i

ABSTRACT

Currently the underlying necessities for productivity remain big issue of machining of
products in surface grinding. The demand on rapid and economic fabrication of
microproducts with complex shapes has also made new challenges for fixture design and
process parameters.

The current work is focused to reduce machining lead time to increase productivity by
introducing multi part fixture by changing the fixture design according to the component
and varying the process parameters like machining speed, and infeed to achieve required
surface roughness and dimensional accuracy.

By using multi part fixture improves the economy of production by allowing smooth
operation, quick transition from part to part, reducing the requirement of skilled labor by
simplifying the fixture design and increasing conformity across a production cycle.

ii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Description Page no.

1.1 Feed Stock 2

1.2 Sintering Furnace 3

1.3 Finished Parts after Sintering 4

2.1 Single station grinding fixture model 5

2.2 Single station grinding fixture drawing 6

2.3 Functional image of Hammer 7

2.4 General model of system or process 10

2.5 Procedure for design of experiments 16

3.1 General sequential design procedure for fixture design 19

3.2 Graph of time and cost for different stages of fixture design 20
3.3 Multi station grinding fixture model 22
3.4 Multi station grinding fixture drawing 23
3.5 Graphical representation of hypothesis test results 24
4.1 Cutting action of abrasive grains 25
4.2 Longitudinal peripheral grinding 25
4.3 Face diagonal grinding with radial feed 26
4.4 Photographic view of surface grinding machine 27
4.5 Photographic view of Talysurf surface roughness tester 30
4.6 Photographic view of multi part grinding fixture on machine
Bed 31
4.7 Photographic view of surface roughness inspection on notch
Area 32
4.8 Surface roughness value on screen 32
5.1 Main effects plot for standard deviation of surface roughness
indicating the effects input parameters 34

iii
5.2 Main effects plot for mean of surface roughness indicating the
effects of input parameters 35
5.3 Main effects plot for SN ratio of surface roughness indicating

the effects of input parameters 36

iv
 LIST OF TABLES
Table no. Description Page no.

4.1 Levels of parameters 28

4.2 Orthogonal array for experimentation 28

4.3 General specifications of surface machine used 29

4.4 Specifications of Talsurf instrument used 30

5.1 Surface roughness data for design of experiments 34

5.2 Final process parameters for production runs 38
6.1 Comparisons between old and new fixture design 39

v
 NOMENCLATURE

MIM Metal injection molding

Pcs Pieces

INR Indian rupee

DOE Design of experiment

ANOVA Analysis of variance

Mfg Manufacturing

2D Two dimensional

Vwh Velocity of wheel

Vw Velocity of work

OA Orthogonal array

ROI Return of investment

SD Standard deviation

SN Signal to noise

vi
 CONTENTS

Page no.

TITLE SHEET i
CERTIFICATE ii

INDUSTRY CERTIFICATE iii

ABSTRACT iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT v

DECLARATION vi

LIST OF FIGURES vii

LIST OF TABLES ix

NOMENCLATURE x

1. INTRODUCTION 1-4

1.1 Compounding 2

1.2 Moulding 2

1.3 De-Binding 3

1.4 Sintering 3

1.5 Finishing 4

2. LITERATURE REVIEW 5-16

2.1 Background and Literature Review 5

2.2 Existing Grinding fixture details 5
2.3 Component details 7
2.3.1 Component data 7
2.4 Surface roughness 8
2.5 Minitab 8
2.6 Test of Hypothesis 9
2.7 Design of Experiments and Optimization Techniques 10
vii
 2. 8 Overview of Taguchi Philosophy 11
2.8.1Choice of orthogonal array design 14
2.9 Signal to Noise ratio in Taguchi Method 14
3. Design Procedure of Fixture 17-24
3.1 Fixtures 17
3.2 Fixture Function 17
3.2.1 Fixturing Devices Include 17
3.3 Fixture Type and Design 17
3.3.1 Types of Fixture 17
[Link] Plate Fixtures 17
[Link] Angle-Plate Fixtures 18
[Link] Vise-Jaw Fixtures 18
[Link]. Indexing Fixtures 18
[Link]. Multi-Part or Multi-Station Fixtures 18
3.4 Fixture Economics 18
3.5 Fixture Design Criteria 19
3.6 Design Considerations for Fixture 20
3.6.1 Work piece 20
3.6.2 Operations 21
3.6.3 Equipment 21
3.6.4 Personnel 21
3.7 Final Design of Multi Part Grinding Fixture 21
3.8 Test of Hypothesis on Grinding Fixture 24
3.8.1 Experimental procedure for hypothesis test 24
4. Experimental Plan, Setup and Procedure 25-32
4.1 Grinding 25
4.2 Surface grinding process 25
4.2.1 Infeed of grinding wheel 26
4.3 Major advantages and applications of grinding 26
4.3.1 Advantages 26
4.3.2 Applications 26
4.4 Surface Grinding Machine 26
4.5 Experimental Setup 27
4.6 Machine Tool and Instruments Used in Study 28

viii
 4.6.1Machine tool 28
4.6.2 Instruments 30
4.7 Experimental Set Up and Procedure 31
4.7.1 Experimental Procedure 31

4.7.2 Assumption Made During Experimental Run 32

4.7.3 Measurement of surface roughness 32

5. Results and Discussion 33-37
5.1 Results of Surface roughness measurement corresponding to
L4 orthogonal array experiments 33
5.2 Discussion on Results 34
5.3 Significant Process Parameters for Production Runs 36

5.4 Confirmatory Trail with Final Process Parameters 37

6. Conclusions and Future Scope of Work 38-39

6.1 Conclusions 38

6.2 Future scope of work 39

References 40
Appendix-A 41-48
Appendix-B 49-50
Appendix-C 51-52

ix
 CHAPTER1

INTRODUCTION
Better quality at lower cost in a lesser time is increasing the competitive nature among the
manufacturers. Survival of the fittest as stated by Charles Darwin centuries ago, is still
applicable to modern world, especially in industries. To survive in the modern industry
one has to employ continuous quality improvement program with the minimum cost
possible. So to achieve the above requirement certain machine tools are required to
perform some machining operations.

During machining, a work piece with the help of machine tool and cutting tool is
converted into a product. In a product it has to be designed to the required specifications
such as size, shape, surface finish and dimensional accuracy. Machining is one of the
important processes which enhance the production.

Production is a process used for increasing the usage value of goods and services by
transforming a set of input parameter into a set of desired output parameters. One of the
important output parameters are dimensional accuracy and surface finish. Surface finish
of mechanical components may be influenced by various input parameters like feed,
speed, depth of cut, material of work piece, material of the tool, geometry of the tool,
application of cutting fluid, type of cutting fluid, dynamic characteristics of the machine
tool etc.

Further, the process parameters like cutting speed, feed etc. are expected to influence
vibration behavior of the machine tool. To increase the productivity high cutting velocity
and Infeeds are required. In general, due to the limitations arising out of machine tool
chatter and other factors, these cannot be increased after a certain limit. Thus process of
optimization is very important to identify the best parametric combination for obtaining
the desired response or responses like surface finish, material removal rate, etc.
Individually or simultaneously.
The MIM process combines the design flexibility of plastic injection molding with the
strength and integrity of wrought metals to offer cost effective solutions for highly
complex part geometries. The MIM process is typically explained as four unique
processing steps to produce a final part that may or may not need final finishing
operations.
1
Typical processes are listed below.
 Compounding
 Molding
 Debinding
 Sintering

1.1 Compounding:

Figure 1.1 Feed Stock

Fine metal powder less than 20µ particle size is blended with thermoplastic and wax
binders in precise amounts. The metal powder to binder ratio is approximately 60:40 by
volume. The blend is placed in special mixing equipment and heated to a temperature
causing the binders to melt. The mass is mechanically mixed until the metal powder
particles are uniformly coated with the binders. The mass is cooled and then granulated
into free flowing pellets (termed feedstock) that will be accepted by the injection molding
machine.

1.2Moulding:
Injection molding is identical in equipment and technique to how plastic injection
molding takes place. The pelletized feedstock is fed into a machine where it is heated and
injected into a mold cavity under high pressure. The part (now termed as green) is
allowed to cool and then ejected from the mold so the process can repeat. Since only the
binders melt (to carry the metal powders), the entire process happens at about 200° C.
The tooling can be of multiple cavities for high production rates. The mold cavity is sized
approximately 20% larger to compensate for shrinkage that takes place during sintering.
The shrinkage change is precisely known for each material.

2
1.3 De-Binding:

De-binding is a process where the binder materials are removed from the molded
component. This process is usually done in several steps whereby the majority is removed
before the sintering step, leaving behind only enough binder to handle the parts into the
sintering furnace. De-binding can be accomplished by multiple methods, the most popular
being solvent extraction. After de-binding the part is now semi-porous this allows the
remaining binder to easily escape during sintering.

1.4 Sintering:

Figure 1.2 Sintering Furnace

The de-bound parts are placed on ceramic setters which are loaded into a high
temperature, atmosphere controlled furnace. The parts are slowly heated in a protective
atmosphere to drive out the remaining binders. Once the binders are evaporated, the part
is heated to high temperature where the void space between the particles is eliminated as
the particles fuse together. The part shrinks isotropically to its design dimensions and
transforms into a dense solid. The sintered density is typically greater than 97% of
theoretical for most materials. The high sintered density gives the product properties that
are similar to wrought materials.

1.5 Finishing:

Depending upon final requirements, certain finishing operations may be performed to the
sintered part. To improve physical properties, heat treatment can be done as on any metal.

3
 Figure 1.3 Finished Parts after Sintering

Any type of machining operations can be performed to achieve tolerances that are more
precise than what the process can capably supply. Plating and coatings can be readily
applied due to the high material density. Numerous mechanical assembly techniques such
as welding or cold working can also be successfully used.

In metal injection molding technology parts are made in different steps. During these
processes there are many variations or errors occur in component. Especially during
sintering process there is a chance of distortion and density variation in part to part. Due
to the above situations there is a variation between parts to part dimensionally. As per
MIM standards the minimum achievable tolerance for any dimension is 1/10 th of total
dimensions. Hence, any finished component from MIM process should followed by
partial machining process.

Thus Grinding process added to correct MIM variation and grinding process also a
functional requirement

There are few problems in grinding process and they are listed below.

 In present situation productivity of the machining is very less (60 parts/hr)

 Inconsistency in surface roughness (as this is main requirement of part function)

These are the main problems in present machining process and this project work
mainly focused on the above mentioned issues.

4
 CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Background and Literature Review

This Project mainly focused on researched methods of fixture design to get an

understanding of the basic principles of fixture design. We also researched the varying
part holding methods to actually hold the part in a fixture. Grinding process is one of the
most used finishing processes in the manufacture of precision components. The correct
selection of the cutting conditions could provide a greater material removal possibility at
lower cost. Vibration during machining on grinding machine may influence the surface
quality of the product. The effect of vibration on machine tool can be disastrous.
In the present work, some experiments and analyses have been made to study surface
finish in surface grinding of component. The selection of appropriate levels of the cutting
parameters during grinding is very important for controlling required surface quality and
vibration level during the process. So the focus of the present work is to study the
responses (surface finish and vibration) under varied levels of the input parameters like
feed, in feed and work speed. Significance of these parameters on the responses are
evaluated.

2.2 Existing Grinding fixture details:

Figure 2.1 Single station grinding fixture model

5
 Figure 2.2 Single station grinding fixture drawing

To enable accurate machining, the part must be held in a setup that guarantees a definite
location (or position) and an orientation in space in relation to the part’s datum points
and/or surfaces. Moreover, the setup must ensure repeatable part positioning throughout
the production run. Current fixture made with single station i.e. single part at a time and it
is simple in design refer figure- This fixture was designed as per the standard design
procedure. During design of fixture designers considered all basic principles.

 Number of stations: 1part

 Output per hour: ~180 pcs
 Cost of the fixture: 7000 INR
 Minimum of surface roughness: Ra 0.690
 Maximum of surface roughness: Ra 0.980
 Average of surface roughness: Ra 0.80
 Standard deviation of surface roughness: 0.0732

6
2.3 Component details:

The Hammer of a firearm was given its name for both resemblance and functional
similarity to the common tool. The function of the hammer is to strike the firing pin in a
firearm, which in turn detonates the impact-sensitive cartridge (Bullet). When
the trigger of a firearm is depressed, it acts on the sear, which in turn releases the spring-
tensioned hammer. Some firearms have a striker instead of a hammer and firing pin.

Presently grinding operation performed on Sear – Hammer engagement area since this is
critical functional surface of the firearm. Sear notch area must me be very smooth and it
has a fine surface finish to cocking or engage and disengagement.

Figure 2.3 Functional image of Hammer

By considering above function of the Hammer it should posses following properties.

 Should withstand shock load

 Wear & Tear resistance
 Fatigue
 Should work at high temperatures

2.3.1 Component data:

 Name: Hammer
 Material: MIM S7 (Tool steel)
 Hardness: 48-53 HRc
 Density: 7.5g/cc Minimum
7
  Weight: 9gms
 Function: Initiates Firing pin for ignition
 Application: Defense product

2.4 Surface roughness:

Surface roughness, often shortened to roughness, is a component of surface texture. It is

quantified by the vertical deviations of a real surface from its ideal form. If these
deviations are large, the surface is rough; if they are small, the surface is smooth.
Roughness is typically considered to be the high-frequency, short-wavelength component
of a measured surface. However, in practice it is often necessary to know both the
amplitude and frequency to ensure that a surface is fit for a purpose.

Roughness plays an important role in determining how a real object will interact with its
environment. Rough surfaces usually wear more quickly and have higher friction
coefficients than smooth surface. Roughness is often a good predictor of the performance
of a mechanical component, since irregularities in the surface may form nucleation sites
for cracks or corrosion. On the other hand, roughness may promote adhesion.

Although a high roughness value is often undesirable, it can be difficult and expensive to
control in manufacturing. Decreasing the roughness of a surface will usually increase its
manufacturing costs. This often results in a trade-off between the manufacturing cost of a
component and its performance in application.

Roughness can be measured by manual comparison against a "surface roughness

comparator", a sample of known surface roughnesses, but more generally a Surface
profile measurement is made with a profilometer that can be contact (typically a diamond
styles) or optical.

2.5 Minitab:

Minitab 16 Statistical Software is a Windows statistical software package developed and

published by Minitab, Inc. It is used for different statistical analysis and data
management. The program was originally designed as a light edition of OMNITAB until
it was released as a standalone statistical package. The application is also used together
with the implementation of CMMI, Six Sigma, and other statistics-based improvement
methods.

8
2.5.1 Minitab 16 Provides the Following Main Features:

• Statistics Methods – The program is capable of performing different types of statistics

methods. It can be used to do Regression analysis and ANOVA. Basic statistical tests can
also be performed such as confidence intervals, hypothesis tests, descriptive tests, and
normality tests. Aside from this, Minitab 16 also provides control charts, quality tools,
reliability tools and other statistics.
• Graphs – Aside from performing statistical analysis, the program is also capable of
generating graphs. These graphs are mainly used as a visual analysis for the statistic
results. The graphs created using the program can be edited, updated, and exported.

2.6 Test of Hypothesis:

A statistical hypothesis test is a method of making decisions using data, whether from
a controlled experiment or an observational study (not controlled). In statistics, a result is
called statistically significant if it is unlikely to have occurred by chance alone, according
to a pre-determined threshold probability, the significance level. The phrase "test of
significance" was coined by Ronald Fisher: "Critical tests of this kind may be called tests
of significance, and when such tests are available we may discover whether a second

sample is or is not significantly different from the first.”

Hypothesis testing is sometimes called confirmatory data analysis, in contrast to

exploratory data analysis. In frequency probability, these decisions are almost always
made using null-hypothesis tests (i.e., tests that answer the question assuming that the null
hypothesis is true, what is the probability of observing a value for the test statistic that is
at least as extreme as the value that was actually observed?) One use of hypothesis testing
is deciding whether experimental results contain enough information to cast doubt on
conventional wisdom.

A result that was found to be statistically significant is also called a positive result;
conversely, a result whose probability under the null hypothesis exceeds the significance
level is called a negative result or a null result. The critical region of a hypothesis test is
the set of all outcomes which, if they occur, will lead us to decide that there is a
difference. That is, cause the null hypothesis to be rejected in favor of the alternative
hypothesis.

9
Statistical hypothesis testing is a key technique of frequentist statistical inference. The
Bayesian approach to hypothesis testing is to base rejection of the hypothesis on
the posterior probability. Other approaches to reaching a decision based on data are
available via decision theory and optimal decisions.

2.7 Design of Experiments and Optimization Techniques:

Design of experiments (DOE) is a powerful statistical technique introduced by R.A.

Fisher of England in the 1920’s. A experiments is a test or series of tests where
preplanned changes are made to the controllable variables of a process or system so that
the reason for changes in the response can be observed and indentified. So, design of
experiments refers to the systematic and scientific methods which are followed for
planning the experiments such that the experiments can be performed in the most efficient
and economical way to get the required data that will results in valid and objective
conclusions.

Figure 2.4 General model of system or process

This type of statistical approach to experimental design is required if one wishes to draw
a meaningful conclusion from the observed data. Hence, basically DOE refers to the
process of planning, designing, & analyzing the experiments so that valid & objective
conclusion can be drawn effectively and efficiently. In performing DOE, one will
intentionally make changes to the input process variables or factors in order to observe
corresponding changes in the output process Figure2.1 shows a general model of a
particular process or system.

In general, a system or process can be visualized as a combination of machines, methods,

people and other resources that transform some input (MIM Components, machines,
10
equipment, energy, manpower, etc.) into an output (products) that has one or more
observable responses. Some of the process variables (x1, x2,.., xp) are controllable
(Infeed, load, speed, time, etc.) i.e. they can be suitably changed to control the process
response, whereas other variables (z1, z2, …, zn) are uncontrollable (errors in measuring
instrument, impurities in the metal, human errors, atmospheric conditions etc.) i.e. they
can‘t be controlled in any way.
DOE can be highly effective when it is necessary to:

 Optimize product and process designs.

 Study the effects of multiple factors on the performance.
 Solve production problems by objectively laying out the experiments.
 Study the influence of the individual factors on the performance.
 Study the significance of each factor on the system response.
 Find out the tolerance level of the factors.
 Allocate quality assurance resources based on the objective data.
 Indicate whether a supplier‘s part causes problem or not.
 Combine different factors to their proper settings to get the best results.

2. 8 Overview of Taguchi Philosophy:

Dr. Genechi Taguchi carried out research with DOE techniques while working for
Electronic Control Laboratory in Japan, in the late1940‘s. He spent considerable effort to
make this experimental technique more user-friendly and applied it to improve the quality
of manufactured products. Dr. Taguchi's standardized version of DOE, popularly known
as the Taguchi method or Taguchi approach, was introduced in the USA in the
early1980's. Now-a-days it is the most effective quality building tool used by engineers
for all fields of manufacturing activity. The DOE using Taguchi approach can
economically satisfy the needs of problem solving and product/process design
optimization projects. Dr. Genechi Taguchi is regarded as the foremost proponent of
robust parameter design, which is an engineering method for product or process design
that focuses on minimizing variation and/or sensitivity to noise.
In robust parameter design, the primary goal is to find factor settings that minimize
response variation, while adjusting (or keeping) the process on target. After determining
which factors affect variation, it is necessary to find settings for controllable factors that
will either reduce the variation, make the product insensitive to changes in uncontrollable

11
(noise) factors, or both. A process designed with this goal will produce more consistent
output and a product designed with this goal will deliver more consistent performance
regardless of the environment in which it is used. Engineering knowledge should guide
the selection of factors and responses. It is necessary to scale control factors and
responses so that interactions are unlikely. When interactions among control factors are
likely or not well understood, it is necessary to choose a design that is capable of
estimating those interactions. Robust parameter design uses Taguchi designs (orthogonal
arrays), which allows to analyze many factors with few runs. Taguchi designs are
balanced, that is, no factor is weighted more or less in an experiment, thus allowing
factors to be analyzed independently of each other.

The application of DOE requires careful planning, prudent layout of the experiment, and
expert analysis of results. Based on years of research and applications Dr. Genechi
Taguchi has standardized the methods for each of DOE application steps. Thus, DOE
using the Taguchi approach has become a much more attractive tool to practicing
engineers and scientists. DOE using Taguchi approach attempts to improve quality which
is defined as the consistency of performance. Consistency is achieved when variation is
reduced. This can be done by moving the mean performance to the target as well as by
reducing variations around the target. The prime motivation behind the Taguchi
experiment design technique is to achieve reduced variation (also known as robust
design).

The following are the objectives of applying the Taguchi method.

 Making products and processes insensitive to environmental variations

 Making products insensitive to product deterioration
 Making products and processes insensitive to manufacturing variations
 Making products insensitive to unit to unit variations
In this optimization technique, the process or product should be carried out in a three
stage approach such as system design, parameter design and tolerance design. System
design reveals the usage of scientific and engineering information required for producing
a part. This design includes the product design stage and process design stage. In the
product design stage, the selection of materials, components, tentative product parameter
values etc. are involved. Similarly in process design stage, the analysis of processing
sequences, the selection of production equipment, tentative process parameter values etc.
are incorporated. The parameter design is used to obtain the optimum levels of process
12
parameters for developing the quality characteristics and to determine the product
parameter values depending on optimum process parameter values. Lastly, the tolerance
design is employed to determine and to analyze tolerances about the optimum
combinations suggested by parameter design. Tolerance design is required if the reduced
variation obtained by the parameter design does not reach the required performance.

Taguchi introduces an approach, using an experimental design for:

 Designing products/processes so as to be robust to environmental conditions.
 Designing and developing products/processes so as to be robust to component
variation.
 Minimizing variation around a target value.

Taguchi method is employed with the following steps to optimize the input parameters so
that the performance of the process is improved:
 To identify the process parameters to be evaluated
 To determine the number of levels for the design parameters and possible
interactions between the process parameters
 To select the appropriate orthogonal array and assign the design parameters to the
orthogonal array
 To conduct the experiments based on the arrangement of the orthogonal array
 To analyze the experimental results using ANOVA
 To select the optimal levels of process parameters
 To verify the optimal process parameters through the confirmation experiment.

The following terminologies have been used in DOE

 Factor (f): Those parameters that the tester intentionally changes during testing to
study its effect on the output.
 Levels (p): The different values of factors used in testing.

2.8.1Choice of orthogonal array design:

The Taguchi method reduces experimental costs by using orthogonal arrays to extract
useful and sufficient information from a minimum set of test data. Since experimental
procedures are generally expensive and time consuming the need to satisfy the design
objectives with the least number of tests is clearly an important requirement. The Taguchi
13
method involves laying out the experimental conditions using specially constructed tables
known as orthogonal arrays. The use of these tables ensures that the experimental design
is both straight forward and consistent. Adopting the Taguchi approach, the number of
analytical explorations required to develop a robust design is significantly reduced, with
the result that both the overall testing time and the experimental costs are minimized.
Through an analysis of the main effects and interactions of various controllable factors,
the use of an orthogonal array enables to screen and rank individual factors in order to
establish their optimal level settings. Furthermore, orthogonal arrays ensure consistent
results when different experimenters conduct the design of experiments. To choose an
appropriate orthogonal array, the total number of degrees of freedom needs to be
computed. The degrees of freedom are defined as the number of comparisons between
process parameters that can be made to determine which level is better. The degrees of
freedom associated with interaction b meaetween two process parameters are given by the
product of degrees of freedom for the two process parameters. The selection criterion is
based on the condition that the degrees of freedom for the orthogonal array should be
greater than or equal to sum of the degree of freedom of the input parameters and their
interactions. In the present work, L4 orthogonal array is chosen.

2.9 Signal to Noise ratio in Taguchi Method:

Taguchi method uses the S/N ratio to measure the quality characteristics. There are three
categories of quality characteristics are used.
 Smaller - the - better (minimize)
 Larger – the – better (maximize)
 Nominal – the- better (Optimum)
In Taguchi the term ‘signal’ represents the desirable value (mean) for the output
characteristics and term ‘noise’ represents the undesirable value (standard deviation S.D.)
for the output characteristics. Therefore, S/N ratio is the ratio of the mean and the S.D.
The S/N ratio is used to measure the quality characteristics deviating fro the desired
value. Taguchi uses logarithmic fuctions to determine the signal - to – noise ratios for the
three categories of quality characterstics which at=re as follows:
Calculations of the S/n ratio depends on the experimental objective:
 Larger - the - better

[ ]
n
S 1 1
ratio=−10 log 10 ∑ 2 (2.1)
N n i=1 yi
Where n= number of replications, y is the observed data and
14
 S stands for signal and N stands for noise.

 Smaller – the – better

[ ]
n
S 1
ratio=10 log 10 ∑ yi 2 (2.2)
N n i=1
Where n= number of replications, y is the observed data

 Nominal – the – best

S
N
μ2
ratio=10 log 10 2
d [ ] (2.3)

Where µ= mean
d = Standard deviation
In statistics , the standard deviation (SD) (represented by the Greek letter sigma, σ)
measures the amount of variation or dispersion from the average. A low standard
deviation indicates that the data points tend to be very close to the mean (also called
expected value); a high standard deviation indicates that the data points are spread out
over a large range of values.

Factor levels that maximize the appropriate S/N ratio are considered optional. A statistical
analysis of variance (ANOVA) is then used to find the influence of the process
parameters on the system response under consideration.

Identifying the factors to be optimized

15
Identifying the test conditions
Figure 2.5 Procedure for design of experiments

Chapter 3
Design Procedure of Fixture
16
3.1 Fixtures:
A fixture is a work-holding or support device used in the manufacturing industry. Fixtures
are used to securely locate (position in a specific location or orientation) and support the
work, ensuring that all parts produced using the fixture will maintain conformity and
interchangeability. Using a fixture improves the economy of production by allowing
smooth operation and quick transition from part to part, reducing the requirement for
skilled labor by simplifying how work pieces are mounted, and increasing conformity
across a production run.

3.2 Fixture Function:

Machining is basically a method of material or stock removal to a specified limit or
tolerance. To control this removal, the machining tool is fitted with stops, gages or
computer controls. Also, spatial relationships between the surface or edge being
machined and any part of the fixture must be identified and controlled.

3.2.1 Fixturing Devices Include:

• Various standard clamps, chucks, and vises
• Metal plates containing dowel and/or tapped locating holes or key slots
• Dedicated fixtures with specific design and build requirements

3.3 Fixture Type and Design:

The fixture must be designed to withstand the forces generated by the machining process.
Allowances in fixture design, as well as part design, must be made with respect to firm
clamping of the work and in the robustness of the fixture itself. Additionally, the forces
generated by the tool should be directed toward the clamping whenever possible.

3.3.1 Types of Fixture

[Link] Plate Fixtures
Plate fixtures are constructed from a plate with a variety of locators, supports and clamps.
They are the most common type of fixture because their versatility makes them adaptable
to a wide range of machine tools. They are made from many different kinds of materials,
which are governed only by the part being machined and the process being performed.

[Link] Angle-Plate Fixtures:

17
Angle-plate fixtures are a modification of plate fixtures in that rather than a reference
surface parallel to the mounting surface, it is set perpendicular to the mounting surface.

[Link] Vise-Jaw Fixtures:

Vise-jaw fixtures are modified inserts for vises designed to accommodate a Particular
work piece. These fixtures are the least expensive and simplest to modify. The only
limitations to these types of fixtures are size of the part and capacities of available vises.

[Link]. Indexing Fixtures:

Indexing fixtures are used to reference work pieces that need machining details set at
prescribed spacing. Indexing fixtures must have a positive means to accurately locate and
maintain the indexed position of the part.

[Link]. Multi-Part or Multi-Station Fixtures:

Multi-part or multi-station fixtures are normally used for either machining multiple parts

in a single setup, or machining individual parts in sequence, performing different

operations at each station.

In addition to their basic construction, fixtures may be classified in respect to the process

or machine tool to be used in the machining process.

3.4 Fixture Economics:

Of major concern in fixture design is the cost-to-benefit ratio. Fixture costs are amortized

by production quantities, part quality requirements and tooling accuracy.

To justify fixture cost and the lowest cost per part, the fixture must exhibit:

• Fast operational characteristics

• Ease of part loading and unloading

• Fool proof part locating during the production run

• Clamp requirements

3.5 Fixture Design Criteria:

Start

Analysis of the part for 18

which fixture is designed
 No

Yes

No

Yes

No

Figure 3.1 General sequential design procedure for fixture design

From above algorithem design of fixtures made simple and [Link] initial stage
need to understand the purpose of fixture, based on the requirements designers can start
desiging the fixture. Once the final design ready designer must relaese the fixture design
to manufaturing. After final assembly of fixture calibration must be taken care as per the
drawing and fixture can used for trial run.

Considering all steps right from the design to final production fixture the following Gantt
chart shows the time & cost spent on differnet steps in fixture design.

19
 Figure 3.2 Graph of time and cost for different stages of fixture design

3.6 Design Considerations for Fixture:

3.6.1 Work piece:

 Size (large, small)

 Shape (rectangular, square, cylindrical, spherical, other)
 Required accuracy (tolerances, machining allowances)
 Material type (steel, stainless steel, aluminum, iron, other)
 Material condition (cold rolled, hot rolled, cast, forged, other)
 Locating points (machined surfaces, unmachined surfaces, holes, slots, other)
 Locating stability (rigid, fragile)
 Clamping surfaces (machined vs. Unmachined, supported vs. Unsupported,
avoiding part damage)
 Production quantity (limited vs. Mass production, one-time vs. Recurring
production, projected future increases)

3.6.2 Operations:

 Type of operations (machining, assembly, other)

 Number of operations (similar vs. Different, sequential vs. Simultaneous)
 Sequence (primary operations, secondary operations, heat treating, finishing)
20
  Inspection requirements

3.6.3 Equipment:

 Machine tools (horsepower, size limitations, weight limitations, other)

 Cutting tools
 Special machinery
 Assembly equipment and tools
 Inspection equipment and tools
 Equipment availability and scheduling
 Plant space required

3.6.4 Personnel:

 Safety equipment (machine, operator, plant)

 Safety regulations and work rules
 Economy of motion
 Operator fatigue
 Power equipment
 Possible automation

3.7 Final Design of Multi Part Grinding Fixture:

Based on the above elaborated discussion a final design has been made for Grinding
fixture, refer Fig.--- for fixture design model and 2-D print respectively. During trail runs
there were lot changes has been made in fixture design according to the practical
situations. Fixture undergone so many reworks due to the manufacturing errors as well as
design errors.

21
Figure 3.3 Multi station grinding fixture model

22
Figure 3.4 Multi station grinding fixture drawing

23
3.8 Test of Hypothesis on Grinding Fixture:
Any new design must undergo a validation or trail run before it going to work under
actual conditions. In present work, design modification has been done on current fixture
and based on the current fixture data new fixture design has to validate. To validate new
fixture design with current fixture statistically, there is a tool called test of hypothesis,
which provides end results at 95% of confidence level.
3.8.1 Experimental procedure for hypothesis test:
 Collect the output data for both the fixture for which fixture has been made i.e., in
present work roughness value.
 During validation, process parameter (speed, feed, etc.,) must be kept same for
both fixtures to avoid variation due to process parameters.
 Collect the randomly and tabulate in Minitab. (For detailed trails data refer
appendix-B )
 Run the test of hypothesis with the data entered and results of hypothesis test
mentioned below graphs.

Figure 3.5 Graphical representation of hypothesis test results

From fig.3.5 results there is no significant change in end output (roughness of

component) of grinding fixture. Hence, the new fixture design is in line with the current
design and new fixture design has been approved to proceed further actions.
24
 Chapter 4
Experimental Plan, Setup and Procedure
4.1 Grinding:
Grinding is the most common form of abrasive machining. It is a material cutting process
which engages an abrasive tool whose cutting elements are grains of abrasive material
known as grit. These grits are characterized by sharp cutting points, high hot hardness,
chemical stability and wear resistance. The grits are held together by a suitable bonding
material to give shape of an abrasive tool.

Figure 4.1 Cutting action of abrasive grains

4.2 Surface grinding process:

ap :Feed in the direction of the grinding

wheel

ae: Feed relative the work piece surface

vft : Feed speed

Vc : Cutting speed

Figure 4.2 Longitudinal peripheral grinding

25
 Figure 4.3Face diagonal grinding with radial feed
4.2.1 Infeed of grinding wheel:

Infeed and feed rate (wok speed) crucially determine the total machining time in
reciprocating grinding. An increase of infeed, increases grinding forces and thermal
stress. The work piece surface roughness decreases with a higher number of engaged
cutting edges. In low removal rate grinding, maximum infeeds are recommended in the
range of 0.005-0.010mm. Larger infeeds can be achieved in creep grinding and high
removal rate grinding.

4.3 Major advantages and applications of grinding:

4.3.1 Advantages
• Dimensional accuracy
• Good surface finish
•Good form and location accuracy
• Applicable to both hardened and unhardened material
4.3.2 Applications
• surface finishing
• slitting and parting
• descaling, deburring
• Stock removal (abrasive milling)
• finishing of flat as well as cylindrical surface
• grinding of tools and cutters and resharpening of the same.
4.4 Surface Grinding Machine:

Surface grinding machine is used widely in industry to finish length and thickness of the
work piece within precise tolerances. The standard magnetic table furnished with surface
grinding machines can be used satisfactorily for work piece having resting surface

26
parallel to the surface to be ground. Solid plates can be ground under magnetic clamping
alone and no other fixtures are necessary.

Figure 4.4 Photographic view of surface grinding machine

For work pieces unsuitable for magnetic clamping and intricate shapes, special fixtures
must be designed. Surface grinding fixtures are generally similar to face milling fixture in
design. However, generally face milling is the first operation whereas grinding is done at
a much later stage when a number of the work pieces are available for location and
clamping
.
4.5 Experimental Setup:
Four sets of experiments were conducted to quantify the effects of the key process
parameters on the performance of the grinding operation. The full experimental procedure
is presented in the ensuing sections.

27
In order to quantify the effects of the controllable parameters on process performance and
part quality characteristics and establish the process constraints, a 4- run orthogonal array
characterization experiment was conducted using orthogonal array (OA) L4(23)
As mentioned earlier the input/process parameter i.e. the factors considered in the study
are feed, spindle speed and wheel grade. The response measured is surface roughness.
Based on trails runs, the levels of the factors are determined from Mini Tab. table. 4.2
Shows the factors and their levels. The design matrix corresponding to L4 orthogonal
array is given in Table 4.1

Table 4.1 Levels of parameters

Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3
Trail 1 1 1 1
Trail 2 1 2 2
Trail 3 2 1 2
Trail 4 2 2 1

Table 4.2 Orthogonal array for experimentation

Exp No. Wheel grade Level Infeed Level Spindle speed Level
DOE1 120 1 0.05 1 2700 1
DOE2 120 1 0.1 2 3300 2
DOE3 220 2 0.05 1 3300 2
DOE4 220 2 0.1 2 2700 1

Factor interactions were not considered in this experiment. The process parameter
traverse feed was not included as controllable experimental factor because they could not
be set precisely on the manual feed grinder used in this study. The order of experimental
trials was randomized and each trial was performed to obtain data points for each work
piece material.
4.6 Machine Tool and Instruments Used in Study:

4.6.1Machine tool:
For the present work, the surface grinding machine used has following principle
specifications, as given in table 4.3
Make: Okomoto
Model number: LINEAP450B
The photographic view of grinding machine is shown in Figure 3.2

28
Table 4.3 General specifications of surface machine used
Item Dimensions in mm
Capacity
Max. grinding capacity 450
Max. grinding width 150
Spindle center to table surface 75-465
Tables
Surface length 480
Surface width 150
Max. longitudinal movement 530
Max. cross movement 210
T-slot(No X width) 1X17
Feeds
Longitudinal movement of table one [Link] hand wheel (approx) 130
Cross movement of saddle one [Link] hand wheel (approx) 3
One graduation of hand wheel 0.02
Vertical movement of grinding head one rev. of hand wheel 1
One graduation of hand wheel 0.05
Rapid feed 400/480 per minute
Grinding wheel
Diameter 205
Width 6-25
Bore 31.75
Speed 2700-3600 rpm
Motors
Grinding wheel spindle 1.5w, 2P
Dust suction system 0.4Kw, 2P
Vertical feed 0.2Kw, 2P
Floor space
Machine height 1727
Length 1942
Width 1405
Net weight 940 Kg

29
4.6.2 Instruments:
The surface roughness parameters Ra, of the sampled surfaces are measured with the help of
Talysurf (Surface roughness measuring device)

Figure 4.5 Photographic view of Talysurf surface roughness tester

Table 4.4 General specifications of Talsurf instrument used

Item Specifications
Measurement rande 800, 80, 8, <4microns
No. of sampling data pieces 3267 max.
Evaluation length 0.1mm step from 0.1mm to max. drive
distance However, the max. evaluation
length
Differs depending on measurement speed.
Average no. of processing time 100 times max.
Display function Cold cathode tube side light system TFT
color liquid crystal display (6.5”)
Input device Touch panel
Output device Print out
Power supply 90 to 264 VAC single phase
Rough dimensions 300(W)X293(D)X211(H)
Weight Approx. 9.2 kg
Working environmental condition Temperature 10°C to 40°C
Humidity 40% to 70%
Instrument R & R 9 under standard test conditions

30
4.7 Experimental Set Up and Procedure:

As stated earlier a OKAMOTO surface grinding machine has been used and multi station
grinding fixture has been loaded on magnetic table of machine. The pictorial view of the
experimental setup is shown in the Figure 4.4

4.7.1 Experimental Procedure:

Step by step experimental procedure explained as below and fig.4.4 shows the
experimental set up of grinding fixture on machine bed.

Figure 4.6 Photographic view of multi part grinding fixture on machine bed
 Grinding fixture has been made straight by lever dial indicator so that dimensional
and straight of the grinding surface (notch) can be achieved.
 Parts have been loaded in each station and each station placed on the base of
fixture.
 Process parameters were fixed as per the design of experiment (DOE).
 Grinding process has been carried out on each set of experiments
 Data (surface roughness) has been collected on each DOE and tabulated.

31
4.7.2 Assumption Made During Experimental Run:

 Effect of uncontrollable variable is zero.

 Dressing frequency of grinding wheel made constant during the experiment i.e.
every 50 Pcs dressing has been done.
 Coolant used for all experiments.

4.7.3 Measurement of surface roughness:

After grinding, surface roughness has been measured for all the set DOE samples by
using Talysurf which has been mentioned earlier. The values of the surface roughness Ra
parameters have been recorded along the length of the notch. While inspecting the
roughness a cutoff / sampling length has been fixed as 0.9mm and has been maintained
same in all measurements.
As mentioned above surface roughness of the component inpected by using Talysuf probe
and corresponding Ra value at screen mentioned in below fig.4.5 and fig.4.6 respectively.

Figure 4.7 Photographic view of surface roughness inspection on notch area

Figure 4.8 surface roughness value on screen

32
 Chapter-5
Results and Discussion

In the previous chapter details of experimental plan, set up and procedure have been
discussed. In this chapter results are presented, discussed and analyzed.
5.1 Results of Surface roughness measurement corresponding to L4
orthogonal array experiments:
The results found from measurement of surface roughness are shown in table --. From the
results of surface roughness measurement, it is found that Ra ranges from 0.402 to
0.745µm
Table 5.1 Surface roughness data for design of experiments

Trail no. DOE-1 DOE-2 DOE-3 DOE-4

1 0.639 0.547 0.521 0.638
2 0.542 0.638 0.471 0.587
3 0.616 0.548 0.534 0.714
4 0.428 0.498 0.423 0.628
5 0.481 0.529 0.465 0.581
6 0.523 0.661 0.584 0.661
7 0.625 0.745 0.581 0.495
8 0.553 0.487 0.516 0.552
9 0.477 0.586 0.402 0.711
10 0.493 0.528 0.518 0.641
11 0.439 0.544 0.510 0.659
12 0.504 0.569 0.543 0.492
13 0.483 0.687 0.597 0.677
14 0.544 0.551 0.456 0.584
15 0.492 0.577 0.630 0.636
16 0.441 0.620 0.504 0.547
17 0.486 0.591 0.511 0.611
18 0.414 0.545 0.600 0.479
19 0.578 0.450 0.512 0.584
20 0.618 0.618 0.425 0.665
21 0.448 0.547 0.528 0.545
22 0.495 0.572 0.454 0.723
23 0.525 0.538 0.487 0.485
24 0.586 0.566 0.549 0.641
25 0.472 0.654 0.481 0.529
33
 26 0.519 0.527 0.522 0.572
27 0.452 0.491 0.591 0.539
28 0.561 0.518 0.531 0.637
29 0.572 0.741 0.472 0.492
30 0.548 0.529 0.578 0.581
Ave 0.518 0.573 0.517 0.596
Min 0.414 0.450 0.402 0.479
Max 0.639 0.745 0.630 0.723
Range 0.225 0.295 0.228 0.244
Stdev 0.0621 0.0708 0.0568 0.0712

5.2 Discussion on Results:

The results of L4 orthogonal array experiments, given the Table 5.1 shows surface
roughness values and among the four experiments standard deviation of DOE-3 shows
low value. However, to know which trail is better and which factor is significant
statistically above data must be analyzed by using Minitab.

Figure 5.1 Main effects plot for standard deviation of surface roughness indicating the
effects of input parameters on surface roughness

34
From fig.5.1 main effects plot for standard deviation of roughness shows that, there is no
significant effect on roughness by the factors wheel grade and spindle speed respectively.
However, there is adverse effect on roughness due to the infeed i.e., decreasing infeed
gives the better surface roughness. Hence, infeed of 0.05mm/pass gives the better output.

Figure 5.2 Main effects plot for mean of surface roughness indicating the effects of input
parameters on surface roughness

From above fig.5.2 main effects plot for mean clearly shows that there is no significant
effect on roughness by the factors wheel grade and spindle speed but, there is a significant
effect on roughness by infeed at 0.05 mm/pass i.e. lower the infeed gives a better mean
value of surface roughness.

35
 Figure 5.3 Main effects plot for SN ratio of surface roughness indicating the effects of
input parameters on surface roughness

From above fig.5.3 main effects plot for SN ration under smaller is better condition shows
that, at infeed 0.05mm/pass is gives higher signal to noise ratio since SN ratio should be
always as high as possible. Rest of factors (Wheel grade & speed) there is no significant
effect on response (roughness).

5.3 Significant Process Parameters for Production Runs:

Based on the above all main effects plots infeed have been causing main effect on surface
roughness and remaining parameter at both the levels gives the almost constant result. So
at any level both the parameter (Wheel grade & speed) can use to process the parts. To
proceed further a confirmatory trial must be run as per the below process parameter
combination.

Option-1 Infeed 0.05mm + Wheel grade 120 + Spindle speed 2800 rpm

Option-2 Infeed 0.05mm + Wheel grade 220 + Spindle speed 3300 rpm

Option-1 is preferably good due to following reasons,

 Wheel life is comparatively more in 120 grade.

36
  Frequency of wheel dressing is less in 120 grade.
 Burning issue also less due to coarse structure of wheel when compared with the
220 grade.
 Cost of wheel is less.

5.4 Confirmatory Trail with Final Process Parameters:

After finalizing the parameters, a confirmatory trail must be taken to ensure that whether
selected factors are really contributing the desired effect on output. Sometimes there is a
chance of undesired output from the selected factors due to the testing conditions or
wrong factors chosen for DOE. To avoid this situation every DOE must undergo a
confirmatory trail and must ensure purpose of DOE.

Based on the confirmatory trail data (refer appendix-C) the standard deviation is
calculated as 0.0641and which is close to the trail value. Hence, the final process
parameters are as follows.

Table 5.2 Final process parameters for production runs.

Process parameter Parameter value

Infeed 0.05mm/pass
Wheel grade 120
Spindle speed 2800 rpm

37
 CHAPTER-6

Conclusions and Future Scope of Work

6.1 Conclusions:
Table 6.1 Comparisons between old and new fixture design

Features Single station Multi station

No. of parts per Cycle 1 12
Machining time per cycle 12 sec 60 sec
Total cycle time 20 sec 160 sec
Clamping method Toggle clamp Spring loaded clamp
Machining cost per part INR 0.7 INR 0.5
Cost of fixture INR 7,000 INR 45,000
Standard deviation 0.0732 0.0641

From above table project can conclude as below:

 In new fixture, number of parts per cycle has been increased to 11 and this
modification improves the productivity and reduces the manufacturing lead time
of a component.
 In new fixture, machining time saves up to 58.3% so that capacity of machine can
increase by engaging machine with other components or same.
 Cost on machining time of component saves directly up to 50% so that bottom
line on component increases.
 Cycle time of process has been reduced by 33.3% so that customer demands can
meet with in time.
 Machining cost of a component has been decreased to 28.6%.
 Clamping method methodology has been changed to special spring material so
that, it improves the clamping force and consistency in new fixture.
 Durability of new spring clamp is more when compared with mechanical toggle
clamp.
 Cost of new fixture is too high due to robustness of design. However, the
following calculation justifies whether present design feasible or not.
 Standard deviation has been reduced by 12.4% i.e., variation output of the fixture
has been reduced by 12.4%.

Cost of new fixture or investment on new fixture =45,000/-

Parts produced per year =1, 50,000 pcs
38
Machining cost of total part produced in old fixture = 0.7*150000
=105000
Machining cost of total part produced in new fixture =0.5*150000
=75000
Difference between new and old machining cost =105000-75000
Cost saving by new fixture per year =30000
From above values Return of investment (ROI) period=1.5 years
Hence from above ROI period, new grinding fixture is feasible to adopt in present
production line.
 To meet customer demands, need to maintain minimum of 3-4 old fixtures in
production line due to this, maintenance of fixtures is complex as well as spaced
occupied for storage is more.

6.2 Future scope of work:

 The work can be horizontally deployed to similar type of components in an
industry.
Presently there are 12 variants of Hammer are running in industry. So that, can
deploy on all of the Hammers.
 The principle of multipart fixture can be adopted in reaming or drilling and
milling operation by indexing mechanism or some other fixturing concepts.
 Design of experiments may be conducted by changing the process parameters, to
reduce process variation.
 Present multi part fixture design may be modified to increase number of parts per
cycle i.e., 12 parts to 16 parts.

39
 References
[Link]

[Link]

AIAG, “Statistical Process Control”, Reference manual 2nd Edition, July 2005

[Link]

“Design and analysis of experiment”, Wiley, India, 1991.

“Introduction to quality engineering”, Asian productivity organization, 1990.

“A primer on Taguchi method”, New York, Van Nostraid Reinhold, 1990.

Minitab Tutorials for Design and Analysis of Experiments Dr. Jianbiao (John) Pan

Design and analysis of experiments‖, Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd, 1951.

Hand book of Machining with Grinding Wheels

By Ioan D. Marinescu, Mike P. Hitchiner, Eckart Uhlmann, W. Brian Rowe, Ichiro

Inasaki

Okomoto grinding machine user manuals.

Surfcom 480 instrument manuals.

Hasan O ktem et al., ―A study of the Taguchi optimization method for surface roughness
in finish milling of mold surfaces‖, International Journal of Advance Manufacturing
Technology, Issue 28, 2006.

Ross, P.J., 1989, Taguchi Techniques for Quality Engineering. McGraw-Hill,

New York.

40
 Appendix-A

Fig.A.1 Detail drawing of multi part fixture view-1

41
Fig.A.2 Detail drawing of multi part fixture view-2

42
43
 Fig.A.3 Spring steel clamp

Fig.A.4 Dowel pin for clamp

Fig.A.5 Locating pin for part hole-1

44
Fig.A.6 locking screw for Clamp dowel pin

Fig.A.7 Part locating block ( Left)

Fig.A.8 Locating pin for part hole-2

45
 Fig.A.9 Part locating block (Right)

Fig.A.10 Spring holding block for clamp

46
 Fig.A.11 Ejector block

Fig.A.12 Center support block

47
Fig.A.13 Cam screw

Fig.A.14 Butting pin

Fig.A.15 Carbide bush

48
Fig.A.16 Carbide slip

49
 Appendix-B
Table B.1 Surface roughness data for hypothesis test

Response 0.80 0.80

USL 0.80 0.80
LSL 0.00 0.00
Checking Method Surface roughness tester

[Link]. Old fixture New fixture

data data
1 0.95 0.841
2 0.91 0.74
3 0.86 0.76
4 0.78 0.86
5 0.72 0.81
6 0.89 0.84
7 0.88 0.63
8 0.81 0.72
9 0.78 0.86
10 0.69 0.84
11 0.72 0.82
12 0.86 0.74
13 0.82 0.77
14 0.84 0.75
15 0.78 0.74
16 0.87 0.76
17 0.95 0.74
18 0.73 0.64
19 0.76 0.68
20 0.86 0.78
21 0.83 0.81
22 0.79 0.69
23 0.82 0.74
24 0.72 0.68

50
25 0.82 0.84
26 0.88 0.77
27 0.71 0.81
28 0.82 0.81
29 0.98 0.76
30 0.75 0.85
Min 0.690 0.630
Max 0.980 0.860
Avg 0.819 0.769
Std 0.0763 0.0698

51
 Appendix-C
Table C-1 Surface roughness data for final confirmatory trail

Response 0.80
USL 0.80
LSL 0.00
Surface
Checking
roughness
Method
tester
1 0.651
2 0.722
3 0.623
4 0.647
5 0.654
6 0.718
7 0.646
8 0.745
9 0.658
10 0.669
11 0.679
12 0.756
13 0.717
14 0.752
15 0.689
16 0.674
17 0.837
18 0.782
19 0.729
20 0.718
21 0.824
22 0.812
23 0.729
24 0.685
25 0.645
26 0.744
27 0.658
28 0.824
52
29 0.784
30 0.832
Min 0.623
Max 0.837
Avg 0.720
Std 0.0641

53