Comparative study demonstrates multi-objective optimization improves outcomes in Al-TiB2 composites, suggesting a reliable machining approach.
The study emphasizes on optimization and evaluation of significant process parameter for Abrasive Water Jet Machining of Al7075-TiB 2 metal matrix composite. Al-TiB 2 metal matrix composite is developed through stir casting using in-situ technique. Optimization of machining parameters is done utilizing Taguchi's L 25 orthogonal array for the design of experiments, for four input parameters such as Nozzle speed, stand-off distance and abrasive flow rate and jet pressure at five different levels ranging from 100-500mm/min, 0.5-2.5mm, 100-300gms/min and 2000-4000bars respectively. Effect of machining parameters on material removal rate, surface roughness and dimensional error was determined using Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) method and the nozzle traverse speed majorly influence the Volumetric Material Removal Rate (VMRR) (99%) as well as the surface roughness (91%). The dimensional accuracy is critically dictated by jet pressure, abrasive flow rate and nozzle speed contributing to 35%, 30% and 30% correspondingly. The study also includes the comparison of Univariate optimization with multi-objective optimization. The novelty of integrating Taguchi design, ANOVA, interaction-effect analysis, and desirability-based multi-objective optimization helps in developing a robust machining strategy for Al7075-TiB 2 composites, a material for which optimization studies remain limited. The results obtained through both the models are compared with verification experiments for validation indicated the multi-objective optimization a relatively reliable technique with deviations in VMRR 0.91%, surface roughness 1.80%- and 20.16%-dimensional error that are lower than that of the single variable optimization.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kavya et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: