DR B R AMBEDKAR NATIONAL OF TECHNOLOGY JALANDHAR-144011, INDIA

DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL AND PRODUCTION ENGINEERING

IVTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON PRODUCTION AND INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING, CPIE-2016

Minimization of Specific Energy Consumption and Surface Roughness in

Wet Machining by Optimizing the Cutting Parameters

Sachin Sharma1, P.Sudhakar Rao2, Amit Singh3

1
ME Student, Department of Mechanical Engineering
National Institute of Technical Teachers Training and Research, Chandigarh, INDIA
2
Assistant Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering
National Institute of Technical Teachers Training and Research, Chandigarh, INDIA
3
Assistant Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering
Malviya National Insitute of Technology Jaipur, INDIA

ABSTRACT
In this paper an experimental investigation is conducted for optimizing the cutting parameters
in turning of AISI 1040. The effect of cutting speed, feed rate and depth of cut are analyzed
for the response parameters specific energy and surface roughness. Face Centered Composite
Design (FCC) of Response Surface Methodology (RSM) is used for generating the
experimental runs followed by regression modelling for the specific energy and surface
roughness. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) is used for checking the adequacy of the model.
The effect of three input parameters on two output responses is analyzed by the contour plots
generated by the RSM. Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) has been used for finding the
optimum values of input parameters for minimizing the specific energy and surface
roughness. In the end it is concluded that surface roughness is mostly affected by the feed
rate whereas specific energy is affected by cutting speed.
Keywords: Turning, AISI 1040, Face Centered Composite Design, Analysis of Variance,
Particle Swarm Optimization.

NOMENCLATURE
PSO: Particle Swarm Optimization
ANOVA: Analysis of Variance
FCC: Face Central Composite Design
RSM: Response Surface Methodology

1. INTRODUCTION
Manufacturing industries provide jobs and fulfilling the customers needs by delivering the
products. It has huge amount of share in global capital but at the backend of this process, it
consumes a lot of energy (both renewable and non-renewable) for converting the raw
materials into goods [1]. In order to increase the production rate industries increase the
number of machines for this more resources are required as raw material. Lots of energy
required for this process which leads to depletion of the renewable and non-renewable
resources and has impact on the environmental cycles of planet. Industries consume 30% of
the total worlds energy and this consumption rate is growing rapidly. There are lots of
machining processes in manufacturing industries such as turning, milling, drilling, grinding
etc. Among these turning process is mostly used [2]. Now-a-days sustainable manufacturing
is very important which deals with the environmental, social and economic factors. It covers
all factors by using green manufacturing which reduces the energy consumption and provides

1
 DR B R AMBEDKAR NATIONAL OF TECHNOLOGY JALANDHAR-144011, INDIA
DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL AND PRODUCTION ENGINEERING
IVTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON PRODUCTION AND INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING, CPIE-2016

the cleaner production [3]. Energy consumed during any machining process in both non-
cutting and cutting operations like spindle, fans, tool change, motors, fluid pumps etc. But it
is found that about 65% of energy is consumed during cutting operations [4]. So the selection
of cutting parameters is the most important task during machining. It improves the production
system without any changes in the machining setup. For reducing the energy consumption
and improving the quality of the products there is need of knowledge about the cutting
parameters and machine tools [5]. For turning operation lots of research papers has been
published regarding the optimization of cutting forces, surface roughness, tool wear, material
removal rate, power consumption etc. In addition, process parameters optimization is the
most important task being followed to improve the production system while looking into the
machining operations and without any drastic changes in the machining operations.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW
All new discoveries dont show up out of the research work, they basically build upon the
result of previous research and findings. In literature, Venkateshan K. et al. [6] studied the
effect of cutting parameters during turning on Aluminium Matrix comosite for finding the
cutting forces and surface roughness. It is found that the feed rate and depth of cut have the
most influence on the output responses. Ding T. et al. [7] used the orthogonal taguchi method
for finding the effects of cutting parameters on AISI H13 material and found that feed rate
and axial cut affects have the most influence on output responses. Aouici H. et al. [8] used the
Response surface methodology to generate the experimental run in turning for AISI H11
steel. It is concluded that lowest feed and depth of cut gives better results for reducing the
cutting forces and surface roughness. Balogun V.A. and Mativenga P.T. [9] gave a model to
evaluate the redesign of the machine tool to make the process to be energy efficient and
found that at tool tip very less energy consumed as compared to zero load operation. Velchev
S. et al. [10] investigated and studied the empirical model for energy consumption and found
that for minimizing the specific energy consumption, material removal rate during cutting
operation should be more. So that optimum cutting speed and more depth of cut should be
preferred. Isik Y. [11] found that cutting fluids has important impact during machining. It
reduces the heat generation and lowers the friction during the cutting operation which
increases the tool life, energy consumption during machining operations and improved the
quality of the products. Guo Y. et al. [12] proposed energy based approach for finishing
operation by using the cutting fluid during turning operation. Qualitative models of surface
roughness and specific energy are used and found that by increasing the cutting speed surface
quality increases and get degrades by using the feed rate. Kuram E. et al. [13] used the D-
optimal model for evaluating the specific energy consumption, surface roughness and tool
wear by using vegetable based cutting fluids. Ayed Y. et al. [14] performed an experiment by
using high jet pressure cutting fluids and found that wear during high pressure is controlled
and it provides the continue cooling to the tool and work piece.
On the basis of literature study, it is observed that minimization of the surface roughness and
specific energy consumption is the important aspect of present manufacturing system. So in
this paper turning operation is performed on EN8 material with carbide inserts. The effect of
cutting parameters is analyzed on the output responses. In the end Particle Swarm
Optimization algorithm is used to find the optimum values of the cutting parameters for
minimizing the output responses.

2
 DR B R AMBEDKAR NATIONAL OF TECHNOLOGY JALANDHAR-144011, INDIA
DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL AND PRODUCTION ENGINEERING
IVTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON PRODUCTION AND INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING, CPIE-2016

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Selection of Work material and Tool

AISI 1040 carbon steel has been selected for investigation. It has high carbon content and can
be hardened by heat treatment followed by quenching and tempering. It has wide range of
application in manufacturing industries for making axles, bolts, coupling etc. For
investigation the cylindrical rods of dimensioning of 100mm length and 56mm diameter is
selected. Tool holder and cutting inserts of tagutech is used for cutting operation. Triangular
inserts of carbide are used for machining of model TNMG160408.

3.2 Experimental Setup

Figure.1 shows the experimental setup which consist of Okam Lathe of variable speed, feed
and depth of cut. Surface Roughness and specific energy are considered as the output
responses. Surface roughness is measured by Mitutoyo surface tester of SJ-301 and Kistler
Dynamometer 9257B is used for measuring the cutting forces from where specific energy is
calculated.

Surface Tester
Dynamometer

Lathe Machine

Figure 1 Experimental Setup for Measuring Surface Roughness and Specific Energy
3.3 Selection of Cutting Parameters
Selection of cutting parameters for this experimentation was done on the basis of previous
literature review. The selected input parameters were varied up to 3 levels. Table 1 shows the
parameters and their level for the experimentation.
Table 1 Cutting Parameters and their Levels
Cutting Parameters Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
Cutting Speed 68 92 128
Feed 0.21 0.26 0.31
DOC 1 1.5 2

3.4 Measurement of Surface Roughness

Surface Roughness is measurement by using Mitutoyo Surface tester. Probe of the surface
tester is touched with the finished component. By moving the probe on the surface of finished

3
 DR B R AMBEDKAR NATIONAL OF TECHNOLOGY JALANDHAR-144011, INDIA
DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL AND PRODUCTION ENGINEERING
IVTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON PRODUCTION AND INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING, CPIE-2016

component the value of surface roughness is recorded at 3 locations of the component and
average of these three is taken as the output value of the surface roughness.

3.5 Measurement of Specific Energy

Specific energy is measured by measuring the cutting forces. Cutting forces are measured by
using Kistler dynamometer. Resultant force is computed by using Eqn. 1given below:

Fc = (1)
Cutting power used for turning operation is calculated by multiplying the resultant of force
with cutting speed as shown in Eqn. 2.

Pc = Fc*v (2)
Where Pc is cutting Power, Fc is resultant of cutting force and v is cutting speed. From here
specific energy is measured by using Eqn. 3.

U= (3)
3
Where U is the specific energy having units J/mm and MRR is the material removal rate in
mm3/sec.

3.6 Design of Experiment

Design of experiment is the most important procedure for conducting the experiments in a
systematic way to find the appropriate conclusion from experiments. In this case for
designing the experiment Face Central Composite Design of RSM is used. In this 20
experimental run is generated by varying the three cutting parameters upto 3 levels. Total 40
experiments is conducted by repeating the same experiment twice shown in Figure 2.
Average of the output responses is considered as the final output value.

Figure 2 Experiments performed on Workpiece

4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Table 2 shows the values of output responses surface roughness and specific energy. The
value of surface roughness is varies between 1.95-4.25m and specific energy is lies between
0.074-0.25 J/mm3.

4
 DR B R AMBEDKAR NATIONAL OF TECHNOLOGY JALANDHAR-144011, INDIA
DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL AND PRODUCTION ENGINEERING
IVTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON PRODUCTION AND INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING, CPIE-2016

Table 2 Experimental data collected using the RSM technique

Std Order Run Order Speed Feed Depth Of Cut Ra Specific Energy
1 2 128 0.21 1 1.9565 0.232369
2 7 68 0.31 2 4.0990 0.076844
3 20 92 0.26 1.5 3.4450 0.094300
4 17 92 0.26 1.5 3.4850 0.094417
5 15 92 0.26 1.5 3.4150 0.093949
6 1 68 0.21 1.0 2.1080 0.253635
7 18 92 0.26 1.5 3.4480 0.094164
8 14 92 0.26 2.0 3.9295 0.074027
9 6 128 0.21 2.0 3.0615 0.086764
10 9 68 0.26 1.5 3.3550 0.093433
11 11 92 0.21 1.5 3.3950 0.128768
12 8 128 0.31 2.0 3.6750 0.077659
13 16 92 0.26 1.5 3.4350 0.094255
14 12 92 0.31 1.5 3.9450 0.078412
15 19 92 0.26 1.5 3.4140 0.094053
16 5 68 0.21 2.0 3.2948 0.085494
17 4 128 0.31 1.0 3.5030 0.121526
18 13 92 0.26 1.0 2.9900 0.140867
19 3 68 0.31 1.0 4.2950 0.173387
20 10 128 0.26 1.5 2.5530 0.092613

4.1 Statistical Analysis

A variance analysis of surface roughness and specific energy was made with the objective of
analysing the influence of cutting speed, feed rate and depth of cut on the results. Table 3 and
4 shows the ANOVA results for surface roughness and specific energy respectively. This
analysis shows the 95% confidence level of output responses.

Table 3 ANOVA table for Surface Roughness

Source Df Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F-Value P-Value
Regression 9 6.26624 6.26624 0.696249 17.64 0.042
Linear 3 4.99527 0.71804 0.239348 6.06 0.013
v 1 0.71623 0.41268 0.412681 10.46 0.009
f 1 3.25037 0.01681 0.016808 0.43 0.529
doc 1 1.02868 0.12908 0.129081 3.27 0.101
Square 3 0.53117 0.53117 0.177057 4.49 0.031
v*v 1 0.31133 0.48336 0.483356 12.25 0.006
f*f 1 0.21625 0.16696 0.166961 4.23 0.067
doc*doc 1 0.00359 0.00359 0.003594 0.09 0.769
Interaction 3 0.73980 0.73980 0.246601 6.25 0.012
v*f 1 0.06307 0.06307 0.063069 1.60 0.235
v*doc 1 0.00637 0.00637 0.006367 0.16 0.696
f*doc 1 0.67037 0.67037 0.670366 16.99 0.002
Residual Error 10 0.39465 0.39465 0.039465 ------ -------
Lack of Fit 5 0.39121 0.39121 0.078243 59.75 0.645
Pure Error 5 0.00344 0.00344 0.000688 ------ -------
Total 19 6.66090 --------- ----------- ------ -------

5
 DR B R AMBEDKAR NATIONAL OF TECHNOLOGY JALANDHAR-144011, INDIA
DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL AND PRODUCTION ENGINEERING
IVTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON PRODUCTION AND INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING, CPIE-2016

Table 4 ANOVA table for Specific Energy

Source Df Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F-Value P- Value
Regression 9 0.046922 0.046922 0.005214 15.58 0.011
Linear 3 0.034029 0.012456 0.004152 28.34 0.003
v 1 0.000167 0.000227 0.000227 1.55 0.242
f 1 0.006719 0.001644 0.001644 11.22 0.007
doc 1 0.027144 0.005773 0.005773 39.40 0.002
Square 3 0.008447 0.008447 0.002816 19.22 0.004
v*v 1 0.005047 0.000199 0.000199 1.36 0.271
f*f 1 0.002124 0.000860 0.000860 5.87 0.036
doc*doc 1 0.001276 0.001276 0.001276 8.71 0.015
Interaction 3 0.004447 0.004447 0.001482 10.12 0.002
v*f 1 0.000122 0.000122 0.000122 0.83 0.383
v*doc 1 0.000569 0.000569 0.000569 3.88 0.077
f*doc 1 0.003756 0.003756 0.003756 25.63 0.000
Residual Error 10 0.001465 0.001465 0.000147 ------ ------
Lack of Fit 5 0.001465 0.001465 0.000293 48.218 0.58
Pure Error 5 0.000009 0.000009 0.000005 ------- ------
Total 19 0.04838 ---------- ----------- ------- ------

From the table 3 it is cleared that the model is significant for surface roughness having P
value 0.42 which is less than 0.5. Cutting speed has the least effect on the surface roughness
while feed is the most affecting parameter followed by depth of cut. Interaction of cutting
speed and depth of cut and cutting speed and feed also affect the surface roughness.
Regression equation generated for surface roughness is shown in Eqn. 4.
Regression equation (Surface Roughness)=-3.1642+0.1001*v16.773*f+3.0369*doc-
0.0005*v*v+98.56*f*f+0.1446*doc*doc-0.0590*v*f+0.0019*v*doc11.57*f*doc (4)
Table 4 for specific energy is also significant having P value 0.011. In this case specific
energy is mostly affected by cutting speed followed by feed. Interaction of Cutting speed and
feed followed by cutting speed and DOC also affects the output responses. Regression
equation generated for specific energy is given in Eqn.5.
Regression Equation (Specific Energy) = 1.5248-0.0023*v-5.245*f-0.64223*doc
+0.00001*v*v + 7.073*f*f+0.086*doc*doc-0.0025*v*f+0.00056*v*doc+0.86668*f*doc (5)

4.2 Effects of machining parameters on Output responses

Contour plots are used for measuring the effects of input parameters on output responses.
The interaction effects of cutting speed and feed, cutting speed and depth of cut, feed and depth
of cut on the surface roughness were analyzed and concluded that cutting speed and feed has the
most effect on surface roughness shown in figure 3(a) whereas cutting speed and depth of cut
has least effect on it shown in figure 3(b). From here it is cleared that at low level of cutting
speed and feed the surface roughness is minimum and by increasing both it increases upto a
level and in end it slight decreases. Behaviour of feed rate remains same for all interactions
shown in figure 3(a) and 3(c), if feed rate is increases then output response starts increasing.
Cutting speed in both of the cases shown in figure 3(a) and 3(b) has same behavior. At first
by increasing cutting speed output responses increases and by further increasing the cutting
speed it starts decreasing. Depth of cut has very less effect on surface roughness shown in
figure 3(b) and 3(c), at high value of depth output response is very less. Cutting speed and
depth of cut has the least effect on the surface roughness. From here it is concluded that feed
rate is the most effecting parameter for surface roughness followed by cutting speed and

6
 DR B R AMBEDKAR NATIONAL OF TECHNOLOGY JALANDHAR-144011, INDIA
DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL AND PRODUCTION ENGINEERING
IVTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON PRODUCTION AND INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING, CPIE-2016

depth of cut. For minimum value of surface roughness the cutting speed should be more and
feed should be minimum.

(a) (b)
.

(c)

Figure 3 Contour Plots for Surface Roughness (a) Plots for Surface roughness vs Feed
and Cutting Speed (b) Plots for Surface roughness vs Depth of Cut and Cutting Speed
(c) Plots for Surface roughness vs Feed and Depth of Cut
In case of specific energy the interaction effects of cutting speed and feed, cutting speed and
depth of cut, feed and depth of cut on the specific energy values were analysed shown in
Figure 4 and concluded that the combined effect of cutting speed and depth of cut has the
most effect on the specific energy, whereas cutting speed and feed has the least effect. From
figure 4(a) it is cleared that at low level of cutting speed and feed the specific energy is
maximum and by increasing the cutting speed and at low feed the specific energy is slightly
decreases. By increasing both cutting speed and feed specific energy decreases slightly. From
figure 4(b) it is found that at low level of cutting speed and depth of cut specific energy is more
and at low level of depth of cut and high cutting speed the same effect is found. If both cutting
speed and depth of cut increases then specific energy starts decreases .The behaviour of cutting
speed was found similar for both interaction plots shown in figure 4(a) and 4(b). In figure 4 (c) it
is found that that with increasing the feed rate specific energy decreases slowly at low level of
depth of cut and by decreasing both parameters surface roughness decrease very fast. From the
above figures it is cleared that at low cutting speed and feed the specific energy is more and
depth of cut is found has the significant parameter for specific energy. It indicates that for
minimum value of specific energy cutting speed and feed should be of medium range and depth
of cut should be more.

7
 DR B R AMBEDKAR NATIONAL OF TECHNOLOGY JALANDHAR-144011, INDIA
DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL AND PRODUCTION ENGINEERING
IVTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON PRODUCTION AND INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING, CPIE-2016

(a) (b)

(c)

Figure 4 Contour Plots for Specific Energy (a) Plots for Specific Energy vs Feed and
Cutting Speed (b) Plots for Specific Energy vs Depth of Cut and Cutting Speed (c)
Plots for Specific Energy vs Feed and Depth of Cut
4.3 Optimization of Results
Particle swarm optimization algorithm is used for optimizing the input parameters. It
basically works on the birds flocking. Regression equations generated for surface roughness
and specific energy are used as the objective function for PSO. All optimization process is
performed on MATLAB.
Input Parameters range for optimization procedure

68 Cutting Speed 128

0.21 Feed 0.31
1 Depth of Cut 2
Pop. size= 35
Iterations = 10000
After optimization the results obtained for minimum surface roughness is cutting speed
should be 126.80m/min, feed should be 0.22mm/rev and depth of cut should be 1.021 mm.
surface roughness value obtained by using these parameters is 1.835m. For specific energy
the parameters obtained are cutting speed should be 92.97m/min, feed should be 0.28mm/rev

8
 DR B R AMBEDKAR NATIONAL OF TECHNOLOGY JALANDHAR-144011, INDIA
DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL AND PRODUCTION ENGINEERING
IVTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON PRODUCTION AND INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING, CPIE-2016

and depth of cut should be 1.98mm from these the specific energy value obtained is 0.062
J/mm3.

5 CONCLUSIONS
RSM is used for generating the experimental runs for turning process. AISI 1040 is selected
for investigation which is to be machined with a carbide tool. Optimum values of the cutting
parameters were found to minimize the output responses surface roughness and specific
energy. Specific energy basically tells about total energy consumed by the machine tool for
per material removal rate per second. By optimizing the cutting parameters the minimum
value of this response is found for minimizing the specific energy consumption. On the other
side Surface roughness defines the quality of the product. If the workpiece is not of good
quality that is rejected which involves the remachining and it consumes the more energy
which impacts on the environment. Optimization of the cutting parameters is done by particle
swarm optimization algorithm. The objective function is affected by three variables cutting
speed, feed and depth of cut. In optimization the optimum value of these parameters is found
to minimize the output responses.
From the above discussions it is concluded that surface roughness is mostly affected by feed
rate followed by depth of cut and cutting speed. Specific energy is mostly affected by cutting
speed followed by feed and depth of cut. So for minimum surface roughness and specific
energy feed rate should be less and cutting speed should be optimum respectively. Particle
swarm optimization concluded that for minimum value of surface roughness cutting speed
should be 126.80m/min, feed should be 0.22mm/rev and depth of cut be 1.021mm and for
minimum specific energy consumption cutting speed should be 92.97m/min, feed should be
0.28mm/rev and depth of cut should be 1.98mm. In future grey relational analysis can be
used for multi objective equation so that single optimum results should be calculated for
minimum specific energy and surface roughness.

REFERENCES

[1] C.Camposeco-Negrete, J. de Dios Caldern Njera, and J. C. Miranda-Valenzuela,

Optimization of Cutting Parameters to Minimize Energy Consumption During Turning of AISI
1018 Steel at Constant Material Removal Rate Using Robust Design, International Journal of
Advance Manufacturing Technology,Vol. 83, 2015,pp.1341-1347.
[2] C. J. Rao, D. N. Rao, and P. Srihari, Influence of Cutting Parameters on Cutting Force and
Surface Finish in Turning Operation, Procedia Engineering, Vol. 64,2013, pp. 14051415.
[3] C. Camposeco-Negrete, Optimization of Cutting Parameters Using Response Surface Method for
Minimizing Energy Consumption and Maximizing Cutting Quality in Turning of AISI 6061 T6
Aluminum,Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 91,2015, pp. 109117.
[4] Q. Wang, F. Liu, and X. Wang, Multi-objective Optimization of Machining Parameters
Considering Energy Consumption, International Journal of Advance Manufacturing
Technology, Vol. 71,2014,pp. 11331142.
[5] S. Kara and W. Li, Unit Process Energy Consumption Models for Material Removal Processes,
CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 60,2011, pp. 3740.
[6] K. Venkatesan, R. Ramanujam, J. Joel, P. Jeyapandiarajan, M. Vignesh, D. J. Tolia, and R. V.
Krishna, Study of Cutting Force and Surface Roughness in Machining of Al alloy Hybrid
Composite and Optimized Using Response Surface Methodology, Procedia Engineering, Vol.
97, 2014, pp. 677686.

9
 DR B R AMBEDKAR NATIONAL OF TECHNOLOGY JALANDHAR-144011, INDIA
DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL AND PRODUCTION ENGINEERING
IVTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON PRODUCTION AND INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING, CPIE-2016

[7] T. Ding, S. Zhang, Y. Wang, and X. Zhu, Empirical Models and Optimal Cutting Parameters for
Cutting Forces and Surface Roughness in Hard Milling of AISI H13 steel, International
Journal of Advance Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 51,2010, pp. 4555.
[8] H. Aouici, M. A. Yallese, K. Chaoui, T. Mabrouki, and J. F. Rigal, Analysis of Surface
Roughness and Cutting Force Components in Hard Turning with CBN tool: Prediction model
and cutting conditions optimization,Measurement Journal of the International Measurement
Confederation, Vol. 45, 2012, pp. 344353.
[9] V. A. Balogun and P. T. Mativenga, Modelling of Direct Energy Requirements in Mechanical
Machining Processes, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 41, 2013,pp. 179186.
[10] S. Velchev, I. Kolev, K. Ivanov, and S. Gechevski, Empirical Models for Specific Energy
Consumption and Optimization of Cutting Parameters for Minimizing Energy Consumption
During Turning, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 80, 2014 ,pp. 139149.
[11] Y. Isik, An Experimental Investigation on Effect of Cutting Fluids in Turning With Coated
Carbides Tool, Strojniski Vestnik-Journal Of Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 56, 2010, pp. 17.
[12] Y. Guo, J. Loenders, J. Duflou, and B. Lauwers, Optimization of Energy Consumption and
Surface Quality in Finish Turning, Procedia CIRP, Vol. 1,2012, pp. 512517.
[13] E. Kuram, B. Ozcelik, M. Bayramoglu, E. Demirbas, and B. T. Simsek, Optimization of Cutting
Fluids and Cutting Parameters During end Milling by Using D-optimal Design of Experiments,
Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 42, 2013, pp. 159166.
[14] Y. Ayed, G. Germain, A. Ammar, and B. Furet, Tool Wear Analysis and Improvement of Cutting
Conditions Using the High-Pressure Water-Jet Assistance When Machining the Ti17 Titanium
Alloy,Precision Engineering, Vol. 42,2015, pp. 294301.

10