MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407058689 · doi:10.1016/j.jmrt.2025.01.246

Optimising subsurface integrity and surface quality in mild steel turning: A multi-objective approach to tool wear and machining parameters

2025· article· en· W4407058689 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Yuzhu Bai, Raheel Naveed

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Materials Research and Technology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced machining processes and optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, University of AlbertaState Key Laboratory of TribologyTsinghua University
KeywordsMaterials scienceSurface integrityMachiningMetallurgyQuality (philosophy)Tool wearMechanical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the impact of machining parameters and tool dynamics on mild steel degradation of surface quality and subsurface, including heat effects, deformation, and microstructural changes that lead to microcracks and work hardening. Firstly, we examined the individual impacts of cutting velocity (Vc), feeding rate (f), and depth of cut (ap) on surface roughness and surface topography. Secondly, an examination was conducted to assess the influence of tool wear on the morphology of the turning surface using the white light interferometer (ZYGO). Finally, this study employs Grey Relational Analysis (GRA), Data Environment Analysis Ranking (DEAR), and Multi-objective Optimization based on Ratio Analysis Method (MOORA) optimization techniques with S/N ratios to refine 3D surface roughness (Sa, Sz, Sq) and material removal rates (MRR) in mild steel turning using a CVD-coated carbide tool. Key findings reveal that increasing Vc reduces surface roughness and improves morphology, while higher f and ap deteriorate both. Tool wear progresses through three stages, with the poorest surface quality occurring in the final stage. The results showed that cutting speed is the most influencing parameter on surface roughness in wet (43.37%) and dry (56.66%) turning, followed by feed rate (wet: 6.90%, dry: 7.71%) and depth of cut having minimal impact (wet: 2.04%, dry: 0.12%). The optimal machining parameters, determined as Vc = 125.6 m/min, f = 0.35 mm/rev, and ap = 0.7 mm, demonstrate the efficacy of the optimization techniques in achieving enhanced surface quality and making a significant contribution to the field of machining and manufacturing.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.445

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.310 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Materials Research and TechnologySame topicAdvanced machining processes and optimizationFrench-language works237,207