CHAPTER-2.

LITERATURE SURVEY

2. INTRODUCTION:

In recent years, the number of people involved with the development and evaluation of improved
cutting tool materials has grown considerably. It is inevitable that, as people from diverse fields
become interested in cutting tools, many will not have a strong background in the mechanics of
cutting and in the theoretical and experimental studies of tool wear and tool life.

Varun Nayyar et al [1] investigated the machinability of different grades of cast iron and has
been studied in terms of cutting temperatures, cutting forces, tool life, deformed chip thickness
and contact length in different continuous machining operations. The tests performed were:
external turning, boring and face turning. Pearlitic Flake Graphite Iron (FGI), Compacted
Graphite Iron (CGI) and Spheroidal Graphite Iron (SGI) materials were selected for making the
experiments. From this study, it has been found that The properties of the materials used for
machinability testing are shown in Table 1. Three pearlitic grades; Flake Graphite Iron (FGI),
Compacted Graphite Iron (CGI) and Spheroidal Graphite Iron (SGI-2) were tested.In the
pearlitic grades the material hardness increases with change in graphite shape from flake
compacted spheroidal.

Materials Pearlite % Hardness

FGI >99 175
CGI 86 210
SGI2 76 230
SGI5 22 155

Table 1. Properties of grades of cast iron used for machinability testing.

Cutting fluid can increase the tool life and decrease the cutting forces for the machining of
graphitic cast irons with carbides inserts. Also at a cutting speed above 200 m/min, the use of
cutting fluid for CGI and SGI is desired when machining with coated carbide tools in a
continuous machining operation. It is not recommended to machine CGI and SGI in dry
conditions above a cutting speed of 200 m/min because of adhesion of the workpiece material on
the tool, whereas FGI could be machined dry in a continuous machining operation. However,
Within the graphitic cast iron grades, hardness and type of matrix can give an indication of the
machinability. But, if all parameters are considered, the shape of graphite is the main
machinability influencing factor. As it has been seen for ferritic SGI-5, the tool life was less than
for pearlitic CGI in dry machining conditions, although it has a lower hardness. However, ferritic
CGI and ferritic SGI would have better machinability than pearlitic CGI and SGI.

Of the many types of cast iron used by the auto industry, gray cast iron, according to Wang et al.
[2], is used most. The main features of gray cast iron are its low melting point, good fluidity, and
high resistance to wear. Its chemical composition and metallurgical structure, however,
compromise its machinability, according to Souza et al. [3]. The machinability of martensitic
gray cast iron is aided by its chemical composition, which include graphitizing elements. It also
includes elements that impair its machinability: carbide-forming elements and hard abrasives,
such as niobium,
tungsten, vanadium, chromium, titanium, and molybdenum. These are in addition to the
martensitic microstructure, an impairment itself to machinability. Alloying elements can
be added to martensitic cast iron material to give it better mechanical properties (higher
corrosion and wear resistance, wear, tensile and rupture strength). After casting, gray cast iron is
subjected to a tempering process. Here forms the extremely hard and brittle martensitic structure.
Consequently, the material undergoes a tempering heat treatment, producing the tempered
martensitic structure.
 Fig. 1 Tempered martensitic matrix

% C Si Mn P S Cu Cr Ni Mo Ti V W Nb

mean 3.4 4.3 0.85 0.18 0.08 1.15 0.4 1.05 1.5 0.15 0.75 0.8 0.65

Table 2.Chemical composition of martensitic cast iron

In any machining operation, it is an important task to select cutting parameters for achieving high
cutting performance. Usually, the desired cutting parameters are determined based on experience
or by use of a handbook. However, this does not ensure that the selected cutting parameters have
optimal or near optimal cutting performance for a particular machine and environment.
According to W.H. YANG et al [4] to choose the cutting parameters properly the Taguchi
method, a powerful tool to design optimization for quality, is used to find the optimal cutting
parameters for turning operations.

symbol Cutting unit Level1 Level2 Level3

parameter
A Cutting speed m/min 135 210 285
B Feed rate mm/rev 0.08 0.20 0.320
C Depth of cut mm 0.6 1.1 1.6

Table: 3. Cutting parameters and their levels

The cutting experiments were carried out on an engine lathe using tungsten carbide with the
grade of P-10 for the machining of S45C steel bars. The initial cutting parameters were as
follows: cutting speed 210 m min_1; feed rate 0.20 mm rev_1; and depth of cut 1.1 mm. The
feasible space for the cutting parameters was defined by varying the cutting speed in the range
135285 m min_1, the feed rate in the range 0.080.32 mm rev_1, and the depth of cut in the
range 0.61.6 mm. In the cutting parameter design, three levels of the cutting parameters were
selected, shown in Table 3.The machining industries are facing a great challenge to achieve high
quality, good surface finish and high material removal rate with a view to economize in
machining. Turning is one of the most common methods for cutting and especially for the
finishing of components. The goal of the modern industries is to manufacture low cost, high
quality products in short time. In turning, to achieve high cutting performance, selection of
optimum parameters is very essential. Nilrudra Mandal et al [5] studies about the Optimization
of flank wear using Zirconia Toughened Alumina (ZTA) cutting tool by using Taguchi method
and Regression analysis. It has been studied that Several experiments have been carried out
based on an orthogonal array L9 with three parameters (depth of cut feed rate, cutting speed) at
three levels (low, medium and high).

Parameters unit Level 1 Level 2 Level 3

Cutting speed m/min 420 280 140
Depth of cut mm 0.5 1 1.5
Feed rate mm/rev 0.12 0.18 0.24

Table 4 .Turning parameters and their levels

EXPERIMENT NO A B C

1 1
2 1
3 1
4 2
5 2
6 2
7 3
8 3
9 3
1 1
2 2
3 3
1 2
2 3
3 1
1 3
2 1
3 2

Table 5 L9 standard orthogonal array

Based on the mean response and signal to noise ratio (SNR), the best optimal cutting condition
has been arrived at A2B1C1 i.e. cutting speed is 280 m/min, depth of cut is 0.5 mm and feed rate
is 0.12 mm/rev considering the condition smaller is the better approach. Analysis of Variance
(ANOVA) is applied to find out the significance and percentage contribution of each parameter.
It has been observed that depth of cut has maximum contribution on tool wear. The mathematical
model of flank wear has been developed using regression analysis as a function of the above
mentioned independent variables. The predicted value from the developed model and
experimental values are found to be very close to each other justifying the significance of the
model.

D.I. Lalwani et al [6] studies the experimental investigation of the effect of cutting speed, feed
rate and depth of cut on the feed force, thrust force, cutting force and surface roughness in finish
hard turning of MDN250 (50 HRC) steel using coated ceramic tool. The following findings are
drawn on Surface roughness model that the feed rate provides primary contribution and
influences most significantly on the surface roughness. The interaction between feed rate and
depth of cut, quadratic effect of feed rate and interaction effect of speed and depth of cut provide
secondary contribution to the model.

Parameters unit Level 1 Level 2 Level 3

Cutting speed m/min 55 74 93
Depth of cut mm 0.1 0.15 0.2
Feed rate mm/rev 0.04 0.08 0.12

While Good surface roughness can be achieved when cutting speed and depth of cut are set
nearer to their high level of the experimental range (93m/min and 0.2mm) and feed rate is at low
level of the experimental range (0.04mm/rev). This is borne by the fact that when cutting speed
is increased from55 to 93m/min at a depth of cut = 0.2mmand feed rate = 0.04mm/rev, the
surface roughness decreases from 0.397 to 0.352_m (Eq. (4)) which amounts to an 11.33%
reduction of the surface roughness value and is attributed to the secondary effect of interaction
between cutting speed and depth of cut.
Methodology: