Influence of coconut oil on tribological behavior of carbide cutting tool insert during turning operation

  • B. S. Ajay Vardhaman
  • M. AmarnathEmail author
  • Durwesh Jhodkar
  • J. Ramkumar
  • H. Chelladurai
  • M. K. Roy
Technical Paper


In manufacturing industries, machining is considered as one of the most significant and effective processes. During machining process, cutting zone experiences the higher temperature due to friction between the chip-tool and work-tool interfaces, which directly influences the tool wear, surface quality and dimensional accuracy of the work material. Even though cutting lubricants are extensively used for lubricating and cooling the tool-workpiece contact area, their application has several drastic effects on environment and the health of operators. Hence, there is a need to identify an environmental friendly and user-friendly alternative to conventional cutting lubricants. The main objective of this work is to evaluate the effect of cutting lubricants on tool wear, friction coefficient, surface quality and chip morphology during turning of AISI 1040 steel with tungsten carbide tool insert under dry, wet, coconut oil, minimum quantity lubrication (MQL) using water-miscible fluid and MQL using coconut oil cutting conditions. The wettability characteristic of coconut oil on a carbide tool insert results in good adsorption on tool and workpiece, which causes effective lubrication and reduction in friction. It was found that the wettability angle of coconut oil is 33.7°, which greatly enhanced the wettability characteristics compared to the conventional cutting fluids. The MQL method using coconut oil machining condition resulted in a significant decrease in tool wear, friction coefficient along with favorable chip morphology and better surface quality of the workpiece.


Friction Tool wear Coconut oil Cutting lubricants 



The authors gratefully acknowledge the support provided for this work by IIT Kanpur and IIITDM Jabalpur.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


  1. 1.
    Paul S, Dhar NR, Chattopadhyay AB (2001) Beneficial effects of cryogenic over dry and wet machining on tool wear and surface finishing turning AISI 1060 steel. J Mater Process Technol 116:44–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Stanford M, Lister PM (2004) Investigation into the relationship between tool-wear and cutting environments when turning EN32 steel. Ind Lubr Tribol 56:114–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shashidhara YM, Jayaram SR (2010) Vegetable oils as a potential cutting fluid—an evolution. Tribol Int 43:1073–1081CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lawal SA, Choudhury IA, Nukman Y (2012) Application of vegetable oil based metal working fluids in machining ferrous metals—a review. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 52:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dhar NR, Paul S, Chattopadhyay AB (2002) The influence of cryogenic cooling on tool wear, dimensional accuracy and surface finish in turning AISI 1040 and E4340C steels. Wear 249:932–942CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dhar NR, Kamruzzaman M, Ahmed M (2006) Effect of minimum quantity lubrication on tool wear and surface roughness in turning AISI-4340 steel. J Mater Process Technol 172:299–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Diniz AE, Micaroni R (2002) Cutting conditions for finish turning process aiming: the use of dry cutting. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 42:899–904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sreejith PS, Ngoi BKA (2000) Dry machining: machining of the future. J Mater Process Technol 101:287–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hadad M, Sadeghi B (2013) Minimum quantity lubrication-MQL turning of AISI 4140 steel alloy. J Clean Prod 54:332–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Khan MMA, Dhar NR (2006) Performance evaluation of minimum quantity lubrication by vegetable oil in terms of cutting force, cutting zone temperature, tool wear, job dimension and surface finish in turning AISI-1060 steel. J Zhejiang Univ 7(11):1790–1799CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Khan MMA, Mithu MAH, Dhar NR (2009) Effects of minimum quantity lubrication on turning AISI 9310 alloy steel using vegetable oil based cutting fluid. J Mater Process Technol 209:5573–5583CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Machado AR, Wall bank J (1997) The effect of extremely low lubricant volumes in machining. Wear 210(1–2):76–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ozcelik Babur, Kuram E, Cetin MH, Demirbas E (2011) Experimental investigations of vegetable based cutting fluids with extreme pressure during turning of AISI 304L. Tribol Int 44:1864–1871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lawal SA, Choudhury IA, Nukman Y (2013) A critical assessment of lubrication techniques in machining processes: a case for minimum quantity lubrication using vegetable oil-based lubricant. J Clean Prod 41:210–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zeman A (1995) Biodegradable lubricants-studies on thermo-oxidation of metal working and hydraulic fluids by differential scanning calorimetry. DSC 268:9–15Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mannekote JK, Kailas SV (2009) Studies on boundary lubrication properties of oxidized coconut and soybean oils. Lubr Sci 21:355–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tai BL, Dasch JM, Shih AJ (2011) Evaluation and comparison of lubricant properties in minimum quantity lubrication machining. Mach Sci Technol 15:376–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wakabayashi T, Inasaki I, Suda S (2006) Tribological action and optimal performance: research activities regarding MQL machining fluids. Mach Sci Technol 10:59–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Narayan prabhu K, Fernades P, Kumar G (2009) Effect of substrate surface roughness on wetting behavior of vegetable oils. Mater Des 30:297–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Xavior MA, Adithan M (2009) Determining the influence of cutting fluids on tool wear and surface roughness during turning of AISI 304 austenitic stainless steel. J Mater Process Technol 209:900–909CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Belluco W, De Chiffre L (2004) Performance evaluation of vegetable-based oils in drilling austenitic stainless steel. J Mater Process Technol 148:171–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kamata Y, Obikawa T (2007) High speed MQL finish-turning of Inconel 718 with different coated tools. J Mater Process Technol 192–193:281–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Obikawa T, Kamata Y, Asano Y, Nakayama K, Otieno AW (2008) Micro-liter lubrication machining of Inconel 718. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 48:1605–1612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sharma VS, Dogra M, Suri NM (2009) Cooling techniques for improved productivity in turning. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 49:435–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Li Bin, Deng J, Ze Wu (2009) Effect of cutting atmosphere on dry machining performance with Al2O3/ZrB2/ZrO2 ceramic tool. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 49:459–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Nath Chandra, Shiv GK, Srivastava AK, Iverson Jon (2013) Effect of fluid concentration in titanium machining with anatomization-based cutting fluid (ACF) spray system. J Manuf Processes 15:419–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Erhan SZ, Asadauskas S (2000) Lubricant base stocks from vegetable oils. Ind Crops Prod 11:277–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Abdalla HS, Patel S (2006) The performance and oxidation stability of sustainable metal-working fluid derived from vegetable extracts. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part B Eng Manuf 220:2027–2040CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Jayadasa NH, Nair KP, Ajithkumar G (2007) Tribological evaluation of coconut oil as an environment-friendly lubricant. Tribol Int 40:350–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Govindapillai AN, Jayadas H, Bhasi M (2009) Analysis of the pour point of coconut oil as a lubricant base stock using differential scanning calorimetry. Lubr Sci 21:13–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Masjuki HH, Kalam MA, Maleque MA, Kubo A, Nonaka T (2001) Performance, emissions and wear characteristics of an indirect injection diesel engine using coconut oil blended fuel. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part D J Automob Eng 215:393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Thottackkad MV, Perikinalil RK, Kumarapillai PN (2012) Experimental evaluation on the tribological properties of coconut oil by the addition of CuO nanoparticles. Int J Precis Eng Manuf 13:111–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Jayadas NH, Nair KP (2006) Coconut oil as base oil for industrial lubricants—evaluation and modification of thermal, oxidative and low temperature properties. Tribol Int 39:873–878CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    VamsiKrishna P, Srikant RR, Nageswara Rao D (2010) Experimental investigation on the performance of nanoboric acid suspensions in SAE-40 and coconut oil during turning of AISI 1040 steel. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 50:911–916CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Attanasio A, Gelfi M, Giardini C, Remino C (2006) Minimal quantity lubrication in turning: effect on tool wear. Int J Sci Technol Frict Lubr Wear 260:333–338Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Fox NJ, Stachowiak GW (2007) Vegetable oil based lubricants—a review of oxidation. Tribol Int 40:1035–1046CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Mannekote JK, Kailas SV (2012) The effect of oxidation on the tribological performance of few vegetable oils. J Mater Res Technol 1(2):91–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Marina AM, Man YBC, Nazimah SAH (2009) Chemical properties of virgin coconut oil. J Am Oil Chem Soc 86:301–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Fernandes P, Narayan Prabhu K (2008) Comparative study of heat transfer and wetting behavior of conventional and bio quenchants for industrial heat treatment. Int J Heat Mass Transf 51:526–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Morra M, Occhiello E, Garbassi F (1990) Knowledge about polymer surfaces from contact angle measurements. Adv Coll Interface Sci 32:79–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Sakai H, Fujii T (1999) The dependence of the apparent contact angles on gravity. J Colloid Interface Sci 210:152–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Wolansky G, Marmur A (1999) Apparent contact angles on rough surfaces: the Wenzel equation revisited. Colloids Surf 156:381–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Jung YC, Bhushan B (2009) Wetting behavior of water and oil droplets in three-phase interfaces for hydrophobicity/philicity and oleophobicity/philicity. Langmuir Am Chem Soc 25(24):14165–14173Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Park KH, Ewald B, Kwon PY (2011) Effect of nano-enhanced lubricant in minimum quantity lubrication balling milling. J Tribol 133:031803CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Marmur A (1983) Equilibrium and spreading of liquids on solid surfaces. Adv Coll Interface Sci 19:75–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Jahanmir S (2007) Tribology issues in machining. Mach Sci Technol Int J 2(1):137–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Kwon Y, Ertekin Y, Tseng TL (2004) Characterization of tool wear measurement with relation to the surface roughness in turning. Mach Sci Technol 8:39–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Senthil Kumar A, Durai AR, Sornakumar T (2006) The effect of tool wear on tool life of alumina-based ceramic cutting tools while machining hardened martensitic stainless steel. J Mater Process Technol 173:151–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    ISO 3685, Tool-life testing with single-point turning tools, First Edition, Annex G, 1977, p 41Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Li Bin (2012) A review of tool wear estimation using theoretical analysis and numerical simulation technologies. Int J Refract Metal Hard Mater 35:143–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Dutta AK, Narasaiah N, Chattopadhyay AB, Ray KK (2002) Influence of microstructure on wear resistance parameter of ceramic cutting tools. Mater Manuf Processes 17:651–670CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Gill SS, Singh H, Singh R, Singh J (2011) Flank wear and machining performance of cryogenically treated tungsten carbide inserts. Mater Manuf Processes 26:1430–1441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Li Bin (2011) Chip morphology of normalized steel when machining in different atmospheres with ceramic composite tool. Int J Refract Metal Hard Mater 29:384–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Joshi S, Tewari A, Joshi SS (2015) Micro structural characterization of chip segmentation under different machining environments in orthogonal machining of Ti6Al4 V. J Eng Mater Technol 137:011005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Chinchanikar Satish, Choudhury SK (2013) Investigations on machinability aspects of hardened AISI 4340 steel at different levels of hardness using coated carbide tools. Int J Refract Metal Hard Mater 38:124–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Senthil Kumar K, Senthilkumaar JS (2014) Analysis of flank wear and chip morphology when machining super duplex stainless steel in a gas cooled environment. Int J Eng Technol 5(6):5045–5056Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Khandekar S, Ravi Shankar M, Agnihotri V, Ramkumar J (2011) Nano-cutting fluid for enhancement of metal cutting performance. Mater Manuf Processes 27(9):963–967CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Jerold BD, Pradeep Kumar M (2012) Experimental comparison of carbon-dioxide and liquid nitrogen cryogenic coolants in turning of AISI 1045 steel. Cryogenics 52:569–574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Bermingham MJ, Kirsch J, Sun S, Palanisamy S, Dargusch MS (2011) New observations on tool life, cutting forces and chip morphology in cryogenic machining Ti-6Al-4V. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 51:500–511CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Material Science ProgrammeIndian Institute of TechnologyKanpurIndia
  2. 2.Department of Mechanical EngineeringIndian Institute of TechnologyKanpurIndia
  3. 3.Tribology and Machine Dynamics Laboratory, Department of Mechanical EngineeringPDPM Indian Institute of Information Technology, Design and ManufacturingJabalpurIndia
  4. 4.Discipline of Natural SciencesPDPM Indian Institute of Information Technology, Design and ManufacturingJabalpurIndia

Personalised recommendations