Some Studies in Metal Matrix Composites Machining using Response Surface Methodology
Source abstract
Abstract
The present study establishes the relationship between cutting conditions and machinability characteristics during the turning of metal matrix composites (MMC). The investigation aims at determining the effects of cutting speed and feed rate on machining force, cutting power, and specific cutting force by developing second-order mathematical models using response surface methodology (RSM). Aluminum alloy reinforced with 20% of SiC particulates (A 356/20/SiCp-T6) were machined using a polycrystalline diamond (PCD) tool. The experiments have been planned as a full factorial design of experiments (FFD). The analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed to check the adequacy of the mathematical models. The parametric analysis reveals that the machining force and cutting power increase with increase in feed rate while the specific cutting force decreases.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Aluminum Alloys Composites Properties · Advanced machining processes and optimization · Advanced Machining and Optimization Techniques
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Industrial and Production Engineering B.V.B. College of Engineering and Technology, Hubli-580 031, Karnataka, India,
Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering B.V.B. College of Engineering and Technology, Hubli-580 031, Karnataka, India
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Aveiro Campus Santiago, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal
References (25)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1007/BF0054444810.1007/BF00544448 ↗
2. Sinclair, I. · Scien. Tech. · 1997 · 13 · 709
3. Goni, J. · Scien. Tech. · 2000 · 16 · 743
4. 10.1016/S0007-8506(07)61151-210.1016/S0007-8506(07)61151-2 ↗
5. Groover, M.P. · 1996
6. 10.1016/S0924-0136(00)00495-710.1016/S0924-0136(00)00495-7 ↗
7. Davim, J.P. · Instn. Mech. Engrs. Part B · 2001 · 215 · 37110.1243/0954405011515433 ↗
8. 10.1243/095440801153033410.1243/0954408011530334 ↗
9. 10.1016/S0924-0136(02)00431-410.1016/S0924-0136(02)00431-4 ↗
10. 10.1016/S0890-6955(00)00071-710.1016/S0890-6955(00)00071-7 ↗
11. 10.1016/S0924-0136(01)00551-910.1016/S0924-0136(01)00551-9 ↗
12. 10.1016/S1359-835X(01)00094-X10.1016/S1359-835X(01)00094-X ↗
13. 10.1016/S0924-0136(02)00935-410.1016/S0924-0136(02)00935-4 ↗
14. 10.1016/S0924-0136(02)00946-910.1016/S0924-0136(02)00946-9 ↗
15. Kilickap, E. · J. Mater. Proces. Technol. · 2005 · 164
16. Sahin, Y. · Des. · 2003 · 24 · 671
17. 10.1007/s00170-003-1624-z10.1007/s00170-003-1624-z ↗
18. Ciftci, I. · Des. · 2004 · 25 · 251
19. 10.1016/S0924-0136(98)00444-010.1016/S0924-0136(98)00444-0 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2006.10.02510.1016/j.jmatprotec.2006.10.025 ↗
21. Davim, J.P. · Des. · 2007 · 24 · 2684
22. Basavarajappa, S. · Des. · 2007 · 28 · 1393
23. 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2007.05.04310.1016/j.jmatprotec.2007.05.043 ↗
24. Khuri, A.I. · 1996
25. Montgomery, D.C. · 2003