Analysis and Modeling of Cryogenic Turning Operation Using Response Surface Methodology


In the present scenario, metal cutting industries are looking for alternative cooling techniques to conventional cooling to satisfy the stringent environment regulations as well as lower productivity problems while machining of difficult to cut materials. Cryogenic machining is a novel eco-friendly as well as efficient cooling techniques. In present work, an attempt has been made to study the effect of process parameters on turning performance characteristics and the development of correlation models between the input process parameters and output responses while machining of difficult to cut materials 17-4 precipitated hardened stainless steel (PH SS) using response surface methodology (RSM) under the cryogenic cooling environment. The turning process parameters considered in the present study are cutting velocity (v), feed rate (f) and depth of cut (d) whereas responses are tool flank wear (Vb), surface roughness (Ra) and material removal rate (MRR) respectively. RSM based face centered central composite design (CCD) experimental design has been used to perform the experiments. From the conformation test results, it was observed that very good agreement was found between the actual and predicted values, which represent that the developed predictive models are well effective with a maximum of ± 5% error.

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


  1. 1.

    Kochmański P, Nowacki J (2006) Activated gas nitriding of 17-4 PH stainless steel. Surf Coat Technol 200(22–23):6558–6562

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Mohanty A, Gangopadhyay S, Thakur A (2015) On applicability of multilayer coated tool in dry machining of aerospace grade stainless steel. Mater Manuf Process 31(7):869–879

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Shaw MC (1984) Metal cutting principles. Clarendon Press, Wotton-under-Edge

    Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Hong SY, Broomer M (2000) Economical and ecological cryogenic machining of AISI 304 austenitic stainless steel. Clean Prod Process 2(3):0157–0166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Montgomery DC (1987) Design and analysis of experiments-second edition. Qual Reliab Eng Int 3(3):212–212

    Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Gupta MK, Sood PK, Sharma VS (2016) Machining parameters optimization of titanium alloy using response surface methodology and particle swarm optimization under minimum quantity lubrication environment. Mater Manuf Process 31(13):1671– 1682

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Gupta MK, Sood PK, Sharma VS (2016) Optimization of machining parameters and cutting fluids during nano-fluid based minimum quantity lubrication turning of titanium alloy by using evolutionary techniques. J Clean Prod 135:1276–1288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Makadia AJ, Nanavati JI (2013) Optimisation of machining parameters for turning operations based on response surface methodology. Meas J Int Meas Confed 46(4):1521–1529

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Asiltürk I, Neşeli S, Ince MA (2016) Optimisation of parameters affecting surface roughness of Co28Cr6Mo medical material during CNC lathe machining by using the Taguchi and RSM methods. Meas J Int Meas Confed 78:120–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Bouacha K, Yallese MA, Mabrouki T, Rigal JF (2010) Statistical analysis of surface roughness and cutting forces using response surface methodology in hard turning of AISI 52100 bearing steel with CBN tool. Int J Refract Met Hard Mater 28(3):349–361

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Bouacha K, Yallese MA, Khamel S, Belhadi S (2014) Analysis and optimization of hard turning operation using cubic boron nitride tool. Int J Refract Met Hard Mater 45:160–178

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Mandal N, Doloi B, Mondal B (2011) Development of flank wear prediction model of Zirconia Toughened Alumina (ZTA) cutting tool using response surface methodology. Int J Refract Met Hard Mater 29(2):273–280

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Aouici H, Yallese MA, Fnides B, Chaoui K, Mabrouki T (2011) Modeling and optimization of hard turning of X38CrMoV5-1 steel with CBN tool: machining parameters effects on flank wear and surface roughness. J Mech Sci Technol 25(11):2843–2851

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Chauhan SR Dass K (2012) Optimization of machining parameters in turning of titanium (grade-5) alloy using response surface methodology. Mater Manuf Process 27(5):531–537

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Sivaiah P, Chakradhar D (2017) Multi-objective optimisation of cryogenic turning process using Taguchi-based grey relational analysis. Int J Mach Mach Mater 19(4):297–312

    Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Sivaiah P, Chakradhar D (2017) Machinability studies on 17-4 PH stainless steel under cryogenic cooling environment. Mater Manuf Process 32(15):1775–1788

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Sivaiah P, Chakradhar D (2017) Influence of cryogenic coolant on turning performance characteristics?: a comparison with wet machining. Mater Manuf Process 32(13):1475–1485

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Sivaiah P, Chakradhar D (2017) Comparative evaluations of machining performance during turning of 17-4 PH stainless steel under cryogenic and wet machining conditions. Mach Sci Technol 22(1):147–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Stephan DD, Werner J, Yeater RP (1998) Essential regression and experimental design for chemists and engineers. MS Excel add Softw Packag. 2001

  20. 20.

    Pawade RS, Joshi SS, Brahmankar PK, Rahman M (2007) An investigation of cutting forces and surface damage in high-speed turning of Inconel 718. J Mater Process Technol 193:139–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Palanikumar K, Karthikeyan R (2006) Optimal machining conditions for turning of particulate metal matrix composites using taguchi and response surface methodologies. Mach Sci Technol 10(4):417–433

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Maity KP, Swain PK (2008) An experimental investigation of hot-machining to predict tool life. J Mater Process Technol 198(1–3):344–349

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. Sivaiah.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sivaiah, P., Chakradhar, D. Analysis and Modeling of Cryogenic Turning Operation Using Response Surface Methodology. Silicon 10, 2751–2768 (2018).

Download citation


  • Cryogenic machining
  • Response surface methodology
  • 17-4 PH SS
  • Tool wear
  • Surface roughness
  • Material removal rate (MRR)
  • Modeling