Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 14520–14525 www.materialstoday.com/proceedings

ICAFM_2017

Machinability Studies on CNC Turning of PH Stainless

Steel with Coated Inserts
D.Palanisamya*, A. Devarajua, S. Harikrishnana, N.Manikandanb
a
Adhi College of Engineering and Technology, Chennai
b
SreeVidyanikethan Engineering College, Tirupati, Andra Pradesh,
* Corresponding Author email: dpalanisamy.me@gmail.com

Abstract

In this present study, the machinability analysis of peak aged PH stainless steel was studied for various machining
process parameters. Cutting speed, feed rate and nose radius with three levels were the process parameters considered for this
experimental study. Machinability performance measures such as cutting force, surface roughness and micro-hardness were
analyzed. The experiments were conducted based on full factorial design and the experimental results revealed that the feed rate
is the most influencing parameter that affects the desired performance measures followed by the cutting speed. The variation in
nose radius exhibited less effect on micro-hardness. The hardness on the machined surface was high up to a certain depth and
there was reduction in hardness at the subsurface and finally reached the base metal hardness. Higher cutting speed and lower
feed rate favors the better surface finish and reduces the cutting forces significantly while the tool insert with higher nose radius
improved the surface finish.
© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and/or Peer-review under responsibility of ICAFM’17.

Keywords:PH stainless steel; CNC; Cutting Force; Surface Roughness; Micro Hardness

1. Introduction

Stainless steels have poor machinability compared to regular carbon steel because they are tougher, adhesive and
tends to work harden very rapidly. The slightly hardened steel may decrease its adhesiveness and make it easier to
machine. Precipitation Hardened (PH) stainless steels use chromium & nickel as their major alloying elements and
are a combination of the martensitic and austenitic alloy types. 15-5 PH stainless steel contains around 15 % of
chromium and 5% of nickel as its major constituent elements along with small content of copper as its precipitates
in its structure [1]. PH stainless steels can be hardened by aging treatment to provide high strength and toughness.
Hardening of stainless steel can be achieved by addition one or more of the elements copper, aluminium, titanium,
niobium and molybdenum. The hardened PH steel is termed under the category of hard-to-machine material [2]. The
age hardening behaviour and microstructure transformation of 15-5 PH stainless steel were analysed. It was stated
that the hardening effect of PH stainless steel is due to the fine copper precipitates, whereas the coarsened copper

2214-7853© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Selection and/or Peer-review under responsibility of ICAFM’17.
 Palanisamy et al./ Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 14520–14525 14521

precipitates have no contribution to strengthening [3]. Peng et al. [4] concluded that the precipitation hardening
behavior of 15-5 PH stainless steel depends on the balance between the softening caused by the formation of
reversed austenite and the hardening caused by the precipitation of copper. The microstructural development and
aging reactions of 17-4 PH stainless steel were investigated. It was stated that during aging process, the tempering of
martensite has certain effect on hardness. In the specimen aged at peak aged condition (480 °C), copper precipitates
were revealed and at over aged condition (620 °C) the reformation of austenite and formation of copper precipitates
were noticed [5]. Plasma nitriding process was performed on 316L stainless steel and the micro-hardness and
microstructure were analysed. It was revealed that formation of fine dispersion of nitride particles increased the peak
hardness [6, 7].

The precipitation process during aging of 13-8 PH stainless steel was investigated. It was reported that the formation
of precipitates during aging are enriched in Ni and Al and depleted of Fe and Cr. It was also reported that the
hardening effect at the early stage of aging is due to redistribution of atoms such as Cr, Fe, Ni and/or Al [8].
Tamimi et al. studied the machinability characteristics such as cutting force, specific cutting energy, shear angle,
shear stress, coefficient of friction and shear strain rate of high strength AISI 420 stainless steel at different cutting
conditions and tool inserts. It was revealed that feed is the most influencing parameter that affects the main cutting
force and cutting speed is the significant parameter for the power consumption [9]. The effects of machining
parameters on tool wear during machining martensitic stainless steel with alumina-based ceramic tool inserts were
analysed. It was observed that at low speed, the tool life was affected by flank wear and at high speed the tool life
was affected by crater wear or notch wear. It was also revealed that alumina-based ceramic cutting tools mixed with
TiC, TiN exhibit higher tool life [10].

Turning experiments under dry and wet condition with different cutting speeds and feed rates were conducted to
optimize the machining parameters in terms of surface roughness and tool wear during machining AISI 304 stainless
steel. The experimental results revealed that use of cutting fluid during machining results in better surface finish and
increased tool life. Moreover, feed is the most influencing parameter for the surface roughness and cutting speed is
the influencing parameter for the tool flank wear [11]. The effect of machining parameters on surface roughness and
tool wear during machining of AISI 440C martensitic stainless steel with CBN tool inserts were analysed. It was
found that the surface finish was better at a parameter condition of high speed, low feed and low depth of cut. It was
also stated that the tool flank wear was due to the heat generated during machining, hard particles present in the
work material and abrasive action between the cutting tool and tool tip [12]. Cutting forces, tool wear and cutting
temperature were measured during dry machining of Cr12Mn5Ni4Mo3Al precipitation hardening semi austenitic
stainless steel with WC/Co and WC/TiC/Co tool inserts. Experimental results revealed that for the same machining
conditions the flank wear was less, cutting force was low and the cutting temperature was small during machining
with WC/TiC/Co carbide inserts and hence it is most suitable for machining Cr12Mn5Ni4Mo3Al stainless steel than
WC/Co inserts [13].

The machinability of hardened AISI 4340 high strength low alloy steel and AISI D2 cold work tool steel with coated
carbide insert and mixed alumina-cutting tool were evaluated in terms of cutting force, surface roughness, wear
mechanism and tool life. It was stated that during machining AISI 4340 steel the cutting force were high and the
surface roughness were better at high cutting speed and low feed rate [14]. The effect of machining parameters,
different coating materials, workpiece hardness on cutting force, surface roughness, chip morphology and tool life
during turning AISI 4340 steel were investigated. It was observed that the cutting force was higher and the surface
roughness was better during machining harder workpiece. Moreover, the tool wear was less for the CVD coated tool
due to the formation of protective Al2O3 oxide layer that protects the tool from severe abrasion at elevated
temperatures [15].

From the previous literatures, it is found that there is a lack of literature available for comparing the
machinability study of peak aged 15-5 PHSS with coated tungsten carbide inserts of different nose radius. This
present exploration details the importance of machining the peak aged15-5 PHSS with inserts of various nose radius.
14522 Palanisamy et al./ Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 14520–14525

The machining performances are compared for various machining conditions such as cutting force, surface
roughness and micro-hardness.

2. Materials and Methods

Commercially available solution treated 15-5 PH stainless steel was used in this present study and its chemical
composition is shown in Table 1. The PHSS samples were treated to a temperature of 482ºC (peak aged condition)
for one hour and it is cooled in air. After heat treatment, turning experiments were conducted in Leadwell CNC
turning center under dry condition with three different TiAlN Coated Tungsten Carbide Insert having nose radius of
0.4, 0.8 and 1.2mm. The machining parameters considered for this study with their levels presented in the Table 2.
The machining variable depth of cut (ap) 0.5 mm was kept constant for all the experiments. The experiments were
conducted based on full factorial experimental design and a total of 27 experiments for the given three machining
parameters and three levels were tabulated and presented in Table 3 with experimental data.

A tool holder having ISO designation of PCLNL 1616 H12 and insert of CNMG 120408-GM were used for
machining. Tangential cutting force (Fz) was measured using three component KISTLER 9257B type dynamometer.
Average surface roughness (Ra) was measured using Mitutoyo SJ 411 surface roughness tester. The cutting speeds
(Vc) used were 100, 150 and 200 m/min, the feed rates ( f) were 0.05, 0.1 and 0.15 mm/rev and the depth of cut (ap)
0.5 mm was kept constant. Vickers micro hardness tester (Wolpert-Wilson Instruments) was used to measure the
micro hardness with a dwell time of 10 seconds.
Table 1 Chemical composition of PHSS work sample
Constituents C Mn P S Si Cr Ni Cu Nb& Ta Fe
Weight (%) 0.03 0.76 0.028 0.01 0.28 15.15 3.94 3.11 0.26 Bal

Table 2 Machining parameters and their levels

Description Unit Level 1 Level 2 Level 3

Cutting Speed m/min 100 150 200
Feed mm/rev 0.05 0.1 0.15
Nose radius mm 0.4 0.8 1.2

3. Results and discussion

3.1 Effect of cutting parameters on cutting Force
Cutting force was measured for different cutting conditions using various inserts of nose radius 0.4, 0.8 and
1.2mm. Cutting force obtained during the machining conditions are listed in Table 3. As shown in Fig. 1 (a), it was
observed that for a given nose radius and cutting speed, as the feed increases the cutting force is increased. Whereas,
as the cutting speed increased a decrease in cutting force was observed for given feed and nose radius. It is due to
the fact that shear plane area of the chip increases and forces required for cutting increases. At low cutting speed, the
chip remains for long time in the rake face of the tool and which increases the tool-chip contact length. Therefore, it
increases the friction between the tool and chip that resulted in higher forces.

Similarly, while turning at higher cutting speed, the temperature generation is high which makes the material soft
at cutting zone and helps in removing the material at lower cutting forces.The same trend was observed for the other
set of machining parameters as shown in Fig. 1 (b). As the nose radius increased from 0.4 to 0.8 mm, an increasing
trend of cutting force was observed and from 0.8 to 1.2 cutting force decreased. The maximum cutting force
observed was 146.2 N for cutting speed of 100 m/min, feed of 0.15 mm/rev and nose radius of 0.8 mm. Therefore it
can be concluded that lower cutting speed, higher feed rate and moderate values of nose radius will generate higher
cutting forces during machining peak agedPH stainless steel.
 Palanisamy et al./ Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 14520–14525 14523

Table 3 Measured values of cutting force and surface roughness

Cutting Surface
Exp no Speed Feed Node Cutting Roughness
m/min mm/rev Radius Force (Fz ) (Ra)
Vc f r N Micro m
1 100 0.05 0.4 54.68 0.61
2 100 0.05 0.8 63.8 0.71
3 100 0.05 1.2 59.06 0.691
4 100 0.1 0.4 94.08 0.996
5 100 0.1 0.8 118.8 0.812
6 100 0.1 1.2 87.38 0.598
7 100 0.15 0.4 100.3 1.5
8 100 0.15 0.8 146.2 1.49
9 100 0.15 1.2 109.1 1.126
10 150 0.05 0.4 51.78 0.59
11 150 0.05 0.8 79.9 0.55
12 150 0.05 1.2 65.67 0.514
13 150 0.1 0.4 70.51 1.067
14 150 0.1 0.8 76.58 0.97
15 150 0.1 1.2 79.86 0.66
16 150 0.15 0.4 73.48 1.698
17 150 0.15 0.8 96.36 1.67
18 150 0.15 1.2 96.28 0.82
19 200 0.05 0.4 91.88 0.732
20 200 0.05 0.8 65.23 0.447
21 200 0.05 1.2 60.61 0.612
22 200 0.1 0.4 65.68 1.069
23 200 0.1 0.8 79.19 0.616
24 200 0.1 1.2 66.98 0.654
25 200 0.15 0.4 109.6 1.98
26 200 0.15 0.8 113.3 1.11
27 200 0.15 1.2 72.58 0.713

for Vc=100 m/min for feed (f)=0.06 mm/rev

200 nose 90 Variable
radius r=0.4
r=0.4 r=0.8
175 r=0.8 r=1.2
r=1.2
80

150
cutting force (N)

cutting force (N)

125 70

100
60

75

50
50
0.050 0.075 0.100 0.125 0.150 0.175 100 120 140 160 180 200 220
feed(f) mm/rev cutting speed (m/min)

Fig.1 Effect of machining parameters on Cutting Force

3.2 Effect of cutting parameters on surface roughness

Surface roughness (Ra) of different machined surfaces are measured and shown in Table 3. As the cutting speed
increased there was a reduction in surface roughness value as shown in Fig. 2(a) and better surface finish was
obtained. It is due to the fact that as the cutting speed increased the cutting force is decreased. Lower values of
cutting forces produce lesser deformation and vibrations in the workpiece, which favors better surface finish.
Due to low temperature, during machining at lower cutting speeds, the formation of built up edge is found that
causes poor surface finish. For given nose radius as the increase in feed rate, the surface roughness value increases
14524 Palanisamy et al./ Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 14520–14525

as shown in Fig. 2(b). Increases in feed rate leads to vibrations and gives poor surface finish. Experimental results
revealed that the feed rate is the most significant parameter to provide smooth surface and the surface finish
improves at higher cutting speed. Minimum surface roughness value obtained is 0.447 (microns) for the sample
machined with the cutting conditions of higher cutting speed, low feed rate and low depth of cut [(Vc) =200m/min,
feed rate (f) =0.05 mm/rev, nose radius(r) =0.8 mm]. Therefore it is concluded that higher cutting velocity lower
feed rate, and moderate value of nose radius gives better surface finish.

for Vc=100 m/min for feed (f)=0.06 mm/rev

200 nose 90 Variable
radius r=0.4
r=0.4 r=0.8
175 r=0.8 r=1.2
r=1.2
80

150
cutting force (N)

cutting force (N)

125 70

100
60

75

50
50
0.050 0.075 0.100 0.125 0.150 0.175 100 120 140 160 180 200 220
feed(f) mm/rev cutting speed (m/min)

Fig.2 Effect of machining parameters on Surface Roughness

3.3 Effect of Cutting Parameters on Micro Hardness

The Effect of machining parameters on micro-hardness is shown in Fig. 3(a-c). It was observed that machining
affected the hardness of the material. For given feed of 0.15 mm/rev highest value of hardness observed was 400HV
for 100m/min and with nose radius of 1.2 mm. Large gradients were observed for cutting speed of 150 m/min and
small gradients for 200 m/min. With cutting conditions of Vc=200 m/min lowest gradient was observed for feed rate
0.05mm/rev, nose radius of 1.2. The plot of micro-hardness(HV) Vs depth beneath the machined surface for Vc=200
m/min, nose radius 1.2 with feed rate 0.12 mm/rev completely shifted from the other two plots and it was observed
that the highest value of micro-hardness was observed. Results derived from micro-hardness tests confirmed that the
feed rate is the most influencing machining parameter followed by the cutting speed Vc.

For Vc=220 m/min and nose radius(r) =0.4 For Vc=220 m/min and nose radius(r) =1.2
a
385 feeed in
b
390
For Vc=220 m/min and nose radius(r) =0.8
feeed in
c
420 feeed in
mm/rev mm/rev mm/rev
0.06 0.06 0.06
380
0.12 380 0.12 410 0.12
0.18 0.18 0.18
375
370 400
Hardness(HV)
Hardness(HV)

Hardness(HV)

370

360 390
365

360 350 380

355
340 370

350
330 360
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
depth beneath the machined surface depth beneath the machined surface depth beneath the machined surface

Fig.3 Effect of machining parameters on Microhardness

4. Conclusions
In this present study, an exploration has been performed on CNC turning of peak aged 15-5 PH stainless steel
with different tool inserts. The interactive influence of process parameters on responses cutting force, surface
roughness and micro-hardness were analyzed using surface plots. From the selected parameters and experimental
results, the following conclusions are drawn.
 Palanisamy et al./ Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 14520–14525 14525

• Cutting force was increased with the increase in nose radius and feed rate. It was observed that the lower feed,
lower nose radius and high cutting velocity favors the lower value of cutting forces.

• Surface roughness (Ra) were increased with the increase of feed rate and decreased with the increase of cutting
speed and nose radius. It was observed that the higher cutting speed, lower feed rate and with a moderate nose
radius favors better surface finish.

• On the machined surface the micro-hardness was high for a certain depth and there was reduction in micro-
hardness at the subsurface and reached the base metal hardness.

• The better machinability was achieved at higher cutting speed, moderate feed rate with a larger nose radius.

References

1. A.K. Steel, Product Data Sheet-15-5 PH Stainless Steel, AK Steel Corporation, 2007.
2. A. Kumar, Y. Balaji, N. Eswara Prasad, G. Gouda, K. Tamilmani, Sadhana 38 (1) (2013) 3–23.
3. H.R. HabibiBajguirani, Mater. Sci. Eng., A 338 (2002) 142–159.
4. Peng, Xin-yuan, Xian-liang Zhou, Xiao-zhen Hua, Zhen-wei Wei, and Hua-ying Liu. (2015) J. Iron and Steel Research, Int.
22(7):607–14.
5. Hsiao, C. N., C. S. Chiou, and J. R. Yang. (2002), Mater. Chem. Phys., 74(2):134–42.
6. A. Devaraju, A. Elayaperumal, J. Alphonsa, Satish V. Kailas, S. Venugopal, Surf. Coat. Technol.207 (2012) 406–412;
7. A. Devaraju, A. Elayaperumal, J. Alphonsa, Satish V. Kailas, S. Venugopal, Wear 288 (2012) 17– 26
8. Guo, Z., W. Sha, and D. Vaumousse. (2003Acta Mater., 51(1):101–16.
9. El-Tamimi, a. M. and T. M. El-Hossainy. (2008), Mater. Manuf. Processes, 23 (4):419–26.
10. Senthil Kumar, A., A. Raja Durai, and T. Sornakumar. (2006) ,J. Mater. Process. Technol., 173(2):151–56.
11. Mahdavinejad, R. A. and S. Saeedy. (2011), Sadhana - Academy Proceedings in Engineering Sciences, 36(6):963–70.
12. Thamizhmanii, S., B. Bin Omar, S. Saparudin, and S. Hasan. (2008), Manufacturing Engineering, 26(2):139–42.
13. Jianxin, Deng, Zhou Jiantou, Zhang Hui, and Yan Pei. (2011), Wear, 270 (7-8):520–27.
14. Lima, J. G., R. F. Ávila, A. M. Abrão, M. Faustino, and J. Paulo Davim. (2005) J. Mater. Process. Technol.169(3):388–95.
15. Chinchanikar, Satish and S. K. Choudhury. 2013. Int. J. Refract. Met.Hard Mater. 38:124–33.