Comparison OF Lubricant Properties in Minimum Quantity Lubrication Machining
Comparison OF Lubricant Properties in Minimum Quantity Lubrication Machining
LUBRICANT PROPERTIES
IN MINIMUM QUANTITY
LUBRICATION
MACHINING
A power point presentation by
1. A.Tejaswara Rao
DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING (19A55A0322)
2. P.Sai venkata narasimha rao
(18A51A03A0)
ADITYA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT 3. G.Balu
(An Autonomous Institution)
(19A55A0316)
Approved by AICTE, Permanently affiliated to JNTU, Kakinada,
Accredited by NBA (AICTE) & NAAC (UGC) u/s 2(f) & 12(b)
4. M.Sainadh
K.KOTTURU, TEKKALI-532201, SRIKAKULAM Dist. (AP). (18A51A0389)
BATCH: 2018-2022
Under the guidance of
Contents:
• Objective
• Abstract
• Introduction
• Literature Survey
• Approach
• Application of the Project
• Expected Conclusions
Objective :
Comparison of Lubricant properties in minimum quantity lubriaction machining and
Reduction of tool wear and thermal stresses at the tool point.
A. Biodegraded esters
B. Renewable acid esters
C. Naturally derived synthesis
D. Vegetable based
E. Vegetable based + EP
F. Biodegraded esters
G. Naturally occuring fatty oils
H. Synthetic esters
I. Vegetable based + EP
Types of MQL delivery system
There are two major delivery methods for MQL - one is an external application and
the other is an internal application. In the case of the external application, a mixture
of compressed air and oil is fed via an external nozzle to the cutting zone from a
chamber. In contrast to this, there are two possible methods for the external
application of oil and air or aerosol.
Ejector nozzle: The compressed air and oil are supplied to the ejector separately and
mixing occurs just after the nozzle.
Conventional nozzle: The aerosol is prepared in an external atomizer and then
transported to a conventional nozzle.
The internal delivery system of MQL is also known as a through-tool application,
where the
delivery of MQL is made through the spindle. There are two different
configurations available
Single-channel: The oil and compressed air are mixed before being
suppliedthrough the cutting tool to the workpiece/tool zone.
Dual-channel: The oil and compressed air are delivered in different
channels and are only mixed before the holder of the cutting tool.
Advantages of MQL
Financial Advantages:
• Due to omission of supply and disposal of coolant, high savings are possible.
• after optimization of processes, a higher tool life can be expected and also
reduce the machine cycle upto 30 % .
• There will be no expenditure for control and care of coolant.
Ecological advantages:
• No used emulsions will accumulate.
• Accidents due to large quantities of leaking coolant are avoided.
• Airway or skin diseases caused by coolants can be avoided.
Advancements in MQL
Although MQL is proven to be a good alternative for traditional flood cooling, its
cooling and lubricating effects are still in question. Therefore, researchers have
been exploring ways to enhance the effectiveness of MQL by improving both its
cooling and lubricating effects
Literature Survey :
• Boubekri & Shaikh, 2015 reported that the application of MQL based synthetic
ester as the cutting fluid was more efficient for the machining process as it reduced
the cutting temperature, cutting force, tool-chip contact length and produced better
chip thickness compared to dry machining technique.
• Madhukar et al, 2016 studied about the minimum quantity lubrication and
reported that MQL does generate a significant amount of mist compared to flood
cooling. However, minimum quantity lubrication, machining is safe for both
operators and environment, particularly when vegetable oil based lubricants are
used.
• Boswell Islam, 2012 Concluded that air cooling with the use of small amount of
vegetable oils is not a totally dry process it is quite close and therefore is a
sustainable. It also studied the effects of three parameters like cutting speed, feed
and depth of cut upon surface finish during milling operation and found that the
Approach:
• Nine MQL fluid test samples, named A to I, were acquired from six suppliers, and
their known physical properties are There is a large range in the viscosity of the
fluids (8.8 to 69 centistokes) and in the flash points (182 to 280°C). Fluid E is the
same as fluid D except for the addition of a sulfurized EP component.
• In this study, fluid B is used as the reference fluid to test against other commercial
MQL fluids since it is currently the standard fluid used in MQL machining tests at
General Motors. The evaluation metrics are divided into three groups:
• Physical properties: including density, viscosity, flash point, and thermal
conductivity. Since thermal conductivity information was not provided by the
supplier, it was measured in this study to complete the physical properties.
• Bench testing: Bench testing includes wettability, tribological properties and
mist characterization. Wettability was determined by the sessile drop method.
Tribological properties included lubricity and EP properties, measured with tapping
torque and pin-and-vee block methods, respectively. Mist characterization was the
measurement of the mist size and concentration generated by each fluid in the
machine enclosure.