Table 1
Input machining parameters for both AA6063/SiCg and AA6063/SiCb composites and their levels
| Factor | Symbol | Units | Level | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Level 1 | Level 2 | Level 3 | |||
| Pulse on time | TON | μs | 50 | 75 | 100 |
| Wire Feed | WF | m/min | 6 | 12 | 18 |
| Flushing Pressure | FP | MPa | 1 | 2 | 3 |
Table 2
Experimental design for L9 orthogonal array and the experimental data
| Sl. no. | TON | WF | FP | AA6063/SiCb | AA6063/SiCg | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MRR-1 (mm3/min) | Ra-1 (μm) | MRR-2 (mm3/min) | Ra-2 (μm) | ||||
| 1 | 50 | 6 | 1 | 8.57 | 1.88 | 8.81 | 1.82 |
| 2 | 50 | 12 | 2 | 9.09 | 1.59 | 9.27 | 1.63 |
| 3 | 50 | 18 | 3 | 9.78 | 1.11 | 9.94 | 1.24 |
| 4 | 75 | 6 | 2 | 10.51 | 1.65 | 10.83 | 1.69 |
| 5 | 75 | 12 | 3 | 11.23 | 1.67 | 11.19 | 1.81 |
| 6 | 75 | 18 | 1 | 11.86 | 2.45 | 11.98 | 2.40 |
| 7 | 100 | 6 | 3 | 13.25 | 2.56 | 13.05 | 2.72 |
| 8 | 100 | 12 | 1 | 13.52 | 3.09 | 13.66 | 3.05 |
| 9 | 100 | 18 | 2 | 13.61 | 3.10 | 14.13 | 3.17 |
[i] MRR-1 and Ra-1 = MRR and surface roughness of AA6063/SiCb; MRR-2 and Ra-2 = MRR and surface roughness of AA6063/SiCg.
[ii] All the experiments were conducted thrice, and the average values are provided.
[iii] FP, flushing pressure; MRR, material removal rate; TON, pulse on time; WF, wire feed.

Fig. 1
XRD patterns of (A) SiCb, (B) SiCg, and (C) AA6063. XRD, X-ray diffraction

Fig. 2
SEM images of (A) SiCb and (B) SiCg. SEM, scanning electron microscopy

Fig. 3
Influence of the input factors on the S/N ratio of (A) MRR-1, (B) Ra-1, (C) MRR-2, and (D) Ra-2. MRR-1, material removal rate; Ra, surface roughness; S/N, signal-to-noise
Table 3
ANOVA for MRR-1, Ra-1, MRR-2, and Ra-2
| Response | Source | DF | Adj. SS | F-value | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MRR-1 R2 = 99.65% | TON | 2 | 27.9286 | 268.49 | 0.004 |
| WF | 2 | 1.4216 | 13.67 | 0.068 | |
| FP | 2 | 0.1940 | 1.87 | 0.349 | |
| Error | 2 | 0.1040 | |||
| Total | 8 | 29.6483 | |||
| Ra-1 R2 = 96.64% | TON | 2 | 3.07616 | 22.98 | 0.042 |
| WF | 2 | 0.05429 | 0.41 | 0.712 | |
| FP | 2 | 0.72142 | 5.39 | 0.157 | |
| Error | 2 | 0.13389 | |||
| Total | 8 | 3.98576 | |||
| MRR-2 R2 = 97.82% | TON | 2 | 27.4332 | 1818.10 | 0.001 |
| WF | 2 | 1.8955 | 125.62 | 0.008 | |
| FP | 2 | 0.0138 | 0.91 | 0.523 | |
| Error | 2 | 0.0151 | |||
| Total | 8 | 29.3575 | |||
| Ra-2 R2 = 96.26% | TON | 2 | 3.19647 | 22.69 | 0.042 |
| WF | 2 | 0.05627 | 0.40 | 0.715 | |
| FP | 2 | 0.37520 | 2.66 | 0.273 | |
| Error | 2 | 0.14087 | |||
| Total | 8 | 3.76880 |
[i] Adj., adjusted; ANOVA, analysis of variance; DF, degrees of freedom; F, F-ratio; FP, flushing pressure; MRR-1, material removal rate-1; P, probability; Ra, surface roughness; SS, sums of squares; TON, pulse on time; WF, wire feed.
Table 4
Grey relational analysis for the WEDM process of AA6063/SiCb
| Experimental data | Normalized data | Grey relational coefficients | GRG-1 | Rank | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MRR-1 | Ra-1 | MRR-1 | Ra-1 | MRR-1 | Ra-1 | ||
| 8.57 | 1.88 | 0 | 0.613 | 0.333 | 0.564 | 0.449 | 9 |
| 9.09 | 1.59 | 0.103 | 0.759 | 0.358 | 0.675 | 0.516 | 7 |
| 9.78 | 1.11 | 0.240 | 1.000 | 0.397 | 1.000 | 0.698 | 1 |
| 10.51 | 1.65 | 0.385 | 0.729 | 0.448 | 0.648 | 0.548 | 6 |
| 11.23 | 1.67 | 0.528 | 0.719 | 0.514 | 0.640 | 0.577 | 5 |
| 11.86 | 2.45 | 0.653 | 0.327 | 0.590 | 0.426 | 0.508 | 8 |
| 13.25 | 2.56 | 0.929 | 0.271 | 0.875 | 0.407 | 0.641 | 4 |
| 13.52 | 3.09 | 0.982 | 0.005 | 0.966 | 0.334 | 0.650 | 3 |
| 13.61 | 3.10 | 1.000 | 0.000 | 1.000 | 0.333 | 0.667 | 2 |
[i] GRG, grey relational grade; MRR-1, material removal rate-1; Ra, surface roughness; WEDM, wire-cut electrical discharge machining.
Table 5
Grey relational analysis for the WEDM process of AA6063/SiCg
| Experimental data | Normalized data | Grey relational coefficients | GRG-1 | Rank | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MRR-2 | Ra-2 | MRR-2 | Ra-2 | MRR-2 | Ra-2 | ||
| 8.81 | 1.82 | 0 | 0.699 | 0.333 | 0.625 | 0.479 | 9 |
| 9.27 | 1.63 | 0.086 | 0.798 | 0.354 | 0.712 | 0.533 | 7 |
| 9.94 | 1.24 | 0.212 | 1.000 | 0.388 | 1.000 | 0.694 | 1 |
| 10.83 | 1.69 | 0.379 | 0.767 | 0.446 | 0.682 | 0.564 | 4 |
| 11.19 | 1.81 | 0.447 | 0.705 | 0.475 | 0.629 | 0.552 | 6 |
| 11.98 | 2.40 | 0.596 | 0.399 | 0.553 | 0.454 | 0.504 | 8 |
| 13.05 | 2.72 | 0.797 | 0.233 | 0.711 | 0.395 | 0.553 | 5 |
| 13.66 | 3.05 | 0.912 | 0.062 | 0.850 | 0.348 | 0.599 | 3 |
| 14.13 | 3.17 | 1.000 | 0.000 | 1.000 | 0.333 | 0.667 | 2 |
[i] GRG, grey relational grade; MRR-2, material removal rate-2; Ra, surface roughness; WEDM, wire-cut electrical discharge machining

Fig. 4
SEM micrographs of WEDM-processed surfaces: (A, B) AA6063/SiCb and (C, D) AA6063/SiCg. SEM, scanning electron microscopy; WEDM, wire-cut electrical discharge machining

Fig. 5
Texture analysis from Figure 4B (i–iii) and Figure 4D (iv–vi) at three different positions using Gwyddion image processing software (the red arrow denotes the 100-count mark)

Fig. 6
EDX mapping analysis over the machined surface of AA6063/SiCb. EDX, energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy; C, carbon; O, oxygen; Mg, magnesium; Al, aluminium; Si, silicon

Fig. 7
EDX mapping analysis over the machined surface of AA6063/SiCg. EDX, energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy; C, carbon; O, oxygen; Mg, magnesium; Al, aluminium; Si, silicon

Fig. 8
SEM micrograph of debris generated from (A and B) AA6063/SiCb and (C and D) AA6063/SiCg. EDX analysis of debris generated from (E) AA6063/SiCb and (F) AA6063/SiCg. EDX, energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy; SEM, scanning electron microscopy

Fig. S1
Experimental vs predicted values for (A) MRR-1, (B) Ra-1, (C) MRR-2, and (D) Ra-2. MRR, material removal rate; Ra, surface roughness