See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/360771758

A review on micro-blasting as surface treatment technique for improved

cutting tool performance

Article in Materials Today Proceedings · May 2022

DOI: 10.1016/j.matpr.2022.05.196

CITATIONS READS

12 397

3 authors:

Mahendra Gadge Gaurav M. Lohar

Vishwakarma Institute Of Information Technology, Pune Lal Bahadur Shastri College of Arts, Science and Commerce, satara
7 PUBLICATIONS 51 CITATIONS 62 PUBLICATIONS 838 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Satish Chinchanikar
Vishwakarma Institute of Information Technology, Pune, India
35 PUBLICATIONS 452 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Mahendra Gadge on 03 October 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) 1–6

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Today: Proceedings

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com

F
A review on micro-blasting as surface treatment technique for improved
cutting tool performance

OO
Mahendra Gadge, Gaurav Lohar, Satish Chinchanikar
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Vishwakarma Institute of Information Technology, Pune 411 048, India

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

PR
Keywords: Micro-blasting is a cold working process based on erosion caused by abrasives blasted with high pressurized air.
Micro-blasting Micro-blasting is used for surface treatment of smaller and intricate parts. Micro-blasting is used as pre-and post-
Surface treatment treatment for cutting tools to increase their life. Abrasive particles are the most significant aspect while micro-
Residual stresses
blasting. The choice of the type of particles depends on the desired performance characteristics such as a good
Abrasive particles
MRR, residual stresses, deburring, surface roughening, or reducing surface roughness. A nozzle is a crucial aspect
Pre-treatment
Post-treatment of a micro-blasting machine as it affects both the precision of blasting and the velocity of the particles. The selec-
tion of the blasting pressure with the blasting time is crucial to have the required properties in the tool substrate
D
or coating. Stand-off distance, abrasive type, size and shape, nozzle diameter, and blasting pressure significantly
affect the MRR, surface finish, and dimensional accuracy. This study finds that the selection of process parame-
ters of micro-blasting is crucial as incorrect parameters may only cause surface roughening and lower tool life.
© 20XX
TE

1. Introduction of previous articles to find the appropriate parameters for micro-

blasting for pre-and post-surface treatments. There are two fundamen-
In 1870, a technology was patented that used air to blast solid particles tal types of micro-blasting depending on how it affects the erosion of
such as sand or fine quartz for cutting, smoothing, or grinding a solid the solid. Micro-blasting is an effective pre-and post-treatments for in-
EC

substrate utilizing erosion [1]. Since then, abrasive blasting has been creasing surface roughness and inducing compressive residual stresses
widely used in industries as it is an inexpensive method for cleaning in the cutting tool substrate before coating. The work also discusses
and surface preparation of materials with complex shapes. The hose how the abrasive particle affects different processes with its size, shape,
used for blasting abrasive media can easily reach corners. It can easily hardness, and abrasive flow rate of the jet.
machine curves and edges compared to the primordial cutting tools, but
sandblasting was too harsh for smaller and intricate shapes, which led 1.1. Dry micro-blasting
RR

to micro-blasting.
Micro-blasting is a machining process in which a jet of abrasive me- In dry micro-blasting, the mixture of abrasive particles and high-
dia with sizes 10–50 µm and effective up to 300 µm are blasted on a pressure air blasted on the substrate through a nozzle. The compressed
substrate. Micro-blasting becomes reliable and repeatable for brittle air from the air compressor and abrasive particles from the abrasive
and intricate substrates due to the smaller size of abrasive particles. Be- tank are mixed in the mixing chamber. Abrasive particles mixed with
fore coating removing loose and friable layers from cutting tools in- compressed air form aerosol. The impact of the abrasive particles on the
CO

creases the adhesion between the tool surface and the coating [2]. Mi- substrate causes material removal (chip formation) or minor surface
cro-blasting is a flexible process used for deburring and cleaning sur- fractures. Air then carries away the chipped particles and abrasives
faces documented as an effective method for improving cutting tool from the substrate. Fig. 1 shows the schematic of the micro-blasting
performance by treating the surface pre-and post-treatments for coated setup. It is an excellent way for cleaning or surface preparation for cut-
tools [3–4]. It is also being used widely in dental applications for sur- ting tools. Abrasives with larger grain sizes can also induce residual
face preparation of cemented cast crowns [5]. Micro-blasting has be- stresses and improve the overall strength of the cutting tools [6–9]. Dry
come one of the most preferred surface treating technologies in the 21st micro-blasting is preferred being cost-effective and efficient for surface
century due to being cost-effective and having high versatility. preparation. However, an essential issue with dry blasting is the release
Since the past few decades, there has been an increase in the usage of abrasive dust that can cause health hazards. But with proper dust
of micro-blasting for surface treatment. This work is an inclusive study containment and an air mask, the process can be safe.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2022.05.196
2214-7853/© 20XX

Note: Low-resolution images were used to create this PDF. The original images will be used in the final composition.
2 M. Gadge et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) 1–6

F
OO
Fig. 1. Micro-blasting setup.

1.2. Wet micro-blasting sistance and the coating adhesion of post-treated coated tools [10,

PR
16–17]. However, some studies reported a decrease in the coating sur-
In wet micro-blasting, the carrier of the abrasive media is water. An face roughness with micro-blasting was at the cost of a reduction in
abrasive slurry is prepared from the water and the abrasive. This abra- wear resistance [17]. The tool life was improved by 40% when using a
sive slurry carried by high-pressure air is blasted on the surface through post-treated micro-blasted tool while machining Ti6Al4V [18]. But the
the nozzle. Wet micro-blasting eliminates the problem of dust. The ero- post-treatment has negatives as well. The blasting pressure and the
sion carried in wet micro-blasting is because of the drag caused by the blasting time can affect the coating thickness and wear. Increased blast-
water on the abrasive [4]. The higher drag of abrasives causes the ero- ing time for TiN/Al2O3/TiCN layers resulted in a higher wear rate be-
cause of fracture erosion mode. Post-treatment of coatings at higher
D
sion rate to be higher and the flow rate to be more dominant in wet mi-
cro-blasting. However, wet micro-blasting may introduce the substrate blasting pressure can also lead to the formation and propagation of
to corrosion. Wet micro-blasting is expensive due to additional equip- cracks [19].
ment and wastewater treatment. On the other hand, wet micro-blasting
TE

reduces the entrapment of abrasives in the substrate to a greater extent 2.2. Effect on residual stresses
against dry micro-blasting.
One of the most crucial applications of micro-blasting is inducing
2. Potentials and limitations residual compressive stresses. Residual stresses can affect machines and
tools in a very positive way. Residual stresses can improve fatigue resis-
2.1. Surface treatment for tools tance significantly. Shot peening is the most effective method for induc-
EC

ing and distributing compressive residual stresses on surfaces. When

Surface treatment before coating (pre-treatment) should be neces- particles shoot substrate, the residual stresses are induced mainly be-
sary to remove the surface defects and friable layers and help roughen cause of the shot velocities and shape. This cold working process can be
the surface on a micro-scale [2]. The roughness caused by the impinged achieved through micro-blasting with appropriate abrasive particles.
abrasives on the surface results in peaks of uniform heights which in An experiment on longitudinal fillet showed that blasting improved the
turn help adhering the coating [6]. Pre-treating cutting tool substrate fatigue strength at two million cycles as much as 19% and increased fa-
RR

with micro-blasting affects the microstructure and crystallographic ori- tigue limit by 66% [20]. Micro-blasting at the tool’s tips can improve
entation. And post-treating coating by micro-blasting produces grain re- the surface finish and induce the residual stresses at the surface and
finement of cutting tool coating [8]. A FEM (Finite Element Method) sub-surface levels. It is reported that blasting has improved the tool life
simulation of the pre-treated coated tools showed an increase in adhe- and surface finish [21].
sion of the coating that was in line with the experimental analysis Inducing residual compressive stresses in the coating is a surefire
[10–11]. If the parameters are selected appropriately, increased coating way to harden and make the coating durable. The positive effect of mi-
adhesion with the tool substrate improves the wear resistance of the cro-blasting on residual stresses of tool coating is reported by many re-
CO

tool’s coatings and the tool life [12]. The evidence provided by articles searchers [18–25]. AlTiN coated tools with initial compressive residual
concludes that pre-treating a tool with micro-blasting before coating stress of 0.1 GPa (low-σ) and 2.6 GPa (high-σ), respectively were sub-
deposition is feasible as micro-blasting is a cost-effective method that jected to micro blasting. The residual stresses were observed to increase
will prevent tool wear for more extended periods. However, several fac- with the blasting pressure for Low-σ, whereas it was constant for the
tors affect the pre-treatment; adhesion of the coating, tool profile, and high-σ coating [22].
microstructure of the substrate [13]. Attempts were made using wet micro-blasting of PVD AlTiN coating
Post-treating a tool substrate before coating improves the coating that induced residual stresses in the coating [23]. Efforts were made to
strength, adhesion, wear resistance, and decreases its roughness. Pre- evaluate the fatigue limit and residual stress distribution for a PVD CrN
treatment improves the tool life and lowers the surface roughness and coating thickness of 4 μm. The stress values for the coating weren’t af-
hence friction. The reduction in friction lowers the cutting temperature. fected due to micro-blasting [26]. Coatings with higher initial stress
It is reported that the surface roughness of abrasives treated CVD coat- values were observed to have little effect on the residual compressive
ing Al2O3/TiCN decreased to 0.052 µm from the initial value of stresses by micro-blasting treatment. The selection of process parame-
0.181 µm [14]. The tribological properties of the TiN/MT- ters of micro-blasting is crucial as incorrect parameters may only cause
TiCN/Al2O3/TiCNO coating also showed improvement after post- surface roughening and lower tool life [27].
treatment [15]. FEM-based simulations also showed improved wear re-
 M. Gadge et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) 1–6 3

3. Process parameters stresses, and avoiding coating film brittleness. A group of

researchers used spherical ZrO2 abrasive particles for micro-
3.1. System parameters blasting of carbide tool for better coating adhesion with blasting
pressure of 0.4 MPa [7]. Some studies attempted using Al2O3
System parameters are the factors to be considered while using the abrasive particles with micro-blasting pressure and time of
micro-blasting. The most influential process parameters are the blasting 0.5 MPa and 60 s, respectively [14]. Blasting pressure was the
angle and pressure, stand-off distance, and the nozzle diameter. The most significant parameter for obtaining the desired residual
process parameters are selected based on the type of operation, work- stresses in the tool substrates or coatings. The residual
piece material, and desired properties. However, it is vital to use opti- compressive stresses increased with an increase in the blasting
mum parameters to obtain better results. pressure [22]. However, high blasting pressures may lead to

F
crack propagation and cause unwanted coating degradation.
• Blasting angle: It is the angle made by the axis of the nozzle with Barbatti et al. [19] showed that when blasting at a pressure of
the substrate surface. When using micro-blasting for cleaning 0.15 MPa, the coating’s roughness decreased from 0.69 ± 0.04

OO
purposes, avoiding surface damage is the primary requirement by to 0.19 ± 0.03, which was caused directly due to erosion. It is
controlling micro-blasting parameters. However, it is reported that reported to use higher blasting pressures and lower time for
the nozzle angle close to 75° while cleaning application cause bare achieving desired surface roughness [31]. The selection of the
minimum damage to the surface [28–29]. In another study, poor blasting pressure with the blasting time is crucial to have the
Al2O3 coating adhesion was observed when micro-blasted with 90°. required properties in the tool substrate or coating. Bouzakis et
However, better coating adhesion strength was observed when al. [3] observed better performance with the micro-blasted
micro-blasted at 75° [30], and the maximum erosion of the coated tools against untreated tools. An X-ray diffraction

PR
substrate was found for the nozzle angle between 20° to 35°. Lower technique was used to analyze the grain structure of micro-
values of nozzle angles are preferred for softer substrates. Studies blasted coated tools. Fig. 2. depicts the effect of varying micro-
reported an increase in the material removal rate with the blasting blasting pressure of 0.2 MPa, 0.4 MPa, and 0.6 MPa on coated
angle. tool’s structure using the XRD technique. It can be seen that the
• Stand-off distance (SoD): It is the distance between the blasting micro-blasting pressure has a significant effect on the structure
nozzle and the surface of the substrate. It is suggested to have of coated tools. And one has to select it very carefully,
higher SoD for cleaning, deburring, and finishing operations. And considering the material of the tool substrate for obtaining the
smaller SoD for micro-drilling operations. In micro-blasting with compressive residual stresses.
D
the increase of SoD, the MRR (Material Removal Rate) decreases. It
is because the jet intensity is higher when closer to the nozzle. The 3.2. Nozzle parameters
most optimum value of MRR was observed at SoD of 10 mm during
jet drilling of FRP composites with silicon carbide and aluminum A nozzle is a crucial aspect of a micro-blasting machine as it affects
TE

oxide abrasives. Most studies found SoD of 8–10 mm is ideal for both the precision of blasting and the velocity of the particles. A de-
better performance of the process. Also, abrasive type, size and crease in the diameter of the nozzle significantly affects the air velocity.
shape, nozzle diameter, and blasting pressure significantly affect Laval nozzles are mostly preferred as it homogenizes the abrasive parti-
the MRR, surface finish, and dimensional accuracy. While cles and the air. Laval nozzles are nozzles that have a pinch in them.
deburring, SoD was observed as the most influential factor than the The velocity and energy of the particles are increased with Laval noz-
EC

blasting pressure, abrasive size, and flow rate. zles and help in improving the micro-blasting process. Some of the de-
• Blasting pressure: Obtaining optimum blasting pressure is veloped Laval nozzles reduce the abrasive jet distortion and improve
crucial for the desired surface roughness, compressive residual particle velocity [32–33]. Along with the design, the nozzle diameter is
RR
CO

Fig. 2. Effect of micro-blasting pressure on coated tool’s structure using XRD technique [3].
4 M. Gadge et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) 1–6

another critical parameter. The researchers mostly used the nozzle di- a hardness of 9 on the Mohs scale. But aluminum oxide being
ameter of 3–4 mm while micro-blasting. The MRR increased with the relatively abundant, is mostly used. Sodium bicarbonate is
increase in the nozzle diameter. However, with time, a nozzle wears out preferred for cleaning purposes as it has a hardness of 2 on the
being in continuous contact with the hard abrasive particles. It not only scale and won’t affect the substrate.
affects the precision but also affects the blasting pressures. Hence it
should be made of rugged and durable materials like tungsten carbide 4. Wet micro-blasting
and sapphire, which have high durability. With the proper nozzle
geometry, nozzle wear can be reduced. Attempts were made using wet micro-blasting of PVD AlTiN coating
that induced residual stresses in the coating [23]. Bouzakis et al. [35]
3.3. Abrasive parameters investigated the effect of wet and dry micro-blasting by Al2O3 abrasive

F
grains of various diameters on PVD films’ hardness, tool wedge geome-
• Abrasive particles are the most significant aspect while micro- try, and cutting performance. Their study observed that wet micro-
blasting. There are different types of abrasives used, namely blasting with coarse sharp-edged Al203 grains resulted in a prominent

OO
aluminum oxide (Al2O3), zirconium dioxide (ZrO2), silicon carbide increase in coated tool life. However, study pointed out that the applied
(SiC), sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3), crushed glass, and other micro-blasting pressure has to be adjusted concerning the size of the
abrasives. The selection of the abrasive parameters depends on the abrasive grains used. Further, they found that wet micro-blasting is a
operation to be carried out. The choice of the type of particles more efficient post-treatment for enhancing the cutting performance of
depends on the desired performance characteristics such as a good coated tools against dry micro-blasting. On the other hand, coatings
MRR, residual stresses, deburring, surface roughening, or reducing with higher initial stress values were observed to have little effect on
surface roughness. Abrasive size and its shape are the parameters the residual compressive stresses by micro-blasting treatment. The se-

PR
that affect the surface topology. However, its hardness depends on lection of process parameters of micro-blasting is crucial as incorrect
the purpose as a harder abrasive is appropriate for material parameters may only cause surface roughening and lower tool life [27].
removal while a softer abrasive is preferred for cleaning purposes. Vopat et al. [36] deposited nanocomposite AlCrSiN hard coatings on
• Abrasive size: Klocke et al. [34] showed that grain sizes larger the cemented carbide substrates. Samples were prepared by brushing
than 40 μm were suitable for inducing stresses in cutting tool and wet micro-blasting to finish a surface and prepare the required cut-
substrates or coatings. On the other hand, grain sizes smaller than ting-edge radii. Their study observed that the longer time of edge
40 μm were perfect for increasing the surface roughness and a preparation with surface finishing led to a slight deterioration in the ad-
good MRR. Using smaller sizes can help in reducing surface hesion strength of the coating to the substrate. However, the tool life
D
roughness significantly without eroding the surface much. was observed to increase when the cutting-edge radius was smaller
• Abrasive shape: The abrasive shape is one of the deciding factors while turning austenitic stainless steel using the cemented carbide in-
of the surface achieved through micro-blasting. Fig. 3 depicts the serts.
effect of coarse and spherical abrasive particles' on the substrate Zhang et al. [37] investigated edge passivation and quality of car-
TE

surface. From sketch shown on the left, it can be seen that coarser bide cutting inserts treated by wet micro-abrasive blasting. Their study
abrasives cause higher peaks resulting in more surface roughness, observed that the higher injection pressure (0.35 MPa) and abrasive
while spherical particles achieving a lower surface roughness can concentration (20–25%), longer sandblasting time (50 s), and smaller
be seen from the sketch shown on the right. Spherical abrasives abrasive size (320 mesh) were good processing parameters to provide a
cause less intense erosion and help in obtaining a smoother surface stronger passivation capability to cutting edge. Further, their study
EC

[7]. Coarse abrasives may cause intense chipping, which can cause found that water played an important role in micro-abrasive blasting
higher MRR. technology. The kinetic energy and water wedge accelerated the edge
• Abrasive hardness: Hardness is usually measured on Mohs passivation by suppressing dust and hence, improved micro-abrasive
hardness scale, which ranges from 1 to 10 and is the most basic blasting environment. Their study found that the insert treated by mi-
measurement. Most steels have a hardness around 6–7 on the cro-abrasive blasting had lower edge roughness, higher life, and rela-
scale, coated cutting tools harness is around 8.5 on the scale. tively stable cutting force. Their study demonstrated that it is feasible to
According to the process and the hardness of the substrate, a passivate the cutting edge of inserts using the wet micro-abrasive blast-
RR

suitable abrasive is selected. Al2O3 is the most commonly used ing.

abrasive for blasting purposes as it has a hardness of 9 on the Krebs et al. [38] analyzed the feasibility of the wet abrasive jet ma-
scale and is inert and non-toxic compared to silica-based chining process while preparing micro-milling tools. Their study de-
abrasives. Silicon carbide may range from 9 to 10 on the scale, fined the preparation process that allows an effective reduction of the
but silicon dust is very harmful to human lungs and eyes and can defects and a successful adjustment of different rounding sizes of the
cause damage. Tungsten carbide and zirconium dioxide also have cutting edge in a relatively short preparation time. Zhong et al. [39]
CO

Fig. 3. Coarse vs spherical abrasive effect on the substrate.

 M. Gadge et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) 1–6 5

study demonstrated better performance by the coated inserts, which References

were post-treated by wet-blasting followed by polishing. These post-
treated inserts exhibited the lowest surface roughness, smallest work [1] Benjamin Chew Tilghman, US patent, US108408A, 18 October 1870.
[2] D.B. Lewis, S.R. Bradbury, M. Sarwar, Effect of substrate surface preparation on
hardening value of the workpieces, and better tool life. the performance and life of TiN-coated high speed steel circular saw blades, Surf.
This study finds further scope for comparative evaluation of dry and Coat. Technol. 82 (1–2) (1996) 187–192, https://doi.org/10.1016/0257-8972(95)
wet micro-blasted cutting tool performance during machining of diffi- 02636-3.
[3] K.D. Bouzakis, S. Gerardis, G. Skordaris, G. Katirtzoglou, S. Makrimallakis, F.
cult-to-cut alloys. Also, there is a scope for optimization of the micro- Klocke, E. Bouzakis, Effect of dry micro-blasting on PVD-film properties, cutting
blasting process parameters for obtaining the desired properties for a edge geometry and tool life in milling, Surf. Coat. Technol. 204 (6–7) (2009)
cutting tool. 1081–1086, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2009.07.018.
[4] R. Melentiev, F. Fang, Recent advances and challenges of abrasive jet machining,
CIRP J. Manuf. Technol. 22 (2018) 1–20, https://doi.org/10.1016/

F
5. Conclusion j.cirpj.2018.06.001.
[5] R.P. O’Connor, A. Nayyar, R.E. Kovarik, Effect of internal microblasting on
retention of cemented cast crowns, J. Prosthet. Dent. 64 (5) (1990) 557–562,
Micro-blasting is gaining significant importance as a surface treat-

OO
https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(90)90127-X.
ment process to remove impurities and friable layers from the cutting [6] A. Singh, S. Ghosh, S. Aravindan, Influence of dry micro abrasive blasting on the
tool substrate for better coating adhesion. Pre-and post-treated coated physical and mechanical characteristics of hybrid PVD-AlTiN coated tools, J.
tools showed improved coating adhesion and hence better tool life Manuf. Process. 37 (2019) 446–456, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jmapro.2018.11.024.
against untreated coated tools. The selection of process parameters for [7] K.D. Bouzakis, F. Klocke, G. Skordaris, E. Bouzakis, S. Gerardis, G. Katirtzoglou,
micro-blasting is crucial as incorrect parameters may only cause surface S. Makrimallakis, Influence of dry micro-blasting grain quality on wear behaviour
roughening and lower tool life. Studies have shown that abrasive grains of TiAlN coated tools, Wear 271 (5–6) (2011) 783–791, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.wear.2011.03.010.
having a size smaller than 40 μm, stand-off distance (SoD) of 8–10 mm, [8] A. Jacob, S. Gangopadhyay, A. Satapathy, S. Mantry, B.B. Jha, Influences of

PR
angle of blasting around 75°, a blasting pressure of 0.4–0.5 MPa, and a micro-blasting as surface treatment technique on properties and performance of
nozzle diameter of 3–4 mm should be used for the pre-treatment of cut- AlTiN coated tools, J. Manuf. Process. 29 (2017) 407–418, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jmapro.2017.08.013.
ting tools before the coating deposition. Studies have also shown a de- [9] M. Gadge, S. Chinchanikar, Characterization of pre-and/or post-treated PVD-
crease in material removal rate (MRR) with the increase in SoD as the AlTiN coating: Nanohardness, modulus of indentation and percent elastic portion
abrasive stream deteriorates at higher SoD. Post-treatment is attempted of the nanoindentation, Mater. Today: Proc. 46 (2021) 8386–8392, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2021.03.439.
to induce and distribute residual stresses, which increase with the blast-
[10] K.D. Bouzakis, G. Skordaris, I. Mirisidis, N. Michailidis, G. Mesomeris, E.
ing pressure. The blasting pressure and the blasting time can affect the Pavlidou, G. Erkens, Cutting performance improvement through micro-blasting on
coating thickness and wear. Post-treatment of coatings at higher blast- well-adherent PVD films on cemented carbide inserts, Surf. Coat. Technol. 200
D
ing pressure can also lead to the formation and propagation of cracks. (5–6) (2005) 1879–1884, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2005.08.015.
[11] K.D. Bouzakis, G. Skordaris, N. Michailidis, A. Asimakopoulos, G. Erkens, Effect
Al2O3 is the most commonly used abrasive for blasting purposes due to on PVD coated cemented carbide inserts cutting performance of micro-blasting and
its higher hardness, inertness, and non-toxic against silica-based abra- lapping of their substrates, Surf. Coat. Technol. 200 (1–4) (2005) 128–132, https://
sives. doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2005.02.119.
TE

[12] K. Bouzakis, G. Skordaris, E. Bouzakis, T. Kotsanis, S. Pantelakis, S. Koubias,

Improving the cutting performance of coated tools via appropriate pre- and post-
CRediT authorship contribution statement treatments, MATEC Web Conf. 188 (2018) 04018.
[13] A.I. Fernández-Abia, J. Barreiro, L.N. de Lacalle, D. González-Madruga, Effect of
mechanical pre-treatments in the behaviour of nanostructured PVD-coated tools in
Mahendra Gadge: Conceptualization, Methodology. Gaurav Lo- turning, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 73 (5–8) (2014) 1119–1132, https://doi.org/
har: Writing – original draft. Satish Chinchanikar: Writing – review & 10.1007/s00170-014-5844-1.
EC

editing. [14] C. Liu, Z. Liu, B. Wang, Modification of surface morphology to enhance

tribological properties for CVD coated cutting tools through wet micro-blasting
post-process, Ceram. Int. 44 (3) (2018) 3430–3439, https://doi.org/10.1016/
Declaration of Competing Interest j.ceramint.2017.11.142.
[15] T. Shen, L. Zhu, Z. Liu, Effect of micro-blasting on the tribological properties of
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial TiN/MT-TiCN/Al2O3/TiCNO coatings deposited by CVD, Int. J. Refract. Met. Hard
Mater 88 (2020) 105205, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmhm.2020.105205.
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influ- [16] K.D. Bouzakis, G. Skordaris, F. Klocke, E. Bouzakis, A FEM-based
ence the work reported in this paper. analytical–experimental method for determining strength properties gradation in
RR

coatings after micro-blasting, Surf. Coat. Technol. 203 (19) (2009) 2946–2953,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2009.03.012.
[17] K.D. Bouzakis, G. Skordaris, I. Mirisidis, G. Mesomeris, N. Michailidis, E.
Pavlidou, G. Erkens, Micro-blasting of PVD films, an effective way to increase the
cutting performance of coated cemented carbide tools, CIRP Ann. 54 (1) (2005)
95–98, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-8506(07)60058-4.
[18] K. Chang, G. Zheng, X. Cheng, R. Xu, Y. Li, Z. Yu, X. Yang, Surface integrity
evolution and wear evolution of the micro-blasted coated tool in high-speed
CO

turning of Ti6Al4V, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 115 (1–2) (2021) 603–616.
[19] C. Barbatti, J. Garcia, R. Pitonak, H. Pinto, A. Kostka, A. Di Prinzio, M.H. Staia,
A.R. Pyzalla, Influence of micro-blasting on the microstructure and residual stresses
of CVD κ-Al2O3 coatings, Surf. Coat. Technol. 203 (24) (2009) 3708–3717, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2009.06.021.
[20] I.T. Kim, Fatigue strength improvement of longitudinal fillet welded out-of-plane
gusset joints using air blast cleaning treatment, Int. J. Fatigue 48 (2013) 289–299,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2012.11.010.
[21] D.M. Kennedy, J. Vahey, D. Hanney, Micro shot blasting of machine tools for
improving surface finish and reducing cutting forces in manufacturing, Mater. Des.
26 (3) (2005) 203–208, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2004.02.013.
[22] S. Tanaka, T. Shirochi, H. Nishizawa, K. Metoki, H. Miura, H. Hara, T. Takahashi,
Micro-blasting effect on fracture resistance of PVD-AlTiN coated cemented carbide
cutting tools, Surf. Coat. Technol. 308 (2016) 337–340, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.surfcoat.2016.07.094.
[23] K.D. Bouzakis, E. Bouzakis, G. Skordaris, S. Makrimallakis, A. Tsouknidas, G.
Katirtzoglou, S. Gerardis, Effect of PVD films wet micro-blasting by various Al2O3
grain sizes on the wear behaviour of coated tools, Surf. Coat. Technol. 205 (2011)
1 Corresponding S128–S132, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2011.03.046.
author: Satish Chinchanikar, Email: satish.chin-
[24] E.K. Ohriner, W. Zhang, G.B. Ulrich, Analysis of abrasive blasting of DOP-26
chanikar@viit.ac.in
6 M. Gadge et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) 1–6

iridium alloy, Int. J. Refract. Hard Mater. 35 (2012) 122–126, https://doi.org/ 90093-X.
10.1016/j.ijrmhm.2012.05.002. [32] M. Achtsnick, P.F. Geelhoed, A.M. Hoogstrate, B. Karpuschewski, Modelling and
[25] F. Klocke, T. Schroeder, E. Bouzakis, A. Klein, Manipulation of coating and evaluation of the micro abrasive blasting process, Wear 259 (1–6) (2005) 84–94,
subsurface properties in reconditioning of WC–Co carbide cutting tools, Surf. Coat. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2005.01.045.
Technol. 202 (4–7) (2007) 1194–1198, https://doi.org/10.1016/ [33] M. Achtsnick, A.M. Hoogstrate, B. Karpuschewski, Advances in high performance
j.surfcoat.2007.06.023. micro abrasive blasting, CIRP Ann. 54 (1) (2005) 281–284, https://doi.org/
[26] C. Petrogalli, L. Montesano, A. Pola, M. Gelfi, A. Ghidini, G.M. La Vecchia, 10.1016/S0007-8506(07)60103-6.
Improvement of fatigue resistance of a tool steel by surface treatments, Procedia [34] F. Klocke, C. Gorgels, E. Bouzakis, A. Stuckenberg, Tool life increase of coated
Eng. 109 (2015) 154–161, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2015.06.227. carbide tools by micro blasting, Prod. Eng. 3 (4–5) (2009) 453, https://doi.org/
[27] K.D. Bouzakis, G. Skordaris, E. Bouzakis, A. Tsouknidas, S. Makrimallakis, S. 10.1007/s11740-009-0173-1.
Gerardis, G. Katirtzoglou, Optimization of wet micro-blasting on PVD films with [35] K.D. Bouzakis, A. Tsouknidas, G. Skordaris, E. Bouzakis, Optimization of wet or
various grain materials for improving the coated tools’ cutting performance, CIRP dry micro-blasting on PVD films by various Al2O3 grain sizes for improving the
Ann. 60 (1) (2011) 587–590, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2011.03.012. coated tools’ cutting performance, Tribol. Ind. 33 (2) (2011) 49.

F
[28] M.Á. Iglesias-Campos, J.L. Pérez, S.G. Fortes, Spot analysis to determine [36] T. Vopát, M. Sahul, M. Haršáni, O. Vortel, T. Zlámal, The tool life and coating-
technical parameters of microblasting cleaning for building materials maintenance, substrate adhesion of AlCrSiN-coated carbide cutting tools prepared by LARC with
Constr. Build. Mater. 132 (2017) 21–32, https://doi.org/10.1016/ respect to the edge preparation and surface finishing, Micromachines 11 (2) (2020)
j.conbuildmat.2016.11.115. 166.

OO
[29] M.Á. Iglesias-Campos, J.L. Pérez, S.G. Fortes, Microblasting cleaning for façade [37] S. Zhang, B. Zou, Y. Liu, Y. Wang, C. Huang, Z. Liu, Edge passivation and quality
repair and maintenance: Selecting technical parameters for treatment efficiency, of carbide cutting inserts treated by wet micro-abrasive blasting, Int. J. Adv. Manuf.
Constr. Build. Mater. 94 (2015) 605–612, https://doi.org/10.1016/ Technol. 96 (5) (2018) 2307–2318.
j.conbuildmat.2015.07.033. [38] E. Krebs, M. Wolf, D. Biermann, W. Tillmann, D. Stangier, High-quality cutting
[30] S. Amada, T. Hirose, T. Senda, Quantitative evaluation of residual grits under edge preparation of micromilling tools using wet abrasive jet machining process,
angled blasting, Surf. Coat. Technol. 111 (1) (1999) 1–9, https://doi.org/10.1016/ Prod. Eng. 12 (1) (2018) 45–51.
S0257-8972(98)00482-4. [39] Z.Q. Zhong, L. Zhang, L. Zhou, L.C. Qiu, H.D. Shi, M.L. Yang, J.F. Zhu, Cutting
[31] J.A. Wigren, Grit blasting as surface preparation before plasma spraying, Surf. performances and the related characteristics of CVD coated hard metal inserts
Coat. Technol. 34 (1) (1988) 101–108, https://doi.org/10.1016/0257-8972(88) changed by post-treatments, Int. J. Refract. Met. Hard Mater. 70 (2018) 162–168.

PR
D
TE
EC
RR
CO

View publication stats