Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2012) 62:405–420 413

Table 3 Plan of experiments and summary of responses for stainless steel and brass workpieces

Standard order Exp. no. Actual value of parameters Stainless steel Brass

P (bar) N S (RPM) R Initial Ra (μm) Final Ra (μm) %ΔRa Initial Ra (μm) Final Ra (μm) %ΔRa

1 17 35 500 40 1 0.26 0.18 30.77 0.23 0.14 39.13

2 15 40 500 40 1 0.26 0.17 34.62 0.24 0.12 50
3 12 35 700 40 1 0.25 0.16 36 0.25 0.13 48
4 23 40 700 40 1 0.25 0.15 40 0.25 0.11 56
5 13 35 500 80 1 0.26 0.17 34.62 0.24 0.12 50
6 14 40 500 80 1 0.26 0.16 38.46 0.24 0.1 58.33
7 22 35 700 80 1 0.25 0.15 40 0.24 0.09 62.5
8 26 40 700 80 1 0.25 0.14 44 0.24 0.08 66.67
9 27 35 500 40 3 0.27 0.18 33.33 0.24 0.12 50
10 6 40 500 40 3 0.27 0.17 37.04 0.25 0.1 60
11 7 35 700 40 3 0.25 0.16 36 0.24 0.1 58.33
12 18 40 700 40 3 0.27 0.16 40.74 0.25 0.09 64
13 4 35 500 80 3 0.26 0.16 38.46 0.23 0.11 52.17
14 16 40 500 80 3 0.26 0.15 42.31 0.23 0.09 60.87
15 28 35 700 80 3 0.27 0.16 40.74 0.25 0.09 64
16 9 40 700 80 3 0.25 0.14 44 0.25 0.08 68
17 19 32.5 600 60 2 0.26 0.17 34.62 0.24 0.12 50
18 30 42.5 600 60 2 0.26 0.16 38.46 0.23 0.09 60.87
19 29 37.5 400 60 2 0.27 0.18 33.33 0.23 0.1 56.52
20 5 37.5 800 60 2 0.25 0.15 40 0.23 0.09 60.87
21 2 37.5 600 20 2 0.25 0.17 32 0.23 0.12 47.83
22 20 37.5 600 100 2 0.26 0.17 34.62 0.23 0.1 56.52
23 10 37.5 600 60 0.34 0.26 0.17 34.62 0.23 0.11 52.17
24 8 37.5 600 60 4 0.25 0.15 40 0.23 0.1 56.52
25 1 37.5 600 60 2 0.26 0.18 42.31 0.24 0.07 70.83
26 25 37.5 600 60 2 0.27 0.16 40.74 0.24 0.08 66.67
27 24 37.5 600 60 2 0.25 0.14 44 0.25 0.08 68
28 11 37.5 600 60 2 0.26 0.14 46.15 0.23 0.07 69.57
29 21 37.5 600 60 2 0.26 0.14 46.15 0.24 0.08 66.67
30 3 37.5 600 60 2 0.27 0.15 44.44 0.23 0.07 69.57

respectively (calculated from all experiments in Table 3). It
means there is a substantial improvement in terms of finish-
ing rate in R-MRAFF process.
6 Results and discussion
The experimental results (Table 3) were analyzed using
Design Expert® software, and the analysis of variance
(ANOVA) for %ΔRa for stainless steel and brass work-
pieces are presented in Table 4. The model p value
(“Prob > F”) of 0.0006 for stainless steel and <0.0001
for brass being less than 0.05 (significance level, α for
95% confidence interval) implies that the models are
significant. It has been found that during finishing by
R-MRAFF process, all the parameters considered in
Table 2 have an impact on %ΔRa. From Table 4 it is
observed that P, N, S, R, P2, N2, S2, and R2 are signif-
icant model terms in case of stainless steel. In case of
brass, the terms P, N, S, R, SR, P2, N2, S2, and R2 are
significant.
Extrusion pressure greatly affects the Fa and Fr acting on
the abrasive particles (as explained in Eq. 2 in Section 2).
These forces together cause abrasion leading to the shearing
of surface peaks. By controlling the rotational motion of the
medium, tangential cutting force (Ft in Eq. 5) and centrifu-
gal force (Fcen in Eq. 3; which also controls the indentation
depth) acting on the abrasive particles can be controlled to
improve the surface finish. Also, the surface roughness can
be minimized by conducting R-MRAFF experiments at
optimum finishing cycles. Hence, these parameters have
significant influence in improving the finishing performance