A FOUR LEVELED HYBRID OPTIMIZATION TECHNIQUE

OF MACHINING PARAMETERS OF CNC TURNING FOR

ALUMINIUM ALLOY

Presented By-
Samrin Iqbal Sara 180107064
Aodrite Ghosh 180107084
Nur Mohamood Pavel 180107021
2 OUTLINE

❖Abstract ❖Methodology
❖Introduction ❖Result & Discussion
❖Objectives ❖Conclusion
❖Literature Review ❖References
❖Research Gap
3 ABSTRACT

▪ Research topic

▪ Purpose of the research

▪ Methods

▪ Result
 4 INTRODUCTION

 Al Alloy characteristics

 Significance of CNC Turning

 Significance of Surface Roughness and MRR

 Specialties of hybrid optimization technique

5 Literature Review

Authors Year Summery

Bopanna and Jahoor, V 2019 Hybrid of TM-RSM-GA helped reduce surface
Chowdhury, Riaz and Ali, roughness
Farhaz and Trishel
M Junaid Mir 2018 RSM and ANOVA backed up that cutting speed and
cutting tool has the most significant effect on
Surface roughness
Hamza Bensoulia 2016 Applied a hybrid of TM, RSM and ANOVA to obtain
better surface quality using coated cutting tool
6 Literature Review

Authors Year Summery

L Mahesh Kumar 2015 Used RSM and GA to find that higher cutting speed,
higher feed rate and higher depth of cut leads to
maximum MRR
Jayaraman 2015 Used RSM and GA during turning AA and found out
Ponnambalathandi that higher cutting speed, feed rate and higher
depth of cut leads to maximum MRR
Ranganath M. Singari 2013 Feed Rate, Depth of Cut, Cutting speed has the
strongest effect on surface roughness when TM and
RSM is used in turning various materials
7
RESEARCH GAP

➢Turning operation in CNC lathe machine using aluminum 7XXX alloy is

relatively a new field of study.
➢Hybrid optimization by integration of 4 techniques for cutting
parameters when both surface roughness and MRR have been
determined has not been studied yet.
8
OBJECTIVES

 To prepare the working material according to the molecular ratio of

AA 7XXX.
 To observe the influence of cutting parameters in terms of surface
roughness and MRR.
 To develop a hybrid optimization technique to optimize the output
variables.
9
Methodology

➢ Workpiece : Aluminum Alloy 7XXX ➢Cutting Tool : Carbide insert cutting tool
Table 1: Elements of prepared Material
Element Atom %
Mg 3.5
Al 88.04
Si 2.18
Mn <0.1
Fe 1.08
Ni 0.64
Cu 1.84
Zn Properties of Aluminum 3831.27
Figure: Alloy Figure 1: Cutting tool
Sn 1.45
10 Methodology (Cont.)

Machine: Roughness Tester Profilometer:

➢CNC Lathe Machine ➢Mitutoyo Surftest SJ-210

Figure 2: ST-30Y CNC Lathe machine Figure 3: Surface Roughness Tester

11 Methodology (Cont.)
Taguchi Analysis:
Table 2: Initial parameters for SR & MRR

Levels
Sl. Variables/Factors
1 2 3

1 Feed rate (mm/min) .2 .3 .4

2 Depth of cut (mm) .3 .4 .5

3 Number of Pass 3 4 5

4 Spindle speed (rpm) 1000 1200 1400

12 Methodology (Cont.)
Table 3: Data table for SR
Feed rate Spindle speed No Depth of cut Surface
(mm/min) (rpm) of Passes (mm) Roughness, Ra (µm)

0.2 1400 5 0.5 1.21433

0.4 1400 4 0.3 1.21433

0.3 1000 4 0.5 3.34733

0.2 1200 4 0.4 3.34733

0.4 1000 5 0.4 4.04406

0.4 1200 3 0.5 6.65633

0.2 1000 3 0.3 1.68967

0.3 1400 3 0.4 3.80900

0.3 1200 5 0.3 2.67600

13 Methodology (Cont.)
Table 4: Data table for MRR

Feed rate (mm/min) Spindle speed (rpm) Number of pass Depth of cut (mm) MRR

0.2 1400 5 0.5 7.65608

0.4 1400 4 0.3 9.18730

0.3 1000 4 0.5 11.4841

0.2 1200 4 0.4 6.12486

0.4 1000 5 0.4 12.2497

0.4 1200 3 0.5 15.3122

0.2 1000 3 0.3 4.59365

0.3 1400 3 0.4 9.18730

0.3 1200 5 0.3 6.89047

14 Methodology (Cont.)

Figure 4: Graph of Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SR) Figure 5: Graph of Signal-to-Noise Ratio (MRR)
15 Methodology (Cont.)

Regression Equations (TM)

Surface Roughness (µm) = 0.74+ 14.60 * Feed Rate – 0.00056 * Rotational

Speed - 1.26 * Depth of Cut – 0.133 * No of Pass

Material Removal Rate(mm^3/min) = - 12.07 + 36.21 * Feed Rate – 0.00106 *

Rotational Speed +28.41 * Depth of Cut – 0.040 * No of Pass
16 Methodology (Cont.)
TA-RSM Optimization:
Table 5: Initial parameters for SR
SL Variable Levels
-2 -1 0 1 2
1 Feed Rate 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
2 Rotational Speed 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600
3 Depth of Cut 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4
4 No. of Pass 3 4 5 6 7

Table 6: Initial parameters for MRR

SL Variable Levels
-2 -1 0 1 2
1 Feed Rate 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5
2 Rotational Speed 800 900 1000 1100 1200
3 Depth of Cut 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6
4 No. of Pass 1 2 3 4 5
17 Methodology (Cont.)
Table 7: Data table of TM-RSM for Surface Roughness
Exp No. Feed Rate Rotational Speed Depth of Cut Number of Pass Surface Roughness

(mm/min) RPM mm µm
1 0.2 1400 0.3 5 1.71
2 0.25 1300 0.35 6 2.159333333
3 0.2 1400 0.3 5 1.717333333
4 0.2 1400 0.3 7 1.595
5 0.2 1400 0.3 5 1.736
6 0.2 1200 0.3 5 1.583
7 0.15 1500 0.35 4 0.656
8 0.25 1300 0.25 4 4.059
9 0.25 1500 0.25 4 3.170333333
10 0.2 1400 0.3 5 1.68
11 0.15 1500 0.25 6 1.177
12 0.25 1500 0.25 6 1.704666667
13 0.15 1300 0.25 4 0.956666667
14 0.25 1300 0.35 4 2.53
15 0.2 1600 0.3 5 1.834333333
18 Methodology (Cont.)
Table 8: Data table of TM-RSM for Surface Roughness (Cont.)
Exp No. Feed Rate Rotational Speed Depth of Cut Number of Pass Surface Roughness

16 0.15 1500 0.35 6 1.267666667

17 0.15 1300 0.25 6 1.061
18 0.2 1400 0.3 5 1.322333333
19 0.2 1400 0.2 5 2.181666667
20 0.25 1300 0.25 6 1.954666667
21 0.15 1500 0.25 4 1.203666667
22 0.15 1300 0.35 6 1.248666667
23 0.25 1500 0.35 4 2.435666667
24 0.25 1500 0.35 6 1.984
25 0.2 1400 0.4 5 2.190333333
26 0.15 1300 0.35 4 1.478333333
27 0.1 1400 0.3 5 1.099666667
28 0.2 1400 0.3 3 1.227666667
29 0.3 1400 0.3 5 4.384666667
30 0.2 1400 0.3 5 1.477666667
19 Methodology (Cont.)
Table 9: Data table of TM-RSM for MRR
Exp No. Feed Rate Rotational Speed Depth of Cut Number of Pass MRR

(mm/min) RPM mm mm3/min

1 0.45 900 0.45 2 15.3954108
2 0.35 900 0.55 4 14.90123712
3 0.4 1000 0.4 3 11.86016832
4 0.4 1000 0.5 3 15.205344
5 0.4 800 0.5 3 15.50945088
6 0.5 1000 0.5 3 19.00668
7 0.4 1000 0.5 5 14.59713024
8 0.45 1100 0.45 4 15.3954108
9 0.3 1000 0.5 3 12.08824848
10 0.4 1200 0.5 3 15.81355776
11 0.4 1000 0.5 3 16.42177152
12 0.35 900 0.45 4 11.9742084
13 0.35 1100 0.55 2 14.10295656
14 0.45 900 0.55 2 19.15873344
15 0.4 1000 0.5 3 15.205344
20 Methodology (Cont.)
Table 10: Data table of TM-RSM for MRR(Cont.)
Exp No. Feed Rate Rotational Speed Depth of Cut Number of Pass MRR

16 0.4 1000 0.5 3 17.33409216

17 0.35 1100 0.55 4 15.16733064
18 0.35 900 0.55 2 14.6351436
19 0.35 1100 0.45 4 12.24030192
20 0.35 900 0.45 2 11.9742084
21 0.4 1000 0.5 3 15.50945088
22 0.45 1100 0.55 4 18.13237272
23 0.45 1100 0.45 2 15.3954108
24 0.45 1100 0.55 2 17.79025248
25 0.45 900 0.55 4 18.8166132
26 0.4 1000 0.5 1 16.42177152
27 0.45 900 0.45 4 16.76389176
28 0.35 1100 0.45 2 12.24030192
29 0.4 1000 0.6 3 18.2464128
30 0.4 1000 0.5 3 15.81355776
21 Methodology (Cont.)
Table 11: Optimized Data table of TA-RSM for Surface Roughness
Number Feed Rotational Depth of Number of Surface Desirability
Rate Speed Cut Pass Roughness
1 -1.000 0.999 0.648 -1.000 0.747 0.976 Selected

2 -1.000 1.000 0.676 -1.000 0.747 0.976

3 -1.000 1.000 0.703 -1.000 0.748 0.975

4 -1.000 1.000 0.529 -1.000 0.749 0.975

5 -1.000 1.000 0.773 -1.000 0.749 0.975

6 -1.000 1.000 0.625 -0.996 0.749 0.975

7 -1.000 0.979 0.689 -1.000 0.750 0.975

8 -0.995 1.000 0.743 -1.000 0.750 0.975

9 -1.000 0.998 0.496 -1.000 0.750 0.975

10 -1.000 0.986 0.529 -1.000 0.750 0.975

22 Methodology (Cont.)
Table 12: Optimized Data table of TM-RSM for MRR

Rotational Number of
Number Feed Rate Depth of Cut MRR Desirability
Speed Pass

1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 18.757 0.990 Selected

2 1.000 1.000 0.991 1.000 18.744 0.989
3 0.990 1.000 1.000 1.000 18.738 0.988
4 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.975 18.757 0.987
5 1.000 0.977 0.997 1.000 18.754 0.987
6 0.979 1.000 1.000 0.997 18.717 0.986
7 1.000 0.963 1.000 1.000 18.757 0.986
8 0.999 0.999 0.975 1.000 18.718 0.986
9 0.984 1.000 0.988 1.000 18.709 0.986
10 0.991 1.000 1.000 0.966 18.740 0.985
23 Methodology (Cont.)
Table 4.17: Optimized Factors and their Coded Levels (MRR)
SL Variable Levels

-2 -1 0 1 2
1 Fr 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5
2 N 800 900 1000 1100 1200
3 Dc 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 .6
4 P 1 2 3 4 5
Table 4.17: Optimized Factors and their Coded Levels (SR)

SL Variable Levels
-2 -1 0 1 2
1 Fr 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
2 N 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600
3 Dc 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4
4 P 3 4 5 6 7
24 Methodology (Cont.)

Regression Equation (TM-RSM)

Surface Roughness (µm) = 0.74+ 14.60 * Feed Rate – 0.00056 * Rotational

Speed - 1.26 * Depth of Cut – 0.133 * No of Pass

Material Removal Rate(mm^3/min) = - 12.07 + 36.21 * Feed Rate –

0.00106 * Rotational Speed + 28.41
* Depth of Cut – 0.040 * No of Pass
25 Methodology (Cont.)
Machined Workpieces:

Figure: Machined Workpieces

26 Methodology (Cont.)
Table: Boundaries for TM-RSM-GA Optimization

Parameter SR MRR

Lower Upper Lower Upper

Boundary Boundary Boundary Boundary
Fr 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.5

N 1200 1600 800 1200

Dc 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.6

P 3 7 1 5
27 Methodology (Cont.)

Figure 11: Optimized Genetic Algorithm Result (Surface Roughness)

28 Methodology (Cont.)

Figure 13: Optimized Genetic Algorithm Result (MRR)

29 Methodology (Cont.)
Table: Boundaries for TM-RSM-SA Optimization

Paramete SR MRR
r
Lower Upper Start Lower Upper Start Point
Boundary Boundary Point Boundary Boundary
Fr 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.45

N 1200 1600 800 800 1200 900

Dc 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.6 0.55

P 3 7 1 1 5 4
30 Methodology (Cont.)

Figure 13: Matlab Result (SR)

31 Methodology (Cont.)

Figure 14: Matlab Result (MRR)

32 Methodology (Cont.)

 Table: Conditions to define limitations constraints bounds

Conditions Decisions

Upper Bound Lower Bound

GA<SA GA SA

GA>SA SA GA

Nearest upper bounded of Nearest lower bounded of

GA=SA the coded value of the coded value of
experimental design experimental design
33 Methodology (Cont.)

Figure: Simulation Windows for TM-RSM-GA-SA-1

34 Methodology (Cont.)

Figure: Simulation Windows for TM-RSM-GA-SA-2

35 RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Table: Result for SR

Fr N Dc Number of Predicted Actual Ra

Method
(mm/min) (RPM) (mm) passes Rt (µm) (µm)

TM 0.2 1400 0.3 5 1.365 1.686

TM-RSM 0.15 1500 0.33 4 0.747 1.262

TM-RSM-GA 0.1 1200 0.4 3 0.661 0.826

TM-RSM-SA 0.1 1503.507 0.398 5 0.186 0.651

TM-RSM-GA-SA-1 0.1 1502.367 0.4 5 0.1897 0.621

TM-RSM-GS-SA-2 0.1 1335.372 0.4 5 0.2879 0.752

36 RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Table: Result for MRR
Predicted
Fr N Dc Number Actual MRR
Method MRRt
(mm/min) (RPM) (mm) of passes (mm^3/min)
(mm3 /min)

TM 0.4 1000 0.5 3 15.31 15.003

TM-RSM 0.45 900 0.55 4 18.736 17.961

TM-RSM-GA 0.5 800 0.6 1 22.193 23.720

TM-RSM-SA 0.5 883 0.6 1 22.105 23.568

TM-RSM-GA-SA-1 0.5 800 0.6 1 22.193 23.720

TM-RSM-GS-SA-2 0.5 800.007 0.6 1 22.1929 23.523

37 SEM ANALYSIS
38 CONCLUSION
 The more the level of hybridizations are added, the better outcomes are being achieved.
 To optimize the cutting parameters of AA 7XXX in terms of turning operation, TM-RSM-GA-
SA1 gives the best result than the traditional TM or RSM techniques as TM-RSM gives better
result than traditional RSM.
 Surface roughness can be improved by decreasing the values of feed rate while
increasing the depth of cut.
 Better MRR can be achieved by increasing both the feed rate and depth of cut.
 TM-RSM-GA-SA1 gives the best results with the process parameter values of Fr=0.1mm/min,
N=1502.367rpm, Dc=0.4mm and P=5 for Ra and Fr=0.5mm/min, N=800rpm, Dc=0.6mm and
P=1 for MRR.
 The lowest Ra has been achieved is 0.1897µm theoretically and 0.621µm experimentally.
 The highest theoretical MRR has been found is 22.193mm^3/min and the highest
experimental MRR is 23.720mm^3/min.
39 RECOMMENDATIONS

 Experimental work in different alloy materials can be carried out with

different cutting parameter values.
 Different types of output can also be introduced to observe the effect of
input parameter on their machinability.
 Different input parameters (tool materials, nose radius) can be introduced
too.
 Apart from turning operation, other operations like drilling, milling, grinding
etc. can be performed.
 Variety of cutters can be introduced
40 REFERENCE
 Chowdary, B. V., Jahoor, R., Ali, F., & Gokool, T. (2021). Optimisation of surface
roughness when CNC turning of Al-6061: application of Taguchi design of experiments
and genetic algorithm. Journal of Mechanical Engineering (JMechE), 16(2), 77-91.
 Mir, M., & Wani, M. (2018). Modelling and analysis of tool wear and surface roughness in
hard turning of AISI D2 steel using response surface methodology. International Journal of
Industrial Engineering Computations, 9(1), 63-74
 Bensouilah, H., Aouici, H., Meddour, I., Yallese, M. A., Mabrouki, T., & Girardin, F.
(2016). Performance of coated and uncoated mixed ceramic tools in hard turning
process. Measurement, 82, 1-18.
 Jayaraman, P., & Kumar, L. M. (2015). Optimization of Cutting Parameters in Turning of
AA6351 Using Response Surface Methodology and Genetic Algorithm. International
Journal of Applied Engineering Research, 10(23), 43905-43911.
 Ponnambalathandi, Jayaraman & Kumar, L. & V.S., Senthil kumar. (2015). Optimization of
cutting parameters in turning of AA6351 using response surface methodology and genetic
algorithm. 10. 43905-43911.
 Ranganath, M. S., Vipin, R. S., & Mishra, S. (2013). Optimization of process parameters in
turning operation of aluminium (6061) with cemented carbide inserts using taguchi method
and ANOVA. International Journal, 1(1), 13-21.
THANK YOU…