In magnetorheological fluid-based finishing processes, the lower gripping of abrasives in between ferromagnetic particle’s chain structure limits its finishing speed, resulting in a lower material removal rate and desired surface standard. In addition, tool ageing has significantly impacted these finishing processes at a higher speed. To improve the efficiency of finishing processes, composite magnetic abrasives are fabricated by using powder metallurgy techniques via both microwave and conventional processing (sintering) routes. Comparison studies were performed on these samples based on ferromagnetic materials (CIPs and EIPs) used and sintering at 950°C under fixed element composition. A newly advanced chemo-mechanical magneto-rheological finishing (CMMRF) process for aluminium alloy surface polishing was also proposed, combining mechanical abrasion and chemical action for the performance evaluation of composite magnetic abrasives. Most notably, the microwave processed composite magnetic abrasive outperformed conventionally processed samples in terms of magnetic and rheological properties. The composite magnetic abrasives significantly increased the rate of material removal from the metal surface while reducing the tool ageing effect. The surface profile and observation show that a nearly defect-free surface was produced at higher speeds using these composite magnetic abrasives compared to simply mixed abrasives based results.
JainVKSidparaASankarMR, et al. Nano-finishing techniques: A review. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science2012; 226: 327–346.
2.
JainVK. Magnetic field assisted abrasive based micro-/nano-finishing. J Mater Process Technol2009; 209: 6022–6038.
3.
SinghMSinghAK. Theoretical investigations into magnetorheological finishing of external cylindrical surfaces for improved performance. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science2020; 234: 4872–4892.
4.
AnjaneyuluKVenkateshG. Surface texture improvement of magnetic and non magnetic materials using magnetic abrasive finishing process. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science2021; 235: 4084–4096.
5.
KordonskiWIGoliniD. Fundamentals of magnetorheological fluid utilization in high precision finishing. J Intell Mater Syst Struct1999; 10: 683–689.
6.
SinghDKJainVKRaghuramV. Parametric study of magnetic abrasive finishing process. J Mater Process Technol2004; 149: 22–29.
7.
FanZTianYZhouQ, et al. Enhanced magnetic abrasive finishing of Ti–6Al–4V using shear thickening fluids additives. Precis Eng2020; 64: 300–306.
8.
SirwalSASinghAK. Analysis of the surface roughness for novel magnetorheological finishing of a typical blind hole workpiece. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science2019; 233: 1541–1561.
9.
PetareACJainNK. A critical review of past research and advances in abrasive flow finishing process. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2018; 97: 741–782.
10.
KhalilAKYipWSToS. Theoretical and experimental investigations of magnetic field assisted ultra-precision machining of titanium alloys. J Mater Process Technol2022; 300: 117429.
11.
SrivastavaMPandeyPM. Experimental investigation into polishing of monocrystalline silicon wafer using double-disc chemical assisted magnetorheological finishing process. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science2021; 235: 5467–5486.
12.
RanjanPBalasubramaniamRJainVK. Analysis of magnetorheological fluid behavior in chemo-mechanical magnetorheological finishing (CMMRF) process. Precis Eng2017; 49: 122–135.
13.
AhmadSSingariRMMishraRS. Development of Al2O3-SiO2 based magnetic abrasive by sintering method and its performance on Ti-6Al-4V during magnetic abrasive finishing. Trans Inst Metal Finishing2021; 99: 94–101.
14.
SrivastavaMPandeyPM. The influence of ultrasonic vibrations on material removal in the silicon wafer polishing using DDCAMRF: experimental investigations and process optimization. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science2022; 236: 3198–3215.
15.
LiuZQChenYLiYJ, et al. Comprehensive performance evaluation of the magnetic abrasive particles. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2013; 68: 631–640.
16.
MomohjimohISahebNHusseinMA, et al. Electrical conductivity of spark plasma sintered Al2O3–SiC and Al2O3-carbon nanotube nanocomposites. Ceram Int2020; 46: 16008–16019.
17.
GhoshGSidparaABandyopadhyayPP. Magnetorheological finishing of WC-Co coating using iron-B4C-CNT composite abrasives. Tribol Int2021; 155: 106807.
18.
ShuklaVCPandeyPM. Experimental investigations into sintering of magnetic abrasive powder for ultrasonic assisted magnetic abrasive finishing process. Mater Manuf Process2017; 32: 108–114.
19.
NiranjanMSJhaS. Experimental investigation into tool aging effect in ball end magnetorheological finishing. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2015; 80: 1895–1902.
20.
ZhuWDongXHuangH, et al. Iron nanoparticles-based magnetorheological fluids: A balance between MR effect and sedimentation stability. J Magn Magn Mater2019; 491: 165556.
21.
ShuklaVCPandeyPMDixitUS, et al. Modeling of normal force and finishing torque considering shearing and ploughing effects in ultrasonic assisted magnetic abrasive finishing process with sintered magnetic abrasive powder. Wear2017; 390-391: 11–22.
22.
MadhanMPrabhakaranG. Microwave versus conventional sintering: Microstructure and mechanical properties of Al2O3–SiC ceramic composites. Boletín de la Sociedad Española de Cerámica y Vidrio2019; 58: 14–22.
23.
Vignesh BabuRKanagarajS. Thermal, electrical and mechanical characterization of microwave sintered copper/carbon nanotubes (CNT) composites against sintering duration, CNT diameter and its concentration. J Mater Process Technol2018; 258: 296–309.
24.
MishraDKPandeyPM. Effect of sintering parameters on the microstructure and compressive mechanical properties of porous Fe scaffold fabricated using 3D printing and pressure less microwave sintering. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science2020; 234: 4305–4320.
25.
SidparaAMJainV. Nanofinishing of freeform surfaces of prosthetic knee joint implant. Proc IMechE, Part B: J Engineering Manufacture2012; 226: 1833–1846.
26.
BanerjeeGRhoadesRL. Chemical Mechanical Planarization Historical Review and future direction. ECS Trans2008; 13: 1–19.
27.
XuGLiangHZhaoJ, et al. Investigation of copper removal mechanisms during CMP. J Electrochem Soc2004; 151: G688.
28.
HongJNiuXLiuY, et al. Effect of a novel chelating agent on defect removal during post-CMP cleaning. Appl Surf Sci2016; 378: 239–244.
29.
YuhMJangSKimH, et al. Development of green CMP by slurry reduction through controlling platen coolant temperature. Int J Prec Eng Manuf Green Techn2015; 2: 339–344.
30.
KordonskiWGoliniD. Multiple application of magnetorheological effect in high precision finishing. J Intell Mater Syst Struct2002; 13: 401–404.
31.
KordonskiWGorodkinS. Material removal in magnetorheological finishing of optics. Appl Opt2011; 50: 1984–1994.
32.
KumarYSinghH. Chemomechanical magnetorheological finishing: Process mechanism, research trends, challenges and opportunities in surface finishing. J Micromanuf2021; 1–14.
33.
NiranjanMJhaSKotnalaRK. Ball end magnetorheological finishing using bidisperse magnetorheological polishing fluid. Mater Manuf Process2014; 29: 487–492.
34.
RanjanPBalasubramaniamRSuriVK. Development of chemo-mechanical magnetorheological finishing process for super finishing of copper alloy. Int J Manuf Technol Manag2013; 27: 130–141.
35.
GhaiVRanjanPBatishA, et al. Atomic-level finishing of aluminum alloy by chemo-mechanical magneto-rheological finishing (CMMRF) for optical applications. J Manuf Process2018; 32: 635–643.
36.
WangZWuYDaiY, et al. Subsurface damage distribution in the lapping process. Appl Opt2008; 47: 1417–1426.
37.
ZhangGZhaoYZhaoD, et al. New iron-based SiC spherical composite magnetic abrasive for magnetic abrasive finishing. Chin J Mech Eng2013; 26: 377–383.
38.
RanjanPBalasubramaniamRSuriVK. Modelling and simulation of chemo-mechanical magnetorheological finishing (CMMRF) process. Int J Precis Technol2014; 4: 230.
39.
KubotaAYoshimuraMFukuyamaS, et al. Planarization of C-face 4H-SiC substrate using Fe particles and hydrogen peroxide solution. Precis Eng2012; 36: 137–140.
40.
LiangHLuJPanJ, et al. Material removal process of single-crystal SiC in chemical-magnetorheological compound finishing. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2018; 94: 2939–2948.
41.
LiTSunHWangD, et al. High-performance chemical mechanical polishing slurry for aluminum alloy using hybrid abrasives of zirconium phosphate and alumina. Appl Surf Sci2021; 537: 147859.
42.
FrielJJ. Atmospheric corrosion products on Al, Zn, and AlZn metallic coatings. Corrosion1986; 42: 422–426.
43.
HunterMSFowleP. Natural and thermally formed oxide films on aluminum. J Electrochem Soc1956; 103: 482.
44.
NagdeveLJainVKRamkumarJ. Preliminary investigations into nano-finishing of freeform surface (femoral) using inverse replica fixture. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2019; 100: 1081–1092.
45.
WangYGopeDJandhyalaV, et al. Generalized Kirchoff’s current and voltage law formulation for coupled circuit–electromagnetic simulation with surface integral equations. IEEE Trans Microw Theory Tech2004; 52: 1673–1682.
46.
FanZTianYLiuZ, et al. Investigation of a novel finishing tool in magnetic field assisted finishing for titanium alloy Ti-6Al-4V. J Manuf Process2019; 43: 74–82.
47.
RanjanPBalasubramaniamRJainVK. Analysis, design and synthesis of water-based magnetorheological fluid for CMMRF process. J Manuf Process2018; 1: 45–52.
48.
RanjanPBalasubramaniamRJainVK. Mechanism of material removal during nanofinishing of aluminium in aqueous KOH: A reactive molecular dynamics simulation study. Comput Mater Sci2019; 156: 35–46.
49.
SinghPSinghLSinghS. Manufacturing and performance analysis of mechanically alloyed magnetic abrasives for magneto abrasive flow finishing. J Manuf Process2020; 50: 161–169.
50.
ChengYSunSHuH. Preparation of Al 2 O 3 /tic micro-composite ceramic tool materials by microwave sintering and their microstructure and properties. Ceram Int2014; 40: 16761–16766.
51.
JonesSBFriedmanSP. Particle shape effects on the effective permittivity of anisotropic or isotropic media consisting of aligned or randomly oriented ellipsoidal particles. Water Resour Res2000; 36: 2821–2833.
52.
ShilanSTMazlanSAIdoY, et al. A comparison of field-dependent rheological properties between spherical and plate-like carbonyl iron particles-based magneto-rheological fluids. Smart Mater Struct2016; 25: 095025.
53.
NagdeveLSidparaAJainVK, et al. On the effect of relative size of magnetic particles and abrasive particles in MR fluid-based finishing process. Mach Sci Technol2018; 22: 493–506.
54.
MishraVGoelHMulikRS, et al. Determining work-brush interface temperature in magnetic abrasive finishing process. J Manuf Process2014; 16: 248–256.
55.
SinghRKGangwarSSinghDK. On the temperature analysis of magnetic abrasive finishing of aluminum 6060 using finite element method. Mach Sci Technol2021; 25: 177–208.
56.
SrivastavaMPandeyPMBasheedGA, et al. Synthesis and characterization of the rheological behavior of MR fluid for polishing silicon wafer using double-disc chemical-assisted magneto-rheological finishing process. J Magn Magn Mater2021; 534: 168044.
57.
SaraswathammaKJhaSVenkateswara RaoP. Rheological behaviour of magnetorheological polishing fluid for Si polishing. Mater Today Proc2017; 4: 1478–1491.
58.
SidparaADasMJainVK. Rheological characterization of magnetorheological finishing fluid. Mater Manuf Process2009; 24: 1467–1478.
59.
JainVKRanjanPSuriVK, et al. Chemo-mechanical magneto-rheological finishing (CMMRF) of silicon for microelectronics applications. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol2010; 59: 323–328.
