Surface Roughness Modeling in Wire Electrical

Discharge Machining (WEDM) using

Response Surface Methodology
M.K. Das1, K. Kumar2, T.K. Barman3 and P. Sahoo4
1,3,4Department

of Mechanical Engineering, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India

of Chemical and Polymer Engineering, BIT, Mesra, India
e-mail: 1milanpdas@gmail.com

2Department

AbstractThe objective of this investigation is to study the surface characteristics of WEDMed surface of EN31
tool steel using a zinc coated brass wire as the tool electrode and to optimize the machining parameters for
minimum roughness (centre line average). The machining process parameters selected for this study are
discharge current, voltage, pulse on time and pulse off time. The second order response surface model is
developed in terms of machining parameters for surface roughness prediction using response surface
methodology (RSM) on the basis of experimental results. Experiment has been carried out according to the
experimental plan based on central composite design (CCD). The significant coefficients are obtained by
performing analysis of variance (ANOVA) at 95% confidence level. It is found that parameters, current and pulse
on time have most significant effects on the Ra. The model selected for optimization has been validated with Ftest. Finally, confirmation test is carried out to check the validity of the experimentation.
Keywords: WEDM, EN 31 tool steel, ANOVA, Response Surface Methodology (RSM).

INTRODUCTION
Wire electrical discharge machining (WEDM) is an important non-traditional machining process in which
material is eroded from the work piece by a series of discharge spark between the work piece and wire
electrode (tool) separated by a thin film of dielectric fluid (deionized water) which is continuously fed to
the machining zone to flush away the erode particles. This machining process is widely used in the
aerospace and automotive industry. There are many researchers who have tried to study the surface
roughness of machined surface in WEDM. An extensive study on WEDM process has been carried out
by Trang et. al.(1995) to determine the effects of different machine parameters on the responses viz.,
MRR and surface roughness using artificial neural network methodology. Similar study has been carried
out by Rajkumar and Wang (1993) using a thermal model. Liao et. al. (1997) have performed an
experimental study using SKD11 alloy steel as the work piece material and established mathematical
models relating the machine performance like MRR, surface roughness and gap width with various
machining parameters and then determined the optimal parametric settings for WEDM process applying
feasible-direction method of non-linear programming. Kuriakose et. al. (2004) have carried out
experiments with titanium 15 alloy (Ti-6Al-4V) and used a data-mining technique to study the effect of
various input parameters of WEDM process on the cutting speed and surface roughness. Hewidy et. al.
(2005) is developed the mathematical models for correlating the inter relationships of various WEDM
machining parameters of Inconel 601 material such as peak current, duty factor, wire tension and water
pressure on the metal removal rate, wear ratio and surface roughness using RSM. Ramakrishnan and
Karunamoorthy (2006) have described the multi-objective optimization of WEDM process using
parametric design of Taguchi methodology. Mahapatra and Patnaik
(2006) have developed
relationships between various process parameters and responses like MRR, surface roughness and kerf
by means of non-linear regression analysis and then employed genetic algorithm to optimize the WEDM
process with multiple objectives. Han et. al. (2007) have reported that the surface finish improved by
decreasing pulse duration and discharge current in WEDM of alloy steel (Cr12). Kumar et. al. (2012)
have presented an investigation on WEDM of pure titanium (grade-2) to investigate the effects of process
parameters viz., pulse on time, pulse off time, peak current, spark gap voltage, wire feed and wire
ISBN: 978-93-82062-79-0

Surface Roughness Modeling in Wire Electrical Discharge Machining (WEDM) Using Response Surface Methodology

187

tension on surface roughness. The effect of various machining parameters such as pulse on time, wire
tension, delay time, wire feed speed, and ignition current intensity has been studied in machining of
heat-treated tool steel. It is identified that the pulse on time and ignition current intensity has influence
more than other parameters. Many researchers have attempted to model surface roughness in WEDM
but the developed models are far from complete as it is not possible to consider all the controlling factors
in a particular study. So, researchers always pay attention to model surface roughness in a better way so
that surface roughness modeling can be done more accurately. In the present study, response surface
model is developed to correlate process parameters with the response parameters in WEDM of EN 31
tool steel. Centre line average roughness (Ra) is considered as the response while peak current, pulse on
time, pulse off time and voltage are considered as the process parameters. A central composite design
(CCD) experimental design is used in the present investigation. The effects of the process parameters on
response are investigated and finally an attempt has been taken to optimize the material removal rate
and surface roughness in the experiments regime. Finally, one confirmation test is carried out to check
the validity of the experimentation.

EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS
The experiments are performed on 4 axis CNC type WEDM (ELEKTRA, MAXICUT 434). The work
piece and electrode are separated by dielectric medium (deionized water). The traveling of the wire in a
closely controlled manner, through the work piece, generates spark discharges and then erodes the work
piece to produce the desired shape (based on the path of the tool electrode). A 0.25 mm diameter zinc
coated brass wire is selected as the tool electrode for experimentation. There are a large number of
factors that can be considered for machining of a particular material in WEDM. However, the review of
literature shows that the following four machining parameters are the most widespread among the
researchers and machinists to control the WEDM process: discharge current (amp), Voltage (V), pulse-on
time (s) and pulse-off time (s). In the present study these are selected as design factors while other
parameters have been assumed to be constant over the experimental domain. Levels of machining
parameters are listed in Table 1. To carry out the experiments, a rotatable central composite design of
experiment (CCD) is considered and for four parameters with three levels for each parameter, total 31
no of experiments are carried out. For four number of variables, the required to achieve rotatability is

* +

computed as g = 16 =2 Center line average (Ra) is selected as the response which is the arithmetic
mean value of the departure of the profile from the centre line along the sampling length. To find out the
roughness, machined surfaces are measured using a stylus-type profilometer, Talysurf (Taylor Hobson,
Surtronic 3+). The profilometer is set to a cut-off length of 0.8 mm, and traverse speed 1 mm/sec and 8
mm traverse length. Roughness measurements, in the transverse direction, on the work pieces are
repeated five times and average of five measurements of surface roughness parameter values is
recorded. The measured profile is digitized and processed through the dedicated advanced surface finish
analysis software Talyprofile for evaluation of the roughness parameters.
Table 1: Input Parameters and their Levels
Parameters
Discharge Current (Ip) in A
Voltage (V) in V
Pulse on time (Ton) in s
Pulse off time (Toff) in s

Coding
A
B
C
D

-1
4
45
2
2

Level
0
6
50
3
3

1
8
55
4
4

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

As discussed, experiments are carried out varying the process parameters (pulse on time, pulse off time,
peak current and voltage) in WEDM of EN 31 tool steel. The experiments are conducted based on
ISBN: 978-93-82062-79-0

188

International Conference on Advances in Mechanical Engineering and its Interdisciplinary Areas (ICAMEI-2012)

central composite design (CCD) consisting 31 numbers of experiments. Experimental results for surface
roughness parameter (Ra) are presented in Table 2. These experimental results are used for the
development of an empirical model using response surface methodology (RSM). RSM adopts both
mathematical and statistical techniques which are useful for the modeling and analysis of problems in
which a response of interest is influenced by several variables and the objective is to optimize the
response. RSM helps in analyzing the influence of the independent variables on a specific dependent
variable (response) by quantifying the relationships amongst one or more measured responses and the
vital input factors. The mathematical models thus developed relating the machining responses and their
factors facilitate the optimization of the machining process. Usually when the response function is not
known or non-linear, a second order model is utilized [2001]. For the development of second order
response model, Minitab software is used.
Table 2: Shows the Experimental Matrix of the CCD (Rotatable) Design in the Present Study
Sl No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

A
-1
-1
-1
0
-1
0
0
0
-1
0
-1
0
1
0
2
1

B
-1
-1
-1
0
1
0
2
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
1

C
-1
1
-1
2
1
0
0
0
-1
0
1
0
1
0
0
-1

D
-1
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
2
-1
0
-1
0
0
-1

Ra
5.86
5.06
5.32
4.31
4.56
5.94
5.53
5.94
5.23
5.64
4.76
5.94
5.42
5.94
6.45
6.11

Sl No
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31

A
-1
1
0
-1
1
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
-2

B
-1
-1
0
1
-1
0
-2
-1
1
-1
0
0
0
1
0

C
1
-1
0
-1
1
0
0
-1
1
1
0
-2
0
-1
0

D
-1
1
0
-1
1
0
0
-1
1
-1
-2
0
0
1
0

Ra
5.32
5.99
5.94
5.36
5.89
5.94
5.75
6.19
5.75
5.78
5.63
5.31
5.94
5.68
5.35

Using the experimental results for Ra, response surface model is developed and analysis of variance
(ANOVA) for the adequacy of the model is then performed in the subsequent step. The F ratio is
calculated for 95% level of confidence. The value which are less then 0.05 are considered significant and
the values greater than 0.05 are not significant and the model is adequate to represent the relationship
between machining response and the machining parameters. It is observed from the adequacy test by
ANOVA that linear terms, A (discharge current), B (Voltage), C (pulse on time) and D (pulse off time)
and square terms are significant. The levels of significant are depicted in Table 3. The fit summary
recommends that the quadratic model is statistically significant for analysis of Ra. For the appropriate
fitting of Ra, the non-significant terms (p-value is greater than 0.05) are eliminated by backward
elimination process (Table 4). Analysis of variance (ANOVA) is used to check the adequacy of the
second order model. The ANOVA table for the curtailed quadratic model for Ra is shown in Table 5. It
can be appreciated that the P-value is less than 0.05. The analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the F-ratio
test have been performed to check the adequacy of the models as well as the significance of the
individual parameters. The reduced model results indicate that the model is significant and adequate to
predict the response at 95% confidence level. After eliminating the non-significant terms, the final
response equation in terms of the coded values of independent variable for Ra is given as follows
Ra ? 5.93288 - 0.31547 I p / 0.12537 V / 0.21524 Ton / 0.05484 Toff / 0.07128 V 2

2
/ 0.2789 Ton2 / 0.07248 Toff

ISBN: 978-93-82062-79-0

(1)

Surface Roughness Modeling in Wire Electrical Discharge Machining (WEDM) Using Response Surface Methodology

189

Table 3: ANOVA Table for Ra (Before Elimination)

Term
Constant
A
B
C
D
A*A
B*B
C*C
D*D
A*B
A*C
A*D
B*C
B*D
C*D
R2=96.53 % , R2 (adj)=93.49 %

Coef
5.94
0.31547
-0.1254
-0.2152
-0.0548
-0.007
-0.072
-0.279
-0.0732
0.04829
0.05994
0.06124
-0.0363
0.02873
0.08007

SE Coef
0.04602
0.02485
0.02485
0.02485
0.02485
0.02277
0.02277
0.02277
0.02277
0.03044
0.03044
0.03044
0.03044
0.03044
0.03044

T
129.07
12.693
-5.044
-8.66
-2.207
-0.306
-3.163
-12.252
-3.216
1.586
1.969
2.012
-1.192
0.944
2.631

P
0
0
0
0
0.042
0.763
0.006
0
0.005
0.132
0.067
0.061
0.25
0.359
0.018

Table 4: ANOVA Table for Ra (After Elimination)

Term
Constant
A
B
C
D
B*B
C*C
D*D
R2=92.23 % , R2 (adj)=89.87 %

Coef
5.93288
0.31547
-0.1254
-0.2152
-0.0548
-0.0713
-0.2782
-0.0725

SE Coef
0.04952
0.03099
0.03099
0.03099
0.03099
0.02823
0.02823
0.02823

T
119.797
10.178
-4.045
-6.945
-1.769
-2.525
-9.855
-2.567

P
0
0
0.001
0
0.09
0.019
0
0.017

Table 5: ANOVA for Second Order Model for Ra in WEDM

Source
Regression
Linear
Square
Residual Error
Lack-of-Fit
Pure Error
Total

DF
7
4
3
23
17
6
30

Seq SS
6.29818
3.94979
2.34839
0.53027
0.53027
0
6.82845

Adj SS
6.29818
3.94979
2.34839
0.53027
0.53027
0

Adj MS
0.89974
0.98745
0.7828
0.02306
0.03119
0

F
39.03
42.83
33.95

P
0
0
0

Fig. 1 depicts the main effect plot for Ra. From this figure, it is clear that the parameters peak current
and pulse on time have highest inclination, so these are most significant factors affecting surface
roughness.

Fig. 1: Main Effect Plot for Ra

The parametric analysis has been carried out to study the influences of the input process parameter
on surface roughness in WEDM process. Contour plots and three-dimensional response surface plots are
ISBN: 978-93-82062-79-0

190

International Conference on Advances in Mechanical Engineering and its Interdisciplinary Areas (ICAMEI-2012)

formed based on the quadratic model to evaluate the variation of response. These plots can also give
further assessment of the correlation between the process parameters and response. The contour and
response surface plots for Ra with respect to input machining parameters are presented in Fig. 2 (a-f). In
all these figures, two of the four independent variables are held constant at their centre level. From the
figures it is clear Ra increases with an increase of peak current. This increase becomes more prominent as
the value of current rises, due to higher spark energy that produces the higher temperature. However, Ra
decreases with an increase in voltage and it is maximum at centre value of pulse on time. Also Ra
decreases with an increase of pulse off time. Due to the higher spark energy produces the higher
temperature cause more material to melt and erode from the work piece as a result Ra increases and due
to an undesirable heat loss which does not contribute to Rathat lead to drop in the teperature of the
workpiece before the next spark starts and therefore Ra decreases.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)
Fig. 2: Surface and Contour Plots for Ra

(f)

To check the developed model, one confirmation test is carried out at the mid-levels of the process
parameters. Table 6 shows the result of the confirmation run for Ra and its comparison with the
predicted value. It is observed that the calculated error is very small (0.12% only). This confirms the
reproducibility of experimental conclusion. The parametric combination for minimum surface roughness
is A(-2)B(2)C(2)D(2), i.e. current 2 amp, voltage 60V, pulse on time 5 s and pulse off time 5 s
Table 6: Confirmation Test Results and Comparison with Predicted Result as Per Model
Current
0

Voltage
0

Pulse on Time
0

Pulse on Time
0

Exp
5.94

Predicted
5.933

Error (%)
0.12

CONCLUSION
In the present study, a second order response model has been developed to predict the surface
roughness in WEDM machining operation of EN31 tool steel. To carry out the experiments, four
machining parameters are considered viz., peak current, voltage, pulse on time and pulse off time. To
analyze the experimental results, response surface methodology is applied and ANOVA test is carried
out. It is observed that for Ra the peak current, voltage and pulse off time are most significant factors.
ISBN: 978-93-82062-79-0

Surface Roughness Modeling in Wire Electrical Discharge Machining (WEDM) Using Response Surface Methodology

191

Surface roughness (Ra) decreases with a decrease in peak current. However, Surface roughness (Ra)
decreases with an increase in voltage and pulse off time. Finally, confirmation test is carried out to check
the developed model.

REFERENCES
1.

Han F., Jiang J., Dingwen Yu. (2007), Influence of machining parameters on surface roughness in finish cut of WEDM, Int
J Advan Manuf Technol 34, 538546.
2. Hewidy M.S., EI-Taweel T.A., EI-Safty M.F. (2005), Modelling the machining parameters of wire electrical discharge
machining of Inconel using RSM, J Mater Process Technol 169, 328-336.
3. Kumar A., Kumar V., Kumar J. (2012), Prediction of Surface Roughness in Wire Electric Discharge Machining (WEDM)
Process based on Response Surface Methodology, Int J Engg Technol 2, 4.
4. Kuriakose S., Shunmugam M.S. (2004), Characteristics of wire-electro discharge machined Ti6Al4V surface, Mater Letters
58, 2231 2237.
5. Liao Y.S., Huang J.T., Su H.C. (1997), A Study of machining-parameters Optimization of wire electrical discharge
machining, J Mater Process Technol 71, 487-493.
6. Mahapatra S., Patnaik A. (2006), Parametric optimization of wire electrical discharge machining (wedm) process using
Taguchi method, J. of the Braz. Soc. of Mech. Sci. & Engg 28, 422-429.
7. Montgomery D.C. (2001), Design and analysis of experiments. John Wiley, New York.
8. Rajurkar K.P., Wang W.M. (1993), Thermal modeling and on-line monitoring of wire-EDM, J Mater Process Technol
38(12), 417430.
9. Ramakrishnan R., Karunamoorthy L. (2006), Multi response optimization of wire EDM operations using robust design of
experiments, Int J Advan Manuf Technol 29, 105112.
10. Tarng Y.S., Ma S.C., Chung L.K. (1995), Determination of optimal cutting parameters in wire electrical discharge
machining, Int J Mach Tools Manuf 35(129),16931700.

ISBN: 978-93-82062-79-0