Performance Investigation of MQL Parameters Using Nano Cutting Fluids in Hard Milling

Abstract

Machining difficult-to-cut materials is one of the increasingly concerned issues in the metalworking industry. Low machinability and high cutting temperature generated from the contact zone are the main obstacles that need to be solved in order to improve economic and technical efficiency but still have to ensure environmental friendliness. The application of MQL method using nano cutting fluid is one of the suggested solutions to improve the cooling and lubricating performance of pure-MQL for machining difficult-to-cut materials. The main objective of this paper is to investigate the effects of nanofluid MQL (NFMQL) parameters including the fluid type, type of nanoparticles, air pressure and air flow rate on cutting forces and surface roughness in hard milling of 60Si2Mn hardened steel (50–52 HRC). Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was implemented to study the effects of investigated variables on hard machining performance. The most outstanding finding is that the main effects of the input variables and their interaction are deeply investigated to prove the better machinability and the superior cooling lubrication performance when machining under NFMQL condition. The experimental results indicate that the uses of smaller air pressure and higher air flow rate decrease the cutting forces and improve the surface quality. Al2O3 nanoparticles show the better results than MoS2 nanosheets. The applicability of soybean oil, a type of vegetable oil, is proven to be enlarged in hard milling by suspending nanoparticles, suitable for further studies in the field of sustainable manufacturing.

Investigation of the Effects of Nanoparticle Concentration and Cutting Parameters on Surface Roughness in MQL Hard Turning Using MoS2 Nanofluid

“…On the other hand, nano cutting oil penetrates the cutting zone without being impeded and does not adhere to the top of the cutting edge, so the surface roughness value decreases. The effect of feed rate on surface roughness is the strongest; as feed rate per tooth increases, the distances between peaks and valleys will be higher [1,29], and in hard machining, the formation of surface roughness is mainly due to the scratches of the cutting tool on the machined surface, and the influence of other factors is not significant. Surface roughness rapidly went up with the increase of feed rate (Figure 4c).…”

“…The obtained nano cutting fluid was then directly used for the MQL system [13,27]. For the MQL system, a NOGA Minicool MC1700 was used, and the MQL parameters were the air pressure, p = 6 bar, and an airflow rate of 200 L/min [29]. The nozzle distance was 20 mm and the spray angle was 12 • [30].…”

A review on effects of process parameters in milling challenging materials under nanofluid-based MQL conditions

“…It has been noted that previous studies have generally regarded surface roughness as an output characteristic in all milling operations. Also, in milling operations cutting forces, cutting temperature, tool wear and tool life are the factors that receive the least attention (Ojolo et al , 2015; Safiei et al , 2018; Duc et al , 2021; Bülent and Alaattin, 2020; Duc and Long, 2020; Günan et al , 2020; Singh et al , 2019; Xiufang et al , 2021; Sayuti et al , 2014; Rahmati et al , 2013; Uysal et al , 2015).…”

Machining feasibility and Sustainability study associated with air pressure, air flow rate, and nanoparticle concentration in Nanofluid minimum quantity lubrication-assisted hard milling process of 60Si2Mn steel

“…The predicted optimal value of the resultant cutting force F r = 185.73 N and surface roughness R a = 0.0652 μm Based on the previous studies on the influence of parameters including air pressure, air flow rate, fluid type, and nanoparticle type, it can be seen that, for increasing the value of air flow rate from 100 to 200 L/ min, it has a positive effect on decreasing the values of surface roughness and cutting forces. 46 Therefore, in this study, the authors raised the investigated range of air flow rate from 150 to 250 L/min to investigate and evaluate the influence of this parameter on the machining performance and find out the optimal values of air pressure and nanoparticle concentration. From the multi-objective optimization results, it can be seen that when using a high value of air flow Q = 250 L/min, it shows better efficiency than Q = 200 L/min, which is reflected in smaller predicted cutting forces and surface roughness (Figures 11 and 12).…”