Optimization of Machining Condition in WEDM For Titanium Grade 6 Using MOORA Coupled With PCA - A Multivariate Hybrid Approach

Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Systems
Vol. 16, No. 2 (2017) 81–99

.c World Scienti¯c Publishing Company
#
DOI: 10.1142/S0219686717500068
Optimization of Machining Condition in WEDM for

Titanium Grade 6 Using MOORA Coupled with
PCA | A Multivariate Hybrid Approach
J. Adv. Manuf. Syst. 2017.16:81-99. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
Himadri Majumder* and Kalipada Maity†

by UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND on 07/07/17. For personal use only.
Mechanical Engineering Department

National Institute of Technology Rourkela
Rourkela, Odisha 769008, India
*himu.nita@gmail.com
†
kpmaity@gmail.com
This paper represents a multivariate hybrid approach, combining Multi-Objective Optimization

on the basis of Ratio Analysis (MOORA) and Principal Component Analysis (PCA) to optimize
di®erent correlated responses during Wire Electrical Discharge Machining (WEDM) process of
titanium grade 6. The response parameters selected are the average cutting speed, average Kerf
width and average surface roughness (Ra). All of them have been studied in terms of pulse-ON
time, pulse-OFF time, wire feed and wire tension. As indicated by Taguchi's signal-to-noise
ratio, the optimum process parameters were achieved for the desired average cutting speed,
average Kerf width and average surface roughness, respectively. At last, the optimum combi-
nation of process parameters was validated by a±rmation test which gave considerably im-
proved various quality characteristics. Con¯rmation test outcome revealed that multivariate
hybrid approach MOORA coupled with PCA was a competent strategy to decide available
cutting parameters for a desired response quality for WEDM of titanium grade 6.
Keywords: Multi-criteria; WEDM; MOORA; PCA; titanium grade 6.
Nomenclature
WEDM Wire Electrical Discharge Machining
EDM Electrical Discharge Machining
MADM Multi-Attribute Decision-Making
MOORA Multi-Objective Optimization on the basis of Ratio Analysis
ECMM Electrochemical Micro-Machining
PAC Plasma Arc Cutting
AJM Abrasive Jet Machining
USM Ultrasonic Machining
ECM Electrochemical Machining
81
82 H. Majumder & K. P. Maity
AWJM Abrasive Water Jet Machining

LBM Laser Beam Machining
AHP Analytic Hierarchy Process
GRA Gray Relational Analysis
TOPSIS Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution
PAM Plasma Arc Machining
SAW Submerged Arc Welding
PCA Principal Component Analysis
RSM Response Surface Methodology
MRR Material Removal Rate
DEA Data Envelopment Analysis

NT Numerical Taxonomy
MMAW Manual Metal Arc Welding
G-PCA Gray-Principal Component Analysis
MMCs Metal Matrix Composites
WPCA Weighted Principal Component Analysis
GT–PCA Gray Taguchi–Principal Component Analysis
Ra Surface Roughness
L27 Orthogonal Array of 27 runs
TON Pulse-ON Time
TOFF Pulse-OFF Time
WF Wire Feed
WT Wire Tension
1. Introduction
Wire Electrical Discharge Machining (WEDM) is a well-known, most useful and
versatile nontraditional machining process for cutting complex shapes, pro¯les made
of conductive materials. WEDM is a process based on a discharge of thermoelectric
energy between the electrically conductive work material and an electrode. The
theory of the process has been established by Soviet scientist Lazarenko in the middle
of 1940s.1,2 In WEDM operation a series of electrical pulses are produced by the pulse
generator unit. The voltage in the form of pulses is applied between the conductive
workpiece and the traveling wire electrode (0.02–0.33 mm in diameter).3 In the case
of a spark discharge, there is a °ow of current across the workpiece and the wire
electrode gap. Energy discharged during the series of these spark discharges expand
the temperature of the dielectric to about 10,000 C which removes a small amount
of workpiece material. A substantial number of such time spaced tiny discharges
between the workpiece and wire electrode cause electroerosion of the workpiece
material. The material is evacuated in Electrical Discharge Machining (EDM) by
melting and vaporization of material. WEDM commercially developed in the
Optimization in WEDM for Titanium-6 Using Hybrid MOORA–PCA Approach 83
mid-1970s, started to be a feasible technique that helped to develop metal and die
working industry we see today. In the mid-1980s the EDM procedure was transferred
to a machine tool. This migration made EDM more broadly accessible and appealing
over traditional machining processes. In 1969, the Swiss ¯rm Agie produced the
world's ¯rst WEDM machine. The WEDM machining is one of the most accurate
manufacturing processes used to machine hard material and di±cult to machine
materials like cermets, ceramic, titanium alloys, MMC, superalloys, etc.4–10
Processing of superalloys has been an active area of research owing to the in-
creasing demand of this class of material and typical problems associated with their
processing. The selection of the titanium alloy grade 6 was made taking into account
its wide range of applications for airframe and jet engine applications requiring good
stability and strength at elevated temperatures, good weldability, etc. It has also
been used for liquid gas and propellant containment for rockets and space vehicles.
To meet the di±culties of worldwide competitiveness, manufacturing associations
are encountering the issues of selecting the best preferred methodologies, design of
product and process, machine and equipment. It turns out to be more mind boggling
as there are heaps of options in perspective of contrary criteria. To o®er these
determinations some aid with processing, di®erent Multi-Attribute Decision-Making
(MADM) techniques are currently accessible. MADM indicates making decisions in
the presence of various con°icting attributes which is very common in regular life. An
MADM problem concerns with various options to be surveyed and various criteria to
evaluate the choices. The improvement of MADM practice is ¯rmly identi¯ed with
the improvement of computer technology. MADM strategies are picking up signi¯-
cance as potential instruments for analyzing complex problems because of their
natural capacity to judge distinctive options on di®erent criteria for conceivable
choice of the suitable alternative(s). In spite of the fact that a considerable amount of
MADM strategies are presently available11–17 for varying evaluation and selection
issues, Multi-Objective Optimization on the basis of Ratio Analysis (MOORA) is
seen to be computationally simple and basic. Khan and Maity18 explored a unique
MADM technique MOORA to solve distinctive multi-objective problems for di®er-
ent manufacturing techniques. They reviewed totally nine manufacturing processes,
namely WEDM, Electrochemical Micro-Machining (ECMM), Plasma Arc Cutting
(PAC), Abrasive Jet Machining (AJM), Ultrasonic Machining (USM), Electro-
chemical Machining (ECM), Abrasive Water Jet Machining (AWJM), Laser Beam
Machining (LBM) and Laser cutting process. They concluded that MOORA was
time saving, simple, accurate, easily operational and could be used for di®erent
selection problems within speci¯c selection criteria. Chakraborty19 explored appli-
cation of MOORA to ¯gure out six common decision-making problems and suggests
to use MOORA for accurate, simple and robust evaluation of alternatives in
manufacturing environment. Patel and Maniya20 used a combination of Analytic
Hierarchy Process (AHP) and MOORA to select optimum machining parameters of
WEDM for EN31 alloy steel. Tansel and Yldrm21 studied MOORA-based Taguchi
method to solve multi-response optimization method and suggested that it was
robust and simple compared to other MADM methods like Gray Relational Analysis
(GRA), VIKOR, Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution
(TOPSIS), etc. Madić et al.22 used MADM method MOORA to solve nonconven-
tional machining processes selection problem like WEDM, AWJM, LBM and Plasma
Arc Machining (PAM). Gadakh et al.23 applied MOORA method for previously
solved di®erent MADM problems in welding like Submerged Arc Welding (SAW),
gas tungsten or gas metal arc welding, CO2 laser and friction stir welding to provide
better accurate results. Gadakh24 successfully implemented MOORA method in
previously solved di®erent milling processes to ¯nd out optimum process parameters.
Keeping in mind the end goal to optimize the multi-performance characteristics,
MOORA methodology was not adept directly in the present investigation, as the
contribution of each performance characteristic might not have the same impact in
real-life solution. With a particular deciding objective to ¯nd the relative impact of
every performance criterion a statistical procedure called Principal Component
Analysis (PCA) has been utilized to decide the weighting percentage of each per-
formance parameter.
Li and Xiong25 used PCA based on GRA to obtain the optimum controllable
quality factors characteristics of Al–11% Si alloy castings. Paiva et al.26 used multi-
variate hybrid approach in turning of AISI 52100 hardened steel. They adopted a
combination of Response Surface Methodology (RSM) and PCA to optimize di®erent
correlated responses like tool life, cutting time, cycle time, processing cost per piece,
surface roughness and Material Removal Rate (MRR) using cutting speed, feed rate
and depth of cut as input factors. Portnoy et al.27 proposed weighted recursive tech-
nique based on PCA to address the concern of the false alarm rate increment in process
monitoring schemes. Pradhan28 investigated the e®ect of di®erent machining para-
meters on AISI D2 tool steel for the EDM process using an integrated hybrid approach
of GRA coupled with PCA. Maity and Bagal29 used the composition of RSM and GRA
coupled with PCA to evaluate the e®ect of di®erent machining parameters on the
responses in PAC cutting for AISI 316 stainless steel. Azadeh et al.30 used integrated
multi-criteria approach using PCA, Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) and Numer-
ical Taxonomy (NT) for product quality assessment where PCA was used for evalu-
ation of the importance of each indicator. Saha and Mondal31 used MADM approach
GRA in combination with PCA to ¯nd out optimum welding parameters in Manual
Metal Arc Welding (MMAW) and studied the performance characteristics for
nanostructured hardfacing material. Chalisgaonkar and Kumar32 developed an
MADM technique using utility method tie-up with the weight assignment concept in
trim cut WEDM for pure titanium. They investigated the e®ect of di®erent machining
parameters like pulse-ON time (TON), pulse-OFF time (TOFF), wire type, peak cur-
rent, servo voltage, wire feed (WF) and wire o®set on wire weight consumption, MRR
and surface roughness in ¯nish cut WEDM operation. Adalarasan et al.33 did an
experimental study following L9 orthogonal matrix of the friction welded joints con-
taining AA 6061 and AA 6351 alloys to determine the optimal welding parameter
settings using Gray-Principal Component Analysis (G-PCA). Jean and Wang34
investigated the di®erent multi-performance characteristics for electron beam welding

treatment using PCA and L19 Taguchi's orthogonal array. They also referred PCA as a
convenient approach for engineering problems. Saha and Mondal35 used Taguchi's
robust design concept with PCA to optimize the process parameters of nanostructured
hardfacing material in WEDM. Rao and Krishna36 used an integrated approach of
PCA coupled with Taguchi's robust theory for simultaneously optimizing di®erent
interacting responses of WEDM process for machining ZC63/SiCP reinforced Metal
Matrix Composites (MMCs). They also suggested that this integrated methodology
could also be applied for di®erent materials and machining conditions so as to ¯nd out
the optimal values to automate the process. Soepangkat and Kis Agustin37 optimized
WEDM process of SKD61 tool steel (AISI H13) using Taguchi method coupled with
Weighted Principal Component Analysis (WPCA) and also referred that combination
of Taguchi and WPCA e®ectively improved machining performance of WEDM. A
combined approach of Gray Taguchi–Principal Component Analysis (GT–PCA) was
used by Adalarasan and Sundaram38 to predict optimum level of continuous friction
welding process for Al/SiC/Al2O3 composites. Lahane et al.39 used WPCA method to
optimize di®erent responses of WEDM process for high speed steel and observed that it
performed signi¯cantly better overall quality than the other approaches. Saha and
Mondal40 simultaneously optimized di®erent performance characteristics like MRR,
surface roughness and machining time in the WEDM process of nanostructured
hardfacing materials using hybrid techniques GRA and PCA and manifested TON as
the most important parameter for both brass and zinc-coated brass wire electrodes.
Padhi et al.41 did an experimental investigation to determine optimum conditions for
MRR, surface roughness (Ra) and dimensional deviation for WEDM of EN-31 steel.
They used WPCA coupled with Taguchi method to overcome the correlated multi-
response optimization problem.
From literature, it has been observed that many works have been portrayed to
solve di®erent optimization problems in manufacturing industry as well as other
industries. But little attention has been paid to optimize di®erent process parameters
in WEDM operation and also very less research report is available using the
MOORA/PCA method. To ¯ll that research gap a novel MADM approach MOORA
coupled with PCA has been introduced to determine a preferable machining parameter
combination for WEDM process for titanium grade 6. Based on Taguchi's L27 experi-
mental design a series of experiments were performed considering four important process
parameters such as such as TON, TOFF, WF, wire tension (WT) to obtain multi-per-
formance characteristics of WEDM for titanium grade 6 in respect of cutting speed, Kerf
width and surface roughness as responses.
2. Experimental Procedure and Data Collection

A series of experimental trials were performed on ECOCUT, manufactured by
Electronica, EIPULS 15. The machining parameters that a®ect the performance of
the WEDM process were identi¯ed based on experience and information available
Table 1. Chemical composition of titanium grade 6.
Titanium Grade 6
Element Ti Sn Si Al N C O Fe H
Content (%) Balance 2.5 1.79 6.0 0.05 0.08 0.2 0.5 0.02
Table 2. Input machining parameters with their levels.
Denotation Machining Parameter Level
Low (1) Medium (2) High (3)

Pulse-ON Time (TON Þ, s

A 105 110 115

B Pulse-OFF Time (TOFF Þ, s 50 55 60
C Wire Feed (WF), m/min 3 4 5
D Wire Tension (WT), kg-F 5 6 7
from literature.42,43 This led to select four cutting parameters which were pulse-ON
time, pulse-OFF time, wire feed and wire tension. Input parameters and their levels are
shown in Table 2. The voltage (30 V) and current (5 A) were kept constant throughout
the experiments. In the experiment brass wire was used as electrode having a diameter
of 0.25 mm. A plate of titanium grade 6 (dimension: 100 mm 50 mm 5 mm) was
used as workpiece material (Fig. 1). The chemical compositions of titanium grade 6 are
shown in Table 1. During the experiment 10 mm length with 5 mm depth was cut along
the workpiece according to L27 . WEDM machine setup is shown in Fig. 2. The cutting
speed was noted down from the WEDM machine itself and averaged from ¯ve
observations at di®erent instants during machining. The Kerf width was measured
using the Toolmaker Microscope (Fig. 3). The average Kerf width value was calculated
Fig. 1. Workpiece (titanium grade 6) material before experiment.

Fig. 2. WEDM of titanium grade 6.
Fig. 3. Kerf width measurement in Toolmaker Microscope.

Fig. 4. Surface roughness (Ra) measurement in Taylor Hobson Surface Tester.
Table 3. Responses from experiments for di®erent conditions of process parameters.
Exp. No. TON TOFF Wire Feed Wire Tension Avg. Cutting Speed Avg. Kerf Avg. Surface
(s) (s) (m/min) (kg-F) (mm/min) Width (mm) Roughness (m)
1 105 50 3 5 0.692 0.333 2.670

2 105 50 3 5 0.660 0.322 2.330
3 105 50 3 5 0.670 0.302 2.800
4 105 55 4 6 0.485 0.318 2.530
5 105 55 4 6 0.460 0.302 2.400
6 105 55 4 6 0.477 0.320 2.667
7 105 60 5 7 0.400 0.321 2.530
8 105 60 5 7 0.396 0.306 2.730
9 105 60 5 7 0.380 0.330 2.800
10 110 50 4 7 0.858 0.325 2.800
11 110 50 4 7 0.870 0.315 2.800
12 110 50 4 7 0.850 0.320 2.876
13 110 55 5 5 0.780 0.304 2.400
14 110 55 5 5 0.679 0.290 2.876
15 110 55 5 5 0.760 0.300 3.000
16 110 60 3 6 0.767 0.322 2.667
17 110 60 3 6 0.770 0.316 3.067
18 110 60 3 6 0.759 0.307 2.400
19 115 50 5 6 1.535 0.323 2.400
20 115 50 5 6 1.494 0.326 1.733
21 115 50 5 6 1.578 0.331 1.867
22 115 55 3 7 1.368 0.321 1.867
23 115 55 3 7 1.417 0.298 2.000
24 115 55 3 7 1.380 0.308 3.400
25 115 60 4 5 1.300 0.347 2.800
26 115 60 4 5 1.340 0.322 2.933
27 115 60 4 5 1.290 0.292 2.800
from the mathematical average of three measurements. Surface roughness was mea-
sured from ¯ve di®erent locations in Taylor Hobson Surface Tester (Fig. 4) along the
cutting direction having a cut of length 0.80 mm. Experimental results for di®erent
input conditions are shown in Table 3.
3. Methodology
In the present work an MADM model MOORA coupled with PCA has been applied
for the optimization of di®erent responses of WEDM of titanium grade 6. The
methodology involves the accompanying steps:
3.1. Multi-objective optimization on the basis of ratio analysis

Multi-objective optimization or MOORA is used to simultaneously optimize two or more

contrary attributes subject to certain constraints. It was ¯rst introduced by Brauers.44
MOORA is quite robust in decision-making approaches.45 The following steps are fol-
lowed for MADM approach MOORA.
First step: Determine the problem
First step of MOORA method accomplice with de¯ning the objective and to classify
all the desired alternatives and their characteristics.
Second step: Decision matrix formation
After identifying the objectives and its characteristics the next step for MOORA is
preparation of decision matrix which represents the performance characteristics with
respect to di®erent variables like other multi-criterion decision-making processes:
2 3
q11 q12 . . . . . . q1n
6 q21 q22 . . . . . . q2n 7
6 7
Q¼6 7
6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7: ð1Þ
4... ... ... ... ... 5
qm1 qm2 . . . . . . qmm
Here, qij ¼ performance measure of the ith alternative on jth attribute, m ¼ number
of alternatives and n ¼ number of attributes.
Third step: Normalization of performance measures
In next step decision matrix is normalized to make it dimensionless with the goal that
every component can be compared. It is important to specify that the criteria, whether
it is bene¯cial or nonbene¯cial does not impact in decision matrix normalization. This
normalization method followed by a ratio system which is the square root of the sum of
squares of individual alternative per criterion.46 It can be represented as beneath:
qij
q ij ¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
P m 2ffi : ð2Þ
i¼1 q ij
Here, exhibits the normalized value ith alternative on jth criterion which lies between 0
and 1.
Fourth step: Evaluation of overall assessment value

After determining the normalized performance measures, in the fourth step, these are
added together for larger is better or bene¯cial criterion and subtracted for lower is
better or nonbene¯cial criterion. Overall assessment of the performance measures
follows the below equation:
X
g X
n
yi ¼ q ij q ij : ð3Þ
j¼1 j¼gþ1
Generally it is found that few of the attributes are more in°uential than others. To
give more preference to an objective, it could be multiplied by its corresponding
weight.47 In this case overall assessment value becomes:

X
g X
n
yi ¼ wj q ij wj q ij ; ð4Þ
j¼1 j¼gþ1
where wj is known as the weight of jth criterion.

Fifth step: Assign ranking to overall assessment
Finally the overall assessment value is sorted in descending order. The alternative
having the highest assessment value is the best alternative. The highest value of
yi represents the best alternative whereas the lowest value of yi represents the
worst.
3.2. Principal component analysis

Pearson48 ¯rst introduced multivariate statistical analysis method PCA in 1901 and
then Hotelling49 developed it in 1933. In the present analysis dimensionality reduc-
tion technique PCA was carried out to ¯nd the actual weightage of individual out-
comes of the present system.
PCA begins with multi-response array with n investigations and m character-
istics. In the present work, response parameters are retrieved after the calculation of
normalized value yi to ¯gure out the criteria weights. The calculation of correlation
coe±cient uses the equation below:

covðxi ðjÞ; xi ðlÞÞ
Rjl ¼ ; ð5Þ
xi ðjÞ xi ðlÞ
where xi ðjÞ is the normalized values of each response, cov(xi ðjÞ, xi ðlÞÞ is the co-
variance of response variables j and l, xi(jÞ and xi ðlÞ are the standard deviations of
response variables j and l.
Thereafter, eigenvalues and corresponding eigenvectors are
ðR x Im ÞVi k ¼ 0; ð6Þ
Pn T
where x eigenvalues, k¼1 k ¼ n, k ¼ 1; 2; . . . ; n; and Vi k½ak1 ; ak2 ; . . . ; akm are
the eigenvectors corresponding to eigenvalues k :
Thus, the principal components are

X
n
Ymk ¼ xm ðiÞVik ; ð7Þ
i¼1
where Ym1 , Ym2 ; . . . are known as ¯rst principal component, second principal com-
ponent and so on.
The principal components are adjusted in descending order with respect to var-
iance, and consequently, the ¯rst principal component Ym1 represents the most
variance in the data.
4. Results and Discussion

The alternatives considered in the present investigation are TON , TOFF , WF and WT
whereas output attributes are average cutting speed (C1), average Kerf width (C2)
and average surface roughness (C3). Among these attributes, average cutting speed
is bene¯cial where higher value is preferable, and average Kerf width and average
surface roughness are nonbene¯cial where a lower value is preferable. To ¯nd out the
optimum combination of machining parameters in WEDM using MOORA method,
the data of the decision matrix is ¯rst transformed into dimensionless values using a
linear normalization procedure, so that all these criteria can be comparable. Using
Eq. (2) the normalized value of every performance measure has been computed as
shown in Table 4.
In the next step, PCA method was introduced and relative weights of each per-
formance characteristics were evaluated according to Eq. (6) as shown in Tables 5
and 6. The square value of the eigenvalues implies the contribution of the related
quality characteristics of PCA. In addition, the variance contribution for the ¯rst
principal component is having a higher percentage at 48.1%. Accordingly, in the
present work, the squares of its subsequent eigenvectors Yim are preferred as
weighing values of the associated responses [Eq. (4)]. Di®erent contributions are
determined for average cutting speed, average Kerf width and average surface
roughness as 0.393129, 0.209764 and 0.3969, respectively.
Finally the overall assessment value (Yi Þ has been evaluated using Eq. (4) and
displayed in Table 7. As described in MOORA method, each assessment value ar-
ranged in descending order and then ranking has been assigned. It has been found
that experiment no. 21 has the maximum Yi value. Thus, according to L27 orthogonal
array optimum combination of machining parameters for the multi-criteria char-
acteristics should be selected as A3-B1-C3-D2, namely TON ¼ 115 s, TOFF ¼ 50 s,
WF ¼ 5 m/min and WT ¼ 6 kg-F. Figure 5 shows the overall assessment value
graph of each level of the WEDM process parameters which suggests the optimal
parameter setting as A3-B1-C1-D2, namely TON ¼ 115 s, TOFF ¼ 50 s, WF ¼ 3 m/min
and WT ¼ 6 kg-F.
To determine the optimum machining parameter combination for an individual
attribute, S/N ratio of Taguchi design is utilized. It is mostly used to solve the single
Table 4. Decision matrix and normalized values for optimal

cutting parameters selection problem.
Serial No. Decision Matrix Normalized Values
C1 C2 C3 C1 C2 C3
A1 0.692 0.333 2.670 0.135 0.203 0.196

A2 0.660 0.322 2.330 0.129 0.196 0.171
A3 0.670 0.302 2.800 0.131 0.184 0.205
A4 0.485 0.318 2.530 0.095 0.194 0.185
A5 0.460 0.302 2.400 0.090 0.184 0.176
A6 0.477 0.320 2.667 0.093 0.195 0.195
A7 0.400 0.321 2.530 0.078 0.196 0.185
A8 0.396 0.306 2.730 0.077 0.186 0.200

A9 0.380 0.330 2.800 0.074 0.201 0.205

A10 0.858 0.325 2.800 0.168 0.198 0.205
A11 0.870 0.315 2.800 0.170 0.192 0.205
A12 0.850 0.320 2.876 0.166 0.195 0.211
A13 0.780 0.304 2.400 0.153 0.185 0.176
A14 0.679 0.290 2.876 0.133 0.177 0.211
A15 0.760 0.300 3.000 0.149 0.183 0.220
A16 0.767 0.322 2.667 0.150 0.196 0.195
A17 0.770 0.316 3.067 0.151 0.193 0.225
A18 0.759 0.307 2.400 0.148 0.187 0.176
A19 1.535 0.323 2.400 0.300 0.197 0.176
A20 1.494 0.326 1.733 0.292 0.199 0.127
A21 1:578 0:331 1.867 0.309 0.202 0.137
A22 1.368 0.321 1.867 0.268 0.196 0.137
A23 1.417 0.298 2.000 0.277 0.182 0.147
A24 1.380 0.308 3.400 0.270 0.188 0.249
A25 1.300 0.347 2.800 0.254 0.211 0.205
A26 1.340 0.322 2.933 0.262 0.196 0.215
A27 1.290 0.292 2.800 0.252 0.178 0.205
Table 5. Eigenvalues and proportions of principal

components.
Principal Component Eigenvalues Proportion (%)
First 1.4430 48.1

Second 0.8826 29.4
Third 0.6744 22.5
Table 6. Eigenvectors for principal components and contribution.
Quality Characteristics Eigenvectors
First Principal Second Principal Third Principal Contribution

Component Component Component (jÞ
Avg. cutting speed (mm/min) 0.627 0:333 0.704 0.393129

Avg. Kerf width (mm) 0.458 0.889 0.013 0.209764
Avg. surface roughness (m) 0:630 0.314 0.710 0.3969
Table 7. Overall assessment value.
Experiment No. yi Rank
E1 0.692 17
E2 0.660 14
E3 0.670 20
E4 0.485 23
E5 0.460 22
E6 0.477 24
E7 0.400 25
E8 0.396 26
E9 0.380 27
E10 0.858 13
E11 0.870 12
E12 0.850 15
E13 0.780 10
E14 0.679 19
E15 0.760 18
E16 0.767 16
E17 0.770 21
E18 0.759 11
E19 1.535 5
E20 1.494 2
E21 1.578 1
E22 1.368 4
E23 1.417 3
E24 1.380 9
E25 1.300 8
E26 1.340 7
E27 1.290 6
Fig. 5. Process parameter e®ects on overall assessment value.

Fig. 6. Main e®ects plot for S/N ratio of average cutting speed.
Fig. 7. Main e®ects plot for S/N ratio of average Kerf width.
quality characteristic. The S/N ratio plots of average cutting speed, average Kerf
width and average surface roughness with respect to TON , TOFF , WF and WT are
shown in Figs. 6–8, respectively, which clearly demonstrate that each response has its
own particular parameters combination. In this way, the optimum input parameters
for the higher average cutting speed determined by the Taguchi S/N ratio (Fig. 6)
are TON ¼ 115 s, TOFF ¼ 50 s, WF ¼ 4 m/min and WT ¼ 6 kg-F. Optimum input
parameters for the smaller average Kerf width determined by the Taguchi S/N ratio
Fig. 8. Main e®ects plot for S/N ratio of average surface roughness (Ra).
(Fig. 7) are TON ¼ 115 s, TOFF ¼ 55 s, WF ¼ 5 m/min and WT ¼ 5 kg-F. Opti-
mum input parameters for the smaller average surface roughness (Ra) determined by
the Taguchi S/N ratio (Fig. 8) are TON ¼ 115 s, TOFF ¼ 50 s, WF ¼ 5 m/min and
WT ¼ 6 kg-F.
5. Con¯rmation Test
The con¯rmation test was conducted according to the optimum parameter setting
with its selected levels to ¯gure out the quality characteristics for WEDM of titanium
grade 6. Table 7 shows that experiment no. 21 is having the highest overall assess-
ment value which indicates that the optimum input parameter setting of A3-B1-C3-
D2 (according to orthogonal array) has the ¯nest multiple performance characteristics
among the total 27 experiments. Figure 5 shows process parameter that a®ects overall
assessment value which suggests the optimum parameter setting of A3-B1-C1-D2
(according to MOORA/PCA design). Table 8 shows the comparison of the experi-
mental results using the orthogonal array (A3-B1-C3-D2) and optimum MOORA/PCA
design (A3-B1-C1-D2) of WEDM for titanium grade 6.
Table 8. Optimization results of L27 OA versus MOORA/PCA design.
Optimal Process Parameters
Orthogonal Array MOORA/PCA Design
Optimum setting A3-B1-C3-D2 A3-B1-C1-D2

Average cutting speed (mm/min) 1.578 1.826
Average Kerf width (mm) 0.331 0.287
Average surface roughness (m) 1.867 1.726
The average cutting speed shows an increased value from 1.578 mm/min to
1.826 mm/min, the average Kerf width shows a reduced value from 0.331 mm to
0.287 mm and the average surface roughness shows a reduced value from 1.867 m
to 1.726 m. The corresponding improvement in average cutting speed is 15.72%
and average Kerf width and average surface roughness are 13.29% and 7.55%,
respectively.
6. Conclusions
In the present study, the work material made of titanium grade 6 was machined
according to Taguchi's L27 orthogonal array by WEDM process using brass wire.
The results were optimized simultaneously using a multivariate hybrid approach

MOORA coupled with PCA. On the basis of the investigation results, the accom-
panying conclusions might be drawn:
(a) The MOORA coupled with PCA strategy can be considered as a more sup-
portive strategy than other MADM approaches due to its ability to illuminate
process °uctuation. A weighted estimation of each quality response has been
proposed, which decreases the versatile nature of the decision-making technique.
(b) The proposed MADM approach requires less mathematical calculations and also
relatively easier than that of other conventional methods. Thus, it can be con-
nected to those mechanical circumstances where various reactions are to be
enhanced all the while.
(c) While applying the multivariate hybrid approach MOORA coupled with PCA
average cutting speed shows an increased value from 1.578 mm/min to
1.826 mm/min, average Kerf width shows a reduced value from 0.331 mm to
0.287 mm and the average surface roughness shows a reduced value from
1.867 m to 1.726 m.
(d) Optimum process parameters for the higher average cutting speed determined
by the Taguchi S/N ratio are TON ¼ 115 s, TOFF ¼ 50 s, WF ¼ 4 m/min and
WT ¼ 6 kg-F. The optimum process parameters for smaller average Kerf width
are TON ¼ 115 s, TOFF ¼ 55 s, WF ¼ 5 m/min and WT ¼ 5 kg-F. The opti-
mum process parameters for the smaller average surface roughness (Ra) are
TON ¼ 115 s, TOFF ¼ 50 s, WF ¼ 5 m/min and WT ¼ 6 kg-F.
References
1. B. R. Lazarenko, To invert the e®ect of wear on electric power contacts, Ph.D. Disser-
tation, Dissertation of the All-Union Institute for Electro Technique in Moscow/CCCP,
Russian (1943).
2. B. R. Lazarenko, SU-Pat 70010/IPC B23p/Priority (1943).
3. M. Kunieda, B. Lauwers, K. P. Rajurkar and B. M. Schumacher, Advancing EDM
through fundamental insight into the process, CIRP Annals Manufacturing Tech-
nology 54(2) (2005) 64–87.
4. T. R. Paul, H. Majumder, V. Dey and P. Dutta, Study the e®ect of material removal rate
in die-sinking EDM for Inconel 800 using response surface methodology, Journal of
Material Science and Mechanical Engineering 2(9) (2015) 27–31.
5. S. Lopez-Esteban, C. F. Gutierrez-Gonzalez, G. Mata-Osoro, C. Pecharroman, L. A.
Diaz, R. Torrecillas and J. S. Moya, Electrical discharge machining of ceramic/semi-
conductor/metal nanocomposites, Scripta Materialia 63(2) (2010) 219–222.
6. R. K. Fard, R. A. Afza and R. Teimouri, Experimental investigation, intelligent modeling
and multi-characteristics optimization of dry WEDM process of Al–SiC metal matrix
composite, Journal of Manufacturing Processes 15(4) (2013) 483–494.
7. G. Selvakumar, G. Sornalatha, S. Sarkar and S. Mitra, Experimental investigation and
multi-objective optimization of wire electrical discharge machining (WEDM) of 5083 alu-
minum alloy, Transactions of Nonferrous Metals Society of China 24(2) (2014) 373–379.
8. A. Torres, C. J. Luis and I. Puertas, Analysis of the in°uence of EDM parameters on

surface ¯nish, material removal rate, and electrode wear of an INCONEL 600 alloy,
International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 80(1–4) (2015) 123–140.
9. A. Kumar, V. Kumar and J. Kumar, Multi-response optimization of process parameters
based on response surface methodology for pure titanium using WEDM process, Inter-
national Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 68(9–12) (2013) 2645–2668.
10. K. Ravi Kumar and V. S. Sreebalaji, Modeling and analysis on the in°uence of rein-
forcement particle size during EDM of aluminum (Al/3.25 Cu/8.5 Si)/Fly Ash compo-
sites, Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Systems 15(4) (2016) 189–207.
11. A. Saha and H. Majumder, Multi criteria selection of optimal machining parameter in
turning operation using comprehensive grey complex proportional assessment method for
ASTM A36, International Journal of Engineering Research in Africa 23 (2016) 24–32.
12. A. Khan and K. Maity, Application of MCDM-based TOPSIS method for the optimi-
zation of multi-quality characteristics of modern manufacturing processes, International
Journal of Engineering Research in Africa 23 (2016) 33–51.
13. C. Bhowmik, Optimization of process parameter using theory of constraints, Interna-
tional Journal of Basic and Applied Science Research 1 (2014) 7–10.
14. P. Karande, E. Zavadskas and S. Chakraborty, A study on the ranking performance of
some MCDM methods for industrial robot selection problems, International Journal of
Industrial Engineering Computations 7(3) (2016) 399–422.
15. S. Datta and S. Mahapatra, Modeling, simulation and parametric optimization of wire
EDM process using response surface methodology coupled with grey-taguchi technique,
International Journal of Engineering, Science and Technology 2(5) (2010) 162–183.
16. P. C. Padhi, S. S. Mahapatra, S. N. Yadav and D. K. Tripathy, Multi-objective opti-
mization of wire electrical discharge machining (WEDM) process parameters using
weighted sum genetic algorithm approach, Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Systems
15(2) (2016) 85–100.
17. A. Saha and H. Majumder, Performance analysis and optimization in turning of ASTM
A36 through process capability index, Journal of King Saud University – Engineering
Sciences (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jksues.2016.11.002.
18. A. Khan and K. Maity, Parametric optimization of some non-conventional machining
processes using MOORA method, International Journal of Engineering Research in
Africa 20 (2015) 19–40.
19. S. Chakraborty, Applications of the MOORA method for decision making in
manufacturing environment, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Tech-
nology 54(9–12) (2011) 1155–1166.
20. J. D. Patel and K. D. Maniya, Application of AHP/MOORA method to select wire cut
electrical discharge machining process parameter to cut EN31 alloys steel with brasswire,
Materials Today: Proceedings 2(4) (2015) 2496–2503.
21. Y. Tansel İç and S. Yldrm, MOORA-based Taguchi optimisation for improving product
or process quality, International Journal of Production Research 51(11) (2013) 3321–3341.
22. M. Madić, M. Radovanović and D. Petković, Non-conventional machining processes se-
lection using multi-objective optimization on the basis of ratio analysis method, Journal
of Engineering Science and Technology 10(11) (2015) 1441–1452.
23. V. S. Gadakh, V. B. Shinde and N. S. Khemnar, Optimization of welding process para-
meters using MOORA method, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing
Technology 69(9–12) (2013) 2031–2039.
24. V. S. Gadakh, Application of MOORA method for parametric optimization of milling
process, International Journal of Applied Engineering Research 1(4) (2010) 743.

25. S. Li and X. Xiong, Multi-response robust design based on principal component and grey
relational analysis, 2014 11th World Congress on Intelligent Control and Automation
(WCICA) (2014), pp. 5024–5029.
26. A. P. Paiva, J. R. Ferreira and P. P. Balestrassi, A multivariate hybrid approach applied
to AISI 52100 hardened steel turning optimization, Journal of Materials Processing
Technology 189(1) (2007) 26–35.
27. I. Portnoy, K. Melendez, H. Pinzon and M. Sanjuan, An improved weighted recursive
PCA algorithm for adaptive fault detection, Control Engineering Practice 50 (2016)
69–83.
28. M. K. Pradhan, Estimating the e®ect of process parameters on MRR, TWR and radial
overcut of EDMed AISI D2 tool steel by RSM and GRA coupled with PCA, International
Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 68(1–4) (2013) 591–605.
29. K. P. Maity and D. K. Bagal, E®ect of process parameters on cut quality of stainless steel
of plasma arc cutting using hybrid approach, International Journal of Advanced
Manufacturing Technology 78(1–4) (2015) 161–175.
30. A. Azadeh, S. F. Ghaderi and M. Fazli Ahmadabad, Multi criteria quality assessment of
products by integrated DEA-PCA approach, International Journal of Reliability, Quality
and Safety Engineering 14(3) (2007) 201–218.
31. A. Saha and S. C. Mondal, Multi-objective optimization of welding parameters in
MMAW for nano-structured hardfacing material using GRA coupled with PCA, Trans-
actions of the Indian Institute of Metals (2016), doi: 10.1007/s12666-016-0945-1.
32. R. Chalisgaonkar and J. Kumar, Multi-response optimization and modeling of trim cut
WEDM operation of commercially pure titanium (CPTi) considering multiple user's
preferences, Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal 18(2) (2015)
125–134.
33. R. Adalarasan, M. Santhanakumar and A. S. Sundaram, Optimization of weld char-
acteristics of friction welded AA 6061-AA 6351 joints using grey-principal component
analysis (G-PCA), Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 28(1) (2014) 301–307.
34. M. D. Jean and J. T. Wang, Using a principal components analysis for developing a
robust design of electron beam welding, International Journal of Advanced
Manufacturing Technology 28(9–10) (2006) 882–889.
35. A. Saha and S. C. Mondal, Experimental investigation and modelling of WEDM process
for machining nano-structured hardfacing material, Journal of the Brazilian Society of
Mechanical Sciences and Engineering (2016), doi: 10.1007/s40430-016-0608-5.
36. T. B. Rao and A. G. Krishna, Simultaneous optimization of multiple performance
characteristics in WEDM for machining ZC63/SiCp MMC, Advances in Manufacturing
1(3) (2013) 265–275.
37. B. O. Soepangkat and H. C. Kis Agustin, Multiple performance characteristics optimi-

zation in the WEDM process of SKD61 tool steel using taguchi method combined with
weighted principal component analysis (WPCA), Applied Mechanics and Materials 758
(2015) 21–27.
38. R. Adalarasan and A. S. Sundaram, Parameter design in friction welding of Al/SiC/
Al2O3 composite using grey theory based principal component analysis (GT-PCA),
Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering 37(5) (2015)
1515–1528.
39. D. L. Lahane, M. K. Rodge and S. B. Sharma, Multi-response optimization of Wire-EDM
process using principal component analysis, IOSR Journal of Engineering 2(8) (2012) 38–47.
40. A. Saha and S. C. Mondal, Multi-objective optimization in WEDM process of nanos-
tructured hardfacing materials through hybrid techniques, Measurement 94 (2016) 46–59.
41. P. C. Padhi, S. S. Mahapatra, S. N. Yadav and D. K. Tripathy, Optimization of corre-

lated quality characteristics in wedm process using taguchi approach coupled with
principal component analysis, Journal for Manufacturing Science and Production 13(3)
(2013) 199–208.
42. G. Rajyalakshmi and P. V. Ramaiah, Multiple process parameter optimization of wire
electrical discharge machining on Inconel 825 using Taguchi grey relational analysis,
43. V. Aggarwal, S. S. Khangura and R. K. Garg, Parametric modeling and optimization for
wire electrical discharge machining of Inconel 718 using response surface methodology,
44. W. K. Brauers, Optimization Methods for a Stakeholder Society: A Revolution in Eco-
nomic Thinking by Multiobjective Optimization (Kluwer Academic, Boston, 2004).
45. W. K. Brauers and E. K. Zavadskas, Robustness of the multi-objective MOORA method
with a test for the facilities sector, Technological and Economic Development of Economy
15 (2009) 352–375.
46. W. K. Brauers, E. K. Zavadskas, F. Peldschus and Z. Turskis, Multi-objective optimi-
zation of road design alternatives with an application of the MOORA method, in Proc.
25th Int. Symp. Autom. Rob. Constr., Lithuania (2008), pp. 541–548.
47. P. Karande and S. Chakraborty, Application of multi-objective optimization on the basis
of ratio analysis (MOORA) method for materials selection, Materials & Design 37 (2012)
317–324.
48. K. Pearson, On lines and planes of closest ¯t to system of points in space, Philosophical
Magazine 2 (1901) 559–572.
49. H. Hotelling, Analysis of a complex of statistical variables into principal components,
Journal of Educational Psychology 24 (1933) 417–441 and 498–520.

Optimization of Machining Condition in WEDM For Titanium Grade 6 Using MOORA Coupled With PCA - A Multivariate Hybrid Approach

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Optimization of Machining Condition in WEDM For Titanium Grade 6 Using MOORA Coupled With PCA - A Multivariate Hybrid Approach

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Systems

Vol. 16, No. 2 (2017) 81–99

Optimization of Machining Condition in WEDM for

Himadri Majumder* and Kalipada Maity†

Mechanical Engineering Department

This paper represents a multivariate hybrid approach, combining Multi-Objective Optimization

Keywords: Multi-criteria; WEDM; MOORA; PCA; titanium grade 6.

AWJM Abrasive Water Jet Machining

DEA Data Envelopment Analysis

investigated the di®erent multi-performance characteristics for electron beam welding

2. Experimental Procedure and Data Collection

Table 1. Chemical composition of titanium grade 6.

Table 2. Input machining parameters with their levels.

Denotation Machining Parameter Level

Low (1) Medium (2) High (3)

Pulse-ON Time (TON Þ, s

A 105 110 115

Fig. 1. Workpiece (titanium grade 6) material before experiment.

Fig. 2. WEDM of titanium grade 6.

Fig. 3. Kerf width measurement in Toolmaker Microscope.

Fig. 4. Surface roughness (Ra) measurement in Taylor Hobson Surface Tester.

Table 3. Responses from experiments for di®erent conditions of process parameters.

1 105 50 3 5 0.692 0.333 2.670

3.1. Multi-objective optimization on the basis of ratio analysis

Multi-objective optimization or MOORA is used to simultaneously optimize two or more

Fourth step: Evaluation of overall assessment value

weight.47 In this case overall assessment value becomes:

where wj is known as the weight of jth criterion.

3.2. Principal component analysis

Thus, the principal components are

4. Results and Discussion

Table 4. Decision matrix and normalized values for optimal

Serial No. Decision Matrix Normalized Values

A1 0.692 0.333 2.670 0.135 0.203 0.196

A8 0.396 0.306 2.730 0.077 0.186 0.200

A9 0.380 0.330 2.800 0.074 0.201 0.205

Table 5. Eigenvalues and proportions of principal

Principal Component Eigenvalues Proportion (%)

First 1.4430 48.1

Table 6. Eigenvectors for principal components and contribution.

Quality Characteristics Eigenvectors

First Principal Second Principal Third Principal Contribution

Avg. cutting speed (mm/min) 0.627 0:333 0.704 0.393129

Table 7. Overall assessment value.

Experiment No. yi Rank

Fig. 5. Process parameter e®ects on overall assessment value.

Table 8. Optimization results of L27 OA versus MOORA/PCA design.

Optimal Process Parameters

Orthogonal Array MOORA/PCA Design

Optimum setting A3-B1-C3-D2 A3-B1-C1-D2

The results were optimized simultaneously using a multivariate hybrid approach

8. A. Torres, C. J. Luis and I. Puertas, Analysis of the in°uence of EDM parameters on

process, International Journal of Applied Engineering Research 1(4) (2010) 743.

37. B. O. Soepangkat and H. C. Kis Agustin, Multiple performance characteristics optimi-

41. P. C. Padhi, S. S. Mahapatra, S. N. Yadav and D. K. Tripathy, Optimization of corre-

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen