Kirubel Tadele

Experimental Investigation and Parametric Optimization of
EN-8 Steel using Dry Turning for Enhanced Surface Finish
BY:
KIRUBEL TADELE WELDGBREL
Thesis submitted to the Department of Design and Manufacturing Engineering

School of Mechanical, Chemical, and Material Engineering
Office of Graduate Studies

Adama Science and Technology University
Jan 2021
Adama, Ethiopia
Experimental Investigation and Parametric Optimization of
EN-8 Steel using Dry Turning for Enhanced Surface Finish
BY:
KIRUBEL TADELE WELDGBREL
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

MSc in Manufacturing Engineering
Advisor
Moera Gutu Jiru (Ph.D.) Assistant Professor
Co-Advisor
B K Singh (Ph.D.) Professor
Thesis submitted to the Department of Design and Manufacturing Engineering

School of Mechanical, Chemical, and Material Engineering
Office of Graduate Studies

Adama Science and Technology University
Jan 2021
Adama, Ethiopia
i
We, the undersigned members of the Board of Examiners of the final open defense by Kirubel
Tadele Weldgbrel have read and evaluated his thesis entitled “Experimental Investigation and
Parametric Optimization of EN-8 Steel using Dry Turning for Enhanced Surface Finish”
and examined the candidate. Therefore, this is to certify that the thesis has been accepted in
partial fulfillment of the requirement of the Degree of Master of Science in Manufacturing
Engineering.
Name Signature Date
Kirubel Tadele
Name of the Student
Dr. Moera Gutu Jiru
Advisor
B K Singh (Ph.D.)
Co-advisor
External Examiner
Internal Examiner
Chair Person
Head of Department
School Dean
Post Graduate Dean
ii
DEDICATED
TO
MY MOTHER MESERET LULU
iii
Candidate Declaration
I declare that the thesis entitled “Experimental Investigation and Parametric Optimization of
EN-8 Steel using Dry Turning for Enhanced Surface Finish” submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the award of the degree of Masters of Science in Manufacturing
Engineering is an authentic record of my work carried out, under the advisor Moera Gutu Jiru
(Ph.D.) and co-advisor B K Singh (Ph.D.), Mechanical Design and Manufacturing Engineering
Program, Adama Science and Technology University, Adama, Ethiopia. I have not submitted the
matter embodied in this thesis for the award of any other degree or diploma. All relevant resources
of information used in this thesis have been duly acknowledged.
Candidate Date Signature

Kirubel Tadele Weldgbrel ______________ ______________
This is to certify that the above statement made by the candidate is correct to the best of my
Knowledge and belief. This thesis has been submitted for examination with my approval.
Advisor Date Signature

Moera Gutu Jiru (Ph.D.)
Co-advisor
B K Singh (Ph.D.)
iv
Acknowledgment
First, I would like to express my most enormous gratitude to almighty God for giving me a chance
to complete my thesis with all his blessings. I would like to thank my thesis advisors Moera Gutu
Jiru (Ph.D.) and B K Singh (Ph.D.) for their indispensable in providing help and valuable support
through guidance, corrections, and suggestions significant contribution to doing this thesis.
Without their courage and patience, this work would not be possible. It has been a privilege for
me to work under their guidance.
I also express my gratitude to all lecturers who had taught me this far and to all friends who gave
their support to complete my thesis. Finally, I would also like to thank my parents for their lifelong
encouragement and great support.
v
Abstract
In machining parts, it is most important to determine the optimal machining parameters to achieve
the desired product quality. Therefore, it is essential to investigate the effect of cutting parameters
on surface roughness in a machining operation to accomplish the desired quality of an item. The
thesis focuses on optimizing the cutting parameters such as cutting speed, feed rate, and depth of
cut on surface roughness. The cutting parameters were optimized by turning process using the
response surface methodology method. The surface roughness is selected as response variables
and the workpiece is estimated by using a surface roughness analyzer (Profilometer). This study
focuses on the development of optimization models to analyze the influence of machining
parameters on surface roughness and to obtain the optimal machining parameters leading to
minimum surface roughness during the turning of EN-8 steel using cemented carbide cutting tools.
The outcome of data analysis in the environment of the Design-Expert version 11 and Minitab 19
software is presented and discussed. The developed models are compared using relative error and
the results are validated using the experimental confirmation tests. The minimum surface
roughness at optimum tuning parameters in this study was obtained. The result of variance
indicates that the contribution of cutting speed, feed rate, and depth of cut was 3.11%, 7.69%, and
76.36%, respectively. It has been found that the predictive model provides optimum machining
parameters. The results of the proposed model provide improvement in surface roughness over the
best experimental run. The 3D surface and contour plots constructed during the study can be used
for choosing the optimal machining parameters to obtain particular surface roughness values. The
optimal machining parameters indicate that the depth of cut is the most significant machining
parameter followed by the cutting speed and feed rate in surface roughness. The confirmation
experiments were performed to facilitate the verification of the obtained feasible optimal
machining parameters (v = 375 m/min, f = 0.287 mm/rev and d = 1 mm) for the surface roughness
and the optimized surface roughness obtained is (Ra) 5.113 μm. The results reveal that the
developed predictive models provide a close relation between the predicted values and the
experimental surface roughness values.
Keywords: Response Surface Methodology, Surface Roughness, EN-8 steel
vi
Table of Contents
Candidate Declaration .................................................................................................................... iv
Acknowledgment ............................................................................................................................ v
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... vi
Table of Contents ...................................................................................................................... vii

List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. x
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. xi
Nomenclature ............................................................................................................................... xiii
CHAPTER ONE ............................................................................................................................. 1
INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background of the study ............................................................................................... 1
1.2 Motivation of research .................................................................................................. 2
1.3 Surface roughness overview ......................................................................................... 3
1.4 Surface finish general ideas .......................................................................................... 4
1.5 Types of surface............................................................................................................ 4
1.6 Statement of the problem.............................................................................................. 5
1.7 Objective of the study ................................................................................................... 5
1.7.1 General objective................................................................................................... 5
1.7.2 Specific objective .................................................................................................. 5
1.8 Scope of the study......................................................................................................... 6
1.9 Significance of the study .............................................................................................. 6
1.10 Organizations of the thesis ........................................................................................... 6
CHAPTER TWO ............................................................................................................................ 8
LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................................ 8

2.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 8
2.2 Turning operation ......................................................................................................... 8
2.3 Optimization techniques used in machining ................................................................. 9
2.3.1 Conventional optimization techniques ................................................................ 10
2.3.2 Non-conventional optimization techniques ......................................................... 11
2.4 Surface roughness and the effect of cutting parameters ............................................. 12
vii
2.5 Turning operation and surface roughness ................................................................... 13
2.6 Response surface design methodology ....................................................................... 18
2.6.1 Linear RSM model .............................................................................................. 19
2.6.2 Exponential RSM model ..................................................................................... 19
2.7 Summary of literature review ..................................................................................... 20
2.8 Literature Gap ............................................................................................................. 24
CHAPTER THREE ...................................................................................................................... 25
MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGIES ............................................................................... 25

3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 25
3.1.1 Experimental Procedure ...................................................................................... 25
3.1.2 Equipment used ................................................................................................... 26
3.2 Material selection ....................................................................................................... 26
3.2.1 Specification of turning machine ........................................................................ 26
3.2.2 Selection of workpiece material .......................................................................... 27
3.2.3 Carbon steel EN-8 chemical composition ........................................................... 29
3.2.4 EN-8 medium carbon steel mechanical properties and hardness ........................ 29
3.2.5 Specification of the workpiece ............................................................................ 30
3.3 Selecting of cutting tool.............................................................................................. 30
3.3.1 Single-point cutting tools .................................................................................... 31
3.3.2 Cemented carbide ................................................................................................ 31
3.3.3 Tool geometry ..................................................................................................... 32
3.3.4 Cutting conditions ............................................................................................... 33
3.3.5 Dry machining ..................................................................................................... 34
3.4 Machine parameters selection .................................................................................... 34
3.4.1 Cutting speed ....................................................................................................... 35
3.4.2 Feed rate .............................................................................................................. 35
3.4.3 Depth of cut ......................................................................................................... 36
3.4.4 Machining parameters and their levels................................................................ 36
3.5 Response variables ..................................................................................................... 37
3.5.1 Profilometer......................................................................................................... 37
3.6 Response surface methodology .................................................................................. 38
3.6.1 Mathematical model ............................................................................................ 38
viii
3.6.2 Predictive models using response surface methodology ..................................... 40
3.7 Experimental setup ..................................................................................................... 41
3.7.1 Experiment plan .................................................................................................. 42
3.8 Research methodology ............................................................................................... 42
3.8.1 Design of experiment .......................................................................................... 43
3.8.2 The procedure of turning the experiment ............................................................ 45
3.8.3 Surface roughness measurement ......................................................................... 46
CHAPTER FOUR ......................................................................................................................... 49
RESULT AND DISCUSSION.................................................................................................. 49

4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 49
4.1.1 Measured surface roughness ............................................................................... 49
4.1.2 Data generated from the turning experiment....................................................... 50
4.2 Surface roughness data ............................................................................................... 52
4.2.1 Model summary statistics .................................................................................... 53
4.2.2 Analysis of variance ............................................................................................ 53
4.2.3 Fit Statistics ......................................................................................................... 55
4.2.4 Model fitness check ............................................................................................. 56
4.2.5 Parametric influence on surface roughness ......................................................... 57
4.2.6 Validation of the proposed predictive models..................................................... 59
4.3 Surface roughness optimization using response surface methodology ...................... 61
4.3.1 Combined effect .................................................................................................. 63
4.3.2 The interaction contour plot ................................................................................ 64
4.4 Predicted values .......................................................................................................... 68
4.5 Parameter optimization ............................................................................................... 70
4.6 Experimental confirmation ......................................................................................... 71
CHAPTER FIVE .......................................................................................................................... 72
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ........................................................................ 72

5.1 Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 72
5.2 Recommendation ........................................................................................................ 72
5.3 Scope for future work ................................................................................................. 73
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 74
APPENDIX ................................................................................................................................... 81
ix
List of Figures
Figure 1-1 Surface form deviations ................................................................................................ 3
Figure 1-2 Surface characteristics and terminology ...................................................................... 4
Figure 2-1 Conventional lathe machine .......................................................................................... 9
Figure 2-2 Conventional and non-conventional optimization techniques ...................................... 9
Figure 2-3 Parameters affecting surface roughness ...................................................................... 20
Figure 3-1 Experimental scheme .................................................................................................. 25
Figure 3-2 Conventional lathe machine, URSUS 200 model ...................................................... 27
Figure 3-3 Sample of the workpiece material ............................................................................... 30
Figure 3-4 Turning on conventional lathe single-point cutting tool ............................................. 31
Figure 3-5 Cemented carbide tool................................................................................................. 32
Figure 3-6 Geometry of single-point cutting tool ......................................................................... 33
Figure 3-7 Factors affecting the turning process .......................................................................... 34
Figure 3-8 Taylor and Hobson profilometer used to measure surface roughness ........................ 38
Figure 3-9 Outline of response surface methodology used .......................................................... 40
Figure 3-10 Experimental setups .................................................................................................. 41
Figure 3-11 Detailed drawings of the cylindrical bar used in experimentation (All dimensions are
in mm) ........................................................................................................................................... 42
Figure 3-12 Response surface methodology design procedure .................................................... 43
Figure 3-13 Twenty-seven specimen work-piece ......................................................................... 44
Figure 3-14 Workpiece used for measuring the surface roughness .............................................. 46
Figure 3-15 Profilometers used to measure surface roughness .................................................... 47
Figure 3-16 Typical surface roughness observed at different cutting conditions ......................... 47
Figure 4-1 Minimum and maximum surface roughness ............................................................... 52
Figure 4-2 Percentage contribution of cutting parameters on surface roughness ......................... 55
Figure 4-3 Normal probability plot of residuals for surface roughness ........................................ 56
Figure 4-4 Plot of residual versus fitted surface roughness values ............................................... 57
Figure 4-5 Main effect plot of surface roughness ......................................................................... 58
Figure 4-6 Interaction plot of surface roughness .......................................................................... 58
Figure 4-7 Deviation of surface roughness predicted values from the experimental values ........ 60
Figure 4-8 Response optimization plot for surface roughness...................................................... 63
x
Figure 4-9 Combined effects on surface roughness ...................................................................... 63
Figure 4-10 Surface and contour plot of Ra for varying cutting speed and feed rate at 1 mm depth
of cut (A) 2D view and (B) 3D view ............................................................................................ 65
Figure 4-11 Surface and contour plot of Ra for varying feed rate and depth of cut at 375 m/min
cutting speed (A) 2D view and (B) 3D view ................................................................................ 66
Figure 4-12 Surface and contour plot of Ra for varying cutting speed and depth of cut at 0.287
mm/min feed rate (A) 2D view and (B) 3D view ......................................................................... 68
Figure 4-13 Experimentally measured and predicted values of surface roughness ...................... 69
Figure 4-14 Experimentally measured and predicted values of surface roughness ...................... 70
Figure 4-15 Results of parameter optimum .................................................................................. 70
List of Tables
Table 2-1 Summary of literature review on surface roughness .................................................... 17
Table 2-2 Summary of literature review ....................................................................................... 21
Table 3-1 Specification of lathe model URSUS 200 .................................................................. 27
Table 3-2 Experimental conditions ............................................................................................... 28
Table 3-3 EN-8 material equivalent steel-grades.......................................................................... 29
Table 3-4 Chemical composition of EN 8 steel ............................................................................ 29
Table 3-5 Mechanical properties of EN-8 steel ............................................................................ 30
Table 3-6 Specification of the workpiece ..................................................................................... 30
Table 3-7 Recommended cutting conditions for turning .............................................................. 33
Table 3-8 Cutting speed parameters and their levels .................................................................... 35
Table 3-9 Feed rate parameters and their levels ........................................................................... 36
Table 3-10 Depth of cut parameters and their levels .................................................................... 36
Table 3-11 Machining parameters and their levels ....................................................................... 37
Table 3-12 Experimental layouts .................................................................................................. 45
Table 3-13 Specifications of the surface roughness measurement instrument ............................. 46
Table 4-1 Measured surface roughness at L27 full factorial machining parameters ..................... 50
Table 4-2 Data generated from the turning experiment ................................................................ 51
Table 4-3 Model summary statistics ............................................................................................. 53
Table 4-4 Analysis of variance results .......................................................................................... 54
xi
Table 4-5 Fit Statistics summary .................................................................................................. 55
Table 4-6 Predicted values and relative errors for modeling techniques of RSM for surface
roughness ...................................................................................................................................... 59
Table 4-7 Parameters .................................................................................................................... 61
Table 4-8 Starting Values ............................................................................................................. 61
Table 4-9 Optimized solution ....................................................................................................... 61
Table 4-10 Optimal machining parameters................................................................................... 62
Table 4-11 Optimized surface roughness ..................................................................................... 62
Table 4-12 Response optimization for surface roughness ............................................................ 62
Table 4-13 Experimental and predicted values of surface roughness........................................... 68
Table 4-14 Confirmation results for surface roughness ................................................................ 71
xii
Nomenclature
2FI Two-factor interaction DP Dynamic Programing
 clearance angle dr radial depth of cut
γ rake angle EN European standard
µ Mean et al. And others
µm Micrometer F-value Residual mean square
Adj Adjusted f feed
AISI American Iron and Steel institute f* feed
Al Aluminum ft feed/tooth
Al2O3 Aluminum oxide FANUC Factory automation numerical
ASME American Society of Mechanical control
Engineers FFT Fourier transform
ANN Artificial Neural Network g/min Gram Per Minute
ANOVA Analysis of variance GA Genetic Algorithm
B fiber orientation angle GRA Gray relational analysis
BHN Brinell hardness Number H Hot hardness
C40 Carbon steel HRB Brinell hardness
CC Central Composite HRC Hardness
CCD Central Composite Design HSS High-Speed Steels
CI Confidence interval i.e. that is to say
CNC Computer Numerical Control lt lubricant temperature
C.V Coefficient of Variation K approach angle
CVD Chemical vapor deposition kW kilowatt
d depth of cut LP Linear Programing
d Diameter M Milling
D Diameter of tool m Meter
da axial depth of cut MATLAB Matrix Laboratory
df Degrees of freedom Max Maximum
DOE Design of experiment
xiii
MDN Maraging steel RMR Resting metabolic rate
mm Millimeter Rpm Revolutions per minute
mm/rev revolution of per minute Rq Root mean square
MPa Mega pascal RSM Response Surface Methodology
MRR Material removal rate Rt Highest peak to the deepest valley
mt machining tolerance Rz Roughness Depth
N number of inserts Rz Average Rt over a given length
NAK Hardness S.C Share Company
NC Numerical Control S.S Stainless
NLP Non-Linear Programing S/N Signal to Noise ratio
OEM Original Equipment Manufacturer SAE Society of Automotive Engineers
P Steel plate SCEA side cutting edge angle
p-value Probability SF Surface Finish
PI Prediction intervals SiC Silicon carbide
Pred Predicted SKD Tool steel
PRESS Predicted residual error sum of St steel
squares Std. Dev Standard deviation
PVD Physical vapor deposition T Turning
r tool nose radius t time (min)
R Variation t Thickness in mm
Ra Roughness Average Ti Titanium
Ra Surface roughness TiN Aluminum
Ra Average variation from the mean line v cutting speed
xiv
INTRODUCTION ASTU
CHAPTER ONE
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the study
Machining is a flexible procedure generally used in the manufacturing industry to process raw
materials of different types to impart shape and finish to items. While commonly used as an
optional molding process (essential molding being finish using casting, forming, and so on). It is
additionally regularly used as an across-the-board essential procedure for prototyping. It is a
manufacturing process that helps provide shape, dimensions, and in some cases, properties to the
raw material to produce an intended component.
It is a variety of material removal forms in which a cutting instrument removes undesirable
material from a workpiece to deliver the ideal shape. However, the dynamic reaction of a
machining framework is frequently decayed by surface quality. The surface quality is one
among the foremost specified customer requirements, and therefore the major indicator of
surface quality on machined parts is surface roughness (Lauro et al. 2014).
Surface finish is one of the most important quality characteristics in manufacturing industries,
which influences the performance of mechanical parts as well as production cost. In recent times,
modern industries are trying to achieve high-quality products in a very short time with less operator
input. For that purpose, the computer numerically controlled (CNC) machine tools with automated
and flexible manufacturing systems have been implemented. In the manufacturing industries,
various manufacturing processes are adopted to remove the material from the workpiece. Out of
these, turning is the first most common method for metal cutting because of its ability to remove
materials faster with reasonably good surface quality (Sahoo, 2011).
In a turning operation, it's a crucial task to select cutting parameters for achieving high cutting
performance. Usually, the specified cutting parameters are determined by supported experience
or by the use of a handbook (Quintana & Ciurana 2011). Cutting parameters are reflected in surface
roughness, surface texture, and dimensional deviations of the product. Surface roughness, which
is used to determine and evaluate the quality of a product, is one of the main quality attributes of
a turning product. Surface roughness is a measure of the technological quality of a product and an
element that greatly influences manufacturing cost. It describes the geometry of the machined
surfaces and combined them with the surface texture.
1
INTRODUCTION ASTU
Producing good quality, appropriate surface finish, and geometry is essential for the machined
workpiece. The surface finish or surface texture based on (ASME, 1985) is defined as geometrical
irregularities of solid materials surface while surface roughness is defined as the more delicate
irregularities of the surface texture, usually resulting from the inherent action of the assembly
process, such as feed marks produced during machining.
This research aims to investigate the effects of cutting parameters on the resulting surface
roughness in the turning operation of EN-8 steel material. The specific products from this steel are
shafts, cam, bolt, stud, gear, so on. It was essential to optimize this material due to the quick-wear
of components under dynamic load. In the present work, models are developed to predicate the
surface roughness with the assistance of Response surface methodology, Design of
experiments (Montgomery, 2017). The response surface methodology (RSM) may
be practical, accurate, and straightforward for implementation. The study of the most
important variables affecting the quality characteristics and a plan for conducting such
experiments is called the design of experiments (Myers et al., 2016).
The experimental data is used to develop mathematical models for second-order models using
regression methods. Analysis of variance is used to verify the validity of the model. RSM
optimization procedure has been used to optimize the output responses of surface roughness. On
selected material, a different trial with different parameters level carried experiment, and finally,
to verify the predicted value, a confirmation test is conducted based on an experiment. The research
has completed a fractional experiment design that allows considering different levels of cutting
parameters (cutting speed, feed rate, depth of cut) on the measured dependent variable (surface
roughness). The ability to control the process for the better quality of the product is significant
(Kassab and Khoshnaw, 2007).
1.2 Motivation of research
During the internship of about a month and a half in Dire Dawa Food Complex S.C., I have
observed that parts such as shafts, gears, cam, keys, bolts and parts of machines like pump and
cylinders wears so fast due to the dynamic load and poor surface finish. Due to such reasons,
machined parts in their machine shops were harmed and damaged a few times and substituted with
another machined part. This medium occurred because of its poor surface finish the apparatus
wears during the groundwater siphoning strategy. This ground breaks down the outside of the
rigging pump (vein), and smart prompts wear, finally, out of limit. This way, the cost of re-
2
INTRODUCTION ASTU
machining and replacing worn out parts to give indications of progress surface finished ought to
be the center. Achieving this perfect surface quality is an incredible sign of the capacity conduct
of a section.
The primary inspiration driving this work is the requirement for constraining the surface roughness
related to cutting parameters and improve the portion from quick wear and damage, expressly
through scouring, break, and pits formed on the subsurface of the part, which in turn will reduce
the cost of maintenance and time of shutdown.
1.3 Surface roughness overview
Surface roughness refers to deviation from the nominal surface of the third up to the sixth request.
Worldwide models are deviation by characterized a request (Benardos and Vosniakos, 2003).
First-and second-request deviations refer to frame, i.e., flatness, circularity. Furthermore, to
waviness, respectively, and are due to machine tool errors, deformation of the workpiece,
erroneous setups and clamping, vibration, and workpiece material inhomogeneities. Third-and
fourth-request deviations refer to rare grooves, and to breaks and frailties, which are associated
with the shape and state of the cutting edges, chip formation, and process kinematics. Fifth-and
sixth request deviations refer to workpiece material structure, which is related to physical-
chemical components following abreast of a grain and lattice scale (slip, diffusion, oxidation,
residual stress). Diverse request deviations are superimposed and structure the surface roughness
profile as shown in Figure 1-1.
Figure 1-1 Surface form deviations (Benardos and Vosniakos, 2003)
3
INTRODUCTION ASTU
1.4 Surface finish general ideas

Building prints get out a considerable number of things in their endeavor to ensure the part that
gets made matches the creator's expectation. Besides measurements and resistances, another
significant callout is surface finishing.
Surface finishing is a magnitude of the overall texture of a surface that is characterized by surface
roughness and waviness of the surface. Surface finishing when it expects to incorporate each of
the three qualities was keep away from perplexity since engineers regularly allude to surface
roughness as surface finishing. Another term, analogous to the surface roughness is surface
topology.
Figure 1-2 Surface characteristics and terminology (Vorbuger and Raja, 1990)
1.5 Types of surface
A surface may be a boundary that separates an object from another object or substance. The surface
divide into three subgroups (Vorburger and Raja, 1990):
• Real surface
It is the actual boundary of an object. It deviates from the nominal surface because of the
procedure that has made the surface. The deviation additionally relies upon the properties,
composition, and structure of the material.
• Measured surface
It is a representation of the real surface acquired with some estimating tool. This
qualification is made, and no estimation will give the exact real surface.
4
INTRODUCTION ASTU
• Nominal surface or ideal

It is the proposed surface, is a hypothetical, geometrically perfect surface that does not
exist practically speaking, yet it is average of the irregularities that are superimposed on it.
The nominal/idea surface does exclude expected surface roughness.
1.6 Statement of the problem
Surface quality in machining technique is related to surface roughness. If there is un-optimized
surface roughness, there will be a higher chance of occurrence of defects such as wear of parts,
huge pinnacles, and valley formation, which results from part incapable of serving for the arranged
period. In this manner, surface roughness can reduce the surface quality which results in high cost.
In turning operation, cutting parameters are frequent issues, which impact the result of machining
and explicitly the surface finish. The surface roughness issue is subjected to parameters such as
depth of cut, cutting speed, and feed rate.
Because of the expanding request of higher exactness parts for its useful perspective and
production price reduction, it is crucial to examine and investigate the cutting parameters that
influence the surface roughness in the metal turning operation. Furthermore, inappropriate choice
of machining parameters makes cutting tools wear and break rapidly just as monetary misfortunes,
i.e., harmed workpiece and dismissed item quality. In this manner, the target of the present research
is to work on the turning operation of EN-8 steel grade material and to overcome the stated
problems with a modeling technique for the prediction of surface roughness.
1.7 Objective of the study
In this section, the general and specific objectives of the thesis are discussed and presented.
1.7.1 General objective
The general objective of this thesis is to experimentally investigate and parametrically optimize
dry turning operation of EN-8 steel to produce a smooth and enhanced surface finish.
1.7.2 Specific objective
The specific objectives of this thesis are:
• Investigating the variation of surface roughness with varying parameters (cutting
parameters).
• Experimental investigation of surface roughness of EN-8 steel material using turning
operation.
• Investigating the variation of surface roughness with response variables.
5
INTRODUCTION ASTU
• Development of predictive and optimization models to determine the optimum

machining parameters leading to minimum surface roughness.
1.8 Scope of the study
The scope of the research work is on a turning machine with its corresponding cutting parameters
and the effect of cutting speed, feed rate and depth of cut will be studied during the turning of EN-
8 steel using carbide cutting tools. A turning operation carried out and surface roughness
measurement (Profilometer) used for analysis. Finally, this work focuses on the effect of cutting
parameters on surface roughness.
1.9 Significance of the study
Establishing a machining investigation to find out the cutting parameters on surface roughness in
a turning operation with quality material that will produce a good surface finish of the product,
which leads to an increase in the profit is significant.
The thesis has the following significance:
• This study comes with an alternative way of implementing an investigation of cutting
parameters on surface roughness, turning the operation of EN-8 steel material to produce
a smooth surface finish.
• The system works on bits of help to maintain the stability of dimensional accuracy, increase
the precision of the product, obtain a better surface finish, and reduces the friction factors
in the movable joint.
So, the thesis can help as input for large scale production to produce a smooth surface finish.
Furthermore, the result of the research will open an opportunity for further application of the
optimization technique.
1.10 Organizations of the thesis
The thesis consists of five chapters that entitled in the investigation of cutting parameters on
surface roughness for the turning operation of EN-8 steel material.
Chapter one: begins with an introduction in which the background of the study is briefly pointed
out, and definition, fundamental principles, machining process, and others.
Chapter two: A review of relevant research publications in the investigation to find out the cutting
parameters on surface roughness in a turning operation is presented. Available investigation of
cutting parameters on surface roughness in turning operation models are studied to find the
6
INTRODUCTION ASTU
research gap in this chapter. The need for developing a new investigation of cutting parameters on
surface roughness in turning the operation of EN-8 steel has been justified.
Chapter three: describes the experimental setup and plan, which is carried out to establish a
relationship between machining performance (surface roughness) and machining parameters
(cutting speed, feed rate, and depth of cut). The surface roughness is the selected measured
response variables.
Chapter four: the relationship between machining parameters and surface roughness is obtained
by using RSM. Optimum machining parameters leading to minimum surface roughness are
achieved by using RSM. Confirmation experiments are conducted to verify the results.
Chapter five: summarizes the optimization research work completed in this investigation, and
future research directions are discussed.
7
LITERATURE REVIEW ASTU
CHAPTER TWO
2 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
In this part, accessible past works identified with this examination are reviewed inside the domain
of the present analysis. In the metal cutting process, its effects are commonly reduced by
appropriate choice of procedure parameters. The determination of optimization cutting parameters
is a significant issue for each machining procedure to upgrade the nature of the machined item,
reduce the machining cost, and increase the production rate.
To achieve these issues, the researcher proposes models that attempt to reproduce the conditions
during machining and set up circumstances and logical results connection between different factors
and wanted item qualifies—the introduction of each approach by giving minimized data that best
suit their need and detail prerequisites. This chapter sets the background for this study. It is an
assessment of the present state of the art of the wide and complex field of modeling and
optimization of machining operations and their application in conventional machining processes.
2.2 Turning operation
A conventional lathe with its principal components is shown in Figure 2-1. This versatile machine
tool, which is usually called the engine lathe, is mainly used for low to medium production. The
term “engine” dates from the time when these machines were powered with overhead belts and
pulleys, driven by steam engines. Nowadays, various types of automation have been added to the
lathes to improve efficiency and accuracy for repetitive operations.
A conventional lathe consists of a horizontal bed or base supporting all other major components.
The headstock, which is fixed to the bed, is provided with motors, pulleys, and V-belts that rotate
the spindle, which rotates the workpiece at various speeds. Levers on the front of the headstock
are to select the speeds of rotational. The headstock has a hollow spindle to which the work holding
devices, such as chucks and collets, are attached. Opposite the headstock is the tailstock, which
can slide along the ways and be clamped at any position. A center is mounted in the tailstock to
support the other end of a long workpiece. A short workpiece is typically supported only by the
chuck (Nee, 2015).
8
Figure 2-1 Conventional lathe machine (Nee, 2015)

2.3 Optimization techniques used in machining
Many advancement methods have been created by researchers to decide optimal cutting conditions
for machining operations. Extensively, these might classify as (i) conventional optimization
techniques and (ii) non-conventional optimization techniques, as shown in Figure 2-2.
Figure 2-2 Conventional and non-conventional optimization techniques (Mukherjee and Ray,
2006)
9
2.3.1 Conventional optimization techniques

These systems depend on deterministic algorithms with specific standards for moving from one
answer to the other. These algorithms have effectively applied to many engineering design
problems. Extensive literature exists on the optimization of machining processes to mainly
concentrating on minimum cost and maximum production rate.
Asilturk and Akkus (2011) used the Taguchi method for optimizing turning parameters to
minimize surface roughness. The statistical methods of signal to noise ratio and the analysis of
variance were applied to research the consequences of cutting speed, feed rate, and depth of cut
on surface roughness. Results indicated that the feed rate was the most significant factor affecting
surface roughness.
Neseli et al. (2011) applied response surface optimization during turning of AISI 1040 Steel with
Al2O3 coated insert tools. The results revealed the optimal combination of tool nose radius,
approach angle, and rake angle for better surface roughness.
Aouici et al. (2012) used desirability function analysis in RSM to determine the optimum values
of cutting speed, feed rate, workpiece hardness, and depth of cut during the hard turning of AISI
H11 steel with cubic boron nitride inserts. Results revealed that the best surface roughness is
achieved at the lower feed rate and the higher cutting speed.
Chinchanikar and Choudhury (2013) used a desirability function approach in RSM to determine
optimum cutting conditions. It found that the use of lower feed value, lower depth of cut, and
limiting the cutting speed while turning 35 and 45 HRC AISI 4340 steel ensures minimum cutting
forces, minimum surface roughness, and better tool life.
Campatelli et al. (2014) used RSM to analyze the effect of cutting speed, feed rate, radial, and
axial depth of cut on energy consumption during the milling of carbon steel. The optimal values
of the radial engagement and feed to minimize the specific energy associated with the efficiency
of the cutting were 1 mm and 0.12 mm/tooth, respectively.
Conventional optimization techniques are generally gradient-based, and they present numerous
restrictions in application to complex machining models (Rao, 2011). To overcome these issues,
analysts have proposed non-conventional techniques.
10
2.3.2 Non-conventional optimization techniques

These algorithms are stochastic with probabilistic progress rules. These strategies are mainly
founded on biological, molecular, or neurological marvels that copy the allegory of collective
natural advancement or potentially the social conduct of species. To copy the proficient conduct
of these species, different researchers have created computational frameworks that look for quick
and robust answers for complex optimization issues. Subsequently, numerous new algorithms
dependent on random search strategies used in taking care of machining advancement issues (Rao,
2011).
Zain et al. (2010) used a genetic algorithm for assessing the optimal cutting conditions for
minimum surface roughness. A regression model is used to define goal work. Low feed rate, high
cutting speed, and high outspread rake edge lead to bring down surface roughness.
Fu et al. (2012) advanced the cutting parameters during high-speed milling of NAK80 shape steel.
An experiment dependent on Taguchi's technique was performed. The ideal cutting parameters
were acquired utilizing grey relational analysis. The critical part investigation was applied to assess
the loads with the goal that their relative weights can depict. The outcomes indicated that grey
relational analysis combined with principal component analysis could effectively anticipate the
optimal combination of cutting parameters, and the proposed methodology can be a helpful tool to
reduce the cutting force.
Zain et al. (2012) used ANN combined with GA to scan for a lot of ideal cutting condition directs
that lead toward the base estimation of surface roughness. Three machining cutting conditions
considered in this examination were feed, radial rake angle, and speed. The used approach reduced
the surface roughness esteem contrasted with the experimental, ANN, response surface methods,
and regression.
Yan and Li (2013) presented a multi-objective optimization strategy dependent on weighted grey
relational analysis and RSM to upgrade the cutting parameters during milling of medium carbon
steel with carbide tools to accomplish the maximum material removal rate, minimum surface
roughness, and minimum cutting energy. The outcomes demonstrated that the width of the cut was
the most impacting parameter pursued by feed rate, spindle speed, and depth of cut. The
experimental results showed that GRA combined with RSM is a helpful device for multi-objective
optimization of cutting parameters.
11
2.4 Surface roughness and the effect of cutting parameters

Numerous variables influence the presentation of the turning process, additionally influence the
surface finish quality (surface roughness). The surface roughness of a turning workpiece is reliant
on process parameters and tool geometry (cutting edge, side cutting edge, nose radius, and rake
angle, so on). What is more, it also relies upon a few different exogenous factors, such as; vibration
between the workpiece, auxiliary tooling, workpiece machine tool used and lubricant used, cutting
tool, and machine tool (He et al., 2018).
Surface roughness in turning operation is, for the most part, influenced by the accompanying three
cutting parameters: depth of cut, feed rate, and cutting speed. Surface roughness is also affected
by workpiece material, cutting tool material, tool geometry, so on. Thus, to obtain the desired
output, the correct combination of the factors is most vital. Along these lines, the essential goal of
this exploration work is to examine the impact of the accompanying three cutting parameters of
turning operation: feed rate, depth of cut, and cutting speed surface roughness of carbon steel bar
and in this way to advance the cutting parameters (factors) to get the base surface roughness.
Detailed literature reviews on various cutting parameters and most significant of those parameters
on surface roughness have discussed below:
Taguchi analyzes the configuration used to optimize turning parameters and get the lowest degree
level of surface roughness parameters. The investigation result showed that the feed rate and the
associated impact between feed rate and cutting rate were the most influential factors over the Ra.
A few researchers do not just concentrate on the investigation of the part, yet additionally of the
tool, which plays an essential job in deciding the cutting condition, and therefore, in the surface
roughness (Dutta & Narala, 2021).
The cutting rate has an incredible impact on the roughness pursued by the depth of cut, and feed
has no essential effect on surface roughness found by using the Taguchi method. The low depth of
cut, low depth of cut, and low feed rate to get a better surface finish under dry turning action
recommended (Noordin et al., 2017).
It has been seen that cutting velocity, nose radius, and feed rate have higher duty surface roughness,
while the hardness of work material and depth of cut has less massive responsibility surface
roughness (Sijo and Biju, 2014).
12
The impact of feed rate, cutting speed, depth of cut and geometry of the tool on the average
roughness acquired in hard turning bronze parts. The result revealed that the tool radius and the
feed rate were the most dominant factors in Ra has been assessed (Pereira et al., 2017).
2.5 Turning operation and surface roughness
Turning operations using a single-point cutting tool has been one of the most established and well-
known strategies for metal cutting. It has supplanted granulating in a few applications with
decreased lead time without influencing the surface quality. One of the essential aspects which
widely studied in turning is cutting parameters and surface roughness of the workpiece.
Optimization process parameters are incredibly huge while investigating the procedure ability of
any machining operation. Dry machining (no cutting fluid; avoid the problem of cutting fluid
contamination, disposal, and filtration) of steel caused most tool wear and surface roughness, and
wet machining did not show considerable improvement.
Ghani et al. (2004) optimized cutting parameters in end processing when machining hardened steel
under semi-finishing and finishing conditions of feed rate, depth of cut, and rapid cutting speed.
The examination of the outcome shows that the ideal blend for low resultant cutting force and good
surface finish was high cutting speed, low feed rate, and low depth of cut. The investigation shows
that the Taguchi technique was reasonable to take care of the expressed issue with the least number
of preliminaries as contrasted and a full factorial structure.
Palanisamy et al. (2007) worked in improvement dependent on ground-breaking powerful artificial
intelligence called GA. The aftereffect of the work shows how an unpredictable improvement issue
is dealt with by a genetic algorithm and converges very quickly. Experimental end milling tests
have been performed on mild steel to quantify cutting force using milling tool dynamometer,
surface roughness, and vibration using an FFT analyzer for the enhanced cutting parameters in a
Universal milling machine utilizing an HSS cutter. The outcomes demonstrate that the enhanced
parameters equipped for machining the workpiece all the more proficiently with the better surface
finish.
Kumaragurubaran et al. (2013) worked on turning tasks of EN-9 steel with various cutting
parameters such as depth of cut, feed, and cutting speed and indicated that the turning activity
extraordinarily impacted by response parameters including surface roughness and metal removal
rate. In mainly, surface roughness was researched utilizing the L9 symmetrical exhibit utilizing
13
Taguchi's design of experiments with various cutting parameters of EN-9 of turning parameters
and upgraded by S/N proportion and broke down by ANOVA's.
Maiyar et al. (2013) researched the parameter improvement of end milling with multi-response
criteria dependent on the Taguchi symmetrical exhibit with the grey relational analysis. Nine
experimental run dependents on an L9 symmetrical exhibit of the Taguchi method performed. A
grey relational analysis is used to solve the multiple performance characteristics. Moreover, the
ANOVA was additionally applied to distinguish the most critical factor. At last, affirmation tests
were performed to examine the experimental outcomes and created models. Experimental results
have demonstrated that machining execution at the last processing procedure can be improved
adequately through their approach.
Pratyusha et al. (2013) worked with the impacts of different processing parameters such as depth
of cut, feed rate, and spindle speed on the surface roughness of finished components. The tests
were led on AISI 304 S.S. plate material on a vertical processing machine utilizing carbide embeds
and by utilizing Taguchi's system, including the L9 symmetrical cluster. The examination of the
mean and difference system is used to think about the essentialness of each machining parameter
surface roughness.
Saraswat et al. (2014) worked streamline in turning of mild steel in turning activities on mild steel,
and because of that, the blend of the ideal degrees of the elements gotten to get the least surface
roughness. The ANOVA and Sign-to-Noise proportions were used to think about the exhibition
qualities in turning activity. Their examination also shows that the anticipated qualities and
determined qualities were extremely close, which demonstrates that the created model can utilize
to foresee the surface roughness in the turning activity of mild steel. Taguchi technique has
embraced the plan of experimental, and results have been by limiting S/N proportion. Optimizing
of the surface roughness was finished utilizing the Taguchi method, and the Prescient condition
was acquired. An affirmation test was then performed, which delineated that the chose parameters
and prescient conditions were precise inside the cutoff points of the estimation tool.
Sangwan et al. (2015) introduced a methodology for deciding the ideal machining parameters
prompting the least surface roughness by coordinating ANN and GA. A feed-forward neural
system was created by gathering the input acquired during the turning of the Ti-6Al-4V titanium
combination. The MATLAB tool stash has been used for preparing and testing a neural system
model. The anticipated outcomes utilizing ANN show an exceptional understanding of the
14
anticipated qualities and experimental qualities. Further, GA was incorporated with the neural
system model to decide the ideal machining parameters prompting the least surface roughness.
The examination of this investigation demonstrates that the ANN-GA approach is equipped for
foreseeing the ideal machining parameters.
Kumar et al. (2016) considered the parametric enhancement under the consistent progression of
coolant. The machining cutting parameters (depth of cut, cutting speed, and feed rate) were
upgraded to assess high material removal rate and least surface roughness. The response surface
technique translated the examination input with the assistance of the structure of the test. ANOVA
shows the various parameters which give the critical sway on the estimations of surface roughness
and material removal rate.
Panshetty et al. (2016) advanced CNC processing Process Parameters to give a superior surface
finish and high MRR. As Taguchi's method decreases the quantity of experimental, it is used for
streamlining machining parameters. It was applied to discover the impact of different machining
parameters such as depth of cut, feed rate, speed on the surface finish, and MRR. MINITAB-14
software has been used to investigate the outcome. Ra was estimated, and the MRR esteems
determined to decide ideal levels.
Padma et al. (2017) optimized the machining parameters for the turning of EN 9 carbon steel on
the machine utilizing a mix of the Taguchi and the Dark Social Investigation to yield base cutting
forces and anticipated least surface irregularity. Procedure parameters picked were the cutting
speed, a feed, the depth of cut, and a choice cutting liquid. The ANOVA has also been used to
assess the most effective handling parameters that were caused by the experiment. The inversion
conditions are also set up between a procedure parameter and the response. The outcomes that
demonstrate the depth of cut were a significant factor in that influencing a cutting force and the
surface roughness.
Ribeiro et al. (2017) centered on manufacturing parameters that impact the surface quality of
hardness metallic material. In their work, the impacts of differing four parameters in the processing
procedure were used, in particular, cutting speed, feed rate, radial depth, and axial depth. The
impact of every parameter in surface irregularity was then obtained by applying the ANOVA to
experimental data. Their examination also serves to decide the commitment of each machining
parameters and their cooperation for surface roughness. Additionally, the outcomes show that the
spiral cutting depth and the communication between the outspread and hub depth of cut were
15
essential parameters, being their commitments for the minimization surface roughness about 30%
and 24%, respectively.
Prasadraju et al. (2017) used Taguchi's experimental design technique. An L9 orthogonal array,
Taguchi method, and ANOVA used to define the experimental layout to examinations the impact
of every parameter on the machining characteristics and to predict the optimal decision for each
milling parameter such as feed rate, depth of cut, and cutting speed. In the cutting process,
streamlining of cutting parameters is viewed as a fundamental tool for development in the yielding
nature of an item just as decreasing the general production time.
Fedai et al. (2018) examined the impact of machining parameters on the different surface
roughness characteristics (Ra, Rq, and Rz) in the milling of AISI 4140 steel experimentally
investigated. Feed rate, cutting speed, depth of cut, and the number of supplements considered as
control factors; Ra, Rz, and Rq considered as response factors. Additionally, the percent
commitments of the control factors surface roughness were gotten to be the depth of cut (3.29 %,
number of inserts (71.89 %), cutting velocity (5.08%), and feed (19.74 %). Minimum surface
roughness esteems for Ra, Rz, and Rq were acquired by using the multi-objective Taguchi
technique.
Karthikeyan et al. (2018) improved the process parameters such as cutting speed, feed, and depth
of cut to accomplish the least surface roughness and least cutting force separately and combinedly
by utilizing Taguchi – Dark investigation. From their examination, it was discovered that the
joined least surface roughness and cutting force could be achieved under the states of 900 rpm of
axle speed, 0.2 mm/fire up of feed, and 0.25 mm of the depth of cut.
Kumar et al. (2019) studied the impacts of effects of the parameters of primary end milling process
such as cutting speed, radial angle, cutting feed rate, cutting condition, axial depth of cut, and tool
geometry helix angle on Ra by the plan of investigations during CNC end milling of Al 7068
Aluminum. All the experiments were done under dry cutting conditions, and the tests were thought
of according to the requirements of requisites of response surface methodology. All the importance
of end milling process parameters on the Ra resolved with the assistance of ANOVA investigation.
Mathematical models for surface roughness Ra, which have been planned with the help of reaction
second request surface technique. In the end, the parameters such as helix angle, cutting speed,
and radial rake angle of surface roughness seen as the best through the results.
16
Kumar et al. (2019) used to discover the ideal cutting parameters in milling operation of AISI 1005
steel utilizing TiN covered tool. Three cutting parameters, i.e., feed rate, spindle speed, and depth
of cut, were optimized with consideration of Ra and MRR. Analyses have been performed
dependent on the L9 symmetrical cluster. The impact of the cutting parameter was dissected
utilizing ANOVA, and the outcomes show that the depth of cut and feed rate impacts the responses
the most. Moreover, the affirmation test has led to dependent on the ideal parameter to legitimize
the outcomes. Surface roughness and MRR got at ideal process parameters were 2.97 mm and
0.96923 g/min separately.
Table 2-1 Summary of literature review on surface roughness
No. Author Name Years Operation Materials Optimization Input Response
and Machine Techniques Parameters Variables
1 Ghani et al. 2004 Milling AISI H13 Taguchi cutting speed, Surface
feed rate, and Roughness
depth of cut
2 Palanisamy et 2007 Milling Mild Steel GA feed rate, Surface
al. depth of cut, Roughness
cutting speed
3 Kumaraguruba 2013 Turning EN-9 DOE cutting speed, Ra and MRR
ran et al. feed, and
depth of cut
4 Maiyar et al. 2013 Milling Inconel 718 Taguchi, GRA cutting speed, Surface
depth of cut
5 Pratyusha et al. 2013 Milling AISI 304 Taguchi spindle speed, Surface
depth of cut
6 Saraswat et al. 2014 Turning Mild Steel Taguchi depth of cut, Surface
spindle speed
7 Sangwan et al. 2015 Turning TI-6AL-4V ANN-GA cutting speed, Surface
depth of cut
17
8 Kumar et al. 2016 Milling EN18 RSM cutting speed, Ra and MRR
feed rate, and
depth of cut
9 Panshetty et al. 2016 Milling Al 7075 Taguchi speed, feed Ra and MRR
rate, and
depth of cut.
10 Padma et al. 2017 Turning EN 9 GRA cutting speed, Surface
feed, and Roughness
depth of cut
11 Ribeiro et al. 2017 Milling Hardened Taguchi cutting speed, Surface
Steel feed rate, and Roughness
depth of cut
12 Prasadraju et 2017 Milling Mild steel Taguchi spindle speed, Surface
al. feed rate, and Roughness
depth of cut
13 Fedai et al. 2018 Milling AISI 4140 Taguchi depth of cut, Surface
cutting speed
14 Karthikeyan et 2018 Turning EN24 Taguchi- Grey cutting speed, Surface
al. feed, and Roughness
depth of cut
15 Kausika et al. 2018 Milling Al7068 RSM cutting speed, Surface
feed, and Roughness
depth of cut
16 Kumar et al. 2019 Milling AISI 1005 Taguchi spindle speed, Ra and MRR
depth of cut,
and feed rate
2.6 Response surface design methodology

Accordingly, surface methodology, the elements that are considered as most significant, is used to
fabricate a polynomial model in which the independent factor is the examination's response. To
locate the worldwide least of the reaction explores that 'prune' the reaction surface is structured
and the gradient of the response surface used along with the steepest ascent algorithm as follows
(Garcia and Phillips, 1995).
18
2.6.1 Linear RSM model

i. Select the factors to investigate.
ii. Design and run a two-level factorial experiment in a localized region of the response
surface.
iii. Compute the estimates of the effects and thereby calculate the coefficients of the linear
model:
Y = b0 + b1X1 + b2X2 + … + bnXn. (2.1)
where Y is the corresponding response. The terms b0, b1, b2, … bn are the second-order regression
coefficients and the terms x1, x2, … xn is the independent input parameters
iv. Select a reference factor to use as a guide in determining the appropriate steps along the
direction of each factor to continue moving along the path of steepest ascent.
v. Select a few experimental conditions along the path of steepest ascent and run trials to
determine if the response continues to increase. If the response ceases to increase, a new
path should generate.
If a new path is needed, design, and run a new two-level factorial experiment. All previous steps
repeated until no substantial improvement in the response obtained. If substantial improvement is
obtained, exponential RSM model will be conducted.
2.6.2 Exponential RSM model
i. Design and run a three-level factorial experiment in the region where the path of the
steepest ascent yields no substantial improvement in the response.
ii. Compute the coefficients of the model:
Y = b0 + b1X1 + b2X2 + … + b11X21 + b22X22 + … + b12X1X2 + … + bn-1, nXn-1Xn. (2.2)
iii. Using the above model, determine the nature of the stationary point of the response surface.
The stationary point is one where the gradient vanishes.
The sequential nature of RSM enables the experimenter to find out about the procedure or
framework under the investigation proceeds. This ensures through the span of the RSM application
the experimenter will learn: (i) the proper choice of experimental designs; (ii) the approximating
function required; (iii) the location of the region of the optimum; (iv) the location of the region of
the optimum; and (v) regardless of weather changes on the responses or any of the procedure
variables are required (Myers et al., 2016).
19
Even though accurate models have developed, there are still issues to be dealt with. Some instances
such as high accuracy machining, where surface roughness is of great importance, are still under
investigation, and factors such as the cutting tool’s deflection or the thermal conditions must
introduce to future models for a more realistic depiction of surface roughness creation. The
integration of the existing models to a more comprehensive advisory system, which could be used
by a machine tool operator, for example, could be another beneficial and practical application.
Figure 2-3 Parameters affecting surface roughness (Benardos and Vosniakos, 2003)
2.7 Summary of literature review
From the above literature review, it observed that most of the researchers had taken input
parameters such as speed, feed, and depth of cut, while some have taken, machine time, tool length,
tool vibration, nose radius, lubricant, so on to find out their impact on performance parameters
including surface roughness, MRR, tool wear, and tool life.
Most researchers conclude that parameters that have a significant effect on the surface finish are
cutting speed followed by the depth of cut. Other authors observed that the depth of cut is the
significant factor followed by cutting speed. Also, the nose radius has a significant effect on
obtaining a better finish.
The literature review reveals that researchers have focused on various investigate of the effects of
cutting parameters on the resulting surface roughness to determine optimal cutting conditions.
RSM most widely used as it offers enormous information from even a small number of the
experiment, and even it is possible to analyze the influence of independent parameters on
20
performance characteristics. The various authors have used the Taguchi method, RSM, genetic
algorithm, grey relation analysis, so on. as optimization techniques. Table 2-2 suggests that turning
is the most commonly used machining process. It has been observed that most of the researchers
have used steel as workpiece material. Steel is one of the widely researched materials in machining
for more than the last half a century, but there is a renewed interest in the application of steel
because of its sustainability 100% recyclable and almost indefinite life cycle (Kant and Sangwan,
2014).
Table 2-2 Summary of literature review
Workpiece Predictive
No. Author Mp Machining Parameters OT
Material technique
Abhang and f (0.05,0.10,0.15)
1 Hameedullah T d (0.2,0.4,0.6) EN-31 Steel - Taguchi
(2012) lt (10,30,50)
v (120,180,240)
Aouici et al. f (0.08,0.12,0.16) AISI H11
2 T RSM RSM
(2012) d (0.15,0.3,0.45) steel
h (40,45,50)
Asilturk and v (90,120,150)
Hardened
3 Akkuş T f (0.18,0.27,0.36) - Taguchi
AISI 4140
(2011) d (0.2,0.4,0.6)
Benardos and v (300,500,700)
Aluminum
4 Vosniakos M ft (0.08,0.14,0.2) ANN Taguchi
alloy
(2002) d (0.25,0.75,1.2)
v (58,96,151,240)
Bhattacharya AISI 1045
5 T f (0.045,0.1,0.125,0.16) - Taguchi
et al. (2009) Steel
d (1,1.2,1.5,2)
v (2000,3000,4000)
Bhirud et al. f (20,60,100) Al 6063 Taguchi
6 M SF
(2017) d (0.5,1.5,2.5)
N (2,4)
Chinchanikar v (100,200,300) for 35 HRC
and v (100,150,200) for 45 HRC AISI 4340
7 T RSM RSM
Choudhury f (0.1,0.2,0.3) steel
(2013) d (0.5,1.5,2.5)
21
Correia and v (345,410,470)

AISI 1045
8 Davim T f (0.075,0.15,0.25) - -
steel
(2011) r (0.4,0.8)
v (175,250,325)
Fedai et al. f (0.08,0.12,0.16) AISI 4140 Taguchi
9 M RA
(2018) d (0.5,1,1.5)
N (1,2,3)
v (224,280,355)
Ghani et al. Taguchi
10 M f (0.1,0.16,0.25) AISI H13 RA
(2004)
d (0.3,0.5,0.8)
v (410, 660, 900) Taguchi
Karthikeyan et
11 T f (0.2, 0.25, 0.3) EN-24 - - Grey
al. (2018)
d (0.25, 0.5, 0.75)
v (1500,2000,2500,3000,3500)
f (0.02,0.03,0.04,0.05,0.06)
Kausika et al. Al7068
12 M da (1,1.5,2,2.5,3) RA RSM
(2018)
dr (4,8,12,16,20)
 (25,30,35,40,45)
v (1000-5000)
Kumar et al. EN-18 RSM
13 M f (200-2500) RA
(2016)
d (0.2-1)
v (1000,1250,1500)
Kumar et al. AISI 1005 Taguchi
14 M f (100,150,200) RA
(2019)
d (0.25,0.5,0.75)
v (100,150,200) ANOV
Kumaran and EN-19/EN-31
15 M f (0.2,0.25,0.3) SF A
Stephen (2015)
d (0.2,0.3,0.4)
Lakshmi1 and v (100,150,200)
EN-24
16 Subbaiah M f (0.2,0.25,0.3) SF RSM
(2012) d (0.2,0.3,0.4)
v (44.5,83,144.5)
Lalwani et al. MDN250
17 T f (0.039,0.104,0.210,0.216) RSM -
(2008) steel
d (0.2)
Mahdavinejad AISI 304
v (100,125,150,175,200)
18 and Saeedy T stainless RA -
f (0.2,0.3,0.4)
(2011) steel
22
v (25,50,75)
Maiyar et al. Inconel 718 GRA
19 M f (0.06,0.09,0.12) RA
(2013)
d (0.2,0.4,0.6)
v (140,280,480)
Mandal et al. AISI 4340
20 T f (0.5,1.0,1.5) RA Taguchi
(2011) steel
d (0.24,0.18,0.12)
v (240,300,375)
Noordin AISI 1045
21 T f (0.18,0.23,0.28) RSM -
et al. (2004) Steel
SCEA (-3,0,-5)
v (450, 720, 910)
Padma et al. GRA
22 T f (0.02, 0.078, 0.26) EN-9 -
(2017)
d (0.4, 0.98, 1.2)
v (20-40)
Palanisamy et Mild Steel GA
23 M f (0.05-0.3) RA
al. (2007)
d (0.5-2.5)
v (1600,3200,4800)
Panshetty et al. Al 7075 Taguchi
24 M f (165,320,475) RA
(2016)
d (0.6,0.8,1)
v (1000,1250,1500)
Prasadraju et Mild steel Taguchi
25 M f (100,150,200) RA
al. (2017)
d (0.25,0.5,0.75)
v (3.6,3.62,3.16)
Pratyusha et AISI 304 RA Taguchi
26 M f (3.45,3.64,3.31)
al. (2013)
d (3.54,3.33,3.53)
v (150,200,250)
Reddy and f *(200,300,400) AISI 1045
27 M RSM GA
Rao (2005) da (20) steel
r (0.4,0.8,1.2)
v (200,300)
Hardened
Ribeiro et al. f (0.1,0.3) Taguchi
28 M Steel RA
(2017) da (0.1,0.35)
dr (1,2)
Sahin and v (181,208,240, 276, 317)
AISI 1040
29 Motorcu T f (0.1,0.13,0.15, 0.18, 0.21) RSM -
mild steel
(2005) d (0.36,0.43,0.50, 0.58, 0.66)
23
v (80,180,180,280)
Sangwan et al. ANN-
30 T f (0.06, 0.13, 0.21, 0.13) TI-6AL-4V -
(2015) GA
d (0.5, 0.5, 0.75, 0.5)
v (58.9, 86.3, 113.8)
Saraswat et al.
31 T f (0.1, 0.2, 0.3) Mild Steel - Taguchi
(2014)
d (0.4, 0.6, 0.8)
v (410, 660, 900)
Singh et al.
32 T f (0.2, 0.25, 0.3) EN-9 - MRR
(2013)
d (0.25, 0.5, 0.75)
v (100,130)
Yalcin et al. AISI 1050
33 M f (0.05,0.1) ANN Taguchi
(2013) steel
d (1.25, 2)
MP− Machining process, OT − Optimization technique

2.8 Literature Gap
A lot of research has been done in past and a survey on critical controllable turning parameters for
the lathe machines such as cutting speed, feed, depth of cut, tool geometry, tool, and workpiece
material, which affect the desired output including, surface finish, tool wear, tool life and
performance are studied. But a little research has been done on optimization of surface roughness
on cutting parameters of different EN carbon steel grades and a few works are available for
different materials to show contrasting results – few authors observed that cutting speed is the most
significant factor followed by the depth of cut (Aggarwal et al., 2008; Bhattacharya et al., 2009;
Bhushan, 2013). Other authors (Fratila and Caizar, 2011; Hanafi et al., 2012) observed that the
depth of cut is the significant factor followed by cutting speed. Therefore, more studies need to be
carried out to observe the influence of machining parameters on performance characteristics. A
generalized relationship between the machining parameters and the process performance is hard
to model accurately mainly due to the nature of the complicated stochastic process mechanisms in
machining. This work is an attempt to fill this gap in the research. Machining is still an open field
of research after the last some years of research mainly because of the changes in machining
technology, materials, and the advancement in the modeling and optimization techniques as well
as the advancements in computational technology.
24
MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGIES ASTU
CHAPTER THREE
3 MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGIES

3.1 Introduction
This study was performed to investigate the cutting parameters on surface roughness in using the
turning operation of EN-8 steel. This section aims to present the details of the experimental
procedures and material used for the study. Furthermore, machines and instruments are discussed
with supporting photographs and schematic diagrams.
3.1.1 Experimental Procedure
In this experimental procedure, the overall stages of the experimental investigation and parametric
optimization of cutting parameters on surface roughness in the turning operation of EN-8 steel
shown in Figure 3-1.
Material and tool selection
Cutting Parameter selection
Machining operation
Measurement and testing
Optimization by using Design-Expert and Minitab
Data analysis
Figure 3-1 Experimental scheme
25
3.1.2 Equipment used

A conventional lathe machine was used for experimental study for cutting parameters on surface
roughness. The turning machine with the model of URSUS 200 was used for this study. The sample
material for the research is EN-8 steel. The workpiece is estimated by using a surface roughness
analyzer (Profilometer) and it is used to measure average roughness. Generally, the equipment
used for the study are;
i. Conventional lathe model URSUS 200
ii. EN-8 steel material
iii. Cemented carbide tool
iv. Profilometer
3.2 Material selection
A machine tool selection is a significant dynamic procedure for many manufacturing companies.
Inappropriately choice machines can adversely influence the general execution of a generation
framework. The quality, cost, and speed of manufacturing strongly depend on the type of machine
tool used.
In this material selection section specifications of the turning machine, selection of workpiece
material and carbon steel EN-8 steel chemical composition, EN-8 medium carbon steel mechanical
properties, and hardness, and specification of the workpiece are discussed.
3.2.1 Specification of turning machine
The specification material for the research is a conventional lathe. The size and durable
construction of the turning machine give tremendous support to handle large and more massive
machine without damaging itself. It provides flexible computer control options for cutting
purposes and assures accurate cuts.
The primary use of a conventional lathe is to make sure concentric work is produced; this
enables the workpiece to be transferred between machining (inspection) operations with
no loss of accuracy. A part could also be turned during a lathe, sent off for hardening and
tempering, then ground between centers during a cylindrical grinder. The preservation of
concentricity between the turning and grinding operations is crucial for quality work. A
conventional lathe model URSUS 200 model (Figure 3-2) was used in the turning experiment.
In this investigation, an attempt was made to find out the cutting parameters on surface roughness
in turning the operation of EN-8 steel.
26
Figure 3-2 Conventional lathe machine, URSUS 200 model

Table 3-1 Specification of lathe model URSUS 200
Center distance (mm) 1.500
Max. swing over bed (mm) 420
Max. swing over cross slide (mm) 210
Spindle bore (mm) 52
R.P.M. 35 - 1.500 (16x)
kW 5
Volts 380
Cycles 50
3.2.2 Selection of workpiece material

The sample material for the research is EN-8 steel. There is a renewed interest in the application
of this steel because of its sustainability. It is 100% recyclable and almost has an indefinite life
cycle. EN-8 steel is one of the steel grades widely used in different industries (construction,
transport, automotive, power, so on). The chemical composition and mechanical properties of the
EN-8 steel are given in Table 3-4 and Table 3-5 respectively.
EN-8 are steel grades in BS 970-1955 standard, which is a standard for wrought steel for
mechanical and allied engineering purposes. It defines requirements for carbon and carbon-
manganese, free-cutting, alloy, and stainless steels usually supplied in the bright, cold finished
condition.
27
The material of the workpiece used was EN-8 steel for the analysis. EN-8 steel chosen since it
used for the manufacturing of medium size parts such as gears, shafts, spindles, shafts, and general
machine components including cylinders, sprockets, cams, small gears, crankshafts, machine
tools, grinding balls for ball mills, keys, pulleys, ball race rings, bolts, and nuts, so on Which are
the significant results of the mechanical industry. The machining of these parts requires additional
time because of size. We know as the hour of machining increases, the temperature of the cutting
zone additionally expands, which effectively affects work material and tools. So, to improve the
machining, EN-8 steel is chosen.
EN-8 carbon steel is a common medium carbon and medium tensile steel, with improved strength
over mild steel, through-hardening medium carbon steel. EN-8 carbon steel is also readily
machinable in any condition. Proper heat treatment results on sections more significant than 65mm
may still be achievable, but it should be noted that a fall-off in mechanical properties would be
apparent approaching the center of the bar. It is therefore recommended that larger sizes of EN-8
steel materials are supplied in the untreated condition and that any heat treatment is carried out
after initial stock removal. This should achieve better mechanical properties towards the core.
EN-8 engineering steel is unalloyed carbon steel with reasonable tensile strength. It can be flame
or induction hardened and is a readily machinable material. When heat-treated, EN-8 offers
moderate wear resistance. Steel EN8 materials in its heat-treated forms possesses good
homogenous metallurgical structures, giving consistent machining properties. The EN-8 steel with
effective heat treatment viz., tempering at 300oC can be used for structural applications requiring
better fatigue, then it is cooled in air, when subjected to cyclical loading in their routine operations
(Ravindran et al., 2021). Any heat treatment is carried out after initial stock removal. This should
achieve better mechanical properties towards the core.
Table 3-2 Experimental conditions
Machine Turning Machine
Work Specimens EN-8 steel
Hardness 180-280 HB
Environment Dry Machining
Condition Tempered
28
3.2.2.1 EN-8 carbon steel grade equivalents

Other steel grades in DIN, JIS standards are similar and equivalent to EN-8 steel, as follows:
European standard (including Germany DIN, British BSI, French AFNOR, and other EU member
state standards) C40 steel equivalent to Chinese GB standards, Japanese JIS standards, and ISO
standards, so on.
Table 3-3 EN-8 material equivalent steel-grades (steelnumber.com, 2020)
EU USA Germany Japan France England Italy China Poland Czechia Russia Inter
EN - DIN,WNr JIS AFNOR BS UNI GB PN CSN GOST ISO
C40 1038 1.0511 S40C AF60C40 070M40 C40 40 40 12041 40 C40
(1.0511) 1040 C40 AF60C45 080M40 C40E4
Ck40 XC42HI EN-8
3.2.3 Carbon steel EN-8 chemical composition

The workpiece material selected for examination is the EN-8 steel is an unalloyed medium carbon
steel. EN-8 medium carbon steel finds wide varieties of application such as rollers, forging,
forming and molding dies, die making industries, blanking, and forming tools. This steel can
provide greater strength and wear resistance.
Table 3-4 Chemical composition of EN 8 steel (Selvam and Senthil, 2016)
Element Standard (wt%) Actual (wt%)
Sulfur, S 0.045 0.04
Phosphorus, P 0.045 0.04
Molybdenum, Mo 0.10 0.10
Carbon, C 0.36 0.44
Silicon, Si 0.40 0.40
Chromium, Cr 0.40 0.25
Nickel, Ni 0.40 0.25
Manganese, Mn 0.65 0.60
3.2.4 EN-8 medium carbon steel mechanical properties and hardness

The following table gives the EN-8 steel mechanical properties such as diameter and hardness.
29
Table 3-5 Mechanical properties of EN-8 steel (Metals4u.co.uk., 2020)

Sample ID Diameter Area Yield Stress Tensile Stress Hardness
(mm) (mm2) MPa MPa
Solid, 50 1,963.495 280 550 152/207

Round
3.2.5 Specification of the workpiece

The total length to be machined during each reading is 30 mm. 25 mm length on each side is
provided for clamping the workpieces into the three-jaw chuck. Each piece was used to perform
one experiment. A pre-cut of 1 mm depth was performed on each workpiece before actually turning
using a different cutting tool. This is done to remove the rust or hardened top layer from the surface
and to minimize any effect of non-homogeneity on the experimental results.
Table 3-6 Specification of the workpiece
Dimension (mm) 50*55
Weight (kg) 0.771
Density (kg/m3) 7850
Figure 3-3 Sample of the workpiece material
3.3 Selecting of cutting tool

A cutting tool is any tool that wants to remove metal from the workpiece using shear
deformation. Frequently, it also refers to a tool bit. To perform an effective cutting operation,
the cutter must be made from a material harder than the work material to be cut. Also, the tool
30
must be ready to withstand the heat generated during the machining process. The tool must
have a specific geometry (known as tool geometry) for effective cutting and smooth surface
finish. In this selecting of cutting tool single-point cutting tools, cemented carbide, tool
geometry recommended cutting conditions, and dry machining are discussed.
3.3.1 Single-point cutting tools
They are those having one sharp cutting edge attached to the shank. The cutting edge is intended
to create a machined surface on the workpiece, perform cutting, and produce chips. The cutting
tool is held in a tool post fastened to the cross slide. The assembly of the cross slide and tool post
is referred to as the carriage. The carriage is designed to slide along the guides to feed the tool
parallel to the axis of rotation and the guides are tracks along which the rides of carriage. They are
made with great precision to achieve a high degree of parallelism relative to the axis of spindle.
Figure 3-4 Turning on conventional lathe single-point cutting tool

3.3.2 Cemented carbide
Cemented carbide tools are formed by pressing a mixture of tungsten carbide and cobalt together
in a hydraulic press and then heating the compact in a hydrogen atmosphere. Tungsten carbide is
an extremely hard substance. Cobalt acts as a binder for the hard carbide grains. Most of the
cemented carbides used today are made predominantly from the carbides of tungsten, titanium,
and tantalum, usually with cobalt as the binder metal.
Cemented carbide is used in metal-forming applications because they combine high compressive
strength, good abrasion resistance, high elastic modulus, good impact, and shock resistance, and
the ability to take and retain a good surface finish. Typical applications in this category include
drawing dies, hot and cold rolling of strips and bards, cold heading dies, forward and back
extrusion punches, swaging hammers and mandrels, and can-body punches and dies.
31
The Anti-chatter tool is shown in Figure 3-5, a narrow land with 5- 10° negative relief is provided
at the side flank beside the cutting edge. Similarly, the side rake can also be made negative for a
small portion of the rake face adjoining the cutting edge. These features make tools to reduce
vibration/ chatter. The turning is done using a cemented carbide tool mounted in a lathe tool holder
that is then mounted in the tool spindle on the machine.
Figure 3-5 Cemented carbide tool

3.3.3 Tool geometry
The tool angles have essential functions in cutting operations. The rake angle controls the strength
of the tooltip and chip flow direction. Positive rake angles improve the cutting operation by
reducing temperatures and forces, but reduce the tool strength, as the small angle may cause the
cutting edge to chip away. In the general case of oblique cutting, there are two rake angles, namely,
side and back rake angles. As cutting takes place on the side of the tool, the side rake angle is of
primary importance. The back-rake angle also affects the ability of the tool to shear the work
material and form the chip. The relief angle controls the tool interfacing with the workpiece. Too
large a relief angle may cause the tool to chip off, while too small an angle may result in high
frictional forces due to rubbing between the flank surface and workpiece, causing excessive flank
wear. The cutting-edge angle affects the chip formation, tool strength, and cutting forces. The nose
radius affects the surface finish and tooltip strength. A smaller radius creates a rougher surface
finish on the workpiece and a weaker tooltip. However, the large radius can lead to excessive force
and tool vibrations.
32
Figure 3-6 Geometry of single-point cutting tool

3.3.4 Cutting conditions
Cutting conditions play an important role in the efficient use of a machine tool. To represent
favorably and endorse or encourage as an appropriate choice on cutting conditions. The use of
recommended cutting conditions for turning is appropriate.
Table 3-7 Recommended cutting conditions for turning (Mistu, 1994)
Recommended Cutting Condition and Grades
Depth of Feed rate Recommended Spindle
Work Material cut (mm) (mm/min) Coolant Speed and Grades
Light
≤ cutting ≤1.0 ≤0.3 Dry 290 (235 - 335)
Mild 160 Medium 0.4

Steel HB cutting 1-6 (0.2 – 0.6) Dry 350 (260 - 440)
Light
160
cutting ≤1.0 ≤0.3 Dry 280 (210 - 355)
Carbon 280 Medium 0.3

Steel HB cutting 1–5 (0.1 – 0.5) Dry 330 (220 - 440)
Water
Alloy Light Soluble
Steel 280 cutting ≤1.0 ≤0.3 Oil 180 (120 - 230)
33
Water
350 Medium 0.3 Soluble
HB cutting 1–4 (0.2 – 0.4) Oil 170 (120 - 210)
3.3.5 Dry machining
Dry machining can provide a cost advantage and machine-tool flexibility if big sumps are not
required. In this study, it is used because dry machining is becoming more prevalent in turning. In
drilling, coolant is required because the tool has prolonged material exposure, and to evacuate fluid
is essential for chips. Furthermore, in dry turning, a big producer of shafts and gears, does not
apply any coolant because all its machines are fully automated, and there is no manual handling
of parts, so heat build-up is not an issue.
Dry machining represents a more valuable alternative, especially in terms of cost savings and
environmental sustainability. It can provide a machine-tool flexibility and cost advantage if big
sumps are not required.
3.4 Machine parameters selection
In this optimization of surface roughness, three cutting parameters were included: feed rate, cutting
speed, and depth of cut considered to be critical cutting parameters for turning of EN-8 steel. These
cutting parameters are some of the essential parameters which affect the surface roughness. In the
turning process, the parameters such as feed rate, cutting speed, and depth of cut are optimized for
better surface finish.
Turning
process
Depth of cut
Figure 3-7 Factors affecting the turning process

In this machine parameters selection, cutting speed, feed rate, depth of cut, surface roughness, and
machining parameters, and their levels are discussed.
34
3.4.1 Cutting speed

Cutting speed effects tool life significantly. Increasing cutting speed increases cutting temperature
and results in shortening life of tool. Cutting speed varies depending on the hardness and type of
the work material. Selecting a tool grade suitable is necessary for the cutting speed.
The relative motion of the workpiece past the cutting edge is cutting speed, which is calculated
from the following relation.
π∗Dm∗𝑛
𝑣 = (m/min) (3.1)
1000
Where Dm (mm): Workpiece diameter

n (min-1): Rpm of the cutter / Main Axis Spindle Speed
v (m/min): Cutting Speed
π, Pi: 3.14
Cutting parameters (cutting speed) for EN-8 steel were selected depending on the recommended
cutting parameters, which are given in Table 3-7, and the range was taken to get the accurate results
since the maximum difference was at maximum range.
Table 3-8 Cutting speed parameters and their levels
Factor Symbol Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
Cutting speed (m/min) v 220 292 375
3.4.2 Feed rate

The feed-in a turning machine is defined as the rate with which the workpiece advances under the
cutter. The feed per minute is defined by the distance the work advances in one minute. It is
expressed in mm/min.
𝑙
𝑓 = (mm/rev) (3.2)
n
Where f (mm/rev): Feed per tooth

l (mm/min): Cutting Length per min
z: Insert number
Cutting parameters (feed rate) for EN-8 steel were selected depending on the recommended cutting
parameters, which are given in Table 3-7, and the range was taken to get the accurate results since
the maximum difference was at maximum range.
35
Table 3-9 Feed rate parameters and their levels

Feed rate (mm/min) f 0.1 0.2 0.3
3.4.3 Depth of cut

The depth of cut in turning is the thickness of the material removed in one pass of the work
undercutter. It is the perpendicular distance measured between the original and final surface of the
workpiece and expressed in mm.
(d1−d2)
𝑑 = (3.3)
2
d1 = diameter of the work surface before machining

d2 = diameter of the work surface after machining
Cutting parameters (depth of cut) for EN-8 steel were selected depending on the recommended
cutting parameters, which are given in Table 3-7, and the range was taken to get the accurate results
since the maximum difference was at maximum range.
Table 3-10 Depth of cut parameters and their levels
Depth of cut (mm) d 1 1.5 2
3.4.4 Machining parameters and their levels

The choice of machining parameters was made by taking into account the capacity/limiting cutting
conditions of the turning, tool manufacturer’s catalog, experimental time and cost into account,
and the values taken by researchers in the literature. Cutting speed, feed rate, and depth of cut are
the input parameters chosen for the research. The cutting speed (A) [rev/min] is the rotational
speed of the lathe machine spindle or the work-piece. Feed rate (B) [mm/rev] is the speed of the
cutting tool relative to that of the workpiece as the tool takes a cut along the axis of the workpiece.
The depth of cut (C) [mm] is the thickness of the material removed in one pass of the work
undercutter. The performance characteristics chosen to investigate the effect of machining
parameters is surface roughness. Cutting parameters for EN-8 steel were selected depending on
the recommended cutting parameters, which are given in Table 3-7, and the range was taken to get
the accurate results since the maximum difference was at maximum range.
36
Table 3-11 Machining parameters and their levels

Cutting speed (m/min) v 220 292 375
Feed rate (mm/min) f 0.1 0.2 0.3
Depth of cut (mm) d 1 1.5 2
3.5 Response variables

The surface roughness is the selected response variables. The surface roughness, as a measure of
surface texture, is the vertical deviations of a real surface from its ideal form. A significant
deviation is taken as a rough surface, while a small deviation is taken as a smooth surface. Thus,
surface roughness sees as the high frequency, short wavelength component of surface measured,
which determines how a real object will interact with its environment. Rough surfaces wear faster
and have a higher coefficient of friction than smooth surfaces. Again, the roughness of a surface
[micron, µm, or µmm] may form nucleation sites for cracks or corrosion, promote adhesion, and
may be very expensive to control in manufacturing.
3.5.1 Profilometer
The most practical way of determining the surface roughness is to measure the surface roughness,
which is defined as the irregularities that remained on the surface after the machining process. The
average roughness Ra used in the present study. Ra is measured using a surface roughness testing
instrument, which has a probe at one end. During measuring 1mm was set as the cut of length.
Whatever may be the manufacturing process flat surface and the smooth cannot obtain. The
machine elements or parts retain the surface irregularities left after manufacturing. The surface of
a part is exterior or boundary, and the surface irregularities consist of many small valleys and
wedges that deviate from a hypothetical nominal surface. These irregularities are responsible to a
greater extent for the appearance of a surface and its suitability (Kumaran and Stephen, 2015).
Surface roughness value is measured by roughness tester and is denoted as Ra.
37
Figure 3-8 Taylor and Hobson profilometer used to measure surface roughness (AASTU,
Department of Material Engineering)
3.6 Response surface methodology
Response surface methodology is a collection of mathematical and statistical techniques useful for
developing, improving, and optimizing processes. It also has essential applications in the
development, formulation, and design of new products, as well as in the improvement of existing
product designs.
The most extensive applications of RSM are in the industrial world, particularly in situations where
several input variables potentially influence some performance measure or quality characteristic
of the product or process. This performance measure or quality characteristic is called the response.
It is typically measured on rank, sensory responses, although attribute responses and continuous
scales are not unusual. The input variables are sometimes called independent variables, and they
are subject to the control of the engineer or scientist, at least for purposes of a test or an experiment
(Myers et al., 2016).
3.6.1 Mathematical model
Engineering experiments aim at determining the conditions that can lead to optimum
performances. One of the methodologies for obtaining optimum performance is the Response
Surface Methodology (RSM). RSM, developed by (Box and Draper, 1987), is a collection of
mathematical and statistical techniques that are useful for the modeling and analysis of problems
in which several variables influence the response of interest and the objective is to optimize the
response. It is a sequential experimentation strategy for empirical model building and optimization.
By conducting experiments and applying regression analysis, a model of the response to
independent input variables can be obtained. A near-optimal point can then be deduced based on
38
the model of the response. RSM is often applied in the characterization and optimization of
processes. In RSM, it is possible to represent independent process parameters in quantitative form
as:
𝑌 = 𝑓(𝑋1 , 𝑋2 , 𝑋3 , … . . 𝑋𝑛 ) ± 𝜀 (3.4)
where Y is the response, f is the response function, 𝜀 is the experimental error, and X1, X2, X3,
……, Xn are independent parameters. Y is plotted to get the response surface. The form of f is
unknown and may be very complicated. Therefore, RSM aims at approximating f by a suitable
lower ordered polynomial in some regions of the independent process variables. If the response
can be well modeled by a linear function of the independent variables, the function equation (3.4)
can be written as:
𝑌 = 𝑏0 + 𝑏1𝑥1 + 𝑏2𝑥2 + 𝑏3𝑥3 , … . . 𝑏𝑛𝑥𝑛 ± 𝜀 (3.5)
However, if a curvature appears in the system, then a higher-order polynomial such as quadric
model (equation (3.6)) may be used:
𝑌𝑢 = 𝑏0 + ∑𝑛𝑖=1 𝑏𝑖𝑥𝑖 + ∑𝑛𝑖=1 𝑏𝑖𝑗𝑥 2 𝑖 + ∑𝑛𝑖<𝑗 𝑏𝑖𝑗𝑥𝑗 (3.6)
where Y is the corresponding response and xi (1, 2, …, n) is the independent input parameters.
The terms b0, b1, b2, so on. are the second-order regression coefficients. The second term
contributes to the linear effect, the third term contributes to the higher-order effects, and the fourth
term contributes to the interactive effects of the input parameters. The values of the coefficients
are estimated by using the responses collected (Y1, Y2…, Yn) through the design points (n) by
applying the least square technique. This equation can be rewritten in terms of the three variables:
𝑌 = 𝑏0 + 𝑏1𝑥1 + 𝑏2𝑥2 + 𝑏3𝑥3 + 𝑏11 𝑥12 + 𝑏22 𝑥22 + 𝑏33 𝑥32 + 𝑏12𝑥1𝑥2 + 𝑏13𝑥1𝑥3 + 𝑏23𝑥2𝑥3 (3.7)
The objective of using RSM is not only to investigate the response over the entire factor space but
also to locate the region of interest where the response reaches its optimal or near-optimal value.
A careful study of the response surface model provides a combination of factors giving the best
response. The response surface method is a sequential process, and the methodology used for the
modeling can be summarized, as shown in Figure 3-9.
39
Figure 3-9 Outline of response surface methodology used

3.6.2 Predictive models using response surface methodology
Derringer and Suich (1980) proposed the method of desirability function analysis associated with
RSM. This method is based on the reduced gradient algorithm, which starts with multiple solutions
and finally obtains the maximum value of the desirability to determine the optimal solution (Maji
et al., 2013). The desirability function is based on the idea that the quality of a product or process
that has many features is completely unacceptable if one of them is outside the “desirable” limit
(Candioti et al., 2014). Several researchers have used desirability function analysis to optimize
surface roughness (Bhushan, 2013; Hessainia et al., 2013; Sait et al., 2009; Sarıkaya and Gullu,
2014). In the single objective minimization problem, the first step of the desirability function
analysis is to calculate the desirability index (d) using equation (3.8). The scale of the desirability
function ranges between 0 and 1. If d = 0 or approaches 0, then the response is completely
40
unacceptable, and if d = 1 or approaches to 1, then the response is perfectly on the target value.
There are three types of individual desirability functions: a) the larger, the better, b) the smaller,
the better, and c) the nominal, the better. In this study, the desirability function was selected as the
smaller, the better because minimum surface roughness is to be achieved with the optimization of
machining parameters. The desirability function for the single objective minimization problem is
given below:
𝑑 = 1 𝑖𝑓 𝑦 ≤ 𝑦𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝑦−𝑦𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑑=( ) , 𝑦𝑚𝑖𝑛 ≤ 𝑦 ≤ 𝑦𝑚𝑎𝑥 (3.8)
𝑦𝑚𝑖𝑛 −𝑦𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑑 = 0 𝑖𝑓 𝑦 ≥ 𝑦𝑚𝑎𝑥
Where the y is the value of the output during optimization processes, y min and y max are the
lower tolerance limit and the upper tolerance limit in the response parameter experimental data.
The individual response optimization analysis has been performed for achieving the minimum
surface roughness based on the predicted mathematical model given by equation (4.1).
3.7 Experimental setup
The experiments had performed in a conventional lathe machine and the cutting tool used was
cemented carbide cutters. The detailed information on chemical composition and mechanical
properties and specification of EN-8 steel is provided in Table 3-4 and Tables 3-5 respectively.
The experiment is made in Addis Ababa Metals and Engineering Corporation (METEC).
Figure 3-10 Experimental setups
41
3.7.1 Experiment plan

The experiment was performed to investigate the effect of input parameters on response. The
design of the experiment (DOE) has a significant effect on the approximate accuracy and cost of
the response surface. The experiment of 27 runs was randomized by using Design of Experiment.
DOE evaluated as the response to the model fitted. The design data is evaluated by running the
twenty-seven samples through turning operation and calculate the measuring of the surface
roughness using a profilometer. The machining of a cutting parameter is given in Table 3-11.
Figure 3-11 Detailed drawings of the cylindrical bar used in experimentation (All dimensions are
in mm)
3.8 Research methodology
The research carried out for this section is experimental planning, design of experiment, modeling
of surface roughness, surface roughness measurement. By using the materials mentioned above
through the following method, the experimental work would be continued. The steps that must
follow to apply the RSM method correctly shown in the Figure 3-12.
Identifying the problem
Decision of factor levels
Selection the proper design
Running experiment
42
Evaluation the model
Optimization of model
Model validation
Comparison of theoretical and experimental
Conclusion and recommendation for future

work
Results and discussion
Figure 3-12 Response surface methodology design procedure

In this research methodology design of the experiment, the procedure of turning experiments,
studying surface roughness measurement, and data generated from the turning experiment are
discussed.
3.8.1 Design of experiment
In the design of experiment techniques, RSM attempts to minimize the assess experimental error,
make a qualitative estimation of parameters, optimize values of parameters, number of runs or
trials, and make inference regarding the effect of parameters on the characteristics of a process.
The main idea of RSM is to use a sequence of designed experiments to obtain an optimal response.
The experiment was designed to allow us to estimate an interaction and even quadratic effects, and
therefore give us an idea of the shape of the response surface we are investigating. To observe the
most influential process parameters in the turning process, namely cutting speed, feed, and depth
of cut each at three levels considered in the case of this thesis.
For these reasons, RSM, based on CC-DOE, was selected. Therefore, it is used in this work to
model, predict, and optimize Ra. As a mathematical and statistical technique, it developed for the
treatment of problems involving a response of interest as a function of several variables. It is one
43
of the ways machining process modeling and analysis can achieve to facilitate its optimization. Its
application requires machining response Υ to defined as (Sahoo, 2011):
Υ = φ (x1, x2, …, xi) ±e (3.9)
where φ (x1, x2, …, xi) is the response surface function in the form of a polynomial model, x1 is
the process variables and is the residual or experimental error. The second-order polynomial or
quadratic model may, therefore, written as:
φ = φ (x1, x2, …, Xk)
= (Υ ± e) (3.10)
𝑘 𝑘 𝑘
2
= 𝑏𝑜 + ∑ 𝑏𝑖 𝑥𝑖 + ∑ 𝑏𝑖𝑖 𝑥𝑖 + ∑ 𝑏𝑖𝑗 𝑥𝑖 𝑥𝑗
𝑖=1 𝑖=1 𝑖=1
Equation (3.10) is a multiple regression model. In this form, it has constant, linear, square, and
cross-product terms. It can, satisfactorily, be used to correlate dependent variables, φj, with
independent variables, xi. Several techniques for DOE are available for use to estimate the
coefficients of the regression models.
The Central Composite (CC) was selected for the design of the turning experiment. Analysis of
variance (ANOVA) was used to validate the developed models and also to predict the effect of
selected factors A, B, and C on the response characteristics Ra. Optimization of the coded and
actual response functions, Ra (A, B, C), subject to constraints as determined by the limits of the
factors A, B, and C, was performed as appropriate using a standard optimization technique. The
RSM was implemented in the Design-Expert software version 11 environment.
Figure 3-13 Twenty-seven specimen work-piece
44
3.8.2 The procedure of turning the experiment

In the setup for the turning experiment shown in Figure 3-2, twenty-seven (27) specimen work-
piece of EN-8 steel round bars (Figure 3-13) were turned on the conventional lathe with a carbide
tool insert (Figure 3-5). The run order, as generated from Design Expert 11 software based on CC-
DOE, is given in Table 3-12.
Table 3-12 Experimental layouts
A: Cutting speed B: Feed rate C: Depth of cut
No.
(m/min) (mm/min) (mm)
1 220 0.1 1
2 220 0.1 1.5
3 220 0.1 2
4 220 0.2 1
5 220 0.2 1.5
6 220 0.2 2
7 220 0.3 1
8 220 0.3 1.5
9 220 0.3 2
10 292 0.1 1
11 292 0.1 1.5
12 292 0.1 2
13 292 0.2 1
14 292 0.2 1.5
15 292 0.2 2
16 292 0.3 1
17 292 0.3 1.5
18 292 0.3 2
19 375 0.1 1
20 375 0.1 1.5
21 375 0.1 2
22 375 0.2 1
45
23 375 0.2 1.5

24 375 0.2 2
25 375 0.3 1
26 375 0.3 1.5
27 375 0.3 2
3.8.3 Surface roughness measurement
The final workpiece used for measuring the surface roughness is shown in Figure 3-14. The surface
roughness of the finished surface is measured by placing the workpiece on a rectangular block
over a cast-iron surface plate after each cut (Figure 3-15). After the setup was ready, trial cuts were
taken, and equipment was calibrated to ensure that the part quality adhered to the quality
requirements of the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) and to compare the stability of the
machining process to that of the OEM’s. The equipment was calibrated by measuring the known
diameter of a high precision spherical ball. Figure 3-15 shows the surface roughness profile,
measured on the spherical ball. The stability of the experimental setup compared to the OEM’s
recommended specification. Once the stability of the setup was confirmed, the experiments
conducted and the surface roughness was measured at three equally spaced locations around the
circumference of the workpiece to obtain the statistically significant data for the test, and then the
mean of measurements was calculated. Thus, probable observation errors were kept relatively
small. The specifications of the measuring setup presented in Table 3-13.
Figure 3-14 Workpiece used for measuring the surface roughness

Table 3-13 Specifications of the surface roughness measurement instrument
Factor Specification
Nominal measuring range 1 mm
Resolution 16 nm
46
Speed of traverse 1 mm/sec − 10 mm/sec

Make Taylor Hobson
Pickup Inductive type
Model Form Talysurf Intra
Parameters measurable Ra/Rz/Rt
There are many different surface roughness parameters, which include average variation from the
mean line (Ra), the highest peak to the deepest valley (Rt), and the average Rt over a given length
(Rz). Ra is universally recognized and the most widely used parameter for roughness as it can
easily measure by graphical processes (Correia and Davim, 2011). Besides, Ra values are more
accurate than the Rt and Rz values because it considers the averages of peaks and valleys on the
surface. Hence, Ra was selected as a measuring parameter for surface roughness. The machining
parameters and the corresponding measured Ra are given in Table 3-14.
Figure 3-15 Profilometers used to measure surface roughness
Figure 3-16 Typical surface roughness observed at different cutting conditions
47
After finalizing the experimental setup and developing the experimental procedure, the next step
is to develop a predictive and optimization model based on the collected experimental data. The
following chapters provide the development of predictive and optimization models using the
collected experimental data of this chapter.
48
RESULT AND DISCUSSION ASTU
CHAPTER FOUR
4 RESULT AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Introduction
After completing the machining operation, the response parameter that is the surface roughness
was measured. Statistical analysis was performed on the optimum result obtained for attaining
main effects. The experimental study was conducted to evaluate the effect of cutting parameters,
namely cutting speed, feed rate, and depth of cut on the surface quality of EN-8
steel during the turning process. This step determines the effect of various process parameters to
achieve desired surface roughness. The results for each experiment were discussed in this chapter.
Table 4-1 shows the design layout for the turning experiment conducted as well as the response
data generated. The experiment was conducted in a controlled environment to minimize errors.
The design of the experiment was used to identify the optimum cutting parameters and to identify
the most influential parameters. The outcome of data analysis in the environment of the Design-
Expert version 11 and Minitab 19 software is presented and discussed.
This section aims to present the details of the result and discussion used for the
study. Furthermore, predictive and optimization models are discussed with supporting photographs
and schematic diagrams.
4.1.1 Measured surface roughness
Measurements of Ra data were taken at three (3) different locations, 120o from each other, on the
machined surface using a surface roughness tester (Figure 3-15), and the average values were
recorded. The measured Ra has given in Table 4-1.
For all the three runs the maximum and minimum surface roughness values were found to be 15.22
and 4.792μm respectively.
49
Table 4-1 Measured surface roughness at L27 full factorial machining parameters
A: Cutting B: Feed C: Depth of Surface roughness (μm)
No. speed rate cut
(m/min) (mm/min) (mm) Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Average
1 220 0.1 1 13.313 13.496 13.261 13.357

2 220 0.1 1.5 7.592 7.629 7.584 7.602
3 220 0.1 2 7.230 7.218 7.422 7.290
4 220 0.2 1 13.977 15.222 10.776 13.325
5 220 0.2 1.5 7.577 7.824 8.868 8.090
6 220 0.2 2 8.252 8.274 8.297 8.274
7 220 0.3 1 14.150 13.335 12.095 13.193
8 220 0.3 1.5 9.368 9.699 9.985 9.684
9 220 0.3 2 9.409 9.250 9.089 9.249
10 292 0.1 1 9.156 9.167 9.015 9.113
11 292 0.1 1.5 7.010 7.015 6.945 6.990
12 292 0.1 2 8.214 8.203 8.160 8.192
13 292 0.2 1 6.916 7.246 6.374 6.845
14 292 0.2 1.5 6.215 6.10 7.379 6.565
15 292 0.2 2 8.083 8.082 8.130 8.098
16 292 0.3 1 7.076 7.106 7.149 7.110
17 292 0.3 1.5 6.853 6.841 6.831 6.842
18 292 0.3 2 11.066 11.075 11.100 11.080
19 375 0.1 1 5.158 4.792 5.316 5.089
20 375 0.1 1.5 7.074 7.021 7.115 7.070
21 375 0.1 2 11.571 11.564 11.515 11.550
22 375 0.2 1 5.496 5.487 5.503 5.495
23 375 0.2 1.5 6.211 6.225 6.220 6.219
24 375 0.2 2 13.524 13.558 13.501 13.528
25 375 0.3 1 5.156 5.139 5.117 5.137
26 375 0.3 1.5 8.936 8.928 8.889 8.918
27 375 0.3 2 14.733 14.698 14.848 14.760
4.1.2 Data generated from the turning experiment

Data collection plays a significant role in the statistical analysis of any field, as it decides the
progression of the analysis to the best or worst. A proper and suitable data collection leads to better
50
results from the analysis. In such a focus, it is very much essential to choose a well suitable data
collection technique for the analysis. In this work, Data collection for the turning process is
selected for proceeding with Response surface methodology design, i.e., a second-order quadratic
model. The values predicted using the model in the turning of EN-8 steel using a carbide cutting
tool has been shown in Table 4-2.
Table 4-2 Data generated from the turning experiment
Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Response
Run
A: Cutting speed (m/min) B: Feed rate (mm/min) C: Depth of cut (mm) Surface roughness (μm)
1 220 0.1 1 13.357
2 220 0.1 1.5 7.602
3 220 0.1 2 7.290
4 220 0.2 1 13.325
5 220 0.2 1.5 8.090
6 220 0.2 2 8.274
7 220 0.3 1 13.193
8 220 0.3 1.5 9.684
9 220 0.3 2 9.249
10 292 0.1 1 9.113
11 292 0.1 1.5 6.990
12 292 0.1 2 8.192
13 292 0.2 1 6.845
14 292 0.2 1.5 6.565
15 292 0.2 2 8.098
16 292 0.3 1 7.110
17 292 0.3 1.5 6.842
18 292 0.3 2 11.080
19 375 0.2 1 5.089
20 375 0.2 1.5 7.070
21 375 0.2 2 11.550
22 375 0.1 1 5.495
23 375 0.1 1.5 6.219
24 375 0. 2 13.528
25 375 0.3 1 5.137
26 375 0.3 1.5 8.918
27 375 0.3 2 14.760
51
Response Surface roughness (μm)

16
14
Surface roughness (μm)
12
10
4
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Run
Figure 4-1 Minimum and maximum surface roughness

On average the minimum surface roughness was found to be 5.089μm whereas the maximum
surface roughness is 14.760μm.
4.2 Surface roughness data
This analysis deals with the finding the investigation of cutting parameters on surface roughness
in turning the operation of EN-8 steel using cemented carbide cutting tool in turning for the
different values of cutting speed, feed rate, and depth of cut. The selection of experimental design
is a decision-making process that decides the degree of validity of the desired model in finding
optimal cutting parameters. This work is carried out using a Response surface methodology.
Central Composite Design (CCD) method comes under the Response surface methodology.
A central composite design is an experimental design, useful in response surface methodology, for
building a second-order (quadratic) model for the response variable. The response surface design
is better, as it generates a second-order quadratic model of regression, which is a better predictive
model than a first-order quadratic model. In this work, CCD has been applied for the experimental
investigation.
52
4.2.1 Model summary statistics

In the process of model selection, cubic Model is aliased as, the central composite matrix provides
too few unique design points to determine all the terms in the cubic model. It’s set up only for the
quadratic model.
Table 4-3 Model summary statistics
Source Std. Dev. R² Adjusted R² Predicted R² PRESS
Linear 2.81 0.1113 -0.0046 -0.2993 265.23
2FI 1.50 0.7803 0.7144 0.5995 81.77
Quadratic 0.6593 0.9638 0.9446 0.9136 17.63 Suggested
Cubic 0.7282 0.9740 0.9325 0.7873 43.42 Aliased
For each source of terms, the quadratic probability Prob > F falls below 0.05. So far, Design-Expert
is indicating (via bold highlighting) the quadratic model looks best – these terms are significant,
but adding the cubic order terms will not significantly improve the fit. (Even if they were
significant, the cubic terms would be aliased, so they wouldn’t be useful for modeling purposes).
4.2.2 Analysis of variance
The ANOVA is where the descriptive statistics and statistical tests are presented. In general, look
for low p-values to identify important terms in the model. The p-values to determine if the model
explains a significant portion of the variance. Table 4-5 shows ANOVA results for the linear [A,
B, C] quadratic [A2, B2, C2] and interactive [(A × B), (A × C), (B×C)] factors. The sum of squares
is used to estimate the square of deviation from the mean. Mean squares are estimated by dividing
the sum of squares by degrees of freedom. F-value, which is a ratio between the regression mean
square and the mean square error, is used to measure the significance of the model under
investigation concerning the variance of all the terms, including the error term at the desired
significance level. Usually, F > 4 means that the change of the design parameter has a significant
effect on the response variable. P-value or probability value is used to determine the statistical
significance of results at a confidence level. In this study, the significance level of α = 0.05 is used,
i.e., the results are valid for a confidence level of 95%. Table 4-5 shows the p-values, the
significance levels associated with the F-values for each source of variation. If the p-value is less
than 0.05, then the corresponding factor (source) has a statistically significant contribution to the
53
response variable. If the p-value is more than 0.05, then it means the effect of a factor on the
response variable is not statistically significant at a 95% confidence level.
Table 4-4 Analysis of variance results
Source Sum of Squares Df Mean F-value p-value Contribution%
Square
Model 6.75 9 21.86 6.74 < 0.0001 21.62
A-Cutting speed 0.97 1 5.3 1.19 0.0528 3.11
B-Feed rate 2.4 1 8.4 19.33 0.0004 7.69
C-Depth of cut 23.84 1 12.07 27.77 < 0.0001 76.36
AB 0.16 1 0.1646 0.3787 0.0564 0.51
AC 0.75 1 127.77 2.97 0.4901 2.40
BC 0.63 1 8.63 1.85 0.7003 2.02
A² 0.51 1 13.51 3.08 0.3022 1.63
B² 0.57 1 1.62 3.72 0.0505 1.83
C² 0.33 1 22.33 0.38 0.8059 1.06
Residual 1.06 17 0.4346 3.40
Total 31.22 26
The Model F-value of 6.75 implies the model is significant. There is only a 0.01% chance that an
F-value this large could occur due to noise. P-values less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are
significant. In this case, A, B, C, AC, BC, A², C² are significant model terms. Values greater than
0.1000 indicate the model terms are not significant. If there are many insignificant model terms
(not counting those required to support hierarchy), model reduction may improve the model.
54
Residual = A = 3.107%
B = 7.687%
3.4%
C = 76.361%
Figure 4-2 Percentage contribution of cutting parameters on surface roughness

The percentage contribution of each term is also shown in Figure 4-2. Depth of cut (C) was found
to be the most significant factor for Ra, which explains the 76.36% contribution of the total
variation. The next contribution to Ra comes from the feed rate with a contribution of 7.69%. The
cutting speed, quadratic [A2, B2, C2] and interactions [(A × B), (A × C), (B ×C)] do not have
statistical significance because they have a much lower level of contribution and their p-value is
also more than the confidence level.
4.2.3 Fit Statistics
Table 4-5 Fit Statistics summary
Std. Dev. 0.6593 R² 0.9638
Mean 8.84 Adjusted R² 0.9446
C.V. % 7.46 Predicted R² 0.9136
Adequate Precision 25.3881
The other important term is the coefficient of determination R2, which is defined as the ratio of the
explained variation to the total variation and is a measure of the degree of fit. As R2 approaches
unity, the response model fitness with the actual data improves. The value of R2 = 0.9136 indicates
that the model explains 91.36% of the total variations. The adjusted R2 is a statistic used to adjust
the “size” of the model, i.e., the number of factors (machining parameters). The model explains
the value of the R2 (Adj.) = 0.9446 indicating 94.46% of the total variability after considering the
significant factors. R2 (Pred.) = 0.9136 is in good agreement with the R2 (Adj.) and shows that the
model would be expected to explain 91.36% of the variability in new data.
55
The Predicted R² of 0.9136 is in reasonable agreement with the Adjusted R² of 0.9446; i.e., the
difference is less than 0.2. Adequate Precision measures the signal to noise ratio. A ratio greater
than 4 is desirable. The adequate ratio is 25.388 indicates an adequate signal. This model can be
used to navigate the design space.
4.2.4 Model fitness check

The examination of residuals has investigated the adequacy of the modal. The residuals, which are
the differences between the respective observed response and the predicted response, are examined
using normal probability plots of the residuals and the plots of the residuals versus the predicted
response. If a model is adequate, the points on the normal probability plots of the residuals should
form a straight line. Figure 4-3 reveals that the residuals are not showing any particular trend, and
the errors are distributed normally. The residual versus the predicted response plot in Figure 4-4
also shows that there is no obvious pattern and unusual structure.
Expert® Software
Normal Plot of Residuals
roughness
99
oints by value of
roughness :
95
14.76
90
Normal % Probability
80
70
50
30
20
10
5
-2.00 -1.00 0.00 1.00 2.00
Externally Studentized Residuals
Figure 4-3 Normal probability plot of residuals for surface roughness
56
4.2.5 Parametric influence on surface roughness

Theoretically, surface roughness is a function of feed rate and nose radius. However, in practice,
cutting speed, depth of cut, and tool wear also affect surface roughness. Since the inserts used in
the experiments have identical nose radius values, the effect of nose radius was not investigated in
this study. The effect of tool wear was neglected as a new cutting edge was used for each
experiment, and wear did not reach high levels enough to affect the surface roughness.
esign-Expert® Software
Versus Fits (response is Ra)
4.00
urface roughness 3.7226
olor points by value of

urface roughness :
Externally Studentized Residuals
089 14.76
2.00
0.00 0
-2.00
-3.7226
-4.00
4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Predicted
Figure 4-4 Plot of residual versus fitted surface roughness values

The main effects of machining parameters are shown in Figure 4-5. Depth of cut has the greatest
effect on surface roughness. The effect of feed rate is very less, and the effect of cutting speed is
negligible, as seen in Figure 4-5. Even after a 900% increase in cutting speed, no considerable
change was noticed. An increase in cutting speed improves surface quality. This result supports
the argument that high cutting speeds reduce cutting forces, giving better surface finish (Sarıkaya
and Gullu, 2014). The best surface quality values can be achieved at low feed rates and high cutting
speeds. Sahin and Motorcu (2005) also demonstrated that surface roughness increases with an
increase in feed rate and decreases with an increase in cutting speed during the cutting of EN-8
steel using a cemented carbide cutting tool.
57
However, Cetin et al. (2011) indicated that the effects of feed rate and depth of cut are more
effective than cutting speed on reducing the forces and improving the surface finish.
Figure 4-5 Main effect plot of surface roughness
Figure 4-6 Interaction plot of surface roughness

The interaction plot for surface roughness is shown in Figure 4-6. This figure clearly shows that
the surface roughness is high with a variation of feed rate at any depth of cut (row 3 column 2) and
58
any cutting speed (row 1 column 2) as the minimum surface roughness is close to 5 µm for level
1 depth of cut and all levels of feed rate and cutting speed, and the maximum surface roughness is
more than 7.5 µm for level 3 depth of cut and all levels of feed rate and cutting speed. The variation
of feed rate has a negligible effect on surface roughness for feed rate (row 2 column 3) as the
spacing between the lines is very small.
4.2.6 Validation of the proposed predictive models
The results obtained from the proposed predictive modeling techniques of RSM are shown in Table
4-7. The relative percentage error between the fitted values predicted and the experimental values
of the surface roughness are computed using the following equation.
[𝑃𝑟𝑒𝑑𝑖𝑐𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒 − 𝐸𝑥𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒]
𝑅𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝐸𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 (%) = 𝑋100
Experimental Value
Table 4-6 Predicted values and relative errors for modeling techniques of RSM for surface
roughness
Experiment Surface roughness (µm) Relative
No. Experimental Predicted Error (%)
1
Experiment 13.357 12.891 3.489
2 No. 9.113 8.508 6.639
3 5.495 5.821 5.933
4 13.325 12.497 6.214
5 13.193 12.319 6.625
6 6.845 6.737 1.578
7 5.137 5.603 9.071
8 5.089 5.43 6.701
9 7.11 7.453 4.824
10 6.99 7.164 2.489
11 7.602 7.832 3.026
12 6.565 6.294 4.128
13 7.07 7.576 7.157
14 8.09 7.548 6.700
15 9.684 8.916 7.931
59
16 6.842 7.287 6.504

17 8.918 8.365 6.201
18 6.219 6.837 9.937
19 8.098 7.653 5.495
20 7.29 7.414 1.701
21 11.55 11.67 1.039
22 14.76 14.54 1.491
23 8.274 7.806 5.656
24 13.528 12.368 8.575
25 8.192 7.928 3.223
26 11.08 10.499 5.244
27 9.249 10.065 8.823
Table 4-6 and Figure 4-6 show the relative errors for the modeling techniques.
16 10
14 9
Surface roughness (µm)
8
12
Relative error (%)

7
10 6
8 5
6 4
3
4
2
2 1
0 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Experiment No.
Predicted Experimental Relative error
Figure 4-7 Deviation of surface roughness predicted values from the experimental values
The maximum relative error of 9.937% is obtained and which is caused by measurement error and
accuracy of profilometer used.
60
4.3 Surface roughness optimization using response surface methodology

After developing predictive models to predict the surface roughness, the next logical step is surface
roughness optimization with respect to cutting conditions. The selection of optimum cutting
conditions has always been a challenge in machining. Low surface roughness values can be
achieved by adjusting cutting conditions with the help of appropriate optimization methods.
Therefore, the process parameters are defined in the standard optimization format to be solved by
optimization algorithms.
The optimal response plot is generated using MINITAB software.
Response Optimization: Ra
Table 4-7 Parameters

Response Goal Lower Target Upper Weight Importance
Ra Target 4.5801 5.089 14.76 1 1
Table 4-8 Starting Values

Variable v (m/min) f (mm/min) d (mm)
Setting 260.15 0.1 1.202
Desirability is simply a mathematical method to find the optimum. Desirability is an objective

function that ranges from zero outside of the limits to one at the goal. The numerical optimization
finds a point that maximizes the desirability function. A desirability of 1.00 means the goals were
easy to reach and better results may be available. Consider making the goals more difficult or
adding new criteria for less critical responses and even factors. The ultimate goal is not to
maximize the desirability value. The factor settings that result in the highest desirability scores
indicate there is an island of acceptable outcomes. It is quite possible for there to be multiple
islands (local optima) to explore.
Table 4-9 Optimized solution
Solution v f d Ra Composite
(m/min) (mm/min) (mm) Fit (μm) Desirability
1 375 0.287879 1 5.09575 0.999302
61
The value is completely dependent on how closely the lower and upper limits are set relative to
the actual optimum. The goal of optimization is to find a good set of conditions that will meet all
the goals, not to get to a desirability value of 1.0.
Table 4-10 Optimal machining parameters

Variable v (m/min) f (mm/min) d (mm)
Setting 375 0.287879 1
Optimal machining parameters obtained are cutting speed of 375 m/min at a feed rate of 0.287
mm/min and 1 mm depth of cut.
Table 4-11 Optimized surface roughness
Response Fit SE 95% CI 95% PI
Fit
Ra 5.10 3.76 (-2.83, 13.02) (-4.72, 14.91)
The optimized surface roughness obtained is (Ra) 5.10 μm. The desirability value is 0.9993, which
is very close to 1.0.
Table 4-12 Response optimization for surface roughness
Response Goal Optimum Combination Lower Target Upper Predicted Desirability
v (m/min) f (mm/min) d (mm)
Ra Min 375 0.287 1 5.089 5.089 14.76 5.10 0.9993

.
Figure 4-8 shows the surface roughness optimization plots for parameters v, f, and d. Each column
of the graph corresponds to a factor. Each row of the graph corresponds to the response. Each cell
of the graph shows how the response changes as a function of one of the factors, while all other
factors remain fixed. The numbers displayed at the top of a column show the current factor level
settings and the high and low settings of a factor in the experimental design.
The current optimal parameter settings are: cutting speed of 375 m/min, the feed rate of 0.287
mm/min Furthermore, the depth of the cut of 1 mm for achieving the minimum surface roughness.
62
The composite desirability (D) is displayed in the upper left corner of the graph. The label above
composite desirability refers to the current setting and changes interactively with the factor
settings. The optimal response plot is generated using MINITAB software. The vertical lines inside
the graph represent current optimal parametric settings. The horizontal dotted lines represent the
current response values.
Figure 4-8 Response optimization plot for surface roughness

4.3.1 Combined effect
The combined effect of feed rate and cutting speed on surface roughness
11.5
10.5
Surface roughness (μm)
9.5
8.5
7.5
6.5
0.3mm/
5.5 min
4.5
220 240 260 280 300 375
Cutting speed(m/min)
Figure 4-9 Combined effects on surface roughness

Figure 4-9 shows that 3 different combined effect feed rate and the minimum result is found at 0.2
feed rate, at 375 cutting speed and Min Ra = 5.089μm.
63
4.3.2 The interaction contour plot

The 2D, 3D surface and contour plots for the respective cutting parameters and surface roughness
are shown in the Figure 4-10, 411 and 4-12. However, this plot is useful to find the optimum values
of cutting speed and feed rate at a particular value of surface roughness and depth of cut. These
3D surface plots can be used for estimating the surface roughness values for any suitable
combination of the input parameters, namely cutting speed, feed rate, and depth of cut.
Figure 4-10 shows the surface and contour plots for surface roughness at 1 mm depth of cut. It is
observed that the surface roughness increases with decreases in cutting speed at a lower feed rate
and decreases with an increase in feed rate. While at a higher feed rate, the surface roughness
decreases with an increase in cutting speed.
(A)
64
(B)
Figure 4-10 Surface and contour plot of Ra for varying cutting speed and feed rate at 1 mm depth
of cut (A) 2D view and (B) 3D view
Figure 4-11 shows the surface and contour plots for surface roughness at a cutting speed of 375
m/min. It reveals that surface roughness increases with an increase in depth of cut, and feed rate
has less significant effect. Figure 4-12 shows the surface and contour plots for surface roughness
at a feed rate of 0.287 mm/min. At minimum depth of cut and maximum cutting speed the surface
roughness is minimum. At maximum depth of cut maximum cutting speed the surface roughness
is high. At minimum depth of cut and minimum cutting speed surface roughness is maximum.
65
(A)
(B)
Figure 4-11 Surface and contour plot of Ra for varying feed rate and depth of cut at 375 m/min
cutting speed (A) 2D view and (B) 3D view
66
(A)
(B)
67
Figure 4-12 Surface and contour plot of Ra for varying cutting speed and depth of cut at 0.287
mm/min feed rate (A) 2D view and (B) 3D view
4.4 Predicted values
Predicted values of surface roughness from the developed mathematical model and the
experimental values are shown in Figure 4-13 and Table 4-13. The comparison of predicted and
measured values shows that the predicted values of the surface roughness are very close to
measured values.
The mathematical model for the surface roughness prediction based on the experimental results
given in Table 4-4 is developed using equation (3.7). The developed mathematical model to predict
Ra is:
Ra = 41.4 - 0.075 v - 9.6 f - 30.3 d - 0.000028 v2 +
45 f2 + 4.39 d2 - 0.027 v*f + 0.0625 v*d + 0.1 f*d (4.1)
Table 4-13 Experimental and predicted values of surface roughness
Experiment Surface roughness (µm)
No. Experimental Predicted
1 13.357 12.891
2 9.113 8.508
3 5.495 5.821
4 13.325 12.497
5 13.193 12.319
6 6.845 6.737
7 5.137 5.603
8 5.089 5.43
9 7.11 7.453
10 6.99 7.164
11 7.602 7.832
12 6.565 6.294
13 7.07 7.576
14 8.09 7.548
15 9.684 8.916
16 6.842 7.287
68
17 8.918 8.365
18 6.219 6.837
19 8.098 7.653
20 7.29 7.414
21 11.55 11.67
22 14.76 14.54
23 8.274 7.806
24 13.528 12.368
25 8.192 7.928
26 11.08 10.499
27 9.249 10.065
Experiment Predicted
15.5
Surface roughness (µm)
13.5
11.5
9.5
7.5
5.5
3.5
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Experiment number
Figure 4-13 Experimentally measured and predicted values of surface roughness

The comparison of predicted and measured values shows that the predicted values of the surface
roughness are very close to measured values and the same result were reported by Girish Kant
(2016).
69
Figure 4-14 Experimentally measured and predicted values of surface roughness by Kant (2016)
4.5 Parameter optimization
The surface roughness (Ra) is undesirable and uncontrollable quality characteristics of a turning
process. As such, they are to be minimized to improve on product quality subject to constraints
determined by the design limits of the process variables. Figure 4-12, therefore, gives the optimum
setting of cutting speed of 375 m/min at a feed rate of 0.287 mm/min and 1 mm depth of cut. These
would be required to minimize Ra to a value of 5.10 μm with the desirability of 0.9993, all within
the selected design space. This is confirmed by the contour and surface plots of the figures are
Figures 4-10, 4-11, and 4-12.
Figure 4-15 Results of parameter optimum
70
4.6 Experimental confirmation

The confirmation experiments were performed to facilitate the verification of the obtained feasible
optimal machining parameters (v = 375 m/min, f = 0.287 mm/rev and d = 1 mm) for the surface
roughness. The results of the confirmation run for the response Ra are listed in Table 4-14. The
error between the predicted and the confirmation results is 3.403%.
Table 4-14 Confirmation results for surface roughness
Optimum cutting
Surface roughness (μm) Validation
parameters
error
v f d Experimental
Predicted
(%)
(m/min) (mm/min) (mm) Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Average
375 0.287 1 5.10 5.118 5.122 5.113 4.939 3.403
71
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ASTU
CHAPTER FIVE
5 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1 Conclusion
This chapter presents an investigation of cutting parameters on surface roughness for the turning
operation of EN-8 steel. It has been found that the predictive model provides optimum machining
parameters. The results of the proposed model provide improvement in surface roughness over the
best experimental run. It has been observed that the depth of cut is the main influencing machining
parameter for the minimization of surface roughness by the feed rate and the cutting speed. The
3D surface and contour plots constructed during the study can be used for choosing the optimal
machining parameters to obtain particular values of surface roughness these can be used by the
machine tool manufacturers to provide the range of cutting speeds, feed rate, and depth of cut for
a particular application.
RSM is best modeling as it learns the best fit of models. It has better performance in optimization
and enhancement of surface finish. Confirmations experiments carried out using the optimum
machining parameters show that the developed predictive and optimization model can be used for
turning of EN - 8 steel within 3.403% error. The minimum value of surface roughness obtained is
5.113µm. Optimal cutting conditions for turning operation o EN-8 steel for better surface finish of
5.113 µm was found to be 1mm, 375m/min, and 0.287mm/min for depth of cut, cutting speed and
feed rate respectively.
This paper presents the findings of an experimental investigation into the effect of cutting speeds,
feed rate, and depth of cut on the surface roughness.
5.2 Recommendation
Based on the results and conclusion found from this study, the researcher forwards the following
recommendations:
• The experiment was originally planned to be conducted with the involvement of vibration
during a machining operation. Due to the unavailability of the measuring device
(accelerometer), difficulties to measure cutting forces without a dynamometer, and the
experiment was conducted on cutting parameters only. The application of vibration and
cutting forces on the same tool works for the same domain of cutting parameters, and its
effect on surface roughness could be studied and analyzed.
72
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ASTU
• Various parameters and their interactions can extend the study, and the mechanical
properties studies can also be carried out.
5.3 Scope for future work
In this research, only one parameter has been studied following their effects. further researches
can be carried out to:
i. In this study, carbon steel has been used. This can further be extended to other materials to
study the effect of surface roughness under the same cutting parameters.
ii. This work was limited to a single response only. However, a multi-response optimization
of machining parameters for surface roughness techniques can be used and analyzed.
iii. Analyses the effect of cutting forces exerted and tool wear rate during the cutting operation.
iv. Study and compare the differences in performance characteristics on the same work sample
after heat treatment so on.
v. Future research work may be directed towards applying response surface methodology and
genetic algorithm to optimization of cutting parameters, which was beyond the scope of
this research, as it was mainly focused on the identification of the most significant
influencing factors.
73
REFERENCES
REFERENCES
1. Abhang, L. B., and Hameedullah, M. (2012). Optimization of machining parameters in
steel turning operation by Taguchi method. Procedia Engineering, 38, 40-48.
2. Aggarwal, A., Singh, H., Kumar, P., & Singh, M. (2008). Optimizing power consumption
for CNC turned parts using response surface methodology and Taguchi's technique—a
comparative analysis. Journal of materials processing technology, 200(1-3), 373-384.
3. Al-Ahmari, A. M. A. (2007). Predictive machinability models for a selected hard material
in turning operations. Journal of materials processing technology, 190(1-3), 305-311.
4. Aouici, H., Yallese, M. A., Chaoui, K., Mabrouki, T., and Rigal, J. F. (2012). Analysis of
surface roughness and cutting force components in hard turning with CBN tool: Prediction
model and cutting conditions optimization. Measurement, 45(3), 344-353.
5. Asilturk, I., and Akkuş, H. (2011). Determining the effect of cutting parameters on surface
roughness in hard turning using the Taguchi method. Measurement, 44(9), 1697-1704.
6. ASME/ANSI B46.1 (1985) Surface texture (surface roughness, waviness and lay). ASME,
New York
7. Benardos, P. G., and Vosniakos, G. C. (2002). Prediction of surface roughness in CNC face
milling using neural networks and Taguchi's design of experiments. Robotics and
Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 18(5-6), 343-354.
8. Benardos, P. G., and Vosniakos, G. C. (2003). Predicting surface roughness in machining:
a review. International journal of machine tools and manufacture, 43(8), 833-844.
9. Bhattacharya, A., Das, S., Majumder, P., and Batish, A. (2009). Estimating the effect of
cutting parameters on surface finish and power consumption during high-speed machining
of AISI 1045 steel using Taguchi design and ANOVA. Production Engineering, 3(1), 31-
40.
10. Bhirud, N. L., and Gawande, R. R. (2017). Optimization of process parameters during end
milling and prediction of workpiece temperature rise. Archive of Mechanical Engineering,
64(3), 327-346.
11. Bhushan, R. K. (2013). Optimization of cutting parameters for minimizing power
consumption and maximizing tool life during machining of Al alloy SiC particle
composites. Journal of Cleaner Production, 39, 242-254.
74
REFERENCES
12. Box, G. E., and Draper, N. R. (1987). Empirical model-building and response surfaces.
John Wiley and Sons.
13. Campatelli, G., Lorenzini, L., and Scippa, A. (2014). Optimization of process parameters
using a response surface method for minimizing power consumption in the milling of
carbon steel. Journal of cleaner production, 66, 309-316.
14. Candioti, L. V., De Zan, M. M., Cámara, M. S., & Goicoechea, H. C. (2014). Experimental
design and multiple response optimization. Using the desirability function in analytical
methods development. Talanta, 124, 123-138.
15. Cetin, M. H., Ozcelik, B., Kuram, E., and Demirbas, E. (2011). Evaluation of vegetable
based cutting fluids with extreme pressure and cutting parameters in turning of AISI 304L
by Taguchi method. Journal of Cleaner Production, 19(17-18), 2049-2056.
16. Chinchanikar, S., and Choudhury, S. K. (2013). Effect of work material hardness and
cutting parameters on performance of coated carbide tool when turning hardened steel: An
optimization approach. Measurement, 46(4), 1572-1584.
17. Correia, A. E., and Davim, J. P. (2011). Surface roughness measurement in turning carbon
steel AISI 1045 using wiper inserts. Measurement, 44(5), 1000-1005.
18. Dutta, S., & Narala, S. K. R. (2021). Optimizing turning parameters in the machining of
AM alloy using Taguchi methodology. Measurement, 169, 108340.
19. Fedai, Y., Kahraman, F., Kirli Akin, H., and Basar, G. (2018). Optimization of machining
parameters in face milling using multi-objective Taguchi technique. Tehnički
glasnik, 12(2), 104-108.
20. Fratila, D., & Caizar, C. (2011). Application of Taguchi method to selection of optimal
lubrication and cutting conditions in face milling of AlMg3. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 19(6-7), 640-645.
21. Fu, T., Zhao, J., and Liu, W. (2012). Multi-objective optimization of cutting parameters in
high-speed milling based on grey relational analysis coupled with principal component
analysis. Frontiers of Mechanical Engineering, 7(4), 445-452.
22. Garcia-Diaz, A., and Phillips, D. T. (1995). Principles of experimental design and analysis.
Chapman and Hall.
75
REFERENCES
23. Ghani, J. A., Choudhury, I. A., and Hassan, H. H. (2004). Application of Taguchi method
in the optimization of end milling parameters. Journal of materials processing
technology, 145(1), 84-92.
24. Hanafi, I., Khamlichi, A., Cabrera, F. M., Almansa, E., & Jabbouri, A. (2012).
Optimization of cutting conditions for sustainable machining of PEEK-CF30 using TiN
tools. Journal of Cleaner Production, 33, 1-9.
25. He, C. L., Zong, W. J., & Zhang, J. J. (2018). Influencing factors and theoretical modeling
methods of surface roughness in turning process: State-of-the-art. International Journal of
Machine Tools and Manufacture, 129, 15-26.
26. Hessainia, Z., Belbah, A., Yallese, M. A., Mabrouki, T., & Rigal, J. F. (2013). On the
prediction of surface roughness in the hard turning based on cutting parameters and tool
vibrations. Measurement, 46(5), 1671-1681.
27. Kant, G. (2016). Prediction and optimization of machining parameters for minimizing
surface roughness and power consumption during turning of AISI 1045 steel.
28. Kant, G., and Sangwan, K. S. (2014). Prediction and optimization of machining parameters
for minimizing power consumption and surface roughness in machining. Journal of
cleaner production, 83, 151-164.
29. Karthikeyan, R., Satyanarayana, K., and Kumar, P. A. (2018). Application of Taguchi-
Grey Method to optimize turning operations on EN24 with multiple performance
characteristics. Materials Today: Proceedings, 5(9), 17958-17967.
30. Kassab, S. Y., and Khoshnaw, Y. K. (2007). The effect of cutting tool vibration on surface
roughness of workpiece in dry turning operation. Engineering and Technology Journal,
25(7), 879-889.
31. Kausika, V. S., Subramanianb, M., and Sakthivelc, M. (2018). Optimization of End Milling
Tool Geometry Process Parameters for Minimizing Surface Roughness of Al7068 based
on Response Surface Methodology.
32. Kumar, P., Dhingra, A. K., and Kumar, P. (2016). Optimization of Process Parameters for
Machining of Mild Steel EN18 by Response Surface Methodology. Advances in
Engineering: An International Journal-1, 1-12.
76
REFERENCES
33. Kumar, S., Saravanan, I., and Patnaik, L. (2019). Optimization of surface roughness and
material removal rate in milling of AISI 1005 carbon steel using the Taguchi
approach. Materials Today: Proceedings.
34. Kumaragurubaran, B., Gopal, P., Kumar, T. S., Mugunthan, M. P., and Ibrahim, N. M.
(2013). Optimization of Turning Parameters of EN-9 Steel Using Design of Experiments
Concepts. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Robotics Research, 2(3),
182-190.
35. Kumaran, G. T., and Stephen, R. J. (2015). Optimization of Machining Parameters for Face
Milling Operation using ANOVA. Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering, 2278-
1684.
36. Lakshmi, V.K, Dr K Venkata Subbaiah. (2012). Modelling and Optimization of Process
Parameters during End Milling of Hardened Steel. Engineering Research and
Applications 2, 2 pp.674-679
37. Lalwani, D. I., Mehta, N. K., and Jain, P. K. (2008). Experimental investigations of cutting
parameters influence on cutting forces and surface roughness in finish hard turning of
MDN250 steel. Journal of materials processing technology, 206(1-3), 167-179.
38. Lauro, C. H., Brandão, L. C., Baldo, D., Reis, R. A., & Davim, J. P. (2014). Monitoring
and processing signal applied in machining processes–A review. Measurement, 58, 73-86.
39. Mahdavinejad, R. A., and Saeedy, S. (2011). Investigation of the influential parameters of
machining of AISI 304 stainless steel. Sadhana, 36(6), 963-970.
40. Maiyar, L. M., Ramanujam, R., Venkatesan, K., and Jerald, J. (2013). Optimization of
machining parameters for end milling of Inconel 718 superalloy using Taguchi based grey
relational analysis. Procedia Engineering, 64, 1276-1282.
41. Maji, K., Pratihar, D. K., & Nath, A. K. (2013). Experimental investigations and statistical
analysis of pulsed laser bending of AISI 304 stainless steel sheet. Optics & Laser
Technology, 49, 18-27.
42. Mandal, N., Doloi, B., Mondal, B., and Das, R. (2011). Optimization of flank wear using
Zirconia Toughened Alumina (ZTA) cutting tool: Taguchi method and Regression
analysis. Measurement, 44(10), 2149-2155.
43. Metals4u.co.uk. 2020. EN-8 Mild Steel Properties | Technical Information | Metals4u -
Ideas & Advice | Metals4u. [online] Available at: <https://www.metals4u.co.uk/blog/EN-
77
REFERENCES
8-mildsteel#:~:text=EN-
8%20or%20080m40%20can%20be%20tempered%20at%20a,%C2%B0F-
1580%20%C2%B0F%29%20then%20it%20is%20cooled%20in%20air.> [Accessed 18
January 2020].
44. Mistu. (1994). Technical data Recommended Cutting Conditions for face Milling. JIS, pp
2.
45. Montgomery, D. C. (2017). Design and analysis of experiments. John wiley and sons.
46. Mukherjee, I., and Ray, P. K. (2006). A review of optimization techniques in metal cutting
processes. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 50(1-2), 15-34.
47. Myers, R. H., Montgomery, D. C., and Anderson-Cook, C. M. (2016). Response surface
methodology: process and product optimization using designed experiments. John Wiley
and Sons.
48. Nee, A. Y. (Ed.). (2015). Handbook of manufacturing engineering and technology.
Springer reference.
49. Noordin, M. Y., Venkatesh, V. C., Sharif, S., Elting, S., and Abdullah, A. (2004).
Application of response surface methodology in describing the performance of coated
carbide tools when turning AISI 1045 steel. Journal of materials processing
technology, 145(1), 46-58.
50. Padma, B., Kumar, B. S., and Gopikrishna, N. (2017). Optimization of Turning Process
Parameters, On En 9 Carbon Steel Using Grey Relational Analysis. Optimization, 4(1).
51. Palanisamy, P., Rajendran, I., and Shanmugasundaram, S. (2007). Optimization of
machining parameters using genetic algorithm and experimental validation for end-milling
operations. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 32(7-8),
644-655.
52. Panshetty, S., Bute, P., Patil, R., and Satpute, J. (2016). Optimization of Process Parameters
in Milling Operation by Taguchi’s Technique using Regression Analysis. International
Journal of Science Technology and Engineering, 2, 130-136.
53. Prasadraju, K., M. Satish raja, V.Praveen, I.Ajith Kumar. (2017). Optimization of Process
Parameters for Milling Operation using the Taguchi Method. International Journal of
Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) – Volume 48 Number 1.
78
REFERENCES
54. Pratyusha J, Ashok Kumar. U, Laxminarayana.P. (2013). Optimization of Process

Parameters for Milling Using Taguchi Methods. International Journal of Advanced Trends
in Computer Science and Engineering,.2, no.6, 129-135
55. Quintana, G., & Ciurana, J. (2011). Chatter in machining processes: A
review. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture, 51(5), 363-376.
56. Rao, R. V. (2011). Modelling and optimization of machining processes. In Advanced
Modeling and Optimization of Manufacturing Processes (pp. 55-175). Springer, London.
57. Ravindran, M., Aswatha, M., Santhosh, N., Ravichandran, G., & Madhusudhan, M. (2021,
January). Effect of Heat Treatment on Fatigue Characteristics of EN-8 Steel. In IOP
Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering (Vol. 1013, No. 1, p. 012009). IOP
Publishing.
58. Ribeiro, J. E., Cesar, M. B., and Lopes, H. (2017). Optimization of machining parameters
to improve surface quality. Procedia Structural Integrity, 5, 355-362.
59. Sahin, Y., and Motorcu, A. R. (2005). Surface roughness model for machining mild steel
with coated carbide tool. Materials and design, 26(4), 321-326.
60. Sahoo, P. (2011). Optimization of turning parameters for surface roughness using RSM
and GA. Advances in Production Engineering & Management, 6(3).
61. Sahoo, P., Optimization of Turning Parameters for Surface Roughness using RSM and GA,
Advances in Production Engineering and Management, Vol. 6, No. 3, 2011, 197–208
62. Sait, N. A., Aravindan, S., Noorul Haq, A., 2009. Optimisation of machining parameters
of glass-fibre-reinforced plastic (GFRP) pipes by desirability function analysis using
Taguchi technique. Int J Adv Manuf Technol, 43, 581-589.
63. Sangwan, K. S., Saxena, S., and Kant, G. (2015). Optimization of machining parameters
to minimize surface roughness using integrated ANN-GA approach. Procedia Cirp, 29,
305-310.
64. Saraswat, N., Yadav, A., Kumar, A., and Srivastava, B. P. (2014). Optimization of cutting
parameters in turning operation of mild steel. International review of applied engineering
research, 4(3), 251-256.
65. Sarıkaya, M., & Gullu, A. (2014). Taguchi design and response surface methodology-based
analysis of machining parameters in CNC turning under MQL. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 65, 604-616.
79
REFERENCES
66. Selvam, M. D., and Senthil, P. (2016). Investigation on the effect of turning operation on
surface roughness of hardened C45 carbon steel. Australian Journal of Mechanical
Engineering, 14(2), 131-137.
67. Singh, H. (2013). Study of cutting parameters on turning using EN9. Int. J. Adv. Ind. Eng,
1(2), 40-42.
68. steelnumber.com, E., 2020. EN-8 (BS) - Worldwide Equivalent Grades. [online]
Steelnumber.com. Available at:
<http://www.steelnumber.com/en/equivalent_steel_iron_eu.php?zname_id=9007>
[Accessed 18 January 2020].
69. Vorburger, T.V., J.Raja. (1990). Surface finish Metrology. Michigan Technological
University, Volume 3, Issue 10, pp57-67.
70. Yalcin, U., Karaoglan, A. D., and Korkut, I. (2013). Optimization of cutting parameters in
face milling with neural networks and Taguchi based on cutting force, surface roughness
and temperatures. International Journal of Production Research, 51(11), 3404-3414.
71. Yan, J., and Li, L. (2013). Multi-objective optimization of milling parameters–the trade-
offs between energy, production rate and cutting quality. Journal of Cleaner Production,
52, 462-471.
72. Zain, A. M., Haron, H., and Sharif, S. (2010). Application of GA to optimize cutting
conditions for minimizing surface roughness in end milling machining process. Expert
Systems with Applications, 37(6), 4650-4659.
73. Zain, A. M., Haron, H., and Sharif, S. (2012). Integrated ANN–GA for estimating the
minimum value for machining performance. International Journal of Production
Research, 50(1), 191-213.
80
APPENDIX
APPENDIX
Response Surface Regression: Ra versus v, f, d
Coded Coefficients
SE T- P-
Term Coef Coef Value Value VIF
Constant 7.38 1.66 4.44 0.000
v - 0.730 -0.30 0.771 1.28
0.216
f 0.036 0.925 0.04 0.969 2.05
d 0.759 0.973 0.78 0.446 2.27
v*v -0.17 1.32 -0.13 0.902 1.37
f*f 0.45 1.41 0.32 0.756 1.60
d*d 1.10 1.41 0.78 0.447 1.59
v*f -0.21 1.11 -0.19 0.851 1.99
v*d 2.42 1.28 1.90 0.075 1.88
f*d 0.01 1.28 0.01 0.996 2.19
Model Summary
R- R-
S R-sq sq(adj) sq(pred)
2.74217 37.38% 4.23% 0.00%
Analysis of Variance
Source DF Adj SS Adj F- P-
MS Value Value
Model 9 76.307 8.4786 1.13 0.396
81
APPENDIX
Linear 3 8.367 2.7891 0.37 0.775

v 1 0.656 0.6563 0.09 0.771
f 1 0.012 0.0117 0.00 0.969
d 1 4.580 4.5801 0.61 0.446
Square 3 6.648 2.2161 0.29 0.829
v*v 1 0.118 0.1185 0.02 0.902
f*f 1 0.751 0.7508 0.10 0.756
d*d 1 4.550 4.5503 0.61 0.447
2-Way 3 32.892 10.9640 1.46 0.261
Interaction
v*f 1 0.273 0.2729 0.04 0.851
v*d 1 27.087 27.0873 3.60 0.075
f*d 1 0.000 0.0002 0.00 0.996
Error 17 127.831 7.5195
Lack-of-Fit 7 24.800 3.5429 0.34 0.915
Pure Error 10 103.031 10.3031
Total 26 204.138
Fits and Diagnostics for Unusual Observations

Std
Obs Ra Fit Resid Resid
5 13.19 7.90 5.29 2.28 R
R Large residual
82
APPENDIX
Response Optimization: Ra
Parameters
Response Goal Lower Target Upper Weight Importance

Ra Target 4.5801 5.089 14.76 1 1
Starting Values
Variable Setting
v 260.15
f 0.1
d 1.202
Solution
Ra Composite
Solution v f d Fit Desirability
1 375 0.287879 1 5.09575 0.999302
Multiple Response Prediction
Variable Setting
v 375
f 0.287879
d 1
SE
Response Fit Fit 95% CI 95% PI
Ra 5.10 3.76 (-2.83, (-4.72,
13.02) 14.91)
83

Kirubel Tadele

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Kirubel Tadele

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Kirubel Tadele

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Experimental Investigation and Parametric Optimization of

EN-8 Steel using Dry Turning for Enhanced Surface Finish

Thesis submitted to the Department of Design and Manufacturing Engineering

Office of Graduate Studies

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Thesis submitted to the Department of Design and Manufacturing Engineering

Office of Graduate Studies

Post Graduate Dean

MY MOTHER MESERET LULU

Candidate Date Signature

Advisor Date Signature

Table of Contents ...................................................................................................................... vii

List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. xi

Nomenclature ............................................................................................................................... xiii

CHAPTER ONE ............................................................................................................................. 1

LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................................ 8

MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGIES ............................................................................... 25

RESULT AND DISCUSSION.................................................................................................. 49

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ........................................................................ 72

Figure 1-1 Surface form deviations (Benardos and Vosniakos, 2003)

1.4 Surface finish general ideas

• Nominal surface or ideal

• Development of predictive and optimization models to determine the optimum

Figure 2-1 Conventional lathe machine (Nee, 2015)

2.3.1 Conventional optimization techniques

2.3.2 Non-conventional optimization techniques

2.4 Surface roughness and the effect of cutting parameters

2.6 Response surface design methodology

2.6.1 Linear RSM model

Correia and v (345,410,470)

MP− Machining process, OT − Optimization technique

3 MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGIES

Material and tool selection

Cutting Parameter selection

Measurement and testing

Optimization by using Design-Expert and Minitab

Figure 3-1 Experimental scheme

3.1.2 Equipment used

Figure 3-2 Conventional lathe machine, URSUS 200 model

3.2.2 Selection of workpiece material

3.2.2.1 EN-8 carbon steel grade equivalents

3.2.3 Carbon steel EN-8 chemical composition

3.2.4 EN-8 medium carbon steel mechanical properties and hardness

Table 3-5 Mechanical properties of EN-8 steel (Metals4u.co.uk., 2020)

Solid, 50 1,963.495 280 550 152/207

3.2.5 Specification of the workpiece

Figure 3-3 Sample of the workpiece material

3.3 Selecting of cutting tool

Figure 3-4 Turning on conventional lathe single-point cutting tool

Figure 3-5 Cemented carbide tool

Figure 3-6 Geometry of single-point cutting tool

≤ cutting ≤1.0 ≤0.3 Dry 290 (235 - 335)

Mild 160 Medium 0.4

Carbon 280 Medium 0.3

Figure 3-7 Factors affecting the turning process

3.4.1 Cutting speed

Where Dm (mm): Workpiece diameter

3.4.2 Feed rate

Where f (mm/rev): Feed per tooth