THE QUANTITATIVE DESCRIPTION OF MACHINING SURFACE:

An Exploratory Data Analysis of Multiple Surface Roughness Parameters

SURAPOL RAADNUI
Department of Production Engineering, Faculty of Engineering
King Mongkut’s Institute of Technology North Bangkok
1518 Pibulsongkram Road, Dusit, Bangkok, 10800, THAILAND

ABSTRACT
Surface roughness parameters can be measured by variety of typical surface roughness testers available in the
market. Parameters provide from the measuring devices are plethora, and, in turn, are used to represent the
characteristic of the surfaces under investigation. In this particular research, the author seeks his own initiative to
utilize a statistical - based mean to classify the differences between major machining processes. Several plotting
techniques are employed in the surface classification process. In short, the technique may be employed to
identify/differentiate some certain characteristics between typical machining surface. The techniques used are based
mainly on the multivariate statistical approach. The relationship between conventional surface roughness parameters
was studied utilizing the more fundamental exploratory statistical data analysis in hyperspace i.e. Draftsman Plot,
Principal Component Analysis and Andrews’ Plot. Preliminary results for classification of machining surfaces
commonly used in industry, namely planing, milling, grinding and turning processes both within and amongst the
process are presented. It was found out that these techniques were the most useful for a machined surface profile
roughness description in comparison with currently applied parameters, with respect to differentiating between
machining processes.

Keywords: Exploratory data analysis, Machining surfaces, Surface roughness parameters

5. How might we perform data pre-processing such

1. INTRODUCTION
as filtering and leveling for logged area data?
It is well recognized that surface roughness greatly
influences the tribological properties of contacting parts.
Due to limitation of time and scope of this particular
Precisely, the understanding of this behavior is vital in many
paper, the first issue will only be tackled. A central problem
applications such as friction, lubrication and wear. Therefore
here is to correlate surface formation phenomena, in another
characterization of surface roughness has been developed over
word, the machining processes, with the resulting topography.
the last 70 years. The profilometer techniques are used to
The insensitivity of conventional surface roughness analysis to
quantity and standardize measurements; hence, the use of
differentiate meaning surfaces has been recognized for
statistical parameters has been proposed. As early in 1930s,
sometimes [4 to 6]. One manifestation of this problem is that,
researchers started to characterize surface roughness, some
despite an existence and wide spread use of surface roughness
“important unsolved questions” about the significant of
measuring methods over half a century, there is a paucity of
statistical parameter characteristics still remain unsolved [1 to
studies providing correlations with behavior or surface
3]. These include:
creative mechanism. It is believed that systematic approach
1. What set of parameters are able to characterize
utilization of multivariate statistical analysis should provide a
surface topography?
more complete understanding of the surface features.
2. How way the parameters correlate with a
functional sense?
3. How may we define and identify lay structure or 2. METHODS
randomness of a surface? A set of standard machining surfaces, namely, turning,
4. How do the parameters vary with sampling area planing, grinding and milling was selected. Profiles of each
and sampling interval? machined surface of equal average peak to valley roughness
height (Rz) values at 6.3 µm were measured and analyzed
using conventional surface roughness tester. Fifteen repeated 
traces of 5 mm long were made at random location whether
 
Milling
perpendicular or random orientation due to specific machining 
Grinding

process. A Hommel Tester T20A (Hommelwerke GmbH) 
Planing

Frequency

with a TKK 300 stylus (5 µm radius of spherical tip) was  Turning

used. The conventional statistical parameters such as the 

arithmetic mean deviation, Ra; the root-mean-square deviation,

Rq; average peak-to-valley roughness; Rz etc. that are

commonly used were chosen for analysis. In this study, the
utilization of exploratory multivariate statistical analysis 
              
techniques was employed to characterize typical machining               

.
surface. R q (µm)

Fig.2 Histogram of root-mean-square deviation (Rq) of

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Typical machining surfaces used in this study are shown
in Figure 1. These surfaces are easily identified. It is basically
from an arial view that the differences become obvious.
However, human sense, particularly, visual and touch
commonly involve. In this paper, in contrast, exploratory data
analysis techniques are used instead. This type of approach
would enable us to exclude human sense interaction in
classification process.
Grinding Milling
selected machining surfaces.
Further, the correlation coefficients between parameters
are calculated. The first four largest values of surface
roughness parameters are presented in Table 2. In contrast,
Table 3 presents the last four smallest values of correlation
coefficients. Parameters that are highly correlated, e.g., Rm
and Rt or Rzi and Rzd give essentially the same, or redundant,
information about the surfaces, whereas, parameters that do
not highly correlate, e.g., the Rp and R3z give complementary
information. It should be noted that each machining process
has different pairs of parameters that have correlation
coefficients higher than 90%. Similar concept can also be
applied to those correlation coefficients lower than 10%
(absolute values) as well. It can then be excluded that there are
some certain differences between surface roughness statistical
parameters from different typical machining processes
utilizing multivariate statistical analysis techniques. In
addition to the correlation analysis of statistical parameters,
Draftsman plot is presented as shown in Figure 3 (only
grinding process is shown). This type of presentation provides
visual aid in searching for correlation between surface
roughness parameters.

Planing Turning

Fig.1 Typical machining surfaces used in this work.

Conventional statistical parameters describing the

topography of the machining surfaces are listed in Table 1.
Figure 2 shows a power use of univariate analysis, namely,
Histogram of selected data group. It is quite obvious that there
is some significant differences of distribution pattern for a
selected parameter (root-mean-square deviation: Rq) among
machining surfaces.
 
2.5
2
MILLING 1.5
1
R3zm (µm)

0.5 GRINDING
 PC1 0
-0.6 -0.4 -0.2 -0.5 0 0.2 0.4 0.6
-1
PLANING -1.5
-2
-2.5
 -3
8 PC 2

7 Fig.4 Typical plot of the first two principal components of

Rm(µm)

selected machining processes.

6
Another technique that has also been applied is the
5
Andrews plot of high-dimensional data, say, more than three
dimensions where human eye cannot be physically employed
4
[9]. This method utilization of function-plotting to obtain a
visual representation of multivariate data. If the data is p-
3
dimensional each point X′ = (x1,x2,…,xp) defines a following
3 4 5 6 7 8 function:
Rt (µm)
Fx(θ) = x1/√2 + x2sinθ+ x3cosθ+ x4sin2θ+ x5cos2θ+… (1)
Fig.3 Draftsman plot of grinding process.
This function is then plotted over the range -π < θ < π. In
In conjunction with the above analysis, another technique this instance, previous experience and from the PCA result
called Principal Component Analysis (PCA) is performed. suggested that the most four vital parameters in classification
This technique has proven their usefulness in comparing process, in this particular work though, are Wt, Rm, Rp and Rq.
complex data in different applications. Basically, PCA is a These parameters are then substituted x1 to x4, in Eq.1,
linear algebra technique that attempts to describe the quantity respectively. The results are shown in Figure 5.
of the observed data by a smaller number of underlying
factors. The theory of PCA and its application has been ƒ(θ)
45
thoroughly explained [7 and 8]. Figure 4 shows how PCA was
PLANING
utilized in this particular work, to distinguish the surfaces by 40
35 MILLING
the three different machining processes, namely, milling,
grinding and planing. In this instance PC1 represents 30 GRINDING
maximum profile (or waviness) depth parameter (Wt) while 25
TURNING
PC2 represents maximum roughness depth (Rm). This means, 20
therefore that the most significant surface roughness 15
parameters (in this specific work), which are indicative of the 10
machining processes are Wt and Rm.
5
0
θ
4 -3 -2 -1 -5 0 1 2 3 4

Fig.5 Andrews’ plot of the most four influential parameters of

typical machining surfaces.
From the above figure, it can be depicted that different
u Fine (Rz=6.3micron) n Medium (Rz=10micron) p coarse (Rz=20micron)
machining processes pose different patterns in Andrews’ plot.
Hence, the usefulness of the employment of multivariate ƒ(θ)
statistical exploratory data analysis in surface roughness 
identification/classification has been further underlying. 

Further investigation is also carried out in classification of

the differences within specific machining processes, namely,

coarse, medium and fine machine surfaces. Figure 6 and 7

show that there are some specific regions within the Rt vs Wt θ
plots which presumably re present the differences within 
- - - - -     
selected processes, namely, milling and turning process
respectively. Fig.8 Andrews’ plot of the most four influential parameters of
cylindrical grinding process.

·Fine (R =6.3micron)
z , Medium (Rz=10micron) ° coarse (R =20micron)
z

ƒ(θ)






θ

- - - - -    
Fig.6 Two-dimensional plot (Rt vs Wt) for milling process.
Fig.8 Andrews’ plot of the most four influential parameters of
planing process.

It can easily be depicted the differences between multi-level of

specific machined surface i.e. coarse, medium and fine
machined surface.

Fig.7 Two-dimensional plot (Rt vs Wt) for turning process.
In addition, Andrews’ plot of Wt, Rm, Rp and Rq of planing
and cylindrical grinding processes can be seen in Figures 8
and 9.
4. CONCLUSIONS
Several techniques for obtaining a visual representation of
surface roughness multivariate data are presented. The
preliminary examination of most data, in this work, is
facilitated by the use of diagrams. Diagrams prove nothing,
but bring outstanding features readily to the eye. Such
techniques should be useful for a preliminary low level
investigation of surface roughness multivariate data and in
several cases, shown here, may also be used in assisting
communicating results to the investigator involved.
From the above research work, it can be concluded
that:
- Surface roughness parameters are plethora, it has
been demonstrated that these parameters are
significantly useful for identification of
machining processes.
 - Utilization of multivariate statistical analysis is
proved to be important in machining surface
roughness classification processes. Parameter Formulae and/or description
- Multiple surface roughness parameters should be
implemented as part of Quality Control (QC) l
1
l ∫0
process and/or productivity improvement of Ra Ra = y ( x) dx
machining operation.

1
5. REFERENCES R z = ( R1 + R3 + R5 + R7 + R9
[1] W.P. Dong, P.J. Sullivan and K.J. Stout,, RZ 5
“Comprehensive study of parameters for characterizing − ( R2 + R4 + R6 + R8 + R10 ))
three-dimensional surface topography - I: Some inherent
properties of parameter variation”, Wear, 159 (1992), pp. Rm Rm = 6 Ra
161-171
1/ 2
[2] W.P. Dong, P.J. Sullivan and K.J. Stout, “Comprehensive 1 L 
Rq =  ∫ ( y ( x )) dx 
2
study of parameters for characterizing three-dimensional Rq
surface topography - II: Statistical properties of L 0 
parameter variation”, Wear, 167 (1993), pp. 9-21
[3] W.P. Dong, P.J. Sullivan and K.J. Stout, “Comprehensive Rp Rp =
1
(R p1 + R p 2 + ... + R p 5 )
study of parameters for characterizing three-dimensional 5
surface topography - III: Parameters for characterizing
amplitude and some functional properties”, Wear, 178 Rv Rv =
1
(Rv1 + Rv 2 + ... + Rv 5 )
(1994), pp. 29-43 5
[4] B. Nowicki, “Multiparameter representation of surface
roughness”, Wear, 102 (1985), pp. 161-176 R R1 = R p1 + Rv1
[5] T. Klimczak, “Origins, magnitude and statistical
significance of differences between roughness parameters
of two- and three-dimensional characteristics”, Wear, 156 Rtm Rtm =
1
(Rm1 + Rm 2 + ... + Rm5 )
(19920, pp. 19-31 5
[6] J. Michalski and P. Pawlus, “Characterization of the 1 i=n
shape of the roughness profile ordinate distribution of Rpm R pm = ∑ R pi
n i =1
honed cylinder surfaces”, Wear, 161 (1993), pp. 135-143
[7] B.F.J. Manly, Multivariate statistical methods, 2nd
edition, Chapman & Hall, London, England, 1994
Rt Rt=Rm+Rp
[8] D.F. Morrison, Multivariate statistical methods, 3rd
edition, McGraw-Hill Inc., Singapore, 1990
Wt Maximum profile depth

[9] B.S. Everitt and P. Nicholls, “Visual techniques for Pt Maximum waviness depth
representing multivariate data”, The Statistician, 24
(1975), Vol.24, pp. 37-49 R3z Arithmetic mean third peak-to-valley height

Table 1 Selected statistical roughness parameters.

Table 2 The first four largest Correlation Coefficients (CC.)
of machining surface in this work.

CC.
1 2 3 4
Process

Rt vs Rp Rmvs Rt Rpvs Rm Rpmvs Rzd

Milling
99.2% 99.0% 98.8% 94.7%

Wt vs R3zd Rm vs Rt Rpvs Rm Rpmvs Rzd

Planing
96.2% 95.3% 92.0% 90.5%

Rzivs Rzd Rmvs Rt Rzd vs Rt Rzi vs Rt

Grinding
96.9% 93.6% 91.5% 90.7%

Rzi vs Rzd Rm vs Rt Rzi vs Rm Rzd vs Rm

Turning
97.5% 91.6% 90.9% 90.6%

Table 3 The last four smallest Correlation Coefficients (CC.)

of machining surface in this work.

CC.
1 2 3 4
Process
Wt vs Ra R3z vs Rzi Ra vs Rzi Rpm vs Rp
Milling
-0.4% 1.3% -1.9% 5.1%

R3z vs Rzi Pt vs Rpm Wt vs Rpm R3z vs Rpm

Planing
-1.3% -1.7% -5.6% 6.7%

Rp vs R3z Pt vs Rpm R3zvs Rpm Pt vs Rp

Grinding
-2.9% -7.2% 8.1% -10.2%

R3zm vs Rm Wt vs R3z Wt vs Ra Wt vs R3zm

Turning
0.25% -1.9% 3.9% 5.0%