International Conference on Recent Advances in Mechanical Engineering and Interdisciplinary Developments [ICRAMID - 2014]

Multi-Criteria Optimization Using Grey

Relational Analysis in Drilling of Glass/Epoxy
Polymeric Composites
A.Ragothaman*

K.Vijayaraja

M.Mudhukrishnan

Assistant Professor
Research Scholar,
Professor and Head,
Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, Dept. of Aeronautical Engineering, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering,
R.M.K. Engineering College,
Sathyabama University,
Tagore Engineering College,
Kavaraipettai, Chennai, India.
Chennai, India.
Chennai, India.
muthukrishnan77@gmail.com
ragomaan@gmail.com
kvijayaraja@gmail.com
Abstract

I INTRODUCTION

Glass Fibre Reinforced Polymeric (GFRP) composite

materials have been used to make several components
in engineering field. This is due to their excellent
mechanical properties such as high specific strength,
specific stiffness, good fatigue resistance, good corrosion
resistance and light weight. Drilling is the process
required for these composite materials for fitting and
assembly with base part which may generate
delamination at entrance and exit. In drilling of GFRP
composite, delamination is one of the major defect
which is more responsible for the rejection of
components in the final assembly of engineering parts.
An experimental investigation of full factorial design
performed on drilling of Glass Fibre Reinforced plastic
laminates using Helical flute straight shank drill and
Brad and Spur drill by varying the process
parameters such as cutting speed and feed rate to find
the optimum drilling conditions. The main objective of
this paper is to optimize the drilling process parameters
with consideration of multiple performances such as
specific cutting pressure, power, peel-up delamination
factor and push-out delamination factor. Analysis of
variance (ANOVA) was carried out for estimating the
percentage contribution of process parameters on
drilling performance. Grey relational analysis was used
in this multiple objective optimization to get damage
free drilling of GFRP composite. Response table and
graph are used for this analysis which shows that feed
rate is the most significant factor than the cutting speed
and also it indicates that delamintation free drilling can
be obtained at low feed rate and low cutting speed. The
result shows that drilling performance can be enhanced
effectively thorough this approach.

Now a days Glass Fibre Reinforced Plastic (GFRP)

composites have widely used in many engineering
field such as aerospace, automotive, sports goods,
chemical industries etc. They exhibit high specific
strength, specific modulus, specific stiffness, light
weight and corrosive resistance. The conventional
machining of these composite materials are found
difficult due to their anisotropic and non
homogeneous in nature [1].
Nomenclature
S/N
signal to noise
LB
lower the better
HB
higher the better
NSN
normalised signal-to-noise
A
normalised S/N ratio
During drilling of composites, many undesirable
damages such as delamination, fibre pull out occur
drastically that reduces strength and decrease the
long-term performance of composite materials [2].
Delamination is the major issue among all
undesirable damages during drilling [3,4]. It was
reported that 60% of rejected parts in aircraft industry
during final assembly is due to drilling-induced
delamination [5,6]. The critical thrust force models
of various types of drill bits for delamination free
drilling of composite laminates were developed as
well as few unconventional machining processes for
composite materials were studied [7]. Grinding

Keywords: Glass fibre, Drilling, Specific cutting pressure,

Delamination, Multi-objective optimization

ISBN 978-93-80609-17-1
1263

International Conference on Recent Advances in Mechanical Engineering and Interdisciplinary Developments [ICRAMID - 2014]

drilling operation was introduced into hole making

process of composite materials to improve drilling
performance without delamination [8].
In this
drilling operation a high strength and wear-resistance
core drill bit with metal-bond PCD particles were
used. Several researchers considered the thrust force
is the cause of delamination and it is believed that no
damage occurs below the critical thrust force. A
critical thrust force model without delamination for
grinding drilling of composite laminates [9]. The
thrust force is reduced by 20-30% compared with
traditional drilling by vibration assisted twist drilling
(VATD) [10-12]. The tool life of VATD could be
improved with comparison to traditional drilling of
Glass fibre reinforced composites. The delamination
increased with cutting speed during conventional
drilling of composite laminates [13,14]. Meanwhile it
is observed that the delamination decreased with
cutting speed during conventional drilling of wovenply GFRP composites [15, 16]. The effect of point
angle of twist drill bit on delamination when drilling
composite laminates are studied. It was observed that
the delamination increases with increases of point
angle of twist drill bit during both conventional
drilling and high speed drilling of woven-ply CFRP
composite laminates [17,18]. The delamination size
is increased while increasing in feed rate and drill
diameter during drilling of GFR polyester
composites, whereas no clear effect is observed for
fibre orientation [19].

were3mm in thick. The mechanical properties of

GFRP composite are shown in Table 1.
TABLE 1: MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF
GFRP COMPOSITE

Properties
Tensile strength
Tensile modulus
Tensile elongation
Flexural strength
Barcol Hardness
Izod Impact

Value
2200
78000
2
60000
72
360

Unit
N/mm2
N/mm2
%
N/mm2
kJ/m2

B. Measurement of thrust force and torque:

Drilling experiment was conducted on a three-axis
CNC vertical milling machine. To neglect the effect
of drill wear only one set of experiments were
conducted using new helical flute straight shank and
Brad and Spur drills with 6mm diameter. The two
axis dynamometer is mounted on a table which had a
fixture to hold a composite laminate specimen for the
drilling experiment. Thrust force and torque during
machining were measured by piezoelectric
dynamometer. The charge amplifier converts the
resulting charge signals, which are proportional to the
force, to voltage and managed through the data
acquisition system. Experiment conditions were
repeated three times to get consistent value. The
levels of control factors and output parameters during
drilling are presented in Table 2.

II EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH
A. Material:
The glass/epoxy laminates were prepared by 12
layers of woven WFG 200 fabric glass fibre prepregs
by hand layup process.
The GFRP laminates

TABLE 2 : LEVELS OF DRILLING PARAMETERS

Control factors
A-Cutting speed (m/min)
B-Feed rate (mm/rev)

Level 1
15
0.05

Level 2
20
0.10

Level 3
25
0.15

Level 4
30
0.20

Level 5
35
0.25

Output parameters
C-Specific Cutting pressure(N/mm2); D Power (W) ; E Peel up delamination factor ; F Push
out delamination factor

III GREY RELATIONAL ANALYSIS

experimental data, the relationship between the

desired and actual experimental data can be
calculated. Data pre-processing is normally required,
since the range and unit in one data sequence may
differ from others. Then the grey relational grade was

In the grey relational analysis, the normalized

experimental results were found to calculate the grey
relational coefficient.
From the normalized

ISBN 978-93-80609-17-1
1264

International Conference on Recent Advances in Mechanical Engineering and Interdisciplinary Developments [ICRAMID - 2014]

calculated by averaging the grey relational coefficient

corresponding to each process response. The overall
evaluation of the multiple process response is based
on the grey relational grade. The equations used for
normalization are as follows:

Taguchi method recommends the use of the loss

function to measure the performance characteristic
deviation from
the desired value. This is converted to S/N ratio. The
loss function Fij for higher the better is

Larger the better

F =

(1)

(2)

=1

(6)

The S/N ratio for both LB and HB is given by

= 10 log( )

(3)

(7)

The S/N ratio value can be considered for the

optimization of single response problems. The
normalization of S/N values can be done by the
following equation

Aj is the normalized result for the jth performance

characteristic. The ideal normalized value is the
maximum of the normalized S/N ratio since large
normalized S/N ratio is preferred.
is the
distinguishing or identification co-efficient. The grey
relational grade is obtained by averaging the grey
relational co-efficient corresponding to each
performance measure.
Grey Relational Grade
=

(5)

For lower the better,

1
2
F =
=1

where bij is the ith performance characteristic in the jth

experiment maxi bij and mini bij are the maximum and
minimum vales of ith performance characteristic for
alternate j, respectively.
By the normalizing data, grey relational coefficient is
calculated as
+

=1 2

Where, n- number of repetition; K number of tests;

Yijk experimental value of the ith performance in the
jth experiment at the kth test.

Smaller the better

=

=1

(8)

The experimental values of output parameters for

helical flute drill and Brad and Spur drill conducted
for L25 orthogonal array and normalized values of
S/N ratios are presented in Table 3. The S/N ratio for
the output parameter is calculated using Eq. 7. The
S/N ratios were normalized using Eq. 2. The
deviation sequences were also calculated for the
output parameters and listed in Table 4. The Grey
relation coefficients for L25 array was calculated and
listed for both the drills in Table 5 using Eq. 3 and
corresponding Grey Relational Grades (GRG) were
calculate using Eq. 4. The highest GRG indicates the
optimal experimental conditions. The optimal
conditions for both the drills are: feed =0.05mm/rev
and cutting speed= 15m/min. Low feed rate and low
cutting speed results in good drilling performance for
both the drills.

(4)

where Wk indicates the normalized weight factor and

taken as 1. The grey relational grade i represents the
level of correlation between the reference sequence
and the comparability sequence.
The Taguchi based Grey method integrates the
algorithm of Taguchi method and grey relational
analysis to determine the optimum process
parameters with multiple performance characteristics.
The need of Taguchi method is to
(i) To find controllable factors and levels
(ii) To get best factor level through orthogonal
array
(iii) To reduce quality loss and costs

ISBN 978-93-80609-17-1
1265

International Conference on Recent Advances in Mechanical Engineering and Interdisciplinary Developments [ICRAMID - 2014]

TABLE 3 : L25 ORTHOGONAL ARRAY INPUT AND OUTPUT PARAMETERS

Expt.
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Input
parameters
A
B
15
15
15
15
15
20
20
20
20
20
25
25
25
25
25
30
30
30
30
30
35
35
35
35
35

0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25

Normalised S/N ratio - Helical Flute Drill

Normalised S/N ratio Brad & Spur drill

0
0.5368
0.7380
0.8739
0.9428
0.0857
0.5762
0.7522
0.8858
0.9575
0.1694
0.6110
0.7635
0.8964
0.9720
0.2559
0.6506
0.7784
0.9073
0.9861
0.3408
0.6868
0.7893
0.9180
1

1
0.8997
0.8216
0.7895
0.7364
0.8863
0.7495
0.6292
0.5884
0.5293
0.7908
0.6122
0.4422
0.3961
0.3389
0.7155
0.4963
0.2699
0.2138
0.1624
0.6574
0.3922
0.0971
0.0396
0

1
0.8578
0.5105
0.4210
0.4052
0.9684
0.7894
0.4842
0.3368
0.3
0.9315
0.7157
0.4578
0.2578
0.2
0.8947
0.6473
0.4315
0.1736
0.1
0.8631
0.5789
0.4052
0.0894
0

0.9511
0.7255
0.3308
0.1203
0
0.9624
0.6654
0.3157
0.1428
0.0300
0.9774
0.6052
0.2969
0.1654
0.0601
0.9887
0.5451
0.2781
0.1879
0.0902
1
0.4849
0.2631
0.2105
0.1203

0
0.5368
0.7380
0.8739
0.9428
0.0857
0.5762
0.7522
0.8858
0.9575
0.1694
0.6110
0.7635
0.8964
0.9720
0.2559
0.6506
0.7784
0.9073
0.9861
0.3408
0.6868
0.7893
0.9180
1

1
0.8955
0.8139
0.7805
0.7256
0.8815
0.7390
0.6137
0.5713
0.5099
0.7822
0.5961
0.4191
0.3712
0.3113
0.7036
0.4754
0.2397
0.1813
0.1277
0.6431
0.3668
0.0596
0
0.1481

1
0.8579
0.5081
0.4262
0.4043
0.9672
0.7868
0.4863
0.3387
0.3060
0.9289
0.7158
0.4590
0.2568
0.2021
0.8961
0.6502
0.4316
0.1748
0.1038
0.8579
0.5792
0.4043
0.0928
0

1
0.8579
0.5081
0.4262
0.4043
0.9672
0.7868
0.4863
0.3387
0.3060
0.9289
0.7158
0.4590
0.2568
0.2021
0.8961
0.6502
0.4316
0.1748
0.1038
0.8579
0.5792
0.4043
0.0928
0

The S/N ratio of performance characteristic for

different feeds, cutting speeds and drill types are
shown in Fig.1. a h. Normalized S/N ratio value
closer to 1 gives the better performance. It was
observed that the S/N ratios of specific cutting
pressure are closer to 1 at higher feeds for both the
drill types irrespective of cutting speeds whereas S/N
ratios of power, peel up delamination and push out
delamination are observed to be closer to 1 at lower
feeds for both the drill types and at all cutting speeds.
The average of grey relational grades for control

factors based on their levels is calculated and

presented in Table 6 for both the drill types. It was
noticed that highest grey relational grade was
obtained at low feed and low cutting speeds for the
both the drill types. This also supports to the
argument of optimal drilling performance based on
individual grey relational grades. The grey relational
grades verses experiment number for both the drills is
shown in Fig.2.a,b.
(b)

S/N ratio of specific cutting pressure

S/N ratio of specific cutting pressure

(a)
Helical flute drill
1.0

0.8

0.6
15 m/min
20 m/min
25 m/min
30 m/min
35 m/min

0.4

0.2

Brad and spur drill

1.0

0.8

0.6
15 m/min
20 m/min
25 m/min
30 m/min
35 m/min

0.4

0.2

0.0
0.05

0.10

0.15

Feed (mm/rev)

0.0
0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

Feed (mm/rev)

ISBN 978-93-80609-17-1
1266

0.20

International Conference on Recent Advances in Mechanical Engineering and Interdisciplinary Developments [ICRAMID - 2014]

(c)

(d)

15 m/min
20 m/min
25 m/min
30 m/min
35 m/min

Helical flute drill

1.0

1.0

0.8

0.8

S/N ratio of power

S/N ratio of power

15 m/min
20 m/min
25 m/min
30 m/min
35 m/min

Brad and spur drill

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.05

0.10

Feed (mm/rev)

0.15

0.20

Feed (mm/rev)

(e)

(f)

Brad and spur drill

15 m/min
20 m/min
25 m/min
30 m/min
35 m/min

0.8

0.6

S/N ratio of peel up delamination

S/N ratio of peel up delamination

Helical flute drill

1.0

0.4

0.2

0.0
0.05

0.10

0.15

1.0
15 m/min
20 m/min
25 m/min
30 m/min
35 m/min

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0
0.05

0.20

0.10

Helical flute drill

15 m/min
20 m/min
25 m/min
30 m/min
35 m/min

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0
0.05

0.20

(h)

0.10

0.15

0.20

S/N ratio of push out delamination

S/N ratio of push out delamination

(g)

1.0

0.15

Feed (mm/rev)

Feed (mm/rev)

Brad and spur drill

1.0
15 m/min
20 m/min
25 m/min
30 m/min
35 m/min

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0
0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

Feed (mm/rev)

Feed (mm/rev)

Fig.1 a - h S/N ratio of performance characteristics for different feeds, cutting speeds and drill types

ISBN 978-93-80609-17-1
1267

International Conference on Recent Advances in Mechanical Engineering and Interdisciplinary Developments [ICRAMID - 2014]

TABLE 4: DEVIATION SEQUENCES

Expt.
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Deviation sequences - Helical Flute Drill

C
D
E
F
1
0.4631
0.2619
0.1260
0.0571
0.9142
0.4237
0.2477
0.1141
0.0424
0.8305
0.3889
0.2364
0.1035
0.0279
0.7440
0.3493
0.2215
0.0926
0.0138
0.6591
0.3131
0.2106
0.0819
0

0
0.1002
0.1783
0.2104
0.2635
0.1136
0.2504
0.3707
0.4115
0.4706
0.2091
0.3877
0.5577
0.6038
0.6610
0.2844
0.5036
0.7300
0.7861
0.8375
0.3425
0.6077
0.9028
0.9603
1

0
0.1421
0.4894
0.5789
0.5947
0.0315
0.2105
0.5157
0.6631
0.7
0.0684
0.2842
0.5421
0.7421
0.8
0.1052
0.3526
0.5684
0.8263
0.9
0.1368
0.4210
0.5947
0.9105
1

0.0488
0.2744
0.6691
0.8796
1
0.0375
0.3345
0.6842
0.8571
0.9699
0.0225
0.3947
0.7030
0.8345
0.9398
0.0112
0.4548
0.7218
0.8120
0.9097
0
0.5150
0.7368
0.7894
0.8796

Deviation sequences Brad & Spur drill

C
D
E
F
1
0.4631
0.2619
0.1260
0.0571
0.9142
0.4237
0.2477
0.1141
0.0424
0.8305
0.3889
0.2364
0.1035
0.0279
0.7440
0.3493
0.2215
0.0926
0.0138
0.6591
0.3131
0.2106
0.0819
0

0
0.1044
0.1860
0.2194
0.2743
0.1184
0.2609
0.3862
0.4286
0.4900
0.2177
0.4038
0.5808
0.6287
0.6886
0.2963
0.5245
0.7602
0.8186
0.8722
0.3568
0.6331
0.9403
1
0.8518

0
0.1420
0.4918
0.5737
0.5956
0.0327
0.2131
0.5136
0.6612
0.6939
0.0710
0.2841
0.5409
0.7431
0.7978
0.1038
0.3497
0.5683
0.8251
0.8961
0.1420
0.4207
0.5956
0.9071
1

0
0.1420
0.4918
0.5737
0.5956
0.0327
0.2131
0.5136
0.6612
0.6939
0.0710
0.2841
0.5409
0.7431
0.7978
0.1038
0.3497
0.5683
0.8251
0.8961
0.1420
0.4207
0.5956
0.9071
1

TABLE 5: GREY RELATIONAL COEFFICIENTS AND GREY RELATIONAL GRADES (GRG)

Expt.
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Helical Flute Drill

Grey relational coefficients
C
D
E
F
0.3333
0.5191
0.6562
0.7986
0.8973
0.3535
0.5412
0.6686
0.8140
0.9217
0.3757
0.5624
0.6789
0.8284
0.9470
0.4019
0.5887
0.6929
0.8437
0.9729
0.4313
0.6149
0.7035
0.8592
1

1
0.8330
0.7370
0.7037
0.6548
0.8148
0.6662
0.5742
0.5485
0.5150
0.7051
0.5632
0.4726
0.4529
0.4306
0.6373
0.4981
0.4064
0.3887
0.3738
0.5934
0.4513
0.3564
0.3423
0.3333

1
0.7786
0.5053
0.4634
0.4567
0.9405
0.7037
0.4922
0.4298
0.4166
0.8796
0.6375
0.4797
0.4025
0.3846
0.8260
0.5864
0.4679
0.3769
0.3571
0.7851
0.5428
0.4567
0.3544
0.3333

0.9109
0.6456
0.4276
0.3623
0.3333
0.9300
0.5990
0.4222
0.3684
0.3401
0.9568
0.5588
0.4156
0.3746
0.3472
0.9779
0.5236
0.4092
0.3810
0.3546
1
0.4925
0.4042
0.3877
0.3623

GRG
0.8110
0.6941
0.5815
0.5820
0.5855
0.7597
0.6275
0.5393
0.5402
0.5484
0.7293
0.5805
0.5117
0.5146
0.5273
0.7108
0.5492
0.4941
0.4976
0.5146
0.7024
0.5254
0.4802
0.4859
0.5072

ISBN 978-93-80609-17-1
1268

Brad & Spur drill

Grey relational coefficients
C
D
E
F
0.3333
0.5191
0.6562
0.7986
0.8974
0.3535
0.5412
0.6687
0.8141
0.9217
0.3757
0.5624
0.678
0.8284
0.9471
0.4019
0.5887
0.6929
0.8437
0.9729
0.4313
0.6149
0.7035
0.8592
1

1
0.8272
0.7287
0.6949
0.6456
0.8084
0.6570
0.5642
0.5384
0.5050
0.6966
0.5532
0.4626
0.4429
0.4206
0.6278
0.4880
0.3967
0.3791
0.3643
0.5835
0.4412
0.3471
0.3333
0.3698

1
0.7787
0.5041
0.4656
0.4563
0.9384
0.7011
0.4932
0.4305
0.4187
0.8755
0.6376
0.4803
0.4021
0.3852
0.8280
0.5884
0.4680
0.3773
0.3581
0.7787
0.5430
0.4563
0.3553
0.3333

1
0.7787
0.5041
0.4656
0.4563
0.9384
0.7011
0.4932
0.4305
0.4187
0.8755
0.6376
0.4803
0.4021
0.3852
0.8280
0.5884
0.4680
0.3773
0.3581
0.7787
0.5430
0.4563
0.3553
0.3333

GRG
0.8333
0.7259
0.5983
0.6062
0.6139
0.7597
0.6501
0.5548
0.5534
0.5660
0.7059
0.5977
0.5255
0.5189
0.5345
0.6714
0.5633
0.5064
0.4943
0.5133
0.6430
0.5355
0.4908
0.4758
0.5091

International Conference on Recent Advances in Mechanical Engineering and Interdisciplinary Developments [ICRAMID - 2014]

(a)

(b)

Brad and spur drill

0.85
0.85

Helical flute drill

0.80

Grey relational grades

Grey relational grades

0.80
0.75
0.70
0.65
0.60
0.55
0.50

0.75
0.70
0.65
0.60
0.55
0.50
0.45

0.45
0

10

15

20

25

10

15

20

25

Experiment Number

Experiment Number

Fig. 2 a,b Grey relational grades Vs Experiment numbers

TABLE 6: RESPONSE TABLE FOR GREY RELATIONAL GRADE

Control
Factors
A
B

1
0.6508
0.6755

Helical flute drill

Levels
2
3
4
0.6030
0.5726
0.5532
0.6168
0.5765
0.5497

5
0.5402
0.5308

IV ANOVA
ANOVA was done for the L25 array experiments in
order to determine which control factors contributes
more to the drilling performance. It was found that
feed rate contributes more to the drilling performance

1
0.7426
0.7226

Brad and Spur drill

Levels
2
3
4
0.5953 0.5213 0.5240
0.6145 0.5351 0.5297

5
0.5366
0.5473

followed by cutting speed. The details of ANOVA is

presented in Table 7. Confirmation tests were also
done for the optimal level of control factors and
observed closer results. The percentage contribution
of process parameters is also illustrated in Fig.3.a,b.

TABLE 7: ANOVA

Testing
parameter
s
A
B
Error
Total

Degrees
of
freedom
4
4
16
24

Error
0.0035
0%

feed
0.8148
82%

Helical Flute Drill

Sum of
Mean Sum
Contribution
Squares
of Squares
0.0390
0.0097
0.1816
0.1752
0.0438
0.8148
0.0030
0.0001
0.0035
0.2173

cutting speed
0.1816
18%

feed
0.6628
66%

Brad & Spur drill

Sum of
Mean Sum
Contribution
Squares of Squares
0.0666
0.0166
0.3314
0.1332
0.0333
0.6628
0.0045
0.0002
0.0056
0.2044

Error
0.0056
1%

cutting speed
0.3314
33%

cutting speed
cutting speed

feed

feed

Error

Error

(a) Helical flute drill

(b) Brad and Spur drill

Fig.3. Percentage contribution of process parameters on drilling performance

ISBN 978-93-80609-17-1
1269

International Conference on Recent Advances in Mechanical Engineering and Interdisciplinary Developments [ICRAMID - 2014]

plastics. J compos Mater. 29 (1995) 1988.

V CONCLUSION
[9]

H Hocheng, CC Tsao. Effect of special drill bits on

drilling-induced delamination of composite materials. J
Mach Tools Manuf. 46 (2006) 1403.

[10]

X Wang, LJ Wang, JP Tao. Investigation on thrust in

vibnration drilling of fibre-reinforced plastics. J Mater
Process Technol. 148 (2004) 239.

[11]

(ii) This approach converted multiple

performance characteristics into GRG and
therefore simplified the analysis.

J Ramkumar, S Aravindan, SK Malhotra,

R
Krishnamurthy. Effect of workpiece vibration on
drilling of GFRP laminates. J Mater Process Technol.
152 (2004) 329.

[12]

(iii) The influencing control factors on

drilling performance found by ANOVA are
feed rate followed by cutting speed.

S Arul, L Vijayaraghavan, SK Malhotra, R

Krishnamurthy. Influence of tool material on dynamics
of drilling of GFRP composites. Int J Adv Manuf
Technol. 26 (2006) 655.

[13]

JP Davim, P Resis, CC Antonio. Experimental study of

drilling glass fibre reinforced plastics (GFRP)
manufactured by hand lay-up. Compos Sci Technol.
64 (2004) 289.

[14]

JP Davim, P Resis. Study of delamination in drilling

carbon fiber reinforced plastic (CFRP) using desigh
experiments. Compos Struct. 59 (2003) 481.

[15]

UA Khashaba. Delamination in drilling GFR-thermoset

composites. Compos Struct. 63 (2004) 313.

[16]

J Ramkumar, S Aravindan, SK Malhotra,

R
Krishnamurthy. An enhancement of the machining
performance of GFRP by oscillatory assisted drilling.
Int J Adv Manuf Technol. 23 (2004) 240.

UA Khashaba, IA Sobaty, AL Selmy, AA Megahed.

Machinability analysis in drilling woven GFR/epoxy
composites: Part I - Effect of machining parameters.
Composites: Part A. 41 (2010) 391.

[17]

R Mishra, J Malik, I Singh, JP Davim. Neural network

approach for estimate the residual tensile strength after
drilling in uni-directional glass fibre reinforced plastic
laminates. Mater Des.3 (2010) 2790.

VN Gaitonde, SR Karnik, J Campos Rubio, J Davim.

Analysis of parametric influence on delamination in
high-speed drilling of carbon fiber reinforced plastic
composites. J Mater Process Technol. 03 (2008) 431.

[18]

SR Karnik, VN Gaitonde, J Campos Rubio, J Davim.

Delamination analysis of high speed drilling of carbon
fiber reinforced plastics (CFRP) using artificial neural
network model. Mater Des. 29 (2008) 1768.

[19]

TV Rajamurugan, K Shanmugam, K Palanikumar,

Analysis of delamination in drilling glass fiber
reinforced polyester composites. Mater. Des. 45 (2013)
80-87.

The following conclusions were drawn from the

study:
(i) Taguchi based grey relational analysis
was done for L25 orthogonal experimental
design and found that least feed rate and
least cutting speed resulted in best drilling
performance.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to thank the Divya
tools,
Chennai
for
providing
the
experimental facility and also thank Dr. A.
Kadirvel and Mr. R. Ganesh for their help in
grey analysis.
REFERENCES
[1]

[2]

[3]

R Teti. Machining of composite materials.

Annals Manuf Technol. 51 (2002) 611.

CIRP

[4]

AM Abrao, PE Faria, JC Campos Rubio, P Reis, JP

Davim. Drilling of fiber reinforced plastics: a review. J
Mater Process Technol. 186 (2007) 1.

[5]

TL Wong, SM Wu, GM Croy. An analysis of

delamination in drilling composite materials. In:14 th
National SAMPE technology conference. Atlanta,
USA (1982) 471.

[6]

R Sone, K Krishnamurthy. A neural network thrust

force controller to minimize delamination during
drilling of graphite-epoxy laminates. Int J Mach Tools
Manuf. 36 (1996) 985.

[7]

H Hocheng, CC Tsao. The path towards delaminationfree drilling of composite materials. J Mater Process
Technol. 167 (2005) 251.

[8]

KY Park, JH Choi, DG Lee. Delamination-free and

high efficiency drilling of carbon fibre reinforced

ISBN 978-93-80609-17-1
1270