| Literature DB >> 32046057 |
Naveed Ahmed1,2, Mohammad Pervez Mughal1, Waqar Shoaib1, Syed Farhan Raza1, Abdulrhman M Alahmari3.
Abstract
To get the maximum heat transfer in real applications, the surface area of the micro-features (micro-channels) needs to be large as possible. It can be achieved by producing a maximum number of micro-channels per unit area. Since each successive pair of the micro-channels contain an inter-channels fin, therefore the inter-channels fin thickness (IFT) plays a pivotal role in determining the number of micro-channels to be produced in the given area. During machining, the fabrication of deep micro-channels is a challenge. Wire-cut electrical discharge machining (EDM) could be a viable alternative to fabricate deep micro-channels with thin inter-channels fins (higher aspect ratio) resulting in larger surface area. In this research, minimum IFT and the corresponding machining conditions have been sought for producing micro-channels in copper. The other attributes associated with the micro-channels have also been deeply investigated including the inter-channels fin height (IFH), inter-channels fin radius (IFR) and the micro-channels width (MCW). The results reveal that the inter-channels fin is the most critical feature to control during the wire electrical discharge machining (WEDM) of copper. Four types of fin shapes have been experienced, including the fins: broken at the top end, deflected at the top end, curled bend at the top, and straight with no/negligible deflection.Entities:
Keywords: copper; deflection; discharge energy; fin-height; fin-radius; fin-thickness; heat transfer; micro-channels; surface area; wire electrical discharge machining (WEDM)
Year: 2020 PMID: 32046057 PMCID: PMC7074689 DOI: 10.3390/mi11020173
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Micromachines (Basel) ISSN: 2072-666X Impact factor: 2.891
Thermo-physical properties of copper.
| Property | Unit | Value |
|---|---|---|
| Density | g/cm3 | 8.96 |
| Hardness | HV | 110 |
| Electrical resistivity | Ωm | 16.78 |
| Thermal conductivity | W/mK | 401 |
| Melting point | °C | 1085 |
Wire electrical discharge machining (WEDM) parameters utilized during micro-channels screening.
| No | Variable Name | Unit | Levels | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | |||
| 1 | Pulse On-time | µs | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| 2 | Pulse Off-time | µs | 20 | 25 | 30 |
| 3 | Spark Voltage | V | 55 | 60 | 65 |
| 4 | Wire Tension | g | 490 | 520 | 560 |
| 5 | Wire feed rate | mm/min | 90 | 110 | 140 |
Figure 1Micro-channels fabricated through wire electrical discharge machining (WEDM): (a) schematic of responses, (b) schematic of micro-channel features with dimensions, (c) 3D computer-aided design; CAD model of the designed micro-channels, and (d) actual machined samples.
Screening of micro-channel sizes (based on inter-channel fin thickness) and machining parameters.
| Runs | Exp. # | Wire Electrical Discharge Machining (WEDM) Parameters | Designed Inter-Channels Fin Thickness; IFT | Actual Inter-Channels Fin Thickness; IFT | Remarks |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trials Set 1: | |||||
|
| 1-1 | T-on = 2 µs, T-off = 25 µs, SV = 60 V, WT = 520 g, WF = 110 mm/min | 1000 | 1354 | Existence of inter-channel fin with noticeable thickness |
|
| 1-2 | 750 | 816 | ||
|
| 1-3 | 500 | 358 | ||
|
| 1-4 | 250 | - | Inter-channel wall gets broken | |
| Trials Set 2: | |||||
|
| 2-1 | T-on = 2 µs, T-off = 25 µs, SV = 60 V, WT = 520 g, WF = 110 mm/min | 500 | 358 | Existence of inter-channel fin with noticeable thickness |
|
| 2-2 | 450 | 239 | ||
|
| 2-3 | 400 | 179 | ||
|
| 2-4 | 350 | - | No existence of inter-channel fin | |
|
| 2-5 | 300 | - | ||
| Trials Set 3: | |||||
|
| 3-1 | T-on = 2 µs, T-off = 25 µs, SV = 60 V, WT = 520 g, WF = 110 mm/min | 400 | 179 | |
|
| 3-2 | 390 | - | No existence of inter-channel fin | |
|
| 3-3 | 380 | - | ||
|
| 3-4 | 370 | - | ||
|
| 3-5 | 360 | - | ||
| Trials Set 4: | |||||
|
| 4-1 | T-on = 2 µs, T-off = 25 µs, SV = 60 V, WT = 520 g, WF = 110 mm/min | 400 | Measurements were not performed. Only CMM-based observations were captured | Inter-channel fin having a bend at the tip |
|
| 4-2 | 400 | |||
|
| 4-3 | 400 | |||
|
| 4-4 | 400 | |||
|
| 4-5 | 400 | |||
| Trials Set 5: | |||||
|
| 5-1 | T-on = 3 µs, T-off = 30 µs, SV = 65 V, WT = 560 g, WF = 140 mm/min | 400 | - | No existence of inter-channel fin |
|
| 5-2 | 400 | - | ||
|
| 5-3 | 400 | - | ||
|
| 5-4 | 400 | - | ||
|
| 5-5 | 400 | - | ||
| Trials Set 6: | |||||
|
| 6-1 | T-on = 1 µs, T-off = 20 µs, SV = 55 V, WT = 490 g, WF = 90 mm/min | 400 | Measurements were not performed. Only CMM-based observations were captured | Straight inter-channel fins were obtained. |
|
| 6-2 | 400 | |||
|
| 6-3 | 400 | |||
|
| 6-4 | 400 | |||
|
| 6-5 | 400 | |||
Figure 2Experimental results of different trial sets for determining the minimum inter-channel fin thickness.
Experimental results in terms of micro-channels attributes under Taguchi L27.
| Run | WEDM Parameters | Responses | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T-on | T-off | SV | WT | WF | IFT | IFR | IFH | MCW | |
| 1 | 1 | 20 | 50 | 490 | 90 | 95 | 304.5 | 936 | 822.5 |
| 2 | 1 | 20 | 50 | 490 | 110 | 115 | 299 | 863 | 805 |
| 3 | 1 | 20 | 50 | 490 | 140 | 90 | 309 | 921 | 817 |
| 4 | 1 | 25 | 60 | 520 | 90 | 107 | 303 | 902 | 809.5 |
| 5 | 1 | 25 | 60 | 520 | 110 | 98 | 257 | 939 | 825.5 |
| 6 | 1 | 25 | 60 | 520 | 140 | 81 | 294.5 | 915 | 821 |
| 7 | 1 | 30 | 65 | 560 | 90 | 94 | 274.5 | 923 | 822 |
| 8 | 1 | 30 | 65 | 560 | 110 | 84 | 270.5 | 922 | 817 |
| 9 | 1 | 30 | 65 | 560 | 140 | 116 | 313.5 | 929 | 806 |
| 10 | 2 | 20 | 60 | 560 | 90 | 101 | 301.5 | 923 | 821 |
| 11 | 2 | 20 | 60 | 560 | 110 | 62 | 318 | 949 | 830 |
| 12 | 2 | 20 | 60 | 560 | 140 | 79 | 318 | 897 | 822.5 |
| 13 | 2 | 25 | 65 | 490 | 90 | 72 | 277.5 | 819 | 830.5 |
| 14 | 2 | 25 | 65 | 490 | 110 | 87 | 284 | 851 | 829 |
| 15 | 2 | 25 | 65 | 490 | 140 | 96 | 311 | 890 | 824 |
| 16 | 2 | 30 | 50 | 520 | 90 | 70 | 334 | 826 | 833.5 |
| 17 | 2 | 30 | 50 | 520 | 110 | 70 | 302 | 886 | 835 |
| 18 | 2 | 30 | 50 | 520 | 140 | 65 | 308 | 825 | 840 |
| 19 | 3 | 20 | 65 | 520 | 90 | 82 | 336 | 491 | 833.5 |
| 20 | 3 | 20 | 65 | 520 | 110 | 72 | 340.5 | 387 | 846 |
| 21 | 3 | 20 | 65 | 520 | 140 | 59 | 343.5 | 491 | 848.5 |
| 22 | 3 | 25 | 50 | 560 | 90 | 74 | 337 | 673 | 844.5 |
| 23 | 3 | 25 | 50 | 560 | 110 | 82 | 316 | 536 | 832.5 |
| 24 | 3 | 25 | 50 | 560 | 140 | 90 | 303.5 | 550 | 835 |
| 25 | 3 | 30 | 60 | 490 | 90 | 71 | 317.5 | 611 | 837 |
| 26 | 3 | 30 | 60 | 490 | 110 | 68 | 291.5 | 528 | 846.5 |
| 27 | 3 | 30 | 60 | 490 | 140 | 60 | 322.5 | 383 | 845.5 |
Descriptive statistics of responses.
| Responses | N | Min. | Max. | Mean | StDev |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IFT (µm) | 27 | 59 | 116 | 82.96 | 16.06 |
| IFR (µm) | 27 | 257 | 343.5 | 306.9 | 21.93 |
| IFH (µm) | 27 | 383 | 949 | 769.1 | 192.20 |
| MCW (µm) | 27 | 805 | 848.5 | 828.9 | 12.20 |
Figure 3Probability plots of data points associated with: (a) inter-channels fin thickness (IFT), (b) inter-channels fin radius (IFR), (c) inter-channels fin height (IFH), and (d) micro-channels width (MCW).
Figure 4Interval plots for means of responses drawn at 95% confidence interval (CI).
Figure 5Parametric effects on inter-channel fin thickness (IFT): (a) main effects plot and (b) interaction plot.
Signal-to-noise (S/N) ratio analysis of IFT (Larger is better).
| Level | T-on | T-off | SV | WT | WF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 39.74 | 38.29 | 38.30 | 38.30 | 38.49 |
| 2 | 37.73 | 38.77 | 37.97 | 37.72 | 38.13 |
| 3 | 37.20 | 37.62 | 38.41 | 38.65 | 38.05 |
| Delta | 2.54 | 1.15 | 0.44 | 0.93 | 0.44 |
| Rank | 1 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 4 |
Figure 6Parametric effects on inter-channel fin thickness (IFH): (a) main effects plot and (b) interaction plot.
S/N ratio analysis of IFH (Larger is better).
| Level | T-On | T-Off | SV | WT | WF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 59.24 | 57.19 | 57.67 | 57.24 | 57.76 |
| 2 | 58.82 | 57.73 | 57.50 | 56.98 | 57.26 |
| 3 | 54.13 | 57.27 | 57.02 | 57.98 | 57.17 |
| Delta | 5.11 | 0.54 | 0.64 | 1.00 | 0.59 |
| Rank | 1 | 5 | 3 | 2 | 4 |
Figure 7Micro-channels produced under different experimental runs of Taguchi L27.
Figure 8Parametric effects on inter-channel fin radius (IFR): (a) main effects plot and (b) interaction plot.
S/N ratio analysis of IFR (smaller is better).
| Level | T-on | T-off | SV | WT | WF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | −49.28 | −50.06 | −49.89 | −49.59 | −49.79 |
| 2 | −49.70 | −49.47 | −49.60 | −49.88 | −49.44 |
| 3 | −50.18 | −49.63 | −49.67 | −49.69 | −49.92 |
| Delta | 0.89 | 0.60 | 0.29 | 0.30 | 0.48 |
| Rank | 1 | 2 | 5 | 4 | 3 |
Figure 9Parametric effects on micro-channel’s width (MCW): (a) main effects plot and (b) interaction plot.
S/N ratio analysis of MCW (Larger is better).
| Level | T-On | T-Off | SV | WT | WF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 58.24 | 58.35 | 58.37 | 58.37 | 58.36 |
| 2 | 58.38 | 58.36 | 58.37 | 58.41 | 58.38 |
| 3 | 58.50 | 58.40 | 58.36 | 58.33 | 58.37 |
| Delta | 0.26 | 0.04 | 0.01 | 0.07 | 0.01 |
| Rank | 1 | 3 | 5 | 2 | 4 |
Correlation analysis of micro-channels’ attributes with electric discharge machining parameters.
| Response | Significance | Coefficient | Relationship | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strength | Direction | ||||
|
| |||||
|
| 0.000 | Significant | −0.639 | Moderately strong | -ve |
|
| 0.001 | - | 0.596 | Moderately strong | +ve |
|
| 0.000 | - | −0.866 | Strong | -ve |
|
| 0.000 | - | 0.847 | Strong | +ve |
|
| |||||
|
| 0.414 | Insignificant | −0.164 | Very weak | -ve |
|
| 0.147 | - | −0.287 | Weak | -ve |
|
| 0.976 | - | −0.006 | Zero | NA |
|
| 0.492 | - | 0.138 | Very weak | +ve |
|
| |||||
|
| 0.950 | - | 0.013 | Zero | NA |
|
| 0.439 | - | −0.155 | Very weak | -ve |
|
| 0.751 | - | −0.064 | Zero | NA |
|
| 0.868 | - | −0.033 | - | - |
|
| |||||
|
| 0.628 | - | 0.098 | Zero | NA |
|
| 0.771 | - | 0.059 | - | - |
|
| 0.522 | - | 0.129 | Very weak | +ve |
|
| 0.559 | - | −0.118 | - | -ve |
|
| |||||
|
| 0.689 | - | −0.081 | Zero | NA |
|
| 0.569 | - | 0.155 | Very weak | +ve |
|
| 0.731 | - | 0.069 | Zero | NA |
|
| 0.938 | - | 0.016 | - | - |