Materials and Manufacturing Processes

ISSN: 1042-6914 (Print) 1532-2475 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/lmmp20

Effect of ultrasonic vibration on the single

discharge of electrochemical discharge machining

S. Elhami & M. R. Razfar

To cite this article: S. Elhami & M. R. Razfar (2017): Effect of ultrasonic vibration on the single
discharge of electrochemical discharge machining, Materials and Manufacturing Processes, DOI:
10.1080/10426914.2017.1328113

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10426914.2017.1328113

Published online: 07 Jun 2017.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 20

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=lmmp20

Download by: [The UC San Diego Library] Date: 15 June 2017, At: 00:13
MATERIALS AND MANUFACTURING PROCESSES
https://doi.org/10.1080/10426914.2017.1328113

none defined

Effect of ultrasonic vibration on the single discharge of electrochemical

discharge machining
S. Elhami and M. R. Razfar
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Electrochemical discharge machining (ECDM) is one of the non-traditional processes which employs Received 22 November 2016
physical and chemical phenomena to remove the material from the non-conductive workpiece. Accepted 4 May 2017
Moreover, some technical augmentations have been added to the mentioned process to achieve a more KEYWORDS
efficient machining method. Typically, ECDM includes numerous electric discharges, but study on a single Discharge; electrochemical;
discharge, with/without application of external augmentation, leads to understanding the complicated machining; material;
nature of the ECDM process and the effect of technical augmentation. In this research, the ECDM process removal; tool; ultrasonic;
is studied in the mode of single discharge. Also, ultrasonic vibration, as a technical augmentation, is wear
added to the process (UAECDM) and related effects are studied. For this purpose, special configuration
and equipment are used to apply ultrasonic vibration and generate only single discharge. Material
removal and tool wear are two important characteristics of drilling process which can be considered to
determine the machining efficiency. The current signal is used to determine the current variation and
discharge(s) condition. Results showed that the application of ultrasonic vibration changed the current
signal pattern to increase discharge numbers in constant condition. Also, ultrasonic vibration increased
the material removal up to 35%, while tool wear reduced between 3% and 14%.

Introduction ECDM, material removal does not happen by electrochemical

mechanism. Also, a small portion of material removal is done
Electrochemical discharge machining (ECDM) is a machining
by chemical etching. Against ECM, in ECDM process
process which provides acceptable efficiency and low cost to
electrolyte flow and high current density are not necessary.
shape non-conductive materials. The multi-physic nature of
Comparison of ECDM and EDM: In EDM process, discharge
this process can overcome the significant problems of
takes place between the tool and workpiece, but in ECDM
hardness and brittleness of glasses and ceramics. Basically,
discharge takes place between the tool and electrolyte and the
the electrochemical discharge phenomenon takes place when
workpiece receives some part of discharge thermal power. In
two electrodes are immersed in a conductive electrolyte
ECDM, after formation of the gas film discharge can appear,
(Fig. 1). When DC current is applied between electrodes, the
but in EDM process this limitation does not exist. In EDM,
electrolysis phenomenon produces gas bubbles around the
the gap between electrodes (tool and workpiece) is filled with
electrodes. Smaller electrode is completely isolated from
liquid dielectric, while in ECDM gas film acts as electrodes (tool
the electrolyte when enough volume of bubbles is generated
and electrolyte) gap. One side of discharge in ECDM is a liquid
to form the gas film around the electrode. As a result, electric
electrolyte, while in EDM both sides of discharge are solid
discharge happens between the tool and electrolyte (which is
materials. So, heat transfer to the workpiece in ECDM process
in contact with the anode). In this condition, if the workpiece
is more complicated compared with the EDM process.
is placed in a position close to the electrolyte surface and
Two important parameters in drilling process include
discharge location, part of discharge energy reaches to the
material removal rate (MRR) and tool wear [2–4]. Tool wear
workpiece and melts a small portion of the material. Chemical
directly effects on the machining cost and accuracy. So, any
etching is another mechanism which plays small role on the
external augmentation which increases MRR and simul-
material removal (MR) [1].
taneously reduces the tool wear achieves more efficiency. In
In order to better understanding differences of the ECDM
recent years, many researchers have investigated different ways
compared with electro-chemical machining (ECM) and
to improve the efficiency of machining processes. Employ-
electro-discharge machining (EDM) processes, brief compari-
ments of mechanical, chemical, and some other physical
sons between ECDM and mentioned processes are presented.
phenomena and the most efficient way of application have
Comparison of ECDM and ECM: In ECM process, material
been subjected for different machining processes.
removal takes place by electrochemical phenomenon, but in
EDM and ECM are two nontraditional machining
ECDM, electrochemical phenomenon is limited to the
processes which have natural mechanisms close to the ECDM.
electrolysis around the tool and formation of gas film. So, in

CONTACT M. R. Razfar razfar@aut.ac.ir Department of Mechanical Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran 15875-4413, Iran.
Color versions of one or more of the figures in the article can be found online at www.tandfonline.com/lmmp.
© 2017 Taylor & Francis
2 S. ELHAMI AND M. R. RAZFAR
Figure 1. A schematic view of the ECDM experimental configuration.
Between different techniques, many researchers have
investigated the integration of ultrasonic vibration and men-
tioned processes. In ultrasonic-assisted EDM, the vibrating
movement of the tool electrode or the workpiece with high fre-
quency creates turbulence in the surrounding area. Therefore
the fluid circulation and flushing action are enhanced to
facilitate better ejection of the molten metal from craters,
pumping out the contaminated dielectric away, and sucking
fresh dielectric fluid into the gap to provide an ideal condition
for discharges [5]. As a result, the MRR is increased with less
recast material on the surface, and less micro-cracks are
observed [6]. Introduction of ultrasonic vibration into the
micro-EDM has increased the drilling efficiency more than
60 times without significantly increasing the tool wear [7].
Moreover, the MRR of ultrasonic-assisted EDM is about four
to eight times larger than that of micro-EDM and the aspect
ratio of the hole increased noticeably [8]. The intriguing aspect
of ultrasonic-assisted ECM is the possibility of obtaining a
high-quality machined surface, with a relatively small surface
roughness. The ultrasonic vibration effects change the course
of electrode reactions, and improve electrolyte flow in the
inter-electrode gap [9]. Experimental results indicated that
an optimal value of the vibration amplitude existed for
minimal surface roughness [10].
Also, by inducing ultrasonic vibrations in the narrow
machining gap during small hole ECM, the machining time
was reduced by 87% compared with conventional ECM [11].
In the field of ECDM process, the application of the magnetic
field [12], high-speed rotating tool [13], and abrasive particles
[14] to the electrolyte are some of mentioned techniques.
Between mentioned techniques, the components movement
(vibration) has presented interesting results. Vibration with
different frequencies can be applied to different components
of the ECDM configuration. Low-frequency vibration mainly
affects on the electrolyte circulation in the hole, however
high-frequency vibration improves electrolyte circulation and
changes the nature of physical (discharge) and chemical (elec-
trolysis) phenomena involved in the ECDM process. On the
other hand, to avoid undesirable and uncontrollable events,
vibration should be concentrated directly on the machining
area in such a way that it does not affect the other compo-
nents. So, between machining components, the tool tip is
the best location for this purpose. In this research, a high-
frequency (ultrasonic) vibration is concentrated on the tool
tip which directly and continuously effects on the machining
zone and avoids global undesirable effects. The presented pro-
cess by integration of ultrasonic vibration to the ECDM is
defined as ultrasonic-assisted ECDM (UAECDM).
In ECDM process, sinusoidal movement (vibration) can be
applied to different components such as a tool, electrolyte [15],
and workpiece [16] with different frequencies. Han et al. [15]
applied a high-frequency ultrasonic vibration (1.7 MHz) to the
electrolyte in the electrochemical discharge drilling process. In
that work, the ultrasonic vibration created acoustic pressure
which resulted in a more uniform gas film and deeper holes
with larger values of overcut. As another solution, a tool with
an insulated wall and pulse voltage were employed to improve
the accuracy of holes. Finally, the hole diameter was decreased
from 426 to 328 µm and the machining depth was improved
from 320 to 550 µm. In this research, ultrasonic vibration
was applied to the entire electrolyte during the machining of
a blind hole. For this purpose, the drilling of a blind hole
was done on one side of the workpiece, while ultrasonic
vibration was applied to the electrolyte placed on the other
side of the workpiece. It seems that this method for the
application of ultrasonic vibration cannot be effective and
could lead to undesirable events such as decomposition of
the electrolyte on the anode surface and cavitation phenom-
enon. Rusli et al. [16] applied high-frequency ultrasonic
vibration (27–28 kHz) to a glass workpiece in a drilling
process. Results showed that ultrasonic vibration with an
amplitude lower than 2 µm created consecutive discharges
which finally achieved a greater MRR. On the other hand,
ultrasonic vibration with amplitudes of 2–3.5 µm resulted in
a smaller MRR, with an improvement in the surface quality.
Application of ultrasonic vibration to the workpiece could lead
to the cavitation phenomenon on the top surface of the work-
piece and bottom of the hole. Cavitation on the top surface
close to the hole could interrupt the electrolyte circulation to
the hole. On the other hand, cavitation on the bottom of the
hole creates a layer of bubbles between the electrolyte and
the workpiece which acts as an insulator and reduces the
thermal energy transferred to the workpiece.
Low-frequency vibration (<500 Hz) was applied to the tool
and noticeable achievements were achieved [17, 18]. Razfar
et al. [17] studied the effect of vibration frequency (<500 Hz),
amplitude (<27 µm), longitudinal waveform (sinusoidal and
square), and tool shape (cylindrical or drilling tool) on
machining speed and hole depth. Results showed that the
drilling tool shape achieved more efficiency in comparison
with the cylindrical tool shape. Wüthrich et al. [18] applied
a low-frequency vibration (5–30 Hz) to the tool which resulted
in 50% reduction in the machining time for the vibration
amplitude of 10 µm. Vibration amplitudes larger than 10 µm,
however, did not significantly affect the MRR. Low-frequency
vibration improves the electrolyte circulation, but does not
affect the nature of chemical (electrolysis) and physical
(discharges) mechanisms of ECDM.
In common machining methods, when large number of
discharges are applied, the effect of machining characteristics
on the nature of discharge mechanism is associated with
complicated problems. So, study of the variation of single dis-
charge behavior versus machining characteristics can achieve
more clear results and understanding of nature, especially
when the external augmentation is employed. Some research-
ers have employed the single discharge technique in the
ECDM process, but most of them have used this technique
to verify their simulations [19–21]. The EDM process is one
of the known methods to machine conductive materials. Single
 MATERIALS AND MANUFACTURING PROCESSES 3

discharge studies have been done for this process [22–25]

with verification of related simulations (same as ECDM
process) [26].
In this research, a special configuration is employed to
apply ultrasonic vibration to the tool. Also, a special electric
board is used to generate fully controlled electric pulse which
leads to the creation of a single discharge during the ECDM
process. Two important parameters of material removal and
tool wear are investigated in the mode of single discharge to
better understand the effect of vibration and machining
characteristics on the efficiency. By giving attention to the
short length of electric pulse, material removal is found to
be a suitable expression for finding weight of removed material
instead of MRR. Current signal diagrams are used to better
understand the variation of physical and chemical phenomena
during the application of ultrasonic vibration.

Materials and Methods

Tungsten carbide drilling tools with the diameter of 0.5 mm
and NaOH electrolyte were employed. Soda lime glass slides
were selected as workpiece. A special electric board was used
to generate fully controlled electric pulse. Ultrasonic vibration
was achieved by the application of the ultrasonic generator
with the maximum power of 1.5 kW. The workpiece was
placed 70 µm below the tool. Material removal and tool wear
were measured by using a semi-microbalance from Sartorius
Company with the precision of 10 5 g. Modal analysis was
used to determine the position with the maximum amplitude
of vibration. As it is shown in Fig. 2(a), maximum amplitude Figure 2. (a) Results of modal analysis and the maximum amplitude on the
takes place in the tool tip. An actual view of the UAECDM tool tip, (b) actual view of the UAECDM experimental configuration, (c) electric
board.
experimental configuration is shown in Fig. 2(b). Employed
electric board, with the time resolution of 10 4 s, is shown
in Fig. 2(c).
Experimental study on UAECDM was done by consider-
ation of three parameters from vibration and machining Table 1. Considered parameters in the experimental section.
factors which are summarized in Table 1. Totally, 36 experi- Parameter Value
ments were done and results were analyzed. The applied DC Ultrasonic amplitude (µm) 0,5,10,15
Electrolyte temperature (°C) 25,45,65
voltage was kept constant as 32 V. Electrolyte concentration (wt%) 20,25, 30

Measurement procedure
Due to the precision of available semi-microbalance, a special
procedure was used to measure the material removal and tool
wear. First, the workpiece was weighed before the ECDM
(UAECDM) was exerted. In order to measure the removed
material by every discharge, the single discharge of ECDM
was repeated 30 times on the glass workpiece as shown in
Fig. 3(a). This procedure allowed measuring the removed
material by the available balance. Weight of the workpiece,
after machining, was compared with the related value before
the machining process. Recorded weight reduction was div-
ided into the number of repetitions, and the (average) material
removal was obtained for every single discharge (single pulse).
In this research, tool wear was determined by measuring the
weight loss which was caused commonly by discharge(s) on
the tool tip as it is shown in Fig. 3(b). Tool wear was evaluated
in a manner similar to the material removal measuring Figure 3. (a) Craters on the workpiece, (b) sample of single discharge on the
procedure. tool tip (major cutting edge) without ultrasonic vibration.
4 S. ELHAMI AND M. R. RAZFAR
Results and Discussion
Current signal
The current signal is the best method to examine the discharge
behavior and shows the variation of consumed current during
a specific period of time. In order to study the effect of ultra-
sonic vibration on the change of discharge behavior, schematic
views of current signal and gas film variations are shown in
Fig. 4(a, b). Also, experimental results of current signals for
different vibration amplitudes are shown in Fig. 4(c–f). As
can be seen in Fig. 4(c), only single discharge takes place when
ultrasonic vibration has not been applied to the ECDM process
and the pulse on time is 2.1 ms. For the same electric pulse and
by the application of ultrasonic vibration, two main variations
in the current signal can be observed. The first variation
includes formation of thinner gas film [27], as shown in
Fig. 4(a). So, shorter time is required to form the gas film
and consequently more time is provided for discharge activi-
ties (Fig. 4(b)). Also, Reference [27] showed that ultrasonic
vibration caused the higher frequency of bubble separation.
On the other hand, the space occupied by bubble after
separation replaces electrolyte (which finds contact with
Figure 4. (a) Schematic comparison of gas film during ECDM and UAECDM, (b) schematic comparison of current signal during ECDM and UAECDM. Actual current
diagram of (c) ECDM process, (d) UAECDM with the vibration amplitude of 5 µm, (e) UAECDM with the vibration amplitude of 10 µm, (f) UAECDM with the vibration
amplitude of 15 µm.
electrode). So, higher frequency of bubble separation provides
condition for more contact of electrolyte with electrode surface
and improvement of electrolysis rate. During the second vari-
ation, thinner gas film leads to shorter distance between anode
and cathode (Fig. 4(a)), so electric breakdown in hydrogen gas
occurs more easily and more discharges are generated which is
a desired achievement to improve the efficiency (Fig. 4(c–f)).
The best condition is achieved when the amplitude of 10 µm
(Fig. 4(e)) is applied. But, the amplitude of 15 µm deteriorates
the gas film and discharge improvement mechanisms (Fig. 4
(f)). In this condition, the formation of gas film needs more
time, and number of discharges are decreased while these
trends are against the vibration amplitude of 10 µm.
(Average) material removal
ANOVA is used to determine the effectiveness level of selected
parameters on the desired output. All parameters are signifi-
cant at the level of 5%. Table 2 shows the contribution values
of the ANOVA analysis on the material removal and tool wear
which shows the effectiveness ranking of chosen parameters
on desired characteristics. The ANOVA analysis on the

Table 2. Contribution results from ANOVA of material removal and tool wear.
Material removal
material removal shows that amplitude is the most significant
parameter with the contribution of 61.5%. Electrolyte tem-
perature and concentration are other significant parameters
with contributions of 23% and 13.8%, respectively.
Effect of parameters on material removal
Material removal in the ECDM takes place by discharge and
chemical mechanisms. In the single discharge of ECDM pro-
cess, discharge mechanism has the greatest influence on the
material removal related to chemical mechanism.
Material removal improvement for every parameter is
defined as the variation of mean value of the material removal
for every value of selected parameter compared with the smallest
value of mentioned parameter. As can be seen in Fig. 5, increas-
ing the vibration amplitude leads to larger material removal, but
implementation of a very large ultrasonic amplitude (15 µm)
destroys the favorite trend of amplitude effectiveness. Employ-
ment of the vibration amplitude of 10 µm increases material
removal to 5.48 µg which shows improvement of 34.2% com-
pared with the case without ultrasonic vibration with the
material removal of 4.09 µg. Study on the selected values of elec-
trolyte temperature and concentration show that using the lar-
ger values of mentioned parameters achieve greater material
removal and improve the machining efficiency.
The effect of electrolyte temperature on the material
removal of single discharge can be explained by the dominant
discharge mechanism. The effect of electrolyte temperature
can be classified into two aspects. First, the ability of electro-
lyte (at different temperatures) to generate ions which are
the basis of plasma channel and discharge generation. Increas-
ing the bulk temperature of the electrolyte improves the
Figure 5. Mean values of material removal improvement.
MATERIALS AND MANUFACTURING PROCESSES 5
Tool wear
entropy of electrolyte molecules and ions. These ions can leave
the electrolyte surface more easily with more kinetic energy.
Ions with more energy create plasma channel and discharge
with more power, which finally results in a larger molten
and vaporized area of the workpiece. The second aspect relates
to the thermal conductivity of the electrolyte. When discharge
impacts to the electrolyte surface, some of discharge thermal
energy is transferred to the workpiece. The relation between
the transferred energy to the workpiece and the total energy
received to the electrolyte surface can be affected excessively
by the variation of thermal conductivity of the electrolyte.
Large electrolyte temperature rises the electrolyte thermal con-
ductivity [28] and improves the amount of transferred energy
to the workpiece. Finally, more material removal is achieved.
Electrolyte concentration affects the two main material
removal mechanisms (chemical and discharge). More concen-
trated electrolyte provides a higher thermal conductivity which
leads to transfer more discharge thermal energy to the work-
piece surface, so larger material removal is achieved. But, in
the single discharge of ECDM and due to the short length of
pulse on time, chemical mechanism has not significant effect
on the material removal.
In order to study the effect of ultrasonic vibration, the tool
movement should be divided into two states. In the first state,
the tool moves in direction to approach the electrolyte
(reduction of discharge gap). In the second state, the tool
moves away from the electrolyte (increasing the discharge
gap). When the discharge gap increases, the probability of
particle collusion reduces and every particle moves longer path
under the application of electric filed which results in larger
strike velocity of particles to the electrode surface. Finally, more
kinetic energy converts to thermal energy on the electrolyte
surface and larger material removal is achieved. The reduction
of gap distance and more hydrogen gas pressure results in
shorter free path of particles and a large number of particle col-
lisions (short particles distance). On the other hand, greater
pressure means greater particle density and higher conductivity
of the plasma channel. As a result, larger electric current passes
through the plasma channel which results in more energy den-
sity of the channel and more material removal [29, 30]. Average
distance (a) and mean free path of particles (ke) can be stated
by Eqs. (1) and (2), respectively [29].
� �
3 1=3
a¼ ðmÞ ð1Þ
4pn
6 S. ELHAMI AND M. R. RAZFAR
1
ke ¼ ðmÞ
nQei
where n is density of particles in plasma channel, and Qei is the
cross section of thermal electron-ion scattering. Finally, the
conductivity of discharge channel is expressed by Eq. (3) as
follows [29]:
� �
2ð4pe0 Þ2 ð2kB TÞ3=2 1 1
� 1
r ¼ cg 3=2 2 1=2 X � m and K / ð3Þ
p Z me ln K n concentration have the same effectiveness trends. In both
where lnΛ is the Coulomb logarithm, kB is the Boltzmann
constant, γg is the secondary electron emission coefficient,
and Z is the charge of the ions. As a result, σ / n shows direct
relation between conductivity of plasma channel and particles’
density.
(Average) tool wear
Same as material removal analysis, the study on the tool wear
starts with ANOVA to determine the effectiveness ranking of
considered parameters. As can be seen in Table 2, contribution
results show that electrolyte temperature is the first effective
parameter with the contribution of 38%. Vibration amplitude
and electrolyte concentration are next effective parameters
with contributions of 31.2% and 28%, respectively.
The parameter of tool wear reduction can be defined as the
variation of mean value of tool wear for each level of selected
parameters compared with the smallest value. Negative tool
wear reduction means that tool wear increases versus the
Figure 6. Mean values of tool wear reduction.
Figure 7. (a) Tip of the drilling tool, (b) SEM image of the intersection of edges on the tip of drilling tool.
ð2Þ application of larger value (level) of the chosen parameter.
Obtained results are shown in Fig. 6, in which more vibration
amplitude leads to higher wear reduction, which is desired tar-
get of ultrasonic vibration. But, very large amplitude (15 µm)
weakens the improvement mechanisms of ultrasonic vibration.
The vibration amplitude of 10 µm creates tool wear of 3.25 µg,
which shows 14.4% reduction of tool wear compared with the
case of without vibration (3.8 µg). Electrolyte temperature and
cases, increasing the parameter value leads to increasing the
tool wear (larger negative values of tool wear reduction).
Effect of parameters on tool wear
In the case of single discharge, chemical mechanism has little
effect on the tool wear. Produced thermal energy in every dis-
charge is transferred to two components. Some of the energy is
transferred to the small area of the workpiece which leads to
material removal. The other part of discharge energy is trans-
ferred to the tool surface which melts and vaporizes a small
area of the tool. In this section, part of discharge energy which
is transferred to the tool is investigated. Figure 7 shows the
SEM image of drilling tool edges. As can be seen, the major
cutting edge is the sharpest edge, so receives much thermal
energy while has the smallest bulk conduction to the tool. A
large number of resolidified spheroid shapes show the mass
of molten material.
Generally, each parameter which reinforces the discharge
power leads to transfer more thermal energy to the tool surface
and increases the tool wear. Increasing the electrolyte
temperature has greater effect on the discharge power than
the electrolyte concentration. Discharge power is transferred
to the tool and electrolyte with different relations. The greater
part of the energy is transferred to the electrolyte. Also,
common materials which are selected as a tool have a higher
melting temperature and larger thermal conductivity. So, the
mass of molten material of the tool (cathode) is smaller than
vaporized electrolyte and molten glass workpiece.
Application of ultrasonic vibration signifies the convection
mechanism of heat transfer by forced circulating of hydrogen
gas around the tool. So, an excessive cooling mechanism acts
on the tool and smaller material is molten. General relation

Figure 8. SEM images of the major cutting edge of the drilling tool: (a) without ultrasonic vibration, (b) with ultrasonic amplitude of 10 µm.
for heat transfer by convection is stated by Eq. (4), as
follows [31]:
Qconv ¼ hAðTs T1 Þ
where h is mean convection coefficient, A is surface area of
heat transfer, Ts and T∞ are surface and gas temperature,
respectively. In the case of gas flow around the tool, at first,
type of flow (laminar or turbulent) should be determined by
the relation of Reynolds number, as follows [31]:
u ¼ Ax cosðxtÞ ! uMax� ¼ Ax ¼ 15 � 10 6
� 28; 500 ¼ 0:427
3
uMax� L Hydrogen gas 0:427 � 10
ReL ¼
n
! ¼
0:8 � 10 4
< 5 � 105
where A and x are amplitude and frequency of ultrasonic
vibration, respectively. u is the fluid velocity, and L is the con-
tact length. Also, ν is the kinematic viscosity of fluid.
Maximum obtained value of Reynolds number is smaller than
critical value (5 � 105) [31], so laminar flow is present around
the tool, in the case of employment of ultrasonic vibration. In
this condition, the convection coefficient is dependent on the
gas (fluid) velocity according to Eq. (6) [31].
9 As a result, more machining time specified to discharge
ReL ¼ uL = activities. So, material removal and tool wear increased simul-
� / pffiuffiffi
n
�
h ¼ NuLL k !h
;
NuL ¼ 0:664ReL 1=2 Pr1=3
here Pr and NuL are Prandtl and Nusselt numbers,
respectively. Also, k is gas conductivity and L is length of con-
tact. In case of sinusoidal movement (ultrasonic vibration), the
average velocity for half of oscillation period is 0.637 �
uMax. ¼ 0.637 � Ax, which is greater than the case of without
ultrasonic vibration. This variation of gas velocity results in
more convection heat transfer and lower molten material of
the tool.
Figure 8 shows the SEM images of the major cutting edge of
the drilling tool. As can be seen, molten materials are attached
to the tool with spheroid shapes. In the case of ultrasonic
vibration, small spheroids are observed while without
vibration, larger spheroid shapes can be found on the edge.
MATERIALS AND MANUFACTURING PROCESSES 7
Conclusions
In this research, the effect of ultrasonic vibration on a single
discharge of the ECDM process was studied. Ultrasonic
ð4Þ
vibration, electrolyte temperature, and concentration were
considered as machining parameters. Material removal and
tool wear were studied to examine the variation of the machin-
ing efficiency.
The ultrasonic vibration affects two main events in the
ECDM process. Ultrasonic vibration formed a thinner gas film
(result of electrolysis as an electrochemical phenomenon) and
increased the number of discharges in one pulse. Results of
ANOVA showed that the vibration amplitude was the most
effective parameter on the material removal with the contri-
bution of 61.5%. On the other hand, ultrasonic vibration
ð5Þ signified the cooling (convection) mechanism on the tool, so
lower material was melt and smaller tool wear was achieved.
The best results of material removal and tool wear were
achieved by the vibration amplitude of 10 µm. By considering
material removal and tool wear as efficiency indicator, ultra-
sonic vibration improved the total machining efficiency.
Electrolyte temperature and concentration were the next
effective parameters which had the same effectiveness trends
on the material removal. Higher values of these two para-
meters improved the electrolysis rate and discharge power.
ð6Þ taneously. Electrolyte temperature was more effective on the
material removal and tool wear (with contributions of 23%
and 31.2%, respectively) compared with electrolyte concen-
tration (with contributions of 13.8% and 28%, respectively).
Electrolyte temperature and concentration improved one of
the efficiency indicators (material removal), while reduced
the other indicator (tool wear). So, the effect of these two para-
meters on the improvement of total machining efficiency was
uncertain.
References
[1] Singh, T.; Dvivedi, A. Developments in electrochemical discharge
machining: A review on electrochemical discharge machining,
process variants and their hybrid methods. International Journal
of Machine Tools and Manufacture 2016, 105, 1–13.
8 S. ELHAMI AND M. R. RAZFAR
[2] Coteaţă, M.; Schulze, H.-P.; Slătineanu, L. Drilling of difficult-to-cut
steel by electrochemical discharge machining. Materials and
Manufacturing Processes 2011, 26, 1466–1472.
[3] Gupta, P.K.; Dvivedi, A.; Kumar, P. Effect of pulse duration on qual-
ity characteristics of blind hole drilled in glass by ECDM. Materials
and Manufacturing Processes 2015, 31, 1740–1748.
[4] Behroozfar, A.; Razfar, M.R. Experimental study of the tool wear
during the electrochemical discharge machining. Materials and
Manufacturing Processes 2016, 31, 574–580.
[5] El-Hofy, H. Advanced Machining Processes: Nontraditional and
Hybrid Machining Processes, McGraw Hill Professional, New York,
2005.
[6] Kremer, D.; Lebrun, J.; Hosari, B.; Moisan, A. Effects of ultrasonic
vibrations on the performances in EDM. CIRP Annals-
Manufacturing Technology 1989, 38, 199–202.
[7] Huang, H.; Zhang, H.; Zhou, L.; Zheng, H. Ultrasonic vibration
assisted electro- discharge machining of microholes in Nitinol.
Journal of micromechanics and microengineering 2003, 13, 693.
[8] Gao, C.; Liu, Z. A study of ultrasonically aided micro-electrical-
discharge machining by the application of workpiece vibration.
Journal of Materials Processing Technology 2003, 139, 226–228.
[9] McGeough, J.; Pajak, P.; De Silva, A.; Harrison, D. Recent research
and developments in electrochemical machining. International
Journal of Electrical Machining 2003, 8, 1–14.
[10] Ruszaj, A.; Zybura, M.; Żurek, R.; Skrabalak, G. Some aspects of the
electrochemical machining process supported by electrode ultra-
sonic vibrations optimization. Proceedings of the Institution of Mech-
anical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture 2003,
217, 1365–1371.
[11] Yang, I.; Park, M.S.; Chu, C.N. Micro ECM with ultrasonic vibra-
tions using a semi-cylindrical tool. International Journal of Precision
Engineering and Manufacturing 2009, 10, 5–10.
[12] Hajian, M.; Razfar, M.R.; Movahed, S. An experimental study on the
effect of magnetic field orientations and electrolyte concentrations
on ECDM milling performance of glass. Precision Engineering
2016, 45, 322–331.
[13] Huang, S.; Liu, Y.; Li, J.; Hu, H.; Sun, L. Electrochemical discharge
machining micro-hole in stainless steel with tool electrode high-speed
rotating. Materials and Manufacturing Processes 2014, 29, 634–637.
[14] Chak, S.K.; Venkateswara Rao, P. Trepanning of Al2O3 by electro-
chemical discharge machining (ECDM) process using abrasive
electrode with pulsed DC supply. International Journal of Machine
Tools and Manufacture 2007, 47, 2061–2070.
[15] Han, M.-S.; Min, B.-K.; Lee, S.J. Geometric improvement of
electrochemical discharge micro-drilling using an ultrasonic-
vibrated electrolyte. Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineer-
ing 2009, 19, 065004.
[16] Rusli, M.; Furutani, K. Performance of micro-hole drilling by ultra-
sonic-assisted electro-chemical discharge machining. Advanced
Materials Research 2012, 445, 865–870.
[17] Razfar, M.R.; Behroozfar, A.; Ni, J. Study of the effects of tool
longitudinal oscillation on the machining speed of electrochemical
discharge drilling of glass. Precision Engineering 2014, 38,
885–892.
[18] Wüthrich, R.; Despont, B.; Maillard, P.; Bleuler, H. Improving
the material removal rate in spark-assisted chemical engraving
(SACE) gravity-feed micro-hole drilling by tool vibration.
Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering 2006, 16,
N28–N31.
[19] Behroozfar, A.; Razfar, M.R. Experimental and Numerical Study of
Material Removal in Electrochemical Discharge Machining
(ECDM). Materials and Manufacturing Processes 2016, 31,
495–503.
[20] Goud, M.; Sharma, A.K. A three-dimensional finite element
simulation approach to analyze material removal in electrochemical
discharge machining. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical
Engineers, Part C: Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science 2016,
0954406216636167.
[21] Liu, J.; Yue, T.; Guo, Z. An analysis of the discharge mechanism in
electrochemical discharge machining of particulate reinforced metal
matrix composites. International Journal of Machine Tools and
Manufacture 2010, 50, 86–96.
[22] Chu, X.; Zhu, K.; Wang, C.; Hu, Z.; Zhang, Y. A study on plasma
channel expansion in micro-EDM. Materials and Manufacturing
Processes 2016, 31, 381–390.
[23] Liu, J.; Yue, T.; Guo, Z.; Zhang, Y. Single pulse studies of the elec-
trical discharge machining of metal matrix composite materials.
Materials Research Innovations 2015, 19, S5-137–S5-141.
[24] Muralidharan, B.; Chelladurai, H.; Singh, P.; Roy, M.K. Single Spark
Analysis of Electro-Discharge Deposition (EDD) Process. Materials
and Manufacturing Processes 2015, 31, 1853–1864.
[25] Ji, R.; Liu, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, F.; Cai, B.; Fu, X. Single discharge
machining insulating Al2O3 ceramic with high instantaneous pulse
energy in kerosene. Materials and Manufacturing Processes 2012, 27,
676–682.
[26] Bozkurt, B.; Gadalla, A.; Eubank, P. Simulation of erosions in a
single discharge EDM process. Materials and Manufacturing
Processes 1996, 11, 555–563.
[27] Elhami, S.; Razfar, M. Analytical and experimental study on
the integration of ultrasonically vibrated tool into the micro
electro-chemical discharge drilling. Precision Engineering 2016, 47,
424–433.
[28] Zaytsev, I.D.; Aseyev, G.G. Properties of Aqueous Solutions of
Electrolytes. CRC Press: United Kingdom, Boca Raton, FL, 1992.
[29] Roth, J.R. Industrial Plasma Engineering: Volume 2-Applications to
Nonthermal Plasma Processing, Vol. 2, CRC Press, London, 2001.
[30] Raizer, Y.P.; Allen, J.E. Gas Discharge Physics, Vol. 2, Springer:
Germany, Berlin, 1997.
[31] Incropera, F.P.; de Witt, D.P. Fundamentals of Heat and Mass
Transfer. New York, 1985.