This article was downloaded by: [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria]

On: 03 March 2015, At: 13:19

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer
House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of the Chinese Institute of Industrial

Engineers
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tjci20

Determining the optimum green sand casting process

parameters using Taguchi's method
a

A. Kumaravadivel , U. Natarajan & C. Ilamparithi

Department of Mechanical Engineering , Sudharsan Engineering College , Pudukkottai ,

Tamilnadu , India
b

Department of Mechanical Engineering , ACCE&Tech. , Karaikudi , Tamilnadu , India

Published online: 09 Mar 2012.

To cite this article: A. Kumaravadivel , U. Natarajan & C. Ilamparithi (2012) Determining the optimum green sand casting
process parameters using Taguchi's method, Journal of the Chinese Institute of Industrial Engineers, 29:2, 148-162, DOI:
10.1080/10170669.2012.664789
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10170669.2012.664789

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the Content) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of
the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied
upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall
not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other
liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or
arising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Journal of the Chinese Institute of Industrial Engineers

Vol. 29, No. 2, March 2012, 148162

Determining the optimum green sand casting process parameters using

Taguchis method
A. Kumaravadivela*, U. Natarajanb and C. Ilamparithia
a

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Sudharsan Engineering College, Pudukkottai,

Tamilnadu, India; bDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, ACCE&Tech.,
Karaikudi, Tamilnadu, India

Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 13:19 03 March 2015

(Received May 2011; revised December 2011; accepted January 2012)

This study demonstrates optimization of sand casting process parameters using Taguchis design of
experiments method. The process parameters considered are moisture content, permeability, loss on
ignition, compressive strength, volatile content, vent holes, pouring time, pouring temperature, and
mold pressure. An attempt has been made to obtain optimal level of the process parameters in order to
generate the optimum quality characteristics of the cast iron flywheel castings. An orthogonal array,
the signal-to-noise ratio, and analysis of variance are used to analyze the effect of selected process
parameters and their levels on the casting defects. The result indicates that the selected process
parameters significantly affect the casting defects of cast iron flywheel castings. A confirmation run is
used to verify the results, which indicates that this method is more efficient in determining the best
casting parameters for flywheel castings.
Keywords: green sand casting; casting defects; Taguchis method; process parameters; flywheel

1. Introduction
Green sand casting process, in general, involves a
large number of parameters affecting the various
casting quality features of the product. Green sand
casting gives enough green strength to get dimensional stability and to provide excellent surface
finish and better collapsibility during the knockout.
A large number of experimental investigations
linking green sand casting parameters with casting
quality have been carried out by researchers and
foundry engineers over the past few decades [2]. It
has been recognized that the design of green sand
casting parameters impacts casting quality. The
casting process has a large number of parameters
that may affect the quality of castings. Some of
these parameters which affect the quality are
controllable, while others are uncontrollable.
The purpose of the process development is to
improve the performance of the process relating to
the customer needs and expectations. The process
development can be achieved through experimentation and the aim of the process is to reduce and
control the variation of a process. Subsequently,
decisions must be made concerning which parameter affects the performance of the process. The loss
function quantifies which design factor influences
the average and variation of performance of the
process. By properly adjusting the factors, the
variations of the process are reduced and thereby
the losses can be minimized [24].
*Corresponding author. Email: poojaku2003@yahoo.co.in
ISSN 10170669 print/ISSN 21517606 online
2012 Chinese Institute of Industrial Engineers
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10170669.2012.664789
http://www.tandfonline.com

Up to now, the gradient search method, the

finite element method (FEM)-based neural network
method and the Taguchi method are the optimization methods applicable to the design of green sand
casting process parameters [12,15]. Taguchi [29]
and Masters et al. [17] have introduced several new
statistical tools and concepts of quality improvement that depend heavily on the statistical theory
of experimental design. Some applications of
Taguchis methods in the foundry industries have
shown that the variation in casting quality, caused
by uncontrollable process variables, can be minimized [8,21]. Raisinghani [23] and Ross [24]
reported that the Taguchi approach is suitable in
using experimental design for (a) designing and
developing products/processes so as to be robust to
component variation; (b) designing products/processes so as to be robust to environmental conditions; and (c) minimizing variation around a target
value. The Taguchi technique appears to be an
ideal tool for continuous and rapid quality product
design, and it becomes easier and more productive
for todays highly competitive international
markets.

2. Literature review
The majority of published articles on the optimization of parameters based on the Taguchis
method are reviewed below.

Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 13:19 03 March 2015

Journal of the Chinese Institute of Industrial Engineers

During the 1990s, a lot of developments had
taken place in the foundry process [2,7]. Some of
these programs are able to simulate the behavior of
the molten metal close to reality, as the researchers
studied the behavior of the molten gray cast iron
during the filling of different gating systems by
optical means and correlated the measurements to
obtain the behavior by some simulators. Guharaj
et al. [9] have made an attempt to obtain optimal
settings of green sand casting parameters using
Taguchi method. Chang and Liao [5] have presented a gray-based Taguchi method to discover
the optimal design of the rifle muzzle flash reducer.
According to Byrne and Taguchi [4], the parameters, which exert a great deal of influence on the die
casting process, can be adjusted to varying levels of
intensity, so that some settings can result in
robustness of the manufacturing process. Barua
et al. [3] used the Taguchis method to optimize
the effects of the selected process parameters on the
mechanical properties of alloy casting of the
Vacuum V-casting process. Jeyapaul et al. [11]
used the Taguchi concept to optimize the sand
casting parameters. Enright and Prince [6] have
developed a simple mathematical model to study
the effects of liquid metal flow, transient heat
transfer, and foam degradation during casting
process. Noorul Haq et al. [20] presented the
concepts to optimize the CO2 casting parameters
using Taguchi. Jolly et al. [13] analyzed numerical
simulators based on FDM and FEM methods and
provided powerful means of analyzing various
phenomena occurring during the casting process.
Juran et al. [14] stated that control factors are the
selected independent variables of the experiment,
which have different effects on the response variables when adjusted to different levels. Masters
et al. [17] have described a robust design method
for reducing cost and improving quality in an
aluminum remelting process. An experimental
investigation into the process parameter effect is
presented to determine the optimum configuration
of design parameters for performance, quality, and
cost. Muzammil et al. [19] made a study for the
optimization of a gear blank casting process using
Taguchis robust design technique and they demonstrated that the casting process involves a large
number of parameters affecting the various casting
quality features of the product. Papai and Mobley
[22] made detailed temperature measurements in
die casting dies, from which the values of parameters like the heat transfer coefficient at the
interface castingdie are calculated. Syrcos [28]
analyzed various significant process parameters of
the die casting method of aluminum alloy and
made an attempt to obtain optimal settings of the
die casting parameters in order to generate the

149

optimum casting density of the aluminum alloy

castings. Antony et al. [1] used a systematic
framework for quality improvement and gaining
business excellence, and the Six Sigma philosophy
has become the paradigm of the industrial world in
recent years.
Apart from the casting process, the Taguchi
method can be used for other manufacturing
processes like milling, radial forging, grinding,
and the machining of composites [8,26,27], respectively. Based on the above discussions, researchers
attempted to optimize the sand casting process
parameters by conducting analysis of variance
(ANOVA) experiments on Taguchis concept to
minimize the defects in the casting process.
The study is further segmented as follows.
Section 3 explains the selected parameters with
their defect levels. Section 4 defines the selection of
an orthogonal array (OA). In Section 5, analysis
phase of Taguchi with a case study is explained.
Confirmation of experiments and results is provided in Section 6, and Section 7 concludes the
research findings.

3. Process parameters of green sand castings

The focus of this article is on the robustness of the
green sand casting process and the case company is
a leading automobile foundry located in south
India. The basic steps for achieving the above
target are summarized below [25,28]:
(1) To select the most significant parameters
that cause variations in the quality
characteristics.
(2) Casting defects have been selected as the
most representative quality characteristics
in the green sand casting process, as it is
related to many internal defects (shifts, sand
inclusion, blow holes, sand drop, slag, etc.).
The target of the green sand casting process
is to achieve lower casting defects while
minimizing the effect of uncontrollable
parameters.
(3) Make the green sand casting process under
the experimental conditions dictated by the
chosen OA and parameter levels. Based on
the experimental conditions, collect the
data.
(4) An ANOVA table is generated to determine
the statistical significance of the parameters.
Response graphs are plotted to determine the
preferred levels for each parameter.
(5) The optimum settings of the control parameters and predict the results of each of the
parameters at their new optimum levels.

150

A. Kumaravadivel et al.

Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 13:19 03 March 2015

(6) Verify the optimum settings result in the

predicted reduction in the casting defects.
A cause-and-effect matrix is drawn to identify
the casting process parameters with respect to key
process input variables (KPIVs) that may influence
green sand casting defects, as shown in Table 1.
Cause-and-effect matrix relates the key inputs
to the key outputs (customer requirements). The
key outputs are ranked according to their importance, while the key inputs are ranked in terms of
their relationship to that of the key outputs. In the
matrix, a factor of importance for each parameter
is ranked orderly and every listed input parameter
is correlated to every output parameter. Finally, a
total value for each parameter is obtained by
multiplying the rating of importance with the value
given to the parameters and by adding across for
each parameter. The results obtained with the
cause-and-effect matrix can be used for optimization. The KPIVs are listed on the left-hand side,
while the key process output variables (KPOVs) are
listed on the top right-hand side of the diagram. In
certain cases, the KPIVs of one process are the
KPOVs for the next process; for example, moisture
content and operator unawareness.
The process parameters can be listed in six
categories as follows:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)

Mold machine related parameters

Cast metal related parameters
Green sand related parameters
Mold-related parameters
Shake out related parameters
Man process related parameters

To visualize the effect of process parameters on

the casting defects of cast iron flywheel castings,
following parameters are selected:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Moisture content
Permeability
Loss on ignition
Compressive strength
Volatile content
Vent holes
Pouring time
Pouring temperature
Mold pressure

(a) The range of moisture content is taken as

3.03.6%, (b) the range of permeability 120190,
(c) the range of loss on ignition 3.55.0%, (d) the
range of compressive strength number 1.01.35 kg/
cm2, (e) the range of volatile content 2.13.5%, (f)
the range of vent holes 810, (g) the range of
pouring time 4548 s, (h) the range of pouring
temperature 14001440 C, and (i) the range
of mold pressure 57 kg/cm2. The number of
levels for each control parameter defines the

experimental region. For each control factor,

three levels are selected, out of which, one level is
usually the starting level. The selection of parameter levels for the process should cover a wide
experimental region. The sensitivity to noise factors
does not usually change but there are small changes
in the control factor settings. Therefore, each
parameter is analyzed at different levels based on
the behavior of the process parameters. From the
selected parameters, the significant interaction
between them is also considered. The selected
green sand casting process parameters, along with
their ranges, are given in Table 2.

4. Selection of an OA
Experience reveals that non-linear behavior among
the parameters of a sand casting process can only
be determined if more than two levels of parameters used [17]. Before selecting a particular OA to
be used for conducting the experiments, two points
must be considered.
(1) The number of parameters and interaction
of interest.
(2) The number of levels for the parameters of
interest.
In accordance to the study conducted [24] to
know the parameter interactions, it is inferred that
there are significant interactions of moisture content with permeability and moisture content with
loss on ignition. Based on the literatures and the
synthesized data of the foundry, with the foundry
mans experience, moisture content variation with
permeability of the sand (A  B) and the loss on
ignition of the sand (A  C) are taken to investigate
the two factor interaction effects on casting rejection. The total degree of freedom (DOF) for nine
factors, each in three levels and two second-order
interaction, is 26 (9  (3  1) 2(2  2)). Hence, a
three-level OA, with at least 26 DOFs, has to be
selected. The L27 OA having 26 DOFs is selected
for this study.

5. Case study Taguchi

Once the parameters and parameter interactions
are assigned to a particular column of the selected
OA, the factors at different levels are assigned for
each trial. The assigned experimental array is
shown in Table 3. The castings of flywheel are
made as per the trial conditions given in Table 3.
The experiments are conducted thrice for the same
set of parameters using single repetition randomization technique [24,19]. The percentage of defect
for each repetition and average casting defects are
calculated for each trial condition. The casting

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

S. no.

Delay in pouring time

Interrupted pouring
Too long pouring
High pouring rate
Too high height of ladle
Dirty ladles
Strainer or filter core not used
Repeated use of ladle without linings
Improper skimming
Insufficient pouring temperature
Operator unawareness
Low compactability
Use of hot sand
Improper moisture
Low green strength
Low flowability
Insufficient binder
Poor grain distribution
Insufficient mulling time
High moisture content
Operator unawareness
Sharp comers

KPIV

KPOV

Importance estimation as scale

for process from customer

3
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1

3
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
3

0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1

0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1

0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1

3
3
0
0
1
3
5
5
5
5
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
5
5
5
1

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1

3
3
1
0
3
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0

3
3
1
3
1
1
0
0
0
3
5
5
3
5
3
1
1
1
0
5
5
1

5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
3
0
0
0
1

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1

3
3
0
3
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
3
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
1
0
3
3
1
3
0
0
0
0

3
3
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

84
69
15
44
20
36
25
40
26
123
40
34
18
33
48
20
11
67
43
40
50
45

Total
(continued )

0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
1
1

17

16

15

14

13

12

11

10

Ms run

Cold shut

Hot tears

Crack

Shrinkage

Slag inclusion

Core shift

Time of cycle

Sand inclusion

Scabs

Outs and washer

Mold shift

Swells

Blow holes

Pourisity and
pin holes

Warpage

Dirt

Table 1. Cause-and-effect matrix.

Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 13:19 03 March 2015

Journal of the Chinese Institute of Industrial Engineers

151

23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
10
37

Cope drag mismatch

Design parameters
Poor finishing and cleaning
Gating parameters
Change in runner dimension
Change in raiser dimensions
Insufficient air pressure
Improper vent holes
Uneven stripping
Improper ramming
Insufficient turbulence gating system
Insufficient permeability
Moisture content
Insufficient pouring temperature
Operator unawareness

Importance estimation as scale

for process from customer

Table 1. Continued.

3
1
3
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
66

3
3
1
3
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
66

3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
5
0
42

3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
5
0
0
0
5
0
85

5
3
3
0
5
3
1
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
135

5
1
1
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
5
5
3
260

5
3
1
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
40

5
0
0
3
0
1
1
0
5
0
3
0
0
3
1
0
87

3
1
3
5
3
0
0
1
0
3
3
0
0
0
3
5
315

5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
48

3
1
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12

Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 13:19 03 March 2015

3
1
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
24

3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
14

0
0
3
0
0
0
0
5
0
5
0
5
3
5
0
185

0
0
0
1
5
3
3
5
0
0
0
3
5
0
0
126

0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
60

3
1
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
66

3
77
52
97
112
33
17
14
95
15
113
50
34
73
123
40

152
A. Kumaravadivel et al.

153

Journal of the Chinese Institute of Industrial Engineers

Table 2. Process parameters with their ranges and values at three levels.
Parameter designation
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I

Process parameters

Range

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Moisture content (%)

Permeability
Loss on Ignition (%)
Compressive strength (kg/cm2)
Volatile content (%)
Vent holes (Nos)
Pouring time (s)
Pouring temperature ( C)
Mold pressure (kg/cm2)

33.6
120190
3.55
11.35
2.13.5
810
4548
14001440
57

3
120
3.5
1
2.1
8
45
1400
5

3.3
155
4.25
1.175
2.8
9
46.5
1420
6

3.6
190
5
1.35
3.5
10
48
1440
7

Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 13:19 03 March 2015

Table 3. Experimental L27 OA.

Trail
no.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

Moisture
content (%)
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6

Permeability

Loss on
ignition
(%)

Compressive
strength
(kg/cm2)

Volatile
content
(%)

Vent
holes
(Nos)

Pouring
time (s)

Pouring
temperature
( C)

Mold
pressure
(kg/cm2)

120
120
120
155
155
155
190
190
190
120
120
120
155
155
155
190
190
190
120
120
120
155
155
155
190
190
190

3.5
4.25
5
3.5
4.25
5
3.5
4.25
5
3.5
4.25
5
3.5
4.25
5
3.5
4.25
5
3.5
4.25
5
3.5
4.25
5
3.5
4.25
5

1
1.175
1.35
1.175
1.35
1
1.35
1
1.175
1
1.175
1.35
1.175
1.35
1
1.35
1
1.175
1
1.175
1.35
1.175
1.35
1
1.35
1
1.175

2.1
2.8
3.5
2.8
3.5
2.1
3.5
2.1
2.8
2.8
3.5
2.1
3.5
2.1
2.8
2.1
2.8
3.5
3.5
2.1
2.8
2.1
2.8
3.5
2.8
3.5
2.1

8
9
10
9
10
8
10
8
9
10
8
9
8
9
10
9
10
8
9
10
8
10
8
9
8
9
10

45
46.5
48
48
45
46.5
46.5
48
45
45
46.5
48
48
45
46.5
46.5
48
45
45
46.5
48
48
45
46.5
46.5
48
45

1400
1420
1440
1440
1400
1420
1420
1440
1400
1420
1440
1400
1400
1420
1440
1440
1400
1420
1440
1400
1420
1420
1440
1400
1400
1420
1440

5
6
7
7
5
6
6
7
5
7
5
6
6
7
5
5
6
7
6
7
5
5
6
7
7
5
6

defects are the lower the better type of quality

characteristics. Lower the better signal-to-noise
(S/N) ratios are computed for each of the 27
trials given in Table 4. Taguchi method uses the
S/N ratio instead of the average to convert the trial
result data into a value for the characteristic in the
optimum setting analysis. The S/N ratio replicates
both the average and the variation of the quality
characteristics.
For the case of minimizing the performance
characteristic, S/N ratio can be calculated as:
!
N1
X
Yi2 =Ni
1
SNi 10 log
i1

where Yi is the response value of observation in ith

test and Ni the number of trials in ith test.
For example, for trial no. 1, the S/N ratio is
given in Equation (1): S/N ratio 10 log
[(7.682 6.582 6.872)/3)] 16.97. The response
of casting defects referring to the average value of
the performance characteristics for each parameter
at different levels is calculated and given in Table 5.

5.1 Raw data analysis of experimental results

The average values of the response at each parameter level are obtained by adding the results of all
trail conditions at the level considered and then

154

A. Kumaravadivel et al.

Table 4. Casting defects values and S/N ratio against

trail numbers.

Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 13:19 03 March 2015

S. no
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

Trial 1

Trial 2

Trial 3

Average

S/N ratio

7.68
7.12
8.26
8.61
6.81
7.52
7.86
6.28
7.96
7.24
7.54
7.86
8.65
8.68
8.26
6.62
7.34
8.24
7.12
6.52
6.64
6.94
8.12
8.24
6.74
7.26
8.21

6.58
6.42
7.28
8.61
8.31
6.38
7.34
7.61
7.67
8.34
9.10
6.54
6.24
8.24
7.31
6.32
8.24
8.36
6.21
6.12
6.48
8.24
8.36
8.12
7.84
8.21
6.12

6.87
7.68
7.78
7.21
6.24
8.34
8.12
7.26
6.21
6.36
6.12
7.86
7.12
6.86
8.46
8.24
7.66
8.24
6.64
8.13
7.24
7.12
8.24
6.76
7.78
8.32
6.84

7.04333
7.07333
7.77333
8.14333
7.12000
7.41333
7.77333
7.05000
7.28000
7.31333
7.58667
7.42000
7.33667
7.92667
8.01000
7.06000
7.74667
8.28000
6.65667
6.92333
6.78667
7.43333
8.24000
7.70667
7.45333
7.93000
7.05667

16.9745
17.0155
17.8236
18.2445
17.1144
17.4510
17.8197
16.9914
17.2904
17.3353
17.7114
17.4385
17.3892
18.0232
18.0897
17.0376
17.7923
18.3608
16.4787
16.8742
16.6432
17.4496
18.3192
17.7701
17.4669
18.0011
17.0370

Table 5. Average values of casting defects and S/N

ratios at different levels.
Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Casting S/N Casting S/N Casting S/N

Factors defects ratios defects ratios defects ratios
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I

7.408
7.175
7.357
7.430
7.259
7.466
7.435
7.337
7.361

17.41
17.14
17.36
17.43
17.25
17.48
17.44
17.35
17.37

7.631
7.703
7.511
7.457
7.561
7.466
7.444
7.543
7.413

17.69
17.76
17.54
17.49
17.58
17.48
17.47
17.57
17.42

7.354
7.514
7.525
7.506
7.574
7.461
7.513
7.503
7.619

17.34
17.53
17.54
17.52
17.61
17.48
17.53
17.53
17.65

dividing by the number of data points added.

Those for parameter A, the levels total of the
response at A1 and A2 are calculated and it is given
in Equation (2), as explained by Montgomery [18].

The average values of the responses at A1 and

A2 are given in Equation (3)
A1

A1
27

and

A2

A2
27

The average values of casting defects and S/N

ratios for each parameter at different levels are
plotted in Figures 1 and 2, respectively.
It is clear from Figures 1 and 2 that the sand
casting defects are minimum at third level of
moisture content (A3), first level of permeability
(B1), first level of loss on ignition C (C1), first level
of compressive strength (D1), first level of volatile
content (E1), third level of vent holes (F3), first level
of pouring time (G1), first level of pouring temperature (H1), and first level of mold pressure (I1).
The S/N ratio is also maximum at the same levels of
the parameters. In order to study the significance
of the parameters, three-way ANOVA is performed
for casting defects and S/N ratios and the results
are shown in Table 6.
The F-ratio value can be found using the ratio
of mean square of a factor to variance of error is
given in Equation (5). It could be seen from the
F-ratio value result that the significant factors are
the control factors in the order of B (permeability),
E (volatile content), A (moisture content), I (mold
pressure), H (pouring temperature), C (loss on
ignition), G (pouring time), D (pouring time), and F
(vent holes). Furthermore, permeability, volatile
content, moisture content, and mold pressure are
the most significant parameters in the green sand
casting process, since they contribute a greater
percentage than all other control factors. In this
study, the total variation present in the process is
decomposed into following components given in
Equation (4):
(1) Variation due to factors A, B, C, D, E, F, G,
H, I
(2) Variation due to factors A  B and G  H.
(3) Variation due to error
Total variation


SSA SSB SSC SSD SSE SSF
SST
SSG SSH SSI SSAB SSAC
4
Variation due to error

A1 y11 y12 y13  y21 y22 y23 

SSe SST
"
#
SSA SSB SSC SSD SSE SSF

SSG SSH SSI SSAB SSAC

y31 y32 y33  y41 y42 y43 

y51 y52 y53 
y61 y62 y63  y71 y72 y73 
y81 y82 y83 
y91 y92 y93 

1:0004

155

Journal of the Chinese Institute of Industrial Engineers

Average value of casting defects for different parameters at different levels
7.8
7.703

7.7
7.631

7.6

7.514
7.5

7.525
7.511

7.4
7.408

7.357

7.354

7.619
7.574
7.543
7.561 7.466
7.513
7.503
7.461 7.435
7.466
7.413
7.444
7.361
7.337

7.506

7.457
7.43

7.3

7.259
7.2

7.175

7.1
7
6.9
A1A2A3 B1B2B3 C1C2C3 D1D2D3 E1E2E3 F1F2F3 G1G2G3 H1H2H3 I1 I2 I3

Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 13:19 03 March 2015

Y Axis- % of casting defcts

X Axis - Factors at different level

Figure 1. Average values of percentage of casting defects for each parameter at different levels.

Average value of S / N ratio for different values at different levels

-16.8
-16.9

A1A2A3

B1B2B3

C1C2C3 D1D2D3 E1E2E3

F1F2F3

G1G2G3 H1H2H3

I1 I2 I3

-17
-17.1

-17.14

-17.2
-17.3
-17.4

-17.25
-17.41

-17.36

-17.34

-17.54

-17.6
-17.7

-17.49

-17.53

-17.5

-17.35

-17.43

-17.54
-17.52

-17.44
-17.48 -17.48
-17.47
-17.48
-17.58
-17.53
-17.61

-17.69

-17.37

-17.42
-17.53
-17.57
-17.65

-17.76

-17.8
-17.9

Y Axis - % of S/Nratio

X Axis - Factors at different level

Figure 2. Average values of S/N ratios for each parameter at different levels.

Table 6. ANOVA for Casting defects and S/N ratio at 95% Confidence Limits.
Sum of squares (SS)

Degrees of freedom ()

Source

Casting
defects

S/N ratio

Casting
defects

S/N ratio

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
AB
AC
Error (e)
Total

0.3885
1.2891
0.1563
0.0266
0.5725
0.0001
0.0328
0.2269
0.3346
0.5760
0.6299
1.0004
5.2337

0.6049
1.7538
0.2086
0.0363
0.6959
0.0000
0.0408
0.2481
0.4240
0.8152
1.0175
1.0004
6.8457

2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
4
54
80

2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
4
54
80

a Level of confidence alpha (a 0.05)

Variance (V)

F-ratioa

Casting
defects

S/N ratio

Casting
defects

S/N ratio

1.1942
0.6445
0.0781
0.0133
0.2862
0.0000
0.0164
0.1134
0.1643
0.1440
0.4074
0.0185

0.3024
0.8769
0.1043
0.0181
0.3479
0.0000
0.0201
0.1244
0.2120
0.4076
0.5087
0.0185

10.497
34.837
4.2216
0.7189
15.470
0.0000
0.8864
6.1297
9.0432
7.7837
22.020
1.0000

16.345
47.400
5.6378
0.9783
18.805
0.0000
1.0864
6.7243
11.459
22.032
40.696
1.0000

156

A. Kumaravadivel et al.

Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 13:19 03 March 2015

The DOF for the error (e) is given in

Equation (6):
Total degrees of freedom

T A B C D E F G

I AB AC


A B C D F G
e T 
54
H I AB AC
6
The result of the ANOVA for casting defects
and S/N ratio are shown in Table 6. From Table 6,
it is clear that those parameters A, B, E, and I
significantly affect both the mean and variation in
the casting defects. The expected amount of sum of
squares (SS0 ) for each factor is computed using
variance. The percent contribution (P) for each
factor is calculated using expected amount of sum
of squares (SS0 ).

5.2 Results of ANOVA

The ANOVA is used to analyze the results of the
conducted experiments. Taguchi method cannot
judge and determine the effect of individual parameter on the entire process. The significant factors
and/or their interactions are identified for various
trial conditions and the parameters which significantly influence the casting defects. However, some
more information is required to conclude with an
optimum setting of parameters [29].
The ANOVA can, however, be useful for
determining influence of any given input parameter
from a series of experimental result by design of
experiment.
5.2.1 Pooling
If the calculated F-ratio for a parameter is less than
the tabulated F-ratio (3.20) at a stated confidence
level (95% confidence level), the effect of the
parameter is insignificant and the parameter is
pooled. If the parameter is pooled, the sum of
squares due to the parameter is added to the error
sum of squares and other ANOVA calculations are
modified in Equations (7)(9). If the parameter A is
pooled,
SSe Pooled SSe SSA

fe Pooled fe fa

Ve Pooled SSe Pooled=fe Pooled

The percent contribution is the portion of the

total variation observed in an experiment attributed to each significant factor and/or interaction
which is reflected. The percent contribution is a

function of the sums of squares for each significant

item and it indicates the relative power of a factor
and/or interactions to reduce the variation. If the
factor and/or interaction levels are controlled
precisely, the total variation could be reduced by
the amount indicated by the percent contribution.
The variation due to a factor or interaction
contains some amount due to error; it is represented by the following form for factor given in
Equation (10).
If parameter A is significant then,
SS0A SSA  Ve  VA

10

Similarly, for other significant parameters, sum

of squares is calculated. The subtracted amount of
sum of squares must be added to the error sum of
squares given in Equation (11) for the total sum
of squares to be unchanged
SS0e SSe Ve  VA

11

Percent contribution due to A(PA)

0
/SST)  100 and it is similarly calculated for
(SSA
remaining factors.
The expected value of the sums of square (SS0 )
for each factor is computed using the percent
contribution (P) for each factor and is calculated
for casting defects and S/N ratio, as shown in
Tables 7 and 8, respectively.

5.2.2 Estimation of mean

Once an experiment is conducted, the optimum
treatment condition within the experiment is determined. There is the second situation to tackle and
hence the most direct way to estimate the mean for
that treatment condition is to average all the results
for the trials which are set at those particular levels.
The estimation of mean for casting defects is
achieved by the following equation given as
Equation (12), Syrcos [28].
 T A3  T  B1  T  C1  T  D1  T 
E1  T  F3  T  G1  T 
H1  T  I1  T 
 A3 B1 C1 D1 E1 F3 G1
H1 I1  8T
 7:354 7:175 7:357 7:430 7:259 7:461
7:435 7:337 7:361  8  7:464
 6:457%

12

where  is the casting defects at the optimal casting

parameters; T the average casting defects of all
control factors; A3 the lower value of average
casting defect when factor A (moisture content) is
at level 3; B1 the lower value of average casting
defect when factor B (permeability) is at level 1; C1

157

Journal of the Chinese Institute of Industrial Engineers

Table 7. ANOVA for casting defects including percent contribution at 95% confidence limits.

Source
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
AB
AC
e(pooled)
Total

Sum of
squares (SS)

Degrees of
freedom ()

0.3885
1.2891
0.1563
0.0266
0.5725
0.0001
0.0328
0.2269
0.3346
0.5760
0.6299
1.0004
5.2337

2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
4
54
80

Variance (V)

F-ratioa

Expected (SS0 )

Percent
contribution (P)

1.1942
0.6445
0.0781
0.0133
0.2862
0.0000
0.0164
0.1134
0.1643
0.1440
0.4074
0.0185

10.497
34.837
4.2216
0.7189
15.470
0.0000
0.8864
6.1297
9.0432
7.7837
22.020
1.0000

0.3849
1.2771
0.1548
0.0263
0.5712

0.0324
0.2248
0.3315
0.5733
0.6223
1.0000
5.2337

7.35
24.40
2.95
0.50
10.83

0.62
4.29
6.33
10.95
11.89
19.11
100

Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 13:19 03 March 2015

a Level of confidence alpha (a 0.05)

Table 8. ANOVA for S/N ratio including percent contribution at 95% confidence limits.

Source
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
AB
AC
e(pooled)
Total

Sum of
squares (SS)

Degrees of
freedom ()

0.6049
1.7538
0.2086
0.0363
0.6959
0.0000
0.0408
0.2481
0.4240
0.8152
1.0175
1.0004
6.8457

2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
4
54
80

Variance (V)

F-ratioa

Expected (SS0 )

Percent
contribution (P)

0.3024
0.8769
0.1043
0.0181
0.3479
0.0000
0.0201
0.1244
0.2120
0.4076
0.5087
0.0185

16.345
47.400
5.6378
0.9783
18.805
0.0000
1.0864
6.7243
11.459
22.032
40.696
1.0000

0.5999
1.7375
0.2066
0.0356
0.6894

0.0400
0.2465
0.4200
0.8076
1.0080
1.0000
6.8457

8.76
25.39
3.02
0.52
10.07

0.59
3.60
6.13
11.80
14.73
14.61
100

a Level of confidence alpha (a 0.05)

the lower value of average casting defect when

factor C (loss on ignition) is at level 1; D1 the lower
value of average casting defect when factor D
(compressive strength) is at level 1; E1 the lower
value of average casting defect when factor E
(volatile content) is at level 1; F3 the lower value of
average casting defect when factor F (vent holes) is
at level 3; G1 the lower value of average casting
defect when factor G (pouring time) is at level 1; H1
the lower value of average casting defect when
factor H (pouring temperature) is at level 1; and I1
the lower value of average casting defect when
factor I (mold pressure) is at level 1.

5.2.3 Confidence interval around the estimated

mean
The optimum value of casting defects is predicted
at the selected levels of significant parameters. The
estimate of the mean () is only a point estimate

based on the average of the results obtained from

the experiment. Statistically, this provides a 50%
chance of the true average being greater than  and
a 50% chance of the true average being less than .
The confidence level is the maximum and minimum
value between which the true average should fall at
some stated level. There are three different types of
confidence intervals (CIs) according to Frayce et al.
[10] and Taguchi [30], 95% CI of confirmation
experiments (CICE) and of population (CIPOP) is
calculated using the following equations given as
Equations (13) and (14):


CICE F, 1, e Ve 1=eff 1=r 1=2

13



1=2
CIPOP F, 1, e Ve 1=eff

14

where  is the level of risk, (Ve) the error variance,

(e) the degrees of freedom for error, eff the

158

A. Kumaravadivel et al.
Table 9. Result of confirmation experiment.
Percentage of
casting defects
Day/trial
Day 1
Day 2
Day 3
Total average

Trial 1

Trial 2

Average percentage
of casting defect

Error (%)

7.21
6.95
7.31

7.11
7.62
7.43

7.16
7.29
7.37

0.7
0.8
0.9

7.32

0.86

Total production 942

Defects 69

effective number of replications and r the number

of test trials.

Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 13:19 03 March 2015

eff 81=1 18 4:3

 1- confidence limits 95% 0:05
F -ratio 1, 0:05, 54 4:05tabulated
CICE 4:05  0:01851=4:3 1=31=2
0:2059,

and

CIPOP 0:1321

Predicted optimal range (for a confirmation

runs of three experiments) at 95% CI is given in
Equation (15):
  CICE  /  /  CICE  6:25 / 6:457 / 6:666
15
The 95% CI of the predicted optimum casting
defect is given in Equation (16):
  CICOP  /  /  CICOP  6:32 / 6:457 / 6:59
16

5.3 Confirmation experiments

The objective of the confirmation run is to determine whether the selected control parameter values
will produce better results than those produced in
the first part of the experiment. The confirmation
experiments are used to verify whether the factors
and levels chosen from an experiment cause a
product or process to behave in a certain fashion.
The confirming experiment is highly recommended
to verify the experimental conclusions. If the
average of the results of the confirmation is
within the range of the confidence limits, the
significant factors as well as the appropriate levels
for obtaining the desired results are properly
chosen. If the average of the results of the
confirmation experiment is outside the range of
the CI, the parameter selected levels to control the
results for a desired value are incorrect or have
excessive measurements, confirming further

experimentation [16]. Three set of confirmation

experiments are conducted at the optimum settings
of the process parameters recommended by the
investigation and the results are given in Table 9.
The average of response of casting defects in
each experiment is found to be 7.32% and the error
range is 0.86. The error range is very small due to
minimum confirmatory trials and it is in the
positive improvement. The selected parameters as
well as their appropriate levels are significant
enough to obtain the desired result.

6. Confirmation results
Various flywheel green sand casting experiments
are conducted for this case study. ANOVA along
with interpretation method is used to obtain the
percent contribution of each parameter and optimum levels of each parameter. Tables 9 and 10
show the following results.
(1) The percent contribution of each parameter
to the variation of casting defects and
optimum parameter.
(2) The optimum levels of various green sand
casting parameters for minimum casting
defects of flywheel green sand castings.
(3) The predicted range of optimum casting
defects is 6.32 5 6.457 5 6.59 (At 95%
confidence limits).
(4) The Sigma Level of the overall process of
the company increased to 3.68 from 3.47.
Higher the Sigma Level, better the process
and lower the probability that a defect will
occur. The Taguchi method resulted in a
quantum improvement in the Sigma Value
of the casting process, given in Figure 3.

7. Conclusion
Casting defects in sand casting process is analyzed
by Taguchi method. From the results of the study,
it is found that the application of Taguchis method

159

Journal of the Chinese Institute of Industrial Engineers

Table 10. Percent contribution and optimum parameters under economic considerations.

Parameter

Mean of casting
defects percent
contribution

S/N ratio of casting

defects percent
contribution

Optimum
levels

Optimum
value

Moisture content (%)

Permeability
Loss on ignition (%)
Compressive strength (kg/cm2)
Volatile content (%)
Vent holes (Nos)
Pouring time (s)
Pouring temperature ( C)
Mold pressure (kg/cm2)

7.35
24.40
2.95
0.50
10.83

0.62
4.29
6.33

8.76
25.39
3.02
0.52
10.07

0.59
3.60
6.13

3
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1

3.6
120
3.5
1
2.1
10
45
1400
5

Parameter
designation

Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 13:19 03 March 2015

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I

15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0

Before Taguchi application

14.78

After optimal setting Confirmation

process
7.32

3.47

3.68

Sigma level

Rejection %

Figure 3. Performance level of casting process before

and after Taguchi application.

to the green sand casting process has the following

contributions:
(1) Improves the productivity of the castings
produced.
(2) Increases stability of the casting process.
Before the application of Taguchis method,
the parameters of the casting process were
more arbitrary and difficult to control, and,
hence, the product quality suffered instability problems. Taguchis method has yielded
optimized control factors, resulting in superior product quality and stability.
(3) A higher product yield is possible because,
prior to the application of the Taguchi
method, the casting defects of the casting
process were 7.703%, and after the application of Taguchis method, the casting defects
of the casting process declines to 7.32%. It
shows the reduction in average percentage of
rejection rate of sand casting process by
0.38% and process sigma level of the company has increased to 3.68 from 3.47.
Among the nine control parameters, the hierarchy of process variables affecting casting defects
is established, and optimal casting defects in sand

casting process with a minimal number of experimental runs have been made and confirmed with
the verification experiment. The response table of
the S/N ratio and the ANOVA analysis for all the
nine control factors indicate a very strong influence
of B (permeability), E (volatile content), A (moisture content), and I (mold pressure) and moderate
influence of H (pouring temperature), C (loss on
ignition), A  B (interaction of moisture content
and permeability), A  C (moisture content and
loss on ignition), and no or little influence of F
(vent holes), G (pouring time), and D (compressive
strength). The optimum parameters are A3, B1, C1,
D1, E1, F3, G1, H1, and I1 found to yield the highest
S/N ratios and minimum casting defects. At these
optimal settings, the confirmation test has yielded
minimum casting defects within 95% CI.
Also, the experiments give a clear picture of the
every factors contribution to the variation in the
green sand casting process and the quality can be
improved without additional investment. From this
analysis, it is concluded that the quality is improved
by Taguchis method of parameter design at the
lowest possible cost.
To optimize the set of parameters obtained and
to make the analysis more precise and cost effective, response surface methodology is suggested as
a future scope for research.

Nomenclature
yi response value of observation in ith
test
Ve error variance
F(,1,e) F-ratio required at level of risk
eff effective number of replications
T total degrees of freedom
fe F-ratio for error pooled
fa F-ratio for parameter A pooled
V factor variance of factor
SS Sum of square

160

A. Kumaravadivel et al.
SS0

e
SSA
V0
P


T
N

expected sum of square

level of risk
degrees of freedom for error
Sum of square for factor A
expected amount of variation
percent contribution
mean
degrees of freedom
average values of casting defects
total number of experiments

Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 13:19 03 March 2015

Notes on contributors
A. Kumaravadivel is working as a Professor in
Mechanical Engineering Department, Sudharsan
Engineering College, Tamilnadu, India. He completed
his PG in Industrial Engineering at the Thiagarajar
college of Engineering, Madurai Kamaraj University,
Tamilnadu (India) and pursuing his Doctorate in the
field of Six Sigma at Anna University, Tamilnadu
(India). He has presented many papers in national and
international journals and conferences. His area of
interest is quality and philosophical subjects.
U. Natarajan is working as an Assistant Professor in
Department of Mechanical Engineering, ACCE&Tech.
Karaikudi (India). He completed his PhD at Anna
University Tamilnadu (India). After this, he went to
South Africa for 2-year postdoc fellowship. He has
published many papers in various reputed international
journals. He has guided research scholars in the area of
micromachining and surface machining. His area of
interest is micromachining, response surface methods,
quality engineering subjects, etc.
C. Ilamparithi is working as an Assistant Professor in
Mechanical Engineering Department in Sudharsan
Engineering College. He completed his PG in Industrial
Engineering at the Sudharsan Engineering College,
Pudukottai, Tamilnadu, India. He has presented many
papers in national and international conferences. His
area of interest is quality and philosophical subjects.

References
[1] Antony, J., M. Kumar and M.K. Tiwari, An
application of Six Sigma methodology to reduce the
engine-overheating problem in an automotive company, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical
Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering
Manufacture, 219, 633646 (2005).
[2] ASM International Committee, Metals Handbook for
Castings, ASM International, Materials Park, OH
(1990).
[3] Barua, P.B., P. Kumar and J.L. Gaindhar,
Optimization of mechanical properties of V-process
castings by Taguchi method, Journal of Indian
Foundry, 14, 1725 (1997).
[4] Byrne, D.M. and G. Taguchi, The Taguchi
approach to parameter design, Quality Progress,
20, 1926 (1987).

[5] Chang, C.S. and R.C. Liao, A grey based Taguchi

method to optimize design of muzzle flash restraint
device, International Journal of Advanced
Manufacturing Technology, 24, 860864 (2004).
[6] Enright, T.P. and B. Prince, Offline quality control
parameter estimation and experimental design with
the Taguchi method, AFS Transactions, 393400
(1983).
[7] George, P.M., B.K. Raghunath., L.M. Manocha
and A.M. Warrier, EDM machining of carbon
carbon compositea Taguchi approach, Journal
of Materials Processing Technology, 145, 667679
(2002).
[8] Ghani, J.A., I.A. Choudhury and H.H. Hassan,
Application of Taguchi method in the optimization
of end milling parameters, Journal of Materials
Processing Technology, 145, 8492 (2004).
[9] Guharaja, S., A. NoorulHaq and K.M.
Karuppanan, Optimization of green sand casting
process parameters by using Taguchis method,
International Journal of Advanced. Manufacturing
Technology, 30, 10401048 (2006).
[10] Frayce D., J.F. Hetu and C.A. Loong, Numerical
modeling of filling and solidification in die casting,
Transactions of the NADCA. International
Congress and Exposition, Oct.1821, Cleveland,
OH, (1993).
[11] Jeyapaul, R., P. Shahabudeen and K. Krishnaiah,
Quality management research by considering
multi-response problems in the Taguchi methoda
review, International Journal of Advanced
Manufacturing Technology, 26, 13311337 (2004).
[12] Johnston, R.E., Design of experiments: Taguchi in
the foundry, AFS Transactions, 82, 415418 (1989).
[13] Jolly, M.R., H.S.H. Lo, M. Turan and J.Campbell,
Use of simulation tools in the practical development of a method for manufacture of cast iron
camshafts, Proceedings of the Modeling of Casting,
Welding and Advanced Solidification Processes
(MCWASP IX), Aachen, Germany, 311318
(2000).
[14] Juran, J.M., F.M. Gryna Jr and R.S. Bingham Jr,
Quality Control Hand Book, 3rd Edn, McGraw-Hill,
New York, NY (1951).
[15] Kumar, P. and J.L. Gaindhar, Off-line quality
control for V-process castings, Quality and
Reliability Engineering International, 11, 175181
(1995).
[16] Lipinski, M., W. Schaefer and S. Andersen
Modeling of combined heat and fluid flow for
determination of filling sequence for real complex
shaped castings, in Modeling of Casting, Welding
and Advanced Solidification Processes, TMS,
Warrendale, PA, 185211 (1991).
[17] Masters, I., A.P. Khoei and D.T. Gethin, The
application of Taguchi methods to the aluminium
recycling process, Proceedings of the 4th ASM
Conference and Exhibition on the Recycling of
Metals, Vienna, Austria, 115124 (1999).
[18] Montgomery, D.C., Design and Analysis of
Experiments, 4th Edn, Wiley, New York, NY
(1997).

Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 13:19 03 March 2015

Journal of the Chinese Institute of Industrial Engineers

[19] Muzammil, M., P.P. Singh and F. Talib,
Optimization of gear blank casting process by
using Taguchis robust design technique, Journal of
Quality Engineering, 15, 351359 (2003).
[20] Noorul Haq, A., S. Guharaja and K.M.
Karuppanan, Parameter optimization of CO2
casting process by using Taguchi method,
International Journal on Interactive Design and
Manufacturing, 3, 4150 (2009).
[21] Osma, A., A statistical approach to comparing
wheel hub forging processes, Proceedings of the
Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part D:
Journal of Automobile Engineering, 223, 15591576
(2009).
[22] Papai, J. and C. Mobley, Die thermal fields
and heat fluxes during die casting of 380
aluminum alloy in H-13 steels, Transactions of
the NADCA Congress and Exposition, Detroit,
MI, 377 (1991).
[23] Raisinghani, M.S., Six Sigma: Concept tools and
applications, Industrial Management and Data
Systems, 105, 491505 (2005).

161

[24] Ross, P.J., Taguchi Techniques for Quality

Engineering, McGraw-Hill Book, New York, NY
(1988).
[25] Roy, R.K., A primer on Taguchi method, Van
Nostrand Reinhold, New York, NY (1990).
[26] Sahoo, A.K., M.K. Tiwari and A.R. Mileham, Six
Sigma based approach to optimize radial forging
operation variables, Journal of Materials
Processing Technology, 202, 125136 (2008).
[27] Shaji, S. and V. Radhakrishnan, Analysis of process
parameters in surface grinding with graphite as
lubricant based on the Taguchi method, Journal of
Materials Processing Technology, 141, 5159 (2003).
[28] Syrcos, G.P., Die casting process optimization
using Taguchi methods, Journal of Materials
Processing Technology, 135, 6874 (2002).
[29] Taguchi, G., Taguchi on robust technology development, bringing quality upstream by Genichi Taguchi,
ASME, New York, NY (1993).
[30] Taguchi, G., Introduction to Quality Engineering,
Asian Productivity Organization, Tokyo, Japan
(1986).

162

A. Kumaravadivel et al.

Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] at 13:19 03 March 2015

A. Kumaravadivel*
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Sudharsan Engineering College, Pudukkottai, Tamilnadu, India
U. Natarajan
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
ACCE&Tech., Karaikudi, Tamilnadu, India
C. Ilamparithi
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Sudharsan Engineering College, Pudukkottai, Tamilnadu, India

S/N

poojaku2003@yahoo.co.in