Surface Topography Investigations by Fractal Analysis of Spark-Eroded,

Electricdly Conductive Ceramics

Dr. ir. D. F. Dauw (2). Charmilles Technologies SA, Meyrin-Geneva/Switzerland;
Dr. C. A. Brown, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA/USA;
Dr. Ing. J. P. van Griethuysen, Dr. ir. J. F. L. M. Albert, Charmilles Technologies
Received on January 15,1990

Several ceramics, two metals, a n d graphite were electric discharge ( E D ) machined u s i n g two different
m a c h i n i n g conditions. The ED machined surfaces are studied using scanning electron microscopy ( S E M I
a n d profilometry. There is a brief discussion of the basic principles of the electric discharge
m a c h i n i n g ( E D H ) process a n d of fractal analysis. Relations between EDM conditions, workpiece
material, microscopic analysis, a n d fractal a n d conventional a n a l y s i s o f profiles, are found. Con-
ventional relations between EDM parameters a n d surface roughness are not confirmed with ceramic work-
pieces. Fractal analysis h a s some potential t o i l l u m i n a t e the relation between t h e workpiece, EDM
process, a n d the resulting surface.
KEY W O R D S : EDM, ceramic workpieces, f r a c t a l analysis. surface roughness. S E H

1. IN'TRODL~TI0.Y
Electric discharge machining (EDI), also called spark
erosion, is a thermo-electrical, material removal process
often applied in the tool and die making business. During EDM
sparks are eiieratcd between the workpiece and a tool
electrode. fiiis yields heating of the workpiece such that
melting and even evaporating of the material occur. EDM has
its niche because it can be applied where mechanical machining
processes fail, for reason of mechanical constraints (too
tou h material, too brittle, etc.). EDM is a promising
canfidatc when the material to be machined is sufficicntly
electrically conductive. Tuo techniques are currently
availahle. i.e. die sinking, (Fig. la) and wire cutting (Fi .
Ib). The technique that has to be used depends on tie
application.
Applications for EDW are increasing due to several
field of mate ria^'
driving forces [l For example, new developments in the
sciences have lead to new en ineerin
metal I ic materials, composite materials, and figh-tecp
ceramics. Currently, several advanced engineering ceramics
are commercially available, which feature ood mechanical
properties and thermal characteristics, as we18 as sufficient
electrical conductivity so that they can readily be machined
by spark erosion [2,3].
When the machinine (both roughing and finishing) of
ceramics is concerned, DW turns out to he a very good
alternative with respect to traditional machining techniques
such as grinding, milling, turning, sawing and others.
Indeed, as a thermal machine process, EDM provides a means of
machining ceramic materials, irrespective of their hardness
and strength, provided that their electrical conductivity is
of the order of 0.01 S/cm (100 R. cm). Recorded machining
speeds when EDI is applied on those ceramics are far better
than those ohtained with the traditional machining techniques.
lhis, combined with the extremely good surface finish obtained
and the high quality of the cut, will stimulate the machining
and certainly the finishing of ceramic materials by this non-
traditional machining process during the next decade [2].
1.1 EDU Principles
As mentioned before, EDll is a therno-electrical
material removal process, in which a tool electrode sha e is
reproduced mirrorwise into a workpiece to be machined. T\e
FIG. la. Die Sinkiiig FIG. Ib. Wire Cutting
energv required is wencrated by a pulse enerator. Its main
function is to pro8uce high-frcquency efectrical discharges
betuccn the tool (electrode) and the workpiece. The spark
erosion process takes place in a liquid dielectric, in which
tool and workpiece are submerged (Fig.1). This allows the
creation of a working ap (i.e., the y p between tool and
workpiece) in which the figh density spar s appear.
In wire EDM, the electrode used is a fine wire (0.03 mm
t o 0.45 mm in diameter). Ruled surfaces can be machined out
of a uorkpiece by employing specially developed CNC
controllers. Geometrical wire inclinations up to 35 degrees
can he ohtained. As in die sinking, the main application area
is in tool and die making business.
I .2 Topographic Analysis Priiiciples
To use EDI, or any manufacturing process, effectively,
one needs t o understand the relation between the workpiece
material, the process and the resulting surface topo raphy.
l'his understanding needs t o be expanded when EDY is appfied to
new materials, such as ceramics. ED machined surface
topography results from the interaction of the spark erosion
process, as characterized by the machining conditions, with
the workpiece material. Therefore, given a material, the
surface topography is a function of the process, and, for a
iven process, the topography is a function of the material.
fttempts to systematically correlate surface top0 raphy
parameters with the machining conditions and the woripiece
material have achieved success only when narrow ranges of
materials and eondit,ions are considered.
Development of a more universal system for predicting
surface roughness from the materials and processes would be an
important step for better control and optimization of the
manufacturing process. This step may depend, to some degree,
on the selection of appropriate nethods of characterizin the
surface topography. Many characterization parameters, %ased
on profilometry data, are available, and have been studied to
determine which might best represent the surface [4,5 .
Recently, fractal analysis has been ap lied to t e
characterization of surface topography [6]. ihen ap lied to
1
profilometry data, fractal analysis appears to \e more
sensitive to fine scale detail than conventional analysis [7 .
Vhen fine scale detail is indicative of the interaction of tie
roccss wiLli the workpiece, then surface topogra hy parameters
Eased on fractal analysis may advance the unkrstanding of
this interaction.
One objective of this work is to compare, for ED
machined surfaces on several materials, the results of visual
analysis of scannin electron microscope (SEM) micro raphs,
and analyses of surface profils by conventional and fractal
methods. The visual analysis, based on the identification of
dominating features, attempts t o reduce a large amount of
graphic information, (grey level as a function of position:
x,y) in a semi-quantitativeway. Profil analysis is performed
on data contained in a vertical section through the surface
(height, z , as a function of only x or y , which has been
smoothed by the interaction between the surhce and the stylus
[8]. While profil anal-sis ignores the complete geometry of
the surface (z=z(x,y$, it is widely used; the data
acquisition and su sequent analysis are relatively
uncomplicated. Although the visual analysis tends to be
imprecise, it is based on more complete information and may be
more easily associated with surface creation mechanisms, than
vould the profil analyses. The comparison of these two
analysis methods is intended to advance the understanding of
the relation between surface topography, and the interactions
of ceramic workpieces materials with EDM.

Annak of the ClRP V d %/l/lSKU 161

2. METHODS
Uatei ial Drsrrint ion Watm ial ,\wl ]cat ion>
2.1 Machining Conditions
sso I ( s w a s ) Composite prxde. Extrusion d i m .
The basic machining parameters to he selected, and based on silicon, Wrrhaniral appl.
related t.o the physical aspects of the process are illustrat.ed and nitrogen with
in Fig. 2. These graphs show the discharge voltage and the approximat ely 507,
discharge current versus time. By selecting proper values for TiN
the process parameters, one can vary the machining conditions
from roughing to super-finishing machining. Tahle 1 contains SiSiC S i 1 iron infi 1trat ed Uechaniral
the machinin conditions which were applied. The machining inf i 1trated siliron constructions.
was performe8 by die sinking. carbide (10% free Rotative parts
siliron)
Two machining condit.ionswere selected [Table 1 ) . The
first condition (regime 1) features a smaller discharge power. A1203 t 40% Tic Aluminiim oxide +
These conditions were selected in order to test the titanium carbide
theoretical hypotheses that intensive discharges (large
discharge power during a short time period) may cause more A1203 t 30%TiC Aluminum oxide t
surface structural damage on the specimen to be machined than titanium rarhide
small power discharges. It means that s ecimen machined under
regime 2 mi ht show more structural surface damage than those TiB2 Tit an ium tl i hor ide llrat resistant
machined unfer regime 1. environments

TAR1.E 2. List, of conductivr reramirs used in the

rxperiments.

Cracks: wins in the surface. to be divided

in two groups, largr and small.
Craters: bowl- shaprd depressions on the surface.
Grains: small congealed spheroids. "halls." of
material. on thr surfarr. -
2 . 3 . 2 Profil Analy.;is: Conventional and Fractal

b Perthometer SGP prof ilometer (Feinpruf Gmbll.

Cottingen, FRG) with a RFIITB-50 st,ylus ( 5 p spherical tip) was
used t o measure six randomly orientationed traces, 0.56mm long
on the machined surfaces of the specimrns. The tracing Iengt.hs
FIG 2 . tXNl pulse chararteristics. voltage ( 1 1 ) and current (i) are shorter than vould normally he used for conventional
versus timr (t.,l:ignition tlclav time, tf:voltage full analysis, in order t o liavr the largest sensitivity t o fine
timr, ti:pulsr 1Iiirat ion, tp:pirIsr r y r l e t.imr) scale details with thr smallest. digit ized point spacing
available 011 this equipment (8Ynm). Rrduced tracing lengths
are expected to have an influence on t,he convent.iona1
Rrgime i,(d) iie(V) ~ ~ ( p s ) to(ps) parameters similar to that of a short critical wave lengt.hs,
i.e., reduction of the apparent, roughness. The arit.limetic
1 8 28 1no ,100 average roughness, Ra. and the average peak-to- vallev
2 12 28 50 200 rou hness, Rz, wcre recorded along Kith two parametrrs hasd
on fractal analysis.
P,(k') "eW Ve(m.J) ke(mJ) Several methods for applying fractal analysis t,o
surface topography can he found in the literature. Uecause
1 22-1 4.5 22 4 ..i these methods are novel, and none have been standardized, some
2 336 6i 17 3.4 of them are mentioned below. although it is not intended t.o
provide an extensive review here.
I+: dischargr voltage P,: discharge power The essence of fractal analysis of surface topo raphy
is t o quantify surface irregularity and how t,liis irregufarity
ic: dischargr riirrrnt P(,: mean discharge power depends on the scale of ohservation. .An objert is said to he
fractal, or to exhihit fractal behavior over a range of scal~s
t,: discharge duration We: discharge eiicrgy of ohservation, if, over that range, the irregularity
increases as an exponential function of the drcrease in scale
to: pulse interval time WC: meail discharge etiergy of observation. Such objects demonstrate self- similaritv or
self-affinity with scale; that is, aftrr magnification.
TAIIIX 1 . El)M working contlit.ions. perhaps different mounts in the horizontal and \,ercical
directions in the case of self-affine fract.als. the object
2.2 Mat.erials looks the same as it did before.
In order to collrct a large set of machining data, Possibilities for applying fractal analysis to surfaces
several electrically conductive ceramics have been machined. include: the slit-island method [9] ; the structure function
These materials are summarized in lablc 2 . Test results are ; the coastline or compass method [ 1 1 , 7 ] : box counting
compared vit.11 well-linow~~ED!! materials: steel, copper and ; the variation method [13], The compass method was chosen
graphite, which arc not included in Table 2 . or this work because the analysis and its application to
profilometxy data is straight-forward, and it supplies
2.3 Topographic Evaluation Techniques parameters which, it is believed, have the potential to
correlate with visual impressions on the micrographs.
2.3.1 Nicroscopic diialysis
In the compass method the length of the profil is
After EUI of the three well known materials and seven estimated using rulers of progressively smaller len ths. The
conductive ceramics four SE\I micrographs were taken of each log of the estimated length divided bv the project,edPength is
specimen: two magnifications of both machining conditions (200 plotted versus the log of the ruler -length (Fig. 3 ) . In this
x and 1000~). llased on tlirse micrographs a visual study the plots are calculated from an analysis of
characterization of the material surfaces was performed to approximately 34 000 profile points, in total, from the six
assay the results t.0 t,he theorctical speculation. The most traces.
noticeahlc fraturcs on t.hc surface wrre chosen t o characterize
the specimens. Tlic following list of features could he Some general aspects of the compass analysis applied to
recorded: profilometry data follow. At, Ion ruler lengths the estimated
Islands: tlrop-shaped piccrs of material, to be length is close to the projectef length. As the ruler length
divided in two groups, large and small. decreases eventually the apparent length increases by a
Cavities: liolev in t.lw sill-face.either filled with significant amount. It is proposed that the rulrr length at.
small grains or unfilled. which this occurs represents a threshold in scalc, above which

162
the surface may he considered smooth, below which it is rough. 1.09
After this roughness threshold is exceeded there is a range of I
ruler lengths throu h which the apparent length increases in a 1.08
linear fashion on tke log-'logplots. The slo e of this portion ++
of the lot can be related to the fracta! dimension [14]. I.07 ++t
Eventual! due to the limits of sensitivity of the stylus and * +++
to the i:gitized point spacing, the increase in apparent. 1.86 +
+
length with the decrease in ruler len th begins to diminish. *+
Finally when the ruler lcn th approacfes the digitized point 1.05 +
spacing there is no furtaer significant increase in the ++
1.04
apparent length. Based on this sort. of digitized rofilomctry
data, the maximum ap arent length is the sum ofe!lt distances ++
1.03 +
between the digitize! points.
1.02 +
Two parameters from aspects of the compass analysis are
used in this study: the,roughness threshold, which is taken t o -
tn
1.01
+++
++
++++
be the ruler len th, i.e., scale of observation. where the +++
apparent len th Birst exceeds ten percent of its maximum 1.00 +++,++
A l I I I
value; and tfe slope of the linear r t i o n on the log-log I
l
10
L
I00
plot, which is taken to he the slope, etermined by regression
analysis, over the decade of ruler lengths where the lox (ruler length, pm)
correlation coefficient, r, is greatest (nO.98 for the all
the data in this study).
FIG. 3. Compass plot of profils from SI'ALON S501. regime 1.
3. RESCZTS AND DISCLISSIOS
3.1 Hicroscopy The last specimen, electrol 'tic copper, displaved a
The visual characterizations of the dominating features
very re ular and smooth surfacc in bth
regimes, as coild be
expectef. The results on blie copper were disrinctly different
in the micrographs are listed in Table 3 . Observed at the 200 from the ceramic materials.
x magnification the ceramics (numher 1, 2 , 3, 4 , 5 , 10 - Table
3) show a surface familiar in appearance to the graphite 3.2 Profilometry
(number 8). On the contrary, the 1000 x magnification shows a
surface condition rather different from the graphite. Yhere The results of the conventional and fractal analyses of
the graphite surface was smooth, containing a few cavities. the profilomet,ry data are listed in Table 4 .
most of the ceramics had an irregular surface, with cavities,
cracks and grains. Despite the more intense discharge for regime 2 , which
is supposed to cause greater surface damage, there is no clear
Fig. 4 displays a 200 x magnification of the graphite tendency towards rougher surfaces for this re ime.
specimen (regime 1 . In comparison with S5Ol (fig. 5 ) there Considering just the metals, copper and the steel, ant the
is only a small difference. The actual difference can he convrnt,ional parameters, Ra and Rz, regime 2 produced a
found on the 1000 x magnification of both mat.eria1 surfaces. rougher surface. It may he t,hat the surfacc roughness is not
The S501 surface shows some small cracks, and the existing a good indicator of spark induced surface damage in ceramics,
cavities are filled with small rains (Fig. 6). The graphite or that the ceramics do not react in the same way as metals to
surface is rather spongy (Fig. 6. t.he discharge intensity. Or, the longer, more energetic pulse
in regime 1 could have a similar influence on the roughness as
The results of the experiments using regime 2 are the more intense pulse in regime 2 [15,1G]. A larger sample
comparable. However they are not as clear as the results seen size and broader range of machining condit,ions should he
on the micrographs taken after EDM machining at regime 1. It studied to test these hypothesises.
can be supposed that the actual influence of EDM materials is
to be found on fine scales. The results of the thermal shocks In nine materials out of t.rn, the change in Ra, with
caused by EDM seem to be clear on this scale. respect to machining regime, is in the same sense as Rz. This
is consistant with the results of Nowicki [4] who found these
It is to he mentioned that the conditions used during two parameters to be highly correlated for conventionally
machinin were typical of rou hin EDM. No EDM finishing was machined surfaces. These nine cases are examined helow to
performe! in this study. Tie &sence of finishing EDI is determine if the characterization by the fractal related
obvious on the steel specimen. The micrographs of this parameters provides redundant information, or if it might
specimen only show features characteristic of a recast, white eliminate other aspects of the surface topography.
layer, that would disappear almost completely after EDY
finishing. Finished surfaces were not st,udird.

163
PIC. 4 Graphite, ED machined surface, regime 1 (low mag.) FIG. 6 SYALON S501, ED machined surface, regime 1 (high mag.)

FIG. 5 SYALON S501, ED machined surface, regime 1 (low mag.) Fig. 7 Graphite? ED machinrd surface, regime 1 (high mag.)
The roughness threshold changed, with respect t o conditions for the steel, also have high Ra and Rz values. The
machining regime, in a different sense from the conventional third, with one of the sixth highest rou hness thresholds, has
parameters in only two of the nine cases where Ra and Rz the among the lowest Ra and Rz, which further Indicates that,
changed in the same sense. This might be expected as the roughness threshold contains different information.
theoretically these parameters have limited similarities. The
calculation of both Ra and RL considers only profile height.s; The surfaces on the copper appear to be in a special
the roughness threshold drpends on both the height and class with the needle shaped veins and the lowest Ra and Rz
spacing. values, roughness thresholds, and slopes.
The slope changed, with respect to the machining
regime, in a different sense from the conventional parameters
in five out of the nine cases where Ra and Rz changed in rhc
same sense. This bears out the expectation that the slope is Material Regime Ra(pn) Rz(pn) threshold(p) slope
fundamentally different from the other parameters, which have
units of len th, in that it de ends on the complexity of the mean mean 10% - innx
profil as a function of scale o f ohservation and is unitless. -
3.3 Comparison of Microscopy and Profilomctry SYALON 1 1.67 7.62 34.71 2.62
(5501) 2 1.62 7.23 39.05 2.2.5
In comparing the tuo observation methods, the cracks
and grains should not be expected to pla a role, as these are SiSiC 1 1.48 6.44 49.42 1.52
features which too small to be dctected iy the stylus, yet are Feld. 2 1.SR 6.76 49.42 1.40
noticable on the micrographs.
SiSiC 1 1.46 6.09 55.60 1.44
All the surfaces identified as containing large Charm. 2 1.S4 6.04 43.49 1.46
islands, six in total, are found in the top seven out of
twenty ranked in terms of Ra and Rz. This is unlikely to be SiSiC 1 1.47 6.60 39.05 1.69
random distribution. The only exception appears to be the Didie 2 1.4R 5.91 39.05 I .73
graphite surface, machined using the conditions in regime 1,
which ranks fourth and fifth in terms of Ra and Rz, and is not A1203 1 1.71 7.81 43.93 2.11
identified as having lar e islands. The surfaces in the large 40XTiC 2 1.26 5.42 43.93 1.18
island roup also are found in the top eight in terms of
slope. %he two surfaces which are also found in the top eight A1203 1 1.11 5.05 30.85 1.16
in terms of slope are the S501 regime 2 , and again graphite 3O%TiC 2 1.34 5.33 49.42 I .09
regime 1. Both of these surfaces are identified as having
small islands, although other surfaces with small islands have Steel 1 2.33 8.39 89.06 2.09
the smallest slopes. K107 2 2.39 9.00 79. I6 2.03
There ap ears to be no correlation between the hver 1 0.84 4.06 30.85 0.74
cavities, filld or unfilled, and any of the roughness cu 2 1.05 4.68 34.71 0.96
parameters. This could be somewhat unexpceted in that an
unfilled cavity should contribute to the peak-to-valley Graphite 1 1.95 8.13 62.55 2.21
rou hness. Most of the cavities, however, while plainly C 2 1.47 5.99 49.42 1.58
evifent at lar e ma nifications, appear to have diameters
small enough toebe befow the sensitivity limit of the stylus. Ti62 1 2.07 8.59 79.16 2.35
2 1 .79 8.45 34.71 3.05
The three surfaces with craters are all among the top
nine in terns of roughness thresholds, appearing to be non-
randomly distributed. Two of these surfaces, both machining TABLE 4 . Profil analysis

164
4. CONCLUDING REMARKS
In that electrically conductive deramics can be easily
machined by EDM it is desirable to establish relations between
the machining conditions and the surface topography. This is a
preliminary study to investigate the potential of fractal and
conventional profil analysis, alon with scannin electron
microscopy, to advance the understansing of this refationship.
Subsequent studies should use larger sample sizes for more
detailed statistical analysis. Additional1 material
properties should be investifited,, including: tkrmal shock
resistance, electrical con uctivity, microstructure, and
material porosity, to derive a basic and consistant removal
theory for the EDM of ceramics.
From this study it appears that:
The EDM theories and hypotheses which are reliable and
consistently applicable to metals cannot be confirmed when
EDM is applied to elecrically conductive ceramic
materials. It means that material removal rates and
machined surface roughness are not only dependent on the
physical machinin parameters as defined in the physical-
mathematical modefs, hut on the material as well.
It is possible to associate noticable features on
micrographs with parameters derived from fractal and
conventional analysis of profilometry data. The fractal
analysis results in parameters which appear to contain
different information about the profil than the
conventional parameters.
REFERENCES
Dauw, D.F., Schumacher, B., 1989, Milestones of Worldwide
EDM Research Activities, International S mposium for
Electro-Machining,ISEM IX, April 1989, iagoya, Japan:
250-254.
Koenig, W . , Dauw, D.F., Levy, C., Panten, U., 1988, EDM:
Future Steps Towards the Machining of Ceramics, Tokyo
1988, Annals of the CTRP 37/2:625-631.
Dauw, D.F., 1989, Charnilles Technologies: Facing the
Future, paper presented during the inauguration of CT-
Japan, Yokohama, Japan, Friday April 14, 1989.
[4] Peters, J., Vanherck, P., Sastrodinoto, I, 1979,
Assessment of Surface Top0 raphy Analysis Techniques,
Annals of the CIRP, 28/2:584554.
[5] Nowicki, B, 1985. Multiparameter Representation of Surface
Roughness, Uear 102:161-176.
[6] Thomas, T.R., 1988, Surface Roughness: The Next Ten
Years, Surface Topography 1 :3-9.
[7] Brown, C.A., Savary, G . , 1988, Fractal Aspects of
Machines Surface Top0 raphy Determined by Stylus
Profilometrv. Weitz. f. A . . Sander. L.M.. Mandelbrot.
B.B. (eds.); .Fractal Asoects of Materials: Disordered
Svstems, Materials Research Soc., Pitssburgh, 275-278.
[8] DeVries, W.R., Chcng-Jih,L., 1985, Algorithms To
Deconvolve Stylus Ceometr From Surface Profile
Measurements, Journal of Eng. for Industry 107:167-174.
[9] Mandelbrot, B.B., Passoja, D.E., Paullay, A.J., 1984,
Fractal Character of Fracture Surfaces of Metals, Nature
308:721-722.
[lo] Jordan, D.L., Hollins, R.C., Jakeman, E, 1986,
Measurement and Characterization of Multiscale Surfaces,
Wear 109:127-134.
[Ill Underwood, E.E., Banerju, K:, 1986, Fractals in
Fractopgraphy, Materia s Science and Engineering 80:l-14.
[12] Cagnepain, J.J., Roques-Carmes,C., 1986, Fractal
Approach To Two-Dimensional and Three-Dimensional Surface
Roughness, Wear 109:114 126.
[13] Dubuc, B., quiniou, J.F., Rogues-Carmes,C., Tricot, C.,
Zucker, S.U., 1989, Evaluating the Fractal Dimension of
Profiles, Physical Review A 39/3:1500-1512.
[I41 Mandelbrot, B.B., (1977), Fractals, W. II. Freeman and Go.,
San Francisco,32.
[IS] Jeswani, M . L . , 1978, Roughness and Wear Characteristics
of Spark-Eroded Surfaces, Uear 51 :227-236.
[16] Ito, S., Nakamura, M . , Kanematsu, W . , 1987, Machining of
High Performance Ceramics, Bull, Japan SOC. of Prec.
Engg 21:3.
165