J, Sales WF (2013) Tool life and wear mechanisms in high speed machining of Ti–6Al–4V alloy with PCD tools under various coolant pressures. J Mater Process Technol 213(8):1459–1464CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Kamruzzaman
    • 1
  • Saadman Sakib Rahman
    • 2
    Email author
  • Md. Zurais Ibne Ashraf
    • 2
  • Nikhil Ranjan Dhar
    • 3
  1. 1.Mechanical EngineeringDhaka University of Engineering and TechnologyGazipurBangladesh
  2. 2.Mechanical and Production EngineeringAhsanullah University of Science and TechnologyDhakaBangladesh
  3. 3.Industrial and Production EngineeringBangladesh University of Engineering and TechnologyDhakaBangladesh

Personalised recommendations