2016
DOI: 10.1177/0954405416629586
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Ultrasonic machining of WC–Co composite material: Experimental investigation and optimization using statistical techniques

Abstract: In manufacturing industries, WC–Co composite material is highly demanded due to its excellent properties such as toughness with hardness, good dimensional stability, and higher mechanical strength. However, the difficulties in its machining restrict the application and competitiveness of this material. This investigation is aimed at studying the impact of different experimental conditions (by varying cobalt content, thickness of workpiece, tool geometry, tool material, abrasive grit size, and power rating) on … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
(35 reference statements)
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Depending on the requirements, the entire lists for the available USM process parameters and responses can also be selected. The entire information related to these USM process parameters and responses are accumulated from (Kumar & Khamba, 2010;Kataria et al, 2017). Based on these requirements, the developed system predicts the responses as conicity = 0.023-0.038º, SR = 0.78-0.85 µm, MRR = 0.025-0.035 mm 3 /min, TW = 0.98-1.05 mm 3 /min and micro-hardness = 155-160 HV.…”
Section: Example 2: Ultrasonic Machiningmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Depending on the requirements, the entire lists for the available USM process parameters and responses can also be selected. The entire information related to these USM process parameters and responses are accumulated from (Kumar & Khamba, 2010;Kataria et al, 2017). Based on these requirements, the developed system predicts the responses as conicity = 0.023-0.038º, SR = 0.78-0.85 µm, MRR = 0.025-0.035 mm 3 /min, TW = 0.98-1.05 mm 3 /min and micro-hardness = 155-160 HV.…”
Section: Example 2: Ultrasonic Machiningmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the material removal tendency decreases because of the loss of energy possessed by the abrasives in the slurry. As the number of particles between the tool and the work surface increases due to higher slurry concentration, loss of energy due to interparticle collision may prevail during this phenomenon (Kataria et al, 2017;Chakraborty et al, 2020).…”
Section: Figure 11 a Typical Error Message For Usm Processmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Different researchers used the statistical techniques for the experimental design to investigate the predictive model of response characteristics (cutting cost, cutting forces, material removal rate, SR, tool wear, tool life) (Kataria and Kumar, 2014; Sharma et al , 2015; Gupta and Kumar, 2015; Jangra et al , 2016; Kataria et al , 2017; Jha et al , 2018; Singh et al , 2020; Gupta et al , 2020).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A large number of process parameters exist in USM which would influence the machining performance, 8 and this enhances the difficulty in studying the material removal mechanism. Generally, slurry characteristics play a particular important role in USM.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%