Non Conventional Machining Process Ppt Updated 🆓
Why it matters: Traditional single-energy methods have physical limits. Hybridization overcomes these.
An updated presentation must include a data-driven comparison table. Here is the 2025 benchmark data:
| Process | Material Removal Rate (mm³/min) | Surface Finish (Ra, µm) | Tool Wear Ratio | Typical Tolerance (mm) | "Updated" Note |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| EDM | 300 - 600 | 0.1 - 5.0 | 0.1 - 5% (Electrode) | ±0.005 | Dry EDM reduces environmental cost by 90% |
| LBM (Femtosecond) | 10 - 100 | 0.05 - 1.0 | Zero contact (No tool) | ±0.002 | Zero HAZ – critical for medical implants |
| ECM | 500 - 1500 | 0.05 - 0.8 | 0% (Cathode lasts) | ±0.01 | Pulsed ECM doubles MRR |
| USM | 50 - 200 | 0.1 - 0.5 | High (Abrasive slurry) | ±0.02 | RUM reduces cracking in glass |
| AJM | 10 - 50 | 0.5 - 1.5 | High (Nozzle wear) | ±0.05 | Nano-abrasives enable die cutting |
2. Electrochemical Processes: Material removal via anodic dissolution.
3. Chemical Processes: Material removal via chemical reaction.
4. Thermal Processes: Material removal by melting/vaporization using heat.
The updated presentation on Non-Conventional Machining Processes demonstrates a solid effort to modernize the content. The inclusion of recent advancements (e.g., Hybrid machining, EDM with AI integration, Water Jet Guiding Laser) is a strong plus. However, the slide density and lack of comparative data visuals slightly hinder the learning flow.
Pros: No heat damage; low cost. Cons: Low MRR (Material Removal Rate); nozzle wear.
Electrochemical processes (chemical + electrical):
Chemical processes:
Thermal processes:
Abrasive/Mechanical processes:
Hybrid and advanced processes:
Why it matters: Traditional single-energy methods have physical limits. Hybridization overcomes these.
An updated presentation must include a data-driven comparison table. Here is the 2025 benchmark data:
| Process | Material Removal Rate (mm³/min) | Surface Finish (Ra, µm) | Tool Wear Ratio | Typical Tolerance (mm) | "Updated" Note |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| EDM | 300 - 600 | 0.1 - 5.0 | 0.1 - 5% (Electrode) | ±0.005 | Dry EDM reduces environmental cost by 90% |
| LBM (Femtosecond) | 10 - 100 | 0.05 - 1.0 | Zero contact (No tool) | ±0.002 | Zero HAZ – critical for medical implants |
| ECM | 500 - 1500 | 0.05 - 0.8 | 0% (Cathode lasts) | ±0.01 | Pulsed ECM doubles MRR |
| USM | 50 - 200 | 0.1 - 0.5 | High (Abrasive slurry) | ±0.02 | RUM reduces cracking in glass |
| AJM | 10 - 50 | 0.5 - 1.5 | High (Nozzle wear) | ±0.05 | Nano-abrasives enable die cutting |
2. Electrochemical Processes: Material removal via anodic dissolution.
3. Chemical Processes: Material removal via chemical reaction.
4. Thermal Processes: Material removal by melting/vaporization using heat.
The updated presentation on Non-Conventional Machining Processes demonstrates a solid effort to modernize the content. The inclusion of recent advancements (e.g., Hybrid machining, EDM with AI integration, Water Jet Guiding Laser) is a strong plus. However, the slide density and lack of comparative data visuals slightly hinder the learning flow.
Pros: No heat damage; low cost. Cons: Low MRR (Material Removal Rate); nozzle wear.
Electrochemical processes (chemical + electrical):
Chemical processes:
Thermal processes:
Abrasive/Mechanical processes:
Hybrid and advanced processes:
