# Study of the High-Efficiency Ejecting-Explosion EDM of SiCp/Al Composite

^{1}

^{2}

^{*}

## Abstract

**:**

## 1. Introduction

^{2}was obtained by optimizing process parameters such as peak current, pulse width, and open-circuit voltage, using EN-31 steel as the object of study, resulting in a material removal rate of 80.52%ni [19]. Chandramoulis et al. studied the Taguchi method to optimize the process parameters of copper tungsten electrode steel-processing materials. The research results show that the pulse on time and discharge current have significant effects on the material removal rate and surface roughness, while the pulse off time has the least effect, which has been verified by experiments [20].

## 2. Experiment on Ejecting-Explosion EDM

#### 2.1. Experimental Materials

#### 2.2. Ejecting-Explosion EDM Experiment Device

#### 2.3. Experimental Design Scheme

#### 2.4. Experiment Index and Method

- (1)
- Machining removal rate

^{3}/min) of EDM reflects the processing speed. It refers to the amount of the workpiece material removed per unit of time under certain processing conditions, which is directly related to the processing time and processing efficiency of the workpiece. It is usually divided into mass removal rate and volume removal rate. At present, the volume removal rate is widely used in practice, which can more intuitively reflect the removal of the material. In this paper, the volume removal rate is used, and the formula is expressed as follows:

_{s}is the volume removal rate (mm

^{3}/min), V is the volume of workpiece removal (mm

^{3}), t is the processing time (min), Δm is the mass of workpiece removal (g), and ρ is the workpiece material density (g/mm

^{3}).

- (2)
- Machining roughness of pit bottom

## 3. Analysis on Influencing Factors of Material Removal Speed in Ejecting-Explosion EDM

#### 3.1. Influence of Voltage Difference of HLW

#### 3.2. Influence of Peak Current Difference of HLW

#### 3.3. Influence of Peak Current Difference of HLW

#### 3.4. Influence of Phase Difference of HLW

## 4. Analysis of Factors Affecting Surface Roughness of Materials in Ejecting-Explosion EDM

#### 4.1. Effect of High–Low-Voltage Difference on Surface Roughness and Surface Quality

#### 4.2. Effect of High–Low Current Difference on Surface Roughness and Surface Quality

#### 4.3. Effect of High–Low Pulse Width Difference on Surface Roughness and Surface Quality

#### 4.4. Effect of HLW Phase Difference on Surface Roughness and Surface Quality

## 5. Conclusions

- (1)
- The influence of waveform parameters on the material removal rate of SiCp/Al composites with different volume fractions was studied. Taking 45% SiCp/Al composites as an example, the results show that when the open-circuit voltage difference increases from 40 V to 120 V, the removal rate increases by 150.39%, but the removal rate slows down. When the peak current difference increases from 1 A to 8 A, the removal rate increases by 164.63%. When the pulse width difference increases from −30 μs to 30 μs, the removal rate increases by 2.89%. When the pulse phase difference increases from −100% to 100%, the removal rate increases by 71.41%. The material removal rate increases with the increase in pulse phase difference and open-circuit voltage difference, and first increases and then decreases with the increase in peak current difference and pulse width difference.
- (2)
- The influence of waveform parameters on the surface roughness of SiCp/Al composites with different volume fractions was studied. Taking 45% volume fraction SiCp/Al composites as an example, the results show that when the open-circuit voltage difference increases from 40 V to 120 V, the surface roughness increases by 20.49%. When the peak current difference increases from 1 A to 8 A, the surface roughness increases by 30.03%. When the pulse width difference increases from −30 μs to 30 μs, the surface roughness increases by 29.31%. When the pulse phase difference increases from −100% to 100%, the surface roughness increases by 41.06%. The surface roughness of the material increases with the open-circuit voltage difference, peak current difference, pulse width difference, and pulse phase difference.

## 6. Innovation and Prospects for Future Research

- (1)
- Due to the limited research time, the experiment only studies the electrical parameters of the ejecting-explosion EDM process; however, the next step can be to conduct the experimental research on the SiCp/Al composite material for non-electrical parameters such as different electrodes and different working fluids, and establish a more complete database.
- (2)
- After the completion of the ejecting-explosion EDM experiment, only the surface quality and material removal rate of the workpiece were analyzed. If the state and elements of the debris after processing of SiCp/Al composites with different volume fractions were analyzed at the same time, the removal method of the ejecting-explosion EDM could be comprehensively explained.

## Author Contributions

## Funding

## Data Availability Statement

## Conflicts of Interest

## References

- Selvarajan, L.; Rajavel, R.; Prakash, B.; Mohan, D.G.; Gopi, S. Investigation on spark electrical discharge machining of Si
_{3}N_{4}based advanced conductive ceramic composites. Mater. Today Proc.**2020**, 27, 2174–2178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Kaliappan, S.; Karthick, M.; Patil, P.P.; Madhu, P.; Sekar, S.; Mani, R.; Kalavathi, D.F.; Mohanraj, S.; Jida, S.N. Utilization of eco-friendly waste eggshell catalysts for enhancing liquid product yields through pyrolysis of forestry residues. J. Nanomater.
**2022**, 2022, 3445485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Kar, C.; Surekha, B.; Jena, H.; Choudhury, S.D. Study of influence of process parameters in electric discharge machining of aluminum–red mud metal matrix composite. Procedia Manuf.
**2018**, 20, 392–399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Zhang, Z.; Zhang, Y.; Lin, L.; Wu, J.; Yu, H.; Pan, X.; Li, G.; Wu, J.; Xue, T. Study on productivity and aerosol emissions of magnetic field-assisted EDM process of SiCp/Al composite with high volume fractions. J. Clean. Prod.
**2021**, 292, 126018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Kavosi, J.; Saei, M.; Kazeminezhad, M. Dislocation density and flow stress modeling of nanostructured Al-SiC composite during accumulative roll bonding. Comput. Mater. Sci.
**2013**, 67, 359–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Bharti, J.; Dhami, S.S. A review of modeling and simulation techniques in EDM process. Mater. Today Proc.
**2023**, in press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Zhao, Y.; Kunieda, M.; Abe, K. Study of EDM cutting of single crystal silicon carbide. Precis. Eng.
**2014**, 38, 92–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Chen, S.T.; Chen, C.H. Development of a novel micro w-EDM power source with a multipleResistor-Capacitor (mRC type) relaxation circuit for machining high-melting point, -hardness and -resistance materials. J. Mater. Process. Technol.
**2017**, 240, 370–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Chung, D.K.; Shin, H.S.; Park, M.S.; Chu, C.N. Machining characteristics of micro EDM in water using high frequency bipolar pulse. Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf.
**2011**, 12, 195–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Odulio CM, F.; Sison, L.G.; Escoto, M.T. Energy-saving flyback converter for EDM applications. In Proceedings of the Melbourne: IEEE Region 10, Melbourne, Australia, 21–24 November 2005; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, Z.; Yang, F.; Qin, D.; Li, L. High frequency pulse power generator for micro-EDM. Procedia CIRP
**2020**, 95, 621–626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Wu, P.; Yang, F.; Qin, D.; Li, L.; Guan, L.; Zhao, W. Multi-phase Interleaved buck-Type Pulse Power Generator for Die-Sinking EDM. Procedia CIRP
**2020**, 95, 615–620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Yang, J.; Yang, F.; Hua, H.; Cao, Y.; Li, C.; Fang, B. A bipolar pulse power generator for, micro-EDM. Procedia CIRP
**2018**, 68, 620–624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Tajdeen, A.; Khan, M.W.; Basha, K.K.; Sakthivelmurugan, E.; Koppula, N. Experimental investigation and optimization of EDM process parameters on EN31 steel using genetic algorithm. Mater. Today Proc.
**2022**, 64, 821–827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Le, V.T. Influence of processing parameters on surface properties of SKD61 steel processed by powder mixed electrical discharge machining. J. Mater. Eng. Perform.
**2021**, 30, 3003–3023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Jose, J.; Paul, L. Experimental analysis of the influence of discharge gap on EDM performance. Mater. Today Proc.
**2022**, 55, 394–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Khan, M.A.; Jappes, J.W.; Kumar, P.S.R.; Mashinini, P.M. EDM process parameter optimization using response surface methodology for Ni-Ti shape memory alloy. Mater. Today Proc.
**2022**, 52, 1466–1471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Sivakumar, K.; Kumar, P.M.; Amarkarthik, A.; Jegadheeswaran, S.; Shanmugaprakash, R. Empirical modeling of material removal rate surface roughness of OHNS steel using Cu-TiB2Tool in EDM. Mater. Today Proc.
**2021**, 45, 2725–2729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Ganapathy, S.; Palanivendhan, M.; Susitra, K.; Balasubramanian, P. Optimization of machining parameters in EDM using Taguchi based grey relational analysis. Mater. Today Proc.
**2023**, 82, 43–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Chandramouli, S.; Eswaraiah, K. Optimization of EDM Process parameters in Machining of 17-4 PH Steel using Taguchi Method. Mater. Today Proc.
**2017**, 4, 2040–2047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

**Figure 8.**Surface morphology of high- and low-volume-fraction SiCp/Al composites (from top to bottom: low volume fraction to high volume fraction). (

**a**) Open-circuit voltage difference 40 V. (

**b**) Open-circuit voltage difference 80 V. (

**c**) Open-circuit voltage difference 120 V. (

**d**) Open-circuit voltage difference 40 V. (

**e**) Open-circuit voltage difference 80 V. (

**f**) Open-circuit voltage difference 120 V.

**Figure 10.**Surface morphology of low- and high-volume-fraction SiCp/Al composites (from top to bottom: low volume fraction to high volume fraction). (

**a**) Peak current difference 1 A. (

**b**) Peak current difference 4 A. (

**c**) Peak current difference 8 A. (

**d**) Peak current difference 1 A. (

**e**) Peak current difference 4 A. (

**f**) Peak current difference 8 A.

**Figure 12.**Surface morphology of low- and high-volume-fraction SiCp/Al composites (from top to bottom: low volume fraction to high volume fraction). (

**a**) Pulse width difference −36 μs. (

**b**) Pulse width difference 0 μs. (

**c**) Pulse width difference 36 μs. (

**d**) Pulse width difference −36 μs. (

**e**) Pulse width difference 0 μs. (

**f**) Pulse width difference 36 μs.

**Figure 14.**Surface morphology of low- and high-volume-fraction SiCp/Al composites (from top to bottom: low volume fraction to high volume fraction). (

**a**) Pulse phase difference −100%. (

**b**) Pulse phase difference 0%. (

**c**) Pulse phase difference 100%. (

**d**) Pulse phase difference −100%. (

**e**) Pulse phase difference 0%. (

**f**) Pulse phase difference 100%.

Volume Fraction | Density g/cm ^{3} | Coefficient of Thermal Expansion (10 ^{−6}/°C) | Thermal Conductivity (w/mk) |
---|---|---|---|

20% | 2.82 | 14.9 | 170 |

30% | 2.89 | 12.8 | 182 |

45% | 2.92 | 11.0 | 195 |

65% | 2.97 | 8.5 | 209 |

Parameter | Specification |
---|---|

X, Y axis travel (mm) | 195 |

Z-axis travel (mm) | 120 |

Table size (mm) | 240 × 300 |

Maximum feed speed (mm/min) | 1200 |

Experiment Number | High Wave Voltage (V) | High Wave Current (A) | High Wave Pulse Width, Low Wave Pulse Width (μs) | High Wave Phase, Low Wave Phase (%) | Low Wave Voltage (V) | Low Wave Current (A) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

1 | 120, 140, 160, 180, 200 | 5 | 20, 20 | 0, 0 | 80 | 3 |

2 | 100 | 5, 6, 8, 10, 12 | 20, 20 | 0, 0 | 80 | 4 |

3 | 160 | 5 | 5, 35 | 0, 0 | 80 | 3 |

10, 30 | ||||||

20, 20 | ||||||

30, 10 | ||||||

35, 5 | ||||||

4 | 100 | 5 | 20, 20 | −100, 100 | 80 | 3 |

−50, 50 | ||||||

0, 0 | ||||||

50, −50 | ||||||

100, −100 |

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |

© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

## Share and Cite

**MDPI and ACS Style**

Liu, Y.; Qu, J.; Zhao, K.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, S.
Study of the High-Efficiency Ejecting-Explosion EDM of SiCp/Al Composite. *Micromachines* **2023**, *14*, 1315.
https://doi.org/10.3390/mi14071315

**AMA Style**

Liu Y, Qu J, Zhao K, Zhang X, Zhang S.
Study of the High-Efficiency Ejecting-Explosion EDM of SiCp/Al Composite. *Micromachines*. 2023; 14(7):1315.
https://doi.org/10.3390/mi14071315

**Chicago/Turabian Style**

Liu, Yu, Jiawei Qu, Keguang Zhao, Xuanyuan Zhang, and Shengfang Zhang.
2023. "Study of the High-Efficiency Ejecting-Explosion EDM of SiCp/Al Composite" *Micromachines* 14, no. 7: 1315.
https://doi.org/10.3390/mi14071315