Measurement 46 (2013) 1521–1529

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Measurement
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/measurement

Optimisation of machining parameters for turning operations

based on response surface methodology
Ashvin J. Makadia a,⇑, J.I. Nanavati b,1
a
Darshan Institute of Engineering and Technology, Gujarat Technology University, At. Hadala, Rajkot-Morbi Highway, Nr. Water Sump,
Rajkot 363 650, Gujarat, India
b
Faculty of Engineering and Technology, MS University, Kalabhavan, Baroda 390 001, Gujarat, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Design of experiments has been used to study the effect of the main turning parameters
Received 12 January 2012 such as feed rate, tool nose radius, cutting speed and depth of cut on the surface roughness
Received in revised form 9 November 2012 of AISI 410 steel. A mathematical prediction model of the surface roughness has been
Accepted 11 November 2012
developed in terms of above parameters. The effect of these parameters on the surface
Available online 5 December 2012
roughness has been investigated by using Response Surface Methodology (RSM). Response
surface contours were constructed for determining the optimum conditions for a required
Keywords:
surface roughness. The developed prediction equation shows that the feed rate is the main
Response surface methodology
Surface roughness
factor followed by tool nose radius influences the surface roughness. The surface roughness
Optimisation was found to increase with the increase in the feed and it decreased with increase in the
tool nose radius. The verification experiment is carried out to check the validity of the
developed model that predicted surface roughness within 6% error.
Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction roughness depends on cutting speed, feed rate, depth of

Surface roughness is one of the most important require-
ments in machining process, as it is considered an index of
product quality. It measures the finer irregularities of the
surface texture. Achieving the desired surface quality is
critical for the functional behaviour of a part. Surface
roughness influences the performance of mechanical parts
and their production costs because it affects factors, such
as friction, ease of holding lubricant, electrical and thermal
conductivity, geometric tolerances and more. The ability of
a manufacturing operation to produce a desired surface
roughness depends on various parameters. The factors that
influence surface roughness are machining parameters,
tool and work piece material properties and cutting
conditions. For example, in turning operation the surface
⇑ Corresponding author. Mobile: +91 09426429122; fax: +91 02822
293008.
E-mail addresses: ajmakadia@yahoo.com (A.J. Makadia), jinanavati@
hotmail.com (J.I. Nanavati).
1
Mobile: +91 09825027274.
cut, tool nose radius, lubrication of the cutting tool, ma-
chine vibrations, tool wear and on the mechanical and
other properties of the material being machined. Even
small changes in any of the mentioned factors may have
a significant effect on the produced surface [1].
Therefore, it is important for the researchers to model
and quantify the relationship between roughness and the
parameters affecting its value. The determination of this
relationship remains an open field of research, mainly
because of the advances in machining and materials tech-
nology and the available modeling techniques. In machin-
ability studies investigations, statistical design of
experiments is used quite extensively. Statistical design
of experiments refers to the process of planning the exper-
iments so that the appropriate data can be analysed by
statistical methods, resulting in valid and objective conclu-
sions [2]. Design methods such as factorial designs,
response surface methodology (RSM) and taguchi methods
are now widely use in place of one factor at a time
experimental approach which is time consuming and
exorbitant in cost.

0263-2241/$ - see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2012.11.026
1522 A.J. Makadia, J.I. Nanavati / Measurement 46 (2013) 1521–1529
Previously, most published studies show the tendency
to seek effect of cutting conditions like cutting speed, feed
rate and depth of cut on surface roughness as well as less
number of trials (Table 1). Present study seeks to find out
the effect of above parameters and cutting geometry such
as tool nose radius on the surface roughness value and
81 number of experiments. Thiele and Melkote [3] had
used a three-factor complete factorial design to determine
the effects of work piece hardness and cutting tool edge
geometry on surface roughness and machining forces.
These models concluded that the effect of the two-factor
interaction of the edge geometry and work piece hardness
on the surface roughness is also found to be important. Mi-
tal and Mehta [4] have conducted a survey of surface pre-
diction models developed and factors influencing the
surface roughness. They have developed the surface finish
models for aluminium alloy 390, ductile cast iron, medium
carbon leaded steel, medium carbon alloy steel 4130, and
inconel 718 for a wide range of machining conditions de-
fined by cutting speed, feed and tool nose radius. They con-
cluded that cutting speed, feed and tool nose radius have a
significant effect on the surface roughness. Sundram and
Lambert [5,6] have developed the mathematical models
for predicting the surface roughness of AISI 4140 steel dur-
ing the fine turning operation using both TiC coated and
uncoated tungsten carbide throw away tools. Noordin
et al. [7] studied the application of response surface meth-
odology in describing the performance of coated carbide
tools when turning AISI 1045 steel. They concluded that
feed was the most significant factor that influences the sur-
face roughness, however (SECA)2 and (feed  SECA) also
provide contribution for the surface roughness. Suresh
et al. [8] have developed a surface roughness prediction
model for turning mild steel using a response surface
methodology to produce the factor effects of the individual
process parameters. Surface roughness prediction model
has been optimised by using genetic algorithms (GAs).
The Taguchi method was used by [9,16,17] to find the opti-
mal cutting parameters for turning operations. The study
found that feed rate and tool nose radius having highest ef-
fect. Choudhury and El-Baradie [10] revealed that cutting
speed was the main influencing factor on the tool wear,
followed by the feed rate and the depth of cut. Munoz
and Cassier [11] developed mathematical model for sur-
face roughness for different types of steel such as AISI
1020, AISI 1045 and AISI 4140. They found that surface fin-
ish improves by increasing cutting speed and tool nose
radius and by decreasing the feed rate. The depth of cut
Table 1
Factors affecting on surface roughness and major investigators.
Investigators Nos. of trials Major factors
Yang and Tarang [9] 09 Cutting speed,
Chaudhary et al. [33] 24 Cutting speed,
Noordin et al. [7] 16 Cutting speed,
Mohamed et al. [32] 12 Cutting speed,
Davidson et al. [31] 17 Cutting speed,
Lalwani et al. [29] 28 Cutting speed,
Nikos et al. [24] 32 Cutting speed,
Nikolaos et al. [23] 27 Cutting speed,
does not seem to have a significant influence on surface
finish. Fang and Wang [12] developed an empirical model
for surface roughness using two level fractional factorial
design (251) with three replicates considering work piece
hardness, feed rate, cutting tool point angle, cutting speed
and cutting time as independent parameters using non lin-
ear analysis. Paulo Davim [13], the cutting speed has great-
er influence on the roughness followed by the feed and
depth of cut has no significant influence on surface rough-
ness found by using the Taguchi method. Lee, Tarng and
Jaun [14,15] have developed a system for measuring sur-
face roughness of turned parts through computer vision
system. They extracted the features of the surface image
and thus predicted the surface roughness of the turned
parts using the image of the turned surface and turning
conditions. Petropoulos et al. [18] had used multi regres-
sion analysis and ANOVA for statistical study of surface
roughness in turning of PEEK composite. The result for all
three PEEK’S examined increase in feed causes significant
increase in all the surface roughness, increase of cutting
speed was favourable, as decreases roughness but only
slightly. Nikolaos et al. [19] used 23 full factorial design
for AISI 316L steel with three variables named feed, speed
and depth of cut for application of femoral head. The estab-
lished equation showed that the depth of cut was the main
influencing factor on the surface roughness. It increased
with increasing the depth of cut and feed rate respectively,
but it decreased with increasing the cutting speed. Nikos
[20] used Response Surface Methodology (RSM) and fuzzy
logic system through the Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference
System (ANFIS) for Ti6Al4 V titanium alloy. The feed rate
has been verified as the most important parameter for
the surface of Ti6Al4 V. The polynomial models that have
been employed to predict the surface roughness produced
during the Ti6Al4 V turning, only the 2FI model was suc-
cessful in Ra prediction. Lalwani et al. [21] used RSM for
investigations of cutting parameters influence on cutting
forces and surfaces finish in hard turning of MDN250 steel
and concluded that good surface roughness can be
achieved when cutting speed and depth of cut are set
nearer to their high level of the experimental range and
feed rate is at low level of the experimental range. Moham-
ed Dabnum et al. [22] describe the development of surface
roughness model for turning glass ceramic (MACOR)
utilising design of experiment and response surface
methodology and showed that the feed rate was the main
influencing factor on the roughness, followed by cutting
speed and depth of cut. Choudhury and EL-Baradie [23]
Material used Methodology
feed rate, depth of cut S 45C Taguchi method
feed rate, depth of cut EN 24 T Response surface
feed rate, side cutting edge angle AISI 1045 steel Response surface
feed rate, depth of cut Glass ceramic Response surface
feed rate, coolant Flow formed AA6061alloy Response surface
feed rate, depth of cut MDN250 steel Response surface
feed rate, depth of cut Ti6Al4 V Alloy Response surface
feed rate, depth of cut AISI 316L steel Response surface
 A.J. Makadia, J.I. Nanavati / Measurement 46 (2013) 1521–1529 1523

developed surface roughness prediction model for turning
of EN 24T utilising response surface methodology. The re-
sults have revealed that the effect of feed is much more
pronounced than the effect of cutting speed and depth of
cut on the surface roughness. However, a higher cutting
speed improves the surface roughness.
The aim of the present study has been, therefore to de-
velop the surface roughness prediction model of AISI 410
steel with the aid of statistical method under various cut-
ting conditions. By using response surface methodology
and (34) full factorial design of experiment, quadratic mod-
el has been developed with 95% confidence level.
If the first order model demonstrates any statistical lack
of fit, a second order model can then be developed.
^ ¼ b0 þ b1 x1 þ b2 x2 þ b3 x3 þ b4 x4 þ b12 x1 x2 þ b13 x1 x3
y
þ b14 x1 x4 þ b23 x2 x3 þ b24 x2 x4 þ b34 x3 x4 þ b11 x21
þ b22 x22 þ b33 x23 þ b44 x24 ð6Þ
A second order empirical regression model is required
when the true response function is non linear and
unknown.
3. Experimental work

2. Postulation of the surface roughness model In this study, cutting experiments are planned using 3
level full factorial experimental design. Machining tests
A popular model [1] to estimate the surface roughness are conducted by considering four cutting parameters: cut-
with a tool having none zero radius is: ting speed (v), feed rate (f), depth of cut (d), and tool nose
radius (r). Total 34 = 81 cutting experiments are carried
0:032f 2 out. Low-middle-high level of cutting parameters in cut-
Ra ¼ ð1Þ
r ting space of three level full factorial experimental design
where Ra is the surface roughness (lm), f is the feed rate are shown in Table 2. Ranges of cutting parameters are se-
(mm/rev), r is the tool nose radius (mm). lected based on shop floor. All the experiments were car-
To borrow the Taylor’s tool life equation in metal cut- ried out on Jobber XL model made by Ace design, CNC
ting, a functional relationship between surface roughness lathe machine with variable spindle speed 50–3500 RPM
and the independent variables under investigation could and 7.5 KW motor drive was used for machining tests. Sur-
be postulated by: face finish of the work piece material was measured by
Surf test model No. SJ-400 (Mitutoyo make).The surface
m q
Ra ¼ cf r n v p d ð2Þ roughness was measured at three equally spaced locations
around the circumference of the work pieces to obtain the
where Ra is the surface roughness, c the constant, f the feed statistically significant data for the test. In the present
rate (mm/rev), r the tool nose radius (mm), v the cutting work, the work piece material was the AISI 410 steel. This
speed (m/min), d the depth of cut (mm), m, n, p, q are the material has good wear and corrosion resistance and used
constant that are to be derived. for the manufacturing of nozzle, valve parts and impeller of
A logarithmic transformation can be applied to convert submersible pump. A mechanical property of the material
the non linear form of Eq. (2) into the following linear
form: Table 2
Input parameters and their levels.
lnðRa Þ ¼ lnc þ m lnf þ n lnr þ p lnv þ q lnd ð3Þ
Sr. no. Parameters Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
This is one of the data transformation methods used in 1 Cutting speed (v), m/min 220 250 280
empirical model building. Eq. (3) can be rewritten as a lin- 2 Feed (f), mm/rev 0.1 0.15 0.2
ear model: 3 Depth of cut (d), mm 0.3 0.6 0.9
4 Tool nose radius (r), mm 0.4 0.8 1.2
g ¼ b0 þ b1 x1 þ b2 x2 þ b3 x3 þ b4 x4 ð4Þ

where g is the true value of surface roughness on logarith- Table 3

mic scale. For simplicity Eq. (4) can be written as: Mechanical properties of AISI 410 steel.

^ ¼ b0 þ b1 x1 þ b2 x2 þ b3 x3 þ b4 x4
y ð5Þ Material properties AISI 410 steel
Physical density 7.74 g/cm3
where y^ is the predicted surface roughness value after log- Mechanical hardness, Rockwell B 99 HRB
arithmic transformation and b0, b1, b2, b3 and b4 are esti- Tensile strength, ultimate 510 Mpa
mates of the parameters b0, b1, b2, b3, b4 respectively. Tensile strength, yield 310 Mpa
Elongation of break 25%
With the experimental data, the analysis consisted of
Modulus of elasticity 200 Gpa
estimating these four parameters for a first order model.

Table 4
Model summery statistics.

Source Standard deviation R2 Adj. R2 Pred. R2 PRESS

Linear 0.130411 0.9476 0.9449 0.9407 1.46332
2FI 0.114851 0.9626 0.9572 0.9528 1.16464
Quadratic 0.067053 0.9880 0.9854 0.9825 0.43136 Suggested
1524 A.J. Makadia, J.I. Nanavati / Measurement 46 (2013) 1521–1529

Table 5
Estimated regression coefficients for roughness (Ra).

Term Coeff. SE Coeff. T P

Constant 0.11407 0.022351 49.844 0.000
Cutting speed (v) 0.05481 0.009125 6.007 0.000
Feed (f) 0.50981 0.009125 55.871 0.000
Depth of cut (d) 0.04407 0.009125 4.830 0.000
Nose radius (r) 0.4100 0.009125 44.931 0.000
Speed  speed 0.0837 0.015805 5.296 0.000
Feed  feed 0.11241 0.015805 7.112 0.000
Depth of cut  depth of cut 0.01185 0.015805 0.750 0.456
Nose radius  nose radius 0.12259 0.015805 7.757 0.000
Cutting speed  feed 0.02528 0.011176 2.262 0.027
Cutting speed  depth of cut 0.01472 0.011176 1.317 0.192
Cutting speed  nose radius 0.01194 0.011176 1.069 0.289
Feed  depth of cut 0.01417 0.011176 1.268 0.209
Feed  nose radius 0.0950 0.011176 8.501 0.000
Depth of cut  nose radius 0.00556 0.011176 0.497 0.621

is given in Table 3. In this study, ceramic inserts (supplied
by Ceratizit) were used. Inserts with ISO code
TNMG160404 EN-TMF, TNMG 160408 EN-TM and TNMG
160412 EN-TM with different nose radius (60° triangular
shaped inserts) were used. The inserts were mounted on
a commercial tool. The procedure of experimental scheme
is shown in Fig. 8.
4. Result and discussion
The analysis of variance (ANOVA) was applied to study
the effect of the input parameters on the surface rough-
ness. Table 4 gives the statistics for the model summery.
It reveals that the quadratic model is the best appropriate
model. So, for further analysis this model was used. Table 5
gives the Estimated Regression Coefficients of surface
Roughness for uncoded units. The value ‘‘p’’ for the model
is less than 0.05 which indicates that the model terms are
significant, which is desirable as it indicates that the terms
in the model have a significant effect on the response. From
response surface Eq. (7), the most significant factor on the
surface roughness is feed rate. The next contribution on
surface roughness is nose radius and cutting speed. Fur-
ther, it is seen that the R2 value is 0.9880 and the Adj. R2
is 0.9854. The predicted R2 value 0.9825 is in reasonable
agreement with Adj. R2 value. The R2 value in this case is
high and close to 1, which is desirable.
In order to understand the turning process, the experi-
mental results were used to develop the mathematical
models using response surface methodology (RSM). In this
work, a commercially available software package (MINI-
TAB 14) was used for the computation work. The proposed
quadratic model was developed from the above functional
relationship using RSM method.
Ra ¼ 5:32260  0:0475792v þ 31:1315f
 0:208642d  1:75949r þ 0:00009v 2
2
 44:9630f 2  0:131687d þ 0:7662204r 2
 0:0168519v f þ 0:00163580v d
þ 0:000995370v r þ 0:94444fd  457000fr
 0:0462963dr ð7Þ

Fig. 1. Main effect plots of surface roughness (Ra).

 A.J. Makadia, J.I. Nanavati / Measurement 46 (2013) 1521–1529 1525

Fig. 2. Interaction plots of surface roughness (Ra).

Eq. (7) gives the prediction model for the surface rough-
ness in terms of actual factors. It reveals that surface
roughness increases with increasing feed rate and de-
creases with increasing tool nose radius. Surface finish im-
proves with increasing cutting speed. However, depth of
cut has no significant effect on the surface roughness
(Fig. 1)
The adequacy of the modal has been investigated by the
examination of residuals. The residuals, which are the dif-
ference between the respective observed response and the
predicted response are examined using normal probability
plots of the residuals and the plots of the residuals versus
the predicted response. If the model is adequate, the points
on the normal probability plots of the residuals should
form a straight line. On the other hand the plots of the
residuals versus the predicted response should be struc-
ture less, that is, they should contain no obvious pattern.
The normal probability plots of the residuals and the plots
of the residuals versus the predicted response for the sur-
face roughness values are shown in Figs. 3 and 4. It re-
vealed that the residuals generally fall on a straight line
implying that the errors are distributed normally. Fig. 4 re-
vealed that they have no obvious pattern and unusual
structure. This implies that the model proposed is ade-
quate and there is no reason to suspect any violation of
the independence or constant variance assumption [7].

Fig. 3. Normal probability plot of residual for surface roughness data.

1526 A.J. Makadia, J.I. Nanavati / Measurement 46 (2013) 1521–1529

parameters namely feed rate, tool nose radius, cutting

Fig. 4. Plot of residual vs. fitted surface roughness values.
The effect of main factor and interactions are shown in
Figs. 1 and 2.
The 3D surface graphs for the surface roughness are
shown in Figs. 5–7. As the model is adequate these 3D sur-
face plots can be used for estimating the surface roughness
values for the any suitable combination of the input
speed and depth of cut. It is clear from Fig. 5 that the sur-
face roughness decreases with increasing tool nose radius.
Good surface finish can be obtained for a higher tool nose
radius, and depth of cut has no significant effect on the sur-
face roughnes. Fig. 6 revealed that cutting speed improves
surface roughness. Fig. 7 gives the surface graph for surface
roughness at depth of cut = 0.3 mm, tool nose ra-
dius = 0.4 mm and feed rate and cutting speed varies. It
indicates that surface roughness increases with increasing
feed rate.
One of the most important aims of experiments related
to manufacturing is to achieve the desired surface rough-
ness of the optimal cutting parameters. To end this, the re-
sponse surface optimisation is an ideal technique for
determination of the best cutting parameters in turning
operation. Here, the goal is to minimise surface roughness
(Ra). RSM optimisation results for surface parameters are
shown in Fig. 9 and Table 6. Optimum cutting parameters
are found to be cutting speed of 255.75 m/min, feed of
0.1 mm/rev, depth of cut of 0.3 mm and tool nose radius
of 1.2 mm. The optimised surface roughness parameter is
Ra = 0.2601 lm.

Fig. 5. 3D Surface graph for (Ra) at nose radius and depth of cut varies.

Fig. 6. 3D Surface graph for (Ra) at cutting speed and nose radius varies.
 A.J. Makadia, J.I. Nanavati / Measurement 46 (2013) 1521–1529 1527

Fig. 7. 3D Surface graph for (Ra) at cutting speed and feed varies.

Fig. 8. Experimental scheme.

5. Confirmation test
In order to verify the accuracy of the model developed,
three confirmation run experiments were performed
(Table 7). The test conditions for the confirmation test
were so chosen that they be within the range of the levels
defined previously. The predicted values and the associ-
ated experimental values were compared. The error per-
centage is within permissible limits. So, the response
equation for the surface roughness predicted through
RSM can be use to successfully predict the surface rough-
ness values for any combination of the feed rate, tool nose
radius, cutting speed and depth of cut within the range of
the experimentation performed.
1528 A.J. Makadia, J.I. Nanavati / Measurement 46 (2013) 1521–1529

Fig. 9. Response optimisation for surface roughness parameters.

Table 6
Response optimisation for surface roughness parameters.

Parameters Goal Optimum conditions Lower Target Upper Pre. resp. Desirability
v (m/min) f (mm/rev) d (mm) r (mm)
Ra Minimum 255.758 0.1 0.3 1.2 0.3 0.3 2.4 0.260122 1

Table 7
Confirmation test.

Sr. no. Speed (v) (m/min) Feed (f) (mm/rev) Nose radius (r) (mm) Depth of cut (d) (mm) Experimental RSM Predicted Error (%)
(Ra) (Ra)
1 220 0.12 0.4 0.5 1.30 1.2230 5.9
2 260 0.15 0.8 0.7 0.95 0.9170 3.4
3 275 0.18 1.2 0.8 0.90 0.8519 5.3

6. Conclusions
In this paper, application of RSM on the AISI 410 steel is
carried out for turning operation. A quadratic model has
been developed for surface roughness (Ra) to investigate
the influence of machining parameters. The results are as
follows:
(255.75 m/min, 0.1 mm/rev, 0.3 mm, 1.2 mm) for
cutting speed, feed rate, depth of cut and tool nose
radius respectively.
(5) Verification experiments carried out show that the
empirical models developed can be used for turning
of AISI-410 steel within 6% error.

(1) For the surface roughness, the feed rate is the main
influencing factor on the roughness, followed by the
tool nose radius and cutting speed. Depths of cut have
no significant effect on the surface roughness.
(2) It can be seen that interaction between most factors
has no significant effect except feed rate and tool
nose radius which have the highest influence.
(3) 3D surface counter plots are useful in determining
the optimum condition to obtain particular values
of surface roughness.
(4) Response surface optimisation shows that the opti-
mal combination of machining parameters are
Acknowledgements
The author wishes to thank Mr. Mahesh Pansuriya of M/
s Unitech Engg. Pvt. Ltd., Rajkot, Gujarat, for providing help
and support for the measurement of surface roughness of
the work piece material for research work.
References
[1] G. Boothroyd, W.A. Knight, Fundamentals of Machining and Machine
Tools, third ed., CRC press, Taylor & Francis Group, 2006.
[2] D.C. Montgomery, Design and Analysis of Experiments, fourth ed.,
John Wiley & sons Inc., 1997.
 A.J. Makadia, J.I. Nanavati / Measurement 46 (2013) 1521–1529
[3] J.D. Thiele, S.N. Melkote, Effect of cutting edge geometry and work
piece hardness on surface generation in the finish hard turning of
AISI 52100 steel, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 94 (1999) 216–226.
[4] A. Mittal, M. Mehta, Surface finish prediction models for fine turning,
Int. J. Prod. Res. 26 (12) (1988) 1861–1876.
[5] R.M. Sundaram, B.K. Lambert, Mathematical models to predict
surface finish in fine turning of steel, Part 1, Int. J. Prod. Res. 19 (5)
(1981) 547–556.
[6] R.M. Sundaram, B.K. Lambert, Mathematical models to predict
surface finish in fine turning of steel, Part 2, Int. J. Prod. Res. 19 (5)
(1981) 557–564.
[7] M.Y. Noordin, V.C. Venkatesh, S. Sharif, S. Elting, A. Abdullah,
Application of response surface methodology in describing the
performance of coated carbide tools when turning AISI 1045 steel,
J. Mater. Process. Technol. 145 (2004) 46–58.
[8] P.V.S. Suresh, P.V. Rao, S.G. Deshmukh, A genetic algorithmic
approach for optimization of surface roughness prediction model,
Int. J. Mach. Tools & Manuf. 42 (2002) 675–680.
[9] W.H. Yang, Y.S. Tarng, Design optimization of cutting parameters for
turning operations based on Taguchi method, J. Mater. Process.
Technol. 84 (1998) 112–129.
[10] I.A. Choudhury, M.A. El- Baradie, Tool life prediction model by design
of experiments for turning high strength steel, J. Mater. Process.
Technol. 77 (1998) 319–326.
[11] P.M. Escalona, Z. Cassier, Influence of critical cutting speed on the
surface finish of turned steel, Wear 218 (1998) 103–109.
[12] C.X. (Jack) Feng, X. Wang, Development of empirical models for
surface roughness prediction in finish turning, Int. J. Adv. Manuf.
Technol. 20 (2002) 348–356.
[13] J.P. Davim, A note on the determination of optimal cutting
conditions for surface finish obtained in turning using design of
experiments, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 116 (2001) 305–308.
1529
[14] B.Y. Lee, Y.S. Tarng, Surface roughness inspection by computer vision
in turning operations, Int. J. Mach. Tools & Manuf. 41 (2001) 1251–
1263.
[15] B.Y. Lee, S.F. Yu, H. Juan, The model of surface roughness inspection
by vision system in turning, Mechatronics 14 (2004) 129–141.
[16] E.D. Kirby, Z. Zhang, J.C. Chen, J. Chen, Optimizing surface finish in a
turning operation using the Taguchi parameter design method, Int. J.
Adv. Manuf. Technol. 30 (2006) 021–1029. doi 10.1007/s00170-005-
0156-0.
[17] T.S. Lan, M.Y. Wang, Competitive parameter optimization of multi-
quality CNC turning, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 41 (2009) 820–826.
doi 10.1007/s00170-008-1495-4.
[18] G. Petropoulos, F. Mata, J.P. Davim, Statistical study of surface
roughness in turning of peek composites, Mater. Des. 29 (2008) 218–
223.
[19] N.I. Galanis, D.E. Manolakos, Surface roughness prediction in turning
of femoral head, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 51 (2010) 79–86.
[20] N.C. Tsourveloudis, Predictive modeling of the Ti6Al4V alloy surface
roughness, J. Int. Robot Syst. 60 (2010) 513–530. doi 10.1007/
s10846-010-9427-6.
[21] D.I. Lalwani, N.K. Mehta, P.K. Jain, Experimental investigations of
cutting parameters influence on cutting forces and surface
roughness in finish hard turning of MDN250 steel, J. Mater
.Process. Technol. 206 (2008) 167–179.
[22] M.A. Dabnum, M.S.J. Hashmi, M.A. El-Baradie, Surface roughness
prediction model by design of experiments for turning machinable
glass–ceramic (Macor), J. Mater. Process. Technol. 164-165 (2005)
1289–1293.
[23] I.A. Choudhury, M.A. El-Baradie, Surface roughness prediction in the
turning of high-strength steel by factorial design of experiments, J.
Mater. Process. Technol. 67 (1997) 55–61.