Advertisement

A Multi-parameter Experimental and Statistical Analysis of Surface Texture in Turning of a New Aluminum Matrix Steel Particulate Composite

  • N. M. Vaxevanidis
  • N. A. Fountas
  • G. V. Seretis
  • C. G. Provatidis
  • D. E. Manolakos
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering book series (LNME)

Abstract

Metal matrix composites (MMCs) represent a new generation of engineering materials in which a strong reinforcement is incorporated into a metal matrix to improve its properties including specific strength, specific stiffness, wear resistance, corrosion resistance and elastic modulus. Aluminum matrix composites (AMCs), a specific type of MMCs, are rapidly replacing conventional materials in various engineering applications, especially in the aerospace and automobile industries due to their attractive properties. From the literature already published it is evident that the machining of AMCs is an important area of research, but only very few if any studies have been carried out using metal particles reinforced AMCs. A multi-parameter analysis of surface finish imparted by turning to a new L316 stainless steel flake-reinforced aluminum matrix composite is presented. Surface finish is investigated by examining a number of surface texture parameters. Spindle speed as well as feed rate was treated as the independent variables under a constant depth of cut whilst roughness parameters were considered as the responses under an L9 orthogonal array experimental design. ANOVA analysis was also conducted to study the effect of the two cutting variables on the surface texture responses.

Keywords

Surface texture Aluminum matrix particulate composite (AMPC) Stainless steel flakes (SSF) Turning Multi-parameter analysis 

References

  1. 1.
    Kok M (2005) Production and mechanical properties of Al2O3 particle-reinforced 2024 aluminium alloy composites. J Mater Process Technol 161(3):381–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bains PS, Sidhu SS, Payal HS (2016) Fabrication and machining of metal matrix composites: A review. Mater Manuf Processes 31(5):553–573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tomac N, Tannessen K, Rasch, FO (1992) Machinability of particulate aluminium matrix composites. CIRP Ann-Manuf Technol 41(1):55–58Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kainer KU (ed.) (2006) Metal matrix composites: custom-made materials for automotive and aerospace engineering. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Aramesh M, Shi B, Nassef AO, Attia H, Balazinski M, Kishawy HA (2013) Meta-modeling optimization of the cutting process during turning titanium metal matrix composites (Ti-MMCs) Procedia CIRP 8:576–581Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Seretis GV, Kouzilos G, Polyzou AK, Manolakos DE (2016) Provatidis, effect of stainless steel flakes content on mechanical properties and microstructure of cast aluminum matrix composites, submitted to Materials Research Express, Sept 2016Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kannan S, Kishawy HA (2008) Tribological aspects of machining aluminium metal matrix composites. J Mater Process Technol 198(1):399–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kumar GV, Rao CSP, Selvaraj N (2011) Mechanical and tribological behavior of particulate reinforced aluminum metal matrix composites–a review. J Miner Mater Charact Eng 10(01):59Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gururaja S, Ramulu M, Pedersen W (2013). Machining of MMCs: a review. Mach Sci Technol 17(1):41–73Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Basavarajappa S, Chandramohan G, Rao KN, Radhakrishanan R, Krishnaraj V (2006) Turning of particulate metal matrix composites—review and discussion. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part B: J Eng Manuf 220(7):1189–1204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Vaxevanidis NM, Galanis NI, Petropoulos GP, Karalis N, Vasilakakos P, Sideris J (2010) Surface roughness analysis in high speed-dry turning of a tool steel. In: ASME 2010 10th biennial conference on engineering systems design and analysis, ESDA 2010, pp 551–557Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Vaxevanidis NM, Fountas NA, Galanis NI, Bounas I, Sideris J (2011) Multiparametric analysis of surface roughness in high-speed turning of a high-alloyed tool steel. In: Proceedings of 7th BalkanTrib international conference, pp 351–358Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Aramesh M, Shi B, Nassef,AO, Attia H, Balazinski M, Kishawy HA (2013) Meta-modeling optimization of the cutting process during turning titanium metal matrix composites (Ti-MMCs) Procedia CIRP 8:576–581Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Petropoulos GP, Vaxevanidis NM, Pantazaras CN, Antoniadis AT (2006) Multi-parameter identification and control of turned surface textures corresponding to various cutting factors—new typology charts. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 29:118–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gadelmawla ES, Koura MM, Maksoud TMA, Elewa IM, Soliman HH (2002) Roughness parameters. J Mater Process Technol 123(1):133–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Grzesik W, Brol S (2003) Hybrid approach to surface roughness evaluation in multistage machining processes. J Mater Process Technol 134(2):265–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Petropoulos G, Pandazaras C, Vaxevanidis NM, Ntziantzias I, Korlos A (2007) Selecting subsets of mutually unrelated ISO 13565-2: 1997 surface roughness parameters in turning operations. Int J Comput Mater Sci Surf Eng 1(1):114–128Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Petropoulos G, Vaxevanidis NM, Pandazaras C (2004) Modeling of surface finish in electro-discharge machining based upon statistical multi-parameter analysis. J Mater Process Technol 155:1247–1251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shin YC, Dandekar C (2012) Mechanics and modeling of chip formation in machining of MMC. In: Machining of metal matrix composites. Springer, London, pp 1–49Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hung NP, Yeo SH, Lee KK, Ng KJ (1998) Chip formation in machining particle-reinforced metal matrix composites. Mater Manuf Processes 13:85–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pramanik A, Zhang LC, Arsecularatne JA (2008) Machining of metal matrix composites: effect of ceramic particles on residual stress, surface roughness and chip formation. Int J Mach Tool Manuf 48(15):1613–1625CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • N. M. Vaxevanidis
    • 1
  • N. A. Fountas
    • 1
  • G. V. Seretis
    • 2
  • C. G. Provatidis
    • 2
  • D. E. Manolakos
    • 3
  1. 1.Laboratory of Manufacturing Processes and Machine Tools (LMProMaT), Department of Mechanical Engineering EducatorsSchool of Pedagogical and Technological Education (ASPETE)AthensGreece
  2. 2.Section of Mechanical Design and Automatic ControlSchool of Mechanical Engineering, National Technical University of Athens (NTUA)Zografou, AthensGreece
  3. 3.Section of Manufacturing Technology, School of Mechanical EngineeringNational Technical University of Athens (NTUA)Zografou, AthensGreece

Personalised recommendations