Advertisement

Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Optimal selection of cutting tool materials based on multi-criteria decision-making methods in machining Al-Si piston alloy

  • 299 Accesses

  • 8 Citations

Abstract

Cutting tools are the executor and core element of machining, and tool materials are of decisive significance for the development of high-speed machining technology. For a particular workpiece material, to select the appropriate tool material is an important prerequisite to increase the machining productivity and to improve the machined surface quality. In this paper, a compromised weighting method composed of the subjective judgment method and the objective judgment method was utilized to conduct criterion weighting in the cutting tool material selection when machining Al-Si piston alloy. The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method was used to subjectively judge the significance of the material properties and determine their criterion weight, while the entropy weight method was adopted to objectively judge the significance and determine their weight values. The synthesis weights of the material properties were determined by the comprehensive assessment of both the AHP and entropy methods, and the synthesis scores of the different tool material candidates were obtained. Results revealed that PCD was found as best materials for Al-Si piston alloy machining, and YG8 is slightly more suitable than YG6X for machining Al-Si piston alloy. In short, the qualitative problems in tool material selection were realized systematically and hierarchically by quantitative calculation and analysis. This provides a new thinking in tool material selection for high-efficiency machining of difficult-to-machine materials.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1.

    Loladze TN, Tkemaladze GR, Kochiashvili OV, Mikanadze AI (1982) Shorttime test method for selection of proper cutting tool materials. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 31(1):45–48

  2. 2.

    Maity SR, Chatterjee P, Chakraborty S (2012) Cutting tool material selection using grey complex proportional assessment method. Mater Design 36:372–378

  3. 3.

    Ai X (2003) High speed machining technology. National Defence Industry Press, Beijing

  4. 4.

    Yuan YF, Chen WY, Gao LS (2010) Tool materials rapid selection based on initial wear. Chin J Aeronaut 23(3):386–392

  5. 5.

    Whitney ED. Ceramic cutting tools: materials, development and performance. William Andrew, 2012

  6. 6.

    Fenton RG, Gagnon MFJ (1993) Computer-aided tool material selection for metal-cutting operations. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 42(1):565–568

  7. 7.

    Oral A, Cakir MC (2004) Automated cutting tool selection and cutting tool sequence optimisation for rotational parts. Rob Comput Integr Manuf 20(2):127–141

  8. 8.

    Temuçin T, Tozan H, Vayvay Ö, Harničárová M, Valíček J (2014) A fuzzy based decision model for nontraditional machining process selection. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 70(9–12):2275–2282

  9. 9.

    Liu HC, You JX, Zhen L, Fan XJ (2014) A novel hybrid multiple criteria decision making model for material selection with target-based criteria. Mater Design 60:380–390

  10. 10.

    Arunachalam APS, Idapalapati S, Subbiah S (2015) Multi-criteria decision making techniques for compliant polishing tool selection. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 79(1–4):519–530

  11. 11.

    Prasad K, Chakraborty S (2013) A quality function deployment-based model for materials selection. Mater Design 49:525–535

  12. 12.

    Wang D, Zhao J (2015) Design optimization of mechanical properties of ceramic tool material during turning of ultra-high-strength steel 300M with AHP and CRITIC method. Int J Adv Manuf Technol. doi:10.1007/s00170-015-7903-7

  13. 13.

    Çalışkan H (2013) Selection of boron based tribological hard coatings using multi-criteria decision making methods. Mater Design 50:742–749

  14. 14.

    Avram O, Stroud I, Xirouchakis P (2011) A multi-criteria decision method for sustainability assessment of the use phase of machine tool systems. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 53(5–8):811–828

  15. 15.

    Feng C, Mai Y (2015) Sustainability assessment of products based on fuzzy multi-criteria decision analysis. Int J Advanced Manuf Technol. doi:10.1007/s00170-015-7978-1

  16. 16.

    Huang H, Zhang L, Liu Z et al (2011) Multi-criteria decision making and uncertainty analysis for materials selection in environmentally conscious design. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 52(5–8):421–432

  17. 17.

    Çalışkan H, Kurşuncu B, Kurbanoğlu C, Güven ŞY (2013) Material selection for the tool holder working under hard milling conditions using different multi criteria decision making methods. Mater Design 45:473–479

  18. 18.

    Saaty TL (1981) The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill, New York

  19. 19.

    Tzeng GH, Huang JJ (2011) Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications. CRC Press, USA

  20. 20.

    Hamidi N, Pezeshki PM, Moradian A. Weighting the criteria of brand selecting in beverage industries in Iran. Asian J Manag Res, 2010: 250–67.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Anhai Li or Jun Zhao.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Li, A., Zhao, J., Gong, Z. et al. Optimal selection of cutting tool materials based on multi-criteria decision-making methods in machining Al-Si piston alloy. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 86, 1055–1062 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-015-8200-1

Download citation

Keywords

  • Tool material selection
  • Multi-criteria decision-making method
  • Al-Si piston alloy
  • AHP method
  • Entropy method