Design of Experiment (DOE) Approach to Optimize Accuracy of Surface Roughness

Ali Rafidah; A. Nurulhuda; Arshad Azrina; Yacob Suhaila; I.S. Anwar; A.W.M. Ikbar

doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.465-466.1224

Paper Titles

The Roles of Shape and Size in the Pinch Effort of Screw Knobs
p.1202

Effect of Welding Current Mode on Weld Quality Characteristics of Pulsed Current Micro Plasma Arc Welded AISI 304L Sheets
p.1209

The Effect of EDM Die-Sinking Parameters on Material Characteristic for Aluminium Composite Using Tungsten Copper Electrode
p.1214

The Effect of Vortex well Thickness on Microstructure and Mechanical Properties of Aluminium LM6
p.1219

Design of Experiment (DOE) Approach to Optimize Accuracy of Surface Roughness
p.1224

Influence of Pressure Angle on Load Sharing Based Stresses in Asymmetric Normal Contact Ratio Spur Gear Drives
p.1229

Load Sharing Based Fillet Stress Analysis of Involute Helical Gears
p.1234

Hydrogen Blended with Gasoline for Internal Combustion Engine Effect on Specific Fuel Consumption Based on Load Tests (L0,L1,L2)
p.1239

Correlation between RFID Network Planning (RNP) Parameters and Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) Solutions
p.1245

HomeApplied Mechanics and MaterialsApplied Mechanics and Materials Vols. 465-466Design of Experiment (DOE) Approach to Optimize...

Design of Experiment (DOE) Approach to Optimize Accuracy of Surface Roughness

Abstract:

This paper presents an investigation on the accuracy of average roughness (Ra) in three surface areas of specimen. For this study, we used two different probes of Mahr Surf XR20 which was MFW 250 tracing arm 6851804 (4.5mm) and tracing arm 6851806 (9.0mm). Full factorial design was used in the experiment plan. The normal probability graph, main effect and interaction plot had been analyzed by using MINITAB (software). The experiment result showed that the tracing arm 6851804 (4.5mm) consisted of small errors compared to the tracing arm 6851806 (9.0mm) based on the main effect plot and interaction plot analysis.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

4th Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering

View Preview

Info:

Periodical:

Applied Mechanics and Materials (Volumes 465-466)

Pages:

1224-1228

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.465-466.1224

Citation:

Cite this paper

Online since:

December 2013

Authors:

Ali Rafidah, A. Nurulhuda, Arshad Azrina, Yacob Suhaila, I.S. Anwar, A.W.M. Ikbar

Keywords:

Average Roughness (Ra), Coordinate Measuring Machine (CMM), Design of Experiment (DOE)

Export:

RIS, BibTeX

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Request Permissions

Permissions PLS:

Request Permissions

Сopyright:

Citation:

References

[1] D.C. Montgomery: Design and Analysis of Experiments, 6th ed., Wiley, New York, (1997).

Google Scholar

[2] L. M. Lander, L. M. Siewierski,W. J. Brittain, E. A. Vogler: A Systematic Comparison of Contact Angle Method, Langmuir, 1993, pp.2237-2239.

DOI: 10.1021/la00032a055

Google Scholar

[3] H. J. Pahk, K. Stout, L. Blunt: A Comparative Study on the Three-Dimensional Surface Topography for the Polished Surface of Femoral Head, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 16 (2000) 564-570.

DOI: 10.1007/s001700070046

Google Scholar

[4] C.Y. Poon and B. Bhushan: Comparison of surface roughness measurements by stylus profiler, AFM, and non-contact optical profiler", Wear, 190, 2008, pp.76-88.

DOI: 10.1016/0043-1648(95)06697-7

Google Scholar

[5] T.R. Thomas: Trends in surface roughness, International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture, 38, Issues 5-6, 1998, pp.405-411.

DOI: 10.1016/s0890-6955(97)00084-9

Google Scholar

[6] R. H. Myers and D. C. Montgomery: Response surface methodology, A Wiley-Interscience Publication. (2002).

Google Scholar

[7] S. H. Park: Design of Experiments, Minyoungsa. (2002).

Google Scholar

[8] Information on http: /www. minitab. co. kr.

Google Scholar