Experimental Analysis on Composite Material Using Multiple Electrodes by EDM Process

  • Subhashree Naik
  • Debabrata Dhupal
  • Bijoy Kumar Nanda
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering book series (LNME)


High-performance lightweight aluminium metal matrix composite (MMC) is used in the aerospace and automotive industries in recent years. This work suggests an experimental analysis of the various machining parameters for the electrical discharge machining (EDM) on aluminium metal matrix composite (AL-22%-SiC). A Box–Behnken design (BBD) of response surface methodology (RSM) has been used to calculate the responses such as the tool wear rate (TWR) and surface roughness (Ra) using copper and brass electrodes with input machining process parameters such as low voltage current (LVC), high voltage current (HVC), pulse-on time (Ton), pulse-off time (Toff) and flushing pressure (FP). Quadratic regression models are established for the individual responses, and response surface methodology has been applied to the invention of the optimum process parameter settings.




  1. 1.
    Li L, Feng L, Bai X, Li ZY (2016) Surface characteristics of Ti–6Al–4V alloy by EDM with Cu–SiC composite electrode. Appl. Surf. Sci. 388:546–550Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Khanra AK, Sarkar BR, Bhattacharya B, Pathak LC, Godkhindi MM (2007) Performance of ZrB2–Cu composite as an EDM electrode. J Mater Process Technol 183:122–126Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kumar SS, Uthayakumar M, Kumaran ST, Varol T (2018) Investigating the surface integrity of aluminium based composites machined by EDM. Def Technol 1–6Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mahanta S, Chandrasekaran M, Samanta S (2018) GA based optimization for the production of quality jobs with minimum power consumption in EDM of hybrid MMCs. Mater Today Proc 5:7788–7796Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Patel KM, Pandey PM, Venkateswara Rao P (2009) Surface integrity and material removal mechanisms associated with the EDM of Al2O3 ceramic composite. Int J Refract Met Hard Mater 27:892–899Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tanjilul M, Ahmed A, Senthil Kumar A, Rahman M (2018) A study on EDM debris particle size and flushing mechanism for efficient debris removal in EDM-drilling of Inconel 718. J Mater Process Technol 255:263–274Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bodukuri AK, Chandramouli S, Eswaraiah K, Laxman J (2018) Experimental Investigation and optimization of EDM process parameters on aluminum metal matrix composite. Mater Today Proc 5:24731–24740Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zhang Y, Liu Y, Shen Y, Ji R, Li Z, Zheng C (2014) Investigation on the influence of the dielectrics on the material removal characteristics of EDM. J Mater Process Tech 214:1052–1061Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Puhan D, Mahapatra SS, Sahu J, Das L (2013) A hybrid approach for multi-response optimization of non-conventional machining on AlSiC p MMC. Measurement 46:3581–3592Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Habib SS (2009) Study of the parameters in electrical discharge machining through response surface methodology approach. Appl Math Model 33:4397–4407Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dhara S, Purohit R, Saini N, Sharma A, Hemath Kumar G (2007) Mathematical modeling of electric discharge machining of cast Al–4Cu–6Si alloy–10 wt% SiCP composites. J Mater Process Technol 194:24–29Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Luis CJ, Puertas I, Villa G (2005) Material removal rate and electrode wear study on the EDM of silicon carbide. J Mater Process Technol 165:889–896CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Singh PN, Raghukandan K, Pai BC (2004) Optimization by grey relational analysis of EDM parameters on machining Al–10%SiCP composites. J Mater Process Technol 156:1658–1661Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Subhashree Naik
    • 1
  • Debabrata Dhupal
    • 1
  • Bijoy Kumar Nanda
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Production EngineeringVSS University of TechnologyBurlaIndia
  2. 2.Department of Mechanical EngineeringNITRourkelaIndia

Personalised recommendations