Indian Journal of Engineering & Materials Sciences

Vol. 17, August 2010, pp. 265-274

Determination of optimum parameters on delamination in drilling of GFRP

composites by Taguchi method
Erol Kilickap*
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Dicle University, 21280 Diyarbakir, Turkey
Received 26 August 2009; accepted 8 June 2010
Drilling is one of the important machining processes in hole making operations. Delamination is a vital problem during
any drilling operation. It causes structural integrity reduction and poor assembly tolerance as well as potential for long-term
performance deterioration. As a result, drilling of any material requires dimensional stability and interface quality. In this
study, glass fibre reinforced plastic composite is selected as experimental material for investigation of cutting parameters
(cutting speed, feed rate and tool geometry) affecting delamination in drilling operation. Moreover, the Taguchi method is
used to determine optimal cutting parameters for damage-free drilling material. A plan of experiments, based on L16
Taguchi design method, is performed drilling with cutting parameters in a GFRP composite. The orthogonal array, signal-tonoise (S/N) ratio and analysis of variance (ANOVA) are employed to investigate the optimal drilling parameters of GFRP
composites using four different drills. The experimental results demonstrate that the feed rate is the major parameter among
the controllable factors that influence the delamination. Additionally, the optimal combinations of the cutting parameters are
determined.
Keywords: Taguchi method, Analysis of variance, Design optimization, Drilling, Delamination, Glass fibre reinforced
plastic composites

The uses of glass fibre reinforced plastic (GFRP)

composites in engineering applications such as
automotive, aircraft and manufacture of spaceships
and sea vehicles industries have been increased
considerably in resent years due to their significant
advantages over other materials. They provide high
specific
strength/stiffness,
superior
corrosion
resistance, light weight construction, low thermal
conductivity, high fatigue strength, ability to char and
resistance to chemical and microbiological attacks. As
a consequence of the widening range of applications
of GFRC, the machining of these materials has
become a very important subject for research1-3.
Drilling is a frequently practiced machining process in
industry owing to the need for component assembly in
mechanical pieces and structures4. Delamination is a

dramatic problem associated with drilling fibrereinforced composite materials that, in addition to
reducing the structural integrity of the material,
also results in poor assembly tolerance and has
the potential for long-term performance
deterioration5. Therefore, a precise drilling needs to
be performed to ensure the dimensional stability and
interface quality6.

*E-mail: ekilickap@dicle.edu.tr

It is necessary to understand the relationship

among the various controllable parameters and
identify the important parameters that influence the
quality of drilling. Mohan et al.7 have performed and
analyzed delamination in drilling process of GFRP
composite material. Hocheng and Tsao in their study
on drilling of composites materials with various drill
bits, presents a comprehensive analysis of
delamination in use of various drill types, such as saw
drill, candle stick drill, core drill and step drill. In
their analysis, the delamination is predicted and
compared with twist drill8. Davim et al.9 studied the
behaviour of two cemented carbide drilling (K10)
with distinct geometry (Stub Length and Brad &
Spur) when drilling glass fibre reinforced plastic
(GFRP) manufactured by hand lay-up. Their studys
objective was to establish a correlation between
cutting parameters with the specific cutting pressure,
thrust force, damage factor and surface roughness.
Moreover, a number of research workers have
investigated the drilling of GFRP composite materials
using Taguchi design method to investigate the
influence to cutting parameters on delamination.
Palanikumar et al.10 studied evaluation of
delamination in drilling GFRP composites using HSS
twist drill and 4-flute cutter. They developed

266

INDIAN J ENG. MATER. SCI., AUGUST 2010

empirical models to prediction in drilling of GFRP

composites using response surface regression. Davim
and Reis11 presented an approach using Taguchis
method and ANOVA to establish a correlation
between cutting speed and feed rate with the
delamination in a composite laminate. Tsao and
Hocheng12 investigated a prediction and evaluation of
delamination factor in use of twist drill, candle stick
drill and saw drill. The aim of the study was to
establish a correlation between feed rate, spindle
speed and drill diameter by using Taguchis method
and analysis of variance. Enemuoh et al.13 presented
an approach for development of delamination-free
drilling in fibre reinforced plastic. To obtain the
optimum cutting parameters, a combination of
Taguchis experimental analysis and multi-objective
optimization criteria was developed. Rao et al.14
presented a comprehensive study of delamination in
use of various drill types, three different feed rate and
spindle speeds. The influence of drilling parameters
on the extension of delamination was examined by
conducting the number of experiments as per the
design of experiments and analysis of variance
techniques of Taguchi. In order to understand
the effects of machining parameters in the
various machining, a number of researchers used
Taguchi techniques15-19.
The objective of this paper is to demonstrate
an application of Taguchi parameter design in order
to achieve low damage with a particular
combination of cutting parameters in drilling of GFRP
composite materials.

workpiece material specimens having size of

4003010 mm were cut from the plate. The drilling
tests were conducted on a SX XHMT vertical drilling
machine. Drills used throughout test were all 7 mm
diameter with high speed steel (HSS). Drill
characteristics are shown in Table 1. All tests were
run without coolant at cutting speeds of 5, 10, 15 and
20 m/min and feed rates of 0.1, 0.2, 0.3 and
0.4 mm/rev. The damage around the holes as
measured using a microscope, Nikon Epiphot
200 optical microscope, with 10 magnification and
1 m resolution.
Delamination and calculation of delamination factor

Delamination is recognized as one of the major causes

of damage when drilling of GFRP composites. The
damage generated associated with drilling glass fibre
reinforced composites were observed, both at the entrance
and the exit during the drilling.
To determine the delamination factor around the holes,
the maximum diameter (Dmax) in the delamination zone
was measured (Fig. 1). The value of delamination factor
(Fd) can be determined by Eq, (1)9,20:

Experimental Set-up and Machining Conditions

Materials and method

In this study, a GFRP composite manufactured by

hand lay-up, with ultimate tensile strength of
240 MPa and modulus of elasticity of 25 GPa,
provided by Armaplast Inc (Turkey) was chosen as
test materials. The GFRP composites have E-glass
fibres and epoxy matrix. The GFRP composite was
provided in the size of 40040010 mm. The

Fig. 1The delamination size around the drilled hole

Table 1Drill tool types and characteristics

Drill type

Description
HSS twist drill, 109 mm long, point angle of 118o
HSS-E TiN coated twist drill, 109mm long, point angle of 135o
HSS standard brad point drill, 105 mm long
HSS steel step drill, 105 mm long, step diameter:4mm, step length:10mm, step angle of
90o, point angle of 118o

KILICKAP : DELAMINATION IN DRILLING OF GFRP COMPOSITES

Fd =

D
D

... (1)

max

drill

In which, Dmax is the maximum diameter of the

delamination zone in mm and Ddrill is diameter of the drill
in mm.
Taguchi Method and Design of Experiment
Taguchi method

Traditional experimental design methods could be

very complicate and difficult to use. Additionally,
these methods could require a large number of
experiments, when the number of process parameters
increase17,21. In order to minimize the number of tests
required, Taguchi experimental design method, a
powerful tool for designing high quality system, was
developed by Taguchi. This method uses a special
design of orthogonal arrays to study the entire
parameter space with small number of experiments
only.
Taguchi recommends analyzing the mean response
for each run in the inner array, and he also suggests
analyzing variation using an appropriately chosen
signal-to-noise ratio (S/N). These S/N ratios are
derived from the quadratic loss function, and three of
them (Eqs (2)-(4)) are considered to be standard and
widely applicable.
S
y2
= 10 log 2
N
s
S
1 n 2
smaller is the best :
= 10 log
yi
N
n i=1

... (2)

Nominal is the best :

larger is the best :

... (3)

267

have four levels, denoted 1, 2, 3 and 4 (Table 2). The

experimental design was according to an L16 (4^5)
array based on Taguchi method while using the
Taguchi orthogonal array would markedly reduce the
number of experiments17,19.
A set of experiments designed using the Taguchi
method were conducted to investigate the relation
between the process parameters and delamination
factor. The DESIGN EXPERT 6.07 software was
used for regression and graphical analysis of the
obtained data.
Results and Discussion
Experimental results

The delamination occurs at entrance and exit

during the drilling GFRP composites. Thus, a drilling
test was conducted to evaluate the effect of cutting
parameters and drill types on the damage at
workpiece (entrance and exit sides). After measuring
the maximum diameter Dmax in the damage around
each hole, the delamination factor (Fd) is determined
by using Eq. (1). Tables 3 and 4 show the computed
values of the delamination factor at workpiece
entrance and exit, respectively.
Analysis of the S/N ratio

In the Taguchi method, S/N ratio is the measure of

quality characteristics and deviation from the desired
Table 2Drilling parameters and levels
Symbol
Drilling parameter Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4
A
Cutting speed (m/min)
5
10
15
20
B
Feed rate (mm/rev)
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
[

1 n 1
S
= 10 log
2
i 1
N
n yi

... (4)

Table 3Experimental design using L16 orthogonal array and

the computed values of Fdentrance

where y is the average of observed data, s is the

variation of y, n is the number of observations, and y
is the observed data7,22.
Regardless of category of the performance
characteristics, the lower S/N ratio corresponds to a
better performance. Therefore, the optimal level of the
process parameters is the level with the lowest S/N
value. The statistical analysis of the data was
performed by analysis of variance (ANOVA) to study
the contribution of the factor and interactions
and to explore the effects of each process on the
observed value19,23,24.
Design of experiment

In this study, two machining parameters were used

as control factors and each parameter was designed to

Trial no.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

Levels of factors
v
f
1
1
1
2
1
3
1
4
2
1
2
2
2
3
2
4
3
1
3
2
3
3
3
4
4
1
4
2
4
3
4
4

118o
1.20
1.23
1.33
1.44
1.21
1.23
1.42
1.49
1.22
1.27
1.43
1.50
1.24
1.29
1.49
1.52

Drill type
135o
Step
1.11
1.06
1.20
1.15
1.33
1.22
1.35
1.26
1.22
1.06
1.44
1.12
1.48
1.15
1.54
1.27
1.27
1.07
1.48
1.13
1.55
1.20
1.56
1.27
1.30
1.15
1.50
1.15
1.52
1.25
1.68
1.26

Brad
1.06
1.15
1.37
1.43
1.07
1.19
1.37
1.40
1.11
1.25
1.45
1.50
1.12
1.25
1.50
1.56

INDIAN J ENG. MATER. SCI., AUGUST 2010

268

value. The mean S/N ratio for each level of the cutting
parameters and drill types is summarized and called
the L16 experiments is also.
Entrance
After computed values of the delamination factor
(Table 3), S/N ratios for each experiment of L16
(4^5) was calculated by applying the Eq. (3). Table 5
gives the S/N ratio for the workpiece entrance. The
objective of using the S/N ratio as a performance
measurement is to develop products and processes
insensitive to noise factor24. Thus, by utilizing
computed values of the delamination factor (Table 3)
Table 4Experimental design using L16 orthogonal array and
the computed values of Fdexit
Trial no.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

Levels of factors
v
f
1
1
1
2
1
3
1
4
2
1
2
2
2
3
2
4
3
1
3
2
3
3
3
4
4
1
4
2
4
3
4
4

118o
1.35
1.42
1.53
1.62
1.45
1.42
1.70
1.67
1.56
1.55
1.73
1.74
1.56
1.70
1.80
1.87

Drill type
135o
Step
1.21
1.03
1.33
1.07
1.35
1.08
1.50
1.10
1.40
1.05
1.35
1.09
1.40
1.12
1.48
1.18
1.50
1.07
1.60
1.11
1.61
1.14
1.68
1.20
1.70
1.10
1.73
1.12
1.78
1.17
1.80
1.22

Brad
1.25
1.50
1.62
1.75
1.37
1.62
1.75
1.87
1.50
1.62
1.75
2.10
1.56
1.68
1.87
2.10

Table 5S/N response table for the delamination factor

at entrance
Trial no.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

Levels of factors
v
5
5
5
5
10
10
10
10
15
15
15
15
20
20
20
20

f
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4

Drill type
o

118
-1.58
-1.80
-2.48
-3.17
-1.66
-1.80
-3.05
-3.46
-1.76
-2.08
-3.11
-3.52
-1.87
-2.21
-3.17
-3.64

135o
-0.91
-1.58
-2.48
-2.61
-1.73
-3.17
-3.40
-3.75
-2.08
-3.40
-3.69
-3.86
-2.28
-3.52
-3.63
-4.50

Step
-0.50
-1.21
-1.72
-2.00
-0.50
-0.98
-1.21
-2.07
-0.58
-1.06
-1.58
-2.11
-1.21
-1.21
-1.94
-2.00

Brad
-0.50
-1.21
-2.73
-3.10
-0.58
-1.51
-2.76
-2.92
-0.90
-1.93
-3.22
-3.52
-0.98
-2.00
-3.52
-3.86

and S/N ratios (Table 5), average effect response

value (Table 6) and average S/N response ratios
(Table 7), respectively, were calculated for each drill
types. The S/N ratios response graph for delamination
at workpiece entrance is shown in Figs 2 and 3.
Regardless of category of the quality characteristic,
a greater S/N ratio corresponds to a better
performance. The level of a factor with the highest
signal-to-noise ratio is the optimum level24. Therefore,
the optimal parameter combination level identified for
the present investigation in the drilling process is
cutting speed at level 1 (A1) and feed rate at level 1
(B1) for all the drill types(* optimum level). From
Fig. 2, it can be observed that raise of cutting speed
increases the delamination factor in drilling of GFRP
composites by all drill tools. The increase of feed rate
increases the delamination factor for all drill tools.
Exit
After calculating values of the delamination factor
(Table 4), the next step is to compute the S/N ratios.
S/N ratios for each experiment were calculated by
applying the Eq. (3). Table 8 gives the S/N ratio for
the workpiece exit. By using computed values of the
delamination factor (Table 4) and S/N ratios
(Table 8), average effect response value (Table 9) and
average S/N response ratios (Table 10), respectively,
were calculated for each drill types. The S/N ratios
response graph for delamination at workpiece exit is
shown in Figs 4 and 5.
Based on the results of the S/N ratio and mean
(Figs 4 and 5), the optimal cutting parameters for
FdExit were obtained 5 m/min cutting speed (Level 1)
and 0.1 mm/rev feed rate (Level 1) for all drills
(*Optimum level). It can be observed that decrease of
Table 6Average effect response table for the Fdentrance
Level
1
2
3
4

118o
v
1.300
1.337
1.355
1.385

f
1.217
1.255
1.417
1.487

135o
v
1.247
1.420
1.460
1.500

f
1.225
1.405
1.470
1.532

Step
v
f
1.172 1.085
1.150 1.122
1.167 1.205
1.202 1.265

Brad
v
f
1.250 1.090
1.257 1.210
1.327 1.422
1.357 1.472

Table 7Average S/N response table for delamination factor

Level
1
2
3
4

118o

135o

Step
Brad
v
f
v
f
v
f
v
f
*
*
*
*
*
*
-2.257 -1.710 -1.895 -1.750 -1.357 -0.697 -1.889 -0.745*
-2.495 -1.972 -3.012 -2.917 -1.190* -1.115 -1.946 -1.667
-2.610 -2.950 -3.257 -3.300 -1.332 -1.612 -2.398 -3.062
-2.722 -3.447 -3.480 -3.680 -1.590 -2.045 -2.593 -3.352

*Optimum level

KILICKAP : DELAMINATION IN DRILLING OF GFRP COMPOSITES

269

Table 8S/N response table for the delamination factor at exit

Trial no.

Fig. 2Effect of cutting speed on delamination factor at entrance

(S/N Mean)

Levels of factors
v
5
5
5
5
10
10
10
10
15
15
15
15
20
20
20
20

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

Drill type
o

135o
-1.65
-2.48
-2.61
-3.52
-2.92
-2.61
-2.92
3.40
-3.52
-4.08
-4.14
-4.51
-4.61
-4.76
-5.01
-5.10

118
-2.61
-3.05
-3.69
-4.19
-3.23
-3.05
-4.61
-4.45
-3.86
-3.81
-4.76
-4.81
-3.86
-4.61
-5.11
-5.44

f
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4

Step
-0.25
-0.58
-0.66
-0.83
-0.42
-0.75
-0.98
-1.43
-0.58
-0.90
-1.13
-1.58
-0.82
-0.98
-1.36
-1.27

Brad
-1.94
-3.52
-4.19
-4.86
-2.76
-4.19
-4.86
-5.43
-3.52
-4.19
-4.86
-6.44
-3.86
-4.50
-5.46
-6.44

Table 9Average effect response table for the Fdexit

Level
1
2
3
4

118o
v
1.480
1.560
1.645
1.732

135o

f
1.480
1.522
1.690
1.725

v
1.347
1.407
1.597
1.752

f
1.452
1.502
1.535
1.615

Step
v
f
1.070 1.062
1.110 1.097
1.130 1.127
1.152 1.175

Brad
v
f
1.530 1.420
1.652 1.605
1.742 1.747
1.802 1.955

Table 10Average S/N response table for delamination factor

Level
1
2
3
4

118o
v

135o
f

-3.385
-3.835
-4.310
-4.755

-3.390
-3.360
-4.540
-4.722

Step
f

-2.565
-2.962
-4.062
-4.870

v
*

-3.175
-3.482
-3.670
-4.132

Brad
f

-0.584
-0.898
-1.053
-1.225

v
*

-0.523
-0.806
-1.038
-1.394

f
*

-3.627
-4.313
-4.753
-5.068

-3.022*
-4.101
-4.842
-5.796

*Optimum level

Fig. 3Effect of feed rate on delamination factor at entrance

(S/N Mean)

cutting speed reduces the delamination factor in

drilling of GFRP composites by each drill. The
increase of feed rate increases the delamination factor
for all drill tools.
Analysis of variance (ANOVA)

Entrance
The relative importance of the cutting
parameters with respect to the delamination factor

was investigated to determine more accurately the

optimum combinations of the cutting parameters by
using ANOVA. The analysis of variance (ANOVA)
was applied to study the effect of cutting parameters
on the delamination factor. Tables 11-14 give
ANOVA results for delamination factor in drilling
GFRP composites.
Analysis of variance was carried out for all drill
types in Tables 11-14. Feed rate was found to be the
major factor affecting the delamination factor at
workpiece entrance in all experimental results. It can
be observed from the tables that cutting speed also
affects delamination factor at workpiece entrance.
From Tables 11-14, values of prob > F less
than 0.0500 indicate drilling parameter terms are

INDIAN J ENG. MATER. SCI., AUGUST 2010

270

Fig. 4Effect of cutting speed on delamination factor at exit

(S/N Mean)

Fig. 5Effect of feed rate on delamination factor at exit

(S/N Mean)

Table 11Table ANOVA results for the delamination factor for drill point angle 118o
Source of variance
Model
Cutting speed
Feed rate
Error
Total
S.D.
Mean

SDQa

DFb

MSc

F value

p-value

0.20
0.012
0.19
3.225E-003
0.21

6
3
3
9
15

0.034
3.842E-003
0.064
3.583E-004

95.05
10.72
179.37

<0.0001
0.0025
<0.0001

Significant

0.019
1.34

C.V.
PRESS

1.41
0.010

R2
Adj.R2

0.9845
0.9741

Pred. R2
Adeq. Precision

Contribution %
5.55
92.90
1.55
100.0
0.9509
27.354

Table 12Table ANOVA results for the delamination factor for drill point angle 135o
Source of variance

SDQ

DF

MS

F Value

Prop>F

Contribution %

Model
Cutting speed
Feed rate
Error
Total

0.36
0.15
0.21
0.012
0.37

6
3
3
9
15

0.060
0.049
0.070
1.345E-003

44.26
36.74
51.78

<0.0001
<0.0001
<0.0001

Significant

S.D.
Mean

0.037
1.41

C.V.
PRESS

2.61
0.038

R2
Adj.R2

0.9672
0.9454

Pred. R2
Adeq. Precision

40.14
56.58
3.28
100.0
0.8964
23.084

Table 13Table ANOVA results for the delamination factor for step drill
Source of variance
Model
Cutting speed
Feed rate
Error
Total
S.D.
Mean

SDQa

DFb

MSc

F Value

Prop>F

0.091
8.292E-003
0.083
4.252E-003
0.095

6
3
3
9
15

0.015
2.796E-003
0.028
4.724E-004

32.07
5.85
58.30

<0.0001
0.0169
<0.0001

Significant

0.022
1.18

C.V.
PRESS

1.85
0.013

R2
Adj.R2

0.9553
0.9255

Pred. R2
Adeq. Precision

Contribution %
8.71
86.82
4.47
100.0
0.8588
17.651

KILICKAP : DELAMINATION IN DRILLING OF GFRP COMPOSITES

important. Therefore, A and B (cutting speed and feed

rate) are significant drilling patameter terms for all
drills.
Figures 6 and 7 show normal probability plots of
the residuals. Figures 6 and 7 revealed that the
residuals generally fall on a straight line implying that
the errors are distributed normally. This result was
also mentioned by various researchers18,25.
[

Exit
Tables 15-18 show the results of the ANOVA with
delamination factor at exit in drilling GFRP
composite, for the four drills.
Analysis of variance was carried out for all drill
types in Tables 15, 17 and 18. Feed rate was found to

271

be the major factor affecting the delamination factor

at workpiece entrance in all experimental results.
It can be observed from the tables that cutting
speed also affects delamination factor at
workpiece entrance.
It was noticed that cutting speed was influential
parameter affecting the delamination factor at exit
84.71% for drill point 135o in Table 16. It was also
observed that feed rate has an effect on delamination
factor at workpiece exit 11.55 %.
The values of Prob > F in Tables 15-18 for drilling
patameter terms are less than 0.0500 which indicate
that drilling patameter terms are noteworthy, which is
desirable. Therefore, A and B (cutting speed and
feed rate) are significant drilling patameter terms.

Table 14Table ANOVA results for the delamination factor for brad drill
Source of variance
Model
Cutting speed
Feed rate
Error
Total
S.D.
Mean

SDQa

DFb

0.42
0.033
0.39
4.664E-003
0.43

6
3
3
9
15

0.023
1.30

C.V.
PRESS

MSc

F Value

Prop>F

0.070
135.26
0.011
21.39
0.13
249.12
5.182E-004

<0.0001
0.0002
<0.0001

Significant

R2
Adj.R2

0.9890
0.9817

Pred. R2
Adeq. Precision

1.75
0.015

Contribution %
7.82
91.08
1.55
100.0

Fig. 6Normal probability plot of residuals for delamination factor at entrance

0.9653
32.542

INDIAN J ENG. MATER. SCI., AUGUST 2010

272

Fig. 7Normal probability plot of residuals for delamination factor at exit

Table 15Table ANOVA results for the delamination factor for drill point angle 118o
Source of variance

SDQa

DFb

MSc

F Value

Prop>F

Model
Cutting speed
Feed rate
Error
Total

0.32
0.14
0.18
0.017
0.33

6
3
3
9
15

0.053
0.047
0.059
1.84E-003

28.83
25.73
31.93

0.32
0.14
0.18
0.017
0.33

Significant

S.D.
Mean

0.043
1.60

C.V.
PRESS

2.67
0.052

R2
Adj.R2

0.9505
0.9176

Pred. R2
Adeq. Precision

Contribution %
42.42
52.63
4.95
100.0
0.8437
17.537

Table 16Table ANOVA results for the delamination factor for drill point angle 135o
Source of variance

SDQ

DF

MS

F Value

Prop>F

Contribution %

Model
Cutting speed
Feed rate
Error
Total

0.47
0.41
0.056
0.018
0.48

6
3
3
9
15

0.078
0.14
0.019
2.008E-003

38.60
67.93
9.27

<0.0001
<0.0001
0.0041

Significant

S.D.
Mean

0.045
1.53

C.V.
PRESS

2.94
0.057

R2
Adj.R2

0.9626
0.9377

Pred. R2
Adeq. Precision

84.71
11.55
3.74
100.0
0.8818
19.145

KILICKAP : DELAMINATION IN DRILLING OF GFRP COMPOSITES

273

Table 17 Table ANOVA results for the delamination factor for step drill
Source of variance
Model
Cutting speed
Feed rate
Error
Total
S.D.
Mean

SDQa

DFb

MSc

F Value

Prop>F

0.042
0.015
0.027
2.006E-003
0.044
0.015
1.12

6
3
3
9
15
C.V.
PRESS

6.998E-003
4.906E-003
9.090E-003
2.229E-004

31.39
22.01
40.78

<0.0001
0.0002
<0.0001

Significant

1.34
6.341E-003

R2
Adj.R2

0.9544
0.9240

Pred. R2
Adeq. Precision

Contribution %
33.46
61.98
4.56
100.0
0.8559
19.746

Table 18Table ANOVA results for the delamination factor for brad drill
a

Source of variance

SDQ

DFb

MSc

F Value

Prop>F

Model
Cutting speed
Feed rate
Error
Total

1.02
0.25
0.77
0.082
1.10

6
3
3
9
15

0.17
0.083
026
9.126E-003

18.65
9.08
28.21

<0.0001
0.0044
<0.0001

Significant

S.D.
Mean

0.096
1.70

C.V.
PRESS

5.62
0.26

R2
Adj.R2

0.9256
0.8759

Pred. R2
Adeq. Precision

From the results of Taguchi method and ANOVA, the

best combination levels of the cutting speed and feed rate
was obtained at low levels of cutting parameters. The
minimum exit delamination is observed at low
level of feed rate (0.1 mm/rev) and cutting speed
(5 m/min).
Conclusions
The application of Taguchi optimization for
investigating the effect of cutting parameters (cutting
speed and feed rate) on delamination factor during
drilling of GFRP composite has been presented in this
paper. The following conclusions can be drawn from
this study:
The analysis of experimental results is carried out
using Taguchis orthogonal array and analysis of
variance. The level of the best of the cutting
parameters and drill types on the damage is
determined by using ANOVA.
Taguchi design can present a systematic procedure
that can successfully and efficiently identify the
minimum damage in the process control of drilling
machines.
The results of ANOVA revealed that feed rate is
the dominant cutting parameter, which has greater
influence on the delamination factor for four drills.
The feed rate is cutting parameters that have the
physical as well as statistical influence on the
delamination at entrance and exit in GFRP composite.
The damage increases with both cutting
parameters, which means that the composite damage

Contribution %
22.54
70.01
7.44
100.0
0.7647
14.916

is bigger for higher cutting speed and feed rate. For

achieving minimal delamination on the GFRP
composite, always lower feed rates and cutting speeds
are preferred.
Based on the S/N, optimal parameters for the
minimum entrance damage are the cutting speed at
Level 1(5 m/min) and the feed rate at Level 1
(0.1 mm/rev). Similarly, the optimum cutting
parameters for minimum exit damage are cutting
speed at Level 1(5 m/min) and the feed rate at Level 1
(0.1 mm/rev).
The step drill produces less delamination the GFRP
composites (entrance and exit) than three drills, i.e.,
the delamination factor at entrance and exit is smaller.
References
1

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Wallenberger F T, Watson J C & Li H, Glass fibers, edited

by Miracle D B & Donaldson S L (ASM Handbook Volume:
21 Composites, USA) 2002.
Blaga A, http://irc.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/pubs/cbd/ cbd205_e. html
(2005)1-6.
Pihtili H & Tosun N, Compos Sci Technol, 62 (2002) 367370.
Davim J P & Reis P, Compos Struct, 59 (2003) 481-487.
Sonbaty I E, Khashaba U A & Machaly T, Compos Struct,
63 (2004)329-338.
Mohan N S, Ramachandra A & Kulkarni S M, Compos
Struct, 71 (2005) 407-413.
Mohan N S, Kulkarni S M & Ramachandra A, J Mater
Process Technol, 186 (2007) 265-271.
Hocheng H & Tsao C C, J Mater Process Technol,
140 (2003) 335-339.
Davim J P, Reis P & Antonio C C, Compos Sci Technol,
64 (2004) 289-297.

274

INDIAN J ENG. MATER. SCI., AUGUST 2010

10 Palanikumar K, Prakash S & Shanmugam K, Mater Manuf

Process, 23 (2008) 858-864.
11 Davim J P & Reis P, Mater & Des, 24 (2003)
315-324.
12 Tsao C C & Hocheng H, Int J Mach Tools Manuf, 44 (2004)
1085-1090.
13 Enemuof E U, El-Gizawy A S & Okafor A C, Int J Mach
Tools Manuf, 41 (2001) 1795-1814.
14 Rao B S, Rudramoorthy R, Srinivas S & Nageswara Rao B,
Mater Sci Eng: A, 472 (2008) 347-352.
15 Hascalik A & Caydas U, Int J Adv Manuf Technol,
38 (2008) 896-903.
16 Tosun N, Cogun C & Tosun G, J Mater Process Technol,
152 (2004) 316-322.
17 Bagci E & Ozcelik B, Int J Adv Manuf Technol, 29 (2006)
629-636.

18 Noordin M Y, Vankatesh V C, Sharif S, Elting S & Abdullah

A, J Mater Process Technol, 145 (2004) 46-68.
19 Savaskan M, Taptik Y & Urgen M, Itu dergisi/d Eng,
3 (2004) 117-128.
20 Arul S, Vijayaraghavan L, Malhotra S K & Krishnamurthy
R, Int J Mach Tools Manuf, 46 (2006) 252-259.
21 Rosa J L, Robin A, Silva M B, Baldan C A & Peres M P,
J Mater Process Technol, 209 (2009) 1181-1188.
22 Montgomery D C, Design and Analysis of Experiments,
(Arizona State University, New York) 1991.
23 Petropoulos G, Ntziantzias I & Anghel C, A predictive model
of cutting force in turning using Taguchi and response
surface techniques, 1st IC-EpsMsO, Athens, 2005.
24 Yang W H & Tarng Y S, J Mater Process Technol,
84 (1998) 122-129.
25 Davidson M J, Balasubramanian K & Tagore G R N, J Mater
Process Technol, 202 (2008) 41-46.