Effect of the Process Parameters on the Surface
Roughness during Magnetic Abrasive Finishing
Process on Ferromagnetic Stainless Steel work-
pieces
ABSTRACT
Study of new and cost effective finishing processes has always
been an area of keen interest to overcome the difficulties of
existing finishing process. Magnetic Abrasive Finishing
(MAF) is a process in which a mixture of non-ferromagnetic
abrasives and ferromagnetic iron particles is used to do
finishing operation with the aid of magnetic force. The iron
particles in the mixture are magnetically energized using a
magnetic field. The iron particles form a lightly rigid matrix
in which the abrasives are trapped. This is called Flexible
Magnetic Abrasive Brush (FMAB), which when given relative
motion against a metal surface, polishes that surface.
The major studies concerning MAF have been done regarding the
behaviors of the process under the effect of various parameters
like working gap, mesh number of abrasive, speed of relative
motion on cylindrical and flat work-pieces taking one type of
material, non-ferromagnetic or ferromagnetic only. But limited
comparative study by taking stainless steel with ferromagnetic
behavior has been done to analyze the surface roughness that is
generated during the process.
This paper has aim of development of Magnetic Abrasive
Finishing Process & studying the effect of the process
parameters (percent composition of iron powder, mesh
number of abrasive and current) on the surface roughness
during MAF of ferromagnetic S.S. work-piece material for
flat work-pieces. The results of the experiments are
statistically analyzed using design expert v.7 software for the
responses generated during the process.
In case of ferromagnetic work-piece, percent composition of
iron powder has more effect than the other parameters. With
increase in mesh size of abrasive, percent improvement in
surface roughness increases. With increase in current the
percent improvement in surface roughness value increases
much more than the other parameters, therefore effect of
applied current is seen to the most significant amongst all the
parameters.
Keywords: Magnetic abrasive finishing, Surface Roughness,
Mesh number, Stainless steel, current
I. INTRODUCTION
A magnetic abrasive finishing process is defined as a process by
which material is removed, in such a way that the surface
finishing and deburring is performed with the presence of a
magnetic field in the machining zone. Magnetic abrasive finishing
(MAF) has a magnetic field which assisted finishing process. The work
piece is kept between the two poles of a magnet.. The method was
originally introduced in the Soviet Union, with further fundamental
research in various countries including Japan. Nowadays, the study of
the magnetic field assisting finishing processes is being conducted at
industrial levels around the world
A. Working Principle
The working gap between the work piece and the magnet is
filled with magnetic Abrasive particles (MAP), composed of
ferromagnetic particles and abrasive powder. MAP is
prepared by sintering of ferromagnetic particles and abrasive
particles.The magnetic abrasive particles join each other
along the lines of magnetic force and form a flexible magnetic
abrasive brush (FMAB) between the work piece and the
magnetic pole .This brush behaves like a multi-point cutting
tool for finishing operation. When the magnetic N-pole is
rotating, the Magnetic Abrasive Finishing Brush (MAFB) also
rotates like a flexible grinding wheel and finishing is done
according to the forces acting on the abrasive particles. .
In external finishing of cylindrical surface, the cylindrical work
piece rotates between the magnetic poles, with the MAP filled in
both the gaps on either side (Fig 1). Whereas in internal finishing
of cylindrical surface, the work piece rotates between the
magnetic poles and the MAP .as shown in Figure 2. The magnetic
field generator can be either electromagnetic coils or permanent
magnets. The relative motion between the induced abrasive
particles of the FMAB and work piece generates the necessary
shearing action at the abrasivework-piece interface to remove
material from the work-piece in the form of miniature chips.
Fig1.External cylindrical finishing Fig 2.Internal cylindrical finishing
 II. LITERATURE REVIEW Proper deburring conditions are suggested to satisfy the
Change in the strength of magnetic field in the direction of the productivity and the accuracy. In addition to deburring,
line of magnetic force near the work-piece surface will actuate the efficiency influence to surface roughness is analyzed. To
magnetic abrasive particle. The effective way of changing the improve the surface roughness and purity, volume of powder,
force/finishing pressure and rigidity of MAFB is through the height of gap, inductor rotational frequency, feed velocity and
change in diameter D of magnetic abrasive particle. Hence, the method of coolant supply are analyzed and proved that
ferromagnetic particles of several times the diameter of diamond the continuous flow of coolant and the Fe powder without
abrasive d are mixed to form the magnetic abrasive brush. abrasive is effective for deburring and surface quality. [11]
MAF is affected by the material, shape and size of the work-piece,
and shape and size of the magnetic pole. Pressure increases with III. EXPERIMENTAL SET-UP
increase in flux density and decreases as the clearance gap Fundamental requirements of the experimental set-up are:
between tool & work-piece increases. Larger the particle size,
poorer the finishing (except for 50m particles) but higher is the A. Magnetization unit
stock removal which increases linearly with finishing time [1]. B. Electromagnet
The surface roughness is predicted as a function of finishing C. Magnet rotary motion unit
time by a model that has been derived from the removed D. Motion control unit.
volume of material. Thus, it is possible, from the surface- E. Work piece fixture, work piece size &
roughness model, to predict the time when existing scratches material
are completely removed [2]. The magnetic force acting on the
magnetic abrasive, controlled by the field at the finishing A. Magnetization Unit
area, is considered the primary influence on the abrasive Basic purpose of magnetization unit is to generate the
behavior against the inner surface of the work-piece. [3]. required magnetic field to assist the finishing process. Main
parts of magnetization unit are
With increase in working gap, the percentage improvement in surface D.C. Power supply
roughness increases initially, reaches a maximum value and then it Electromagnet
starts decreasing [4]. Removal of burrs in large surfaces with drilled To energize the electromagnet a constant voltage/current D.C.
holes using MAF shown that this method can be applied both for regulated power supply of output voltage from 0 to 30 V and
ferromagnetic and non-magnetic parts. This method can be improved output current from 0 to 5 A was used. By controlling the
as applied to new tasks of deburring [5]. induced current from D.C. power supply the generated
magnetic field can be controlled.
The finishing characteristics of unbonded magnetic abrasive B. Electromagnet
within cylindrical magnetic abrasive finishing. The unbonded A round flat faced electromagnet with diameter of 100 mm
magnetic abrasive is a mechanical mixture of Sic -abrasive and and height 57 mm was used for experimentation.
ferromagnetic particles with a SAE30 lubricant. Iron grit and Electromagnet has a centered N-Pole (diameter 42 mm),
steel grit, three particle sizes were prepared for both and were surrounded with a coil (thickness = 24 mm), further
used as ferromagnetic particles, each of them being mixed with surrounded by an outer S-Pole (Thickness=6mm). Other
1.2 and 5.5 m Sic abrasive, respectively. Results indicate that dimentions of Electromagnet are given in Table 1
steel grit is more suitable for magnetic abrasive finishing because
of its superior hardness and the polyhedron shape. However its TABLE I. Dimensions of Electromagnet
corrosion resistibility decreased on a surface that was finished via
steel grit mixed with SiC abrasive [6].Important parameters Dimensions
influencing the surface quality generated during the MAF were External Diameter of magnet 110 mm
identified as: (i) voltage (DC) applied to the electromagnet, (ii)
working gap, (iii) rotational speed of the magnet, and (iv) Height of magnet pole 55 mm
abrasive size (mesh number). [7]. Permissible current value 0 6 amp
Wire used for winding Copper
Efficient finishing of magnesium alloy is possible by the
process. The volume removed per unit time of magnesium Permissible required voltage 0 25 V
alloy is larger than that of other materials such as brass and Magnetic field intensity 0 1.2 T
stainless, that is, high-efficiency finishing could be achieved.
Micro-burr of magnesium alloy could be removed easily in a Diameter of north pole 42 mm
short time by the use of MAF [8]. Thickness of south pole 5 mm
MAF process creates micro scratches having width less than
0.5 m on the finished surface. Moreover, the surfaces have Thickness covered by the coil 24 mm
finished by the shearing of the peaks resulting in circular lays Material used for outer body shell EN 8
formed by the rotation of the FMAB. It shows that the
finished surface has fine scratches/micro-cuts which are Carbon Bush dimension 31.5 20 7.5 mm3
farther distant apart resulting in smoothened surface. But
these fine scratches would also disappear by using higher C. Magnet Rotary Motion Unit
mesh number (finer abrasive particles)[9]. To get the finished surface, it was necessary to
A new technique was developed to compare the performance get relative motion between FMAB and work piece. This unit was
of the magnetic abrasive powders and to find the powder that used to rotate the magnet and consequently to get the relative
is appropriate for finishing and deburring of drilled holes motion between work piece and FMAB. This facility already
placed on a plane steel surface [10]
exists in vertical milling machine available in our machine experimentation due to various practical difficulties . Therefore
tool lab. only three parameters were chosen for present study are-
D. Motion Control Unit
The machine is equipped with a precise motion control 1. Mesh size of the abrasive particles,
unit (MCU). The work piece can be easily and accurately 2. Current supplied
positioned to get the finished surface. There are three different 3. %age composition of iron and abrasive
lead screw attachments to accurately position the work piece with particles.
respect to the electromagnet in three mutually perpendicular
directions viz. X, Y, and Z, respectively. The work piece can be The ranges of the various parameters selected for MAF
controlled in X, Y and Z direction. The X and Y directions are process are shown in Table II and constant parameters for the
automatic controlled and Z direction is manually controlled. present study are given in Table III

E. Fixture and Work Piece

Magnetic stainless steel was chosen as work piece material. TABLE II. Variable parameters and their ranges
The work piece was made of rectangular shaped. The length
of the work piece was 100.6 mm which is slightly greater than
Parameter Values
the diameter of the electromagnet which was 100 mm . It was
taken slightly more deliberately because, in this case there
was not chance of breaking of flexible brush phenomenon Mesh size of the abrasive particle 30 # - 200 #
during finishing. During experiments the work pieces were
mounted on the table with a base plate without the fixture. Current(amp) 0.2 - 1.0

IV. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE Percent composition of iron in MAPs 60 % - 90 %

The experiments were conducted according to following steps-

TABLE III. Fixed parameters and their values
1. Work pieces were initially ground by surface grinder
to give most same initial surface roughness value.
Parameter Value
2. After the grinding process, the work pieces were manually
cleaned by acetone to remove the foreign particles. Initial Gap 2.5 mm
surface roughness values were measured by using
Telesurf analyzer with least count of 0.001m. Size of iron particles 80#

3. To conduct the surface finish experiments, the work piece Abrasives used in MAP Al2O3
was mounted on the table of MAF machine with a base
plate. The work piece was made parallel to the Percent of oil in MAP 2%
electromagnet using a dial indicator (least count-0.01mm)
to maintain proper gap between them. The work piece Finishing time 12 min
was made parallel in both X and Y direction. The position
of work piece in XY plane was kept in such a way that the
center of the electromagnet coincide with the center of the
Work-pieces Flat stainless steel
work piece.
4. Working gap between electromagnet and work piece B. Response Characteristics
was maintained by a filler gauge and this gap was The effect of selected process parameters was studied on
filled with the MAP. The amount of MAP depends on the response characteristic of MAF process.
the working gap. Percent by weight method was used
to calculate the amount of MAP in the working gap. The surface roughness was measured at near centre of work-piece
5. The current to the electromagnet was supplied and got using Digital Surf Analyzer CY510 having least count 0.001m.
it energized and abrasive powder fill between the The average of Surface finish (Ra) values was calculated and the
electromagnet and work piece making FMAB. By percentage improvement in roughness was estimated as:
giving rotation to the magnet, this FMAB performs
the actual finishing operation. Ra = (Initial roughness final roughness) 100
6. After completing the finishing operation, work piece
was again cleaned manually using acetone and final Initial roughness
surface roughness value was measured.
C. Observations:
A. Selection of parameters for experimentation Design data is obtained by using the DX 7 software. By putting
As per the data given by various reserchers, various parameters the range values of the process parameters we obtained the
such as Type and size of abrasive particles, Percentage standard and the run denotes the run which we have to perform
composition of iron particles and abrasive particles, Size of iron i.e. for 1st experiment we have to perform the experiment using
particles , RPM of magnet, Finishing time etc effect the surface 12th rows parameters. Here the response value taken is (Ra) in
roughness produced, but all of the above cannot be taken for Table IV.
 TABLE IV:-Observations (from 63 to 166), the %age improvement in surface roughness
(Ra) increases.
Factor Factor Factor
Response
1 2 3
1
Std. Run A: B: C: Iron
Ra
Size Current powder
(gm)
(mesh) (amp) (%age)
1 12 62.26 0.35 64.05 28.21

2 11 160.32 0.35 64.05 35.23

3 20 62.26 0.62 64.05 20.01

4 3 160.32 0.62 64.05 28.3

5 14 62.26 0.35 75.95 23.25

6 18 160.32 0.35 75.95 21.90

7 17 62.26 0.62 75.95 35.73

Fig .1: -Effect of % of iron powder & Abrasive size on Ra
8 10 160.32 0.62 75.95 35.43
Fig 2 represent (1) as the value of Current in the FMAB increases
9 6 28.00 0.50 70.00 21.61 (from 0.3 to 0.6 amp) resulting increase in the %age improvement
in surface roughness (Ra).(2) as the abrasive size increases
10 2 200 0.50 70.00 34.75
(from 63 to 166), the %age improvement in surface roughness
11 15 112.00 0.30 70.00 26.01 (Ra) increases.

12 5 112.00 1.0 70.00 28.23

13 9 112.00 0.50 60.00 24.08

14 1 112.00 0.50 90.00 23.13

15 7 112.00 0.50 70.00 20.88

16 19 112.00 0.50 70.00 20.01

17 16 112.00 0.50 70.00 19.55

18 4 112.00 0.50 70.00 19.45

19 8 112.00 0.50 70.00 18.12

Fig .2:- Effect of % of Current & Abrasive size on Ra
20 13 112.00 0.50 70.00 18.22

It can be seen in Fig 3,(1) as the value of iron %age in the

V. RESULTS & DISCUSSIONS FMAB increases (64 to 76) resulting increase in the %age
improvement in surface roughness (Ra). (2) as the current
It is not always necessary that all the input process increases (0.38 to 0.62), the %age improvement in surface
parameters have significant contribution in surface response. roughness (Ra) increases.
Some of the parameters may be very much significant than other
parameters. In Central rotatable Composite Design, the
combination of the input parameters in actual experiments is
such that only one experiment is conducted at extreme value for
each variable. Therefore it is not much worthy to do analysis at
extreme values to see the effectiveness of input variables.
Moreover in central run experiments, same experiments are
repeated many times so they also cannot be taken to see the effect.

From the design data usingDesign expert v.7 software,

response curves were drawn.

From Fig 1, (1) the %age of iron powder in the FMAB increases
(from 64% to 76%) resulting increase in the %age improvement
in surface roughness (Ra). (2) as the abrasive size increases
Fig .3:- Effect of % of Iron powder & Current on Ra
 VI. CONCLUSIONS [11]. S.L. Ko, Yu M. Baron and J.I. Park , Micro deburring for
precision parts using MAF, Journal of Materials Processing
Technology ,Volumes 187-188, 12 June 2007, Pages 19-25
All the three individual parameters, mesh size of abrasive,
current and percent composition of Fe powder in MAP have
significant effect on the surface roughness in ferromagnetic work
piece Fe percent has higher contribution to Ra. In case of
ferromagnetic work piece if the Fe percent in MAP is high then,

The conclusions regarding %age Improvement in Surface

finish are as follows

1. Due to this the rigidity of FMAB will be more in

ferromagnetic case and it will make more
contribution to finishing process. Current has high
contribution in Ra .

2. In surface finish experiments % of iron powder is

the most significant factor for work-piece material.
3. In case of ferromagnetic work-piece, percent
composition of iron powder has more effect than the
mesh size of abrasives.
4. With increase in mesh size of abrasive, percent
improvement in surface roughness value also increases.
5. With increase in current of power supply the percent
improvement in surface roughness value increases.

References:

[1]. Jain V.K, Advance Machining Processes Allied

Publishers Pvt. Ltd. 2002
[2]. Jeong-Du Kim , Min-Seog Choi, Simulation for the prediction
of surface-accuracy in magnetic abrasive machining, Journal of
Materials Processing Technology 53 (1995) pp 630- 642
[3]. Hitomi Yamaguchi*, Takeo Shinmura, Study of an internal
magnetic abrasive finishing using a pole rotation system
Discussion of the characteristic abrasive behavior, Journal
of the International Societies for Precision Engineering and
Nanotechnology 24 (2000) 237244
[4]. Jain V.K, Kumar P., Behera P.K., Jayswal S.C., Effect of
working gap and circumferential speed on the performance
of magnetic abrasive finishing process, Wear, Vol. 250
(2001), pp.384-390.
[5]. Yuri M.Baron ,Sung Lim Ko, Elena Repnikova,
Experimental Verification of Deburring by Magnetic
Abrasive Finishing Method, (2001)
[6]. Geeng-Wei Chang, Biing-Hwa Yan ,Tzong Hsu , Study on
cylindrical magnetic abrasive finishing using unbonded
magnetic abrasives, International Journal of Machine Tools
and Manufacture
Volume 42, Issue 5 , April 2002, Pages 575-583
[7]. Singh Dhirendra K., Jain V. K. and Raghuram V.,
Parametric study of magnetic abrasive finishing process,
Journal of Materials Processing Technology Volume 149,
Issues 1-3 , 10 June 2004, Pages 22-29
[8]. Shaohui Yin,Takeo Shinmura, Vertical vibration-assisted
magnetic abrasive finishing and deburring for magnesium
alloy, International Journal of Machine Tools &
Manufacture 44 (2004) 12971303
[9]. Singh Dhirendra K., Jain V. K. and Raghuram V, R. Komanduri,
Analysis of surface texture generated by a flexible magnetic
abrasive brush, 2005 Published by Elsevier
[10]. Y. M. Baron , S. -L. Ko and J. I. Park, Characterization of
the Magnetic Abrasive Finishing Method and Its
Application to Deburring, Key Engineering Materials Vols.
291-292 (2005) pp. 291-296