This study investigates the potential use of glass waste as an abrasive in abrasive water jet (AWJ) cutting of rocks. A comparative analysis is presented to evaluate the cutting performance of glass waste in comparison to garnet, which is the most frequently utilised abrasive material. The following performance outputs are considered: cutting depth, cutting wear zone (CWZ) depth, cutting width, material removal rate (MRR), quality of the cutting surfaces and kerf angle. It is concluded that glass waste can be successfully used as an abrasive, particularly for cutting rocks that are not very hard. Finally, it can be stated that the utilisation of glass waste as an alternative abrasive to garnet has the potential to engender a number of environmental and economic advantages.
EnginIC.A correlation for predicting the abrasive water jet cutting depth for natural stones. S Afr J Sci2012; 108(9/10): 1–11.
2.
AkkurtA.Su jeti ile kesme sistemleri ve uygulama alanlarının değerlendirilmesi. Politeknik Dergisi2004; 7(2): 129–139.
3.
AydinGKarakurtIAmiriM, et al. Improvement of rock cutting performance through two-pass abrasive waterjet cutting. Sustainability2022; 14(19): 12704.
4.
XuS. Modelling the cutting process and cutting performance in abrasive waterjet machining with controlled nozzle oscillation. Ph.D. Thesis, Queensland University of Technology, School of Engineering Systems, 2005.
5.
Kantha BabuMKrishnaiah ChettyOV. A study on recycling of abrasives in abrasive water jet machining. Wear2003; 254(7–8): 763–773.
6.
AydinG.Recycling of abrasives in abrasive water jet cutting with different types of granite. Arab J Geosci2014; 7(10): 4425–4435.
7.
AydinG.Performance of recycling abrasives in rock cutting by abrasive water jet. J Central South Univ2015; 22(3): 1055–1061.
8.
AydinGKayaSKarakurtI.Utilization of solid-cutting waste of granite as an alternative abrasive in abrasive waterjet cutting of marble. J Clean Prod2017; 159: 241–247.
9.
PerecA.Experimental research into alternative abrasive material for the abrasive water-jet cutting of titanium. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2018; 97: 1529–1540.
10.
SabarinathanPAnnamalaiVERajkumarK.Sustainable application of grinding wheel waste as abrasive for abrasive water jet machining process. J Clean Prod2020; 261: 121225.
11.
ChaYOhTMJooGW, et al. Performance and reuse of steel shot in abrasive waterjet cutting of granite. Rock Mech Rock Eng2021; 54: 1551–1563.
12.
PalaniyappanSVeiravanAKaliyamoorthyR, et al. Sustainable solution to low-cost alternative abrasive from electric ceramic insulator waste for use in abrasive water jet machining. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2022; 120: 5243–5257.
13.
ISRM. The complete ISRM suggested methods for rock characterization, testing and monitoring: 1974-2006 (Ed: UlusayRHudsonJA). Kozan Ofset, Ankara, 2007, p. 628.
14.
EN 14157. Natural stone test methods-Determination of the abrasion resistance. CEN European Committee for Standardization, Brussels, Belgium, 2017.
15.
ASTM. Standard test methods for specific gravity of soil solids by water pycnometer. D854–14, 2016.
16.
OhTMChoGC.Characterization of effective parameters in abrasive waterjet rock cutting. Rock Mech Rock Eng2014; 47: 745–756.
17.
AydinGKayaSKarakurtI.Effect of abrasive type on marble cutting performance of abrasive waterjet. Arab J Geosci2019; 12: 357.
18.
GrycRHlaváčLMMikolášM, et al. Correlation of pure and abrasive water jet cutting of rocks. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci2014; 65: 149–152.
19.
PearsonK.VII. Note on regression and inheritance in the case of two parents. Proc R Soc Lond1895; 58: 240–242.
FowlerGPashbyIRShipwayPH.The effect of particle hardness and shape when abrasive water jet milling titanium alloy Ti6Al4V. Wear2009; 266: 613–620.
22.
AswathyKGovindanP.Modeling of abrasive water jet machining process. Int J Recent Adv Mech Eng2015; 4(3): 59–71.
23.
LongXRuanXLiuQ, et al. Numerical investigation on the internal flow and the particle movement in the abrasive waterjet nozzle. Powder Technol2017; 314: 635–640.
24.
LabusTJNeusenKFAlbertsDG, et al. Factors influencing the particle size distribution in an abrasive waterjet. J Eng Ind1991; 113: 402–411.
25.
EnginICOzkanEKulaksızS.Investigation on the usage of some non-almandine garnet minerals as abrasive material in waterjet cutting. Gazi Univ J Sci2011; 24(3): 535–545.
26.
HashishM.Material properties in abrasive-waterjet machining. J Eng Ind1995; 117: 578–583.
27.
KarakurtIAydinGAydinerK.An experimental study on the depth of cut of granite in abrasive waterjet cutting. Mater Manuf Process2012; 27(5): 538–544.
28.
KayaSAydinGKarakurtI.An experimental study on the cutting depth produced by abrasive waterjet: how do abrasive and rock properties affect the cutting process?Int J Adv Manuf Technol2023; 125(9–10): 4811–4823.
29.
NazirRMomeniEArmaghaniDJ, et al. Correlation between unconfined compressive strength and indirect tensile strength of limestone rock samples. Electron J Geotech Eng2013; 18: 1737–1746.
30.
KabilanNMuttharamM.Correlation between unconfined compressive strength and indirect tensile strength for jointed rocks. Int J Res Eng2016; 5(5): 157–161.
31.
SaeedSBHAlshkaneYM. Effect of freezing and thawing on physical and mechanical properties of Sedimentary Rock. J Garmian Univ2018; 5(2): 155–172.
32.
SchülerMDadgarMHerrigT, et al. Experimental investigation of abrasive properties in waterjet machining. Procedia CIRP2021; 101: 210–213.
33.
AgusMBortolussiACaredduN, et al. Optimization of abrasive-workpiece matching. In: 15th international conference on jetting technology, Ronneby, Sweden, 2000, pp.171–180.
34.
ZarembaDHeesePBauerM, et al. Particle disintegration in the abrasive water injection jet. In: WJTA-IMCA conference and expo, New Orleans, LA, 2–4 November 2015.
35.
AydinGKarakurtIAydinerK.Prediction of the cut depth of granitic rocks machined by abrasive waterjet (AWJ). Rock Mech Rock Eng2013; 46(5): 1223–1235.
36.
KarakurtIAydinGAydinerK.An investigation on the kerf width in abrasive waterjet cutting of granitic rocks. Arab J Geosci2014; 7(7): 2923–2932.
37.
NatarajanYMurugesanPKMohanM, et al. Abrasive water jet machining process: a state of art of review. J Manuf Process2020; 49: 271–322.
38.
KonigWWulfC. The influence of the cutting parameters on jet forces and the geometry of the kerf. In: The seventh international symposium on jet cutting technology, Ottawa, Canada, 1984, pp.179–191.
39.
ArolaDRamuluM.The influence of abrasive waterjet cutting conditions on the surface quality of graphite/epoxy laminates. Int J Mach Tools Manuf1994; 34(3): 295–313.
40.
WangJ.A machinability study of polymer matrix composites using abrasive waterjet cutting technology. J Mater Process Technol1999; 94: 30–35.
41.
KarakurtIAydinGAydinerK.Analysis of the kerf angle of the granite machined by abrasive waterjet (AWJ). Indian J Eng Mater Sci2011; 18(6): 435–442.
42.
FowlerGShipwayPHPashbyIR.A technical note on grit embedment following abrasive water-jet milling of a titanium alloy. J Mater Process Technol2005; 159(3): 356–368.
43.
MomberAWKovacevicR.Principles of abrasive waterjet machining. Berlin: Springer, 1998, p.419.
44.
KarakurtIAydinGAydinerK.A machinability study of granite using abrasive waterjet cutting technology. Gazi Univ J Sci2011; 24(1): 143–151.
45.
KarakurtIAydinGAydinerK.A study on the prediction of kerf angle in abrasive waterjet machining of rocks. Proc IMechE, Part B: J Engineering Manufacture2012; 226: 1489–1499.
46.
AydinGKarakurtIAydinerK.Performance of abrasive waterjet in granite cutting: influence of the textural properties. J Mater Civ Eng2012; 24(7): 944–949.
47.
AydinGKarakurtIAydinerK.Investigation of the surface roughness of rocks sawn by diamond sawblades. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci2013; 61: 171–182.
48.
WanLXiongJCaiJ, et al. Feasible study on the sustainable and clean application of steel slag for abrasive waterjet machining. J Clean Prod2023; 420: 138378.
