journal article·2016-02

Determination of Optimum Process Parameters for Cutting Hole in a Randomly-oriented Glass Fiber Reinforced Epoxy Composite by Milling Process: Maximization of Surface Quality and Cut-hole Strength

G. Hussain, K.A Al-Ghamdi, K. Bijanrostami, A.J. Alehashemi

Polymers and Polymer Composites· Volume 24· Issue 2
Publisher page

Abstract

The epoxy based randomly-oriented glass fiber reinforced polymer (GFRP) composites are used to construct structures intended to support multi-directional loading. Due to random orientation of the fibers, cutting of high quality hole is a difficult task in such composites. In the present study, a composite with 60% glass and 40% epoxy (by volume fraction) was fabricated by hand lay-up. To begin with, the performance of two machining processes, namely twist-drilling and end-milling, was compared to cut hole in the composite. It was found that the milling performed better than the drilling process. Later, a design of experiments following the response surface methodology was conducted to determine the effect of milling parameters (i.e., feed rate and speed) on the surface quality and cut-hole strength of composite. The results showed that the parameter-response relationship was not straight rather the parametric effects were interactive and complex. Further, the relative value of speed and feed rate was observed to have controlling influence on the process performance. To predict the process performance for a given set of conditions, empirical models were proposed. Finally, the optimal parameters minimizing the surface roughness and maximizing the tensile strength, employing desirability function approach, was carried out so as to provide guidelines to the users.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Advanced machining processes and optimization · Mechanical Behavior of Composites · Manufacturing Process and Optimization

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, GIK Institute of Engineering Sciences and Technology, KP, Topi, Pakistan

Department of Industrial Engineering, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Eastern Mediterranean University, TRNC, Turkey

References (40)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.12989/scs.2014.17.1.06910.12989/scs.2014.17.1.069 ↗
2. 10.1007/s11029-013-9379-610.1007/s11029-013-9379-6 ↗
3. 10.1177/095440541350811710.1177/0954405413508117 ↗
4. Doomra V. K. · Proc. ImechE, Part B: J Engineering Manufacture · 2014
5. 10.1016/j.matdes.2012.08.04710.1016/j.matdes.2012.08.047 ↗
6. 10.1016/S0924-0136(03)00749-010.1016/S0924-0136(03)00749-0 ↗
7. 10.12989/scs.2014.17.1.06910.12989/scs.2014.17.1.069 ↗
8. 10.1007/s11029-013-9379-610.1007/s11029-013-9379-6 ↗
9. 10.1177/095440541350811710.1177/0954405413508117 ↗
10. Doomra V.K · Proc. ImechE, Part B: J Engineering Manufacture · 2014
11. 10.1016/j.matdes.2012.08.04710.1016/j.matdes.2012.08.047 ↗
12. 10.1016/S0924-0136(03)00749-010.1016/S0924-0136(03)00749-0 ↗
13. 10.1016/S0924-0136(98)00396-310.1016/S0924-0136(98)00396-3 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2006.12.04310.1016/j.jmatprotec.2006.12.043 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2006.01.02010.1016/j.compositesa.2006.01.020 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.eswa.2010.02.02310.1016/j.eswa.2010.02.023 ↗
17. 10.1080/1042691080193837910.1080/10426910801938379 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2009.10.01010.1016/j.compstruct.2009.10.010 ↗
19. 10.1016/S0263-8223(03)00181-810.1016/S0263-8223(03)00181-8 ↗
20. 10.1007/s00170-012-4006-610.1007/s00170-012-4006-6 ↗
21. 10.1007/s12046-013-0186-510.1007/s12046-013-0186-5 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.matdes.2005.03.01110.1016/j.matdes.2005.03.011 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2005.10.00410.1016/j.ijmachtools.2005.10.004 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2004.02.01910.1016/j.ijmachtools.2004.02.019 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2010.10.00410.1016/j.jmatprotec.2010.10.004 ↗
26. 10.4314/ijest.v3i4.6854610.4314/ijest.v3i4.68546 ↗
27. AndersonM.J., WhitcombP.J. RSM. simplified: optimizing processes using response surface methods for design of experiments. Productive Publications Inc. (2004).10.4324/9781482293777 ↗
28. 10.1515/IJMSP.2004.6.3.11910.1515/IJMSP.2004.6.3.119 ↗
29. HasegawaY., HanasakiS., SatanakaS. Characteristics of tool wear in cutting of GFRP. In: Proceedings of Fifth International Conference on Production Engineering, Tokyo, Japan 185 (1984).
30. 10.1016/S0007-8506(07)61593-510.1016/S0007-8506(07)61593-5 ↗
31. 10.1016/j.ast.2011.11.00910.1016/j.ast.2011.11.009 ↗
32. 10.1016/j.ast.2014.02.00110.1016/j.ast.2014.02.001 ↗
33. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2013.12.05710.1016/j.compositesb.2013.12.057 ↗
34. 10.1061/(ASCE)EM.1943-7889.000066510.1061/(ASCE)EM.1943-7889.0000665 ↗
35. 10.12989/scs.2013.14.1.08510.12989/scs.2013.14.1.085 ↗
36. 10.1142/S021987621350082510.1142/S0219876213500825 ↗
37. 10.1142/S021987621350077110.1142/S0219876213500771 ↗
38. Mahi A. · Applied Mathematical Modelling · 2014
39. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2011.05.03210.1016/j.compositesb.2011.05.032 ↗
40. 10.1177/109963621452685210.1177/1099636214526852 ↗