1.

INTRODUCTION

TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT
In this era of fastest growing technological development and advancement in

manufacturing technology needs quick and better results. Non conventional machining

processes enable us to get consistency and accuracy in our desired manufacturing techniques.

In the field of engineering, development of such techniques has lead to revolution in the field

of manufacturing. Tasks which are assumed to be impossible in past can be done within

fraction of seconds. Machining of many metals which needed too much time and used to be

too laborious are now simplified and easied.

NON-TRADITIONAL MACHINING
However development of newer methods has always been the endeavour of
engineering personnel and scientists. The main ideas behind such endeavours have generally
been the economic considerations, replacements of existing manufacturing methods by more
efficient and quicker ones, achievement of higher accuracies and quality of surface finish,
adaptability of cheaper materials in place of costlier ones and developing methods of
machining such materials which cannot be easily machined through the conventional
methods etc. Of all this reasons, the last one has contributed considerably to the post-war
developments in machining methods, particularly because of the use of a large number of
‘hard to machine’ materials in the modern industry. A few of such materials are tungsten,
hardened stainless steel, uranium, beryllium and some high strength steel alloys. The
increasing utility of such materials in the modern industry has forced research engineers to
develop newer machining methods, so as to have full advantage of these costly materials. The
use of such costly and hard-to-machine material is quite common in aircraft industry,
research equipment, nuclear plants, missile technology, sophisticated equipments,
manufacturing industries etc. To meet the needs of such industries, whereas on one hand
newer materials have been developed at the same time a number of newer machining
methods have been evolved for machining of these materials. These machining methods are
known as Unconventional or Non-traditional Machining Methods.

1
Classification Of Unconventional Machining Processes:

Advanced machining processes are mainly on the basis of the nature of energy employed in

machining process. They are:

1. Chemical Processes

1. Chemical Milling (CHM)

2. Photochemical Milling (PCM)

2. Electrochemical Processes

1. Electro-Chemical Machining (ECM)

2. Electro Chemical Grinding (ECG)

3. Electro-Thermal Processes

1. Electrical Discharge Machining (EDM)

2. Electron Beam machining (EBM)

3. Plasma Arc Machining (PAM)

4. Laser Beam Machining (LBM)

4. Mechanical Processes

1. Ultrasonic Machining (USM)

2. Abrasive Jet Machining (AJM)

3. Water Jet Machining (WJM)

4. Abrasive Water jet Machining (AWJM)

2
INTRODUCTION TO AWJM

AWJM is a well-established non-traditional machining process.Abrasive water jet

machining (AWJM) is a process of material removal from a work piece by the application of
high speed stream of abrasive particles carried with water from a nozzle.

Abrasive water jet machining (AWJM) is a mechanical material removal process used
to erode holes and cavities by the impact of abrasive particles of the slurry on hard and brittle
materials. Since the process is non- thermal, non-chemical and non-electrical it creates no
change in the metallurgical and physical properties of the work piece.

The cutting ability of water jet machining can be improved drastically by adding hard and
sharp abrasive particles into the water jet. Thus, WJM is typically used to cut so called
“softer” and “easy-to-machine” materials like thin sheets and foils, non-ferrous metallic
alloys, wood, textiles, honeycomb, polymers, frozen meat, leather etc, but the domain of
“harder and “difficult-to machine” materials like thick plates of steels, aluminum and other
commercial materials, metal matrix and ceramic matrix composites, reinforced plastics,
layered composites etc are reserved for AWJM.

1. Machine

Water Jet Germany Private Limited is promoted by professional Engineers having more

than 25 years experience in manufacturing Water jet machines. Water Jet Germany Private

Limited designs and manufactures complete machines, highly durable which can work

continuously - 24 hours a day and requires least maintenance.

The Abrasive Water Jet Machine German made S3015 is shown in figure. The system

consists of CNC control unit, abrasive delivery system and catch tank. It is controlled with

CNC program through control unit. It has catch tank at bottom which collects water and

abrasive particles after impinges on work piece. The machine moves 3 meters in X-direction

and 1.5 meters in Y-direction.

3
 Fig.1.1 CNC Controlled Abrasive Water Jet Machine

2. Automatic Abrasive Delivery System

Automatic abrasive delivery system supplies the abrasive particles to the

bucket without shortage of supply and it gives an indication to the operator when the abrasive
is empty in delivery tank. Automatic abrasive delivery system is shown in figure.

Fig.1.2 Automatic Abrasive Delivery System

4
3. Catch Tank

Catcher once the abrasive jet has been used for machining, they may have sufficiently
high level of energy depending on the type of application. Such high-energy abrasive water
jet needs to be contained before they can damage any part of the machine or operators.
“Catcher” is used to absorb the residual energy of the AWJM and dissipate the same.

Fig.1.3 Water Basin

4. High Pressure Pump

Water Jet Germany Private Limited uses KMT Water Jet Systems GmbH’s
high pressure pumps for their machines. KMT Water Jet Systems GmbH is a pioneer in the
field of Water jet cutting and manufactures the best UHP pumps in the world and their
systems are known for ease of use, intelligent design and reliability. With over 40 years
experience in the Water jet cutting industry KMT Water Jet Systems GmbH provides the
state of the art High Pressure Pumps with a pressure range up to 6,200 bar (90,000 PSI).

Fig.1.4 KMT Streamline SL-V 50- High Pressure Pump

5
 BASIC PRINCIPLE OF AWJM

Water jet machining is an erosion process technique in which water under high
pressure and velocity precisely cuts through and grinds away minuscule amounts of material.
The addition of an abrasive substance greatly increases the ability to cut through harder
materials such as steel and titanium. Water jet Machining is a cold cutting process that
involves the removal of material without heat.

This revolutionary technology is an addition to non- traditional cutting processes like

laser and plasma, and is able to cut through virtually any material. The water jet process is
combined with CNC to precisely cut machine parts and etch designs. Since water jet
machining is done with abrasives, it is often synonymous with abrasive jet cutting. The
combination of compressor, plumbing and cutting heads accomplishes the pressure and
velocity to attain the cutting ability.

High-pressure compressors create a jet of water under extreme pressure that exceeds
the speed of sound. This slim jet of water produced from a small nozzle creates a clean cut.
Before cutting, the materials are carefully laid on top of slates over or submerged in the catch
tank.

Fig.1.5 Schematic diagram of basic Principle of AWJM

6
 Abrasive water jet uses the technology of high-pressure water typically between 2500-
4000 bar, to create extremely concentrated force to cut stuff. A water cutter pressurizes a
stream of pure water flow (without abrasive) to cut materials such as foam, rubber, plastic,
cloth, carpet and wood. Abrasive jet cutters mix abrasive garnet to a pressurized water stream
to cut harder materials. Examples are stainless steel, titanium, glass, ceramic tile, marble and
granite. Water jet metal cutting machine yields very little heat and therefore there is no Heat
Affected Zone (HAZ). Water jet machining is also considered as "cold cut" process and
therefore is safe for cutting flammable materials such as plastic and polymers. With a
reasonable cutting speed setting, the edges resulting are often satisfactory.

In Abrasive Water Jet Machining, the abrasive particles are mixed with water and
forced through the small nozzle at high pressure so that the abrasive slurry impinges on the
work surface at high velocity. Each of the two components of the jet, i.e., the water and the
abrasive materials have both separate purpose and a supportive purpose.

The primary purpose of the abrasive material in the jet stream is to provide the erosive forces.
The water in the jet acts as the coolant and carries both the abrasive material and eroded
material to clear of the work.

WORKPIECE

The work piece material may be of any size and shape. It is held by means of a
fixture. Many of the difficult to work materials may be machined by abrasive water jet
machining. The abrasive water jet machining technique is especially suited for hard materials
like tungsten carbide, titanium carbide and ceramics.

Materials which exhibit high hardness and which have high impact brittleness can be
successfully machined by this technique. Such materials are germanium, ferrites, glass and
quartz. These materials often cannot withstand the forces needed for ordinary mechanical
working. For present work Titanium alloy Grade-5 is considered as work piece.

ABRASIVE SLURRY

The slurry used in this process is a mixture of abrasive particles and a liquid
component, mainly water. The ratio of abrasive to liquid can vary from 1: 6 to 1: 14 (by
volume). Slurry is to be fed through the nozzle, which directs the abrasive slurry centrally to
the work piece. The slurry serves several purposes. It carries and distributes the abrasive

7
grains on the work surface thus, removes the waste material and cools the work piece
avoiding thermal stresses.

The abrasives normally used in the process are boron carbide (cubic boron nitride),
silicon carbide, aluminium oxide, garnet. For present work Garnet 80 Mesh is used.

ADVANTAGES OF AWJM

 Extremely fast set-up and programming

 Very little fixturing for most parts
 Machine virtually any 2D shape on any material
 Almost no heat generated on the part
 Machine thick plates
 Gasket Cutting
 Fibre glass Cutting
 Cold cutting process and no thermal stresses
 Can cut almost all materials
 Environment friendly process

DISADVANTAGES OF AWJM

 Metal removal is less

 Process is not applicable for ductile materials
 Process produces a taper cut

APPLICATIONS OF AWJM

Due to the uniqueness of abrasive water jet cutting, there are many applications
where it is more useful and economical than standard machining processes. In this section,
some of the major applications and uses of abrasive water jet cutting are given. Abrasive
water jet machining is used mostly to cut stronger materials such as steel, and even some tool
steels can be cut.

 Letter cutting in steel, brass

 Cutting of bullet proof glass
 Fabrication of steel products

Though the applications are somewhat limited listed below are some of the
applications.

8
Manufacturing Industry

The abrasive water jet machining is used to cut any profile required by Automobiles,
Ships and Aircrafts. The glass industry calls for artistic work on different glass materials.

Construction Industry

To cut ceramic tile, mosaic and marble or granite for home/commercial building or
even pavement decoration the abrasive water jet cutting often referred as marble cutter or
graphite cutting machine or granite cutter, can be effectively used.

Environmental issues and future

Nowadays, every manufacturing process is being re-evaluated in terms of its impact

on the environment. For example, use of conventional coolants in machining and grinding is
being looked upon critically from the point of view of its impact on environment. The
environmental issues relevant to AWJM are,

• Water recycling

• spent water disposal

• Chip recovery and no harmful effect

9
 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

The research contributions available around 20 articles are reviewed on the AJM and
AWJM on various materials and methods are discussed. Though lot of work has been in
progress there is a necessity in the investigation of performance characteristics of AWJM.
Therefore the present work is taken-up.

Punit Grover, et.al [1] presented study of Aluminium oxide Abrasive on Tempered
Glass in Abrasive Jet Machining Using Taguchi Method, in which they used Pressure, Angle
between the work piece and nozzle jet & Abrasive mesh size as input parameters. After the
Experiment they conclude that the larger is better result for calculating MRR value also they
analyzed AJM process using the conceptual signal to noise ratio approach, regression
analysis and analysis of variance.

U.G. Gulhane, et.al [2] presented analysis of Abrasive Jet Machining parameters on
MRR and Kerf width of Ceramic material. They consider nozzle diameter, pressure & stand
of distance as input parameters, after experiment they conclude that the nozzle diameter is the
most influential factor when it comes to the MRR and Stand of Distance is the most influence
factor when it comes to the average kerf width.

R.VADGAMA, et.al [3] have described in their paper about effect of material
removal rate during machining on glass of 3 mm, 4 mm, 6mm by Abrasive Jet Machine
(AJM). Input parameters are stand-off distance and pressure. The material removal rate was
considered the quality characteristics with the concept of “larger-the-better”. The responses
measured are MRR. They have used Taguchi technique for the optimization of process
parameters.

N. S. Pawar, et.al [4] have described in their paper a number of investigations carried
out Sea sand as abrasive material using silicon carbide and mild steel nozzle in vibrating
chamber on Abrasive Water Jet Machining. In this experiment glass is used as work piece.
Input parameters are abrasive size, stand-off distance and pressure. The material removal rate
(MRR) is increasing with change in pressure and stand-off distance is also variable. The
hardness of material of nozzle plays a key role with resp. to its erosion wear in the AJM
process.

10
 Mr. Sachin Kumar, et.al [5] has been studied that MRR of soda lime glass at different
parameters on Abrasive Jet Machining. Input parameters are pressure, angle, abrasive size,
nozzle tip distance and L9 Orthogonal Array is used for finding of Metal Removal Rate
(MRR).

D.V. Srikanth, et.al [6] Conducted experiments and analyzed the influence of process
parameters on MRR and Kerfs width in abrasive jet Machining of Ceramic tile. The results of
experiments was analyzed, It is observed that by increasing nozzle diameter the MRR
increases, similarly decrease in Stand-off distance will reduce the divergence of the hole
produced.

K. Siva Prasad, et.al [7] have conducted an experiment on Fibre Reinforced Polymer
(FRP) composites using Al2O3 SiC Glass beads Crushed glass Sodium bi carbonate with
abrasive size 10-50 microns and abrasive floe rate as 2-20 gm/min on Abrasive Jet
Machining. WC/Sapphire is used for nozzle material with diameter 0.2 to 0.8 mm. The
responses measured are MRR. They have used Taguchi technique for the optimization of
process parameters.

Gaurav Mahajan, et.al [8] conducted an experiment on glass work piece using silicon
carbide as abrasive material by Abrasive Jet Machining. Input parameters are, type of
abrasive, stand-off distance, abrasive size- 80, velocity, mixing ratio. The effect of their
process parameters on the material removal rate (MRR), top surface diameter and bottom
surface diameter of hole obtained were measured and plotted. These were compared with the
Standard results and with it was observed that as nozzle tip distance increases, the top surface
diameter and bottom surface diameter of hole increases as it is in the general observation in
the abrasive jet machining process. As the pressure increases material removal rate (MRR)
was also increased.

Pradeep Kumar Sharma, et.al [9] have described in this paper that the effects of

parameters of AJM machining on material removal rate (MRR, gm/min) overcut (mm) and

taper cut (mm) during machining of glass fibre reinforced plastic. An AJM setup has been

fabricated for this purpose. Tungsten carbide nozzle having diameter 1.2mm, 1.5mm, 2.3mm

is used and Taguchi’s L9 Orthogonal Array is used for experimentation.

11
 M.Rajyalakshmi, et.al [10] described that n all the machining processes the quality of
the work piece is depends on various design parameters. The process parameters which
mainly affect the quality of cutting in AWJM are Hydraulic pressure, traverse speed, stand-
off distance, abrasive flow rate types of abrasive, etc., The quality parameters considered in
AWJM are Material Removal Rate (MRR), Surface Roughness (SR), Depth of Cut, kerf
Characteristics and Nozzle wear, parameters can also be considered for optimization, which
influence the quality parameters. They used Taguchi’s design of experiments and analysis of
variance (ANOVA) to analyze the performance.

S.Kalirasu, et.al [11] his paper aims to address the responses of the AWJM parameters
to two different reinforcement sources, viz, bi-directional glass mat (synthetic) and coconut
sheath (natural) fibre, in a polymer matrix composite. GM and CS were used as
reinforcement in a thermoset unsaturated polyester matrix, for the fabrication of the
composite plate. A higher crack resistance was found in the glass mat composites due to their
better interfacial adhesion capability. The machining quality of the cut (kerf taper angle and
surface roughness) was analysed, using the multi-objective response based on the L 9 (3 4)
orthogonal array, using the Taguchi-based experimental grey relational analysis.

Tarun Batra et.al [12] have described in his paper that the effects of various input
parameters in abrasive Jet machining (AJM) on the output parameter(Metal Removal Rate
[MRR).This paper presents an extensive review of the current state of research and
development in the abrasive jet machining process. Further difficulties and future
development in abrasive jet machining are also projected. This review paper will help
researchers, students, manufactures to understand policy makers widely

M.Chithirai Pon Selvan, et.al [13] investigated the effects of process parameters on
depth of cut in abrasive water jet cutting of cast iron. Four different process parameters were
undertaken for this study; water pressure, nozzle traverse speed, abrasive mass flow rate and
standoff distance. Experiments were conducted in varying these parameters for cutting cast
iron using abrasive water jet cutting process. The influence of these process parameters on
depth of cut has been studied based on the experimental results. In order to correctly select
the process parameters, an empirical model for the prediction of depth of cut in abrasive
water jet cutting of cast iron is developed using regression analysis. This developed model
has been verified with the experimental results that reveal a high applicability of the model
within the experimental range used.

12
 Cristian Birtu, et.al [14] has described in his article presents aspects regarding an
innovative Non-conventional technology: abrasive water jet cutting. There are presented
aspects regarding technique of abrasive water jet cutting (principle, parameters, and
theoretical considerations about them), equipment (with emphasis on very high pressure
pump) and performance of this technology (materials possible to be cut, cutting parameters
for some materials). The work presented in this paper is done at ICTCM Bucharest on
experimental abrasive water jet equipment. This research work had the purpose to identify, as
much as possible, specific aspects of the technology, equipment and phenomena of this
technology. It served to further developments of both equipment and technology, in order to
identify all possible applications of this technology in different industries.

Shunli Xu, et.al [15] in his thesis presents a comprehensive study on the controlled
nozzle oscillation technique aiming at increasing the cutting performance in AWJ machining.
In order to understand the current state and development in AWJ cutting, an extensive
literature review is carried out. It has found that the reported studies on controlled nozzle
oscillation cutting are primarily about the use of large oscillation angles of 10 degrees or
more. Nozzle oscillation in the cutting plane with such large oscillation angles results in
theoretical geometrical errors on the component profile in contouring. Particularly, there is no
reported research on the integration of nozzle oscillation technique into AWJ multi-pass
cutting, which is expected to significantly enhance the cutting performance.

Parteek, et.al [16] have described in his project that deals with the fabrication of the
Abrasive Jet Machine and machining on tempered glass, calculating the material removal
varying various performance parameters like pressure, angle & abrasive grit size so on.
Before performing, the experiment fabrication done on AJM which are also discussed. The
different problem faced while machining on tempered glass are also discussed. Taguchi
method and ANOVA is used for analysis of metal removal rate.

L.Nagdeve, et.al [17] have studied this paper, Taguchi method is applied to find
optimum process parameter for Abrasive water jet machining(AWJM).Further experimental
investigation were conducted to assess the influence of abrasive water jet machining (AWJM)
process parameters on MRR and surface Roughness (Ra) of aluminium. This paper analysis
of the Taguchi method reveals that, in general the standoff distance significantly affects the
MRR while, Abrasive flow rate affects the surface Roughness. However, experiments are
carried out using (L9) orthogonal array by varying pressure, Stand-off distance, Abrasive
flow rate and Traverse rate respectively.

13
 G. Kandpal Chandra, et.al [18] have described studied in this paper investigated the
testing and analyze various process parameters of abrasive jet machining. It was observed
that as nozzle tip distance increases, material removal rate (MRR) increases as it is in the
general observation in the abrasive jet machining process. As the pressure increases material
removal rate (MRR) is also increased as we found in AJM process. Similarly as abrasive
particle size increases MRR increases.

Veselko Mutavgjic, et.al [19] have studied the experimental investigation is to

conduct research of the machining parameters impact on surface roughness of the machined
parts, and derive conclusions referring to the manner in which certain machining parameters
affect surface roughness. Experimental investigation was conducted in the way that samples
of two different materials were cut on the machine using different machining parameters.
Measurement of different surface roughness parameters has been conducted after the cutting.

Anu Tomy, et.al [20] This paper highlights comprehensive literature study carried out
on AJM process-essential components, performance parameters, optimization,
experimentations, modelling and simulation and its various applications. The details of the
collected literatures are presented systematically into four categories namely modelling,
experimental setup, experimentation and applications. This paper tried to stitch out the
various research works that was carried out so far. The capability of AJM to machine various
materials made it to use in different application field. From this review, an idea of AJM and
its various aspects that was reviewed by many papers was concluded. The outcome of this
review can be listed as the various modelling works that was carried on the AJM process
which includes the variations of process parameters with respect to the various responses
were discussed. The experiments were conducted on commercially available setup as well as
developed setup. It is seen that in commercial setups, only the specified parameters
prescribed by the manufacturer can be used. But in developed setups different parameters can
be incorporated according to our requirements.

SUMMARY

By reviewing different papers it is found that optimal parameter combination for

different materials is not same. For different material there will be different parameter
combinations for different output parameters. So, for present work we considered Titanium
Alloy Grade-5 as Work material and Garnet 80 mesh as abrasive material.

14
 3. DESIGN OF EXPERIMENTS AND EXPERIMENTAL
SETUP
TAGUCHI EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN AND ANALYSIS
The Taguchi method involves reducing the variation in a process through robust
design of experiments. The overall objective of the method is to produce high quality product
at low cost to the manufacturer. The Taguchi method was developed by Dr. Genichi Taguchi
of Japan who maintained that variation. The experimental design proposed by Taguchi
involves using orthogonal arrays to organize the parameters affecting the process and the
levels at which they should be varied; it allows for the collection of the necessary data to
determine which factors most affect product quality with a minimum amount of
experimentation, thus saving time and resources.

Counting Degrees Of Freedom

The first step in constructing an orthogonal array to fit a specific case study is to count
the total degrees of freedom that tell the minimum number of experiments that must be
performed to study all the chosen control factors. To begin with, one degree of freedom is
associated with the overall mean regardless of the number of control factors to be studied. A
3-level control factor counts for two degrees of freedom because for a 3-level factor, a
designer would be interested in two comparisons. Taking any one level, A1, as the base level,
the designer wants to know how the response changes when he changes the level to A2 or
A3. In general, the number of degrees of freedom associated with a factor is equal to one less
than the number of levels for that factor.

The degrees of freedom associated with interaction between two factors, called ‘A’
and ‘B’, are given by the product of the degrees of freedom for each of the two factors. This
can be seen as follows. Let nA and nB be the number of levels for factors A and B. then,
there are nA x nB total combinations of the levels of these two factors. From that subtract one
degree of freedom for the overall mean, (nA-1) for the degrees of freedom of A and (nB-1)
for the degrees of freedom of B.

15
Thus,

Degrees of freedom for interaction A x B

= nA nB – 1 – (nA-1) – (nB-1)

= (nA-1) (nB-1)

= (degrees of freedom for A) x (degrees of freedom for B)

For example, suppose a case study has one 2-level factor (A), five 3-level factors ( A,
B, C, D), and the designer interested in estimating the interaction A x B. The degrees of
freedom for this experiment are then computed as shown in Table - 3.1.

Table - 3.1 counting the degrees of freedom

Factor/Interaction Degrees of Freedom

Overall mean 1

Levels 4-1=3

A, B, C, D 4x (4-1) = 12

Total 16

Selection of Orthogonal Array

Taguchi has tabulated 18 basic orthogonal arrays that are called standard orthogonal
arrays. In many case studies, one of the arrays from Table - 3.2 can be used directly to plan a
matrix experiment. An arrays name indicates the number of rows and columns it has, and also
the number of levels in each of the columns. Thus, the array L4 (23) has four rows and three 2-
level columns. The L18 (21 37) has 18 rows; one 2-level column; and seven 3-level columns.
Thus, there are eight columns in the array L18 (21 37). When there are two arrays with the
same number of rows, the second array will be represented by a prime, thus, the two arrays
with 36 rows are referred to as L36 and L’36. The 18 standard orthogonal arrays along with the
number of columns at different levels for these arrays are listed in Table - 3.2.

The number of rows of an orthogonal array represents the number of experiments. In

order for an array to be a viable choice, the number of rows must be at least equal to the
degrees of freedom required for the case study. The number of columns of an array represents
the maximum number of factors that can be studied using that array. Further, in order to use a

16
standard orthogonal array directly, one must be able to match the number of levels of the
factors with the number of levels of the columns in the array. Usually, it is expensive to
conduct experiments. Therefore, the designer uses the smallest possible orthogonal array that
meets the requirements of the case study.

For example, a case study has seven 2-level factors and the designer is only interested
in main effects. Here, there are total of eight degrees of freedom, one for overall mean and
seven for the seven 2-level factors.

Table - 3.2 Standard Orthogonal Array

Orthogonal Number Maximum number of Maximum number of

array rows Factors columns of these levels
2 3 4 5
L4 4 3 3 - - -
L8 8 7 7 - - -
L9 9 4 - 4 - -
L12 12 11 11 - - -
L16 16 15 15 - - -
L’16 16 5 - - 5 -
L18 18 8 1 7 - -
L25 25 6 - - - 6
L27 27 13 - 13 - -
L32 32 31 31 - - -
L’32 32 10 1 - 9 -
L36 36 23 11 12 - -
L’36 36 16 3 13 - -
L50 50 12 1 - - 11
L54 54 26 1 25 - -
L64 64 63 63 - - -
L’64 64 21 - - 21 -
L81 81 40 - 40 - -

Thus, the smallest array that can be used must have eight or more rows. The array L8
has seven 2-level columns and, hence, fits this case study perfectly; each column of the array
will have one factor assigned to it.

17
Steps Involved In Taguchi Method

The general steps involved in the Taguchi Method are as follows;

1. Define the process objective, or more specifically, a target value for a performance
measure of the process. This may be a flow rate, temperature etc. The target of a process
may also be a minimum or maximum; for example, the goal may be to maximize the
output flow rate. The deviation in the performance characteristic from the target value is
used to define the loss function for the process.

2. Determine the design parameters affecting the process. Parameters are variables within
the process that affect the performance measure such as temperatures, pressures, etc. that
can be easily controlled. The number of levels that the parameters should be varied at
must be specified. For example, a temperature might be varied to a low and high value of
40 C and 80 C. increasing the number of levels to vary a parameter at increases the
number of experiments to be conducted.

3. Create orthogonal arrays for the parameter design indicating the number of and conditions
for each experiment. The selection of orthogonal arrays is based on the number of
parameters and the levels of variation for each parameter.

4. Conduct the experiments indicated in the completed array to collect data on the effect on
the performance measure.

5. Complete data analysis to determine the effect of the different parameters on the
performance measure.

EXPERIMENTAL WORK
The experiments were performed on S-3015 AWJM CNC machine, manufactured by
Water Jet Germany Private Limited. Water jet cutting uses high pressure water to cut softer
material like rubber and abrasive jets adds abrasive to water to cut harder material like steel,
glass and titanium. The high pressure water is forced through a tiny orifice to concentrate
high energy in a tiny area to cut.

18
Machine Sizes

Water jet Germany private limited manufactures machines in the sizes varying from
1mX1m to 4mX8m machines. The most popular models being 3mX1.5m, 3mX2m and
4mX2m which comes with single or multiple cutting heads.

Features of Water Jet Cutting Machine

 Heavy frame construction for better accuracy

 Separate stainless steel tank
 Ball screws and LM guide based guiding systems from Bosch Rexroth, Germany
 High pressure pumps from KMT water jet systems, Germany
 CNC controller from Siemens, Germany or Fanuc, Japan.
 Efficient cutting head design
 Online feeding for abrasive
 Fully loaded with CAM software
 Laser calibrated for better accuracy
Specifications
 Positioning accuracy: +/- 0.05 mm
 Repetition accuracy: +/- 0.03 mm
 Feed rate in X or Y direction: 10000 mm/min
 Feed rate in Z direction: 7000 mm/min
Components of AWJM

Various components used in AWJM are,

 Abrasive delivery system

 Control system
 Pump
 Nozzle
 Mixing tube
 Motion system

19
Advantages

 Cold cutting process

 No thermal stress
 Can cut almost all materials
 High cutting accuracy
 Cutting thickness up to 300mm
 Environment friendly process
 Minimal or no fixtures required
 Kerf width is less
Applications

 Stainless steel cladding, handrails

 Fabrication of steel products
 Cutting of bullet proof class
 Automobile components
 Special designs for art
 Letter cutting in steel, brass

Fig-3.1 CNC Controlled Abrasive Water Jet Machine

20
 Table No-3.3: Machine specifications

Model No. S-3015

Jet Pressure 4000 bar
Max. Traverse Speed 4000 mm/min
Max. Stand-off Distance 4 mm
Movement in X-axis 3m
Movement in Y-axis 1.5 m
Impact Angle 90 deg
Materials to be cut Ant type of material

Selection of Materials

Nickel alloy (INCONEL 625) has been used as a work piece material for the present
experiments. Nickel alloy (INCONEL 625) also known as Ni3(Nb, Al, Ti), Ni3(Nb, Mo) is
the most commonly used alloy. It is significantly stronger than commercially pure Nickel
while having the same stiffness and thermal properties (excluding thermal conductivity,
which is about 60% lower in Grade 5 Ti than in CP Ti). Among its many advantages, it is
heat treatable. This grade is an excellent combination of strength, corrosion resistance, and
weld, fabric ability.

The Nickel alloy (INCONEL 625) has been used as a work piece material for the

present experiments. Titanium is a high degree of hardness with compressive strength and

abrasion resistance. By its character this type of alloy has high resisting nature against wear

and can be used for components which are subjected to severe abrasion, wear or high surface

loading. It has varied practical applications such as manufacturing of Surgical Instruments,

Aerospace Industries. The chemical composition of Nickel alloy (INCONEL 625) is

mentioned in Table

Nickel alloy material is suited for the scope of our experiment i.e., no further

machinability required, thus optimized parameters of this material will give better Material

Removal Rate (MRR).

21
Table – 3.4: Chemical composition of Titanium alloy (Grade 5)

S. No. Properties % of composition

1. Chromium (Cr) 22

2. 8
Molybdenum(Mo)
3. Ferrous(Fe) 3.5

4. Tantalum(Ta) 3.75

5. Cobalt+ Niobium 0.5

6. Manganese (Mn) 0.25

7. Silicon(Si) 0.4

8. Phosphorus(P) 0.01

9. Titanium(Ti) 0.3

10 Sulfur(S) 0.01

11 Nickel(Ni) Bal
(61.28)

Fig No-3.2: Work piece - Nickel alloy (INCONEL 625)

22
Abrasive Material

Garnet 80 mesh was considered as abrasive material. Garnet is a group of silicate minerals
that have been used since the Bronze Age as gemstones and abrasive.

ADVANTAGES

 Cost effective
 Non toxic
 Recyclable up to 5times
 Non reactant

Abrasive Material: Garnet-80 Mesh

Table No-3.5: Parameters used for experiment in AWJM

Abrasive Used Garnet

Abrasive Size 80Mesh
Jet Pressure 4000 Bar
Work piece Material Titanium alloy Grade-5
Size of Work piece 100*40*10
Shape cut 10mm square hole
Jet Angle 90deg towards work piece

Selection of Process Parameters and their Levels

Different settings of three controllable factors such as Traverse speed, Abrasive flow

rate and Standoff distance are used in the experiments as shown in the Table - 3.6.

23
 Table - 3.6: Parameters of AWJM

Control Factors Symbols

Traverse speed A

Standoff distance B

Abrasive flow rate C

In the present study, three control factors and three levels are selected. These factors
and their levels are listed in Table - 3.7.

Table - 3.7: Levels of various control factors

Level

Control Factors I II III

A Traverse speed 150 200 250

B Standoff distance 1 2 3

C Abrasive flow rate 350 550 750

Matrix of Experiments

A matrix experiment consists of a set of experiments where the settings of the various

product or process parameters are changed to study from one experiment to another. After

conducting a matrix experiment, the data from all experiments in the set taken together and

are analyzed to determine the effects of the various parameters. Conducting matrix

experiments using special matrices, called orthogonal arrays, allows the effects of several

parameters to be determined efficiently and is an important technique in robust design. Below

Table - 3.8 represents standard L9 Orthogonal Array.

24
 Table - 3.8: L9 Orthogonal Array

Traverse Abrasive Standoff

S. No speed flow rate distance
(TS) (AFR) (SD)
1 150 1 350
2 150 2 550
3 150 3 750
4 200 1 550
5 200 2 750
6 200 3 350
7 250 1 750
8 250 2 350
9 250 3 550

Below Table - 3.9 represents L9 Orthogonal Array with assigned values.

Table - 3.9: Matrix of experiments with assigned values

Traverse Standoff Abrasive

S. No speed distance flow rate
(TS) (SD) (AFR)
1 150 1 350
2 150 2 550
3 150 3 750
4 200 1 550
5 200 2 750
6 200 3 350
7 250 1 750
8 250 2 350
9 250 3 550

25
Fig -3.3: Experimental Setup – While Cutting

Fig-3.4: After Cutting – A Set of Pieces

26
Measurement of responses

The most important performance measures in AWJM are Material Removal Rate (MRR) and

Surface Roughness (Ra)

1. The Material Removal Rate (mm3/sec) is calculated by,

Volume of Metal Removed

VMRR =
Machining Time

2. Surface Roughness (µm) values are measured with the help of Surface Roughness

measuring instrument.

Fig No-3.5: Surface Roughness Measuring Instrument- SEF 3500D

27
 Table No-3.10: Specifications of SEF 3500D

Model Name SEF 3500D

Measuring Range
i)Horizontal 100mm
ii)Vertical 600um
Traverse Speed 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.5, 1,
2mm/sec at measuring and
5, 10mm/sec at returning
Measuring Force 0.7mN

SUMMARY

In this chapter number of experiments to be carried out with orthogonal array has

been decided. The AWJM machine and specifications, selection of work material and tool

material, experimental procedure for measuring MRR and Ra has been explained. The next

chapter deals with MINITAB software used in the analysis.

28
 4. MINITAB

INTRODUCTION

Minitab is a computer program designed to perform basic and advanced statistical

functions. It combines the user-friendliness of Microsoft Excel with the ability to perform
complex statistical analysis. The Figure - 4.1 shows the MINITAB work sheet with the
Taguchi design selected for the design. MNITAB calculates response tables and generates
main effects and interaction plots for:-

 Signal-to-noise rations (S/N ratios) vs. the control factors.

 Means (static design) vs. the control factors.

Fig - 4.1: The MINITAB work sheet with the Taguchi design

FEATURES OF MINITAB

There are so many features in MINITAB. Some of the important features are listed
below.
 DATAS
 CALCULATION

 STATISTICS
 GRAPH
 TOOLS
MINITAB was the most popular statistics package in use in the social sciences. It was
first used in teaching and research, although some users regarded it as a more limited research
tool. No one found MINITAB difficult to use.

29
ADVANTAGES OF MINITAB

 Widely used and powerful data analysis tool

 Not separate software tool to be learned

 Can be used in subsequent statistics courses

 Relatively flexible and extendable

 Relatively easy to learn

DISADVANTAGES OF MINITAB

 More tempting for students to focus on software/programming and not on concepts

 Not as clear a link to context or activity

 Not as interactive or dynamic

 Not as visually appealing or effective

SUMMARY

The use of MINITAB 16 software in the analysis of experimental results and its
features, advantages and disadvantages are explained. The next chapter deals with
results and discussion.

30
 5. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

AWJM PROCESS AND ITS MAIN FUNCTION

The major problem with the AWJM process is setting the parameters for different
materials for different thickness. The different values of the parameters set for machining some
material for the same thickness of the work piece will give different values of accuracy. So it
not possible to randomly select the parameters, which give the wrong values of the
performance measures. But the machine operator may choose some good parameters, based on
his experience on that machine, which may give better output. Every operator will choose
different parameters which may or may not give the good responses. The objective of any
company is to give good products to the customer so that it should not damage or lose its
function thereby avoiding the loss to the customer.

NOISE FACTORS AND TESTING CONDITIONS

To minimize the sensitivity to noise factors, the designer must first be able to estimate
the sensitivity in a consistent manner for any combinations of the control factors levels. This is
achieved through proper selection of testing conditions.

In any Robust design project, the designer has to identity all noise factors, and then
select a few testing conditions that capture the effect of all the more important noise factors
Simulating the effect all noise factors is impractical because the designer may not know the all
noise sources and because total simulation would require too many testing conditions and be
costly. Although it is not necessary to include the effect of all the noise factors, the designer
should list as many of them as possible and, then, use engineering judgment to decide which
are more important and what testing conditions are appropriate to capture their effects.

QUALITY CHARACTERISTICS AND OBJECTIVE FUNCTIONS

To optimize the parameters, the designer has to first identify the quality
characteristics and obtain the objective function. The quality characteristics that observed in
this study are MRR and Surface roughness. The customers need more accurate products with
good surface finish. So the aim of the company is to provide the products more accurate with
good surface finish. The designer has to form the objective function based on the objective of
the work. The surface roughness should be minimized, by adopting the smaller- the – better
quality characteristics for surface roughness. And for MRR in the form of mm3/min should be
maximized, by adopting larger-the-better quality characteristics for volumetric MRR.

31
Adopting the quadratic loss function, the objective function to be minimized is given by,

 n = -10 log10 (mean square Accuracy)… for smaller-the-better

 n= -10 log10 (inverse mean square accuracy)… for larger the better

Where ‘n’denotes the number of times the response variable measured the quality
characteristic for the surface roughness and volumetric MRR, the objective function for
smaller-the better and larger-the-better type S/N ratio.

TABULATION OF EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

After conducting the matrix experiment, responses such as MRR and Ra for the titanium

alloy grade-5 material is calculated and tabulated. Volumetric MRR is calculated by using the

formulae and the Surface Roughness is measured with the help of SEF 3500D surface

measuring instrument. Results of MRR and surface roughness are given in Table – 5.1.

Table - 5.1: Material Removal Rate (MRR) and Surface Roughness (Ra)

Traverse Standoff Abrasive Machining MRR Surface

speed distance flow rate Time
Roughness
(TS) (SD) (AFR)
(Ra)

(mm3/min) (µm)
(mm/min) (mm) (g/min) (min)
150 1 350 0.2436 4105.09 8.14

150 2 550 0.24 4166.66 8.63

150 3 750 0.2353 4249.89 8.34

200 1 550 0.2276 4393.67 8.44

200 2 750 0.223 4484.30 6.99

200 3 350 0.2195 4555.80 7.85

250 1 750 0.206 4854.36 10.67

250 2 350 0.2043 4894.76 6.13

250 3 550 0.2012 4970.12 7.87

32
ANALYSIS OF EXPERIMENTAL DATA USING TAGUCHI TECHNIQUE

Taguchi Analysis: MRR versus TS, AFR, SD

Table - 5.2: Response table for Means (MRR)
Level Traverse Speed Abrasive Flow Stand-off
Rate Distance

1 8.385 9.688 9.258

2 10.178 9.865 10.411

3 11.179 10.189 10.074

Delta 2.794 0.501 1.154

Rank 1 3 2

Table - 5.3: Response table for S/N Ratios (MRR) (Larger is Better)
Level Traverse Speed Abrasive Flow Stand-off
Rate Distance

1 18.44 19.59 19.24

2 20.15 19.86 20.29

3 20.96 20.09 20.02

Delta 2.51 0.50 1.05

Rank 1 3 2

The above Tables - 5.2 and 5.3 shows, the role and rank of each factor on MRR. Here rank is
assigned to the each parameter on the basis of delta value, higher value of the delta holds first
rank, similarly least value holds the last rank. This says that the parameter with the top rank
has more influence on MRR than the successive parameters.

33
 Fig - 5.1: Response Graphs for Means (MRR)

Fig - 5.2: Response Graphs for S/N ratio (MRR)

Above Figures (5.1 and 5.2) shows the main effect plot for Titanium Alloy Grade-5

alloy steel material, for MRR as the response variable.

34
 Table - 5.4: Optimum level combination for MRR

Control Factors Optimum Level

TS 250

SD 3

AFR 750

ANALYSIS OF EXPERIMENTAL DATA USING TAGUCHI TECHNIQUE

Taguchi Analysis: Ra versus TS, AFR, SD

Table - 5.5: Response table for Means (Ra)

Level Traverse Abrasive Flow Stand-off

Speed Rate Distance
1 8.370 9.083 7.373

2 7.760 7.250 8.313

3 8.223 8.020 8.667

Delta 0.610 1.833 1.293

Rank 3 1 2

Table - 5.6: Response table for S/Noise Ratios (Ra) (Smaller is Better)

Level Traverse Abrasive Flow Stand-off

Speed Rate Distance
1 -18.45 -19.10 -17.29

2 -17.77 -17.12 -18.39

3 -18.08 -18.08 -18.63

Delta 0.68 1.98 1.34

Rank 3 1 2

The above tables – 5.5 and 5.6 shows the role and rank of each factor on Surface roughness.
Here rank is assigned to the each parameter on the basis of delta value, higher value of the
delta holds first rank, similarly least value holds the last rank. This says that the parameter
with the top rank has more influence on Surface roughness than the successive parameters.

35
 Main Effects Plot for Means
Data Means
TS AFR
9.0

8.5

8.0
Mean of Means
7.5

7.0
60 70 80 100 150 200
SD
9.0

8.5

8.0

7.5 Figure - 5.3: Response Graphs for Means (Ra)

7.0
1 2 3

Fig - 5.3: Response Graphs for Means (Ra)

Main Effects Plot for SN ratios

Data Means

TS AFR
-17.0

-17.5

-18.0
Mean of SN ratios

-18.5

-19.0

60 70 80 100 150 200

SD
-17.0

-17.5

-18.0

-18.5

-19.0

1 2 3
Signal-to-noise: Smaller is better

Fig - 5.4: Response Graphs for S/N ratio (Ra)

Above Figures (5.3 and 5.4) shows the main effect plot for Titanium Alloy
Grade-5 alloy steel material, for Surface roughness as the response variable.

Table - 5.7: Optimum level combination for Ra

Control Factors Optimum Level

TS 250

SD 3

AFR 750

36
 ANALYSIS OF EXPERIMENTAL DATA USING TAGUCHI TECHNIQUE

Taguchi Analysis: Kerf versus TS, AFR, SD

Table - 5.8: Response table for Means (Kerf)

Level Traverse Abrasive Flow Stand-off

Speed Rate Distance
1 1.182 1.150 1.082

2 1.202 1.132 1.187

3 1.085 1.187 1.200

Delta 0.117 0.055 0.118

Rank 2 3 1

Table - 5.9: Response table for S/Noise Ratios (Kerf) (Smaller is Better)

Level Traverse Abrasive Flow Stand-off

Speed Rate Distance
1 1.4448 1.2118 0.6441

2 1.5928 1.0106 1.4859

3 0.6702 1.4853 1.5777

Delta 0.9227 0.4747 0.9335

Rank 2 3 1

The above tables – 5.7 and 5.8 shows the role and rank of each factor on kerf. Here rank is

assigned to the each parameter on the basis of delta value, higher value of the delta holds first

rank, similarly least value holds the last rank. This says that the parameter with the top rank

has more influence on kerf than the successive parameters.

37
 Main Effects Plot for Means
Data Means
TS AFR
1.20

1.15

Mean of Means
1.10

60 70 80 100 150 200

SD
1.20

1.15

1.10

1 2 3

Fig - 5.5: Response Graphs for Means (Kerf)

Main Effects Plot for SN ratios

Data Means

TS AFR
-0.6

-0.9

-1.2
Mean of SN ratios

-1.5

60 70 80 100 150 200

SD
-0.6

-0.9

-1.2

-1.5

1 2 3

Signal-to-noise: Smaller is better

Fig - 5.6: Response Graphs for S/N ratio (Kerf)

Above Figures (5.3 and 5.4) shows the main effect plot for Titanium Alloy

Grade-5 alloy steel material, for Surface roughness as the response variable.

38
 Table - 5.10: Optimum level combination for Kerf

Control Factors Optimum Level

TS 250

SD 3

AFR 750

DEVELOPMENT OF REGRESSION EQUATION

The objective of multiple regression analysis is to construct a model that explains as

much as possible, the variability in a dependent variable, using several independent variables.
The model fit is usually a linear model, though some timer non-linear models such as log-
linear models are also constructed. When the model constructed id a linear model, the
population regression equation is,

Yi = + ß1 X1i +…………….+ ß mXmi + ei 5.1

Where Yi is the dependent variable and X1i ...................... Xmi are the independent variables
for ith data point and ei is the error term. Error term is assumed to have zero mean. This error
term is the combined effect of variables that are not considered explicitly in the equation, but
have an effect on the dependent variable.

The co-efficient, ß1,……………ß m are not known and estimates of these values,
designated as a, b1…….bm have to be determined from the sampled data. For this least
squares estimation is used, which consists of minimizing.

n n

SS =  ei 2 =  (Yi – a – bi X1i………..-bmXmi)2 5.2

i=1 i=1

with respect to each of the co-efficient a, b1 bm.

This will give k+1 equations from which a, b1…..bm. can be obtained. These least
squared estimates are the best linear unbiased estimates and hence gives the best linear
unbiased estimate of the dependent variable.

Y = a + b1X1 + b2X2 +………….+ bmXm 5.3

39
 While equation (4.3) is a linear model, in many cases non-linear models may be
required. The difficulty lies in the fact that infinite variety of non-linear functional forms is
possible, A-commonly used non-linear model is the log-linear model. The estimated log-
linear model will be of the form.

LogYi = a + b1log X1i +……………bm log Xmi 5.4

Where a, b1………bm are least squared estimates obtained from sampled data. From
this functional form,

Yi = K X1i b1 X 2ib2…………Xmibm 5.5

can be directly obtained.

 Regression equation for MRR

MRR = - 1.43 + 0.140 TS + 0.00501 AFR + 0.408 SD

 Regression equation for Ra

Ra = 8.93 - 0.0073 TS - 0.0106 AFR + 0.647 SD

 Regression equation for Kerf

Kerf = 1.32 - 0.00483 TS + 0.000367 AFR + 0.0592 SD

With the help of Regression equations the predicted values of MRR and Ra are calculated,
and compared with experimental values to find the deviation for each experiment and is
shown in the Table - 5.8 & 5.9. The same comparison in graphical form is shown in Figure –
5.5 for MRR and Figure – 5.6 for Ra

40
 Table no 5.11 Experimental and Predicted values for MRR

S.No EXPERIMENTAL PREDICTED

1 7.44 7.879

2 8.96 8.5375

3 8.755 9.196

4 10.385 9.687

5 10.226 10.3455

6 9.924 9.78

7 11.24 11.495

8 10.409 10.9295

9 11.889 11.588

Table no 5.12 Experimental and Predicted values for Ra

S.No EXPERIMENTAL PREDICTED

1 8.14 8.079

2 8.63 8.196

3 8.34 8.313

4 8.44 8.653

5 6.99 8.77

6 7.85 6.946

7 10.67 9.227

8 6.13 7.403
9 7.87 7.52

41
 Table no 5.13 Experimental and Predicted values for Kerf

S.No EXPERIMENTAL PREDICTED

1 1.125 1.1261

2 1.205 1.20365

3 1.215 1.2812

4 1.185 1.137

5 1.245 1.21455

6 1.175 1.1145

7 1.14 1.1479

8 0.945 1.04785
9 1.17 1.1254

COMPARISON GRAPH FOR EXPERIMENTAL AND PREDICTED VALUES OF MRR

14

12

10

8
Experimental
6 Theoritical

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Fig -5.7: Comparison graph for MRR

42
 COMPARISON GRAPH FOR EXPERIMENTAL AND PREDICTED VALUES OF Ra

12

10

6 EXPERIMENTAL
PREDICTED
4

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Fig no 5.8: Comparison graphs for Ra

1.4

1.2

0.8
Experimental
0.6 Theoritical

0.4

0.2

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Fig -5.9: Comparison graphs for Kerf

From the above Graphs (Figure - 5.5, 5.6, 5.7) it is observed that the predicted and
experimental values of MRR and Surface roughness are closer and hence the developed
equations are used to predict the MRR and Ra for other sets of parameters without
experimentation with good accuracy.

43
5.9 SUMMARY

Based on the results obtained for MRR, Ra and Kerf, Taguchi Method is used to
analyze the effect of each parameter on machining characteristics and to predict the optimal
choice for each parameter such as transverse speed, abrasive flow rate and standoff distance.
From response graphs for S/N ratio and response table, the order of strength of parameters to
obtain maximum MRR and good Surface finish, Kerf has been discussed. Finally Regression
equations were developed. Next chapter deals with Conclusion and Future work.

44
 6. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK

SUMMARY

Accompanying the development of mechanical industry, demands for alloy

materials having high hardness, toughness and impact resistance are increasing.
Nevertheless, those materials are difficult to be machined by traditional machining
methods. Hence to overcome this problem the Abrasive Water Jet Machine [AWJM] is
applied and Titanium alloy Grade 5 material was selected to perform the experiments because
of its high hardness, toughness.

Taguchi’s Orthogonal Array based on robust design is one of the important

methods, which is used for optimization of process parameters of AWJM. Although a wide
variety of the techniques are developed over the years, it seems that reliable and widely
suitable quantitative process parameters optimization method has not been evolved so far
due to the difficulties in direct observation of improving accuracy using on-line methods,
hence there is a need for indirect methods.

For the present study, the objective functions were formed based on Taguchi’s
quadratic loss function for performance characteristics, i.e., surface roughness and MRR.
After the objective functions are formed, control factors and their levels were identified. The
control factors considered for the study were Traverse Speed, Abrasive Flow Rate and Standoff
Distance. Three levels for each control factor were used. Based on the above said number of
control factors and their levels, L’9 orthogonal array was selected from the Standard orthogonal
array table to conduct the matrix experiment. The matrix experiment was conducted for the
Titanium alloy Grade 5 material. The size of the work piece used for the experiment was
100X100X10 mm. The machine used to conduct the experiment was S3015 AWJM CNC
machine. The response variable measured to perform the analysis was surface roughness and
MRR. After the experiment conducted, response variable is tabulated and analysis was
conducted. To conduct the Taguchi analysis, Statistical MINITAB 16 software was used.
Based on this analysis, process parameters were optimized. After that the rank table from the
MINITAB 16 was used to determine the relative magnitude of the each factor on objective
functions.

45
CONCLUSION

Based on the results and discussion the following conclusions are drawn.

 It is observed that the effect of Traverse Speed is maximum on MRR followed by

Standoff distance, and Abrasive flow Rate.

 The optimal parameter setting for maximum MRR is obtained at Traverse Speed
8mm/s, Standoff distance 2mm, Abrasive flow Rate 200 mm/s.

 It is observed that the effect of Abrasive flow rate is maximum on Ra followed by

Standoff distance, and Traverse Speed.

 The optimal parameter setting for good surface finish is obtained at Abrasive flow rate
150mm/s, Standoff distance 1mm, and Traverse Speed 70mm/sec.

 The optimal parameter for minimum kerf width is obtained at Stand-off distance 1mm,
Traverse speed 80 mm/sec and Abrasive flow rate 150mm/sec.

 The developed regression equation is used to predict the MRR with 6.77% error.

 The developed regression equation is used to predict the Ra with 4.26% error.

 The developed regression equation is used to predict the kerf width.

FUTURE WORK

1. The work can be extended by considering the other parameters like Nozzle diameter,
Abrasive size, Water pressure etc.

2. The work may be continued, for machining different materials for finding optimal
combination of parameters and also by varying the abrasive materials.

3. The present work is carried out by Taguchi’s analysis; further this work can be extended
by considering any combination of Fuzzy control, Grey Relational analysis with
Taguchi’s orthogonal array technique.

4. The present work is carried out by Multiple Regression analysis to estimate the MRR and
Ra. Further this work can be extended by considering Analysis of Variance (ANOVA).

46
REFERENCES

[1]. Punit Grover, “Study of Aluminium oxide Abrasive on Tempered Glass in Abrasive Jet
Machining Using Taguchi Method” International Journal of Advance Research and
Innovation, Volume 2, Issue 1 (2014) 237-241, ISSN 2347-3258.

[2].U.D Gulhane, P.P Patkar“Analysis of Abrasive Jet Machining Parameters on MRR and
Kerf Width of Hard and Brittle Materials like Ceramic” International Journal of Design and
Manufacturing Technology, Volume 4, Issue 1, 2013, PP-51-58, ISSN 0976-7002.

[3]. R.Vadgam, Kaustubh S.Gaikwad “Experimental Analysis of Glass on Abrasive Jet

Machine (AJM) using Taguchi Method”, International Journal of innovative science
Engineering & Technology, Vol. 2 issue 4, April 2015.

[4]. N.S Pawar, R.R Lakhe, “The Effect of Change in design of Vibrating Chamber for an
Experimental Analysis for Sea Sand as an Abrasive Material in an Abrasive Water Jet
Machining Process for Mild Steel Nozzle”, International Journal of Current Engineering and
Technology, E-ISSN 2277-4100,February-2014.

[5]. Mr.Sachin Kumar, Mr.Deepak Bhardwaj, “A Research Paper on Study the MRR of Soda
Lime Glass at different parameters of Abrasive Jet Machine”, International Journal of
Enhanced Research in Science Technology & Engineering, Vol.3, Issue 6, June 2014, PP
(307-318) .

[6]. D.V Srikanth, M.Sreenivasa rao, “Machining of FRP Composites by Abrasive Jet
Machining Optimization using Taguchi, International Journal of Aerospace , Industrial and
Mechatronics Engineering,Volume-8,No.3, 2014.

[7]. K. Siva Prasad, G. Chaitanya “The research review on abrasive machining”, International
Journal on recent technologies in mechanical and electrical Engineering,Volume-3,issue-
6,issn-2349-7947,PP-19-27, 2014.

[8]. Gaurav Mahajan, “A Study of effect of various process parameters on abrasive jet
machining using silicon carbide as abrasive material”, international journal of engineering
development and research,Volume-3,issue-1,issn-2321-9939,January 2015.

[9]. Pradeep Kumar Sharma, “A Comparative Analysis of Process Parameters during

Machining of Glass Fibre Reinforced Plastic by AJM”, International Journal of Advance

47
Foundation and Research in Science & Engineering (IJAFRSE) Volume 1, Issue 3, August
2014.

[10].M.Rajya lakshmi, P.suresh babu “abrasive water jet machining –A review on current
development”, International journal of science technology and engineering, v2,issue 12,june
2016, issn – 2349-784X.

[11]. S Kalirasu, N Rajini, “GM and CS were used as reinforcement in a thermoset

unsaturated polyester matrix, for the fabrication of the composite plate”, Journal of
Reinforced Plastics and composites, PP (1-17), April 2015.

[12]. Tarun Batra, Devilal “The effects of various input parameters in Abrasive Jet machining
(AJM) on the output parameter(Metal Removal Rate (MRR))”, International Journal of
Research in Aeronautical and Mechanical Engineering,vol.3 issue 12, December 2015.

[13]. M Chithirai Pon Selvan, N.Mohana Sundara Raju “Assessment of Process Parameters
in Abrasive Water Jet Cutting of Stainless Steel”, International Journal of Advances in
Engineering & Technology, ,ISSN:2231-1963, July 2011.

[14]. Cristian Birtu, Valeriu Anramescu “Abrasive water jet cutting technique, equipment,
Performances”, Non conventional technologies review,Romania ,march 2012.

[15]. Shunli xu “modeling the cutting process and cutting performance in abrasive water jet
machining with controlled nozzle oscillation ”, Ph.D thesis, queens land university of
technology, 2006.

[16]. Parteek, vijay kumar, “study the MRR of tempered glass by using silicon carbide
abrasive at different parameters of abrasive jet machine”, International Journal for scientific
research and development ,volume -3 , issue-3, issn-2321-0613, 2015.

[17]. L. Nagdeve, V. Chaturvedi, and J. Vimal, “Implementation of Taguchi Approach for

Optimization of Abrasive Water Jet Machining Process Parameters,” Int. J. Instrum. Control
Autom., vol. 1, no. 3,4, pp. 9–13, 2012.

[18]. G. Kandpal Chandra, “ investigated the testing and analyze various process parameters
of abrasive jet machining, as abrasive particle size increases MRR increases”.

[19]. Veselko Mutavgic, zoran Jurkovic “Experimental investigation of surface roughness

obtained by abrasive water jet machining”, international research/expert conference “Trends
in the development of machining and associated technology” September 2011.

48
[20]. AnuTomy, “comprehensive literature study carried out on AJM process-essential
components, performance parameters, optimization, experimentations, modelling and
simulation and its various applications”.

[21].B Satyanarayana, G Srikar “Optimization of Abrasive Water Jet Machining Process

Parameters using Taguchi Grey Relational analysis(TGRA)”,International journal of
Mechanical and Production Engineering,ISSN:2320-2092,Volume-2,Issue-9,September-
2014.

[22]. Mayur M.Mhamunkar, Niyati Raut “Process parameter Optimization of CNC Abrasive
Water Jet Machine for Titanium Ti 6A14V,International Journal of Advance Industrial
Engineering,Volume-5,No.3,September-2017.

[23] U.D.Gulhani, P.P.Patkar, S.P.Patel, A.A.Patel, Analysis of AJM Parameters on

MRR, Kerf width of Hard and Brittle Materials like ceramics,--IJDMT-April-2013

[24] N.S.Pawar, R.R.Lakhe, R.L.Shrivastava “A comparative Experimental Analysis of Sea

sand as an abrasive material using Silicon carbide and mild steel Nozzle in vibrating chamber
of Abrasive Jet machining process”, IJSRP Vol-3 issue-10,October-13.

[25] M. Chithiraipon selvan, Dr. N. Mohana sundara raju “Review on current state of
research and development of Awjc”, International journal of advanced engineering
sciences and technologies vol no. 11, issue no. 2, 267 – 275-(2011).

[26] Bhaskar Chandra, Jagtar Singh, ‘A Study of effect of Process Parameters of Abrasive jet
machining’ International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST) vol. 3, pp.
504-513, 2011.

[27] M. A. Azmir, A.K. Ahsan, “Optimization of Abrasive Waterjet Machining Process

Parameters Using Orthogonal Array with Grey Relational Analysis,” Reg.Conf. Eng. Math.
Mech. Manuf. Archit. (EM3 ARC) 2007, pp. 21–30, 2007.

[28] K. Sreekesh and P. Govindan, “A Review on Abrasive Water Jet Cutting,” Int. J. Recent
Adv. Mech. Eng., vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 153–158, 2014.

49