Optimizing wear rate for PDC cutter using taguchi’s technique and response surface methodology a comparative analysis

  • Authors

    • Amirul Aliff Jamaludin Mechanical Engineering Department Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS32610 Bandar Seri IskandarPerak Darul Ridzuan
    • Nik Mizamzul Mehat Mechanical Engineering Department Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS32610 Bandar Seri IskandarPerak Darul Ridzuan
    • Shahrul Kamaruddin Faculty of Engineering Technology, Universiti Malaysia Perlis, 02100 Padang Besar, Perlis Indera Kayangan
    2019-08-25
    https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v8i3.17132
  • Cutter, Geometry, Wear Rate, Taguchi, Response Surface Methodology.

  • Abstract

    This paper presents the findings of a simulation results on the effects of chamfer angle, back rake angle, side rake angle and diame-ter on polycrystalline diamond compact (PDC) cutter wear rate. Design of experiment techniques, i.e. Taguchi’s technique and re-sponse surface methodology (RSM), have been used to accomplish the objective of the study. L9 orthogonal array and face centered central composite (fc-CCD) design have been used for conducting the experiments. Taguchi’s technique as well as 3D surface plots of RSM revealed that chamfer angle is the most significant factor in minimizing wear followed by back rake angle and side rake angle. The effects of cutter diameter were found to be insignificant compared to other factors. Though both the techniques predict-ed near similar results, RSM technique seems to have an edge over the Taguchi’s technique.

     

  • References

    1. [1] Knowlton RH (1990), PDC bits using positive rake cutters. SPE/IADC Drilling Conference. Society of Petroleum Engineers. https://doi.org/10.2118/19922-MS.

      [2] Gerbaud L, Menand S & Sellami H (2006) PDC bits: all comes from the cutter rock interaction. IADC Drilling Conference’ Society of Petroleum Engineers. https://doi.org/10.2118/98988-MS.

      [3] Montgomery DC (1997), Design and Analysis of Experiments, 4th ed. Wi1ey, New York.

      [4] Park SH (1996), Robust Design and Analysis for Quality Engineering, Chapman and Hall, London.

      [5] Unal R & Dean EB (1991), Taguchi approach to design optimization for quality and cost. International Society of Parametric Analyst, 13th, 21–24.

      [6] Phadke MS (1989), Quality Engineering Using Robust Design. Printice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-1472-1_3. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-1472-1_3.

      [7] Singh H & Kumar P (2003), Quality optimization of turned parts (En 24 steel) by Taguchi method. Journal of Production 144, 43–49.

      [8] Singh H & Kumar P (2004a), Tool wear optimization in turning operation by Taguchi method. Indian Journal of Engineering and Material Sciences 11, 19–24.

      [9] Singh H & Kumar P (2004b), Effect on power consumption for turned parts using Taguchi technique. Journal of Production 45, 231–238.

      [10] Singh H & Kumar P (2005), Optimizing cutting force for turned parts by Taguchi’s parameter design approach. Indian Journal of Engineering and Material Sciences 12, 97–103.

      [11] Singh H & Kumar P (2006), Optimizing multi-machining characteristics through Taguchi’s approach and utility. https://doi.org/10.1108/17410380610642304.

      [12] Lin TR (2002) Experimental design and performance analysis of TiN coated Carbide tools in face milling stainless steel. Journal of Material Processing Technology 5654, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0924-0136(02)00026-2.

      [13] Design-Expert Software, Version 7, 2006. User’s Guide, Technical Manual. Stat-Ease Inc., Minneapolis, MN.

      [14] Steppan DD, Werner I & Yeater RP (1998), Essential regression and experimental design for chemists and engineers. http://llgeocities.corn/SiliconValley/Network/l032/CGPagel.html.

      [15] Park SH (1996), Robust Design and Analysis for Quality Engineering. Chapman and Hall, London.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    Aliff Jamaludin, A., Mizamzul Mehat, N., & Kamaruddin, S. (2019). Optimizing wear rate for PDC cutter using taguchi’s technique and response surface methodology a comparative analysis. International Journal of Engineering & Technology, 8(3), 155-161. https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v8i3.17132

    Received date: 2018-08-08

    Accepted date: 2019-05-24

    Published date: 2019-08-25