materials

Article
Experimental Study of Macro and Microgeometric
Defects in Drilled Carbon Fiber Reinforced Plastics
by Laser Beam Machining
Pedro F. Mayuet Ares *, Juan Manuel Vázquez Martínez ID
, Mariano Marcos Bárcena and
Antonio J. Gámez ID
Department of Mechanical Engineering & Industrial Design, Faculty of Engineering, University of Cadiz,
Av. Universidad de Cádiz 10, E-11519 Puerto Real (Cadiz), Spain; juanmanuel.vazquez@uca.es (J.M.V.M.);
mariano.marcos@uca.es (M.M.B.); antoniojuan.gamez@uca.es (A.J.G.)
* Correspondence: pedro.mayuet@uca.es; Tel.: +34-616-852-858




Received: 1 July 2018; Accepted: 13 August 2018; Published: 18 August 2018


Abstract: Plastic matrix composite materials are an excellent choice for structural applications where
high strength-weight and stiffness-weight ratios are required. These materials are being increasingly
used in diverse industrial sectors, particularly in aerospace. Due to the strict tolerances required,
they are usually machined with drilling cycles due to the type of mounting through rivets. In this
sense, laser beam drilling is presented as an alternative to conventional drilling due to the absence
of tool wear, cutting forces, or vibrations during the cutting process. However, the process carries
with it other problems that compromise the integrity of the material. One of these is caused by
the high temperatures generated during the interaction between the laser and the material. In this
work, variance analysis is used to study the influence of scanning speed and frequency on macro
geometric parameters, surface quality, and defects (taper and heat affected zone). Also, in order
to identify problems in the wall of the drill, stereoscopic optical microscopy (SOM) and scanning
electron microscopy (SEM) techniques are used. This experimental procedure reveals the conditions
that minimize deviations, defects, and damage in machining holes.

Keywords: laser beam machining; carbon fiber reinforced polymer; hole quality characteristics;
geometrical parameters; roughness parameters; taper; heat affected zone

1. Introduction
Reinforced plastic and polymers were originally designed for improving the physicochemical
properties and reducing the weight of the classic materials, mainly metallic alloys, commonly used in
different industrial sectors. Particularly among them, carbon fiber reinforced polymers (CFRP) are
widely applied in sectors that require lightweight materials, the ability to withstand great efforts, high
stiffness, and excellent conditions for fatigue [1]. These characteristics, especially those related to their
low density, make CFRP materials highly attractive for industrial applications in a great diversity
of sectors, such as the aerospace or automotive sectors. However, changes in global economics and
politics have led to a production standstill of CFRP, even a decrease in certain sectors, due to large cuts,
mainly on the defense sector, although this effect has been diminished by the increase of consumption
for commercial applications. Therefore, some producers expect an increase in demand of about
75% in the industrial sector (excluding the aerospace) by 2020, specifically in energy, transport, and
civil engineering [1].
In the aeronautical industry, the use of non-metal matrix composites (NMMC) has increased
sharply in the last few years as they are becoming more and more used in the building of structural

Materials 2018, 11, 1466; doi:10.3390/ma11081466 www.mdpi.com/journal/materials

Materials 2018, 11, 1466 2 of 12

Materials 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 12

elements of commercial and military airships. In these cases, organic matrix-based composite materials
reinforced with high-strength
materials reinforced fiber or particles
with high-strength fiber orare used [2,3].
particles are usedAmong[2,3].them,
Among CFRP is one
them, CFRP of the most
is one of
widely used. These composite materials are characterized by their
the most widely used. These composite materials are characterized by their high compositional high compositional heterogeneity
and anisotropy,
heterogeneity low
and thermal conductivity,
anisotropy, low thermal matrix sensitivity
conductivity, matrix at high temperatures,
sensitivity and the abrasive
at high temperatures, and
nature
the abrasive nature of the fibers used in their manufacture [4–6]. These features manufacturing
of the fibers used in their manufacture [4–6]. These features complicate the complicate the
processes
manufacturingof theprocesses
airship elements based in
of the airship CFRPs.based in CFRPs.
elements
Moreover, most of the CFRP
Moreover, most of the CFRP elements used elements usedininthe theairship’s
airship’sbuilding
building need
need to tobe be machined
machined by
by drilling or contour milling. However, the aforementioned
drilling or contour milling. However, the aforementioned CFRP features negatively affect theCFRP features negatively affect the
machinability
machinability of of these
theseelements
elementswhen whentraditional
traditional or or conventional
conventional machining
machining processes
processes are used.
are used. The
The material heterogeneity and the abrasive behavior of carbon fiber
material heterogeneity and the abrasive behavior of carbon fiber conditions negatively affect the conditions negatively affect
tool
the
life tool lifeFor
[7–12]. [7–12]. For thisthe
this reason, reason, the and
material material
geometryand geometry
of the tools ofmust
the tools must be
be adapted toadapted
the machiningto the
machining conditions required by the material in order to reduce the
conditions required by the material in order to reduce the tool wear and the thermal and mechanical tool wear and the thermal and
mechanical
defects produced during the cutting process to maintain the functional performance of the
defects produced during the cutting process to maintain the functional performance of the
manufacturing process [13]. Moreover, tool life is one of the most relevant
manufacturing process [13]. Moreover, tool life is one of the most relevant parameters that condition parameters that condition the
economic
the economic performance
performance of theofprocess. However,
the process. However,currently, the optimization
currently, the optimization of the cutting
of the tools
cutting used in
tools
the
used machining processesprocesses
in the machining of CFRP of work
CFRP pieces
work is pieces
considered a difficultatask
is considered [14]. task
difficult In this
[14].sense, different
In this sense,
non-traditional machining processes can be thought to be profitable
different non-traditional machining processes can be thought to be profitable and economical and economical alternatives
to solve the troubles
alternatives to solve previously
the troubles mentioned.
previouslyTherefore,
mentioned. alternatives
Therefore,toalternatives
this type of to machining
this typeare of
becoming more common, such as abrasive water jet (AWJM), electrical
machining are becoming more common, such as abrasive water jet (AWJM), electrical discharge discharge machining (EDM),
ultrasonic
machiningmachining, or laser machining,
(EDM), ultrasonic beam machining or laser (LBM)
beam[12,15–19].
machining (LBM) [12,15–19].
In
In particular,
particular, LBM LBM possesses
possesses several
several advantages.
advantages. For For example,
example, it it is
is aa technology
technology without
without contact
contact
and
and without abrasive particles, therefore eliminating contact forces, tool wear, and vibrations during
without abrasive particles, therefore eliminating contact forces, tool wear, and vibrations during
cutting.
cutting. In Inaddition,
addition,laserlasercutting
cuttingcancan bebe easily
easily automated
automated andand performed
performed at high
at high speed speed [20–23].
[20–23]. On
On
the other hand, the challenges for the laser to machining the carbon fiber are the minimization or
the other hand, the challenges for the laser to machining the carbon fiber are the minimization or
elimination
elimination of of the
the thermal
thermal damage
damage due due to to the
the great
great difference
difference between
between the the mechanical
mechanical and and thermal
thermal
properties
propertiesofofthe thematerial
material constituents
constituents andand to maintain
to maintain a high a cutting speed [24–29].
high cutting Therefore,
speed [24–29]. defects,
Therefore,
such as the
defects, such heat affected
as the heat zone
affected(HAZ),
zonethe carbonization
(HAZ), of the fiber,
the carbonization of the thefiber,
removalthe or loss ofor
removal resin,
loss orof
the delamination due to intense thermal effects, are the main obstacles
resin, or the delamination due to intense thermal effects, are the main obstacles for industrial for industrial applications of
carbon fiber machining
applications of carbon fiber by laser, as seenby
machining in laser,
Figureas1.seen in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Typical defects on the specified surface zones of the material by laser in polymer matrix
Figure 1. Typical defects on the specified surface zones of the material by laser in polymer matrix
composites. At the beam entrance, 1. heat affected matrix, 2. matrix recession, and 3. kerf width. At
composites. At the beam entrance, 1. heat affected matrix, 2. matrix recession, and 3. kerf width. At the
the exit: 4. matrix recession, 5. heat affected matrix, and 6. kerf width.
exit: 4. matrix recession, 5. heat affected matrix, and 6. kerf width.

In this paper, carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) is machined by a fiber laser doped with
In thisIn
ytterbium. paper,
ordercarbon fiberthe
to analyze reinforced polymer
quality of the cut,(CFRP) is machined
the influence by a fiber
of the cutting laser doped
parameters has with
been
ytterbium. In order to analyze the quality of the cut, the influence of the cutting parameters
analyzed. Specifically, a number of tests varying the scanning speed (S) and frequency (Fr) have been has
been analyzed.
performed Specifically,
to obtain a number
holes. The of tests
test pieces havevarying the scanning
been inspected speed (S) stereoscopic
by combining and frequency (Fr)
optical
microscopy (SOM) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) techniques. Furthermore, macro and
micro-geometric parameters, such as diameter (D), cylindricity (C), straightness (St), roundness (R-
Materials 2018, 11, 1466 3 of 12

have been performed to obtain holes. The test pieces have been inspected by combining stereoscopic
optical microscopy (SOM) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) techniques. Furthermore, macro
and micro-geometric parameters, such as diameter (D), cylindricity (C), straightness (St), roundness
(R-In/R-Out), and roughness (Ra), have been studied. Finally, the quality of the holes has been
evaluated by measuring defects such as the heat affected zone (HAZ) or the taper angle (T).

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Experimental Procedure

Table 1 includes the main features of the CFRP pieces (80 mm × 80 mm × 5.85 mm) used in this
study. Holes of 7.92 mm diameter, by combining circular trajectories using a fiber laser doped with
ytterbium (Yb), have been laser drilled. This diameter is commonly used for assembling structural
elements in aeronautical industry.

Table 1. CFRP pieces features.

Type of Material Composition Production Method Technical Specification

Layers of unidirectional carbon fiber
Intermediate module Pre-preg and autoclaved
with epoxy resin matrix and a
fiber (66%) and epoxy at 458◦ ± 5◦ at a pressure AIMS-05-01-XXX
symmetrical stacking sequence of
resin (34%) of 0.69 MPa
(0/90/45/-45/45/-45)

The influence of pulsed frequency, F, and scanning speed, S, on the thermal caused defects
has been analyzed [2,21,22,30]. Thus, Table 2 includes the selected values in this study. The rest of
parameters have remained constant during the tests, Table 3. Before them, trials with each set of
parameters were carried out to determine the thickness of the material in each pass.

Table 2. Cutting parameters selected for the tests.

Parameter Levels
S (mm/s) 25 50 75 100
Fr (kHz) 20 40 60

Table 3. Constant parameters during the tests.

Power Wavelength Spot Diameter Working Scanning

Atmosphere
(W) (nm) (µm) Mode Distribution
10 1062 60 Pulsed Shaded Environment

For the realization of the drills, a strategy of marking by shading was chosen. To program
it, Laser Mark software (version 2.3.0) was used. In addition, it is important to mention that each
consecutive pass was performed by modifying the scanning direction by 45◦ . In this way, the heat
damage distribution is homogenized among all the fiber directions observed in the stacking sequence.
To distinguish the most significant parameters for evaluation results, analysis of variance
(ANOVA) for a 95% confidence interval was employed. Thus, the F value and the p value have
been analyzed to measure the evidence against the null hypothesis. After that, contour charts for each
variable studied in the experimental (D, DIn , DOut , St, C, Ra, T and HAZ) were obtained.

2.2. Macro and Micro-Geometrical Evaluation

The diameter at the inlet and outlet of the material were evaluated using a digital profile projector
Tesa Visio 300 (Hexagon, Stockholm, Sweden).
 Materials 2018, 11, 1466 4 of 12

To analyze the macro and micro geometric deviations, replicas of the holes were fabricated due
to the impossibility of direct measuring on the material. These replicas were made with a polymer
type F80 Ra (R.G.X, Plastiform, Madrid, Spain) with the ability to guarantee stability during the
Materials 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 12
measurement process for diameters greater than 4 mm. In this way, roundness was calculated at
the entrance and exit of the drill (R-In/R-Out), along with straightness (St), cylindricity (C), and
entrance and exit of the drill (R-In/R-Out), along with straightness (St), cylindricity (C), and
roughness (Ra).
roughness (Ra).
A station of measurement Mahr MMQ44 Form Tester (Mahr, Göttingen, Germany) was used
A station of measurement Mahr MMQ44 Form Tester (Mahr, Göttingen, Germany) was used to
to measure the roundness at the entrance and exit of the drill, the cylindricity of the entire profile
measure the roundness at the entrance and exit of the drill, the cylindricity of the entire profile of the
of the drill, and the straightness in four separate generatrices to 90◦ , as shown in Figure 2a. On the
drill, and the straightness in four separate generatrices to 90°, as shown in Figure 2a. On the other
other hand, the evaluation of the micro-geometric defects was carried out using a Mahr Perthometer
hand, the evaluation of the micro-geometric defects was carried out using a Mahr Perthometer
Concept PGK120 (Mahr, Göttingen, Germany) equipment to obtain four 2-D separated profiles, as seen
Concept PGK120 (Mahr, Göttingen, Germany) equipment to obtain four 2-D separated profiles, as
in Figure 2b. For that, a stylus with a 2 µm tip radius and 90◦ tip angle was used for the measurements,
seen in Figure 2b. For that, a stylus with a 2 μm tip radius and 90° tip angle was used for the
where the surface finishing parameter employed to indicate the surface quality was the arithmetic
measurements, where the surface finishing parameter employed to indicate the surface quality was
mean roughness.
the arithmetic mean roughness.

(a) (b)

Figure 2. Measurements made on the replicas, (a) example of measurement of macro geometry; and
Figure 2. Measurements made on the replicas, (a) example of measurement of macro geometry; and
(b) example of measurement of micro-geometry.
(b) example of measurement of micro-geometry.

2.3. SOM/SEM Evaluation

2.3. SOM/SEM Evaluation
The test pieces were inspected by microscopy techniques using Tesa Visio 300 (Hexagon,
The test pieces were inspected by microscopy techniques using Tesa Visio 300 (Hexagon,
Stockholm, Sweden). Subsequently, to calculate the taper (T) with the inlet diameter (DIn), the outlet
Stockholm, Sweden). Subsequently, to calculate the taper (T) with the inlet diameter (DIn ), the outlet
diameter (DOut), and the thickness of the material (t), ImageJ software (1.50i) was used. Also, to obtain
diameter (DOut ), and the thickness of the material (t), ImageJ software (1.50i) was used. Also, to obtain
a thermal damage ratio on the surface of the material, the damaged diameter (Dd) was also calculated.
a thermal damage ratio on the surface of the material, the damaged diameter (Dd ) was also calculated.
DIn + Dout
θ = tan−1 (  )  (1)
−1 2tDIn + Dout
θ = tan (1)
2t
Dd
HAZ = (2)
DIn Dd
HAZ = (2)
DIn
Finally, to complete the inspection of the defects, scanning electron microscopy Quanta 200 (SEM,
Thermo Finally,
FishertoScientific,
complete Waltham,
the inspection
MA,of the defects,
USA) was used.scanning electron microscopy Quanta 200 (SEM,
Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) was used.
3. Results and Discussion
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Results of the Analysis
3.1. Results of the Analysis
Tables 4 and 5 show the data obtained for each test and the ANOVA analysis, respectively.
Tables 4 and 5 show the data obtained for each test and the ANOVA analysis, respectively.
Materials 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 12

Materials 2018, 11, 1466 Table 4. Results of the evaluated variables. 5 of 12

S Fr D DIn DOut St C Ra T
Test HAZ
(mm/s) (kHz) 4. Results(mm)
(mm)Table(mm) of the evaluated
(mm) variables.
(mm) (µm) (rad)
1 25 20 7.934 0.041 0.057 0.028 0.388 3.15 0.069 1.233
2 25 S 40 Fr 7.929 D 0.035 DIn 0.077 DOut St
0.036 C
0.524 Ra
2.20
Test T0.099
(rad) HAZ1.314
3 25 (mm/s)60 (kHz)7.896(mm)0.045(mm) 0.084 (mm) (mm)
0.056 (mm)
0.622 (µm)
2.38 0.118 1.355
4 1 50 25 20 20 8.103 7.9340.0460.041 0.092
0.057 0.028
0.029 0.388
0.430 3.15
2.84 0.069
0.074 1.233
1.119
5 2 50 25 40 40 7.878 7.9290.0430.035 0.121
0.077 0.036
0.039 0.524
0.556 2.20
2.39 0.099
0.100 1.314
1.160
3 25 60 7.896 0.045 0.084 0.056 0.622 2.38 0.118 1.355
6 4
50 50
60 20 8.081 8.1030.0450.046 0.1050.092
0.045
0.029
0.722
0.430
2.80
2.84
0.118
0.074
1.194
1.119
7 5 75 50 20 40 8.066 7.8780.0460.043 0.138
0.121 0.018
0.039 0.429
0.556 3.78
2.39 0.070
0.100 1.031
1.160
8 6 75 50 40 60 7.996 8.0810.0550.045 0.142
0.105 0.042
0.045 0.583
0.722 2.50
2.80 0.097
0.118 1.096
1.194
9 7 75 75 60 20 8.024 8.0660.0700.046 0.144
0.138 0.018
0.057 0.429
0.719 3.78
2.76 0.070
0.152 1.031
1.097
8 75 40 7.996 0.055 0.142 0.042 0.583 2.50 0.097 1.096 1
10 100 20 8.048 0.047 0.123 0.031 0.418 2.68 0.070 1.000
9 75 60 8.024 0.070 0.144 0.057 0.719 2.76 0.152 1.097
11 10100 100 40 20 8.127 8.0480.0620.047 0.138
0.123 0.037
0.031 0.616
0.418 4.37
2.68 0.094
0.070 1.049
1.000 1
12 11100 100 60 40 8.032 8.1270.0790.062 0.192
0.138 0.049
0.037 0.729
0.616 6.22
4.37 0.122
0.094 1.049
1.049
12 100 60 8.032 1 Without
0.079 a heat
0.192affected
0.049
zone. 0.729 6.22 0.122 1.049
1 Without a heat affected zone.

Table 5. ANOVA analysis of the evaluated variables.

Table 5. ANOVA analysis of the evaluated variables.
S Fr
Parameter SF-value p-value Parameter F-valueFr p-value
Parameter D F-value2.19 p-value
0.190 Parameter
D F-value 0.602p-value
0.55
D R-In 2.194.99 0.045
0.190 R-In
D 3.60
0.55 0.094 0.602
R-In R-Out 4.9912.80 0.045
0.005 R-In
R-Out 3.60
2.79 0.139 0.094
R-Out St 12.800.08 0.005
0.970 R-Out
St 2.79
18.02 0.003 0.139
St 0.08 0.970 St 18.02 0.003
C C 5.705.70 0.034
0.034 CC 128.86
128.86 0.000 0.000
Ra Ra 0.830.83 0.229
0.229 Ra
Ra 0.41
0.41 0.686 0.686
T T 0.830.83 0.524
0.524 TT 32.32
32.32 0.001 0.001
HAZ HAZ 143.19 143.19 0.000
0.000 HAZ
HAZ 22.61
22.61 0.002 0.002

3.2. Analysis of Macro and Micro-Geometrical Deviations

3.2.1. Diameter Evaluation

3.2.1. Diameter Evaluation
The
The nominal
nominal diameter
diameter of of the
the drilled
drilled hole
hole was
was 7.92
7.92 mm. The results
mm. The results obtained
obtained from
from the
the diameter
diameter
measurements are shown in Figure 3. In this contour chart, the closest theoretical value
measurements are shown in Figure 3. In this contour chart, the closest theoretical value was obtained was obtained
for
for low scanning speed and medium frequency level conditions. Under these conditions, 7.929 mm
low scanning speed and medium frequency level conditions. Under these conditions, 7.929 mm
was
was the
the best result, obtained
best result, obtained inin test number 2.
test number In contrast,
2. In contrast, measurement
measurement values
values over
over 88 mm
mm inin diameter
diameter
were
were detected
detected for
for SS == 100
100 mm/s.
mm/s. TheTheanalysis
analysis ofof the
the results
results shows
shows that
that aa low
low scanning
scanning speed
speed involves
involves
more accuracy for diameter dimensions of the drilled holes. On the other hand, the
more accuracy for diameter dimensions of the drilled holes. On the other hand, the ANOVA analysis ANOVA analysis
was not conclusive for rejecting the null hypothesis. However, a higher F-value
was not conclusive for rejecting the null hypothesis. However, a higher F-value was shown by was shown by S,
S,
suggesting
suggesting aa greater
greater relation
relation between
between this
this parameter
parameter withwith respect
respect frequency.
frequency.

Figure 3. Contour chart of the diameter.

 Materials 2018, 11, 1466 6 of 12
Materials
Materials 2018,
2018, 11,11, x FOR
x FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 6 of
6 of 1212

3.2.2.Roundness
3.2.2.
3.2.2. RoundnessEvaluation
Evaluation
Inthe
InIn thecase
the caseof
case ofof roundness
roundness
roundness deviations,
deviations,
deviations, thethetheANOVA
ANOVA ANOVA analysis analysis
analysisshowed showed
a higher
showed a ahigher
higherinfluence
influence influence ofofS,S,
of S, allowing
allowing
for forthe
the rejection
allowing for therejection
ofrejection
the nullofof thenull
hypothesis
the nullhypothesis
hypothesis
for the values forthe
for thevalues
values
obtained in obtained ininthe
the measurement
obtained themeasurement
measurement
of the drilled ofofthe
the
hole.
drilled
drilled hole.
Additionally, Additionally, a
a tendency toaincrease
hole. Additionally, tendency
tendency to increase
thetoroundness
increase the the roundness
deviations
roundness could deviations
be observed
deviations could
for high
could be observed
values offor
be observed for
the
highvalues
studied
high valuesofofthe
process the studiedprocess
parameters
studied process
(Fr and parameters
S), as seen(Fr
parameters (Frand
in andS),S),4.
Figure asasseen
seenininFigure
Figure4.4.
Generallyspeaking,
Generally
Generally speaking,R-In R-Inincreased
increasedFrFrand althoughthe
andS,S,although
although theminimum
the minimumwas
minimum foundfor
wasfound
found forlow
for lowsweep
low sweep
sweep
speeds
speedsand
speeds and medium
andmedium frequency
mediumfrequency
frequencyvalues. values.
values.R-Out R-Out showed a similar trend,
R-Outshowed a similar trend, but the lowest but the lowest roundness
lowestroundness
roundness
deviationswere
deviations
deviations weremeasured
were measuredfor
measured forthe
for thelowest
the lowestfrequency
lowest frequencyand
frequency andscanning
and scanningspeed.
scanning speed.
speed.
Also,relevant
Also,
Also, relevantdifferences
relevant differencescould
differences couldbebe
could bedetected
detectedbetween
detected betweenthe theentrance
entranceand andexit sectionsofofthe
exitsections theholes,
holes,
presenting
presentingan
presenting an important
an important growth growth
growthininthe in the deviation
deviation
the deviation valuesvalues
for the
values for the
for exit exit
the section section with
with respect
exit section respect to
to the entrance,
with respect to the the
entrance,
as
entrance, asseen
seenin
seen inasFigure 5.inFigure
Figure
This 5.5.This
behavior Thiswas behavior
specially
behavior was
was specially
related to the
specially related totothe
increase
related inthe
the increase
number
increase ininof
thethe
lasernumber ofof
scanning
number
laser
stages
laser scanning stages
and thestages
scanning and
focal length the focal
and thevariation length
focal length between variation
stages.
variation between
between stages. stages.

(a)(a) (b)(b)
Figure
Figure 4. 4.
(a)(a) Contour
Contour chart
chart ofof the
the inlet
inlet roundness;
roundness; (b)(b) Contour
Contour chart
chart ofof the
the outlet
outlet roundness.
roundness.
Figure 4. (a) Contour chart of the inlet roundness; (b) Contour chart of the outlet roundness.

(a)(a) (b)(b)
Figure 5. Roundness
Figure profile, (a) Hole inlet, Test 12. (S = 100 mm/s and Fr = 60 kHz); (b) Hole Outlet,
Figure5.5.Roundness
Roundnessprofile,
profile,(a)
(a)Hole
Holeinlet,
inlet,Test
Test12.
12.(S(S==100
100mm/s and
mm/s FrFr
and ==60 kHz);
60 (b)(b)
kHz); Hole Outlet,
Hole Outlet,
Test
Test 12. (S = 100 mm/s and Fr = 60 kHz).
Test12.
12.(S(S= =100
100mm/s
mm/sand FrFr
and = 60 kHz).
= 60 kHz).

3.2.3. StraightnessEvaluation
3.2.3. Evaluation
3.2.3.Straightness
Straightness Evaluation
Inthe
InIn the caseofofstraightness,
straightness, thenull null hypothesiscould couldbeberejected
rejectedusing
usingthe
thefrequency
frequencyparameter.
parameter.
thecase
case of straightness,the the nullhypothesis
hypothesis could be rejected using the frequency parameter.
Regarding
Regarding the scanning speed, the straightness behavior did not indicate a significant tendency,
Regardingthe thescanning
scanningspeed,speed,the thestraightness
straightnessbehavior
behaviordid didnot
notindicate
indicatea asignificant
significanttendency,
tendency,
showing
showing similar behavior for all the S values of the range studied. In contrast, an increasing trend
showingsimilar
similarbehavior
behaviorfor forallallthe
theS Svalues
valuesofofthe
therange
rangestudied.
studied.InIncontrast,
contrast,ananincreasing
increasingtrendtrend
havebeen
have beenfollowed
followedininthethestraightness
straightnessdeviations
deviationsasasa afunction
functionofoffrequency,
frequency,asascancanbebeseen
seenininFigure
Figure
6a. Under these considerations, a maximum value of 0.057 mm is reported
6a. Under these considerations, a maximum value of 0.057 mm is reported for the Fr = 60 kHz tests. for the Fr = 60 kHz tests.
Materials 2018, 11, 1466 7 of 12

have been followed in the straightness deviations as a function of frequency, as can be seen in
Materials
Figure 6a.2018, 11, x FOR
Under PEER
these REVIEW
considerations, a maximum value of 0.057 mm is reported for the Fr =7 60
of 12
kHz
Materials 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 12
tests. The evaluation of the measured straightness behavior allowed for the confirmation of a direct
The evaluation of the measured straightness behavior allowed for the confirmation of a direct
dependency with the energy of the pulse, improving the hole features for higher frequency conditions.
The evaluation of the measured straightness behavior allowed for the confirmation of a direct
dependency with the energy of the pulse, improving the hole features for higher frequency conditions.
dependency with the energy of the pulse, improving the hole features for higher frequency conditions.
3.2.4. Cylindricity Evaluation
3.2.4. Cylindricity Evaluation
3.2.4. Cylindricity
Cylindricity Evaluationwere affected by the same considerations as the straightness parameter,
deviations
Cylindricity deviations were affected by the same considerations as the straightness parameter,
showing a relevant
Cylindricity increasing
deviations trend
were as a function
affected by the same of frequency, and as
considerations obtaining a maximum
the straightness value of
parameter,
showing a relevant increasing trend as a function of frequency, and obtaining a maximum value of
0.729
0.729mm.
showingmm.aIn this
thisaspect,
relevant
In aa slighter
increasing
aspect, influence
trendinfluence
slighter fromof
as a function
from the
the scanningspeed
frequency,
scanning speed
and is is
obtaining reported,
reported, as as
cancan
a maximum be
bevalue
seenseen
of in
in
Figure
Figure 6b.
0.729 mm. This behavior
In this
6b. This may
aspect,may
behavior confirm
a slighter
confirm that
influence the Fr
that thefrom parameter
the scanning
Fr parameter could
couldspeed be
be used used reject
is reported, the
reject theas null hypothesis.
canhypothesis.
null be seen in
OnOnthe
theother
Figure 6b.
otherhand,
Thishand, the
the cylindricity
behavior may confirm
cylindricity allowed
that the
allowed for the
Frthe
for calculation
parameter ofofabeafirst
could
calculation first
used approximation
reject the null of
approximation of the taper
hypothesis.
the taper
angle,
On the
angle,being
beingdirectly
other hand, related
directlythe asasshown
cylindricity
related shown ininTable
allowed 4. the
for
Table Thus,
4. Figure
calculation
Thus, Figure7of
shows firstthe
7 ashows cylindricity
cylindricityprofiles
approximation
the inintests
ofprofiles
the taper
with opposite
angle,
tests being
with parameters
directly
opposite showing
related
parameters the taper
asshowing
shown in of the
Table
the taper drills.
4.ofThus, Figure 7 shows the cylindricity profiles in
the drills.
tests with opposite parameters showing the taper of the drills.

(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure 6. (a) Contour chart of the straightness; (b) Contour chart of the cylindricity.
Figure 6. (a) Contour chart of the straightness; (b) Contour chart of the cylindricity.
Figure 6. (a) Contour chart of the straightness; (b) Contour chart of the cylindricity.

(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure 7. Cylindricity profile, (a) Hole inlet, Test 1. (S = 20 mm/s and Fr = 20 kHz); (b) Hole outlet,
Figure
Test 12.7.(SCylindricity profile,
= 100 mm/s and Fr =(a)
60 Hole
kHz).inlet, Test 1. (S = 20 mm/s and Fr = 20 kHz); (b) Hole outlet,
Figure 7. Cylindricity profile, (a) Hole inlet, Test 1. (S = 20 mm/s and Fr = 20 kHz); (b) Hole outlet,
Test 12. (S = 100 mm/s and Fr = 60 kHz).
Test 12. (S = 100 mm/s and Fr = 60 kHz).
3.2.5. Surface Finish Evaluation
3.2.5. Surface Finish Evaluation
The average
3.2.5. Surface Finishroughness
Evaluation parameter Ra was used to assess the surface finish. It was measured by
The average
constructing roughness
replicas parameter
of the drilled Ra In
holes. was used
this to assess the surface
evaluation, finish.between
dependency It was measured by
the studied
The average
constructing roughness
replicas of the parameter
drilled Ra
holes. was
In used
this to assess
evaluation, the
the surface
dependencyfinish. It
between
parameters could not be verified, where the F value of S shows a higher value. However, the highest
was measured
the studied by
constructing
parameters
Ra replicas
could
values were notof
found bethe
for thedrilled
verified,
highest holes.
where theIn
scanning this evaluation,
F speeds
value ofand
S shows athe
frequency dependency
higher between
value. However,
conditions [29], the
the
as seen in studied
highest
Figure
parameters
RaValues
8. could
valuesof
were not be verified,
found for2.20
Ra between where
the highest the
µ m andscanning F value
speeds
6.22 µ m are of and frequency conditions [29], as seen in Figure Ra
S shows
reported. a higher value. However, the highest
values were found for the highest scanning speeds
8. Values of Ra between 2.20 µ m and 6.22 µ m are reported. and frequency conditions [29], as seen in Figure 8.
Values of Ra between 2.20 µm and 6.22 µm are reported.
Materials 11, 1466
2018, 2018,
Materials 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 128 of 12

Roughness (µm)
60
Ra
(um)
< 3
Materials 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 – 4 8 of 12
50 4 – 5
5 – 6
> 6

Fr (kHz)
Roughness (µm)
40
60
Ra
(um)
< 3
3 – 4
30 4 – 5
50
5 – 6
Fr (kHz) > 6

20
40
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1 00
S (mm/s)

30 Figure 8. Contour chart of the roughness.

Figure 8. Contour chart of the roughness.

3.3. Damage and Defects Analysis

20
on the Drilled Holes
3.3. Damage and Defects Analysis30on the
40 Drilled
50 Holes
60 70 80 90 1 00
S (mm/s)
Table 5 shows that the p-value may vary as a function of the analyzed response variable (T,
Table 5 shows that the p-value may
HAZ). First, for taper growth, experimental vary as
data
Figure 8. Contour a confirmed
function
chart ofthe
the analyzed
null
of the roughness. response
hypothesis for the variable (T, HAZ).
Fr parameter,
First, showing
for tapera growth, experimental
direct influence data confirmed
in the defect the nullOn
formation process. hypothesis for the
the other hand, theFrHAZ
parameter,
allowedshowing
for
3.3.influence
a direct
the Damage and
rejection of Defects
inthe
thenull Analysis
defect on the
formation
hypothesis forDrilled HolesOnprocess
process.
the different the other hand, thestudied.
parameters HAZ allowed for the rejection
of the nullTable
hypothesis
5 showsfor
thatthe
thedifferent process
p-value may varyparameters
as a functionstudied.
of the analyzed response variable (T,
3.3.1. Taper Angle
HAZ). First, for taper growth, experimental data confirmed the null hypothesis for the Fr parameter,
3.3.1.showing
Taper Angle
Results obtained
a direct frominthe
influence theANOVA analysis revealed
defect formation the the
process. On relevance of Fr the
other hand, in the
HAZtaper formation,
allowed for
theseen
as rejection
Results in of the9a.
Figure
obtained null
In hypothesis
from this
theway,
ANOVA for the
taper different
formation
analysis processthe
became
revealed parameters
critical studied.
for higher
relevance values
of Fr in theof taper
Fr, resulting in as
formation,
a maximum value of 0.152 in test number 9. This behavior may have caused an increase in the conicity
seen in Figure 9a.
3.3.1.
In this way, taper formation became critical for higher values of Fr, resulting in a
of theTaper Angle
drill hole as a function of the pulse energy of the laser beam. However, a direct dependency
maximum value of 0.152 in test number 9. This behavior may have caused an increase in the conicity
between
Results obtaineddefect
S and taper wasANOVA
from the not detected, where
analysis similar
revealed thevalues are reported
relevance fortaper
of Fr in the all offormation,
the studied
of thespeed
drill range.
hole asUnder
a function
these of the pulse
conditions, Fr energy
may be of the laserthe
considered beam.
most However,
influential aparameter
direct dependency
ininthe
as seen in Figure 9a. In this way, taper formation became critical for higher values of Fr, resulting
between S
processandof taper
taper defect was
development not detected,
[30–32], where
according to similar
Figure 10.values are reported for
a maximum value of 0.152 in test number 9. This behavior may have caused an increase in the conicity
all of the studied
speedofrange.
the drill hole as a function of the pulse energy of the laser beam. However, a direct dependency in the
Under these conditions, Fr may be considered the most influential parameter
3.3.2.
process of Heat
betweentaper Affected
S and taper Zone
development [30–32],
defect was according
not detected, to Figure
where 10. are reported for all of the studied
similar values
speedBased
range. onUnder these conditions,
the evaluation of the HAZ, Fr may be considered
defects caused by theheatmost influential
damages allowed parameter in the
for the rejection
3.3.2.process
Heat Affected Zone
of taper development [30–32], according to Figure 10.
of the null hypothesis. However, its relevant to remark that the F-value showed a higher influence of
S than Fr.
Based on IntheFigure 10b, theoftaper
evaluation decreased
the HAZ, when
defects the scanning
caused by heat speed increased.
damages allowedThis was duerejection
for the to the of
3.3.2. Heat Affected Zone
fact that, with high S, the laser beam affected the composite surface
the null hypothesis. However, its relevant to remark that the F-value showed a higher influencefor a shorter time, leading to a of S
decrease inonthethe
HAZ
than Fr. InBased
Figure 10b, theastaper
expected
evaluation of the[33].
decreasedHAZ,Additionally, in Figure
defects caused
when by heat
the scanning 11,damages
speedthe defect causedfor
allowed
increased. This by the
heatrejection
was is shown
due to the fact
in detail,
of the nulldisappearing when higher
hypothesis. However, speedstowere
its relevant remarkused.
thatInthe
addition, it can bea higher
F-value showed seen how the defect
influence of
that, with high S, the laser beam affected the composite surface for a shorter time, leading to a decrease
S than Fr. only
appeared In Figure
at the10b, the taper
border of thedecreased when
drill, which thethe
favors scanning
extensionspeed increased.
of the zone due Thisto was due to the
the conductivity
in theofHAZ
fact
the
aswith
that, expected
high S,in
reinforcement
[33].
the Additionally,
thelaser beam affected
longitudinal
in Figure 11, the defect caused by heat is shown in detail,
the composite
direction of the fiber.surface for a shorter time, leading to a
disappearing
decrease inwhenthe HAZhigher speeds[33].
as expected were used. In addition,
Additionally, it can
in Figure 11, be seen
the defect howbythe
caused defect
heat is shownappeared
only at
in the border
detail, of the drill,
disappearing whenwhich
higherfavors
speeds the
were extension of the zone
used. In addition, due
it can be to thehow
seen conductivity
the defect of the
appeared only
reinforcement at the
in the border of thedirection
longitudinal drill, which
of favors the extension of the zone due to the conductivity
the fiber.
of the reinforcement in the longitudinal direction of the fiber.

(a) (b)

Figure 9. (a) Contour chart of the taper angle; (b) Contour chart of the heat affected zone.

(a) (b)

Figure 9. (a) Contour chart of the taper angle; (b) Contour chart of the heat affected zone.
Figure 9. (a) Contour chart of the taper angle; (b) Contour chart of the heat affected zone.
Materials 2018, 11, 1466 9 of 12
Materials 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 12

Materials 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 12

Materials 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 12

(a) (b)
(a)
Figure 10. Effect of the frequency, (a) Test 7. (S = 75 mm/s and Fr = 20(b)
kHz); (b) Test 9. (S = 75 mm/s
Figure 10. Effect of the frequency, (a) Test 7. (S = 75 mm/s and Fr = 20 kHz); (b) Test 9. (S = 75 mm/s
and Fr =10.
Figure 60Effect
kHz).of the frequency,
(a) (a) Test 7. (S = 75 mm/s and Fr = 20(b)
kHz); (b) Test 9. (S = 75 mm/s
and Fr = 60 kHz).
and Fr = 60 kHz).
Figure 10. Effect of the frequency, (a) Test 7. (S = 75 mm/s and Fr = 20 kHz); (b) Test 9. (S = 75 mm/s
and Fr = 60 kHz).

(a) (b)

Figure 11. Effect of scanning(a) speed, (a) Absence of reinforcement and (b)matrix at the entrance of the
drill, Test
Figure 11.1.Effect
(S = 20
of mm/s and
scanning Fr = 20(a)
speed,
(a) kHz); (b) Hole
Absence without defects,
of reinforcement Test
and
(b) 10. (Sat=the
matrix 100entrance
mm/s andof Fr
the=
Figure2011. Effect of scanning speed, (a) Absence of reinforcement and matrix at the entrance of the drill,
kHz).
drill, Test 1. (S = 20 mm/s and Fr = 20 kHz); (b) Hole without defects, Test 10. (S = 100 mm/s and Fr =
Test 1.Figure
20(SkHz).
= 2011.mm/s
Effectand
of scanning speed,(b)
Fr = 20 kHz); (a)Hole
Absence of reinforcement
without defects, Test and matrix
10. (S = 100atmm/s
the entrance
and Fr of thekHz).
= 20
drill, Analysis
3.4. SEM Test 1. (S = 20 mm/s and Fr = 20 kHz); (b) Hole without defects, Test 10. (S = 100 mm/s and Fr =
20 kHz).
3.4. SEM Analysis
3.4. SEM Analysis
The heat affected zone is considered the most important defect in the machining of CFRP. SEM
analysis
3.4.
The heatallows
The
SEM heat
Analysis for more
affected
affected zone
zone detailed observation
isis considered
considered the
the distinguishing
most important
most some in
defect
important typical
defect indefects
the machining produced
of CFRP.inSEM
the machining oftheCFRP.
material allows
analysis [34–36].for more detailed observation distinguishing some typical defects produced in the
SEM analysis The allows
heat for more
affected zone is detailed observation
considered thewhat
mosthas distinguishing
important some
defect in typical defects produced
SEM in
In Figure
material [34–36].12, it is possible to appreciate been described inthe
themachining of CFRP.
experimental procedure
the material
analysis
related
[34–36].
allows
to the12,for more of
number detailed
stages observation
necessarywhat distinguishing
to eliminate some typical defects
material-producing produced
defects in the
similar to
In Figure it is possible to appreciate has been described in the experimental procedure
material
In Figure
delamination[34–36].
12, it is possible to appreciate what has been described in the experimental procedure
related to the[33]. In addition,
number of stages charring at the to
necessary drill wall has material-producing
eliminate been observed, basically defectscaused by
similar the
to
hightoIn
related Figure
the
temperatures
delamination
12, itreached
number
[33]. In
is of
possible
stages
during
addition,
to appreciate
necessary
cutting,
charring aswhat
at the
to
seen has Figure
been described
eliminate
drillinwall has 13a.
beenOn
in the
material-producing
the
observed,otherexperimental
hand, it
basically hasprocedure
defects
caused
similar
alsobybeen
the
to
related
delamination to the
to[33]. number
Inreached of
addition, stages necessary
charring
withatmatrixto eliminate material-producing defects similar to
possible
high identify
temperatures areas ofduring
material
cutting, asthe
seendrill wall has
recession.
in Figure 13a. been
This theobserved,
occurs
On when hand,
other basically
the matrix alsocaused
it hasand been by
fibers
delamination
are removed [33].
at In addition,
different charring at thedifferent
drill wall has been observed, basically causedas byseen
the
the high temperatures
possible to identify areasrates
reached owing
during
of material to their
cutting,
with matrix seenthermo-physical
as recession.
in Figure 13a. properties
This occurs On
when the [27,37,38],
other
the matrix hand,
and it has
fibers also
high
in temperatures
Figure 13b. reached during cutting, as seen in Figure 13a. On the other hand, it has also been
been are
possible
removed atIndifferent
addition,
to identify areasmolten
rates matrix
ofowing
material deposited
with
to their on thermo-physical
matrix
different the wall of theThis
recession. drill was also
occurs
properties detected.
when the as
[27,37,38], matrix
seen and
possible to identify areas of material with matrix recession. This occurs when the matrix and fibers
inare
fibersareFigure 13b. Inataddition,
removed different molten
rates matrix
owingdeposited on the wall
to their different of the drill was also
thermo-physical detected.
properties [27,37,38], as
removed at different rates owing to their different thermo-physical properties [27,37,38], as seen
seen in
in Figure 13b. In addition, molten matrix deposited on the wall of the drill was also detected.detected.
Figure 13b. In addition, molten matrix deposited on the wall of the drill was also

Figure 12. Clearance distance per pass in test 1 (S = 20 mm/s and Fr = 20 kHz).
Figure 12. Clearance distance per pass in test 1 (S = 20 mm/s and Fr = 20 kHz).

Figure 12. Clearance distance per pass in test 1 (S = 20 mm/s and Fr = 20 kHz).
Figure 12. Clearance distance per pass in test 1 (S = 20 mm/s and Fr = 20 kHz).
Materials 2018, 11, 1466 10 of 12
Materials 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 12

(a) (b)

Figure 13. (a) Burned fiber debris deposited on the drill wall (charring); (b) Absence of resin due to
Figure 13. (a) Burned fiber debris deposited on the drill wall (charring); (b) Absence of resin due to the
the evaporation process. Detail of molten matrix adhered to the drill wall.
evaporation process. Detail of molten matrix adhered to the drill wall.

5. Conclusions
4. Conclusions
An experimental study was conducted to determine the influence of process parameters on hole
An experimental study was conducted to determine the influence of process parameters on hole
geometry and kerf wall characteristics in laser beam drilling machining of CFRP composites. Based
geometry and kerf wall characteristics in laser beam drilling machining of CFRP composites. Based on
on this, the following conclusions can be made:
this, the following conclusions can be made:
 The roundness measurements obtained at the inlet and outlet of the drill reveal that smaller
• dimensional
The roundness measurements
deviations were obtained
obtainedatwhen the inlet and outlet
selecting low ofscanning
the drill speeds
reveal thatandsmaller
pulse
dimensional deviations were obtained when selecting low scanning speeds
frequencies. In addition, it was found that the deviation of the roundness at the exit is always and pulse frequencies.
In addition,
greater it was found
(increasing thattests
in some the deviation
up to 250%), of the roundness
mainly due to at the
the influence
exit is always greater
of the focal(increasing
distance.
in some tests up to 250%), mainly due to the influence of the focal
 Pulsed frequency and scanning speed also affected straightness and cylindricity in a great depth,distance.
• especially
Pulsed frequency and scanning
for the latter. speed alsodeviation
The straightness affected straightness
decreased with andfrequency
cylindricity in athe
and great depth,
deviation
especially
of for the
cylindricity latter. The
presented straightness
higher deviation
values relating decreased
to the with frequency
taper defect, especiallyand when thethe
deviation
pulsed
of cylindricity presented
frequency was increased. higher values relating to the taper defect, especially when the pulsed
 The frequency was increased.
roughness of the drilled holes did not seem to have a significant relationship with the
• parameters
The roughness of the drilled
evaluated. However, holes did not
reduced seem tospeeds
scanning have ahad significant relationship
better surface qualitywith the
values.
parameters evaluated. However, reduced scanning speeds had
Specifically, for S = 20 mm/s, measurements of about 2 μm were obtained. Roughness values better surface quality values.
Specifically,
were considered for Slow= 20compared
mm/s, measurements
to those obtained of about
through2 µm were
other obtained.processes.
machining Roughness values
were considered low compared to those obtained through other machining
 The taper angle was closely related to the frequency and affected by the speed of scanning, where processes.
• an Theincrease
taper angle in thewasenergy
closelyofrelated to thedecreased
the pulse frequencythe andappearance
affected by of thethe
speed of scanning,
defect. The minimumwhere
value of the angle was obtained in trial 1 with 0.069 rad. However, this drill presentedvalue
an increase in the energy of the pulse decreased the appearance of the defect. The minimum high
of the angle
damage caused wasby obtained in trial 1 with 0.069 rad. However, this drill presented high damage
temperature.
 Thiscaused by temperature.
study showed the direct influence of the parameters proposed in the experiment. However,
• the Thisscanning
study showed speed the direct influence
determined of the parameters
the appearance of defectsproposed in theof
in the surface experiment.
the material. However,
In this
the scanning
study, no damage speed wasdetermined
recorded when the selecting
appearance highofspeeds
defects andinlow
thepulse
surface of the material.
frequencies (S = 100
In thisand
mm/s study,
Fr =no 20damage
kHz). was recorded when selecting high speeds and low pulse frequencies
 (S = 100 to
Similar mm/s and Fr = 20of
the evaluation kHz).
the surface finish, the influence of the cutting parameters in the
• evaluation
Similar to the of the diameterofcould
evaluation not be clearly
the surface finish, stated with this
the influence of test. However,
the cutting the selection
parameters of
in the
reduced
evaluation scanning speeds seemed
of the diameter could tonotoffer a higher
be clearly dimensional
stated with thisaccuracy of the hole.
test. However, the selection of
 SEM reducedanalysis
scanning detected
speedscharacteristic
seemed to offer defects associated
a higher with theaccuracy
dimensional laser machining
of the hole.of composites
• on the hole’s surface. Thus, charring localization, absence of matrix,
SEM analysis detected characteristic defects associated with the laser machining of composites and deposition of matrix
remains on itsurface.
on the hole’s was recorded. These defects
Thus, charring occurred
localization, due to
absence of the highand
matrix, temperatures
deposition produced
of matrix
during
remainsthe on process.
it was recorded. These defects occurred due to the high temperatures produced during
theContributions:
Author process. Conceptualization, P.F.M.A. and M.M.B.; Methodology, P.F.M.A. and J.M.V.M.;
Software, P.F.M.A. and J.M.V.M.; Validation, A.J.G.; Formal Analysis, P.F.M.A. and J.M.V.M.; Investigation,
P.F.M.A.; Resources, M.M.B.; Data Curation, P.F.M.A. and J.M.V.M.; Writing-Original Draft Preparation,
Materials 2018, 11, 1466 11 of 12

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, P.F.M.A. and M.M.B.; Methodology, P.F.M.A. and J.M.V.M.; Software,
P.F.M.A. and J.M.V.M.; Validation, A.J.G.; Formal Analysis, P.F.M.A. and J.M.V.M.; Investigation, P.F.M.A.;
Resources, M.M.B.; Data Curation, P.F.M.A. and J.M.V.M.; Writing-Original Draft Preparation, P.F.M.A.;
Writing-Review & Editing, P.F.M.A. and A.J.G.; Visualization, P.F.M.A. and J.M.V.M.; Supervision, A.J.G.; Project
Administration, M.M.B.; Funding Acquisition, M.M.B.
Funding: This work has received financial support from the Spanish Government (Project DPI2015-71448-RProject
DPI2011-29019) and from the Andalusian Government (PAIDI).
Acknowledgments: P.F.M.A. and J.M.V.M. thank the laboratory of corrosion and protection (LABCYP) at the
University of Cadiz for allowing access to its facilities, where the tests of this work have been carried out.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Soo-Jin, P. Carbon Fibers, 1st ed.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2014.
2. Antar, M.; Chantzis, D.; Marimuthu, S.; Hayward, P. High speed EDM and laser drilling of aerospace alloys.
Procedia CIRP 2016, 42, 526–531. [CrossRef]
3. Liu, D.F.; Tang, Y.J.; Cong, W.L. A review of mechanical drilling for composite laminates. Compos. Struct.
2012, 94, 1265–1279. [CrossRef]
4. Madhavan, V.; Lipczynski, G.; Lane, B.; Whitenton, E. Fiber orientation angle effects in machining of
unidirectional CFRP laminated composites. J. Manuf. Process. 2015, 20, 431–442. [CrossRef]
5. Li, M.J.; Soo, S.L.; Aspinwall, D.K.; Pearson, D.; Leahy, W. Influence of lay-up configuration and feed rate
on surface integrity when drilling carbon fibre reinforced plastic (CFRP). Procedia CIRP 2014, 13, 399–404.
[CrossRef]
6. Feito, N.; Diáz-Álvarez, J.; Cantero, J.L.; Miguélez, M.H. Influence of special tool geometry in drilling woven
CFRPs materials. Procedia Eng. 2015, 132, 632–638. [CrossRef]
7. Tsao, C.C. Investigation into the effects of drilling parameters on delamination by various step-core drills.
J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2008, 206, 405–411. [CrossRef]
8. Teti, R. Machining of composite materials. CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. 2002, 51, 611–634. [CrossRef]
9. Abrate, S.; Walton, D.A. Machining of composite materials. Part I: Traditional methods. Compos. Manuf.
1992, 3, 75–83. [CrossRef]
10. König, W.; Wulf, C.; Grass, P.; Willerscheid, H. Machining of fibre reinforced plastics. Ann. CIRP 1985, 34,
537–548. [CrossRef]
11. Lachaud, F.; Piquet, R.; Collombet, F.; Surcin, L. Drilling of composite structures. J. Compos. Struct. 2001, 52,
511–526. [CrossRef]
12. Abrate, S.; Walton, D.A. Machining of composite materials. Part II: Non-traditional methods. Compos. Manuf.
1992, 3, 85–94. [CrossRef]
13. Krishnaraj, V.; Zitoune, R.; Davim, J.P. Drilling of Polymer-Matrix Composites, 1st ed.; Springer: Heidelberg,
Germany, 2013.
14. Abrão, A.M.; Campos-Rubio, J.C.; Faria, P.E.; Davim, J.P. The effect of cutting tool geometry on thrust force
and delamination when drilling glass fibre reinforced plastic composite. Mater. Des. 2008, 29, 508–513.
[CrossRef]
15. Wang, J. A machinability study of polymer matrix composites using abrasive waterjet cutting technology.
J. Mater. Process. Technol. 1999, 94, 30–35. [CrossRef]
16. Rashed, C.A.; Romoli, L.; Tantussi, F.; Fuso, F.; Burgener, M.; Cusanelli, G. Water jet guided laser as
an alternative to EDM for micro-drilling of fuel injector nozzles: A comparison of machined surfaces.
J. Manuf. Process. 2013, 15, 524–532. [CrossRef]
17. Phadnis, V.A.; Roy, A.; Silberschmidt, V.V. A finite element model of ultrasonically assisted drilling in
carbon/epoxy composites. Procedia CIRP 2013, 8, 141–146. [CrossRef]
18. Hejjaji, A.; Singh, D.; Kubber, S.; Kalyanasundaram, D.; Gururaja, S. Machining damage in FRPs: Laser
versus conventional drilling. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2016, 82, 42–52. [CrossRef]
19. Barile, C.; Casavola, C.; Pappalettere, C. The influence of stitching and unconventional fibres orientation on
the tensile properties of CFRP laminates. Compos. Part B 2017, 110, 248–254. [CrossRef]
20. Dubey, A.K.; Yadava, V. Laser beam machining—A review. Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 2008, 48, 609–628.
[CrossRef]
Materials 2018, 11, 1466 12 of 12

21. Mishra, S.; Yadava, V. Laser beam micromachining (LBMM)–A review. Opt. Lasers Eng. 2015, 73, 89–122.
[CrossRef]
22. Wang, H.J.; Lin, H.; Wang, C.Y.; Zheng, L.J.; Hu, X.Y. Laser drilling of structural ceramics—A review. J. Eur.
Ceram. Soc. 2017, 37, 1157–1173. [CrossRef]
23. Arrizubieta, I.; Lamikiz, A.; Martínez, S.; Ukar, E.; Tabernero, I.; Girot, F. Internal characterization and hole
formation mechanism in the laser percussion drilling process. Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 2013, 75, 55–62.
[CrossRef]
24. Cena, A.A.; Mathew, P. Analysis and prediction of laser cutting parameters of fibre reinforced plastics (FRP)
composite materials. Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 2002, 42, 105–113. [CrossRef]
25. Cenna, A.A.; Mathew, P. Evaluation of cut quality of fibre-reinforced plastics—A review. Int. J. Mach.
Tools Manuf. 1997, 37, 723–736. [CrossRef]
26. Goeke, A.; Emmelmann, C. Influence of laser cutting parameters on CFRP part quality. Phys. Procedia. 2010,
5, 253–258. [CrossRef]
27. Saini, S.K.; Dubey, A.K.; Upadhyay, B.N.; Choubey, A. Study of hole characteristics in laser trepan drilling of
ZTA. Opt. Laser Technol. 2018, 103, 330–339. [CrossRef]
28. Tagliaferri, F.; Leopardi, G.; Semmler, U.; Kuhl, M.; Palumbo, B. Study of the influences of laser parameters
on laser assisted machining processes. Procedia CIRP 2013, 8, 170–175. [CrossRef]
29. Choudhury, I.A.; Chuan, P.C. Experimental evaluation of laser cut quality of glass fibre reinforced plastic
composite. Opt. Lasers Eng. 2013, 51, 1125–1132. [CrossRef]
30. Wonsuk, C.; Hoon-Young, K.; Jin-Woo, J.; Won-Seok, C.; Sun-Hak, C. Vibration-assisted femtosecond Laser
drilling with controllable taper angles for AMOLED fine metal mask fabrication. Materials 2017, 10, 212.
31. Caprino, G.; Tagliaferri, V. Maximum cutting speed in laser cutting of fiber reinforced plastics. Int. J. Mach.
Tools Manuf. 1988, 28, 389–398. [CrossRef]
32. Klotzbach, A.; Hauser, M.; Beyer, E. Laser cutting of carbon fiber reinforced polymers using highly brilliant
laser beam sources. Phys. Procedia 2011, 12, 572–577. [CrossRef]
33. Leone, C.; Genna, S.; Tagliaferri, V. Fibre laser cutting of CFRP thin sheets by multi-passes scan technique.
Opt. Lasers Eng. 2014, 53, 43–50. [CrossRef]
34. Matthams, T.J.; Clyne, T.W. Mechanical properties of long-fibre thermoplastic composites with laser drilled
microperforations: Effect of perforations in consolidated material. Compos. Sci. Technol. 1999, 59, 1169–1180.
[CrossRef]
35. Sola, D.; Grima, L. Laser machining and in vitro assessment of wollastonite-tricalcium phosphate eutectic
glasses and glass-ceramics. Materials 2018, 11, 125. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
36. Pan, C.T.; Hocheng, H. The anisotropic heat-affected zone in the laser grooving of fiber-reinforced composite
material. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 1996, 62, 54–60. [CrossRef]
37. Di Ilio, A.; Tagliaferri, V. Thermal damage in laser cutting of (0/90)2 s aramid/epoxy laminates. Composites
1989, 20, 115–119. [CrossRef]
38. Voisey, K.T.; Fouquet, S.; Roy, D.; Clyne, T.W. Fibre swelling during laser drilling of carbon fibre composites.
Opt. Lasers Eng. 2006, 44, 1185–1189. [CrossRef]

© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).