0 Suka0 Tidak suka

20 tayangan12 halamantest

Dec 06, 2015

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT atau baca online dari Scribd

test

© All Rights Reserved

20 tayangan

test

© All Rights Reserved

- ME 3217 Meta Cutting
- Machining-of-Hastelloy-X-Based-on-Finite-Element-Modelling.pdf
- HW4 2013 Solution heat transfer
- Economics and Product Design Considerations
- Makino Basic Programming
- hw1
- Optimization of Energy Consumption and Surface Quality in Finish Turning
- SolidCAM_iMachining_Getting_Started.pdf
- Introduction.repoRT
- 3D Area Clearance
- ch20.doc
- 1-s2.0-S2212827116301731-main.pdf
- Advances in Mechanical Engineering 2015 Elmunafi
- NTMP%286th%29dec11
- Adapting to Opportunity and Demand in Plastic Manufacturing
- TAKISAWA TMM-series(E)2009-11
- Alibre CAM
- AMPS 1718-00 Introduction.pdf
- Https Www.mitsubishicarbide.com Mmus Catalog PDF Catalog en c006a l
- Design

Anda di halaman 1dari 12

parameters for sustainable-energy

machining in a multi-pass turning

operation

J Engineering Manufacture

2014, Vol. 228(6) 866877

IMechE 2013

Reprints and permissions:

sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/0954405413508945

pib.sagepub.com

Abstract

This study presents a model for the optimization of machining parameters for the minimum energy consumption in a

multi-pass turning operation. The model takes into account finishing and roughing passes separately for the energy optimization followed by the dual optimization of the energy functions for a combination of one finishing pass and multiple

roughing passes to finish a desired diameter on a cylindrical workpiece. The parametric constraints, tool-life constraints

and operational constraints are enforced in the model before optimizing the energy function using non-linear programming. The model is applied to an example case for the optimization. The effects of total-depth-to-be-removed, material

removal rate and tool replacement time are evaluated on the optimal parameters for sustainable machining.

Keywords

Sustainable energy, sustainable manufacturing, sustainable machining, multi-pass turning, optimization model, green

machining

Introduction

Manufacturing is the key engineering sector to build

stronger economies and improve human living standards. Manufacturing processes utilize energy, often

the electrical energy, to transform work materials into

products, and the energy supplied to a manufacturing

process is only partly embodied into the product. The

balance of energy is inevitable wasted in the form of

heat generated and waste produced. A considerable

proportion of the electrical energy available is utilized

in the industries of which manufacturing is an important sector. Sustainable manufacturing has become a

growing area of interest for manufacturing industries

due to the environment conscious regulations imposed

by the governments and the environmental protection

agencies.

The US Department of Commerce defined sustainable manufacturing as the creation of manufactured

products that use processes that are non-polluting, conserve energy and natural resources and are economically sound and safer for employees, communities and

consumers.1 A common definition of sustainability and

sustainability development is passing on to the future

generations a stock of capital that is at least as big as

the one that our own generation inherited from the previous generations.2

Energy consumption causes carbon emissions with

part of the emissions occurring during manufacturing.

In the manufacture of a product, the energy consumed

is directly linked to the carbon emission in producing

electrical energy for running the manufacturing process.3 This means the reduction in the energy consumption leads to the reduction in the carbon emission and

hence mitigation of the greenhouse effect. Carbon emission is often represented by carbon footprint (CF).

Although CF is a decent step towards the environmental consciousness, it is not a sufficient criterion to comprehend the overall environmental impact. This is

because CF is related to greenhouse gas emission,

mainly carbon dioxide, and there are practical cases

Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland

Corresponding author:

Muhammad Arif, Laboratory for Computer-Aided Design and Production

(LICP), Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne (EPFL), 1015

Lausanne, Switzerland.

Email: muhammad.arif@epfl.ch

Arif et al.

867

process leaves a significant negative impact on the

environment.2

According to a survey conducted by US Energy

Information Administration (EIA) in year 2011, 31%

of the total energy consumption was consumed in

industrial sector.4 Manufacturing comprises a significant proportion of the total industrial sector and is

believed to be the area where sustainable energy

approach can bring about propitious results.

Sustainable machining

Sustainability in manufacturing is the optimization of

the overall efficiency of the company, technologies, processes and products.5 In its broader sense, the sustainability in manufacturing brings about every element of a

manufacturing system under investigation for resource

efficiency. The optimization of energy and environmentally associated resources contribute to the ecological

and economical effectiveness. Machining is considered as

key technology in the manufacture of products, believed

to be the most widely applied technology among all the

manufacturing technologies and has a significant impact

on the growth of global economy.

Machining process is particularly useful due to highdimensional accuracy achievable on the parts, flexibility

of its application and cost-effectiveness in producing

limited quantities of the parts. Among manufacturing

processes, machining is considered as unique in that it

can be used to not only create the new products but also

to finish them to final shape. In a typical machining

process, the unwanted portion of the workpiece is

removed in the form of chips to transform the starting

workpiece into the desired shaped product. Machining

is classified as subtractive manufacturing process. Being

inherently a material removal process, machining can

be wasteful in its use of both energy and material.6

Furthermore, due to coolant employment and waste

creation, machining can potentially leave adverse

impact on the environment. The waste of energy occurring in machining process can have a considerable

impact on the economic orientation of the society. With

limited capacity to generate energy against the ever

mounting demand for energy consumption in human

society, economization of energy use has become an

important pillar of sustainability paradigm. Hence,

reducing energy in manufacturing is perceived as one of

the pronounced leaps towards achieving the sustainability. This approach calls for a profound analysis of the

key manufacturing technologies such as machining

from energy consideration viewpoint.

Until recently, most of the research study in machining has focused on the innovation and improvement of

process capability for short-term profitability. With

world now entering an era of energy starvation and

environmental consciousness, sustainable manufacturing or more specifically sustainable machining

technological strategy for sustainable development and

ultimately survival.

Several initial studies have been reported, which analyse the machining processes from energy viewpoint.

Gutowski et al.7 reported a generalized electrical energy

requirement analysis for a variety of manufacturing

processes and concluded that energy requirements of a

manufacturing process are not constant but variable

depending upon the rate of processing. Jawahir and

Jayal8 presented an overview of product and process

sustainability evaluation methods and modelling techniques to predict the performance of sustainable

machining processes. An important measure in evaluating the performance of manufacturing process is setting

the system boundaries so as to include not only the

manufacturing process itself but also the production of

material and impact on environment for a more compact evaluation of sustainability.6,7

In machining processes, it is possible to model only

those sustainability elements, which are deterministic in

nature using analytical and numerical techniques.9 The

other sustainability elements are modelled using nondeterministic techniques.8

The environmental impact of machining process is

very high due to creation of hazards through the chip

removal and the coolant incineration.10 The recycling of

machining waste is an important measure to mitigate the

environmental impact of machining.11 For some energyintensive materials, the energy involved in material production can exceed the energy required for machine tool

operation.5 The environmental hazard can be mitigated

considerably by employing cryogenic cooling in machining. Cryogenic cooling uses liquid nitrogen, which evaporates during machining and improves the tool life by

reducing the coefficient of friction between the tool and

chip.12 Another development in machining is the neardry machining, which significantly increases the machining performance by reducing the cutting forces, improving the surface finish and tool life.13

In machining, tool characteristics are vital consideration to determine the sustainability of both the product and process. Marksberry and Jawahir14 proposed a

method to predict tool-life performance for sustainability in near-dry machining by extending a Taylor speedbased dry machining equation. It was reported that the

edge radius of the tool leaves a significant effect on surface integrity of the workpiece and hence on the sustainability of the resulting product.15 Guodong et al.16

proposed a virtual machining model to quantitatively

analyse the sustainability impacts of machining process

and determine a better sustainable machining plan in a

virtual environment before the actual machining is

performed.

The material selection is also notable consideration

in reducing the energy consumption in machining.

However, the choice for material is dictated by the

properties desired by the product, and hence, there is

usually a very limited option for using alternative

868

material for improved sustainability. The harder materials offer greater resistance to machining, and hence,

energy consumption is inevitably higher.17

The selection of tool material is also important in

sustainable machining. As discussed earlier, the dry

machining and higher material removal rates (MRRs)

favour the energy sustainability of a machining process;

the cutting tool is preferred to be made of a material

allowing higher cutting speeds and heat resistance. It

has been established that coefficient of friction between

the tool and chip is reduced considerably if a coated

cutting tool is used. Consequently, energy consumed in

overcoming friction is reduced and the machining process is more energy efficient.18,19 In high-speed machining, the cutting temperature does not increase beyond a

certain limit even if the cutting speed continues to

increase but the cutting force is reduced due to softening of the work material.20 Hence, high-speed machining with coated cutting tool under dry or near-dry

conditions is considered as key approach to reduce the

specific cutting energy requirements in machining process accompanied by a benign effect on the

environment.

It was also established that only a small fraction of

total energy requirement of a machining system is

accounted for actual machining, and the dominant

share of energy consumed is used in the start-up and

running the supporting equipment.7,21 The fraction of

energy consumed in actual machining becomes even

smaller at lower MRRs. These analyses suggest that

the energy required in a machining process can be

reduced by designing energy efficient support equipment and removing the material at high rate.

operations

In most of the study reported in the literature, the

major emphasis has been on highlighting the more general overview of the energy in machining processes.

Some studies have focused on developing cryogenic

coolant system in machining processes. Furthermore,

these studies are based on energy analysis of general

turning or milling process or a single-pass turning process.17 In practical situation, it is often not feasible to

finish a desired shape on the workpiece in one pass. In

most cases in industrial sector, the workpiece is desired

to be machined to the final shape in multiple passes. In

such practical cases, one or more roughing passes are

performed first to remove the bulk of material from the

workpiece. The roughing pass(es) is often followed by

one finishing pass to achieve the desired level of surface

finish on the final shape of the workpiece. To the

knowledge of the authors, there is no study reported in

the literature until now, which provides a comprehensive optimization model for sustainable energy considering the multi-pass turning process to offer a complete

solution to the practical cases of machining.

This study presents a comprehensive model to optimize machining parameters for minimum energy consumption in a multi-pass turning process taking into

account the practical constraints encompassing

machine tool capability, tool replacement time and feasible range of parametric values. In this way, a complete solution from sustainable energy viewpoint is

proposed for a multi-pass turning process under practical constraints.

In the literature reviewed in the aforementioned sections, there are several approaches proposed to improve

the sustainability of machining processes. However,

most of these approaches revolve around minimization

of coolant use or using innovative coolant systems. But

for a given machine tool system, where redesign of supporting equipment for low-energy consumption is not

possible due to restriction on machine tool design modifications. Furthermore, it is not always possible to eliminate the use of coolant especially in cutting of difficultto-machine alloys where the frequency of cutting tool

failure is likely to rise significantly if the use of coolant

is eliminated. Also, the use of cryogenic liquids is not

always feasible on a large scale as liquefaction process

of the nitrogen or other non-reacting gases itself is an

energy-driven process.

It is therefore of utmost importance to optimize the

machining process under given conditions and constraints for the minimization of the energy consumption by operating the process at optimal parameters.

Currently, the turning process has not been optimized

in broader sense for energy consumption. The available

optimization approaches revolve around more general

aspect of optimization and cover single-pass turning

operation only. However, it is impractical in most of

the cases to finish the desired shape on a workpiece in

one pass. Furthermore, there are different constraints

on the surface roughness requirement in finishing and

roughing pass in addition to the operational and parametric constraints arising from the machine tool capability and stiffness.

It has already been established that in order to optimize the machining parameters for minimum cost, the

total cost of machining is differentiated with respect to

most dominant parameter for tool life, that is, velocity,

and then the optimal tool life is calculated for the minimum cost followed by the determination of optimal

parametric values.22,23 A similar approach has been

proposed for minimum energy approach.17 The model

proposed here takes into account practical constraints

dictated by the operation, tool-life and parametric limitations for a turning process in a broader sense.

The overall energy consumed in a machining process

can be categorized into four constituent energies in a

single pass operation17

E = Ec + EI + ER + ET

Arif et al.

869

ti = nh1 Lt + h2 + h1 Lt + h2

Machining energy

This is the energy consumed in the real machining process per unit piece and is the energy consumed in

powering the machine modules and actual energy consumed in material removal7

2

_ m

Ec = (p0 + kv)t

the machine modules without performing the machining and with spindle stationary, v_ = fdV (m3/min) is the

volume rate of material removal and k (J/m3) is the specific cutting energy of the material. Here, tm (min) is the

actual time of material removal, V is cutting velocity, d

is depth of cut and f is the feedrate.

The machining time is the time consumed in one finishing pass and n roughing passes, that is23

3

tm = tms + tmr

where tms is the time in one finishing pass and tmr is the

total time consumed in n roughing passes.

In turning operation, the machining time can be calculated as24

pDL

tms =

1000Vs fs

iX

=n

pDL

tmr =

1000Vri fri

i=1

4

5

the machining length (mm) and Vs (m/min) and Vri

(m/min) are the cutting speeds in finishing and ith

roughing pass, respectively,

And hence, equation (3) can be written as follows

tm =

to tool approach/departure time.

Hence

EI = p0 tp + nh1 Lt + h2 + h1 Lt + h2

10

The tool is replaced when the machine tool modules are

on but spindle is switched off. For turning process,

Shaw26 reported that the tool replacement time per

piece is the product of tool replacement time per edge te

and total number of edges consumed per piece, (tm =T).

Hence, energy consumed during tool replacement,

ER , in turning operation is given as

t

m

ER = p0 te

11

T

Here, Et is defined as the energy footprint of the tool

per edge per piece and represents the energy embodied

into the tool, the energy consumed in the manufacture

of the tool and the energy consumed in any secondary

operation such as coating17

t

m

Et = Pt

12

T

where Pt is the tool energy per cutting edge and (tm =T)

represents number of cutting edges consumed per piece.

iX

=n

pDL

pDL

+

1000Vs fs

1000V

r fr

i=1

Hence

"

iX

=n

pDL

pDL

Ec = p0 + kv_

+

1000Vs fs

1000V

ri fri

i=1

#

7

As mentioned earlier, in idle state, the energy spent is

equal to the energy required to power the machine

modules and in this state machine spindle is assumed

to be stationary

EI = p0 tl

subdivided into tp for workpiece loading and unloading, and ti is the tool idle motion time when the tool is

approaching/departing the edge of the workpiece.

Again it can be subdivided into one finishing and n

roughing passes. In the case of n roughing passes25

in machining per piece is given by combining the four

aforementioned energy equations (7) and (10)(12)

"

#

iX

=n

pDL

pDL

E = p0 + kv_

+

1000Vs fs

1000Vri fri

i=1

+ p0 tp + nh1 Lt + h2 + (h1 Lt + h2 )

t

t

m

m

+ p0 te

+ Pt

13

T

T

iX

=n

Eri + p0 tp

14

E = Es +

i=1

where

Pt

p0 te

pDL

Es = p0 + kv_ +

+

+ p0 h1 L + h2

Ts

Ts 1000fs Vs

15

Pt

p0 te

pDL

Eri = p0 + kv_ +

+

+ p0 h1 L + h2

Tri

Tri 1000fri Vri

16

870

Optimization approach

Ts =

the machining process. To achieve this objective, first,

an optimal tool life is for the minimum energy consumption determined by differentiating the total energy

consumption equation followed by the total energy

consumed and the parametric values corresponding to

the minimum energy consumption.

The tool life in a turning operation can be given as a

function of cutting speed, feedrate and depth of cut as27

VT a f b d g = C

17

Here, we assume that the tool life in roughing and finishing are the same for simplification of calculation as

well as this is more practical approach. Practically, the

same tool is used for finishing and roughing with only

process parameters being different. This means as soon

as the tool reaches its life limit for any of the two processes (finishing or roughing), the tool must be replaced

with a new one, and hence, the assumption of having

identical tool life in finishing and roughing is valid.

Hence

Vs Tsa fsb dsg = Vri Tra frib drig = C

18

consumption, the optimal tool life is determined by differentiating equation (13) with respect to cutting velocity and equating the resultant to 0, that is, E=V = 0.

For finishing pass

Pt

p0 t e

pDL

Es = p0 + kv_ +

+

Ts

Ts 1000fs Vs

19

+ p0 h1 L + h2

_ the energy equation

By substituting the value of v,

becomes

Pt

p0 t e

pDL

Es = p0 + kfs ds Vs +

+

Ts

Ts 1000fs Vs

20

+ p0 h1 L + h2

Now differentiating equation (20) with respect to cutting velocity and equating to 0

Es

2

= p0 f1

s Vs

Vs

a11 ba1 ag

1

Vs

fs

ds

1

=0

+ Pt + p0 te

a

C

C

1

Pt + p0 te

1

=

1 b g

a

p0

Vs a fs a das

21

1

1

a

Pt + p0 te

p0

23

identical)

1

Pt + p0 te

1

Tr =

24

a

p0

It follows from equation (24) that the optimum tool

life depends only on the velocity exponent in tool-life

equation, machine idle power, tool energy footprint

and tool change time. This equation for an individual

cut is identical to the equation for single pass turning

operation for a given depth of cut.17 However, in multipass turning operation, the number of passes required

to finish a certain diameter on a cylindrical workpiece

makes the difference in the parametric optimization

scheme, which is addressed in this study.

Constraints

The typical constraints in a machining process are presented in the reported literatures, which are widely

acceptable.23 The same are applied here and the details

are mentioned in the following.

The constraints applied on finishing pass are described

in the following.

Parametric constraints. The parametric constraints for finishing pass are given as follows

Vmin 4Vs 4Vmax

fmin 4fs 4fmax

dmin 4ds 4dmax

25a

25b

25c

Tool-life constraints.

C

C

4fsb dsg 4

Vmax Tas

Vmin Tas

26

r

re Rs, max

fs 4

27

32:1

Cutting force constraints.

F = k1 fsm dsn 4Fmax

22

equation and hence

28

P=

FVs

k1 fsm dsn Vs

=

4Pmax

60000h

60000h

29

Arif et al.

871

in the following.

Parameter/constant

Symbol (units)

Value

Idle power

Specific cutting energy

Tool replacement time

Tool energy

Nose radius of tool

Workpiece diameter

Workpiece cutting length

Tool change time

Preparation time

Tool return time

Tool advance/return time

Maximum cutting speed

Minimum cutting speed

Maximum feedrate

Minimum feedrate

Maximum depth of cut

for finishing

Minimum depth of cut for

finishing

Maximum depth of cut

for roughing

Minimum depth of cut for

roughing

Surface roughness

requirement

for finishing

Surface finishing

requirement

for roughing

Maximum cutting force

Maximum cutting power

Machine tool efficiency

Tool-life equation

constant

and exponents

p0 (kWh)

K (MJ/m3)

T (min)

Pt (MJ/insert)

re (mm)

D (mm)

L (mm)

te (min/edge)

tp (min/piece)

h1 (min/mm)

h2 (min)

Vmax (m/min)

Vmin (m/min)

fmax (mm/rev)

fmin (mm/rev)

ds,max (mm)

3.594

5250

As calculated

5.3

1.2

50

300

1.5

0.75

0.0007

0.3

500

5

0.9

0.1

2.0

ds,min (mm)

0.5

dr,max (mm)

4.0

dr,max (mm)

1.0

Rs,max (mm)

2.5

Rr,max (mm)

25

Fmax (N)

Pmax (kW)

h

C

a

b

g

k1

m

n

1960

5

0.85

227

0.2

0.35

0.15

1058

0.75

0.95

Parametric constraints.

Vmin 4Vri 4Vmax

30a

30b

30c

Tool-life constraints.

C

Vmax Tar

4frib drig 4

C

Vmin Tar

31

r

re Rr, max

fri 4

32

32:1

Cutting force constraints.

F = k1 frim drin 4Fmax

33

P=

FVri

k1 frim drin Vri

=

4Pmax

60000h

60000h

34

The sum of depth of cut for one finishing pass and all

roughing passes (nr) must be equal to the total-depthto-be-removed, dt, that is

dt = ds +

iX

= nr

dri

35

i=1

Model solution

Based on the nature of problem stated, non-linear programming is used for solving this model. The objective

function is to minimize the dual energy function represented by equation (14) and find the optimum values of

Vs , fs , ds , Vri , fri , dri and nr for a multi-pass turning operation. Subscripts s and r denote finishing and roughing

pass respectively.

The data and parametric constraints considered in

this study are widely valid for a variety of turning processes.23 Some other authors, in the past, have used

these data and parametric constraints to validate their

machining cost models.25,28 The same applicable data

and parametric constraints are considered in our study

for validation of presented model as the major

in cutting force

and power equations

approach. Gutowski et al.7 have reported the typical

electrical requirements of a turning machine when not

in a cutting state, that is, p0. The specific cutting energy

of alloy steel is available in the literature, and its values

remain reasonable constant within the operating window of the range of feedrate considered in this study.

The specific cutting energy is reported for a variety of

practical materials in Geoffrey and Winston.29 The

data considered are depicted in Table 1. The non-linear

programming software LINGO is used for generating

the solutions by solving the individual and dual energy

functions.

Using the known values of all factors in the optimal

tool-life equation (24), the optimal tool life, for both

finishing and roughing pass, comes out to be

T = 30:5779 min

life for minimum cost criteria using the same

872

ds(mm)

Vs-opt (m/min)

fs-opt (mm/rev)

Es-opt (MJ/piece)

dr (mm)

Vr-opt (m/min)

fr-opt (mm/rev)

Er-opt (MJ/piece)

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

1.6

1.7

1.8

1.9

2.0

192.4159

187.2254

182.9454

179.3175

176.1772

173.4148

170.9532

168.7365

166.7227

164.8796

163.1821

161.6100

160.1470

158.7798

157.4973

156.2902

0.3057

0.3057

0.3057

0.3057

0.3057

0.3057

0.3057

0.3057

0.3057

0.3057

0.3057

0.3057

0.3057

0.3057

0.3057

0.3057

0.4534659

0.4845004

0.5147311

0.5443595

0.5735185

0.6023005

0.6307725

0.6589850

0.6869765

0.7147777

0.7424129

0.7699021

0.7972618

0.8245056

0.8516454

0.8786909

1.0

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

1.6

1.7

1.8

1.9

2.0

2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

2.5

2.6

2.7

2.8

2.9

3.0

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.4

3.5

3.6

3.7

3.8

3.9

4.0

118.8390

117.1521

115.6330

114.2530

112.9900

111.8267

110.7493

109.7468

108.8099

107.9310

107.1037

106.7830

108.2501

109.6709

111.0486

112.3864

113.6868

114.9524

116.1852

117.3874

118.5605

119.7064

120.8264

121.9219

122.9943

124.0446

125.0739

126.0831

127.0733

128.0452

128.9997

0.9000000

0.9000000

0.9000000

0.9000000

0.9000000

0.9000000

0.9000000

0.9000000

0.9000000

0.9000000

0.9000000

0.8889611

0.8380922

0.7922069

0.7506307

0.7128036

0.6782570

0.6465961

0.6174859

0.5906403

0.5658139

0.5427949

0.5213994

0.5014676

0.4828593

0.4654514

0.4491355

0.4338155

0.4194060

0.4058311

0.3930229

0.480255

0.506969

0.533555

0.560032

0.586414

0.612714

0.638941

0.665105

0.691211

0.717265

0.743272

0.770317

0.801565

0.832805

0.864038

0.895264

0.926483

0.957696

0.988903

1.020104

1.051299

1.082488

1.113673

1.144852

1.176026

1.207195

1.238360

1.269520

1.300675

1.331826

1.362973

that there is significant difference in both approaches,

that is, minimum cost machining and minimum energy

machining.

Having applied all the relevant constraints, the optimal

values of parameters for finishing pass alone are

obtained by solving equation (15) using LINGO software. The optimal values of the parameters obtained

are given in Table 2.

Having applied all the relevant constraints, the optimal

values of parameters for roughing pass alone are calculated by solving equation (16) using the software

LINGO, and the values are given in Table 3.

For multi-passes

The complete solution giving the optimal values of all

the turning parameters including number of rough

passes required and the optimal value of energy consumed for different total-depth-to-be-removed dt is

shown in Table 4: in this case, LINGO generates simultaneous dual optimization of the overall energy function represented by equation (14).

Discussion on results

Finishing pass

The model for finishing pass is solved by non-linear

programming using software LINGO. The optimum

values of energy consumed within the allowed range of

depth of cut are given in Table 2. This table also shows

the optimal values of cutting velocity Vs-opt and

feedrate fs-opt at each instant of depth of cut. An increment of 0.1 mm has been used in the depth of cut values

for the illustration purpose. The non-linear programming model can be solved for any small increment or

decimal points in depth of cut value, which is programmable on the computer numerical control (CNC)

machine tool depending upon the resolution and positioning accuracy of the machine tool. It follows from

this table that optimal value of feedrate is governed by

the constraint arising from surface roughness requirement and hence it stays constant. A relax constraint for

surface roughness would also allow variation in the

optimal value of the feedrate as we see in roughing pass

case. It follows from plot in Figure 1 that Vs-opt

decreases as a power function of depth of cut with

increase in depth of cut in finishing pass. This is

because the feedrate is fixed due to surface roughness

as discussed earlier in addition to all other factors,

which remain constant in optimal energy equation.

Hence, for example, under consideration under the

given set of constraints and conditions, the optimal

velocity is the decreasing power function of depth of

cut with exponent equal to the depth of cut exponent

considered in tool-life equation. The plot in Figure 1

also shows the variation in optimal energy, Es-opt with

depth of cut in a finishing pass and it is noted that

Es-opt increases with increase in depth of cut due to

increase in MRR enabled by increasing depth of cut.

Another interesting scenario is the analysis of overall

specific energy (OSE) in finishing, Eos-s, variation with

Arif et al.

873

dt (mm)

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

15.0

20.0

2.0

0.3057

156.2902

1

4.0

0.3930

128.997

0.5

0.3057

192.4158

2

4.0

0.3930

128.9997

3.5

0.4655

124.0446

2.0

0.3057

156.2902

2

4.0

0.3930

128.9997

4.0

0.3930

128.9997

2.0

0.3057

156.2902

3

3.96

0.3980

128.6217

3.96

0.3980

128.6217

2.08

0.9

106.4783

2.0

0.3057

156.2902

4

4.0

0.3930

128.9997

4.0

0.3930

128.9997

2.92

0.5854

117.6285

2.08

0.9000

106.4783

2.40339

3.185364

3.766368

4.50552

5.556777

2.0

0.3057

156.2902

5

4.0

0.3930

128.9997

4.0

0.3930

128.9997

4.0

0.3930

128.9997

3.92

0.4031

128.2410

2.08

0.9000

106.4783

7.231464

Parameters

ds-opt

fs-opt

Vs-opt

nr

dr1-opt

fr1-opt

Vr1-opt

dr2-opt

fr2-opt

Vr2-opt

dr3-opt

fr3-opt

Vr3-opt

dr4-opt

Fr4-opt

Vr4-opt

dr5-opt

Fr5-opt

Vr5-opt

Et-opt (MJ/piece)

depth of cut in finishing pass. This is because removing

material at a higher rate decreasing the machining time,

which means the non-cutting modules (which makes a

significant proportion of total energy consumed) will

be accounted for a shorter time, and the overall energy

consumed in the process is lower than that occurring at

lower MRR. This explains although variable part of

energy consumption increases with depth of cut, the

dividend arising from reducing the constant part of the

overall energy consumption by completing the machining in shorter times is more dominant.

Figure 1. Variation of optimal parameters with depth of cut in

finishing pass.

finishing pass. The term Eos-s is different from optimal

energy in way that it is obtained by dividing the optimal

energy at each depth of cut by the total amount of

material removed at the corresponding depth of cut in

finishing pass. Hence, Eos-s also involves the energy

consumed by non-cutting modules of the machine tool

and is, therefore, also different from specific energy of

the material, which takes into account purely the rate

of energy consumed in the cutting operation divided by

the MRR. It is significant to note that Eos-s is decreasing with rate of material removal enabled by increase in

depth of cut in finishing pass, as shown in Figure 2,

Roughing pass

Besides for finishing pass, the roughing pass problem is

also solved by non-linear programming using the software LINGO, and the optimal values of cutting velocity and feedrate are depicted in Table 4 within the

permissible range of depth of cut and other constraints.

It follows from the plot that the optimal cutting velocity

first decreases as a power function of depth of cut in

roughing with the same exponent used in tool-life equation. This decreasing relationship exists only within a

certain bound of depth of cut ranging from 1.0 to 2.0

mm. From depth of cut value of 2.1 mm onwards, the

optimal cutting velocity, Vr-opt, increases sharply. The

first part of optimal velocity and depth of cut relationship is similar to finishing pass due to a constant optimal feedrate fr-opt, existing within this range of depth

874

Figure 2. Variation of optimal specific energy and optimal material removal rate with depth of cut in finishing pass.

MRR: material removal rate.

(1Vr-opt2)

fr-opt = 2.2762dr-1.267

(2.1 fr-opt 4.0)

Vr-opt = 118.84dr-0.15

(1 Vr-opt 2)

fr-opt(mm/rev)

Vr-opt(m/min)

dr (mm)

of cut, which renders the optimal cutting velocity variation governed by depth of cut in roughing, and hence,

the power exponent is equal to the exponent for depth

in tool-life equation, as plotted and shown in Figure 3.

This region is also explained in another way. That is,

within a given bound of MRR at a given depth of cut,

the increase in MRR is achieved by maximizing the feedrate rather than cutting velocity as tool life is more

sensitive to the cutting velocity than the feedrate.

Hence, in this way, the model tends to economize the

tool life. This maximization of feedrate is determined

by the most dominant constraint on the feedrate, which

is the surface roughness in our case. Once, the feedrate

is increased beyond a certain limit, increase in MRR is

not permissible by increasing feedrate as feedrate has

already been increased to the value allowed by the most

dominant constraint on feedrate. Hence, further

increase in MRR in roughing pass must be achieved by

increasing the cutting velocity alone, which means feedrate is to be adjusted to a new value (lower than the

maximum permissible) to get the optimal tool life with

respect to the minimum energy consumption and so as

to get the optimal energy consumed. That is why when

cutting velocity initiates an upward surge in the plot,

in roughing pass.

onwards. Since now both optimal cutting velocity and

optimal feedrate are being varied iteratively at a given

depth of cut in roughing pass, the further variation or

trend of plot is no more governed by the cutting depth

exponent in tool-life equation rather it is governed by

an iteratively optimized function. Furthermore, the

optimal energy consumed Er-opt increases linearly with

Arif et al.

875

Figure 5. Variation of optimal specific energy and optimal material removal rate with depth of cut in roughing.

MRR: material removal rate.

total-depth-to-be-removed in roughing pass.

MRR: material removal rate.

in finishing pass and this is depicted in Figure 4.

The plot in Figure 5 shows the variation of OSE for

roughing pass Eos-r. It follows that Eos-r decreases

sharply with MRR up to certain level, and then it

almost flattens with very little further decrease. This

refers to the fact that above a certain critical depth of

cut in roughing, both MRR and Eos-r settle to the reasonably stable values.

with increase in dt. This is because the number of

roughing passes or number of overall passes is also

increasing as the dt increases, which means after performing first roughing pass, the diameter of the workpiece reduces and an equivalent depth of cut in

roughing will now remove less material from a reduced

diameter workpiece. Hence, Eos-t will increase as the

same amount of energy consumed is accounted for less

material removal. Hence, the Eos-t is always like to rise

with increase in number of overall passes.

An interesting observation is that as dt = 10.0 mm,

Eos-t is less than Eos-t at dt = 8.0 mm. This is because,

in both cases, the total number of passes required to finish the workpiece is the same. However, in the case of

dt = 10.0 mm, based on plot in Figure 6, the combination of three overall passes is such that it accounts for

the minimum energy consumed in each of these passes.

But in the case of dt = 8.0 mm, due to less material to

be removed, the combination of three passes cannot be

the same as in dt = 8.0 mm and hence Eos-t for dt =

10.0 mm is slightly less than that for dt = 8.0 mm. It is

concluded from this observation that the total-depthto-be-removed has a dominant effect on Eos-t in turning

where equal numbers of total passes are required to

complete the machining process.

Overall turning operation

The overall turning operation is based on the hypothesis of one finishing pass and one or more roughing

pass(es). The non-linear programming gives a combination of one finishing pass and one or more roughing

passes for optimum energy consumption in the overall

operation to remove a given depth of material.

In Figure 6, OSE for the overall turning process,

Eos-t, is plotted for different values of material depth to

Since the model presented here is based upon the optimal tool-life criteria for the minimum energy consumption, the determination of the effect of tool replacement

time serves two purposes; it verifies the best tool

replacement time for the minimum energy consumption

in the turning process, and it also provides an insight

into the variation in the minimum energy consumed if

a different tool replacement time constraints were to be

implemented. Due to practical constraint such as

876

0.891

0.466

ds=0.5mm

ds=2.0mm

0.464

0.889

0.462

0.887

0.885

0.46

0.883

0.458

0.881

0.879

0.456

0.877

0.893

0.454

0.875

0.873

0.452

5

15

25

35

45

55

65

specific energy in finishing pass.

MRR: material removal rate.

inability of the cutting tool to produce a desired minimum level of surface roughness after a certain machining time despite the flank wear is less than the standard

value adopted for the determination of the cutting tool

life. This is a very practical consideration when a very

low value of surface roughness is desired in the finishing pass. Depending upon the surface finish requirement in the finishing pass, a certain tool replacement

time can be enforced as a constraint on the standard

tool life calculated by the minimum energy criteria. In

some cases, a preventive tool replacement strategy is

implemented where a tool is planned to be replaced

before the optimal tool life to avoid any risk of part

rejection due to failure to produce the desired finish on

the part by the tool having reached very close to its life.

The plot in Figure 7 shows the effect of tool

replacement time on the optimal energy Es-opt in finishing pass at two given depth of cuts. The plot verifies that minima of the curves occur at Ts = 30.779

min, which is the unconstrained tool life obtained

from the minimum energy criteria. It follows from the

plot that the optimal energy increases on both ends of

the unconstrained tool life. However, the optimal

energy increases much steeper if the tool is replaced

earlier than the unconstrained tool replacement time

compared to that if the tool is replaced after the

unconstrained too-life. This refers to the fact that

super finishing process tends to consume more unit

energy than the coarser or rougher process.

Conclusion

In this study, a comprehensive model has been presented to optimize the machining parameters in a multipass turning operation for minimal energy consumption

considering the practical constraints. The following

conclusions are drawn from this study:

decreases as a power function of depth of cut.

optimal MRR increases with increase in depth of

cut.

In finishing pass, the removal of material at a

higher rate decreases the energy consumed by the

machine modules (the constant part of overall

energy) due to decreased machining time, which, in

turn, decreases the overall specific cutting energy.

In roughing process, the optimal cutting velocity

decreases up to a certain threshold value of depth

of cut and then increases. The threshold value is

governed by the most dominant parametric constraint imposed.

In roughing process, the optimal feedrate remains

constant up to a certain threshold value of depth of

cut and then decreases.

In roughing process, the optimal specific cutting

energy decreases up to a certain threshold value of

depth of cut and then tends to remain reasonably

constant with further increase in depth of cut.

In roughing process, the optimal MRR increases

up to a certain threshold value of depth of cut and

then tends to remain reasonably constant with further increase in depth of cut.

In multi-pass turning operation, the overall specific

cutting energy is less for higher total-depth-to-beremoved if the optimal number of passes is equal.

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit

sectors.

References

1. Westkamper E and Alting A. Life cycle management and

assessment: approaches and visions towards sustainable

manufacturing. CIRP Ann: Manuf Techn 2000; 49:

501526.

2. Gaussin M, Hu G, Abolghasem S, et al. Assessing the

environmental footprint of manufactured products: a

survey of current literature. Int J Prod Econ 2013; 46:

515523.

3. Jeswiet J and Kara S. Carbon emissions and CES in

manufacturing. CIRP Ann: Manuf Techn 2008; 57:

1720.

4. US Energy Information Administration. Annual energy

review 2011. DOE/EIA-0384(2011), September 2012.

Washington, DC: US Energy Information Administration.

5. Pusavec F and Kopac J. Achieving and implementation

of sustainability principles in machining processes. Adv

Prod Eng Manag 2009; 4: 151160.

6. Dahmus JB and Gutowski TG. An environmental analysis of machining. In: Proceedings of IMECE 2004, ASME

international mechanical engineering congress and RD&D

expo 2004, Anaheim, CA, 1319 November 2004, pp.1

10. New York: ASME.

Arif et al.

877

requirements for manufacturing processes. In: 13th CIRP

international conference of life cycle engineering, Lueven,

31 May2 June 2006. CIRP International, 2006.

8. Jawahir IS and Jayal AD. Product and process innovation for modelling of sustainable machining processes.

In: Seliger G (ed.) Advances in sustainable manufacturing:

proceedings of the 8th global conference on sustainable

manufacturing. Berlin: Springer, 2011, pp.301307.

9. Granados S, Jawahir IS and Fernandez J. A comprehensive criterion for sustainability evaluation of machining

processes. In: 7th Global conference of sustainable manufacturing, IIT Madras, Chennai, India, 24 December

2009, pp.385391.

10. Baniszewski B. An environmental impact analysis of grinding. BSc Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,

Cambridge, MA, 2005.

11. Kurd M. The material and energy flow through the abrasive

water-jet machining and recycling processes. BSc Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, 2004.

12. Hong SY, Markus I and Jeong W-c. New cooling

approach and tool life improvement in cryogenic machining of titanium alloy Ti-6Al-4V. Int J Mach Tool Manu

2001; 41: 22452260.

13. Um J, Chow LC and Jawahir IS. An experimental investigation of the application of the spray cooling method in

stainless steel machining. In: ASME IMECE MED, 1995,

vol. 2, pp.165178. New York: ASME.

14. Marksberry P and Jawahir IS. A comprehensive tool-life

performance model in near-dry machining for sustainable

manufacturing. Int J Mach Tool Manu 2008; 48: 878886.

15. Outeiro JC, Kandibanda R, Pina JC, et al. Size-effects and

surface integrity in machining and their influence on product sustainability. Int J Sustain Manuf 2010; 2: 112126.

16. Guodong S, Deogratias K and Kevin L. A virtual

machining model for sustainability analysis. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2010 international design engineering

technical conferences & computers and information in

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

August 2010, IDETC/CIE 2010, pp.875883. New York:

ASME.

Rajemi MF. Energy analysis in turning and milling. PhD

Thesis, University of Manchester, Manchester, 2010.

Derflinger V, Brandle H and Zimmermann H. New hard/

lubricant coating for dry machining. Surf Coat Tech

1999; 113: 286292.

Grzesik W. Friction behaviour of heat isolating coatings

in machining: mechanical, thermal and energy-based considerations. Int J Mach Tool Manu 2003; 43: 145150.

Schulz H and Moriwaki T. High-speed machining. CIRP

Ann: J Manuf Techn 1992; 41: 637643.

Gutowski T, Murphy C, Allen D, et al. Environmentally

benign manufacturing: observations from Japan, Europe

and the United States. J Clean Prod 2005; 13: 117.

Gilbert WW. Economics of machining. In: American

Society for Metals (ed.) Machining theory and practice.

Cleveland, OH: American Society for Metals, 1950,

pp.465485.

Shint YC and Roor YS. Optimization of machining conditions with practical constraints. Int J Prod Res 1992; 30:

29072919.

Hitomi K. Manufacturing systems engineering. London:

Taylor & Francis, 1979.

Libao A. Optimization of machining parameters in multipass turning and milling operations. MSc Thesis, Concordia University, Montreal, QC, Canada, 2003.

Shaw MC. Metal cutting principle. Oxford: Clarendon

Press, 1984.

Armarego EJA and Brown RH. The machining of metals.

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1969.

Gupta R, Batra JL and Lal GK. Profit rate maximization

in multi-pass turning with constraints: a geometric programming approach. Int J Prod Res 1994; 32: 15571569.

Geoffrey B and Winston A. Fundamentals of machining

and machine tools. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, Taylor

& Francis Group, 2006.

- ME 3217 Meta CuttingDiunggah olehscribbyscrib
- Machining-of-Hastelloy-X-Based-on-Finite-Element-Modelling.pdfDiunggah olehFatih Hayati Çakır
- HW4 2013 Solution heat transferDiunggah olehAlbert Stark
- Economics and Product Design ConsiderationsDiunggah olehاحمد عمر حديد
- Makino Basic ProgrammingDiunggah olehAPSARAUSA
- hw1Diunggah olehjambu99
- Optimization of Energy Consumption and Surface Quality in Finish TurningDiunggah olehraman8895
- SolidCAM_iMachining_Getting_Started.pdfDiunggah olehAdi
- Introduction.repoRTDiunggah olehMd Manowwer Alam
- 3D Area ClearanceDiunggah olehMohamedHassan
- ch20.docDiunggah olehHamood ur Rehman Sheikh
- 1-s2.0-S2212827116301731-main.pdfDiunggah olehNabila Puspanola
- Advances in Mechanical Engineering 2015 ElmunafiDiunggah olehMohammad Azlan
- NTMP%286th%29dec11Diunggah olehsauravkk245
- Adapting to Opportunity and Demand in Plastic ManufacturingDiunggah olehdelustrous
- TAKISAWA TMM-series(E)2009-11Diunggah olehUNIVERSALCNC
- Alibre CAMDiunggah olehwwweng
- AMPS 1718-00 Introduction.pdfDiunggah olehalbertodma
- Https Www.mitsubishicarbide.com Mmus Catalog PDF Catalog en c006a lDiunggah olehTungstenCarbide
- DesignDiunggah olehSantosh Rai
- Experimental investigation, prediction and optimization of cylindricity and perpendicularity during drilling of WCB material using grey relational analysis.pdfDiunggah olehChetan Agrawal
- Effect of Machining Parameters in Ultrasonic Vibration CuttingDiunggah olehHimeo Mas
- Kyocera Catalog CeramicDiunggah olehJoel Alexandre Santiago Almeida
- Micro MachiningDiunggah olehapulavarty
- 0 Helical MachiningGuidebookDiunggah olehMohamed Abd Elmohsen
- Detailed SyllabusDiunggah olehSiva Soorya
- Lathe Machining CatiaDiunggah olehIntan Kartikaningrum
- Sample 8073Diunggah olehAR Siddique
- The Possibilities and Limitations of Dry Machining by Dr. Neil CanterDiunggah olehpptmnlt
- sustainable ecologyDiunggah olehcobalamyanine

- Gmoe - Class 12Diunggah olehMazin Alahmadi
- IoT Revolution LandscapeDiunggah olehMazin Alahmadi
- Ch1.v3Diunggah olehMazin Alahmadi
- Replacement 01Diunggah olehMazin Alahmadi
- Marketing in KSADiunggah olehMazin Alahmadi
- Conference Brochure and FeesDiunggah olehMazin Alahmadi
- Industrial Application TaguchiDiunggah olehMazin Alahmadi
- prob1Diunggah olehMazin Alahmadi
- 2016 Call for Papers.2Diunggah olehMazin Alahmadi
- answers to exercises - mathematical statistics with applications (7th edition).pdfDiunggah olehNikola Krivokapić
- All TestsDiunggah olehMazin Alahmadi
- A2.a.36.BinomialExpansions2Diunggah olehMazin Alahmadi
- PracticeDiunggah olehMazin Alahmadi
- Formulas (2)Diunggah olehMazin Alahmadi
- 1972 QP QuestionsDiunggah olehMazin Alahmadi
- Sample Quiz9Diunggah olehMazin Alahmadi
- ASQ.Actualtests.CQE.v2015-03-26.by.Miguel.160qDiunggah olehMazin Alahmadi
- Control Chart EquationsDiunggah olehMazin Alahmadi
- West Virginia University Calendar Spring 2014pdfDiunggah olehMazin Alahmadi
- 1974 QP QuestionsDiunggah olehMazin Alahmadi
- Discrete Probability DistributionsDiunggah olehdclegaspi
- Modeling and Analyzing Supply Chain Reliability by Different Effects OfDiunggah olehMazin Alahmadi
- Ch1 Probs & Solutions ParkDiunggah olehMazin Alahmadi
- exam_1_solnDiunggah olehMazin Alahmadi
- Modelling With Linear ProgDiunggah olehvijaydh

- Design RefineryDiunggah olehaturcubb
- powersystemprotectiondevices-161120193617Diunggah olehLadyganome No
- 457Diunggah olehwangshu421
- Trinchero 1999.pdfDiunggah olehAndrea Rojas Castro
- Siemens Primax Hearing Aid in GurgaonDiunggah olehGurgaon Hearing Aids Center
- 09-Truss-analysis.pdfDiunggah olehSara Ramli
- Material Property Electrical Pocket BookDiunggah olehgyanendra_vatsa4380
- LIN360 Syllabus (2017)Diunggah olehMichelle Troberg
- Confidence in Context Disc 3Diunggah olehSumeetPaul
- Sony Hcd-s300Diunggah olehgaryyoull
- FSI - Korean Basic Course - Volume 2 - Student TextDiunggah olehtiki
- Thyroid Anatomy_ Overview, Structure, Fascia and LigamentDiunggah olehJosephine Grace Suryadi
- 3502Diunggah olehUMSOE
- From Borderlands and New Mestizas to Nepantlas and NepantlerasDiunggah olehÓscar Salvador de Peña
- 2013 Vcaa Specialist Mathematics Exam 2 SolutionsDiunggah olehGarrison Liu
- Evidence Take a Break Ingles 4Diunggah olehAna Milenitha Salcedo Puerta
- Pci.pulley.2003Diunggah olehARTHURS316
- BIOL207 Open GeneticsDiunggah olehBi Anh
- TeachingDiunggah olehhsa89
- Building SpecificationsDiunggah olehElvin Presto
- HCD-GNX700-GNX800.pdfDiunggah olehAbel Gauna
- D L Moody and Swedes 2008Diunggah olehBrad
- SNUG Austin 2012 Paper51 PresentationDiunggah olehvjemman
- SC2057.PDFDiunggah olehA Mahmood
- 2013 Camp Tuscarora Boy Scout Summer Camp Leader Guide - 2013Diunggah olehSarah Lowery Fernandez
- Translation Supplication Kalachakra MastersDiunggah oleh文光
- Search for Magnetic Monopoles in Polar Volcanic RocksDiunggah olehMohamed IBrahim
- forensik 2Diunggah olehrima oktarini
- Texto 11Diunggah olehKpiotiev
- 266815246 Automotive Electronics Part 3Diunggah olehBudes Daniel

## Lebih dari sekadar dokumen.

Temukan segala yang ditawarkan Scribd, termasuk buku dan buku audio dari penerbit-penerbit terkemuka.

Batalkan kapan saja.