ABRASIVE JET MACHINING

AND
STUDY OF PROCESS PARAMETERS
 Abrasive Jet Machine
Introduction

Abrasive jet machining (AJM) is a non-traditional machining

process that can machine material without generating heat and
shock.

Abrasive jet machining (AJM) is commonly used for Cutting,

Cleaning, Drilling and Etching operation
 Mechanism of AJM

•Fine particles are accelerated in

gas stream .
•The particles are directed towards
the focus of machining.
• As the particle impacts the surface,
it causes a small fracture, and the
gas stream carries both the
abrasive particles and the
fractured (wear) particles away.
 Conventional
Abrasive Jet Machine

Compressor
 Constructional Details
Equipments involved in the construction of the
“ Abrasive Jet Machine” are as follows

1. COMPRESSOR
2. VIBRATOR
3. MIXING CHAMBER
4. NOZZLE
5. MACHINE TABLE
6. PRESSURE GAUGE & REGULATOR
 Process Parameters
The variables that influence the rate of metal removal are as follows :

1.Carrier Gas :
Carbon dioxide, nitrogen & air. Air is most widely used
2.Abrasive :
Aluminum oxide, Silicon carbide, Sodium bicarbonate etc.

3.Velocity of abrasive :
The jet velocity is a function of nozzle pressure & design.
The range of jet velocity is 150-300 m/min
4. Work Material :
It is recommended for processing of brittle material
5. Nozzle Tip Distance (NTD) :
It is the distance between the nozzle tip & work material.
 Effect of Process Parameters
on Machining
a) Effect of Pressure of carrier gas on Material Removal Rate (MRR)

S.No. Gas Pressure Material Removal Rate (MRR)

(Kgf/cm2) (mg/min)

1 5 18

2 6 21

3 7 23

4 8 26

Table a)1 : Effect of Pressure on MRR

30

25
Material Removal Rate (MRR),

20 Gas Pressure Kgf/cm2

mg/min

15
Material Removal Rate
10 mg/min

0
1 2 3 4

Pressure (Kgf/cm2)

Fig a)1 : Effect of Pressure on MRR

Source : Previous Experiments conducted by M. Roopa Rani and S. Seshan

(b) Effect of Nozzle Tip Distance (NTD) on Diameter of Cut.

S. No. Nozzle Tip Distance Diameter of Cut

(NTD) (mm)
(mm)

1 0.79 0.46

2 5.00 0.64

3 10.01 1.5

4 14.99 2.01

Table b1:Effect of Nozzle Tip Distance on Diameter of Cut.

Fig b1:Shows the effect of Nozzle Tip Distance on Diameter of Cut.

Source : Previous Experiments conducted by M. Roopa Rani and S. Seshan
 Block Diagram of
Fabricated Abrasive Jet Machine
Air
Hopper

Regulating
Compressor Valve Mixing Chamber

Nozzle

Nozzle Tip Distance

(NTD)

Workpiece
Table
 Photograph of
Fabricated Abrasive Jet Machine
Experimental Procedure:
Glass was used as a test specimen, was cut into square and
rectangular shape for machining on AJM.
Specimens were cleaned using air jet and weighed on a sensitive
scale, accurate to 0.001 gram .
Each test sample was placed on the work chamber and machined
by abrasive jet machine by varying various process parameters
The machine work piece was then removed, cleaned and
weighed again to determine the amount of material removed
from the work piece.
The size of hole at the top surface and bottom surface was
measured and the results were tabulated.
 Experimental Details:

Experiment No:1- NTD Vs Diameter of Hole

Observation – 1.1

1 2 3 4
NTD=6 NTD=12 NTD=15 NTD=18

Fig.1.1.1 Machined Work piece at Pressure = 5.5 kgf/cm2

Thickness of material = 4 mm
Observation Table
Pressure = 5.5 Kgf/cm2
Top Surface Bottom Surface
Nozzle Tip Distance
S.No. Dia Dia
NTD (mm)
(mm) (mm)
1 6 7.05 4.51
2 12 8.72 5.05
3 15 11.21 5.33
4 18 11.65 6.65
Table1.1 Effect of Nozzle Tip Distance on Dia of Hole.
Graph
Top Surface Dia.
Bottom Surface Dia.
12

11

10

Dia 9
NTD (mm)

Of
8
Hole
(mm) 7

4
6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Diameter of hole (mm)
NTD (mm)
Fig 1.1.2. Shows the graph of Diameter of Hole vs. Nozzle Tip Distance
 Experiment No:1- NTD Vs Diameter of Hole

Observation – 1.2

Fig 1.2.1 Machined Work piece at Pressure =6.5 kgf/cm2

Thickness of material = 4 mm
Observation Table
Pressure = 6.5 Kgf/cm2
S.No. Nozzle Tip Distance Top Surface Dia Bottom Surface Dia
NTD (mm) mm mm
1 6 7.55 4.55

2 12 9.75 5.65

3 15 11.15 5.91

4 18 11.75 6.05

Table1.2 Effect of Nozzle Tip Distance on Dia of Hole.

Graph

Top Surface Dia.

Bottom Surface Dia.
12

11

10

Dia 9
NTD (mm)

Of
8
Hole
(mm) 7

4
6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Diameter of hole (mm)
NTD (mm)

Fig 1.2.2 Graph of Diameter of Hole vs. Nozzle Tip Distance

 Experiment No:1- NTD Vs Diameter of Hole

Observation – 1.3

Fig 1.3.1 Machined Work piece at Pressure = 8 kgf/cm2

Thickness of material = 4 mm
Observation Table
Pressure = 8 Kgf/cm2
S.No. Nozzle Tip Distance Top Surface Dia Bottom Surface Dia
NTD (mm) mm mm
1 6 7.72 5.05

2 12 9.95 5.75

3 15 11.45 5.96

4 18 11.81 6.75

Table1.3 Effect of Nozzle Tip Distance on Dia of Hole

Graph Top Surface Dia.

Bottom Surface Dia.
12

11

10
NTD (mm)

9
Dia
Of 8

Hole 7
(mm)
6

6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Diameter of Hole (mm)
NTD (mm)

Fig1.3.2 Graph of Diameter of Hole vs. Nozzle Tip Distance

 Experiment No:2- Pressure Vs Material Removal Rate (MRR)
Observation - 2.1

Fig 2.1.1 Machined work piece for determination of MRR at Pr.=5.5 kgf/cm2
Pressure 5.5 kgf/cm2 Initial weight = 140.190 gm
Final Weight = 140.150 gm Time = 20 sec
Thickness = 8mm MRR = 120 mg/min

Fig 2.1.2 Machined work piece for determination of MRR at Pr.=6.5 kgf/cm2
Pressure 6.5 kgf/cm2 Initial weight = 141.200 gm
Final Weight = 141.130 gm Time = 20 sec
Thickness = 8mm MRR = 210 mg/min

Fig.2.1.3 Machined work piece for determination of MRR at Pr.=7.5 kgf/cm2

Pressure 7.5 kgf/cm2 Initial weight = 137.530 gm
Final Weight = 137.370 gm Time = 20 sec
Thickness = 8mm MRR = 400 mg/min
Observation Table
Thickness = 8 mm, NTD = 12 mm
S.No.
Pressure Initial Weight Final Weight Time MRR
kgf/cm2 (gm) (gm) (sec) (mg/min)
1 5.5 140.190 140.150 20 120

2 6.5 141.200 161.130 20 210

3 7.5 137.530 137.370 20 400

Table 2.1 Effect of Pressure on MRR

Graph
400

350

300
MRR (mg/min)

250

200

150

100

5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5

2
Pressure (Kgf/cm )

Fig.2.1.4 Graph of Pressure vs. MRR

Experiment No:2- Pressure Vs Material Removal Rate (MRR)
Observation - 2.2

Fig. 2.2.1 Machined work piece for determination of MRR at Pr.=5.5 kgf/cm
Pressure 5.5 kgf/cm2 Initial weight = 206.600gm
Weight = 206.570 gm Time = 20 sec
Thickness = 12 mm MRR = 90 mg/min

Fig.2.2.2 Machined work piece for determination of MRR at Pr.=6.5 kgf/cm2

Pressure 6.5 kgf/cm2 Initial weight = 207.130gm
Final Weight = 207.059 gm Time = 20 sec
Thickness = 12mm MRR = 213 mg/min

Fig 2.2.3 Machined work piece for determination of MRR at Pr.=7.5 kgf/cm2
Pressure 7.5 kgf/cm2 Initial weight = 201.750 gm
Final Weight = 201.590 gm Time = 20 sec
Thickness = 12mm MRR = 480mg/min
Observation Table
Thickness = 12 mm, NTD = 12 mm
S.No.
Pressure Initial Weight Final Weight Time MRR
kgf/cm2 (gm) (gm) (sec) (mg/min)

1 5.5 206.600 206.570 20 90

2 6.5 207.130 207.059 20 213

3 7.5 201.750 201.590 20 480

Table.2.2 Effect of Pressure on MRR

Graph
550

500

450

400
MRR mg/min

350

300

250

200

150

100

50
5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5
2
Pressure Kgf/cm

Fig.2.2.4 Graph of Pressure vs. MRR

 Conclusion:
Abrasive Jet Machine was fabricated with following specification:

1. Diameter of nozzle = 3 mm
2. Type of abrasive particle – aluminum oxide (AlO2)
3. Pressure range – 5 to 8 kgf/cm2
4. Carrier gas used – Dry air

From the experiment conducted it was observed that:

1. As Nozzle Tip Distance increases, the Top surface diameter and Bottom surface

diameter increases
2. As the Pressure increases Material Removal Rate (MRR) also increases.
Scope of Future Work:

In this fabricated abrasive jet unit experiment can be conducted :

1. By using different nozzle tip diameter.

2. By using different type of abrasive particles.

3. By using different sizes of abrasive particles.

4. By using different work material.

5. Also the abrasive jet machine can be improved by retrofitting,

computer numerical control (CNC)
 References
 M. Roopa Rani and S. Seshan “Abrasive Jet Machining-Process Variables and Current
Application”Metals Materials and Process,1995 Vol.7 No.4,pp 279-290.

 P K Ray and Dr A K Paul, “Some Studies on Abrasive Jet Machining” Journal of the Institution of
Engineers (India) vol 68 part PE 2 November 1987

 Alok K.Verma, Cheng Y. Lin Associate Professor ,Engineering Technology Dept. Old Dominion
University Norfolk, Virginia “Parametric Study of the Efficacy of Cutting Process in Abrasive Jet
Machining (AJM)”

 P. C. Pandey & H.S. Shan ,” Modern Machining “ Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company , Edition :
1980

 Production Technology HMT Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company , Edition :1980

 Maleev & Hartman “Machine Design “edited by O. P. Grover “ CBS Publishing & Distributor

 Amitabh Ghosh & Ashok Kumar Malik “Manufacturing Process “East –West Press Private Limited
,New Delhi, Edition 1995
THANKS