4 Review

This article was downloaded by: [University of Otago]
On: 22 December 2014, At: 01:11

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Materials and Manufacturing Processes

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/lmmp20
A Review on Minimum Quantity Lubrication for

Machining Processes
a a b
Vishal S. Sharma , GurRaj Singh & Knut Sørby
a
Department of Industrial and Production Engineering, Dr B R Ambedkar National Institute
of Technology, Jalandhar, India
b
Department of Production and Quality Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and
Technology, Trondheim, Norway
Accepted author version posted online: 16 Dec 2014.
Click for updates
To cite this article: Vishal S. Sharma, GurRaj Singh & Knut Sørby (2014): A Review on Minimum Quantity Lubrication for
Machining Processes, Materials and Manufacturing Processes, DOI: 10.1080/10426914.2014.994759
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10426914.2014.994759
Disclaimer: This is a version of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service
to authors and researchers we are providing this version of the accepted manuscript (AM). Copyediting,
typesetting, and review of the resulting proof will be undertaken on this manuscript before final publication of
the Version of Record (VoR). During production and pre-press, errors may be discovered which could affect the
content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal relate to this version also.
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
A Review on Minimum Quantity Lubrication for Machining Processes
Vishal S Sharma1, GurRaj Singh1, Knut Sørby2

1
Department of Industrial and Production Engineering, Dr B R Ambedkar National
Institute of Technology, Jalandhar, India, 3Department of Production and Quality
Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway
Corresponding author: Email: sharmvs@nitj.ac.in
Abstract
Downloaded by [University of Otago] at 01:12 22 December 2014
In the pursuit towards achieving dry cutting, air machining, MQL and cryogenically
cooled machining are the stepping stones. Nevertheless, machining is always
accompanied by certain difficulties and hence none of these methods has provided a
complete solution. Hence, this article reviews various MQL methods used by various
machining processes for different materials. It also highlights the future work directions
for research in this area.
KEYWORDS: Cutting, fluids, MQL, machining
INTRODUCTION
Industry is seeking methods for reducing consumption of lubricants during metal cutting
operations because of economical and ecological pressures. The overall objective of
international standard 14001 is to protect environment in balance with socio-economic
requirements. The industries signing up for these standards will need to quantify and
prove reduction in the major five elements, namely, harmful air emissions, water
1
contamination, waste management, land contamination and natural resoursec and raw
material preservation [1,2,3,4,5].
Lubrication and heat removal are the basic ways to keep the tool wear under control. It
has been proved that flood cooling, though very effective at lower cutting speeds, gets
ineffective at higher speeds because the amount of heat generation is more and the
coolant cannot reach the critical areas (tool work piece interface), hence the interface
cannot be cooled. Thus, MQL comes out as another alternative that can be studied in
detail so as to reach the desired objective.
The goal of any machining operation is to lower the machining costs by improving
quality and productivity. This is possible if machining is carried out at maximum cutting
parameters and at the same time be able to achieve enhanced TL. Another main focus is
to have minimum part rejections and minimum downtime. Particularly in machining, a lot
of parameters and their interaction with each other affect the cutting performance e.g.
cutting fluids (type, application method, application quantity, flowrate, pressure etc);
cutting tool ( tool material, hardness, tool coating, tool size, tool length, number of edges,
angles, nose radius etc); machine tool ( rigidity, power, type of tool holder, tool clamping
etc); workpiece (material, hardness, size etc); machining parameters (speed, feed, depth
of cut, type of operation) [6].
Although there have been many review articles on this topic but this attempt has its own
merits. A maticulous effort has been made to study four different materials on four
2
machining processes. The main strength of the study lies in the tabular and graphical
representation. Moreover, it also helps in the research being carried out by colleagues in
this area. It highlights the operational parameters that have been left untouched and can
be proved very useful for any future studies in this field.
The paper has been organized in a lucid manner. It starts with an introduction, followed
by separate heading, discussing about the cutting fluids, MQL technique and the
machining of the various materials and processes namely, turning, milling, drilling, and
grinding. Each review section is followed by a conclusion summing up the main points
that may be useful.
Cutting Fluids
Cutting fluids play an important role in increasing the productivity. During machining,
cutting fluids are employed to bring the cooling effect, lubrication effect and to take
away formed chip from the cutting zone [7].
The cooling effect plays an important role in reducing the effect of temperature on cutting
tool and machined workpiece. The lubricant helps to remove the chips in a better way
from the rake surface as a result of a low coefficient of friction. This may cause less built-
up edge on the tool and may also provide better surface finish. Moreover it takes away
the chip generated swiftly from cutting tool and machined surface of the work piece.
Furthermore, a certain amount of heat is taken away by the chips [8,9].
3
Cutting fluids can be classified into four categories: cutting oil, soluble oils (emulsified
oils, emulsions), synthetic (chemical) fluids and semi-synthetic (semi-chemical) fluids.
Cutting oils are also called neat oil or straight cutting oil as they are derived from
petroleum, animal or vegetable origin. They are used at low temperature and low speed
cutting operations. Soluble oils are a basically oil droplets suspended in water. They are
manufactured by mixing oil with emulsifier agent in water (which increases the stability
of the emulsion). It contains base oil, emulsifier and other additives. Base oil could be
mineral oil or vegetable oil, other additives include neutralization agents, lubrication
additives such as antiwear, EP additives, biocides, fungicides and foam inhibitors could
be used. Emulsifiers disperse the oil in water in order to make a stable oil-in-water
emulsion [10]. The water in emulsions can cause rust, bacterial growth and evaporation
losses. EP additives like sulphur, chlorine and phosphorous based chemical are used
under EP conditions. EP reacts chemically and form solid lubricant layer between cutting
fluid and the metal surface. Thus this film possesses low shear strength and good
antiweld properties. Hence EP additives can reduce friction and wear effectively.
Emulsions process allows reduction of heat and hence higher cutting speeds in machining
could be achieved. Moreover, it can be diluted with water to cut down the cost, risk of
fire and lower rate of oil misting. The major drawback associated with emulsions is the
fungi and bacteria growth which increases health hazards and reduces the service life of
cutting fluids. So the use of chemical additives becomes necessary in order to have
bacterial growth control in cutting fluids, but they are dangerous for both the operators
and environment. Mineral based cutting agents are extracted from petroleum.
Furthermore, mineral oils have two types, paraffinic and naphthenic. They have poor
4
biodegradability thus may pollute the environment. Synthetic and semi-synthetic cutting
fluids are normally mixed with water and various chemicals. The added chemicals tend to
prevent rust, improve lubrication and reduce surface tension. Synthetic based cutting
agents tend to have good coolant properties but their lubricant properties are less than that
of other cutting fluid types. Semi-synthetic cutting fluids are combinations of synthetic
cutting fluids and emulsions. Semi-synthetic cutting agents tend to comprise less oil (2–
30 % oil) whereas synthetic cutting fluids contain no oil. The relative advantages and
disadvantages of different types of cutting fluids are presented in Table 1.
In the recent time the inclination of many researchers has shifted to vegetable based
cutting fluids [11]. Vegetable oils have good lubricity properties, higher flash point,
better boiling point and as a result there is less loss from misting. They have a higher
viscosity index but thermal and oxidation stability of vegetable oils are limited.
Type of lubricants for different machining processes were quite closely studied by
Baradie (1996). He provided cutting fluids overview, and further presented the
classification and composition of cutting fluids. In addition the issues of cleaning metal
cutting technology, concentrating on disposal of cutting fluids and their recycling was
also presented.
The choice of suitable cutting fluid is of prime importance as it could affect machining
performance (TL, CF, surface roughness, power consumption etc.) and the selection is
based upon parameters such as workpiece used, material of the cutting tool and type of
5
metal cutting process. The cutting fluids containing sulfur and chlorine additives should
not be used with nickel-based alloys and titanium, respectively. In general cutting fluids
with high lubricity ability are generally used in low-speed machining such as screw
cutting on difficult-to-cut materials, whereas cutting fluids with high cooling ability are
generally used in high-speed machining [6].
The cutting fluids used during machining can affect the health of operator negatively as
the latter can form mist owing to high pressure and temperature. This causes involuntary
inhaling of these particles by the operator, thus causing severe health issues. Mist, fumes,
smoke and odors can even cause severe skin reactions. Physical contact with cutting fluid
may cause dermatological problems for the operators. The machine tool components need
to be cleaned to remove any cutting fluid residue which may require additional time and
cost. Furthermore most of the cutting fluids used in machining are petroleum origin and
the disposal of petroleum-based cutting fluids cause water contamination, air and soil
pollutions.
Shokrani et al. (2012) in their work reviewed machining of hard, non-homogeneous and
ductile materials. Further they identified the material properties that cause trouble in their
machining. They are defined as “difficult-to-machine” materials based upon high CT and
short TL criteria. They could not find anyproper clasification of the cutting fluids. Many
types of coolants are utilized in the industry [15,16]. But certain issues related to health
and the environment and factors related to the cost and disposal also exist [17,6]. The
methods that support cutting are dry, cryogenic and MQL cutting, but none has proved to
6
provide cure all solution. This forms the motivation for the current article, where a review
of MQL and its variants applied to various machining processes have been carried out.
MINIMUM QUANTITY LUBRICATION
The conventional system of applying the coolant is flood coolant system. In this a bulk jet
of the cutting fluid is applied on the cutting zone thus making it highly uneconomical
moreover there are problems concerned to the reachability of the cutting fluid. The
alternative approach of mist lubrication has proven to be a better alternative in which a
mixture of air and cutting fluid is applied on to the cutting zone. It has a better
reachability as a result of the high pressure while the flow rate is 30 ml/h. This quantity is
very small as compared to flood cooling. The required air pressure varies from 2 to 6 bar
[18,19,20].
MACHINING OF MATERIALS
Some of the issues related to machining of Inconel, Titanium and Al materials are
presented in this section.
Machining Of Inconel
These materials possess a very high temperature strength alongside good corrosion
resistance thus finding use in the aerospace industry. Due to such hard nature they are
accompanied by certain problems such as a poor TL as well as strength. Notch wear is
another problem encountered as repeated built up edge (BUE) is formed and removed.
7
This is also accompanied by the induction of residual stresses that takes place as a result
of the metallurgical transformations.
The machining of Inconel alloys could be carried out by cemented carbide tools (K20
grade) at lower speeds of 20-30 m/min. At higher speeds in the range 100 m/min it is
machined using coated carbide tools but only under dry conditions. Oxidation resistance
is of prime importance in machining these materials and thus the PVD (TiAlN) coatings
are most reliable for this purpose. Besides this they also possess properties like high
temperature chemical stability, low thermal conduction and high hot hardness [21]. In
case of more higher speeds in the range of 200-700 m/min, ceramic tools are being used
but they are prone to thermal cracking. The Al2O3-TiC is also used to machine inconel at
higher speeds.
Thakur et al (2010) performed a study on how the turning parameters effected the surface
characteristics of inconel. The inserts used for cutting were made up of tungsten carbide.
Specific cutting pressure was found out to be an important parameter besides the
microstructural alteration and even the MH were evaluated. The micro-structural and MH
analysis showed that even the work hardening could be controlled by optimizing the
cutting parameters [22].
Machining Of Titanium
Titanium along with its alloys posesses immense specific strength that imparts them
properties like corrosion resistance and fracture resistance thus making them a good
8
candidate for aerospace applications. It has wide engineering applications and is available
in many forms. The cost of these materials is somewhat high as compared to their other
variants because of the difficult extraction processes and even problem in melting. In
order to reduce cost they are produced by methods such as castings, isothermal forging or
powder metallurgy. Even these parts also require some kind of machining (finishing).
Titanium and its alloys are difficult to machine because the chips produced are very thin
as a result of the small area of contact of the tool. Also the thermal conductivity of
titanium and its alloys is very low while the stresses produced are very high because of
the low area of contact, this produces a very high cutting temperature.
Titanium and its alloys are highly reactive to the tool materials, especially at higher
temperatures. Many problems in machining exist while machining these alloys.
Moreover, these alloys also have a very high reactivity with interstitial oxygen and
nitrogen which inturn leads to hardening. This hardening causes increase in the tool wear,
making the machining process very uneconomical. Machine tool chatter is yet another
problem encountered while machining titanium because of its low modulus of elasticity
[23]. Ezugwu and Wang (1997) tried to optimize the machining process of titanium and
its alloys. The main step that they laid stress was to eliminate the grinding process that
would lead to improved machinability as well as reduce the machining cost. For this they
suggested that CBN and diamond tools to be used for the finishing of these alloys. They
also stressed the use of straight tungsten carbide cutting tools for machining these alloys
as compared to the CVD coated or creamic tools as they are less reactive and posess a
better thermal conductivity [24].
9
Machining Of Aluminium
Al alloys are most machinable of the common materials. The low melting point of the
material and the highest coefficients of expansion along with relative softness and
elasticity make it necessary to dissipate the generated heat. Otherwise, it is difficult to
maintain tolerances of the workpiece. Al alloys normally have significant amounts of Si
causing them to be adhesive, promoting rapid heat generation resulting in chip welding
and built-up-edge [25]. When compared to the other materials, the machining of Al
alloys is much easies as it’s a comparatively soft material, thus resulting in a longer TL
and much reduced CF. But in addition to these peoperties, for a satisfactory outcome the
other factors that also have to be fulfilled are the problems of material adhesion as well as
the BUE formation that shortens the TL and causes other machining problems. Thus, a
properly optimised tool geometry as well as the machining parameters are highly
recommended for the machining of Al and its alloys in order to achieve proper
results[26].
MACHINING USING MQL: TURNING
Turning is a process that consists of the tool and a stiff tool bit that traces a helical tool
path when the workpiece revolves. It is the machining process for cylindrical items [27].
Thakur et al (2010) attempted to improve the machinability of the inconel alloy by using
the MQL process. They optimized the various parameters like pressure, feed, cutting
speed, frequency of pulses and the direction of application. The optimum values found
10
for various parameters were 13 MPa, 0.05 mm/min, 40 m/min, 300 pulses/min and
inclined in the direction of the cutting fluid. In an another study Thakur et al (2009)
performed experimentation on Inconel 718 and proved that MQL could be used to
perform machining of these super alloys furthermore, the optimal cutting parameters
within the experimental parameters range [28]. They also presented correlations and
confirmation tests for the flank wear. The scope of the current study is rather limited as
only the tool wear has been studied, which could be extended taking into account the
surface roughness and temperature measurements. Also from table 1, Che Haron et al
(2010) also performed turning of Inconel and studied the surface integrity using a coated
carbide tool and thus evaluating the various parameters. Topographic study on turning
surface indicated that surface roughness increased proportionately with feedrate.
Microstructure analysis elucidated that plastic deformation occurred during high cutting
speed and the deformation direction was parallel to cutting direction. Higher values of
MH were obtained at top machine surface which gradually reduced to base material
hardness between 320 HV and 280 HV [29]. Inconel (refer Table1) was machined by
Vasu and Reddy (2011) under MQL (with nanoparticles). They found that SR,
temperature, CF, and TW lowered for MQL as compared to dry or wet machining [30].
The major noticable point about the paper seems to be the range of speed while
performing the experiments, it is towards the lower side. Experiments were conducted on
the machining of Inconel 718. The objective of the study was reduction of production
cost and environmental safety. Coated carbide tools and an upswing in the speed proved
out to be the leading factors in achieving the target. During the comparison of the residual
stresses , it was found out that tensile stress could be controlled by using a lubricant,
11
although its effect could be reduced by increasing the cutting speed [31]. Investigations
were made in all the three methods of cooling and for both continuous and interrupted
types for Ti6Al4V by using FEM to simulate its deformation process. It was found that in
continuous cutting, dry cutting was effective at reduced cutting parameters. MQL gave
better results at higher feed rates and speeds as well as for interrupted cooling. Thus,
MQL is a more suitable cooling lubricant than flood cooling [32]. Liu et al (2010)
worked to prove that dry machining and MQL could be the most suitable processes for
machining titanium. Tool coating was one key factor to realize high speed machining and
green manufacturing. It was observed that (nc-AlTiN)/(a-Si3N4) tool only underwent an
adhesive wear while the (nc-AlCrN)/ (a-Si3N4) tool underwent all forms of wear. The
wear rate for (nc-AlTiN)/(a-Si3N4) tool was also found out to be lower resulting in a
prolonged TL [33]. Turning experiments were also performed for titanium alloys under
MQL condition. Vortex tube in the MQL setup was used to help in the cooling of the
compressed air. They evaluated processing efficiency, CF and SR. They reported feed
rate as a vital factor for affecting SR and CF. Results of MQL were found out to be in
between dry cutting and flood cutting. CF obtained in MQL cutting were a little larger
than those in flood cutting [34]. Aluiminium turning was carried out by Shashidhara and
Jayaram (2013) under MQL conditions (modified versions of the cutting oils) and they
measured CF. They stated that the vegetable oil Jatropha curcas gave best results while
machining. They also stated that, EJME (epoxidized Jatrophamethyl ester) as a better
cutting fluid for machining aluminium as compared to other fluids [35]. The parameter
selection is very good based upon the high input variations. For further improvement in
12
the results, the same experiments could be conducted for coolants such as vegetable oils
and the results could be compared.
Turning of steel has been carried out by many researchers in the past (Refer Table 2).
Attanasio et al (2006) achieved success in proving that MQL gave a better TL when
applied to the tool flank as compared to when applied to tool rake [37]. A two variant
system has been used that gave a linear trend in the results. A three variant system may
give different results although the number of experiments may increase marginally. The
same studies could also be done for other materials as well. Li and Liang (2006) proved
that MQL had a dominant effect on the CT and also helped in reducing the TW. It was
also reported that MQL reduced the tangential cutting force as well [38]. A large number
of experiments were performed on MQL by turning steel samples at a large number of
combinations of speed and feed. Uncoated carbide inserts were used for this purpose.
Important factors such as CT were found to be reduced while the dimensional accuracy
improved by using MQL [39]. Another series of experiments studied the effect of MQL
by vegetable oil on CT, SR, DD and TW while turning steel at different combinations by
using uncoated carbide inserts. It was seen that the dimensional accuracy improved while
significant reduction was noted in TW, SR and CT [40]. The best part of the above
studies was the variation of the cutting speeds and the DOC has been varied properly as
well. But the MQL parameters such as pressure and the flow rate could be varied. Dhar et
al (2007) conducted experiments to compare the performance of MQL and dry
lubrication in AISI-1040 steel. The results showed reduction in the friction and the BUE
formation. Betterment in the chip and tool interface was noticed while the cutting zone
13
temperatures saw reduction [41]. In another study MQL was proved to be a feasible
alternative to the conventional cutting fluid. Variations in cutting force, CT, CTh and
surface roughness under different machining conditions were studied. A reduction was
observed in the tool-chip interface temperature by 20 to 30%, CF by 5 % to 12%, CTh up
to 12 to 17% over dry turning while the surface finish improved [42]. The variation in the
input parameters has been done very nicely but the depth of cut of 0.4 mm was on the
lower side. Choosing a depth of cut around 1 mm would have given more meaningful
results along with variations in the MQL parameters. Ali et al (2011) compared Dry and
MQL, measured CTh ratio, CT, CF, TW, and surface roughness. It was observed that
CTh ratio had an upward trend with an upward variation of speed and feed values. CF
witnessed a downward trend as a result of the high velocity MQL jet that inturn reduced
the chip load. Another favourable point observed was the reduction in TW and
improvement in the surface finish [43]. Sharma and Sachdeva (2012) evaluated
machining under MQL, flood cooling and dry conditions in terms of TW and surface
roughness. The turning experiments on mild steel using coated carbide tool indicated that
MQL was a better option as compared to other two cooling conditions [44]. Experimental
study was carried out on steel samples for turning using the flood cooling, MQL cooling
and pulverization. In order to carry out the study, high pressure jets of the cutting fluid
were used and applied to different regions of the cutting zone or the cutting tool. The
results proved that an application of the fluid jet to the tool chip interface let to reduction
in TW as well as the CF while the TL witnessed an upward trend [45]. Observationswere
also made on the surface properties after turning AISI 316L steel and compared the
results for dry and MQL processes. The influence of variation in the cutting parameters
14
on factors such as SR, CF and defects on the surface was shown and a regression analysis
of the process was performed in which SR was taken as a function of cutting zone
cooling and lubrication conditions. Finally, it was concluded that by proper selection of
the vital parameters, results of MQL and dry cutting could be comparable to the flood
cutting [46]. The studies on tool wear and tool life could also be done following the same
parameters and using different materials. Gordana et al (2013) suggested MQL as a good
alternative for conventional machining processes. They studied carbon steel samples for
turning process by varying the various machining parameters, and output parameters
were CF, SR, TW, TL, and chip shape [1]. Cica et al (2013) performed turning on carbon
steel samples and compared the conventional, MQL and HPJAM techniques and took CF
as a response parameter. It was found lower in both cases as compared to the
conventional machining process. CT was also found lowered for MQL process as a result
of the fragmentation of the fluid that led to better chip-tool and work-tool interaction
[47].
Thus, the turning of the inconel alloys at lower speeds could be carried out by cemented
carbide (K20 grade) tools, while for the higher cutting speeds in dry condition it could be
performed by using the coated carbide tools. Straight tungsten carbide could be used for
the machining of titanium alloys, as the CVD coated carbides and ceramics react with
titanium.
The use of nano particles along with MQL is recommended for Inconel alloys. The use of
a vortex tube can provide cool air which can further enhance the effectiveness of MQL
15
while turning of Titanium. Furthermore, results of MQL turning of Inconel alloys were
intermediate between dry cutting and flood cutting. MQL was effective for turning of
Aluiminium. Turning steel alloys with carbide and coated carbide tools have been studied
well. Most of the authors have indicated adequate betterment in performance with MQL
machining compared to dry machining, more meaningful results could have been
obtained if it was also compared with flood machining (just a few existing studies). It was
found that MQL primarily reduced the CT, which enhanced the chip-tool interaction, thus
improving the tool life and reducing CF. Lesser loss at the tool tip and lesser wear led to
improved surface properties. From the review, it is very much evident that MQL is a
better process for machining of steel samples providing better results.
MACHINING USING MQL: MILLING
Table 4 shows the information of various researches carried out on the milling process.
Zhang et al (2012) machined inconel 718 using both dry cutting as well as MCQL
technique, where a mist of vegetable oil and cryogenic air was applied on the cutting
zone. TW and CF were the output parameters. It was reported that TW occurred as a
result of severe chipping of the cutting edge of the workpiece. MCQL was observed to
give a better TL, which was as much as 1.57 times when compared to that of the dry
machining. While observing the CF, again MCQL showed lower values as compared to
the dry systems, giving credit to the lowered frictional forces at the various interfaces as a
result of the lubrication effect of the vegetable oil [48]. The work done is having a huge
scope of further developments as more speed feed combinations could be used along with
the application of various optimization techniques. Machining of titanium was carried out
16
using dry cutting, flood cooling, and MQL techniques. Input parameters such as speed,
feed, depth of cut, tool load were primarily taken into account. TL and CF values were
observed and compared. It was observed that in case of MQL, lower values of TL and CF
were obtained when compared to the dry cutting, and the values were also comparable to
those of the flood cooling systems. It can be interpreted that MQL has a potential to
replace the flood cooling system on account of its cost factor as the need of cooling was
fulfilled by well focussed coolant jets at the cutting zone rather than flooding the whole
area, thus saving huge amount of cost [49]. Liu et al (2011) performed machining tests
for titanium using MQL process. They varied MQL parameters such as nozzle angle,
pressure of spray and the rate of lubricant flow [50]. It could be seen that these input
parameters had an anchoring effect on the CF as well as the temperature. The
optimization of the air pressure as well as the distance of spraying can have a major effect
on the efficiency of the millling process. Moreover, the effictiveness of MQL diminished
at too large or too short distances in terms of the penetratability of the MQL mist. The
angle of nozzle spraying did not have a significant effect on the process while the rate of
oil flow had a huge effect on the results. The study could be complemented if the
variation of the coolant oil on the basis of its density and viscosity were also studied. In a
recent study Cai et al (2012) performed milling of Ti-6Al-4V, giving stress on the rate of
oil supply while MQL machining in order to study its effects on the various parameters. It
can be interpreted that MQL mist formed was capable of penetrating into the cutting zone
voids in a very efficient manner acting as a very good lubricant. This lubricating effect
resulted into a significant reduction in CF and SR.
17
It was also observed that the increase in supply from 2 ml/hr to 14 ml/hr caused drastic
reduction in both CF and SR. In addition to this, it was also observed that the increase in
the rate of fluid flow was effective only till 10 ml/hr, and had insignificant effects
thereafter. MQL was also observed to cause reduction in the chipping length with
increase in the fluid flow rate [51]. Another series of experiments used uncoated carbide
inserts to perform machining experiments on Ti-6Al-4V by using several combinations of
cooling techniques such as dry, wet, MQL(without cooling air) and MQL(with cooling
air). The results can be interpreted in terms of response parameters like SR, CF and TW
as well as the chip morphology. MQL along with the cooling air has the potential the best
results in terms of the response parameters causing drastic reductions in the SR and TW
values, thus validating it as a good alternative for the traditional techniques [52]. Tosun
and Huseyinoglu (2010) performed milling of Al while using many tool materials such as
TiCN, HSS and WC-Co etc. It can be concluded that machining carried out with WC-Co
tools can give the best possible results when compared to the other variants. It can also be
interpreted that the efficiency of MQL process could be evaluated in terms of the
penetratability of its mist produced. The concentration of the mist or the volumetric
concentration ratio had a dictatorial effect on the parameters such as SR, where a
concentration of 1:9 gave much better results as compared to the ratio 9:10 in terms of the
penetration effect of the mist into the cutting zone voids [53]. The work done could
further be enhanced by taking into account the nozzle design and performing the
experiments with nozzles of different specifications. Al machining carried out by Boswell
and Islam (2012) successfully demonstrated a suitable MQL environment for end milling.
They reported that MQL had the lowest cutting force followed by MQL+cooled air,
18
indicating an efficient machining performance. In addition MQL and MQL+ cooled air
achieved surface finishes as compatible to that of flood coolant. They combined air
cooling + MQL in a suitable redesigned nozzle. Although air cooling using miniscule
amounts of vegetable oil was not a completely dry process but it was quite close and
therefore is sustainable [25]. Murthy (2012) proposed an algorithm based on artificial
neural network model to predict surface roughness and TW for machining of Al under
MQL. They concluded that the optimum parameters among the studied, for minimum
surface roughness and TW were cutting speed of 88 m/min, feed velocity of 180
mm/min, depth of cut of 1.4 mm and coolant flow rate of 600 ml/hr [54]. In another
study, hardened steel was machined and observations on the results were made [55].
MQL has potential to give a better tool performance at all levels of the cutting speeds
when compared to the dry cutting process. This could be explained theoretically in terms
of the formation of a layer of oxides on the interface of the work and the tool, as the
MQL provides additional oxygen to the interface. This layer acts as a protection film to
safeguard the tool material from diffusion with the work material, thus improving the TL.
When taking the cutting speed into account, it can be interpreted that at speeds higher
than the optimal values, significant downfall was observed in the TL, mainly due to the
absence of the protective layer that ultimately led to thermal cracking and ultimately
shortening TL. Iqbal et al (2009) machined hardened tool steel of hardness 62 HRc by
using MQL, and studied the effects of the various cutting parameters on SR and TL [56].
An approach different from others was applied in this case where dispersive
spectroscopic analysis and electron microscopy was performed. It may be concluded that
at lower values of feed and speed, marginal betterments were indicated in the TL and SR
19
values. Further, the main modes of tool failure were indicated as chipping as well as the
adhesion, which due to the effect of MQL got lowered, thus improving the TL. Yan et al
(2012) performed experiments to investigate the various types of lubrication i.e. dry,
flood and MQL cooling to improve the machinability during the milling of forged steel.
They selected TW and SR as the output parameters. The variants of MQL taken as input
were direction, elevation angle, pressure and flow rate. It was reported that MQL resulted
in a lowered TW and SR along with a significant reduction in the CT as well. The

optimal values were obtained as: nozzle position 120o and angle of elevation as 60o and
the optimal distance came out to be 20 mm that ultimately resulted in a better TL, and
lowered SR values. It was also reported that the increase in flow rate from 43.8 ml/h to
58.4 ml/h led to an insignificant change in the flank wear value [57]. Liew et al (2011)
conducted milling of STAVAX (modified 420 stainless steel) using TiAlN single coated,
multicoated as well as uncoated carbide tools. Both flooding as well as MQL processes
were studied and compared. It was reported that misting caused a protective oxide layer
to be formed on the interface, thus lowering frictional forces and resulting in a proper
machinability when compared to the flooding technique. The cost also reduced and so did
the chances for the aberasive wear [58].
While performing the milling operation using MQL, the TL as well as the CF values can
be improved by using the vegetable oil while machining Inconal 718. Another way to
further improve the machining effctiveness of MQL milling is to use cryogenic
compressed along with the lubricant droplets, thus reducing the TW rate. Titanium
milling could be successfully achieved under MQL. MQL also helped in making the tool
20
coating last longer as compared to the flood cooling method. Moreover by regulating oil
supply rate desirable results could be obtained.
Also for the titanium alloys, it’s observed that MQL with cooling air gives better results
of TW and SR as compared to the MQL without the air.
Al alloy milling under MQL was also successfully demonstrated at different cutting
parameters. It was reported that the results of cold air (vortex tube) + MQL were
comparable with that of flood cooling. The vegetable oil was also effective in the Al alloy
machining. The volumetric concentration test by one of the researchers proved that a
concentration ratio of 1:10 while performing MQL was better than the ratio of 9:10 [53].
Stainless steel while being low speed milled gave better results with TiAlN/AlCrN nano-
multilayer tools with coatings. Exessive chipping could be reduced by using mineral oil
in a small quantity as spray.
MACHINING USING MQL: DILLING
The performance of the drilling process is greatly effected by the type of the cutting fluid
used. Haan et al (1997) conducted the drilling of Al and grey cast iron so as to study the
functionability of the cutting fluids. They used the feed, hole depth, material, speed,
cooling condition, temperatures as input parameters. While the response parameters were
the torque, hole quality, chip morphology and SR[59]. It could be interpreted that the
cutting fluids help in reducing the BUE formation. Moreover, the coolant not only
21
removes the exessive heat from the cutting zone but also helps in the lubrication of the
margins of the drill. This has been a very good study in the sphere of drilling technology,
but comparing with the present day technology it lacks many advanced technical
approaches. But the work could well be used as a base for further studies.
Refer Table 5, Rahim and Sasahara (2011) machined inconel 718 using synthetic esters
and palm oil. They found that MQL using such coolants improved the factors such as SR,
microhardness and also reduced the surface defects [60]. Experiments were also
conducted for drilling Ti-6Al-4V using both MQL as well as dry cutting to investigate for
improvements when using MQL. They found the minimum TL in dry cutting[62]. The
primary reason for this can be inferred as the lack of lubrication that inturn results in a
severe chipping of the tool. MQL can be seen as a better method on the basis of
favourable results for factors such as TL, temperature, torque and force. The reason for
the selection of palm oil as a lubricant was its property to create a thin layer that acts as a
lubricant. Very apt results have been provided in the field of surface roughness but while
drilling its very important to take into account the heat dissipation and the temperature.
The is a huge scope of studying the temperature effects by varying the coolants and
studying the results. In yet another study stress was laid on the temperature observations
while drilling titanium alloy Ti6AlV. During these experiments, uncoated K10 carbide
drills as well as the (TiAlN, CrCN or TiCN) coated drills were utilized[61]. Another
difference in the approach was the use of both external as well as internal MQL where the
coolant was applied through the drill. It could be concluded that internal MQL was more
efficient as compared to the external with an efficiency to nearly double of its counter
22
part in terms of temperature. Highest temperature was recorded for the uncoated drills
where the MQL was applied externally. An important factor that should also be taken
into account is the chip morphology and the chip breaking ability of the method used, as
it primarily determines the quality of the hole.
Fox-Rabinovich et al (2011) studied the different coatings and their effect on the TL
while drilling using cemented carbide drills. They made comparison between both MQL
as well as the flood cooling techniques. Three sets of experiments were conducted,
varying the number of holes to be drilled ranging from 50 to 7000 holes. Detailed studies
were done in terms of the friction and the progressive wear while the response parameters
were mainly the chip morphology and the flank wear[63]. Designing of the drill in a very
careful manner so as not to disturb the flow of the mist formed during MQL is another
point of high importance. Also, it can be concluded that the MQL process when used
along with a proper coated tool may give results nearly as good as the flood cooling, and
thus could act as a good alternative for the expensive flood cooling approach.
Investigations were carried out on various methods of external cutting fluid during blind-
hole drilling of cast aluminum alloy. The objective was to get an overall view of the
relative benefits of each with regard to dimensional accuracy and operator’s exposure to
hazardous aerosols. The dimensional accuracy under dry cutting conditions was found
inferior and independent of cutting speed and feed within the test range. For the
remaining cutting fluid application conditions, the most dominant effects were those of
cutting speed on hole size . Flood cooling with synthetic cutting fluid was found to be the
best method for achieving both higher hole accuracy as well as lower generated aerosol.
23
In the case of MQL cooling with soluble mineral oil, the oil content of the cutting fluid
hindered its cooling action while providing limited lubrication. The high volume of fluid
used during flooding seems to absorb many of the particulates generated during cutting,
leading to a lower mist concentration [64]. This study proved flood cooling as a better
method when compared to MQL techniques, making it an even bigger challenge for the
future researchers to find out the optimal parameters while using MQL, so as to give
comparable results to flood cooling. The water soluble coolant used may play an
important role in doing so. Kilickap et al (2011) studied the effects of different cutting
parameters on performance characteristics during the drilling of Al7075. They evaluated
work piece SR and the temperature changes due to the heat at the cutting process. MQL,
compressed air and dry processing (without the usage of any cooling liquid) techniques
were used. They found that better results with MQL technique than with other cooling
techniques. The best surface roughness was obtained at cutting speed of 20 m/min and
0.1 mm/rev as feed [65]. Another series of experiments were performed so as to validate
the usage of MQL while drilling deep holes in cylindrical blocks of Al alloy instead of
the traditional method of using metal working fluids by flood cooling. As a result of these
experiments, a set of optimum values of various parameters were obtained: Cutting
speed: 300 m/min, pressure: 6 bar, oil quantity: 80 ml/h, taper: 0.266 mm/10 mm length,
feed: 0.8 mm/rev, point angle; 135o, while the temperature at the surface of the work
piece was recorded as 32o [66]. Further Tasdelen et al (2008) conducted drilling
experiments using MQL by varying certain conditions such as varying oil amounts, using
emulsions and even using dry compressed air. Factors such as TW, chip contact, SR etc
were taken as the response parameters for the experimentation[67]. It may be concluded
24
that MQL has a potential to give the best results in terms of SR as compared to the
emulsion cooling methods. Dry compressed air lead to a bad SR taking into account the
deposition of the workpiece material on the sides of the holes drilled and produced longer
chips as well. Dasch and Kurgin (2010) examined MQL by varying the methods of mist
application: external MQL, internal single channel and internal double channel MQL.
The mist formed in each case was carefully examined and values such as concentration
and the particle size of the mist were carefully calculated. The results obtained were very
much in competition with the wet cooling systems[68]. External MQL can be reported as
the least expensive as well as the least complicated method. Although, it showed a
limitation of not successfully drilling the deep holes. On the other hand, the internal
systems of mist application showed better effictiveness in performing the desired
operations inspite of being more complex to apply as compared to the external MQL
system. The major drawback recorded was that the tool geometry, if not properly
examined could lead to dissipation of the mist, thus making an optimized tool design
mandatory for successful applicatin of the cooling technique. Bhowmick et al (2011)
drilled the Al alloy AM60 using both dry and MQL systems. The main response
parameters recorded were the drill torque and the thrust forces, while cooling was done
using fatty acid based or distilled water based coolants with a rate of aplication upto 10
ml/h. Dry machining led to a very short TL, as a result of magnesium deposition and
BUE formation ultimately leading to failure of the drill in as short as 80 holes. On the
other hand, MQL drilling resulted in parameters very much comparable to those of flood
cooling systems, giving a better TL. The temperature of the workpiece was also close to
that of the flooding condition. Thus making MQL a highly desirable technique on
25
account of its lesser cost and environment friendliness [69]. Ahsan et al (2010) carried
out drilling of steel with HSS tool and noted the hole size produced under dry, flood and
MQL conditions. They found roundness deviations were smaller under MQL condition as
compared to dry and wet conditions [70]. A study by Tai (2013) demonstrated that the
heat generation through HWS (hole wall surface) was significant in deep-hole drilling of
cast iron. It contributes to 24% to 66% of total heat absorption in the work piece based on
the analysis. The high air pressure could successfully suppress the chip clogging induced
heat and enables stable deep-hold drilling processes under MQL technology [71].
Drilling with MQL can be carried out externally only in the cases where the surface
quality of the holes can be compromised, but for best results, the internally alpied MQL
is the most suitable technique. Keeping the environmental factor in view, the synthetic
esters could well be replaced by palm oil, thus the cost reduction could be made possible
as well while drilling Inconel and Titanium alloys. Few researchers [64] pointed out that
during mist lubrication the mechanism at work was cooling due to evaporation of the
cutting fluid rather than lubrication. They suggested the need for formulating special
cutting fluids for mist lubrication that have a higher latent heat of vaporization. The high
aerosol concentration during mist lubrication points to the need for a scientific
assessment of the atomization properties of cutting fluids. Furthermore, they need to be
formulated such that they atomize to a size range that is nonhazardous to human health.
Also in case of drilling Al with over 2000 holes, diamond turned out to be the best option
with the highest tool life.
26
Likewise, during the machining of magnesium and its alloys, MQL led to a lowered
adhesion rate and BUE formation, thus resulting in a better surface quality and TL.
MACHINING USING MQL: GRINDING
In grinding process, the abrasives plunge and slide against the workpiece during material
removal. This also results in a cutting zone temperature as well as a high specific energy.
So in order to improve process efficiency, lubrication becomes an important requirement

for the grinding fluids, along with chip removal and cooling the grinding zone. These
fluids tend to harm the environment as well as the health of the operator. The cost factor
also contributes in a negative manner as the cost goes beyond feasibility. Thus, MQL
could serve as a good alternative for these processes as compared to the conventional
methods [72]. Inconel 751 has been studied for grinding by Balan et al (2013) so as to
investigate the effect of the various MQL parameters on grinding performance. It can be
interpreted that in comparison to the traditional methods, MQL can lead to a reduction in
GF, SR and the temperature. Furthermore it may also be reported that the MQL process is
quantitatively significant during grinding. It was possible to achieve minimum GF and
SR by increasing the amount of fluid and air pressure in MQL. A rise in GF, temperature,
and roughness was observed with lower (2 bar) air pressure [73]. The study is impeckable
when considered in terms of MQL parameters but for accurate results, the factors such as
wheel velocity, work feed and the depth of cut should also be varied. Another study of
steel grinding the impact of the work hardness, feed, depth of cut, and wheel speed on the
surface properties was studied in order to obtain optimum results for the performance. It
was observed that while grinding 100Cr6 hardened steel using MQL, better surface finish
27
was observed along with improved quality. Conversely, while grinding 42CrMo4 soft
steel, the results came out to be negative in terms of surface roughness in comparison
with flood cooling[74]. When the critical cutting depth and lubrication are increased, the
chips formed may be of lower thickness and the smaller grains, which lead to the
generation of the uncut chips. But in case of 100Cr6 hardened steel, the formation of the
chips takes place through brittle fracture mechanism. MQL leads to a lowered tengential
force that inturn leads to better slipping of the grains at the work tool interface resulting
in a better surface finish and a reduced GF. A significant difference was noted in case of
MQL grinding, due to the lubrication effect. Furthermore, the removal of the metal took
place due to shearing or fracturing whereas in case of the traditional methods, it occured
due to shearing of fracture. The MQL flow rate may be varied as well in order to find out
the trend in the variations. Barczak et al (2010) examined three grades of steel: EN8, M2,
and EN31 for both MQL and the traditional machining methods. They evaluated SR, GT,
power and specific forces. It was concluded that MQL gave results very much
comparable to the flood cooling method, although the cost factor was on the higher side
[75]. Efforts were made to find out the influence of the different coolants as well as the
grinding wheel materials on the performance of the grinding process in terms of the
response parameters, GF and SR. Many experiments were preformed for MQL, dry, and
flood cooling methods in which eleven different kinds of coolants were used while the
wheel materials used were resin bond corundum, vitrified bond corundum, and vitrified
bond[76]. The observations may be interpreted in the terms that the SR wheels give the
best possible results as compared to the other variants. Furthermore, it did not show any
change in performance due to the change in the wheel material and also reduced the chip
28
loading effect. Alves et al (2011) studied the behaviour of MQL for developing
methodology of fluid through the assembly of special nozzle. MQL grinding of steel was
performed using pulverized vegetable oil in a compressed air flow. They evaluated
surface integrity and grinding wheel diametrical wear. They got quite encouraging results
for surface integrity and TW with MQL. They obtained the best performance of MQL at
air: 26.4 m/s and lubricant : 40 ml/h [77]. Another study investigated the grindability of
hardened stainless steel and aluminum alloy using dry, MQL, and conventional fluid
techniques. Five types of corundum wheels and one type of SiC wheel were tested along
with vegetable and synthetic ester MQL oils. They studied the effects of the wheel
material and coolant types in terms of factors such asGF, surface temperature and surface
topography. They found synthetic ester MQL oil performed better as compared to the
other vegetable based MQL oils[72]. When performing MQL cooling using soft wheels
may give a better grindability. Grinding Al based alloys using vegetable oil based MQL
gives a very low SR as compared to a very high surface roughness when using ester
based additives, mainly due to the chip loading effect on the grinding wheel. Oliviera et
al (2012) performed MQL grinding of AISI 4340 tempered and quenched steel using a
vitrified CBN wheel. In addition an air jet focussing on the cutting zone was also used
that was helpful in cleaning the cutting zone by removing the coolant as well as the chips.
The analysis was done on workpiece SR and roundness errors, diametrical wheel wear,
AE generated by the process, and metallographic images of the ground surface and
subsurface. Results showed the positive effects of implementing the cleaning jet
technique as a technological improvement of MQL to reduce the consumption of cutting
fluids [78]. MQL process when used for grinding is successful and even has the potential
29
to surpass the conventional flooding methods. Due to a highly reasonable material
removal rate, lower friction leads to improved surface properties while the TW tends to
decrease. A properly calculated selection of the cutting parameters tends to make the
machining process highly economical as compared to the flooding or the dry cutting
techniques. Pressure values ranging from 4 to 10 bars may be used for better results.
CONCLUSIONS
MQL gave comparable results for turning, milling, drilling and grinding for all materials.
Most of the authors have showed noticable improvement in performance with MQL
machining compared to dry machining, more meaningful results could have been
obtained if it was also compared with flood machining (few studies exist). It is found that
MQL contributes towards its usefulness by reducing the CT. The dimensional accuracy/
surface integrity of work piece improved mainly due to reduction of wear and damage at
the tool tip by the application of MQL. Therefore, it is evident that MQL not only
improves environment friendliness but can also improve the machinability characteristics.
The machining parameters such as depth of cut, cutting speed etc on interaction with the
large number of MQL parameters such as the type of lubricant, count of nozzles etc tend
to make it complexer to understand and thus a better study of the interaction of these
factors is needed so as to make its easily understandable [79]. There are many ways by
which MQL can be studied and improved further and used to our advantage. First of all
the chip evacuation system coud be used to improve its efficiency further. Also the
further studies on cooling techniques and tool materials could lead to better results.
Speaking of its economy point, use of vegetable oils can make it highly economical as
30
compared to the other processes. Thus, considering its economy and environment
friendliness, it can be concluded that MQL is a possible alternative for the conventional
processes in the future machining operations.
REFERENCES
1. Gordana, Globočki; Lakić, Branislav S; Davorin K; Bogdan N, Janez K. Effects
of using MQL cooling in metal. 13th International Conference on Tribology, 2013, 292–
301.
2. Kardekar AD . Modelling and optimization of machining performance measures
in face millingof automotive aluminium alloy A380 under different cooling/lubrication
conditions for sustainable manufacturing, 2005, 1–145.
3. Astakhov VP . Machining and Machinability of Materials. International Journal of
Machining and Machinability of Materials 7, 2010, 1–16.
4. Inasaki I .Towards symbiotic machining processes. International Journal of
Precision Engineering and Manufacturing 13, 2012,1053–1057.
5. Goldberg M . Improving Productivity by Using Innovative Metal Cutting
Solutions with an Emphasize on Green Machining. International Journal of Machining
and Machinability of Materials 12, 2012,117–125.
6. Kuram E; Ozcelik B; Demirbas E . Environmentally Friendly Machining:
Vegetable Based Cutting Fluids. In: Davim JP (ed) Green Manufacturing Processes and
Systems. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2013, pp 23–47.
7. Kundrák J; Mamalis AG; Gyáni K; Markopoulos A . Environmentally Friendly
Precision Machining. Materials and Manufacturing Processes, 2007, 37–41.
31
8. Çakīr O; Yardimeden A; Ozben T, Kilickap E . Selection of cutting fluids in
machining processes. Journal of Achievements in Materials and Manufacturing
Engineering 25, 2007, 99–102.
9. Adler DP; Hii WW-S; Michalek DJ; Sutherland JW . Examining the Role of
Cutting Fluids in Machining and Efforts To Address Associated Environmental/Health
Concerns. Machining Science and Technology 10, 2006, 23–58.
10. Rao DN, Srikant RR . Influence of emulsifier content on cutting fluid properties.
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering
Manufacture 220, 2006, 1803–1806.
11. Lawal S a.; Choudhury I a.; Nukman Y. Application of vegetable oil-based
metalworking fluids in machining ferrous metals—A review. International Journal of
Machine Tools and Manufacture 522012, 1–12.
12. Baradie MA El. Cutting Fluids: Part I Characterisation. Journal of Materials
Processing Technology 56,1996.
13. Baradie MA El. Cutting Fluids: Part II Recycling and clean machining. Journal of
Materials Processing Technology 56, 1996, 798–806.
14. Shokrani A; Dhokia V; Newman ST. Environmentally conscious machining of
difficult-to-machine materials with regard to cutting fluids. International Journal of
Machine Tools and Manufacture 57, 2012, 83–101.
15. Garbrecht M; Heinzel C; Koch T; Eckebrecht J. Current Approaches in Design
and Supply of Metal working fluids. Tribology & Lubrication Technology, 2010, 6–49.
16. Avila RF; Abrao AM. The effect of cutting fluids on the machining of hardened
AISI 4340 steel. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 119, 2001, 21–26.
32
17. Sokovic M, Mijanovic K. Ecological aspects of the cutting fluids and its influence
on quantifiable parameters of the cutting processes. Journal of Materials Processing
Technology 109, 2001, 181–189.
18. Dixit US; Sarma DK; Davim JP. Environmentally Friendly Machining, 2012. 9–
18.
19. Sharma VS; Dogra M; Suri NM. Cooling techniques for improved productivity in
turning. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 49, 2009, 435–453.
20. Sharma VS; Dogra M; Suri NM. Advances in the turning process for productivity
improvement – a review. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B:
Journal of Engineering Manufacture 222, 2008, 1417–1442.
21. Dudzinski D; Devillez A; Moufki A; Larrouquère D; Zerrouki V; Vigneau J. A
review of developments towards dry and high speed machining of Inconel 718 alloy.
International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 44, 2004, 439–456.
22. Thakur DG; Ramamoorthy B; Vijayaraghavan L. Effect of High Speed Cutting
Parameters on the Surface Characteristics of Superalloy Inconel. Proceedings of the
World Congress on Engineering 2010 Vol III WCE 2010, June 30 - July 2, 2010.
23. Yang X; Liu CR.Machining titanium and its alloys. Machining Science and
Technology : An International 3, 1999, 107–139.
24. Ezugwu EO; Wang ZM. Materials Titanium alloys and their machinability.
Jounal of Materials Proessing Technology 68, 1997, 262–274.
25. Boswell B; Islam MN. Feasibility Study of Adopting Minimal Quantities of
Lubrication for End Milling Aluminium. Proceedings of the World Congress on
Engineering 2012 Vol III WCE 2012, July 4 - 6, 2012, London, U.K., 2012, pp 2–6
33
26. V. Songmene; R. Khettabi; I. Zaghbani; J. Kouam and AD. Machining and
Machinability of Aluminum Alloys. Machining and Machinability of Aluminum Alloys,
AluminiumAlloys, Theory and Applications, 2011, pp 377–400.
27. Kalsi NS; Sehgal R; Sharma VS. Cryogenic Treatment of Tool Materials: A
Review. Materials and Manufacturing Processes 25, 2010, 1077–1100.
28. Thakur DG; Ramamoorthy B; Vijayaraghavan L. Optimization of Minimum
Quantity Lubrication Parameters in High Speed Turning of Superalloy Inconel 718 for
Sustainable Development. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology 54,
2009, 224–226.
29. Che Haron CH; Abd Ghani J; Kasim MS; Soon TK; Ibrahim GA; Sulaiman MA .
Surface Intergrity of Inconel 718 under MQL Condition. Advanced Materials Research
150-151, 2010, 1667–1672.
30. Vasu V; Pradeep Kumar Reddy G. Effect of minimum quantity lubrication with
Al2O3 nanoparticles on surface roughness, tool wear and temperature dissipation in
machining Inconel 600 alloy. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers,
Part N: Journal of Nanoengineering and Nanosystems 225, 2011, 3–16.
31. Devillez A; Le Coz G; Dominiak S; Dudzinski D.Dry machining of Inconel 718,
workpiece surface integrity. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 211, 2011,
1590–1598.
32. Wang ZG; Rahman M; Wong YS; Neo KS; Sun J; Tan CH; Onozuka H. Study on
orthogonal turning of titanium alloys with different coolant supply strategies. The
International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 42, 2008, 621–632.
34
33. Liu Z; An Q; Xu J; Chen M; Han S. Wear performance of (nc-AlTiN)/(a-Si3N4)
coating and (nc-AlCrN)/(a-Si3N4) coating in high-speed machining of titanium alloys
under dry and minimum quantity lubrication (MQL) conditions, 2013. Wear 1–11.
34. Liu Z; Xu J; Han S; Chen M. A coupling method of response surfaces (CRSM)
for cutting parameters optimization in machining titanium alloy under minimum quantity
lubrication (MQL) condition. International Journal of Precision Engineering and
Manufacturing 14, 2013, 693–702.

35. Shashidhara YM; Jayaram SR. Experimental Determination of Cutting Power
for Turning and Material Removal Rate for Drilling of AA 6061-T6 Using Vegetable
Oils as Cutting Fluid. Advances in Tribology, 2013, 1–7.
37. Attanasio a.; Gelfi M; Giardini C; Remino C. Minimal quantity lubrication in
turning: Effect on tool wear. Wear 260, 2006, 333–338.
38. Li K-M; Liang SY. Performance profiling of minimum quantity lubrication in
machining. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 35, 2006,
226–233.
39. Dhar NR; Islam MW; Islam S; Mithu MAH. The influence of minimum quantity
of lubrication (MQL) on cutting temperature, chip and dimensional accuracy in turning
AISI-1040 steel. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 171, 2006, 93–99.
40. Khan MM a.; Dhar NR. Performance evaluation of minimum quantity lubrication
by vegetable oil in terms of cutting force, cutting zone temperature, tool wear, job
dimension and surface finish in turning AISI-1060 steel. Journal of Zhejiang University,
2006 ,1790–1799.
35
41. Dhar NR; Ahmed MT; Islam S. An experimental investigation on effect of
minimum quantity lubrication in machining AISI 1040 steel. International Journal of
Machine Tools and Manufacture 472007, 748–753.
42. Abhang LB; Hameedullah M. Experimental investigation of minimum quantity
lubricants. International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology 2, 2010, 3045–
3053.
43. Ali SM; Dhar NR; Dey SK. Effect of minimum quantity lubrication ( MQL ) on
cutting performance in turning medium carbon steel by uncoated carbide insert at
different speed-feed combinations. Advances in Production Engineering & Management
6, 2011, 185–196.
44. Sharma VS; Sachdeva A. Comparative Analysis of Turning under Minimum
Quantity Lubrication , Flood Cooling and Dry Conditions. CAN’2012 Eleventh AES-
ATEMA International Conference Toronto, CANADA, August 06 – 10, 2012.
45. Sanchez; Palma GL; Marinescu I; Modolo DL; Nalon LJ; Santos AE. Effect of
different methods of cutting fluid application on turning of a difficult-to-machine steel
(SAE EV-8). Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of
Engineering Manufacture 227, 2012, 220–234.
46. Leppert T. Surface layer properties of AISI 316L steel when turning under dry
and with minimum quantity lubrication conditions. Proceedings of the Institution of
Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture 226, 2012, 617–631.
47. Cica D; Sredanovic B; Lakic-Globocki G; Kramar D. Modeling of the Cutting
Forces in Turning Process Using Various Methods of Cooling and Lubricating: An
Artificial Intelligence Approach. Advances in Mechanical Engineering,, 2013, 1–8.
36
48. Zhang S; Li JF; Wang YW. Tool life and cutting forces in end milling Inconel
718 under dry and minimum quantity cooling lubrication cutting conditions. Journal of
Cleaner Production 32, 2012, 81–87.
49. Sun J; Wong YS; Rahman M; Wang ZG; Neo KS; Tan CH; Onozuka H. Effects
of Coolant Supply Methods and Cutting Conditions on Tool Life in End Milling
Titanium Alloy. Machining Science and Technology 10, 2006, 355–370.
50. Liu ZQ; Cai XJ; Chen M; An MQL Investigation of cutting force and
temperature of end-milling Ti-6Al-4V with different minimum quantity lubrication
(MQL) parameters. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B:
Journal of Engineering Manufacture 225, 2011, 1273–1279.
51. Cai XJ; Liu ZQ; Chen M; An QL. An experimental investigation on effects of
minimum quantity lubrication oil supply rate in high-speed end milling of Ti-6Al-4V.
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering
Manufacture 226, 2012, 1784–1792.
52. Yuan SM; Yan LT; Liu WD; Liu Q. Effects of cooling air temperature on
cryogenic machining of Ti–6Al–4V alloy. Journal of Materials Processing Technology
211, 2011, 356–362.
53. Tosun N, Huseyinoglu M. Effect of MQL on Surface Roughness in Milling of
AA7075-T6. Materials and Manufacturing Processes 25, 2010, 793–798.
54. Murthy KS. Optimization of End Milling Parameters under Minimum Quantity
Lubrication Using Principal Component Analysis and Grey Relational Analysis. Journal
of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering XXXIV 2012, 253–
261.
37
55. Liao YS; Lin HM. Mechanism of minimum quantity lubrication in high-speed
milling of hardened steel. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 47,
2007, 1660–1666.
56. Iqbal a; Dar NU; He N; Khan I; Li L. Optimizing cutting parameters in minimum
quantity of lubrication milling of hardened cold work tool steel. Proceedings of the
Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture 223,
2009, 043–054.
57. Yan L; Yuan S; Liu Q. Influence of minimum quantity lubrication parameters on
tool wear and surface roughness in milling of forged steel. Chinese Journal of Mechanical
Engineering 25, 2012, 419–429.
58. Liew WYH. Low-speed milling of stainless steel with TiAlN single-layer and
TiAlN/AlCrN nano-multilayer coated carbide tools under different lubrication conditions.
Wear 269, 2010, 617–631.
59. Haan DM; Batzer S a.; Olson WW; Sutherland JW. An experimental study of
cutting fluid effects in drilling. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 71, 1997,
305–313.
60. Rahim EA; Sasahara H.An Analysis of Surface Integrity When Drilling Inconel
718 Using Palm Oil and Synthetic Ester Under Mql Condition. Machining Science and
Technology 15, 2011, 76–90.
61. Zeilmann RP; Weingaertner WL. Analysis of temperature during drilling of
Ti6Al4V with minimal quantity of lubricant. Journal of Materials Processing Technology
179, 2006, 124–127.
38
62. Rahim EA; Sasahara H. Investigation of tool wear and surface integrity on MQL
machining of Ti-6AL-4V using biodegradable oil. Proceedings of the Institution of
Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture 225, 2011, 1505–
1511.
63. Fox-Rabinovich G; Dasch JM; Wagg T; Yamamoto K; Veldhuis S; Dosbaeva
GK, Tauhiduzzaman M. Cutting performance of different coatings during minimum
quantity lubrication drilling of aluminum silicon B319 cast alloy. Surface and Coatings
Technology 205, 2011, 4107–4116.
64. Jayal AD; Balaji AK; Sesek R; Engineering M; Lake S. Machining Performance
and Health Effects of Cutting Fluid Application in Drilling of A390 . 0 Cast Aluminum
Alloy. Journal of Manufacturing Processes 9, 2007.
65. Kilickap E; Huseyinoglu M; Ozel C . Empirical Study Regarding the Effects of
Minimum Quantity Lubricant Utilization on Performance Characteristics in the Drilling
of Al. Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering XXXIII,
2011, 52–57.
66. Hussain MI; Taraman KS; Filipovic AJ; Garrn I; Corporation GM. Experimental
study to analyse the workpiece surface temperature in deep hole drilling of aluminium
alloy engine blocks using MQL technology. Journal of Achievements in Materials and
Manufacturing Engineering 31, 2008, 485–490.
67. Tasdelen B; Wikblom T; Ekered S. Studies on minimum quantity lubrication
(MQL) and air cooling at drilling. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 200, 2008,
339–346.
39
68. Dasch JM; Kurgin SK. A characterisation of mist generated from minimum
quantity lubrication (MQL) compared to wet machining. International Journal of
Machining and Machinability of Materials 7, 2010, 82–95.
69. Bhowmick S; Lukitsch MJ; Alpas AT. Dry and minimum quantity lubrication
drilling of cast magnesium alloy (AM60). International Journal of Machine Tools and
Manufacture 50, 2010, 444–457.
70. Ahsan NAMM; Kibria GM; Ahmed RM; Islam AM; Hossain MM. Performance
Evaluation of Minimum Quantity Lubrication ( MQL ) in Drilling Operation.
International Conference on Mechanical, Industrial and Energy Engineering, 2010, 1–5.
71. Tai BL. Workpiece Temperature During Deep-Hole Drilling of Cast Iron Using
High Air Pressure Minimum Quantity Lubrication. Journal of Manufacturing Science and
Engineering 135, 2013.
72. Hadad M; Hadi M. An investigation on surface grinding of hardened stainless
steel S34700 and aluminum alloy AA6061 using minimum quantity of lubrication (MQL)
technique. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology. doi:
10.1007/s00170-013-4830-3, 2013.
73. Balan a. SS; Vijayaraghavan L; Krishnamurthy R. Minimum Quantity Lubricated
Grinding of Inconel 751 Alloy. Materials and Manufacturing Processes 28, 2013, 430–
435
74. Tawakoli T; Hadad MJ; Sadeghi MH; Daneshi A; Stockert S; Rasifard A. An
experimental investigation of the effects of workpiece and grinding parameters on
minimum quantity lubrication — MQL grinding. International Journal of Machine Tools
& Manufacture 49, 2009, 924–932.
40
75. Barczak LM; Batako a. DL; Morgan MN. A study of plane surface grinding under
minimum quantity lubrication (MQL) conditions. International Journal of Machine Tools
and Manufacture 50, 2010, 977–985.
76. Tawakoli T; Hadad MJ; Sadeghi MH. Investigation on minimum quantity
lubricant-MQL grinding of 100Cr6 hardened steel using different abrasive and coolant–
lubricant types. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 50, 2010, 698–
708.
77. Alves MCS; Bianchi EC; Aguiar PR; Canarim RC. Influence of optimized
lubrication-cooling and minimum quantity lubrication on the cutting forces , on the
geometric quality of the surfaces and on the micro-structural integrity of hardened steel
parts. Revista Materia 16, 2011, 754–766.
78. Oliveira DDJ; Guermandi LG; Bianchi EC; Diniz AE; de Aguiar PR; Canarim RC
. Improving minimum quantity lubrication in CBN grinding using compressed air wheel
cleaning. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 212, 2012, 2559–2568.
79. Duchosal A; Leroy R; Vecellio L; Louste C; Ranganathan N. An experimental
investigation on oil mist characterization used in MQL milling process. The International
Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 66, 2012, 1003–1014.
80. Obikawa T; Kamata Y; Shinozuka J. High-speed grooving with applying MQL.
International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 46, 2006, 1854–1861.
81. Sadeghi MH; Haddad MJ; Tawakoli T; Emami M. Minimal quantity lubrication-
MQL in grinding of Ti–6Al–4V titanium alloy. The International Journal of Advanced
Manufacturing Technology 44, 2008, 487–500.
41
82. Silva LR; Corrêa ECS; Brandão JR; De Ávila RF. Environmentally friendly
manufacturing: Behavior analysis of minimum quantity of lubricant - MQL in grinding
process. Journal of Cleaner Production. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro, 2013.

42
Table 1. Compsrison of different cutting fluids[6]
Straight oils Soluble oils Semi-synthetics Synthetics
Advantages
Excellent lubricity Good lubricity Good cooling Excellent cooling
Excellent rust control Good cooling Good rust control Excellent microbial control
Good microbial control Non flammable
Good corrosion control

Reduced misting and foaming
Disadvantages
Low cooling Rust control Foam easily Poor lubricity
problems
Fire hazard Bacterial Stability is affected by Easily contaminated by other machine fluids
growth water hardness
Create mist or smoke Evaporation Easily contaminated by
losses other machine fluids
Limited to low speed and heavy cutting operations
43
Table2. Turning of various materials under MQL (part I) vc: cutting speed (m/min); fn: feed per revolution (mm/rev); ap: depth of cut
(mm)
Ref Work Material Tool Material Cutting Cooling Type, conditions Parameters
parameters types used Evaluated/DOE
Inconel
[30] Inconel 600 Multicoated carbide vc: 40, 50,60; Dry, T:vegetable-oil-based; p: 5 bar; Tool tip interface
alloy fn:0.08, MQL, q: 100 temperature,

0.12,0.16; MQL MQL with nanofluids (4% CF,TW,Chip
ap:0.4, 0.8,1.2 (nanofluids) volume fraction of Al2O3 and 6% formation/ Taguchi
volume fraction of Al2O3)
[31] Inconel 718 Coated carbide vc: 40, 60, 80; Dry, CF,SR,RS,
fn:0.1 Wet Tool life
ap:0.5
[29] Inconel 718 TiAlN coated vc: 90, 120, MQL q:100 SR, ST, MS, MH/
carbide inserts 150; SpDr: Target rake and flank RSM
fn: 0.15, 0.25, region
0.25;
ap:0.3, 0.4, 0.5
[28] Inconel 718 Tungsten carbide vc: 40, 60; MQL T : water soluble cutting oil; Flank wear/
(WC-Co) insert. fn: 0.08, 0.20; p:100, 130; q: 300, 600 Taguchi
ap: 0.5 N: 200, 300 Pulses/min
SpDr: inclined and vertically
downwards
44
Titanium
[34] Ti-6Al-4V Tungsten carbide vc: 40 to 160; Dry, T:Vegetable oil ; q:16 ; p: 7 ; SR,CF/ Taguchi
inserts (nano- fn: 0.05 to 0.2; Wet, SD:20; SpDr: Flank face
multilayer coatings) ap 0.3 to 1.2 MQL
[33] Ti–6Al–4V (nc-AlTiN)/(a-Si3N4) vc: 120m/min Dry, T.Vortex tube and vegetable oil ; Tool life, Flank
and (nc-AlCrN)/(a- fn: 0.1mm/rev MQL p :.7Mpa wear
Si3N4) coatings ap: 1.2mm Quantity consumed :16ml/h

Aluminium
[35] AA6061 Cemented carbide tool vc : 110, 138, MQL T: Pongam , Jatropha, mineral oil CF
175, 221; Nz: 2; p: 3
fn:
0.1,0.18,0.25;
ap:0.5, 1.0, 1.5
45
Table 3. Turning of various materials under MQL (part II) vc: cutting speed (m/min); fn: feed per revolution (mm/rev); ap: depth of
cut (mm)
Ref Work Material Tool Material Cutting parameters Cooling Type, conditions Parameters
types used Evaluated/DOE
Steel
[45] SAE EV-8 Coated cemented vc:140,170;200; Combined Flood :5% solution of TL,SR, CT, CF, chip
carbide fn: 0.1;.15;.2 Flood, semisynthetic emulsion, form, chip compression

(TiCN, Al2O3 ap:0.5;.75;1 MQCF, MQL T:vegetable-based rate and MS.
and TiN) MQL. lubricant
SD: 50
air p: 4
[46] AISI 316L Carbide vc: 82, 164, 255; Dry, Flood: ARTEsol Super CF,
steel (PVD coating fn:0.08, 0.27, 0.47; Flood, EP, q: 4l/min surface properties
composition: ap: 0.5,1,2 MQL MQL T: Accu-Lube
TiAlN) 8000 oil
NN: 2 nozzle directing
rake face and principle
and auxiliary flank
MQL velocity: 30 m/s, p:
3.5; q: 10, 20, 50
[1] Carbon steel Carbide vc:210,310,400; Flood, Flood p : 3 , q : 2l/min CF, TW,SR,chip
C45E fn:0.224,0.28,0.355,0.40; MQL MQL p: 3 , q: 30 shape/RN, ANN
ap:1.5,2,2.5
46
[47] Carbon steel SNMG 1204 08 vc : 210,320,400; Flood, Flood p:3, q 2 l/min CF/ANN,ANFIS
Ck45E NMX fn: 0.224, 0.280, 0.355, MQL, MQL p: 3 , q 30
0.400; HPJAM HPJAM p 500 bar, q 2
ap: 1.5, 2.0, 2.5 l/min
[43] Medium Uncoated vc: 68, 95, 133, 190, 266; Dry, T:VG-68 Cutting oil; q: CTh ratio, CT, CF, TW,
carbon steel Carbide (P30) fn: 0.10, 0.12, 0.14, MQL 150 ml/hr, SR
0.18,0.20; Air p:23, Oil p: 25

ap:1.0,1.5
[42] Alloy steel Tungsten carbide vc:24, 39,112,189; Dry, T:10% boric acid with Chip tool interface
EN-31 fn: 0.06, 0.10, 0.15 ; MQL SAE 40 base oil Temperature,
ap: 0.4 CF, CTh,SR,
Chip breaking
[41] AISI 1040 Carbide (P-30) vc: 72, 94, 139, 164; Dry, T: Mobil Cut-102 CT, CRC, CF, TW,SR,
steel fn:0.10, 0.13, 0.16,0.20; MQL p 8.0, q: 200 DD
ap: 1.5 SpDr: chip–tool and the
work–tool interfaces
[39] AISI 1040 Carbide, SNMM vc:64, 80, 110, 130; Dry, p: 7 , Temp,
Steel 120408 (P30) fn:0.10, 0.13, 0.16,0.20; Flood, q:Lubricant: 60 CR,DD
ap: 1.0 MQL
[40] AISI 1060 Uncoated vc: 72, 94, 139, 164; Dry, p: 7 ; SR
steel carbide, TTS, fn: 0.10, 0.13, 0.16, 0.20; MQL q: 60
SNMM 120408 ap: 1.5
[37] Norm. 100Cr6 CNMG 12 04 04 vc: 300; Dry, T:Ester oil with EP TW
47
steel PM—4025 fn: 0.20,0.26; MQL additive
ap:1; p: 2.5
CL: 50, 200 q: 20
SpDr: on the rake and on
the flank
[38] AISI 1045 Carbide vc:45.75, 91.5, 137.25; Dry, T: Vegetable oil Coolube TW, PC, Aerosol
fn: 0.0508, 0.0762, Flood 2210 generation rate

0.1016; MQL Flood: Valcool cutting
ap: 0.508, 1.016, 0.762 fluid
+ water; q: 15l/min.
[80] 0.45%C carbon Coated carbide vc: 240;300; MQL T: vegetable oil (100% TW
steel (P35) fn: 0.12; fatty acid)
( TiC/TiCN/ SrDr: 20˚ to the flank of
TiN) the tool shank and 15˚ to
the flank of the tool
insert.
q: 7.0
48
Table 4. Milling of various materials under MQL vc: cutting speed (m/min); ae: radial depth of cut (mm); ap: axial depth of cut (mm);
fn: feed per revolution (mm/rev); fz: feed/ tooth(mm/tooth); vf: feed per minute (mm/min); zn: available cutter teeth
Ref Work Material Tool Material Cutting parameters Cooling types used Type, conditions Parameters
Evaluated/DOE
Inconel
[48] Inconel 718 Cemented carbide, TM: Down Dry, T: Vegetable oil ; Air p: 1.5 ; CF,TW
coated TiAlN+TiN vc: 55;fz: 0.1; MQCL Air temp:-30 ; Air q : 500 l/min
ap:0.5;ae:1 Number of nozzles: 2(rake &
zn=1; fn=0.1 flank)
Oil q :8
Titanium
[49] Ti-6Al-4V alloy Carbide tool vc: 40-140; fn: Dry, Flood: fully synthetic water CF, TW &
0.05;0.3; Flood, soluble coolant(glycol) ratio: 1:20; characteristics
ap: 0.5; ae:2-8; zn:2 MQL MQL: Vegetable oil; p:5.2, q: 2–
10
DM: 3.7
[51] Ti-6Al-4V Coated inserts (TiAlN) vc:200; fz:0.25; ap: 5; Dry, T: Vegetable based; CF, SR, TW &
ae: 1 MQL Oil q:2,6,10,14; Air p:6, Air q:125 mechanisms
zn:2; fn=0.5 l/min ;
SpDr :135˚, ND : 25
[52] Ti–6Al–4V Uncoated cemented vc:62.8 ; fn:0.075; ap: Dry, MQL oil:Synthetic based ester SR, flank wear ,
carbide 1; ae: 8 Wet, Density: 0.92g/cm3 at 20◦C CF, chip
MQL Viscosity: 47mm2/s at 40◦C morphology
49
Cooling
air:0◦C,−15◦C,−30◦C,−45◦C
Flow: 280L/min
P: 7 bar
[50] Ti–6Al–4V Coated vc: 150; fz: 0.05;ap:5; MQL Air p :1, 3, 5,7; CF, Cutting temp.
carbide(TiAlN) ae:1 Air q : 125 l/m;

zn=1; fn=0.05 ND :15, 25, 35, 45;
Oil q :2, 4, 6, 8, 10;
SpDr :45,90,135˚
Aluminium
[25] Al Coated tungsten vc:135, Dry, Airtx vortex tube (Model 20008) CF, power & SR/
carbide 150,165;vf:400 ; ap : Flood, inlet pressure of 85 psi chilled air Taguchi
3 Cooled air, -5oC;
MQL, T: Traditional emulsified cutting
Cooled air+MQL fluid;
SD: 25 mm
[54] Al 6063-T6 ND vc: 35,56,88; MQL T: vegetableoil ; TW,SR/
vf:180,250,355 p: 4 ; q: 300, 600,900 GA,ANOVA
ap: 1,1.2,1.4
[53] AA7075-T6 WC-Co alloy with 6% n:260,780,1330; vf: Flood, T :boron oil and water; SR/ANOVA
cobalt, HSS, TiCN- 20,40,80 MQL Flood: q: 1l/m;
coated HSS tools ap:1; ae:6 MQL q: 300 ; p : 5;
50
MQL ratio : 9 :10 & 1 :10;
Flood ratio :1 :10
Steel
[58] STAVAX TiAlN/AlCrN nano- vc: 50; fz: 0.04; ap: Flood, 1: 93vol% liquid paraffin oil and Surface study,
(modified 420 multilayer coated, 0.2; ae:0.4; zn: 1; fn: mist 7vol% cyclomethicone sprayed in TW, EDX/Raman
stainless steel) TiAlN single-layer 0.04 mist spectroscopy
coated and uncoated MQL q: 0.2 l/h; p: 0.2MPa

carbide tools 2: an emulsified water-based
coolant (9% concentration of
Shell Dormous BL oil)
[57] Forged Steel YBG205, APKT11- vc: 219.8; ap:0.5; Dry, Flood: 20l/min; TW,SR, Chip
(50CrMnMo) T308-PM fz:0.14 Flood, MQL q :13.9,43.8,58.4; morphology/
ae:8; zn=1; fn=0.14 MQL Air p:2,3.5,6; RSM
Air delivery: 280 l/min;
Nz direction in relation to feed:
0,60,120,180˚;
Nzelevation: 30, 45,60˚ ;
Nz Dis: 10,20,30
[55] NAK80 mold Coated carbide vc:300,400,500; Dry, T: Synthetic ester tool life,
steel (TiAlN &TiN) fz: 0.10,0.15, 0.20; MQL p: 4.5 ; q:10 SEM micrographs
ap: 0.3;ae:5 and EDAX
zn=1; analyses of
fn=0.10;0.15;0.20 cutting tools
51
Table 5. Drilling of various materials under MQL vc: cutting speed (m/min);fn: feed (mm/rev); fz:feed per tooth
Ref Work Material Tool Material Cutting Cooling types used Type, conditions Parameters
parameters Evaluated/DOE
Inconel
[60] Inconel 718 Coated carbide vc: 30, 40, 50; External T: Synthetic Ester, Palm MH, Subsurface
(AlTiN) fn: 0.05, 0.1; MQL Oil deformation, Surface
WT:20 Outlet air p: 2 bar; Damage, SR

Lubricant q: 10.3
ml/hour;
Outlet air q : 165 l/min
Titanium Alloy
[62] Ti-6Al-4V AlTiN-coated vc: 60 , 80 ,100 Dry, T: Synthetic Ester, Palm CF, Torque, Work piece
indexable fn: 0.1 ; 0.2 MQL Oil temp.
carbide drill Outlet air p: 2 bar
Lubricant q: 10.3 ml/hour
Outlet air q : 165 l/min
[61] Ti6Al4V carbide drills, vc : 10-50 Flood Flood : abundance of Work piece temp.
coated carbide advance f=0.1– MQL cutting fluid with
0.2mm External and concentration of emulsion
internal nozzle above 3.5%.
Aluminium
[65] Al7075 HSS tools vc:5, 10,15,20 MQL, T: Boron oil-water SR, Temp.
52
fn: 0.1,0.2,0.3 Compresses air, mixture
Dry air p: 10 bar
[66] Alalloycylinder Drill variables vc: 133, 200, 300 MQL p: 4.2, 5, 6; Work piece surface
Point angle: fn: 0.45, 0.6, 0.8 q: 20,40,80 temp. /
118, 126, 135˚; ANOVA
Drill body
taper (mm/ 10
mm length):
0150,
0200,0266
[64] Alalloy(A390.0) uncoated solid vc: 30,60,90 Dry Flood: Synthetic coolant, Dimensional Accuracy,
carbide fn: 0.1, 0.3, 0.5 Flood 5% solution; Soluble Air Quality, TW, Chip
DD:10, L: 20, 30, 40 MQL mineral oil, 5% solution morphology
Three-flute MQL: soluble oil
concentrate Flood 5l/m
MQL q:2, 30, 35
p: 6
[63] B 319 Al alloy Coated tungsten Vc:160 MQL Coolant: Misty blue Tool life ,
carbide drills Fn:.15 canola oil Chip morphology
L:19 Mql: 25ml/h
P: .68 m pa
Steel
53
[70] AISI-1040 High speed n: 5, 11, 16 Dry, Flood q: 1.2 l/m Roundness deviation of
steel L : 19.5 Flood, MQL: holes is
MQL Air p: 6, Air q: 90 ml/min
(through nozzle tip).
[67] precipitation- Carbide vc:155 Dry p:6,7 TW, chip contact,
hardenedsteel inserts fn: 0.11 Flood q: 5,15,23 CF/torques SR
DD: 19 L : 33 MQL(Internal)
54
Table 6. Grinding of various materials under MQL vc: wheel velocity/speed m/min; wc work speed m/min; vf: work feed mm/min; ae:
depth of cut in mm; ts: spark out time (sec)
Ref Work Material Tool Material Cutting parameters Cooling Type, conditions Parameters
types used Evaluated/DOE
Inconel
[73] Inconel 751 Resin bonded TG:Surface grinding MQL q: 60, 80, 100 GF,
diamond wheel; (Down grinding) p: 2, 4, 6 Grinding temp,

WD: 150; vc: 2826 ; vf: 0.9 m/min; Droplet diameter: SR
WW:13 ae: 30 7,12.9,23.7m
Velocity
of droplet (m/s): 19.7, 25, 32
Titanium
[81] Ti-6Al-4V Al2O3 (91A46I8AV) TG: down grinding; Flood, MQL SR, GF
titanium alloy vc:900; MQL T:Vegetable oil, synthetic
wc: 20, 30, 40; oil, Behran cutting oil 34,
ae: 2, 5,7 Behran cutting oil 53
q: 20, 40, 50, 60, 70, 100,
140
p: 3,4, 5,6
Aluminium
[72] hardened One type of SiC; TG: Down surface Dry, Flood: Water miscible SR &GF,
stainless steel five types of Al2O3 grinding mode Flood, p:1, q: 8.4 l/min, Surface
(UNS S34700); wheels vc: 30 MQL fluid velocity:27m/s morphology
55
Al alloy AA6061 vf: 1500 MQL q: 100 ml/h
ae:5,15,25,35,45,55,65 p:4 bar
SD: 100
SpDr: 15˚
Steel
[82] AISI 4340 Al2O3 grinding vc: 1980; vf: 1; wc: 20 ; Flood Flood T: synthetic 5% Surface integrity
wheel ae: 40; ts: 12 s MQL concentration ; ( SR, MS, MH);

q: 11l/min grinding wheel
MQL T:vegitable oil ; diameteral wear
35 mm part wheel interface
p : 6,5 kgf/cm2
[78] AISI 4340 SNB151Q12VR2 vc: 1800; vf: .25,.50,.75 Flood, cutting fluid :vegetable SR,
(vitrified cubic wc: 34.8; MQL, oil(semi) Acoustic
boron nitride wheel) ae: 1.2 × 10−3; 2.5 × 10−3; MQL with MQL cutting fluid :vegetable emissions,
3.7 × 10−3 mm/rev; jet oil (full bio) Wheel wear
ts: 3 s Oil flow in MQL :2.7
×10−8m3/s
Air pressure in MQL:6.0 ×
105 Pa
Air flow :8.0 × 10−3m3/s
Velocity of compressed air
in cleaning system :470 m/s
Air pressure in cleaning
56
system
Workpiece :7.0 × 105 Pa
[77] Quenched and CBN grinding vc: 1800; Flood, Flood T:Vegetable oil GF, AE, SR,
annealed ABNT wheels vf: 1 MQL emulsion Roundness errors,
4340 steel. Workpiece n : 204 rpm; q: 20 l/min ; flow velocity: MH, RS,
Penetration depth (a) of 5.3 m/s Microstructural
0.1mm; ts:8; MQL T: Accu-Lube LB Analysis

Grinding width : 12mm; 1000
Grinding cycles: 100; q: 40, 60, 80ml/h
Max.cutting th.: 0.065 µm;
Min. cutting th. :0.047µm;
[75] EN8,M2,EN31 Alumina wheel vc:: 1500, 2700; Dry, Flood: a common emulsion Grind power, GF,
ae: 5, 15; Flood, of 5% grind temp.
wc: 6.5, 15 MQL by volume. &workpiece SR.
p:1; Fluid velocity: 27 m/s / Taguchi
MQL T: Pure synthetic oil
Castrol
p:4; q: 33
[76] 100Cr6 harden vitrified bond GM: Down cut Dry, MQL: mineral oil, fat SR, GF,
steel corundum, resin vc: 1800;vf: 3000 Flood, alcohol, hydrocracked oil,
bond corundum and ae: 30 MQL ester, white oil, carbon
vitrified bond SG hydride, water miscible
57
wheels (based on high polymer
proportion), water soluble
(based on synthetic oil),
MQL water miscible (based
on mineral oil), Pure water;
Air p:4; SD: 80; SpDr: 15˚
[74] Harden steel, Al2O3 vc:1200, 1500, 1800; Dry, Flood: Water-miscible GF & surface
soft steel (22A46I8V300) wc: 2.5, 5,10; Flood, MQL coolant lubricant Castrol quality
ae: 5, 10, 15, 25 Syntilo 2000, 5%
concentration
MQL
58

4 Review

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

4 Review

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

This article was downloaded by: [University of Otago]

On: 22 December 2014, At: 01:11

Materials and Manufacturing Processes

A Review on Minimum Quantity Lubrication for

Click for updates

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10426914.2014.994759

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Vishal S Sharma1, GurRaj Singh1, Knut Sørby2

Corresponding author: Email: sharmvs@nitj.ac.in

cooled machining are the stepping stones. Nevertheless, machining is always

for research in this area.

KEYWORDS: Cutting, fluids, MQL, machining

operations because of economical and ecological pressures. The overall objective of

international standard 14001 is to protect environment in balance with socio-economic

material preservation [1,2,3,4,5].

detail so as to reach the desired objective.

of cut, type of operation) [6].

be proved very useful for any future studies in this field.

that may be useful.

away formed chip from the cutting zone [7].

Furthermore, a certain amount of heat is taken away by the chips [8,9].

oils, emulsions), synthetic (chemical) fluids and semi-synthetic (semi-chemical) fluids.

disadvantages of different types of cutting fluids are presented in Table 1.

generally used in high-speed machining [6].

MINIMUM QUANTITY LUBRICATION

alternative approach of mist lubrication has proven to be a better alternative in which a

presented in this section.

accompanied by certain problems such as a poor TL as well as strength. Notch wear is

of the metallurgical transformations.

cutting parameters [22].

temperatures. Many problems in machining exist while machining these alloys.

better thermal conductivity [24].

elasticity make it necessary to dissipate the generated heat. Otherwise, it is difficult to

maintain tolerances of the workpiece. Al alloys normally have significant amounts of Si

MACHINING USING MQL: TURNING

surface indicated that surface roughness increased proportionately with feedrate.

green manufacturing. It was observed that (nc-AlTiN)/(a-Si3N4) tool only underwent an

and the results could be compared.

of experiments were performed on MQL by turning steel samples at a large number of

al (2007) conducted experiments to compare the performance of MQL and dry

observed in the tool-chip interface temperature by 20 to 30%, CF by 5 % to 12%, CTh up

in TW as well as the CF while the TL witnessed an upward trend [45]. Observationswere

as a response parameter. It was found lower in both cases as compared to the

better process for machining of steel samples providing better results.

MACHINING USING MQL: MILLING

parameters had an anchoring effect on the CF as well as the temperature. The

resulted into a significant reduction in CF and SR.

inserts to perform machining experiments on Ti-6Al-4V by using several combinations of

experiments with nozzles of different specifications. Al machining carried out by Boswell

therefore is sustainable [25]. Murthy (2012) proposed an algorithm based on artificial

in a lowered TW and SR along with a significant reduction in the CT as well. The

the chances for the aberasive wear [58].

further improve the machining effctiveness of MQL milling is to use cryogenic

supply rate desirable results could be obtained.

of TW and SR as compared to the MQL without the air.

in a small quantity as spray.

MACHINING USING MQL: DILLING

it primarily determines the quality of the hole.

parameters on performance characteristics during the drilling of Al7075. They evaluated

experiments, a set of optimum values of various parameters were obtained: Cutting

systems of mist application showed better effictiveness in performing the desired

mandatory for successful applicatin of the cooling technique. Bhowmick et al (2011)

assessment of the atomization properties of cutting fluids. Furthermore, they need to be

Technology : An International 3, 1999, 107–139.