You are on page 1of 77

Introduction

In engineering, a burr refers to the raised edge on a


metal part. It may be present in the form of a fine wire
on the edge of a freshly sharpened tool or as a raised
portion on a surface, after being struck a blow from an
equally hard or heavy object. More specifically, burrs
are generally unwanted material remaining after a
machining operation such as grinding, drilling, milling,
or turning. These are undesirable projections of
materials beyond the edge of the work-piece arising
because of plastic deformation during machining

Undesirable burrs are created in most machining


processes. A burr is a plastically deformed material that
remained on the work piece after machining. It is often
in the form of a rough strip of metal at the edge of the
work piece adjacent to the machined surface. The burrs
Minimization of Burr 2

produced on piece part edges in machining operations


must be removed for most parts to function effectively.

Effects of burrs and Deburring

The existence of burrs on a work piece may cause


several problems, such as:

• Decreasing the fit and ease of assembly of parts;


• Damaging the dimensional accuracy and surface
finish;
• Increasing the cost and time of production due to
deburring;
• Jeopardizing the safety of workers and
consumers;
• Contributing to electrical short circuits;
• Reducing cutting performance and tool life; and
• Degrading the aesthetics of the components.
• Automation is not possible

Burrs are injurious even during machining because they


hit the cutting edge and cause groove wear. This
groove wear, in turn, accelerates the burr growth

The past years have seen emphasis on increasing the


quality of machined work pieces while at the same time
reducing the cost per piece. Accompanying this is the
decreasing size and increasing complexity of work
pieces. Burr formation in machining accounts for a
significant portion of machining costs for manufacturers
throughout the world. As one could imagine, the cost
and time needed to perform these deburring operations
(process of removal of burr) is significant. Recently,
because of miniaturization and increased precision of

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 3

the machined parts, the size of burrs has been also


reduced and deburring became even more difficult

Burrs formed during machining are the cause of many


industrial problems. Burrs can cause many problems
during inspection, assembly and automated
manufacturing of precision components. They usually
reduce the quality of machined parts and can cause
interference, jamming and misalignment of parts.
Because of their sharpness, they can be a safety hazard
to personnel. Burrs may reduce the fatigue life of
components and can damage them. Burrs in
machined work pieces are real “productivity killers”.

The deburring processes are included in manufacturing,


which increase the production cost and require a
significant amount of time. The selection of an
appropriate deburring method depends on the
dimensions, type of work piece, and the location of the
burr. Thus burr sizes must be controlled for the optimal
choice of a deburring process.

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 4

The costs associated with removing these burrs are


substantial. The typical costs as a percentage of
manufacturing cost varies up to 30% for high precision
components such as aircraft engines, etc. In
automotive components, the total amount of deburring
cost for a part of medium complexity is approximately
14% of manufacturing expenses. The actual investment
in deburring systems increases with part complexity
and precision

To decrease deburring cost it is necessary to select


mostly proper deburring way and to reduce burr size.
These goals can be reached if burr formation
mechanism is known, which make it possible to predict
burr dimensions and to minimize their appearance by
optimum choice of cutting conditions, tool and work
piece geometry.

A typical example drilling deburring examples from a


particular firm is given in the table below

Item Hole range Approximate


annual
Deburring cost
Valves,housing, 1/16 to 1/18 $1,40,000
piston
Combination 1/16 to 1/8 $30,000
valve
Special valve various $8000
Complex 1/16 to 3/8 $8000
bracket

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 5

Small burr size has two immediate benefits, first, it


eliminates the additional cost of deburring the
component and the likelihood of damage during the
deburring process and, second, in the case burrs
cannot be eliminated it improves the effectiveness of
any deburring strategy due to reduced and more
standard burr size and shape

Burr Measurement
Burr Measurement is one of the key elements of
experiment and one of main challenges in burr
research. There are many instruments. Profilometers
are one of simplest and cheapest measuring
instruments.

Meter M Horizontal Floor Profilometers :

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 6

Profilometers, otherwise known as profile projectors are


highly sophisticated and versatile designed as per
international standards. It is ideal for the rapid
inspection and measurement (linear and angular) of

small to medium size components such as watch parts,


gears, tools, rubber components, miniature electronic
assemblies, and so on. Its best quality high resolution
optics provide accurate, bright, clear and sharp image.
The special front and back surface coated mirror are
highly polished and lobbied distortion and reproduction.
Three element condenser system and high intensity
halogen lamps provide brilliant images even in daylight
condition.

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 7

Technical specification

• Projection Screen: Fully usable fine grain ground


screens and rotatable screen has cross hair line
and detachable clips to hold comparator charts.
• Three Magnifications: 10 x lenses for general
purpose, 20x lens for closer observation and 50x
lens for higher precision works are used. All
projection lens screw mounts type to project the
work piece image on the screen at direct
magnification, brightness adjustable for each
magnification by condenser on turret.
Magnification accuracy ±0.1% and surface
±0.15%.
• Work Stage: Medium duty 200x200mm with
standard micrometer heads 0-25 least count 0.1
mm, life long smooth movement assured by the
incorporation of hard steel rolling both in
longitudinal and transverse slide for accurate
measurements.
• Contour Illuminator: Equipped with helical type
condenser built in cooling far for quick to match
the respective objective so as to ensure bright and
sharp image on the screen provided with 24v-
150/250 halogen lamp with solid stage light control
transformer.
• Surface Illuminator: Specially designed surface
illuminator system for shadow less light on optical
axis for the inspection of deep cavities. Provided
with 12v-100w halogen lamp with solid state light
control transformer.

BURR IN DRILLING
C. V. Raman college of Engineering
Minimization of Burr 8

Drilling is one of the most widely used machining


processes making up of approximately 25% of all
machining processes performed in production of goods.
Drilling through a hole consists of three phases
In the first phase the drill enters into the work piece. In
the second phase a steady state torque and thrust is
attained as the drill bit advances to the other end of the
work piece. In the third phase the drill point breaks
through the underside of the work piece and burrs may
be produced.

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 9

Classification
Different types of burr can be classified according to
their height and location of burr

According to height of the burr it is


classified into two classes

• Uniform burr(type I and type II )


• Crown burr

Uniform burr

Uniform burrs are burrs whose height varies in between


1.1mm.Further it is classified into type I and type II .The
height of type I burr varies in between 0.150 mm and
that of type II is between 0.150 to1.1mm.The height of
the burr is more uniform in this type of burr. The drill
cap can be seen in both

Uniform burr type I Uniform burr


type II

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 10

Crown burr
Crown burrs are burrs whose height varies in between
1.1 to 1.5 mm. The height of the burr is not uniform in
this type of burr.

According to location of burr, there are


three types of burr

• Entrance burr
• Interlayer burr
• Exit burr

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 11

Entrance burr
The entrance burr is produced on the side of the work
piece where the drill enters; this burr is usually
considerably smaller than the exit burr and is usually of
little concern as it may be removed easily by
chamfering the hole.

Exit burr
The exit burr is formed on the opposite side of the work
piece as the drill breaks through. These burrs are
usually more substantial than the entrance burr, and as
they are on the opposite side of the work piece to the
machine, they are more challenging to remove. They
can also be located within a cavity in the work piece
where there is no access to the exit side of the hole

Interlayer burr (only in case of multilayered


material)
When drilling through a number of layers, interlayer
burrs are often formed between the layers. In certain
circumstances these burrs must be removed. In order
to do this, it may be necessary to dismantle the parts
to remove the burrs

The exit burr is usually larger than entry burr and is of


prime importance owing to difficulty in removing it from
work piece

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 12

Mechanism
As we see earlier, burrs can be classified according to
their height and location. Now we will go through the
mechanism of formation of burr for each type.
• Uniform Burr and Crown Burr
• Exit burr, Entrance Burr and Interlayer Burr

Uniform Burr and Crown Burr

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 13

Uniform Burr

As the drill approaches the exit surface, the material


under the chisel edge begins to deform. The distance
from the exit surface to the point where the
deformation starts depends on the thrust force of the
drill. As the drill advances, the plastic deformation zone
expands from the center to the edge of the drill. At the
final steps, the remaining material is bent and pushed
out to form a uniform burr with a drill cap. Here the
fracture takes place at the chisel edge. Type 1 and type

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 14

2 uniform burr formation has same mechanism. Under


small feed force condition this type of burr is formed.

Crown Burr

A larger thrust force induces plastic deformation earlier


in the process, making the thicker material layer ahead
of the drill undergo plastic deformation, inducing a
larger maximum stress on the exit surface. As a result,
initial rupture will occur at the center. The remaining
material is then bent and pushed out without being cut
to form a relatively large burr

Exit burr, Entrance Burr and Interlayer Burr

Entrance Burr

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 15

At the beginning of
drilling process,
material bumped up
on the perimeter of
the drill-engaging
region because of the
indenting action of the
drill bit. As more part
of cutting edge
engages in machining,
hole diameter
becomes larger and
before all the cutting
edge is engaged in the
machining, small
amount of bumps of
material is always
observed on the
perimeter of the hole
(t = 1.5 ~ 1.875 sec
in). When almost all
cutting edges are
engaged, the shape of
bump on the perimeter
starts to change from
a smooth, round shape
to a biased, shaper
shape (t = 2.125).
Finally, as all drill bit
engages, i.e. drill
completely penetrates
through the first layer; entrance burr remains on the
surface. (t = 2.25 ~ 2.625 sec). The shape of remaining
burr is uniform around the hole and slightly bent
outward of the hole.
Interlayer Burr

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 16

The formation of inter-layer burr is shown in Figure.


They depend on the combination of the upper and the
lower materials, the
thickness of the
sealant between
layers and the
process parameters.
Here two plates are
being drilled is
shown in the figure
at different instant.
Until around 0.7
second, two plates
bend elastically and
no gap between the
two layers is
observed. Axial
displacement of the
observing nodes
increases almost
linearly up to 0.34
mm. No material
failure occurs in this
stage. Plastic
deformation is
limited near the
area around the drill
tip engaged to the
drilling. At around
0.7 second, the
displacement of the
observing nodes
falls down to 0.13 mm and a small gap starts to form
and increases as the drill advances. Material starts to
fail around the drill tip area and element elimination
starts to occur at this stage.

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 17

Drill bit starts to engage the second layer at around t =


2.6 second. Interlayer gap starts to increase
significantly as the first layer starts to spring back and
the second layer is pushed toward feed direction by the
drill bit. Inter-layer gap reaches the maximum at
around t = 4.5second and starts to decrease as the
second layer starts to spring back as the plastic
deformation of outer surface increases. From around t
= 5.5 second, the displacement of the node on the
entrance surface of the second layer (node 2) starts to
go below that of the node on the exit surface of the first
layer (node 1).This means that the second layer

touches previously formed inter-layer burr.

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 18

Typical inter-layer burrs are shown in Figure. In general,


as the drill moves downwards, a large exit burr forms at
the exit surface of the upper material and a small
entrance burr forms at the entrance surface of the
lower material. When the sealant is thick enough, as in
Figure (a), (b), and (c), the exit burr of the upper
material is fully developed. If the upper material is
ductile or the process conditions are in a specific range
which results in a large uniform burr , the exit burr
reaches to the top of the entrance burr, Figure (b), and
sometimes it is deformed by hitting the entrance burr,
Figure (c). Depending on the profile of the entrance burr
and material properties such as hardness, the exit burr
changes its growing path inwards, Figure (d), or in the
worst case, outwards, Figure (c). When the sealant is
thin, Figure (d), (e), and (f), the interference between
the exit burr and the entrance burr occurs before the
exit burr is fully developed.

Exit burr

As it can be said that uniform burr and crown burr are


two types of exit burr so the mechanism of formation of
exit burr is same as that of uniform burr or crown burr
depending on feed condition.

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 19

Literature Review

Burr Formation Variables

A relatively large amount of research has been


conducted to understand the phenomenon of burr
formation. Burr Height and thickness depends on the
factors stated below in the diagram. Depending on
these variables a cutting process may yield burr of
different height and thickness. Optimizing all these
variables will lead to burr with minimum dimensions

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 20

Methodology
Objectives:
To study the variation heights of burr in drilling of
Aluminum and Mild Steel work-pieces with different
feed, spindle speed for and three different diameters

Experimental Parameters:

From the literature review it is evident that burr height


is depends on many variables shown in the figure. For
this project the effect of feed, spindle speed, drill
diameter and work material will be used as input
parameters.

Materials:
• Aluminum alloy (bright aluminum) blocks of size
60mm x 30mm x 16mm.
• Mild steel blocks of size 60mm x 30mm x 16mm.

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 21

Machine tool and Tools:

R. K. Engineering Radial Drilling machine with 2HP. The


drilling machine allows three discrete variations in the
spindle speed and three discrete variations in feed.

High speed steel (HSS) drill bits of diameter 6mm, 8mm


and 10 mm.

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 22

Instruments:
Meter M Horizontal Floor Profilometers with 10 x lenses,
20x lens, 50x lens, Magnification accuracy ±0.1% and
surface ±0.15%, with least count of 0.01 mm

Experimental Procedure

• To become familiar with burr formation in drilling


• To determine the spindle speed and feed rate at
different settings of the drilling machine.
• To drill holes in both Aluminum and Mild Steel work
pieces with all combinations of feed, spindle speed
and diameter.
• To determine the heights of burr using Profilometer.
• To record the observations and plot graphically.

To determine the spindle speed and feed


rate at different
settings of the
drilling machine.

The drilling machine


allows three discrete
variations in the spindle
speed and three
corresponding discrete
variations in feed. Values
of spindle speed are
measured with help of
Tachometer. Feed values
C. V. Raman college of Engineering
Minimization of Burr 23

are measured by recording the distance traversed using


Graduations on the quill and recording the time by a
stop watch and finally the feed is calculated.

The observations have been tabulated below.

RPM RPM Feed Feed


value value(mm/sec)
a 0.84
A 285 b 0.805
c 1.59
a 1.02
B 554 b 1.53
c 2.87
C a 2.81
1022 b 2.87
c 4.87

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 24

To drill holes in both Aluminum and Mild


Steel work pieces with all combinations of
feed, spindle speed and diameter

Feed, spindle speed, drill diameter and work material


will be used as input parameters. First we kept material
constant i.e. aluminum. Then we fix drill bit of 6 mm in
the drilling machine. Now as we know that we can have
three discreet values of spindle speed and
corresponding three values of feed.

So three holes are drilled in each block with same


spindle speed and three feed rates. This process was
repeated for other two spindle speed. Then the drill bit
was changed to 8 mm and we drilled 9 holes in three
work pieces as described above by varying different
spindle speed and feed rates. This process was

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 25

repeated for 10 mm drill bit. Now the whole process


was repeated taking mild steel as work material. While
drilling the holes the corresponding spindle speed and
feed rate were marked on the work piece.

To determine the heights of burr using


Profilometer

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 26

After drilling the


holes in work
pieces they are
now ready to be
measured in
profilometer. The
work pieces were
kept on the work
stage and then
surface illuminator
was switched on.
This creates an
enlarged two
dimensional
shadow of work
piece on the
projection screen.
From the shadow
we can clearly
make out the
shadow of metal
surface and the
burr. Now using the
rotatable screen
the cross hair line was aligned to the metal surface
shadow. Now the initial reading of the micrometer was
noted down. The work stage was now moved by
rotating the micrometer so that the cross hair line
moved towards the shadow of the burr. The micrometer
was rotated till the cross hair line touched the highest
tip of the burr. At this position the micrometer reading
was noted down. Now the final reading was subtracted
from the initial reading and the burr height was
obtained.
This process was repeated for all holes and the burr
height were calculated and noted down with all their

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 27

corresponding spindle speed, feed rate and drill


diameter.

Burr Observed in Drilling Process


The Results obtained from Profilometer are tabulated
below are graphs are plotted thereafter. The tables
shows the values of burr height at different RPM and
feed.

Drill Diameter 8mm, Material Aluminum

RPM
A(285) B(554) C(1022)
Feed

a 0.45 0.84 0.89

b 0.43 1.63 0.36

c 4 1.88 0.42

Drill Diameter 8mm, Material Mild steel

RPM
A(285) B(554) C(1022)
Feed

a 0.51 0.62 0.46

b 0.84 1.23 0.53

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 28

c 1.01 0.64 1.05

Drill Diameter 6mm, Material Aluminum

RPM
A B C
Feed

a 0.6 0.19 0.52

b 0.57 0.54 0.81

c 0.93 0.56 3.10

Drill Diameter 6mm, Material Mild steel

RPM
A B C
Feed

a 1.08 0.45 3.00

b 0.79 3.65 2.99

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 29

c 4.12 4.06 3.06

Drill Diameter 10mm, Material Aluminum

RPM
A B C
Feed

a 0.47 0.86 1.22

b 1.20 1.16 1.03

c 1.05 1.26 0.43

Drill Diameter 10mm, Material Mild steel

RPM
A B C
Feed

a 0.82 0.31 0.99

b 1.25 0.46 0.93

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 30

c 1.09 0.52 0.44

Graphical Representation
The results are now plotted graphically for easier
interpretation and understanding

Burr Height Vs Feed:

The first set of graphs plotted are burr Burr Height


against Feed for different values of RPM for both
Aluminum and Mild Steel for all three diameters.

Aluminum, 6mm diameter

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 31

Aluminum, 8mm diameter.

Aluminum, 10mm diameter

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 32

Mild Steel, 6mm diameter

Mild Steel, 8mm diameter

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 33

Mild Steel, 10mm diameter

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 34

Effect of Drill Diameter on Burr.

Aluminum

Mild Steel

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 35

Effect of Work Material on Burr Height

These graphs show the burr height against cutting


conditions i.e. RPM and feed for aluminum and Mild
steel. This helps us in comparing how burr height is
influenced by work material and its properties.

6mm diameter

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 36

8mm diameter

10 mm diameter

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 37

Conclusions
As we know that machining does not yield unique
results. So no matter how many parameters we keep
constant the result of a particular machining operation
yields different results at different attempts. But we can
know how the result varies with change of different
parameters.

After recording the burr height with different parameter


we plotted graphs to know how the burr height varies
with different parameters.

Feed vs. burr height: The first three graphs are of


aluminum material. We observed that at low rpm as
soon as we increase feed rate the burr height
increases. We further observed that at medium rpm as
soon as we increase feed burr height tends to a
constant value. At highest rpm there is no such pattern.
The same pattern can be observed in mild steel also
with a few exceptions.

Effect of Drill Diameter on Burr: In aluminum


we observe that average burr height is maximum with
8mm drill diameter whereas in mild steel 6mm drill
gives the largest burr.

Effect of Work Material on Burr Height: There


are three graphs one for each drill diameter. We
observed that the two graphs of 8 mm and 10 mm drill
diameter the burr height of aluminum is less compare
to mild steel. Which is true as far as theory is
concerned but the graph of 6 mm there is an exception
where burr height is more in mild steel than aluminum.
C. V. Raman college of Engineering
Minimization of Burr 38

BURR IN MILLING
In face milling operations, the largest burrs are formed
when radial tool engagement is beyond a critical value.
The height of these burrs approach, and may even
exceed, the depth of cut. Tool path planning can be
used to minimize burr formation by machining the work
piece at low radial engagement conditions. In more
practical terms, tool paths are drawn within the limits
of a feasible offset region as determined by
production tolerances and empirical burr size data
from a given material. This approach, however,
becomes too restrictive when the geometry of the work
piece reaches certain level of complexity

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 39

Burr Classification

Classification based on mechanism of


formation

Gillespie and Blotter classified the machining burrs


into four specific types:

• Poisson burr: The Poisson burr is a result of a


material’s tendency to bulge at the sides when it is
compressed until permanent plastic deformation
occurs

• Roll-over burr: The rollover burr is essentially a


chip that is bent rather than sheared, resulting in a
comparatively larger burr. This type of burr is also
known as an exit burr because it is usually formed
at the end of a cut in face-milling.

• Tear burr: A tear burr is the result of material


tearing loose from the work piece rather than
shearing .

• Cut-off burr : The cut-off burr is a projection of


material left when the work piece falls from the
stock before the separating cut has been
completed

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 40

Classification according to Kishimoto et al

• Primary burr
• Secondary burr

Classification according to Gwo-Lianq Chern

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 41

Gwo-Lianq Chern classified burr according shape of burr


and the type of burr formed is highly dependent on the
in-plane exit angle; five types of burrs are:

•K
n
if
e
-

type burr
• Wave-type burr
• Curl-type burr
• Edge breakout and
• Secondary burr,
C. V. Raman college of Engineering
Minimization of Burr 42

as shown schematically in figure .The first three types


of burrs can be classified into the primary burrs as
Kishimoto et al defined.

Classification according to Nakayama and


Arai

Nakayama and Arai approached the classification of


machining burrs by: (1) the cutting edge which is
directly associated with the burr formation; and (2) the
mode and direction of the burr formation
Types of burr are

• Backward or entrance burr


• Sideward burr
• Forward or exit burr
• Leaned burr

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 43

Mechanisms

Burr Formation Mechanisms according to


Gwo-Lianq Chern

Type of burr formed is highly dependent on the in-


plane exit angle, ψ.
In-plane exit angle,
ψ, is defined as the
angle in the machining
plane between the
cutting velocity vector,
V, and the edge of the
work piece to be
machined, xy, as shown
in figure below.
This definition is consistent with the definition of the
in-plane exit angle in orthogonal cutting and is different
from the exit angle given by Kishimoto et al (explained
later )

Knife-Type Burr :

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 44

The knife-type burr is created by the pushing out of the


uncut part, AB, near the transition machined surface
when ψ reaches 150, as shown in Figure below The
burr height (h) is about the same as the depth of cut, d.
The burr is formed by the plastic bending moment, Mf,
which is caused by the feed force Ff, exerted on AB as
the cutter advances.

Photo of the knife-type burr

Wave type Burr:


For ψ approximately 90, wave-type burrs are created.
These types of burrs are produced from the machined
surface periodically. Figure illustrates the formation of
the wave-type burrs

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 45

A roll-over burr is
formed along the edge
CD after tool exit from
the transition-machined
surface. This roll-over
burr is removed by the
next tool passage
except for the material
very close to the corner
D. This can be
understood by the
‘‘minimum undeformed
chip thickness’’ in that
there is a minimum
undeformed chip
thickness below which a chip will not be formed. When
this occurs rubbing takes place instead. Applying this
idea to the secondary cutting edge on the clearance
surface of a milling tool in this case (where the in- plane
exit angle approximates 90), it is found that a small
triangular portion of the material that should be
removed will be left behind, as can be seen in figure is
the corner angle of the tool. The small triangular
portion left behind has been called a ‘‘Spanzipfel’’. The
Spanzipfel, S, will be plastically deformed as it comes in
contact with the clearance surface of the tool. Thus, as
the tool moves by an increment of the feed, the
Spanzipfel near the corner D in Figure is bent by an
angle of 90-ζ, and the material in S on AD is
compressed to BD. Eventually, as the cutter advances,
the roll-over burr on the edge CD is bent and
C. V. Raman college of Engineering
Minimization of Burr 46

compressed to the edge DE. The length of CD is L1 and


the length of DE is L2, where L2 approximates L1sin z.
This indicates that the roll-over burr along CD is
‘‘squeezed’’ to the shorter length DE, which contributes
to the formation of the wave-type burr as schematically
illustrated in figure above. Thickness of the wave-type
burr also increases under volume-constancy
relationship during this plastic deformation. The interval
of the wave-type burrs, p in Figure above is found to be
of the order of several millimeters and to increase with
feed rate. Close-up photo (×90) of the wave-type burr
is shown in Figure. The formation of a wave-type burr
will increase the difficulty of deburring due to its
complexity of geometric shape and larger thickness,
and thus should be avoided.
Actually, an in-plane exit angle about 90 is very
unfavorable from
the view point of
tool life. The
cutter enters the
work piece and
takes a chip that
gets progressively
thicker as the
cutter tooth
rotates. Since the
center of the
cutter lies along
the work piece edge in this case, as shown in Figure the
tool exits the work piece where the undeformed chip
thickness reaches a maximum. The cutting force
increases with the undeformed chip thickness which is
C. V. Raman college of Engineering
Minimization of Burr 47

the feed per revolution in single-tooth face milling.


Since the variation of cutting force is the most in this
situation, tool life will be reduced accordingly

Curl-Type Burrs:

For in-plane exit angles less than 45, curl-type burrs


are found after machining, as shown in figure below .A
roll-over burr along
the edge KJ is
created after the tool
exits from the
transition machined
surface. This roll-over

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 48

burr curls up as a result of the next tool passage due to


rubbing The burr along KJ is then bent and
compressed to the edge KL. The burr height is
reduced because of the curl-up. However, the burr
root thickness, hr, is larger than those of knife-type
burrs. Photo of the curl-type burr is shown in Figure
below. In plane exit angles less than 90 are not
suggested in real applications since the cutter
center is outside the work piece and the material
removal rate is low in this case.
Secondary Burr:

The secondary burr, as shown in Fig. 4(e), is formed


when fracture causing separation of the primary burr
occurs near the root of the
burr. It takes place when
the plastic strain at the
root of the primary burrs
becomes too high for the
material to sustain. The
burr height is thus reduced
notably. The existence of
secondary burrs is
sometime hard to recognize by naked eyes. But some
small protrusions can still be felt by the fingers when
rubbing the machined edge. Photo of the secondary
burr is shown in Figure

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 49

Edge Breakout Burr:

The edge breakout, as shown in Figure is found when


the metal removal rate becomes very high. A rough
chamfer and sharp burrs are then created along the
tool exit edge. The
interval of the sharp
burrs on the breakout
edge, p, is the same
as the feed rate.
Photo of the edge
breakout is shown
below. Edge breakout
occurred when very
high feed rate was
chosen. Such high

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 50

feed rate is rarely seen in aluminum alloys under


normal cutting conditions because of the ease of
machining this relatively ductile material. Surface
finish deteriorates with increasing feed rate, and thus
feed rate seldom reaches a level high enough to
cause edge breakout

Burr Formation Mechanisms according to


Gillespie and Blotter
• Poisson burr: Poisson burr is formed as a result
of lateral bulging of material along the work edge
when it is compressed under a passing cutting tool.
• Roll-over burr: Roll-over burr is essentially a chip
that remains attached to the work and pushed
ahead of the cutting tool's path on exit from the
work rather than being broken in formation.
• Tear burr. Tear burr is usually formed in a
punching operation as the result of material
deforming basically due to the tool/die clearance
and, like the roll- over burr, adhering to the work
piece edge when the tool exits the part.

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 51

• Cut-off burr : Cut-off burr The cut-off burr is a


projection of material left when the work piece falls
from the stock before the separating cut has been
completed

A combination of the Poisson and tear burr can end up


as a so-called top burr or entrance burr [Lee 2001],
along the top edge of a machined slot, or along the
periphery of a hole when a tool enters it.

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 52

Burr Formation Mechanisms according to

Kishimoto et al
• Primary burr
• Secondary burr

Primary burr is the roll-over burr produced on the tool


exit edge. The burr thickness was found to vary from
minimum to maximum burr thickness along the length
of the burr.

They claimed that through proper selection of


parameters- depth of cut, the exit angle, and the corner
angle (inclination angle) of the tool, the roll-over burr
produced during the face milling process will be
separated at its thinnest portion and only a small burr
will remain on the edge of the machined part. They
named the former normal roll-over burr a ‘‘primary
burr’’ and the latter one a ‘‘secondary burr’’ which is

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 53

the material remaining after the breakage of the


primary burr.

Literature Review

Burr Formation Variables

A relatively large amount of research has been


conducted to understand the phenomenon of burr
formation. Burr Height and thickness depends on the
many factors such as cutter geometry and its
sharpness, work material, machine vibration and
rigidity, machining condition i.e. feed, depth of cut, in
plane exit angle. Cutting fluid, its flow rate and method
of application also have effect on the size of the burr.
Depending on these variables a cutting process may
yield burr of different height and thickness. Optimizing
all these variables will lead to burr with minimum
dimensions

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 54

Methodology
Objectives:
To study the variation heights of burr in Face milling of
Aluminum work-pieces with three different in-plane exit
angle combined with four values of axial depth of cut.

Experimental Parameters:

From the literature review it is evident that burr height


is depends on many variables shown in the figure. For
this project the effect of in-plane exit angle and depth
of cut and work material will be used as input
parameters.

Materials:

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 55

• Aluminum alloy (bright aluminum) blocks of size


50mm x 50mm x 25mm.

Machine tool and Tools:

Dynamill Vertical Milling machine with 3HP. The milling


machine is fitted with a
face milling cutter.

High speed steel (HSS)


milling cutter with 2mm
diameter.

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 56

Instruments:
Meter M Horizontal Floor
Profilometers with 10 x
lenses, 20x lens, 50x
lens, Magnification
accuracy ±0.1% and
surface ±0.15%, with
least count of 0.01 mm

Experimental
Procedure

• To become familiar with burr formation in milling


• To determine the Radial depth of cut for each in
plane exit angle.
• To do single pass face milling in both Aluminum
work pieces with all combinations of axial depth of
cut, and in plane exit angle.
• To determine the heights of burr using Profilometer.
• To record the observations and plot graphically.

To determine the Radial depth of cut for


each in plane exit angle.

From literature review we know that burr height


depends a lot on in plane exit angle but during
machining has to done using the radial depth of cut. So
C. V. Raman college of Engineering
Minimization of Burr 57

we need determine the corresponding radial depth of


cut for all the in plane exit angle values using
geometry.

If angle XAY is 154.1 o then XAB is 180 o - 154.1 o = 25.9 o


And angle OAB should be 90 o – 25.9 o = 64.1o

OB = OA. sin (OAB) = OA*sin (64.1 o)

Now OA = 10 mm, so OB = 10 * 0.899


OB = 8.99 ≈ 9mm

Radial depth of cut = BC = OC + OB


BC = 10 + 9= 19mm
Radial depth of cut= 19 mm

Similarly we can calculate Radial depths of cut for other


in plane exit angles are calculated and the observations
have been tabulated below.

In plane Exit Angle Radial depth of cut


44.4 o 3mm
90 o 10mm

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 58

154.1 o 19mm

So there would twelve cutting conditions as we keep


the speed and feed constant for all the cutting
conditions.

To do single pass face milling in both


Aluminum and Mild Steel work pieces with
all combinations of axial depth of cut, and
in plane exit angle.

The values of radial depths of cut are 3mm, 10mm and


19mm whereas values chosen for axial depths of cut
are 0.5mm, 0.75mm, 1.00mm and 1.25mm. So that
gives us a combination of tweleve different milling
conditions. We do two of them in each as shown in the
figure. So we will six blocks two cuts on each side.

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 59

To determine
the heights of
burr using
Profilometer

After milling
operation the work
pieces they are
now ready to be
measured in
profilometer. The
work pieces were

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 60

kept on the work stage and then surface illuminator


was switched on. This creates an enlarged two
dimensional shadow of work piece on the projection
screen. From the shadow we can clearly make out the
shadow of metal surface and the burr. Now using the
rotatable screen the cross hair line was aligned to the
metal surface shadow. Now the initial reading of the
micrometer was noted down. The work stage was now
moved by rotating the micrometer so that the cross
hair line moved towards the shadow of the burr. The
micrometer was rotated till the cross hair line touched
the highest tip of the burr. At this position the
micrometer reading was noted down. Now the final
reading was subtracted from the initial reading and the
burr height was obtained.

This process was repeated for all workpieces the burr


height were calculated and noted down.
METHODS OF CONTROL OF
BURRS

To effectively address burr prevention, the entire


„process chain “from design to manufacturing must be
considered, Figure 2. Here we see the importance of
integrating all the elements affecting burrs, from the
part design, including material selection, to the
machining process
Since milling (specially face milling) figures so
prominently in the manufacture of so many parts, for
example, automotive engines and transmission
components, it has been a major focus for burr
reduction and prevention for many years. In milling, the
C. V. Raman college of Engineering
Minimization of Burr 61

kinematics of tool exits from the work piece is a


dominant factor in burr formation and, as a result,
substantial success has been realized by adjusting the
tool path over the work piece.

Figure: Five level integration required for burr minimization

Design for Burr Minimization


Burr formation is significantly affected by how a
product is designed . This section introduces several
rules that allow designers to enhance edge quality at
the early design stage. If the part material and its
surface treatment do not change, then the part
geometry and its edge features are the main factors
determining burr formation. Four design rules are
presented and can be embedded into CAD systems, as
shown in Figure

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 62

1. Avoid through holes


Drilling exit burr often occurs along the exit side of a
hole. On the contrary, entrance burrs are usually small
and considered burr-free. Therefore, it is beneficial to
avoid design of through holes. As shown schematically
in Figure, through holes should be replaced with blind
holes for reducing exit burr when this design change
does not affect the original product function

Exit burr
2. Avoid 90º counter sinks
Figure shows that simple counter sinks with angles
greater than 90º creates an exit angle of 135º or
greater . In this case, no burrs will form at the bottom
intersection for certain materials. Hence it is favorable
not to adopt 90º counter sinks in a product design if
edge quality is an important concern
Exit burr

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 63

3. Select appropriate step/slot depths


A curly side burr will form along the side edges of a
slot/step when the axial depth of cut is smaller than a
critical value. Increasing the depth of cut is likely to
produce less detrimental side burrs that loosely attach
to the work part. This type of burr is easy to remove in
the deburring operation. Therefore, a slot/step depth
should be appropriately selected so that the curly side
burr will not produce

Exit burr

Side burr

4. Add appropriate chamfers


Since the tool path cannot be adjusted, it is difficult to
prevent exit burr formation in a slot/step milling
operation. However, adding chamfers along the part
edges can, to a large extent, reduce exit burr size. At
the design stage, a simple look-up table can effectively
help designers select both the chamfer size and angle
in order to meet specified edge quality. Notice that
chamfering requires a secondary finishing operation. An
C. V. Raman college of Engineering
Minimization of Burr 64

interesting issue thus arises: a chamfering operation


prior to a face milling operation may reduce the total
manufacturing cost compared to the reverse operation
sequence, which is prevalently used in industry

Chamfer

Macro-planning
Machining sequences determine what types of burr will
form. Each exit burr, side burr, or top burr requires
different deburring work as well as the associated
deburring cost. Therefore machining operation
sequencing can be a feasible way to reduce deburring
cost. The edge-precision macro-planner contains a set

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 65

of machining feature decomposition and re-mapping


rules that result in less detrimental machining burrs.

(1) Milling prior to drilling because drilling burrs are


easy to form compared to milling burrs

(2) Shallow slot/step prior to deep slot/step for trade-


offs between top burr and exit burr formation along the
edge A

1. 2.

(3) depth first in the slot/step milling to avoid the


formation of curly side along the edge B

(4) width first in the pocket milling for trade-offs


between top burr and exit burr formation along the
island edges

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 66

3. 4.

Micro-planning

Cutting parameters including feed per tooth, the radial


depth of cut and the axial depth of cut are determined
at the micro-planning stage. A series of milling

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 67

experiments have been conducted for Al 6061 to select


appropriate parameters.
Similar to the look-up table used in the conventional
micro-planner, it is also beneficial to set up a series of
machining tables for reducing burr formation. However,
since mostly geometric factors dominate burr formation
behavior, a set of simple rules is established from the
experimental data, instead of complete burr formation
databases. These rules provide useful “handles” for
burr control in the micro-planning:

(1) Exit burr in the cutting direction: one important


factor controlling exit burr formation is the in-plane exit
angle. Adjusting the width of cut can effectively control
the burr height.

(2) Exit burr in the feed direction: in the slotting


operation using end milling cutters, typically exit burr
height along the edge is described as a bell-shape
curve, i.e. larger burr height in the middle and smaller
burr height close to the ends [10]. In addition, burr
height is approximately proportional to the depth of
cut. Feed per tooth also affects exit burr formation but
not significantly.

(3) Side burr: the depth of cut is the most important


factor determining the occurrence of curly side burr.
Our experimental data shows that a depth of cut

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 68

smaller than 0.25R favors the formation of curly side


burr.

(4) Edge breakout: the width of cut (equivalently, the


exit angle) dominates the occurrence of edge breakout.
Given tool geometry, this edge defect only takes place
within the exit angle range from 120o to 135o, not
depending on other cutting parameters.

The strategies used in the micro-planer for enhancing


edge quality are summarized in Table 1.

Tool Path Planning


C. V. Raman college of Engineering
Minimization of Burr 69

Tool engagement, to a large extent, determines


machining burr formation. Therefore, burr minimization
can be achieved by controlling tool engagement
conditions. Three main factors affecting how a tool
cutting edge leaves the work piece: work piece
geometry, tool geometry and tool path. At this stage,
work piece design and tool geometry are usually fixed,
so only tool path can be used for reducing burr
formation. A set of five tool path planning algorithms
are developed:
(1) Avoiding tool exits for 2D polygonal contours by
adjusting the radial depth of cut,
(2) Avoiding tool exits for 2D contours with circular
edges by adjusting the radial depth of cut,
(3) Avoiding tool exits for 2D polygonal contours by
adjusting tool position,
(4) Avoiding tool exits for 2D contours with circular
edges by adjusting tool position, and
(5) Avoiding tool exits for a 2D free-form contour by
adjusting tool position.

To avoid tool exits is the crucial point for reducing exit


burr formation, because tool exit is the necessary
condition for exit burr to occur. When the tool always
enters the workpiece, only a secondary burr can be
produced, which is generally considered to be burr-free.

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 70

Examples of application of burr


minimization strategies
Tool path planning in milling:
One of the most successful areas of application of burr
minimization strategies is in tool path planning for face
milling. To a great extent, burr formation in milling can
be prevented by adjusting the path of the milling cutter
over the work piece face. Specific cases have been
evaluated in automotive engine manufacturing with
major automobile companies. This can be extended to
optimization of the process to insure that surface
quality, including flatness, specifications are met or
exceeded. Figure 10 shows a conventional tool path for
face milling a surface on a cast AlSi alloy automotive
engine block. The presence of substantial burrs at
critical locations required frequent tool changes as well
as additional deburring operations.

The optimized tool path using the criteria described


above is shown in Figure 11 and, in Figure 12, shows
the resulting burr free work piece. Although the tool
path is substantially longer in this example, it was
possible to increase the feed rate without loss of
surface finish to maintain the required 5 second cycle
time for the process. The tool life (as a result of
dramatically reduced burr formation) was increased by
a factor of 3 and the resulting savings per
machine/year were estimated at approximately
$50,000
C. V. Raman college of Engineering
Minimization of Burr 71

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 72

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 73

Contour Chart Of Burr Formation

An empirical model described by least squares and a


contour chart describing the results are proposed for
use to minimize burr formation and improve tool life. An
empirical model of burr formation obtained by lease
squares method is shown below. Here, y is burr height
[
µ
m
].

Figure 12. Contour chart of burr formation.

y = 7.5 - 3.5 Vc + 5.3 ft + 0.2Vc2 + 0.8 ft2 +1.0Vc ft

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 74

Where, Vc is cutting speed and ft is feed per tooth.


Figure 12 shows the contour chart based on Equation
(4).

The following equation is an empirical model for


tool life:

 443 ft- Vc2 - 89 ft2 -18Vc ft (5)


y = - 387+ 44Vc +

where, y is the number


of holes created before
the failure. Figure 13
shows a contour chart
based on Eqation 5 .
With these two charts,
burr formation and tool
life can be controlled
and optimized. For
example, Figure 14
shows the combined
contour chart of
equations 4 and 5.
Using this chart, a confirmation test was conducted to
compare burr formation and tool life at two cutting
conditions, A and B.

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 75

Table 2 shows burr height, tool life and material

removal rate

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 76

Figure Contour chart of burr formation and tool life

References

BURR FORMATION IN DRILLING


Sung-lim ko1 , Jae-eun chang1, “Development of
drill geometry for Burr minimization in drilling.”
P. Stringer, G. Byrne and E. Ahearne, “Tool Design
For Burr Removal In Drilling Operations.”
Jinsoo Kim , “Development of a drilling burr control
chart For stainless steel.”

C. V. Raman college of Engineering


Minimization of Burr 77

Jihong Choi, Sangkee Min, David A. Dornfeld,


“Finite Element Modeling of Burr Formation in Drilling of
a Multi-Layered Material”

BURR FORMATION IN MILLING


David Dornfeld, “Strategies for Preventing and
Minimizing Burr Formation”
K. Nakayama, M. Arai, “Burr formation in metal
cutting, Annals of the CIRP 36 (1) (1987) 33–36”.

D.A. Dornfeld, E. Erickson, “Robotic deburring with


real time acoustic emission feedback control, in:
Proceedings of the Symposium on Mechanics of
Deburring and Surface Finishing Processes.”
L.K. Gillespie, The academic challenge of burr
technology, Allied Bendix Aerospace, KC division,

C. V. Raman college of Engineering