This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
2D FEM estimate of tool wear in turning operation
L.-J. Xiea,∗ , J. Schmidta , C. Schmidta , F. Biesingerb
Institut f¨ r Werkzeugmaschinen und Betriebstechnik, Universit¨ t Karlsruhe (TH), Germany u a b Institut f¨ r Werkstoffkunde I, Universit¨ t Karlsruhe (TH), Germany u a Received 8 July 2003; accepted 11 November 2004
Abstract Finite element method (FEM) is a powerful tool to predict cutting process variables, which are difﬁcult to obtain with experimental methods. In this paper, modelling techniques on continuous chip formation by using the commercial FEM code ABAQUS are discussed. A combination of three chip formation analysis steps including initial chip formation, chip growth and steady-state chip formation, is used to simulate the continuous chip formation process. Steady chip shape, cutting force, and heat ﬂux at tool/chip and tool/work interface are obtained. Further, after introducing a heat transfer analysis, temperature distribution in the cutting insert at steady state is obtained. In this way, cutting process variables e.g. contact pressure (normal stress) at tool/chip and tool/work interface, relative sliding velocity and cutting temperature distribution at steady state are predicted. Many researches show that tool wear rate is dependent on these cutting process variables and their relationship is described by some wear rate models. Through implementing a Python-based tool wear estimate program, which launches chip formation analysis, reads predicted cutting process variables, calculates tool wear based on wear rate model and then updates tool geometry, tool wear progress in turning operation is estimated. In addition, the predicted crater wear and ﬂank wear are veriﬁed with experimental results. © 2004 Published by Elsevier B.V.
Keywords: Tool wear; FEM; Turning operation; Chip formation; Orthogonal cutting; Heat transfer
1. Introduction The main tool failures, which take place in turning operation, include progressive wear (ﬂank wear and crater wear), chipping, partial fracture, plastic deformation, thermal crack, etc. At present, experimental and analytical methods are still the main ways to investigate every type of tool wear. However, with the continuous development of more and more powerful computers and numerical methods and their ever-widening application in manufacturing, phenomena in metal machining, such as cutting force, temperature, and even progressive tool wear are gradually studied using numerical methods mainly including ﬁnite differential method (FDM) and ﬁnite
Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: email@example.com (L.-J. Xie), firstname.lastname@example.org (J. Schmidt), email@example.com (C. Schmidt), firstname.lastname@example.org (F. Biesinger). 0043-1648/$ – see front matter © 2004 Published by Elsevier B.V. doi:10.1016/j.wear.2004.11.004
element method (FEM). The earlier progressive tool wear estimate with numerical methods dates back to 1978, when Usui et al. predicted crater wear and ﬂank wear with FDM method, using wear characteristic equation deduced from adhesive wear . Later it is reported that Monaghan and MacGinley performed tool wear calculation using FEM code-FORGE2 . And recently, Yen et al. made great progress in progressive ﬂank wear and crater wear estimate with FEM code Deform-2D . It is expected that in the future FEM will become an effective tool for the tool wear study and partly take the place of time- and cost-consuming experimental methods. Tool wear estimate with numerical methods is based on chip formation simulation and wear model. Tools with chamfered or rounded edge are most commonly used in real cutting operations for highly strengthened tool edges. Furthermore, initial sharp tool will become blunt as it wears away. Therefore, chip formation modelling for cutting with rounded, blunt and chamfered tool is necessary.
and accordingly in this paper a constant frictional coefﬁcient along tool/chip interface is applied to all the chip formation analysis processes throughout the whole useful tool life as well. Chip formation considerations 2.53. heating. Another one is cutting process variables-wear rate type. An optimum cutting time increment is searched according to a user-speciﬁed VB increment value and the calculated wear rate. and tool geometry is updated. such as normal stress. They are: m = 1. an equivalent to AISI1045 in Germany. rε = 0. 2. (1).-J.1. .1. Photo-elastic experiment and plenty of evidence from worn tools. they play an important role in metal cutting. 2. Several material models are already available for mild carbon steel AISI1045. The contact and friction at tool/chip and tool/work determine the cutting power. turning operation. ε) = σ0 1 − The existing wear model can be classiﬁed into two types: one is cutting parameters-tool life type. aiming at optimisation of machining operation. a second tool wear calculation cycle starts with the updated tool geometry. the FEM code ABAQUS is used as the FEM calculation tool for chip formation. machining quality and tool wear. However. The studied cutting condition in this paper is listed in Table 1. 2. because the physical phenomena associated with the cutting process are extremely complex: friction. αo = 7◦ . where the constants are determined for CK45.1. such as Johnson-cook equation. 1 shows the ﬂow chart of the tool wear calculation program. If the VB value is still smaller than the user-deﬁned tool reshape criterion VBmax . large strain and strain rate. Then wear value T T0 n m (1) with T0 = G0 kln(˙ 0 /˙ (pl) ) ε ε Fig.1. Chip formation and heat transfer analysis supply the cutting process variable values at the steady state of cutting for the wear rate calculation subroutine. which is strongly suggested by HSK . A material model database has been developed by S¨ hner and Altan with the o support from international researchers . A material model. / Wear 258 (2005) 1479–1490 Orthogonal cutting. which describes wear rate as a function of cutting process variables. which establishes the simple relationship between the cutting speed vc and tool life T.1.1. In this paper. Material model. Coulomb’s friction model is still applicable in some cutting conditions and widely used in chip formation modelling at present. Tool wear calculation main program and subroutines are developed with object-oriented programming language Python. ap = 2 mm.1. which is consistent with Zorev’s assumption about slide-stick friction model . Tool wear estimate program design Fig. Among them. especially in highspeed-cutting (HSC).1. and relative sliding velocity on tool face and supplies approaches for tool wear estimate with numerical methods.145 mm/r is calculated. Xie et al. f = 0. which is the most commonly used material in research work and was selected as work material in this paper.0245 mm vc = 300 m/min. Usui’s wear model derived from adhesive wear. strain rate and temperature in the metal cutting process. Flow chart of tool wear calculation program. is necessary for getting better chip formation analysis result. Very high strain. contact temperature. 1. ∗ ∗ ˙ σv (T. from quick-stop sections and from chips showed the coexistence of seizure and sliding at tool/chip interface under many cutting conditions. Many researchers are making efforts to establish such models for different work materials through experimental or analytical methods.2. the material model developed by V¨ hringer is used in the following study. Contact and friction. which is described o by Eq. In addition. dry cutting Mild carbon steel AISI1045 Uncoated carbide WC-Co γ o = −7◦ . often based on one or several wear mechanisms. such as E. different approaches to the implementation of chip separation lead to variation of chip formation modelling. have strong inﬂuence on material’s ﬂow stress.78. Continuous chip formation simulation At present there is no general predictive chip formation model. n = 0. heat transfer and tool geometry updating. such as the famous Taylor’s equation. 2. which includes their relation.1480 Table 1 Cutting condition Cutting type Work material Tool material Tool geometry Cutting parameters L.
Lagrangian and ALE formulations supply approaches to chip separation in the chip formation process. request the steady-state chip geometry and free-surface tracking. and T is temperature in Kelvin . etc. 2(b) shows the formed initial chip and stress distribution at 0. will ensure the smooth implementation of chip separation. sharp tool is most frequently used in chip formation modelling. elements along the concave surface extend and compose the chips’ outside surface.2 mm. Lagrangian formulation tracks discrete material points. because the separation line is obvious and by using very ﬁne elements along this line and deﬁning shear failure only to these line elements.1. Therefore. Eulerian formulation. which depend on tool edge geometry. tracking volumes rather than material particles. cutting depth.1. the tool is at the right side of the work. The analysis of cutting process’ steady state becomes the ﬁrst step to the tool wear estimate. Among them. (a) Initial geometry and mesh.2. it is impossible to analyse initial chip formation. 2. feed rate and cutting speed are kept constant.1. Because no failure criterion is required. cutting force. there is a broader selection of material models. which consists of three analysis steps. In order to save calculation time. such as shear failure criterion. Chip separation. ALE formulation is used to the chip formation analysis steps with rounded-edge cutting tool in the following parts. Fig. is reached. 1 In all ﬁgures of this paper. the conﬂict between cost and precision are settled. and ﬁne elements improve simulated result whereas at the same time increase sharply the calculation time and cost. 2. / Wear 258 (2005) 1479–1490 1481 Fig. and steady state will be reached within several seconds after the entrance of tool edge into work material. k is Boltzmann constant. and on the work a small corner has been cut away at the right side under the consideration of seeding more nodes along the formed concave surface (see Fig. which consists of 327 CPE4RT elements. 2.L. including initial chip formation. the number and size of deleted elements affect produced chip thickness.18 ms. Therefore.29 × 105 s−1 . The work is ﬁxed and the tool is moving in the negative x-direction. ε0 = 7. Correct conﬁguration of surface types and reasonable adaptive meshing control parameters. no predetermined separation line is required and coarser elements can still produce an acceptable chip thickness. The work has a size of 0. by deleting elements ahead the tool edge when element failure criterion. ∗ ˙ G0 = 0. and steady-state chip formation as described in detail in the following parts. With this formulation it is difﬁcult to realize chip separation and simulate the cutting with changing chip thickness.1. Eulerian and Arbitrary Lagrangian Eulerian (ALE). 2(a)). x-direction is pointed to the right side and y-direction to the top of the page. During all the chip formation steps.1. it can be said that progressive tool wear is mainly formed during the steady state and the contribution from the unsteady state can be ignored. Analysis steps In normal turning operation.18 ms. chip growth. (b) Stress ﬁeld (MPa) at t = 0. 2. which comes from experiment or simulation.3. the cutting tool is deﬁned as rigid body. With ALE. only part of the cutting tool near cutting edge joins in the chip formation modelling. Therefore. The ﬁrst two analysis steps supply steady chip geometry for the steady-state chip formation analysis step. Knowledge about the shape and geometry of the formed chip is the prerequisite of steady-state modeling. ALE is very suitable to the cutting conditions in which a rounded or chamfered-edge cutting tool is used. and σ0 = 1352 MPa. . This paper supplies a complete modeling method from initial chip formation to the realization of steady state. in the ﬁrst two steps. With ALE formulation. The failure criterion is usually deﬁned arbitrary because of the difﬁculty of obtaining the required experimental equipment. Initial chip formation. ABAQUS/Explicit supplies several formulations for numerical modelling: Lagrangian. Xie et al. In addition. At the beginning.2.-J. Chip separation is normally performed along predetermined lines of elements on the moving path of the tool edge. milling process or segmented chip formation. the mesh is not attached to the material and thus can move to update the free chip geometry and avoid distortion. Moreover. which is meshed with 2725 CPE4RT elements. Therefore.1 With the tool advancing into the work. whereas in the last analysis step the cutting tool has to be modelled as a deformable body in order to obtain the necessary cutting process variables for the latter tool wear estimate. coupled thermostress analyses are performed with ABAQUS/Explicit . Initial chip formation analysis.6 mm × 3.58 eV.
In addition. / Wear 258 (2005) 1479–1490 Fig.2. For the simpliﬁcation of boundary condition deﬁnition.09 ms. 4.1482 L. 3(a). 3. Steady-state chip formation analysis. (a) Initial geometry and mesh.145 mm/r). etc. whose mesh is ﬁxed in x-direction. Fig. ap = 2 mm. shown with small triangles in Fig. 4(a).3 ms. For example. its movement in x direction is constrained.3 ms.2. Xie et al. and it has Eulerian type boundary region.09 ms in chip growth analysis step.3. temperature. which is the only difference of boundary condition deﬁnition for the work in this step from that in the former step and allows material ﬂow out of the chip mesh area in place of the visualized chip growth. By adding the reaction force component in the same direction at all constrained nodes of the cutting tool and then taking the negative value. With a user-developed subroutine. see Fig. (b) Stress ﬁeld (MPa) at t = 1 ms. f = 0. the mesh in Fig. 4(a) is read from the frame at t = 0. but material ﬂows in continuously from the left surface at cutting speed and ﬂows out of the right surface. the tool is ﬁxed. . the work is ﬁxed in y-direction at the bottom surface. variables of the work and the tool about node coordinate. which changes the shape of the chip top. 2.1. 2. 5. the cutting force components Fc and Ft are obtained. (c) Stress ﬁeld (MPa) at t = 0. Cutting force history (under cutting condition: vc = 300 m/min. 5 shows that the cutting force com- Fig. 3(b). (a) Initial geometry and mesh.2. Fig. (b) Stress ﬁeld (MPa) at t = 0. Chip growth. The left and right boundary of the work are deﬁned as Eulerian boundary regions. The work and tool variables are read into steady-state cutting analysis step model ﬁle from the chip growth analysis step when the chip geometry near the chip root becomes stable. Chip growth analysis. its movement is ﬁxed through deﬁning constraint in x-direction at the right boundary and in y-direction at the top boundary.-J. The mesh of the chip top is ﬁxed. Fig. as indicated with the small arrows in Fig. Fig.1. some nodes at chip top are moved.09 ms and 0. are read into the model ﬁle of the chip growth analysis step from the output database of initial chip formation analysis step at a user-speciﬁed ﬁeld output frame. In this step. Because cutting tool is deformable body. Continuous steady-state chip formation. 4(b) shows the stress distribution at 1 ms. 3(b) and (c) show the growth of the chip with the material ﬂowing into the control area and the stress distribution in the work at 0.
e.. i. SFDRA) and the total contact heat ﬂux are approaching steady state. From Fig. and the Fig. the mechanical cutting process variables. i. which means that heat is transferred from slave surface to master surface. 6(b) within 1 ms. respectively . 8 shows that the total contact heat ﬂux at the whole tool face has always negative values in the ﬁrst 1 ms. From orthogonal cutting experiment. Fig. in which the cutting depth is 1 mm and other cutting parameters have the same value as this simulated cutting condition. (c) Position of nodes in the tool.. 7 shows the temperature distribution at 1 ms. (b) Temperature history of tool face nodes.. Temperature history of tool nodes at steady-state chip formation analysis step. cutting force doubles when cutting depth doubles. The highest temperature is at rake/chip interface.7 ms.e. the heat created by the friction between the tool and the work.. from the work to the tool. compared with the experiment.. highlighted nodes in Fig. / Wear 258 (2005) 1479–1490 1483 ponents change within a very narrow range from 0. At the end of the ﬁrst 1 ms. sliding velocity (i. in comparison with the sharp climbing curves of temperature with time in Fig. Fig. Temperature distribution at t = 1 ms of steady-state chip formation analysis step. (a) Position of nodes on tool face. plastic deformation energy. respectively.L. 6(d) at the highlighted nodes in Fig. therefore. 6(a). . Fig. This means that thermal steady state is not realized in the whole cutting tool. both the total heat ﬂux due to friction (i.. 5 the simulated Fc and Ft are 630N and 300N. whose conversion ratio is set to 90%. From Fig. have a very slow increasing curves. such as contact pressure (i. Xie et al. 6. the heat produced in cutting process includes two parts. cutting temperatures at most of the tool nodes on tool/chip interface. heat converted from inelastic energy. 6(c) inside the tool. half of which is introduced into the tool. 7.e. SFLIPR) at 1 ms are read out for tool wear calculation. CPRESS). In this study. they have errors within 15% and 38%. (d) Temperature history of nodes in the tool. which means approaching steady state. and most part of the tool is still at room temperature. i. Part of the latter heat is transferred to the tool through heat convection at tool/chip interface.e. Fc and Ft are 370N and 240N. According to metal cutting theory.e. and it is deemed that the mechanical steady state is realized.-J.e.
198 × 10−2 7. Fig. at the beginning of heat transfer analysis the high temperature region concentrates in a small area near the cutting edge. which is surrounded by the rake face. 9. and their value comes from the chip formation analysis step. 11(b). 10 shows the development of temperature with time at four nodes in the tool. Wear rate calculation When tungsten carbide tools are used to machine carbon steels. / Wear 258 (2005) 1479–1490 Table 2 Characteristic constants for carbon steels C (m2 /MN) θ f ≥ 1150 K θ f < 1150 K λ (K) θ f ≥ 1150 K θ f < 1150 K 1. crater wear on rake face is mainly caused by adhesive wear.195 × 104 5. In addition. and element connectivity as in chip formation analysis steps. bottom face.1484 L.2 s. The sum of their absolute value makes the total heat ﬂux into the tool at the whole tool face. The tool used in the former chip formation analysis steps is only the highlighted part in Fig. heat ﬂux is deﬁned. 2. and the central hole’s surface. heat transfer analysis is performed with ABAQUS/Standard  for its qualiﬁcation in heat transfer analysis.2. 9.-J. Wear calculation 2.2 s this region extends to nearly one-third of the tool as shown in Fig. and after 2.302 × 103 Fig. Xie et al. When maximum temperature change of 10 K is selected as steady-state criterion. the heat ﬂux distribution along the tool face is obtained.3. By adding the absolute value of contact heat ﬂux and the heat ﬂux due to friction at every tool face node. In Fig. and it consists of 640 DC2D4 elements. The temperature of nodes on rake and ﬂank face at the last frame is read for tool wear calculation. Fig.3. . Shaw’s equation of adhesive wear. 8. and in this step it has the same element label. steady state is reached in the whole tool in 2. 9. the tool makes heat transfer with the environment through rake face and ﬂank face. The nodes on bottom face and hole surface always keep room temperature because of their contact with the tool holder and the screw.1. node label. the circled part is the part of the edge engaged in the cutting. which are selected at random.8 × 10−9 2. This makes variable value transfer from chip formation step effortless. Heat transfer analysis In order to realize thermal steady state in the whole tool.C. At the nodes on the tool/chip interface. Heat ﬂux history of tool/work interface at steady-state chip formation analysis step. The initial temperature value of the nodes in the highlighted part is read from the last frame of the steady-state chip formation analysis step. 2. As shown in Fig. Geometry and mesh of the tool in heat transfer analysis. 11(a). the tool used in this analysis includes the part. The heat ﬂux distribution at the time of 1 ms is written into the heat ﬂux ﬁle of the tool heat transfer model. The initial temperature value of the other nodes is set to room temperature. According to M. ﬂank face.
wear direction in every tool face segment is assumed to be perpendicular to the direction of the relative sliding velocity of work material and points into the tool body. the relative sliding velocity at tool/work interface. tool wear rate is calculated at every tool face node using Eq. which mainly results from abrasive wear. i. 2. 10.2 s. 12). deduced the characteristic equation of tool wear . Wear direction at the tool face node is deﬁned to be opposite to the ˙ where w is wear rate. the ﬁrst part including the rake face and part of the round tool edge (named as rake face part). Xie et al. is searched by the program (the coordinate of the dividing node for the new tool is saved as the edge position for the latter calculation of ﬂank wear land width). is calculated for every tool face node. Fig.e. Wear direction Tool wear expression in geometry can be realized with two approaches: element deletion and tool face node movement. θ f . the wear volume per unit area and unit time. For the combination of carbon steel and uncoated carbide P20. cutting temperature and contact pressure have been obtained for every tool face node. i. the values for the constants are given in Table 2. In the rake face part.. wear direction. i.. which has the minimum ycoordinate.3. Temperature ﬁeld (Kelvin) change of the tool in heat transfer analysis. the dividing node (the circled node in Fig. the ﬁrst tool face node in counter-clockwise order. the normal stress. The latter study [11. From previous analyses. For the convenience of ﬁnding out relative position relation between work nodes and tool face nodes. that is opposite to the unit normal vector. given by ˙ w = Cvs σf exp −λ θf (2) After all the cutting process variables are obtained. (2). The move direction. the tool face nodes are ordered in counter-clockwise beforehand. relative sliding velocity is set to zero. 11. In these two parts. Every tool face node is attached with two tool face segments. Since the relative sliding velocity of work material to tool face is output only at the position of work nodes. (b) t = 2. wear directions are calculated with different methods. At the tool face node.12] shows that this equation is able to describe ﬂank wear as well. vs . C and λ are constants determined for the combination of a tool and a work material. the value at every tool face node in contact has to be calculated according to the relative position between the tool face node and its two neighbouring work nodes. / Wear 258 (2005) 1479–1490 1485 Fig. σ f ..L. This node separates the tool face into two parts. Temperature history of nodes in the tool. the second part including the ﬂank face and the other part of the tool edge (named as ﬂank face part). which are in contact with tool face. (a) Position of the nodes. (b) Temperature history. (a) t = 0 s.2. which loses contact with the work and the chip.-J.e. The latter one is adopted in this paper. Before calculating the wear direction. Usui et al. . the absolute temperature.e.
-J. The permitted error should be a positive value.4.05 mm is speciﬁed by the user. In addition. pointed upwards. as indicated with thick arrows in Fig. Xie et al. For example. it is difﬁcult to predict an approximate cutting time increment value for a speciﬁed tool wear increment value. because it is the last moved tool face node. an initial cutting time increment value t0 is given arbitrarily. (3): ˙ w=w· t · wdirection (3) Fig. VBm is 0. 14. 12. For example. The cutting time increment searching procedure is described by Fig. (b) Cutting time increment searching process. Wear direction vectors (thick arrows) of tool face nodes. During the searching process. wearrate). In the ﬂank face part. the relative sliding velocity is assumed to be in the cutting speed direction because of the negligible elastic recovery of work material. Flank wear calculation and cutting time increment searching process. For saving searching time. when a ﬂank wear land width increment is within the range of the speciﬁed value VB ± permitted error. the aimed VB value should be given a user-speciﬁed permitted error range. the wear direction at every node in this part is the same. in Fig. then node b and c will have smaller y-values than point a1 . Flank wear land width VB is calculated by a ﬂank wear calculation subroutine Flankwear ( t.3. for example. the aimed VB median value VBm is calculated according to the user-speciﬁed VB increment value. This paper uses a user-speciﬁed ﬂank wear land width increment value VB to calculate the time increment value. Therefore. 13(b). If the tool wear is studied only with experimental methods.1 mm. which produces a bulge on ﬂank face. Wear direction is calculated at every tool face node.05 mm. node a is the last tool face node with non-zero wear rate. the tool gets a ﬂank wear land width of 0. and normalized to unit vector wdirection . Therefore. it should move to point a1 . This seldom takes place in practice.3. 2. VB is calculated from edge position to node c. 13(b). 14. ﬂank wear land width increment VB = 0. whereas it is possible by using numerical methods before the tool wear curve is obtained since the wear rate is already known from the previous calculation. in this tool wear calculation cycle. 13. node b and c will move to point b1 and c1 in order to have the same y-value with point a1 . Then the searching process starts. Cutting time increment calculation Cutting time increment means the duration of cutting time between two successive tool wear measurement. . 12. Therefore. VB is the distance from the edge position (which has been saved for the new tool) to the last moved tool face node. the searching lower limit t1 and the searching upper limit t2 are changing until cutting time increment t falls into the permitted error range. resultant vector of unit normal vectors of the two attached tool face segments. (a) Flank wear calculation. / Wear 258 (2005) 1479–1490 Fig. VB = 0.1486 L. At the beginning.05 mm from the previous tool wear calculation cycle. Wear calculation Wear value is calculated at every nodes on tool face by Eq. and in cutting time increment t. denoted as err in Fig. the dotted range in Fig.3. 2.
Boundary conditions of tool updating model. as mentioned above. 2. 15. 14. Xie et al. the circled node in Fig. 15. The displacement of every node.L. marked with small triangles in Fig. This is performed through running an explicit dynamic analysis job.-J. Tool geometry updating In order to visualize the wear shape of the tool and prepare tool geometry for the next tool wear calculation cycle.4. . The second step smoothens zigzags of the crater wear proﬁle and coarsen the mesh near the cutting edge because very ﬁne mesh in this area may result in negative element areas when tool geometry is updated further in the next calculation cycle due to additional Fig. The cutting tool is ﬁxed at the bottom nodes. 15. tool geometry needs updating. Flow chart of cutting time increment searching process. The ﬁrst step produces the tool wear on the tool. two steps are used and both employ adaptive meshing method in the whole tool area. on the rake and ﬂank face is set equal to the wear vector w as boundary conditions. where w is the displacement vector of the tool face node due to wear. some nodes on ﬂank face have to be moved in order to avoid forming bulge on ﬂank face. In addition. / Wear 258 (2005) 1479–1490 1487 Fig. In order to alleviate mesh distortion during tool geometry updating.
In experiment. zigzags of crater wear are smoothened.06 mm.1 mm.05 mm is speciﬁed by user.1 mm and crater wear 0. Coulomb’s friction model is adopted and a constant frictional coefﬁcient 0. 16.01 mm. etc. Fig. Results and discussion With this tool wear estimate program. contact pressure. increased crater wear and ﬂank wear can be found on the updated tool in Fig. after 20 s of cutting. it is unavoidable that difference exists in these tool and work material’s chemical composition and structure. The discrepancy may be caused by: (1) inconsistentness of material combination. Tool reshape criterion is 0. nodes on tool face are moved according to the calculated wear. It was tested by Kitagawa and co-workers that the content and size of abrasive particle dispersed in work material and chemical composition of tool material could be correlated with change in the constants of the wear characteristic equation both in higher and lower temperature ranges . The solid line in Fig. crater wear and ﬂank wear are formed (c) at the end of step 2. 18 shows the wear progress curves of ﬂank wear and crater wear obtained from experiment [13. (a) t = 0 s.15 mm and crater wear 0. (c) t = 46 s. Changes of the mesh during tool updating steps (a) at the beginning of step 1. (3) work material model.. 16 shows the geometry and mesh change of part of the tool near tool edge between every step. It is found that the estimated ﬂank wear and crater wear are smaller than experimental ones. permitted error is set to 0. The constants in work material model is developed for annealed mild carbon steel CK45. Tool wear proﬁles.03 mm. 0. but after 46 s. produced tool wear. The tool wear estimate process is accomplished with two calculation cycles.1488 L. (b) t = 5 s. The dot lines are predicted tool wear curves. Fig. and VB = 0. tool wear under the cutting condition described in introduction part is calculated. Xie et al. which may simplify the contact at tool/work interface and cause a wide divergence in temperature. the ﬂank wear has exceeded . 17(b).3 is used in the whole tool wear estimate process. After the second calculation cycle. After the ﬁrst calculation cycle.14] under the same cutting condition. the estimated ﬂank wear just arrives at 0. 17(c). 3. 17. Because the characteristic equation of tool wear and the tool wear data come from different literatures and researchers. (2) the simpliﬁed friction model and coefﬁcient. / Wear 258 (2005) 1479–1490 Fig.-J. no tool geometry updating is carried out (b) at the end of step 1. 17(a) is updated to the worn tool in Fig. the new tool in Fig.
But the work used in tool wear experiment is AISI1045. part 3: cutting temperature and crater wear of carbide tool. High density of mesh is localized at the produced surface. consistency in simulation. etc. tool geometry is updated according to the calculated nodal displacements and one calculation cycle is ﬁnished. Analytical prediction of three dimensional cutting process. T. experiment and characteristic equation of tool wear. to steady-state chip formation can be used in continuous chip formation analysis. Through the reasonable design of boundary types and ALE mesh control parameters. 100 (1978) 236–243. a bigger wear increment is preferred in order to reduce the calculation cycle number. Finally. such as heat ﬂux. Summary and conclusion This paper makes an interesting study in integrating ABAQUS/Explicit and ABAQUS/Standard with Python user-program to perform the 2D tool wear estimate in orthogonal cutting of turning operation. References  E. (4) In order to improve the estimate result and realize tool wear estimate in quantity. and contact pressure seriously and thus crater wear’s correct proﬁle. The main ﬁndings of this study are as follows: (1) ABAQUS/Explicit can be used to analyse the chip formation of orthogonal cutting with blunted cutting tool. 18. which affects the cutting process variables. Shirakashi. and coarse mesh formed on the outside surface of chip with the chip growing. a pure heat transfer analysis in tool can reduce sharply the calculation time for further realizing the thermal steady state. which certainly will bring bigger errors in estimated result. and at the same time makes some nodes on the tool face lose contact with the chip. The Python user program continues until tool reshape criterion is reached. Technol. This causes the contact ‘noise’. temperature. T. chip growth. Mater. cutting time increment calculation subroutine and wear calculation subroutine. which is opposite to ﬂank face.L. (3) Python user program launches chip formation and heat transfer analysis job automatically every time the cutting process variables at steady state are needed. further mesh control and reﬁnement at chip outside surface in chip formation analysis. the complete modelling of chip formation from initial chip formation. . (a) Flank wear. Eng. There may exist difference in chemical composition and heat treatment. ASME J. In addition. The number of calculation cycles carried on before Python user program stop is deﬁned by dividing tool reshape criterion by the speciﬁed wear increment. Then displacement of every tool face node due to wear is calculated mainly with three subroutines including wear rate subroutine. / Wear 258 (2005) 1479–1490 1489 Fig. contact problem causes the relative greater error of the estimated tool wear in the second calculation cycle with the updated worn tool geometry than that in the ﬁrst calculation cycle with the new tool. for example. (4) poor mesh control at tool/chip interface. more efforts should be made in several aspects: more reasonable frictional modelling. Xie et al. Comparison between estimated and experimental progress curves for tool wear. when ALE technology is applied in chip separation. development of wear characteristic equation and material model for the material used in tool wear experiment. Usui.-J. 4. (b) Crater wear. Trans. (2) ABAQUS/Standard is effective in heat transfer analysis. A trade-off value should be found. Through introducing the heat ﬂux and temperature distribution from the chip formation analysis’ result once mechanical steady state in chip formation is reached. Because of the huge calculation time and cost of chip formation analysis. Kitagawa.
Soc. T. Universit¨ t Karlsruhe (TH). Unia versit¨ t Karlsruhe (TH). K..  ABAQUS Scripting Manual Version 6. . Weule. Mater.  J. England. HSK. V¨ hringer. 2001.  T. 2001. U. pp.. MacGinley. ERC for Net Shape Manufacturing.C.A. 1977. Maekawa. Altan.. Inc. Estimation of o tool wear of carbide tool in orthogonal cutting using FEM simulation. Mater. S¨ hner. T.A.S. U. E. Schmidt.-J.A. Schmidt. Prec. a  P. Monaghan. Jpn. Metal Cutting. in: Proceedings of the 5th CIRP International Workshop on Modeling of Machining Operations. Frank. T. Inc. Trans. Universit¨ t Karlsruhe (TH).  V.S. Ohio State University. Inc. Jpn. Soc. Diplomarbeit. J.2. Comput. Prec. Bull. Diplomarbeit. O. HPM/ERC/NSM-01-R-76. Altan. Development of a FEM-based Tool Wear Model to Estimate Tool Wear and Tool Life in Metal Cutting. U. Eng. Sci.  ABAQUS/Explicit User’s Manual Version 6. HSK. Analytical prediction of ﬂank wear of carbide tools in turning plain carbon steels (part 2)-prediction of ﬂank wear. Dissertation. T. ERC/NSM Report No..  C. Usui.2. HSK.  K. 2001. Trent. Bull.. Inﬂuence of alloying elements on the o strain rate and temperature dependence of the ﬂow stress of steels. Maekawa. 2001. Usui. Metall. Xie et al. Beitrag zur Simulation zerspanungstechnologischer o Vorg¨ ng mit Hilfe der Finite-Element-Methode.2.M. Modelling the orthogonal machining process using coated carbide cutting tools.. Yen. 22 (1988) 263–269. Schulze. 23 (1989) 126–133.  Y. S¨ hner.1490 L. 2003. 149–160.S. Shirakashi. S¨ hner. Eng. Kitagawa. / Wear 258 (2005) 1479–1490  J. Kitagawa. a  ABAQUS/Standard User’s Manual Version 6. a  J. T. A 31A (2000). 2002. H. 16 (1999) 275–284. T. 2002. Material database for manufacturing simuo lation (MADAMS): Summary of the Activities and Flow Stress Database. Improvement of the FEM-based Predictive Model of Tool Wear. Shirakashi. J. Butterworths. E.  E. Analytical prediction of ﬂank wear of carbide tools in turning plain carbon steels (part 1)-characteristic equation of ﬂank wear. 2002.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.