Group 1 Nick Chase

Section 13 Alek Erickson

Thomas Paul

Orthogonal Cutting Lab Report-1/13/20

Learning Objectives:
1. Utilize the lab procedure to carry out the orthogonal cutting and data collection
process in teams.
2. Analyze the effects of tool geometry, materials, and cutting conditions in
orthogonal cutting process.
3. Create team lab report based on data analysis.

Materials and Equipment:

● 3-axis vertical mill
● Samples of 6061-T6 aluminum and 360 brass for cutting
● Dynamometer and vice
● Camera and analysis software
● Tachometer
● Micrometer

Questions for Process Analysis:

1. What effect did the material properties have on the chip thickness, cutting forces,
and thrust forces?

2. What effect did the rake angle have on the chip thickness, cutting and thrust
force?

3. Shear angle can also be calculated (or predicted) from the following formula:
discuss the shear angle values measured and those predicted by the formula
given.

Process Analysis:

1. With the 6061-T6 aluminum being softer than the 360 brass, there was greater
deformation in the aluminum chip causing the thickness to be larger when cut using the
same parameters (KMAC). Since the brass is more brittle, the cut sheared apart rather
than deforming and having more plastic deformation like what was experienced in the
aluminum. This extra strain resulted in greater cutting and thrust forces in the aluminum
which can be seen in Figure 2.

1
Group 1 Nick Chase
Section 13 Alek Erickson
Thomas Paul

Orthogonal Cutting Lab Report-1/13/20

2. It is clear from Tables 1 and 2 that increasing the rake angle affects the cutting
force, thrust force, and chip thickness. As the rake angle increases, the thrust
force and shear force see significant proportional decreases. This implication is
backed by Mitsubishi Materials who also claims that by increasing rake angle, the
vertical force or thrust force decreases. They also state that by increasing the
rake angle, the cutting strength(cutting force) decreases as well. Also, the chip
thickness appears to see a slight decrease as the rake rake angle increases.

3. In order for one to know the shear angle, it can be found or predicted in two
ways. The first is to measure it. In order to measure the shear angle during the
experiment, one must have a camera aimed at the side of the sample which
would be linked to a computer. As the tool cuts more and more off of the sample,
the shear angle becomes more visible. From there, one is able to take a
snapshot of the shear angle and measure it with a program. However, this allows
for multiple potential errors to occur. When measuring the angle, one must
eyeball where he or she believes is the angle. This could result in a major
amount of human error. Another potential for error comes from the camera. If the
camera isn’t perfectly centered, then the snapshot could skew the angle a bit
making it difficult to draw its lines. The other way to find the shear angle is to
calculate (predict) it. To calculate the shear angle, one would use equations 1
and 2. For example, using Table 2 and the second data set, shear angle can be
calculated as follows:

t 0.003
γ c= 0 = =0.375
t c 0.008
γ cos (α ) 0.375cos (10)
Φ=tan−1 ( c )=tan −1 ( )=21.6 °
1−γ c sin(α ) 1−0.375 sin(10)
Figure 1
Comparing the data measured during the experiment to the predicted angles,
one can see that there is little similarity. The reason for this is because of the
errors discussed earlier. However, one similarity that can be seen is as the rake
angle increased, so did the shear angle. This is due to the material being able to
lay more back on the tool as it cuts through the sample.

2
Group 1 Nick Chase
Section 13 Alek Erickson
Thomas Paul

Orthogonal Cutting Lab Report-1/13/20

Equations:
t0
1. γ c =
tc
−1 γ c cos (α )
2. Φ=tan ( )
1−γ c sin( α )

Table 1: Orthogonal Cutting for Aluminum Sample

Machine/Tool Process Measurements Calculation
Settings s

Depth of Cutting Rake Cutting Thrust Shear Final Chip Shear

cut t0, (in) Speed V Angle Force Force (Ft) Angle Thickness Angle,
(in/min) (⍺) (Fc) Measured (Tc) Predicted
from (Θ)
image (Θ)

.003 10 10 76 lbf 38 lbf 14° 14 min 12.4°

.003 10 10 77 lbf 38 lbf 13° 15 min 11.5°

.003 10 20 53 lbf 20 lbf 18° 12 min 14.4°

.003 10 20 55 lbf 21 lbf 16° 14 min 12.3°

Table 2: Orthogonal Cutting for Brass Sample

3
Group 1 Nick Chase
Section 13 Alek Erickson
Thomas Paul

Orthogonal Cutting Lab Report-1/13/20

Machine/Tool Process Measurements Calculation
Settings s

Depth of Cutting Rake Cutting Thrust Shear Final Chip Shear

cut t0, (in) Speed V Angle Force Force (Ft) Angle Thickness Angle,
(in/min) (⍺) (Fc) Measure (Tc) Predicted
d from (Θ)
image
(Θ)

.003 10 10 60 lbf 10 lbf 8° 10 min 17.3°

.003 10 10 44 lbf 10 lbf 11° 8 min 21.6°

.003 10 20 42 lbf 11 lbf 15° 7 min 25.3°

.003 10 20 47 lbf 2 lbf 13° 7 min 25.3°

Measurements: 0.003 in cut depth, 10 in/min cut speed, 10° rake angle
Figure 2:

4
Group 1 Nick Chase
Section 13 Alek Erickson
Thomas Paul

Orthogonal Cutting Lab Report-1/13/20

References
“FUNCTION OF TOOL FEATURES FOR TURNING.” MITSUBISHI MATERIALS
CORPORATION Function of Tool Features for Face Turning,
www.mitsubishicarbide.net/contents/mmus/enus/html/product/technical_information/info
rmation/t_sukui.html.

K-Mac Distribution, 360 Brass Technical Data, http://kmac-

distribution.com/technical/360-brass.htm.

Shelledy, James. “Lab 1 Lab Manual.” 2019.