2016 J MSE Chip Fracture Behavior in The High Speed Machining of Titanium Alloys

Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering.
Received July 23, 2015;

Accepted manuscript posted January 27, 2016. doi:10.1115/1.4032583
Copyright (c) 2016 by ASME
Chip Fracture Behavior in the High Speed Machining of Titanium Alloys

1, * 2 3
Xueping ZHANG , Rajiv SHIVPURI , Anil K. SRIVASTAVA
1
School of Mechanical Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240 China
2
Department of Integrated Systems Engineering, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
d
3
Department of Manufacturing Engineering, University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, Edinburg, TX 78539, USA
ite
*
Corresponding author, Tel: +86 213420 6799, Fax: +86 213420 6799, Email: zhangxp@sjtu.edu.cn
ed
Abstract:
py
Machining of titanium alloy is a severe fracture procedure associated with localized adiabatic shearing process. Chip
Co
segmentation of titanium alloy is usually characterized with Adiabatic Shear Band (ASB) and localized micro-fracture evolution
ot
process. ASB has been recognized as the precursor of fracture locus due to its sealed high strain intensity. Besides strain intensity,
tN
stress triaxiality (pressure-stress states) has also been identified as a significant factor to control fracture process through altering
rip
critical loading capacity and critical failure strain. The effect of stress triaxiality on failure strain was traditionally assessed by
sc
dynamic Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar (SHPB), quasi-static tests of tension, compression, torsion and shear for finite element (FE)
nu
analysis. However, the stress triaxiality magnitudes introduced by these experiments were much lower than those generated from
Ma
the high speed machining operation due to the fact that ASBs in chip segmentation are usually involved in much higher strain,
ed
high strain rate, high stress, and high temperature associated with phase transformation. However, this aspect of fracture evolution
pt
related with stress triaxiality and phase transformation is not well understood in literature. This paper attempts to demonstrate the
ce
roles of stress triaxiality and phase transformation in chip segmentation especially in the high speed machining of titanium alloy in
Ac
finite element framework. Johnson-Cook failure model is calibrated by addressing the characteristics of stress triaxiality and phase
transformation associated with high speed machining. This research confirms that the selection of failure criterion parameters
incorporated the effects of stress triaxiality and the alpha-beta phase transformation is indispensible to successfully predict
fracture behavior during chip segmentation process in the high speed machining of titanium alloys.
1 Xueping Zhang MANU-15-1368
Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering. Received July 23, 2015;
Keywords: Chip fracture behavior, high speed machining of titanium alloy, stress triaxiality, alpha-beta phase transformation
1. Introduction
Astakhov [1] points out that there is a major difference between machining and other metal forming processes, in that there
must be physical separation of the layer to be removed from the work material, and that the process of separation forms new
d
surfaces and chips. Cyclic serrated chips (also referred as chip segmentation or saw-tooth chip) are commonly observed in
ite
machining of titanium alloys. Komanduri and Von Turkovich [2] observed that the titanium alloy chip is serrated and the strain in
ed
it is not uniformly distributed but is confined mainly to narrow bands between the segments. Two typical mechanisms have been
py
recognized to explain serrated chip formation when machining of titanium alloys. Interestingly, these two mechanisms have
Co
achieved tremendous supports respectively in literature.
ot
Recht [3] proposed the “Catastrophic Adiabatic Shear” (CAS) mechanism to account for chip segmentation. Komandruri and
tN
Brown [4] addressed the CAS mechanism associated with chip segmentation in the machining of titanium alloys and concluded
ip
that it is primarily due to plastic instability in the primary shear zone leading to catastrophic shear failure along a shear surface.
r
sc
Chen et al. [5] demonstrated the evidences of thermoplastic instability in chip segmentation. Xu et al. [6] presented the correlation
nu
of the shear localization in chip segmentation with microstructural evolution. Whereas Walker and Shaw [7] proposed that the
Ma
material instability may involve void formation around second phase particles, their propagation into microcracks in the primary
ed
shear zone and the coalescence of these cracks resulting in partial fracture.
The second mechanism concerning chip segmentation is “Periodic Crack Initiation and Propagation” (PCIP). Shaw et al. [8]
pt
ce
suggested that chip serration of titanium alloys is due to the onset of instability in the cutting process which results from
Ac
competition between thermal softening and strain-hardening mechanisms in the primary shear zone. Later, Shaw [9] denied this
suggestion and concluded that the root cause of serrated chip formation is periodic fracture at the free surface of the workpiece but
not adiabatic shear originally suggested as a possibility. He also claimed that once a very complex combination of thermal and
fracture analysis on chip segmentation is involved, analytical prediction will be considerably difficult. Hopefully, FEM is able to

simulate chip formation by considering the total work in machining associated with chip plastic flow, friction and the formation of
new surfaces. Atkins [10] points out those FEM simulations of machining consider plasticity and friction associated with chip
segmentation, unlike traditional algebraic models, a separation criterion has to be employed at the tool tip in order to permit tool
movement. Therefore, fracture criterion is an important factor to guarantee a successful finite element analysis of machining.
d
Nakayama [11] presented that saw-tooth chip formation is initiated by periodic crack formation rather than the periodic formation
ite
of adiabatic concentrated shear bands. Obikawa and Usui [12] addressed this fracture mechanism using finite element method by
ed
introducing a ductile fracture criterion on the basis of strain, strain rate, hydrostatic pressure and temperature to simulate the crack
py
growth during chip segmentation. Shivpuri et al. [13] confirmed the PCIP mechanism by showing that initiation ductile fracture or
Co
failure was mainly determined by the ductility of the material in the high temperature and high strain rate condition associated
with chip segmentation in the machining of titanium alloys.

ot
tN
However, much more evidences in literature, as shown in Table 1, approve that these two mechanisms are not completely
ip
conflicted with or repel each other, indicated by Anand et al. [14]. The two mechanisms mutually govern serrated chip formation
r
sc
in a manner of competition and interaction during machining of titanium alloys,. Barry et al. [15] observed that the underside of
nu
saw-tooth segments of titanium alloys formed at relatively high cutting speeds exhibits ductile fracture behavior, and the chips
Ma
formed at lower cutting speeds are subjected to PCIP mechanism. Meyers et al. [16] investigated the role of shear localization in
ed
the deformation, fracture and microstructural evolution during machining of titanium alloys. Sutter and List [17] found that chip
pt
formation process is regulated by both mechanisms of CAS and PCIP in the machining of titanium alloys at very high speeds. Bai
ce
et al. [18] reported that the fracture process in machining is intimately associated with adiabatic shear localization and phase
Ac
transformation. Molinari et al. [19] presented that ASBs are the manifestation of a thermomechanical instability resulting in the
concentration of large shear deformations in narrow layers. This strain localization is accompanied by a large local growth of the
temperature which is a necessary condition to result in adiabatic shearing. In the machining of titanium alloys, ASB is privileged
by the low value of the heat conductivity. At high machining velocities, ASBs have the characteristic of significantly high

temperature, in which phase transformation has obviously occurred. Thus high speed machining of titanium alloy is a severe
fracture procedure associated with localized adiabatic shearing and phase transformation in chip segmentation. Lee and Lin
[20,21] recognized adiabatic shear band as the precursor of fracture locus due to its sealed high strain intensity.
Besides strain intensity, stress triaxiality (pressure-stress states) has been identified as a significant factor to control fracture
d
process through altering critical loading capacity and critical failure strain. Rice and Tracey [22] showed that fracture of ductile
ite
metals strongly depends on hydrostatic stress. Handcock and Mackenzie [23] found that the ductility depends markedly on the
ed
triaxiality of stress state. Atkins [10] also confirmed that the criterion for fracture initiation is closely dependent on the hydrostatic
py
stress state. This conclusion has been independently arrived at by Hua and Shivpuri [24]. They concluded that at high machining
Co
speed, crack initiates on the free surface side of chip since the less compressive hydrostatic stress that exists on the free surface
ot
side promotes crack propagation in this direction. Bao and Wierzbicki [25] presented that failure process is governed by shear
tN
mode for negative stress triaxiality, void growth is the dominant failure mode at high stress triaxiality, while at low stress
ip
triaxiality between above two regimes, fracture may develop as a combination of shear and void growth modes. Based on stress
r
sc
triaxility, they proposed an empirical fracture model for ductile fracture (referred as BW model) to express failure strain as the
nu
function of hydrostatic stress. This fracture model determines that a ductile material would never fail if the negative stress
Ma
triaxility is less than -1/3. It also demonstrates that the fracture locus exhibits three branches in the whole range of stress triaxility
as a result of two failure mechanism, including void growth and “shear decohesion”. Barsoum and Faleskog [26] also identified
ed
pt
that void coalescence is determined by internal necking at high stress triaxiality and void coalescence by internal shearing at low
ce
stress triaxiality in combined tension and shear. Previous studies of the effect of stress triaxiality on fracture ductility for titanium
Ac
alloy were usually captured by employing dynamic SHPB test and quasi-static tests of tension, compression, torsion or shear for
the application in finite element analysis. In those tests, the stress triaxiality values are ranging from -0.3~0.95, which are
significantly different from those in chip segmentation in the high speed machining of titanium alloy. High speed machining
generally involves complex loading conditions and severe fracture process indicated by Hua and Shivpuri [24].

Table 1 ASB and fracture of chip segmentation in the machining of titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy
Reference ASB (highlighted by circle) Fracture (highlighted by circle)

Komanduri et al. [2, 27]: Case1 Case2
Case1: v5m/s;ap=0.25mm;ac=5.8mm
d
ite
Molinari et al.[19]: Case1 Case2
Case1: v=13m/s;ap=0.12mm;ac=10mm
ed
Case2: v=1.2m/s;ap=0.12mm;ac=10mm
py
Co
Sutter and List [17]: Case1 Case2 Case3 Case4
Case1:v=5m/s;ap=0.1mm;ac=10mm
ot
tN
ip
Gente and Hoffmeister [28]: Case1 Case2 Case

r
sc
nu
Ma
ed
Ye et al. [29]: Case1 Case2

pt
ce
Ac
Note that stress triaxility reaches higher values in the high speed machining of titanium alloys due to the fact that ASBs in chip
segmentation are usually associated with much higher strain, strain rate, stress, temperature, and alpha-beta phase transformation
as shown by Zhang et al. [30]. However, this aspect of fracture evolution related with stress triaxiality was not well understood in

literature. Fracture criteria based on the traditional tests neglecting “higher range” of stress triaxiality and phase transformation
cannot provide a satisfactory prediction on serrated chip formation, especially at high speeds, as indicated by Liu et al. [31].
However, a proper fracture criterion is indispensible for successful predictions of serrated chip formation, separation process,
cutting force fluctuation, and also tool performance including too wear and life.
d
To promote a fundamental understanding of the fracture criterion to demonstrate the fracture behavior in chip segmentation, it is
ite
crucial to quantitatively determine stress triaxialities and alpha-beta phase transformation and their roles played in fracture
ed
evolution during serrated chip formation in the high speed machining of titanium alloys. In this research, simulated machining are
py
used to determine stress triaxiality, strain and phase transformation in chip segmentation without considering fracture behavior,
Co
and thus the energy used for fracture evolution is sealed in the adiabatic shear bands in terms of stress triaxiality and strain. The
ot
coefficients of fracture model and fracture behavior are calibrated by relating failure strain and fracture initiation locus with stress
tN
triaxiality, strain hardening, and thermal softening effect resulted from the elevated temperature and alpha-beta phase
ip
transformation in ASBs. This approach aims to demonstrate the roles of stress triaxiality and phase transformation in serrated chip
r
sc
formation and to provide logical insights into the fracture mechanism in the high speed machining of titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy by
nu
employing finite element method. Based on the calibrated fracture model, fracture evolution in chip segmentation is successfully
Ma
predicted. The predicted results are confirmed by experimental data reported in literature.
ed
pt
2. Process model for the machining of titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy

ce
A machining model is developed in the finite element framework using the commercial software Abaqus/Explict [32], as shown
Ac
in Fig. 1. This model consists of tool and workpiece. Tool is modeled as a rigid body using the CPE3T element type. Workpiece is
subdivided three parts of “Chip”, “Joint” and “Base”. “Chip” is modeled as chip candidate by predetermining a shear angle to
reduce energy assumption when machining titanium alloy. “Joint” is modeled as the thin layer to be removed during machining
process to generate new surface and chip from workpiece. Thus it can be individually applied fracture criterion to make the

separation behavior easier as tool moves forward. “Base” is modeled as the left part of workpiece after machining with a new
machined surface. In the FE model, the three parts are connected as a whole workpiece by coupling the coincided nodes at the
same physical locations. Workpiece adopts the CPE4RT element type, which is characterized with four-node, thermally couple
quadrilateral, bilinear displacement and temperature and reduced integration. A plane-strain couple thermo-mechanical analysis is
d
selected to perform FE simulations of the high speed machining of titanium alloys.
ite
ed
Fig. 1
py
Co
To achieve successful simulations of steady state machining in finite element framework, the bottom of “Base” is restrained in
ot
the Y direction, the right side of “Base” restrained in the X direction, and the left sides of “Base”, “Joint”, and “Chip” also
tN
restrained along the X direction. Tool is fixed by a reference point in initial step, and then set to move along the X direction in the
ip
second step at selected cutting velocities. Thermo-physical properties of titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy including Young’s modulus,
r
sc
expansion, heat capacity and conductivity are considered as functions of temperature, listed in Table 2. The temperature dependent
nu
relationship is represented as the tables in Abaqus/Explict using the experimental data provided by material handbook [33,34].
Ma
Table 2 Physical and mechanical properties for titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy

ed
Material properties Ti-6Al-4V

Expansion(  m  m 1
C
1
)  (T )  3  109  T  7  106
pt
 (T )  7.039e
1 1
c
0.0011. T
Conductivity( Wm )
ce
Young’s modulus( MPa ) E(T)= -57.7T+111672

(T )  505.64e
Ac
Heat capacity( J / Kg . C ) 0
C V
0.0007 T
Density( g / cm )
3
4.43
Poisson’s ratio 0.34
Material constitutive model is crucial to capture the dynamic behavior of titanium alloys subjected to high strain, high strain
rate and high temperature in machining. To accommodate phase transformation of dual phase titanium alloys resulted from high

speed machining, this study employs a new flow stress model based on Self Consistent Method (SCM). The SCM-based flow
stress model, is expressed as Eq. (1), firstly presented by Zhang et al. [29, 34].
     A    B   scm 1  Cscm ln  / 0 1  Thm scm

 (1)
where     is the equivalent stress equal of alpha-beta dual phases titanium alloy determined by SCM.  denotes the plastic
d
strain rate, and 0 the reference strain rate. Th  T  T0  / Tmelt  T0  , where Tmelt (=1650C) is the melting temperature of
ite
titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy, T0 is defined as room temperature of 25C. A   and B   are the initial yield stress and strain
ed
hardening modulus respectively, both are defined as the function of temperature T and alpha volume fraction f. A   B  scm
py
denotes one constant determined by SCM approach at given reference strain rate 0 , strain rate  and temperature T. Cscm and
Co
mscm are the stain rate hardening coefficient and the thermal softening coefficient determined by SCM approach, respectively.
To directly implement the SCM-based JC flow stress model in numerical simulation of machining using commercial software
ot
tN
Abaqus/Explict [32], it is desirable to simply express Eq. (1) as
   A  B 1  C ln  / 0 1  Thm 

ip
(2)
r
The form of Eq. (2) is similar to the JC model existing in Abaqus/Explict software, in which  denotes the equivalent stress
sc
equal of titanium alloys; C is the strain rate hardening constant and m thermal softening coefficient. The SCM-based flow stress
nu
model indicates (A+B) can be regarded as a single constant to represent the combined effects of initial yield stress and additional
Ma
flow stress generated from the dynamic process in machining. It means that  (strain) has negligible influence on flow stress in the
ed
“high strain region” presented in high-speed machining. This conclusion has been confirmed by many researchers including Lee
pt
and Lin [21]. The range of (A+B) is determined as 1900~2600MPa, C 0.009~0.014, and m 0.91~1.01 for the high speed
ce
machining of titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy using SCM approach detailed by Zhang et al. [30] recently.
Ac
Frictional condition at the work-tool-chip interfaces is another important factor to be considered for successful FE simulations
of machining. Temperature in the secondary deformation zone usually reaches above beta () transus temperature of 980C with
100%  phase in machining of titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy at high speeds. Consequently, the flow stress in secondary deformed area
is expected to be much lower than that at room temperature since the strength of  phase is only 33% of  phase. Friction

behavior involves both sticking and sliding regions at tool and chip interface in machining. The friction stresses in sliding region
(      max ) are expressed as      using Coulomb model; the friction stresses in sticking region (       max )
are equal to the maximum shear stress:    max using Tresca model, where: μ is the coefficient of friction along the sliding
zone at chip-tool-work interfaces;     is the uniaxial yield flow stress of + titanium alloy; and max is the material shear yield
d
stress. Using the commonly accepted estimation of  max      / 3 , the maximum shear stress in sticking region is estimated as
ite
300MPa, which is equal to the shear stress of  phase titanium alloy primarily existing at elevated temperatures in the high speed
ed
machining of titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy.
py
Co
3. Failure model with considering stress triaxiality
3.1 Brief introduction of JC failure criterion ot

tN
As Besson [36] summarized, the past decades have seen substantial work on modeling of ductile damage and fracture for metal
ip
forming, high velocity impact, forging, and also machining. Garrison and Moody [37] described ductile fracture as a three stages
r
sc
process: 1) Void nucleation: voids are first initiated at material defects or may also preexist in the material; 2) Void growth: due to
nu
large plastic deformation, these voids grow in particular in situations where the stress triaxiality is high; 3) Void coalescence:
Ma
when voids are large enough they tend to coalesce to form microcracks and eventually a macroscopic crack that leads to
macroscopic failure. Xue et al. [38] confirmed that the ASBs are the preferred sites for nucleation, growth, and coalescence of
ed
voids and are, as such, precursors to failure in machining of titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy, as shown in Fig.2.
pt
ce
Ac
Fig 2
The Johnson-Cook (JC) damage model is a special case of ductile damage criterion model for predicting the onset of damage
due to nucleation, growth, and coalescence of voids in ductile metals. The model assumes that the equivalent plastic strain at the

onset of damage is a function of stress triaxiality and strain rate. The Johnson-Cook criterion can be used in conjunction with the
Von Mises, Johnson-Cook plasticity models, including equation of state. JC failure model is based on the equivalent plastic strain
at element integration points. Damage parameter D is defined by
 pl
D (3)
 fpl
d
where  pl is the increment of the equivalent plastic strain which occurs during an integration cycle, and  fpl is the equivalent
ite
strain to failure, under the current conditions of strain rate, temperature, pressure and equivalent stress. Fracture is then allowed to
ed
occur when D=1.0. The general damage and fracture process is shown in Fig. 3.
py
Co
Fig. 3
ot
JC fracture model assumes that the equivalent plastic strain at the onset of damage is a function of stress triaxiality, strain rate
tN
and temperature. It comprehensively expresses the effects of dynamic mechanical and thermal properties on fracture behavior of
r ip
titanium alloy subjected to machining operation. Thus it has been widely implemented in metal machining characteristic of high
sc
strain, high strain rate, high stress and high temperature. The general expression for the strain at fracture is given by
nu
 fpl  d1  d2 exp d3   * 1  d4  ln  * 1  d5  Th  (4)

Ma
where the dimensionless pressure-stress ratio  *   H /   is referred as stress triaxiality, in which  H is the hydrostatic stress,
n
 is the equivalent stress to measure of shear stress state with n= -5/3 gives a good correlation with experimental data by
ed
  2  3
Hancock and Mackenzie [23], in which    1   2    2   3    3   1   H  1 ,  1 ,  2 , and  3 are
2 2 2
3
pt
principal stresses. The dimensionless strain rate,    pl / 0 , for the reference strain rate 0  1.0s 1 , and Th is the
*
ce
homologous temperature, given by

Ac
 pl 
2
  
1  pl  pl 2  pl  pl 2  pl  pl
 1   2   2   3   3  1   
2
(5)
T  T0
Th  (6)
Tmelt  T0

where 1pl , 2pl , 3pl are the principle strain rates, T current temperature, T0 room temperature. In case of titanium Ti-6Al-4V
alloy, the melting temperature of material is Tmelt=16500C. To determine the critical failure strain of  f in JC failure model, it is
pl
significantly important to obtain JC damage constants of d1~d5 within a wide range of high strains, strain rates and temperature, as
well as stress states.
d
Those constants were usually achieved using the Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar (SHPB) compression and tension tests. Johnson
ite
and Cook [39] performed a series of quasi-static biaxial tests to evaluate the JC fracture model. Unfortunately, they found that
ed
there is an obvious discrepancy in predicting the machining of various materials using JC facture model. And they could not make
py
clear this apparent discrepancy although some explanations were given. They deduced that the model cannot extrapolate into the
Co
more extreme regions of strain rate, temperature and/or pressure such as high speed machining. However, JC fracture model has
ot
achieved the mostly wide application in simulating chip separation behavior for metal machining in literature. Recently, Hammer
tN
[40] performed a series experiment of tension, compression, and torsion on titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy at a wide range of
ip
temperatures of 25~600C based on SHPB and quasi-static approaches to determine the parameters for the JC fracture model. The
r
sc
determined constants of JC fracture model for titanium alloys were significantly different from those by Johnson and Cook [39].
nu
There are evident discrepancies and conflictions in evaluating the effects of stress triaxility, strain rate and temperature in the JC
Ma
fracture model. Hammer [40] suggested that a more complex model should be required to consider the state of stress, material
ed
anisotropy, and tension and compression asymmetry, and it is important to fully characterize the response of the working material
pt
prior to using JC material parameters found in literature. This analysis also indicates that these discrepancies may be rooted in the
ce
limited knowledge of the dynamic mechanical and thermal properties of titanium alloys associated with the high speed machining
Ac
of titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy. Thus it is significant to fully evaluate the characteristics of high speed machining as JC fracture
model is applied to predict chip segmentation in the high speed machining of titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy.
3.2 Stress triaxiality in chip segmentation

To achieve a clear picture of the stress triaxiality in the chip segmentation, it is necessary to analyze the forces acting on an
isolated chip segmentation in machining. The forces acting on the segmented chip during machining are shown in Fig.4. In which,
Fv denotes force perpendicular to the primary tool motion (thrust force), Fs denotes force along the shear plane, Ns refers to force
normal to the shear plane, F is friction force along the rake face, and N is the normal force perpendicular to the rake face.
d
According to Merchant [41], two resultant forces keep this segmented chip as equilibrium: the force between the tool face and the
ite
chip (R), and the force between the work and the chip along the shear plane (R). For equilibrium, R= R. Then the stress state in
ed
primary shear zone can be denoted by the element “E”, which is taken from the ASB as shown in Fig.4. The stress state is
py
identified as shear-compression stress state. Its mechanics model is denoted by the thin-walled cylinder subjected to a twisting
Co
moment with an axial compression force as suggested by Li and Hou [42]. Based on this assumption, stress triaxiality for each
ot
point in the primary shear zone should be identical within ASBs. However, according to Astakhov [1], the compression force F
tN
forms the uniform (at least theoretically) compressive stresses at the root of the partially formed chip-cantilever known as the
ip
primary deformation zone, while the normal force N imposes the bending moment M=NLc. This moment causes the compressive
r
sc
stresses (-) at the region of the chip’s free surface and the tensile stresses (+) at the chip side that separates from the rest of the
nu
work piece. Astakhov [1] pointed out that this state of stress causes chip curling as the chip is “born” with the instilled
Ma
non-uniform stress distribution.
Point “A” located in the ASB next to the primary shear zone, on the free surface of chip, is recognized as the preferential
ed
localized region occurring fracture by Shivpuri et al [13]. This location sustains tensile forces, F, and also clockwise moment M,
pt
ce
as shown in Fig.4. Thus the principal stresses are expected as tensile stresses here. Based on the analysis, it is clear that the stress
Ac
state in chip during machining is far more complex than the previous assumption of the stress triaxiality condition and goes
beyond the reasonable range determined from tension, compression and shear tests.
Fig. 4
Finite element method is applied to simulate high speed machining process to demonstrate the stress pattern in chip

segmentation. Machining parameters and tool geometry are selected as the same as those reported by Sutter and List [17] in the
high speed machining experiments. The rake angle of cutting tool is zero, the clearance angle is 7, and a sharp tool is assumed
with tool radius less than 5m. The uncut chip thickness is 100m. Cutting speed of 21.8m/s is selected to perform the FE
analysis. In the FE model, the friction coefficient  is selected as 0.3 and 1.0, and the maximum shear stresses 300MPa, 500MPa
d
in the secondary and tertiary deformed areas, respectively. The SCM-based flow stress model is applied in titanium alloy. JC
ite
fracture model presented by Johnson and Cook [39] is applied to “Joint” to achieve a successful separation of machine layer from
ed
workpiece. Here no fracture criterion is applied to “Chip” in order to individually evaluate the influence of shearing in chip
py
segmentation. Section 4 discusses the fracture model for “Chip”. The dynamic stresses triaxiality in chip segmentation at
Co
machining speed of 5m/s is shown in Fig.5. The dynamic stresses triaxiality distribuions in one complete cycle of chip
segmentation at machining speed of 21.8m/s are shown in Fig.6.

ot
tN
Fig. 5
r ip
sc
Fig. 6
nu
Both Fig.5 and Fig.6 show that the highest positive value of stress triaxiality is located in ASB next to the primary shear zone
Ma
and close to the free face of chip during one complete cycle of chip segmentation, marked as “A”. The location “A” should be the
ed
most preferential location to produce fracture in terms of high stress triaxiality. The other location “B” having higher stress
pt
triaxiality is located at the back of chip in the secondary deformation zone, some distances away from tool tip, where friction
ce
forces lead to high tensile stresses. It suggests that the secondary shear zone is another preference fracture locus. But the location
Ac
of “B” is not easy occurring fracture especially in the of high speed machining of titanium alloys. The root reason related with -
phase transformation, previously examined by Bayoumi and Xie [43] and Puerta Velasquez, et al. [44], will be further explained in
section 3.3.
Stress triaxiality near tool tip is characterized with negative values, thus this location has little possibility for facture. It is

obvious that the predicted range of stress triaxiality in machining is much higher than those determined from the tests of SHPB
quasi-static tension, compression and torsion. It means that the feasible constants in JC fracture model for machining should be
inconsistent with those values purely based on experimental regression and extrapolation method in literature. It is clear that
fractures primarily happen in location “A”, which is characterized with the highest stress triaxiality. This analysis confirms that the
d
individual components of stress and strain tensors at fracture location “A” are at high value regimes, and stress triaxiality is the
ite
other most important factor to stimulate fracture behavior besides strain intensity in chip segmentation.
ed
3.3 Phase transformation in chip segmentation
py
The variation of  volume fraction with temperatures for titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy was reported by Semiatin et al. [45]. 
Co
transus temperature varies between 950~1050C based on the chemical composition of the alloy, it is assumed that all the  phase
ot
is transformed into  phase when temperature exceeds 980C. The  volume fraction is about 20% at temperature below 730C.
tN
Hence, 150C increases in temperature causes 80% change in  volume fraction. The ductility of  phase is more than that of 
ip
phase titanium alloy, thus the chance to fracture in location “B” is greatly reduced due to the - phase transformation in the
r
sc
secondary deformation zone.

nu
The temperatures and the associated alpha-beta phase transformation in chip segmentation at machining speed of 5m/s and
Ma
21.8m/s are shown in Fig.7 and Fig.8. It indicates that high temperatures happen both in primary shear zone and secondary shear
ed
zone. Especially, the temperatures in the secondary shear zone reach a higher level than beta phase transformation temperature, as
pt
shown in Fig.7(b) and Fig.8(b), the portions indicated by grey color in secondary shear zone are 100% beta phase. Alpha-beta
ce
phase transformation associated with high temperatures modifies the fracture behavior by improving the ductility of titanium alloy
Ac
in the high speed machining.
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

3.4 Strain intensity in chip segmentation
The strains in chip segmentation at machining speeds of 5m/s and 21.8m/s are demonstrated in Fig.9 and Fig.10. It is clear that
the strains are intensified in the primary shear zone with high levels more than 2. The strain increases with increasing machining
speeds. It reveals that the primary shear zone is the favorable region to occur shearing and further fracture, and the occurrence
d
possibility increases with machining speeds.
ite
ed
Fig. 9
py
Co
Fig. 10
ot
tN
4 Determination of the constants for JC fracture model
ip
This section thoroughly analyzes the critical criteria and procedure to determine the constants in JC fracture model. To assess
r
the failure strain in JC fracture model, the feasible range of high stress triaxialitity, extremely high temperature and associated
sc
phase transformation should be fully considered. Neglecting the interactions among stress triaxiality, thermal softening and strain
nu
rate hardening effects, the individual effect of stress triaxiality, temperature and high strain rate on strain to failure can be
Ma
determined by
ed
 fpl


 d 2 d3  exp d3   *  (7)
pt
 fpl
ce
 d5 (8)
Th
Ac
 fpl d 4
 (9)
 *  *
These equations imply that failure strain is not only statically determined by d1~d5, but also dynamically determined by stress
triaxility  * and strain rate  * . Bao and Wierzbicki [46,47] confirmed that ductile material will never fracture if stress triaxiality

is less than -1/3. To determine the failure strain under quasi-static state, the expression in the first set of brackets in the JC fracture
model denotes quasi-static parameters determined by the hydrostatic tension
D0  d1  d2 exp( d3   * ) (10)
Testing temperature is selected as room temperature, Th=0, and strain rate is equal to reference strain rate,   0 , then failure
d
strain is given by
ite
 fpl  D0 (11)
ed
Using the experimental data obtained by Hammer [40], the values failure strain  fpl in machining, without considering the
py
effects of elevated temperatures and high strain rates, can be consistently determined as 0.21.
Co
Fig. 11
ot
tN
As shown in Fig.11, various stress state tests are performed at a strain rate of 1.010-2s-1. Since the reference strain rate 0 is
r ip
1.0 s-1, the strains used to find these parameters will be higher if the tests were performed at the reference strain rate. A scale factor
sc
is used to adjust D0 which is found from d4 and is given by

nu
SF= 1 1  d  ln10   1/1  4.6d 

2
(12)
Ma
4 4
Therefore the parameter D0 is determined by
D0  SF   fpl  0.21 1  4.6d4  (13)

ed
pt
Strain rate has less effect on fracture strain than temperature and stress triaxiality, so the value of d4 is relative low. According
ce
to the values of d4 determined as (0.014)~(-0.012) by Johnson and Cook [39], Kay [48] and Hammer [40], as shown in Table 3, D0
Ac
can be roughly determined as 0.20~0.22. These values are quite consistent to be treated as one constant. As for the strain
hardening coefficient in JC fracture model, this research selects d4 as 0.003, falling in the range of (0.014)~(-0.012), due to the
fact that temperatures in ASBs are quite high so the strain hardening effect may be not significant.

Table 3 Constants of the JC fracture model determined from various tests in literature
Reference Testing apparatus The ranges of strain rate:  (s-1); Parameters

strain: ; and temperature T(C) d1 d2 d3 d4 d5
Johnson and Cook [39]:
Hopkinson bar  =10-2~104; <0.6; T=25 -0.09 0.25 -0.5 0.0014 3.87
Cylinder impact, Biaxial test
Kay [48]: Tension test Hopkinson bar  =10-2~104; <0.6; T=25 -0.09 0.27 0.48 0.014 3.87
Hammer [40]: Tension, Hydraulic load frame  =10-4~1.0; <0.7; T=-50~600
d
-0.8 1.18 -0.15 -0.012 2.10
Torsion & Compression tests Kolsky bar  =5102~8103; <0.5; T=25
ite
ed
Compared with pure experimental data regression and extrapolation, this research determines the ranges of d1, d2, d3 by relating
py
with the original physical mechanism of ductile damage and fracture. This discussion is helpful to clear the confusion to determine
Co
the constants in the JC fracture model related with stress triaxiality. Without considering the effects of strain rate and temperature
on strain to failure, the JC fracture model is expressed in Eq. (10). ot

This expression was originally determined in Eq. (14), firstly presented by Hancock & Mackenzie [23] as
tN
e f  en  1  exp  3 m / 2  (14)
ip
where e f is the failure strain, en the void nucleation strain, whose value is small but should not be less than zero, and 1 is a
r
sc
material constant. Compared Eq. (10) with Eq. (14), the corresponding relations can be drawn as  f  e f , failure strain is the
pl
nu
same; d1= en , equal to the void nucleation strain, thus d10; d2=1, which is related with material property, so once material at
Ma
normal temperatures is determined, d2 is completely determined. Accordingly, there is d3=(-1.5) at high stress triaxiality. In case of
low stress triaxialities close to or less than zero, it is reasonable to assume d3-1.5. The values of d1 proposed by Johnson and
ed
Cook [39], Kay [48] and Hammer [40], shown in Table 3, cause a confused understanding of physical mechanism in the
pt
ce
machining of titanium alloys. This research selects d1, d2, d3 as 0.03, 1 and 1.2 based on the fundamental discussion.
0
Ac
To determine the parameter of d5, the reference strain rate is assumed as 1.0s-1. If the strain rate is equal to the reference
strain, d5 can be expressed by

d5   fpl D0  1 Th  (15)

Since the temperatures in ASBs and secondary shear zone can reach 600~1300C in machining titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy, it is
feasible to relate failure strain with ductility of + titanium alloy at various elevated temperatures. The fracture strain, also called
total elongation of facture, is defined by
l f  l0
 fpl  (16)
l0
d
ite
where l0 is the original length between the gage, and lf is the distance between the gage marks. The most sensitive measure of the
ed
ductility of materials is the reduction in area measured at fracture. The minimum cross-sectional area of the fractured test
py
specimen, Af, can be measured and reduction in area q (or RA) can be calculated as
Co
A0  A f
q (17)
A0
Assumed A0  l0
ot
 Af  l f , fracture strain is expressed as the function of reduction of area q,
tN
q
 fpl  (18)
1 q
r ip
A number of investigations have been conducted to establish the details of phenomenology and mechanism of failure during hot
sc
working, which is characteristic of low strain and high temperature. Semiatin and his cowokers [45, 49] provided quantitative data
nu
on intergranular failure by using hot tension tests on titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy in four microstructural conditions, as shown in
Ma
Fig.12. It indicates that the ductility of titanium alloys with different starting microstructures is completely different during hot
ed
working. The situation can be applied to machining of titanium alloy since machining is state-steady operation.
pt
Fig. 12
ce
Ac
The failure strains  fpl are determined at elevated temperature ranging from 725~980C, as shown in Fig.13.
Fig. 13

This analysis demonstrates that temperature has significant impact on failure strain. The failure strain significantly increases as
temperatures reach  phase transus temperature 950~1050C based on chemical compositions. Fracture behavior has the least
possibility to occur in the secondary shear zone in terms of elevated temperature and  phase percent. This analysis reveals that
the effect of temperature was significantly underestimated in the JC fracture model for machining in previous researches due to
d
the fact that the phenomenon of - phase transformation were completely ignored as the SPHB or quasi-static methods were
ite
performed at temperature much lower than  transus temperature. Alpha to beta transformation takes place during machining, but
ed
this transformation is reversed during cooling. Hence, it is very difficult to find higher beta percent in cooled chip. However the
py
existence of beta can indirectly be deduced by the significant reduction in cutting forces (significantly lower flow stress of beta)
Co
and significant localization of flow (higher ductility of beta).
ot
In this research, the d5 in JC failure model for “Chip” is assumed as “8” by fully considering the high temperature and
tN
alpha-beta transformation in the high speed machining of titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy. However, the value of d5 in JC failure model
ip
for “Joint” is assumed as 0.4 to promote an easy separation of chip from workpiece based on the fact that temperature in “Joint”
r
sc
layer is not high but the stress triaxiality is very low. If the value of d5 in JC failure model for “Joint” is assumed to high,
nu
separation cannot be achieved; if the value of d5 in JC failure model for “Chip” is assumed to low, as evaluated by Liu et al. [31],
Ma
no normal chip morphology is produced instead of generating a lot of little pieces.

ed
5. Fracture evolution in chip segmentation

pt
The fracture evolution behavior in machining of titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy at speed of 21.8m/s is demonstrated in Fig.14.
ce
Ac
Fig. 14
Figure 14(a) is at the onset moment of randomly selected chip formation cycle, assumed as t=0s, to generate a new chip
segmentation. At the moment, the adiabatic shear localization firstly initiates from an indistinct narrow band at shear angle of
about 45. Fig.14(b) is the next moment of t=3.510-7s, to generate a distinct adiabatic shear band with chip upsetting ahead of

tool. As tool advances, the shear is severely localized in the shear band with increases of strain and temperature. Fig.14 (c)
explores that cracks prefer initiating at the free surface of chip, and also within the adiabatic shear localization band where the
strains exceed the fracture strain threshold. Fig.14(d) shows that the cracks propagate to the free surface of the chip as tool
advances. Fig.14(e)-(f) show that the cracks are connected together to release all the energy inside the adiabatic shear localization
d
band. Fig.14(g)-(j) demonstrate that the chip is completely separated from uncut chip and evolves into its final serrated chip as
ite
tool pushes it forward. Fig.14 (k) indicates a new onset moment of the next cycle of serrated chip formation. This cycle of chip
ed
formation is repeated continuously in the high speed machining of titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy. Fig.14 (l) is the corresponding
py
experimental serrated chip from Sutter and List [17]. It demonstrates that the simulated serrated chips remarkably agree well with
Co
the experimental chips at the very high machining speed. To explore the role of phase transformation, temperatures in one cycle of
chip segmentation during fracture evolution are demonstrated in Fig.15.

ot
tN
ip
Fig. 15
r
sc
Figure 15(a) is at the onset moment of selected chip formation cycle with a corresponding moment to Fig.14(a), assumed as
nu
t=0s. At the moment, the adiabatic shear localization initially generates from an indistinct narrow band at shear angle of about 45.
Ma
Fig.15 (b)-(c) shows the temperatures in machining at the moments of t=3.510-7s and t=7.010-7s respectively. As tool advances,
ed
the shear severely localizes in ASBs, temperature in ASBs and the secondary area are slightly increased. Fig.15(d)-(f) show
pt
temperature in ASBs decreases once the separation behavior is completed, and then temperature increases as one new cycle of
ce
chip segmentation initiates. The predicted results show that the fracture behavior can be successfully simulated by employing the
Ac
JC fracture model with carefully considering the effects of stress triaxiality and - phase transformation in the high speed
machining. The fracture locus is corresponding to the predicted locations in chip.
6. Conclusion

Fracture behavior in serrated chip formation during machining was analyzed by considering the effects of high stress triaxiality
and - phase trasformation of titanium alloy at elevated temperature. Major conclusions are drawn below:
1) The highest value of stress triaxiality is located at the free surface of chip segmentation intersected with ASB next to the
primary shear zone in the high speed machining of titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy. This location is also identified as the
d
preferential fracture location in chip segmentation during machining. It confirms that stress triaxiality is the other most
ite
important factor to stimulate fracture behavior besides the strain intensity. Both stress triaxiality and strain intensity in
ed
chips increase with increasing cutting speeds. Therefore, high speed machining of titanium alloy is more favorable for chip
py
fracture process.
Co
2) Stress triaxialities and strain intensities in chip segmentation in the high speed machining are higher than those determined
ot
from the dynamic test of SHPB, and the quasi-static tests of compression, tension, torsion, and shear. Thus the fracture
tN
criteria determined from those tests cannot be successfully implemented to capture the fracture behavior of serrated chip
ip
formation.
r
sc
3) Highest temperature appear in the secondary shear zones, where is preferential location for - phase transformation as the
nu
elevated temperature is higher than  phase temperature (980C). Therefore the possibility of fracture decreases with
Ma
increasing the ductility of titanium alloy due to - phase transformation in the secondary shear zone.
ed
4) Fracture behavior of serrated chip can be successfully simulated by employing the JC fracture model with properly
pt
considering the effects of stress triaxiality and alpha-beta phase transformation by determining fracture strain for the high
ce
speed machining of titanium alloy. The predicted fracture locus agrees well with the actual locations in chip segmentations.
Ac
Acknowledgement
This research was supported from the National Natural Science Foundation of China under the project No.51175331, and a
grant from TechSolve Inc., Cincinnati.

Reference:
[1] Astakhov, V.P., 2005, "On the inadequacy of the single-shear plane model of chip formation," International Journal of
Mechanical Sciences 47, pp.1649-1672.
[2] Komanduri, R., and Von Turkovich, B.F., 1981, "New observations on the mechanism of chip formation when machining
d
titanium alloys," Wear 69, pp. 179-188.
ite
[3] Recht, R.F., 1964, "Catastrophic thermoplastic shear," Transactions of American Society of Mechanical Engineers 86,
ed
pp.189-193.
py
[4] Komanduri, R., and Brown, R.H., 1981, "On the mechanics of chip segmentation in machining," Transaction of ASME,
Co
Journal of Engineering for Industry 103, pp.33-51.
ot
[5] Chen, G., Chen, C., Yang, X., and Guo, T., 2011, "Evidence of thermoplastic instability about segmented chip formation
tN
process for Ti-6Al-4V alloy based on the finite-element method," Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers
ip
Part C: Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science 225, pp.1407-1417.

r
sc
[6] Xu, Y.B., Zhang, J.H., Bai, Y.L., and Meyers, M.A., 2008, "Shear localization in dynamic deformation: microstructural
nu
evolution," Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A 39, pp.811-843.

Ma
[7] Walk, T.J., and Shaw, M.C., 1969, "Advances in Machine Tool Design and Research," Pergamon Press, Oxford.
[8] Shaw, M.C., Dirke, S.O., Smith, P.A., Cook, N.H., Loewen, E.G., and Yang, C.T., 1954, "Machining titanium," MIT Report
ed
to U.S. Air Force.

pt
[9] Shaw, M.C., 2005, "Metal cutting principles," 2nd Ed., Oxford University Press.
ce
[10] Atkins, A.G., 2003, "Modeling metal cutting using modern ductile fracture mechanics: quantitative explanations for some
Ac
longstanding problems," International of Mechanical Sciences 45, pp.373-396.
[11] Nakayama, K., Arai, M., and Kanda, T., 1988, "Machining characteristics of hard materials," CIRP Annals-Manufacturing
Technology 37, pp.89-92.

[12] Obikawa, T., and Usui, E., 1996, "Computational machining of titanium alloy-Finite element modeling and a few results,"
Transaction of ASME 118, pp.208-215.
[13] Shivpuri, R., Hua, J., Mittal, P., and Srivastava, A.K., 2001, "Mcirostructure-mechanics interactions in modeling chip
segmentation during titanium machining," CIRP Annals -Manufacturing Technology 51, pp.85-89.
d
[14] Anand, L., Dillon, O., Place, T.A., and Von Turkovich, B.F., 1990, "Report of the NSF workshop on localized plastic
ite
instabilities and failure criteria," International Journal of Plasticity 6, pp. I-IX.
ed
[15] Barry, J., Byrne, G., and Lennon, D., 2001, "Observations on chip formation and acoustic emission in machining Ti-6Al-4V
py
alloy," International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 41, pp.1055-1070.
Co
[16] Meyers, M.A., Nesterenko, V.F., LaSalvia, J.C., and Xue, Q., 2001, "Shear localization in dynamic deformation of materials:
ot
microstructural evolution and self-organization," Material Science and Engineering A 317, pp.204-225.
tN
[17] Sutter, G., and List, G., 2013, "Very high speed cutting of Ti-6Al-4V titanium alloy-change in morphology and mechanism of
ip
chip formation," International Journal of Machine Tool & Manufacture 66, pp.37-43.
r
sc
[18] Bai, Y.L., Xue, Q., Xu, Y.B., and Shen, L.T., 1994, "Characteristics and microstructure in the evolution of shear localization
nu
in Ti-6Al-4V alloy," Mechanics of Materials 17, pp.155-164.

Ma
[19] Molinari, A., Musquar, C., and Sutter, G., 2002, "Adiabatic shear banding in high speed machining of Ti-6Al-4V:
ed
experiments and modeling," International Journal of Plasticity 18, pp.443-459.
[20] Lee, W.S., and Lin, C.F., 1997, "Adiabatic shear fracture of titanium alloy subjected to high strain rate and high temperature
pt
ce
loadings," Journal Physics IV France 7, pp.855-860.

Ac
[21] Lee, W.S., and Lin, C.F., 1998, "Plastic deformation and fracture behavior of Ti-6Al-4V alloy loaded with high strain rate
under various temperatures," Materials Science and Engineering A 241, pp.48-59.
[22] Rice, J.R., and Tracey, D.M., 1969, "On the ductile enlargement of voids in triaxial stress fields," Journal of the Mechanics
and Physics of Solids 17, pp.201-217.

[23] Hancock, J.W., and Mackenzie, A.C., 1976, "On the mechanisms of ductile failure in high-strength steels subjected to
multi-axial stress states," Journal of Mechanics of Physics and Solids 24, pp.147-169.
[24] Hua, J., and Shivpuri, R., 2004, "Prediction of chip morphology and segmentation during the machining of titanium alloys,"
Journal of Materials Processing Technology 150, pp.124-133.
d
[25] Bao, Y.B., 2005, "Dependence of ductile crack formation in tensile tests on stress triaxiality, stress and strain ratios,"
ite
Engineering Fracture Mechanics 72, pp.505-522.
ed
[26] Barsoum, I., and Faleskog, J., 2007. Rupture mechanisms in combined tension and shear-Experiments. International Journal
py
of Solids and Structures 44, pp.1768-1786.
Co
[27] Komanduri, R., 1982, "Some clarifications on the mechanics of chip formation when machining titanium alloys," Wear 76,
pp.15-34.
ot
tN
[28] Gente, A., and Hoffmeister, H.W., 2000, "Chip formation in machining Ti6Al4V at extremely high cutting speeds," CIRP
ip
Annals 50, pp.49-52.

r
sc
[29] Ye, G.G., Xue, S.F., Jiang, M.Q., Tong, X.H., and Dai, L.H., 2013, "Modeling periodic adiabatic shear band evolution during
nu
high speed machining Ti-6Al-4V alloy," International Journal of Plasticity 40, pp.39-55.
Ma
[30] Zhang, X.P., Shivpuri, R., and Srivastava, A.K., 2014, "Role of phase transformation in chip segmentation during high speed
ed
machining of dual phase titanium alloys," Journal of Materials Processing Technology 214, pp.3048-3066.
[31] Liu, J., Bai, Y.L., and Xu, C.Y., 2013, "Evaluation of ductile fracture models on finite element simulation of metal cutting
pt
ce
process," ASME International Conference on Manufacturing Science and Engineering, July 10-14, Wisconsin, USA.
Ac
[32] H.K.S, 2008, "Abaqus/Explicit Analysis User Manual," Version 6.8.1.
[33] http://www.keytometals.com, 2002, "properties at elevated temperatures".
[34] http://www.keytometals.com, 2002, "SAE AMS T9046, Titanium and Titanium alloy".

[35] Zhang, X.P., Shivpuri, R., and Srivastava, A.K., 2014, "Stress triaxiality in chip segmentation during high speed machining
of titanium alloy," Proceedings of the ASME International Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference, June 9-13,
Detroit, Michigan, USA.
[36] Besson, J., 2010, "Continuum models of ductile fracture: a review," International Journal of Damage Mechanics 19, pp.3-52.
d
[37] Garrison, W.M., and Moody, N.R., 1987, "Ductile fracture," Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids 48, pp.1035-1074.
ite
[38] Xue, Q., Meyers, M.A., and Nesterenko, V.F., 2002, "Self-organization of shear bands in titanium and Ti-6Al-4V alloy," Acta
ed
Materialia 50, pp.575-596.
py
[39] Johnson, G.R., and Cook, W.H., 1985, "Fracture characteristics of three metals subjected to various strains, strain rates,
Co
temperatures and pressures," Engineering Fracture Mechanics 21, pp.31-48.
ot
[40] Hammer, J.T., 2012, "Plastic deformation and ductile fracture of Ti-6Al-4V under various loading conditions," The Ohio
tN
State University, M.S. Thesis.

ip
[41] Merchant, M.E., 1945, "Mechanics of the metal cutting process. I. Orthogonal cutting and a type 2 chip," Journal of Applied
r
sc
Physics 16, pp.267-275.

nu
[42] Li, S.H., and Hou, B., 2013, "Material behavior modeling in machining simulation of 7075-T651 aluminum alloy,"
Ma
Transactions of the ASME, Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology 136, pp.011001.
[43] Bayoumi, A.E., and Xie, J.Q., 1995, "Some metallurgical aspects of chip formation in cutting Ti-6wt.%Al-4wt.%V alloy,"
ed
pt
Materials Science and Engineering A 190, pp.173-180.

ce
[44] Puerta Velasquez, J.D., Bolle, B., Chevrier, P., Geandier, G., and Tidu, A., 2007, "Metallurgical study on chips obtained by
Ac
high speed machining of a Ti-6wt.%Al-4wt.%V alloy," Materials Science and Engineering A 452-453, pp.469-474.
[45] Semiatin, S.L., Seetharaman, V., and Weiss, I., 1998, "Hot workability of titanium and titanium aluminide alloys-an
overview," Materials Science and Engineering A 243, pp.1-24.

[46] Bao, Y.B., and Wierzbicki, T., 2004, "On fracture locus in the equivalent strain and stress triaxiality space," International
Journal of Mechanical Science 46, pp. 81-98.
[47] Bao, Y.B., and Wierzbicki, T., 2004, "A comparative study on various ductile crack formation criteria," Transactions of the
ASME, Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology 126, pp.314-324.
d
[48] Kay, G., 2003, "Failure modeling of titanium 6Al-4V and aluminum 2024-T3 with the Johnson-Cook material model,"
ite
DOT/FAA/AR-03/57, September.
ed
[49] Semiatin, S.L., Montheillet, F., Shen, G., and Jonas, J.J., 2002, "Self-consistent modeling of the flow behavior of wrought
py
Alpha/Beta titanium alloys under isothermal and nonisothermal hot-working conditions," Metallurgical and Materials
Co
Transactions A 33, pp. 2719-2727.
ot
[50] Matsumoto, T., Nishigaki, M., Fukuda, M., and Nishimura, T., 1985, "Titanium: Science and Technology," Deutsche
tN
Gesellschaft Mellkunde, Oberursel, Germany, pp.617-623.

r ip
sc
nu
Ma
ed
pt
ce
Ac

Table1 ASB and fracture of chip segmentation in the machining of titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy
Table 2 Physical and mechanical properties for titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy
Table 3 Constants of the JC fracture model determined from various tests in literature
d
ite
ed
py
Co
ot
tN
r ip
sc
nu
Ma
ed
pt
ce
Ac

Fig. 1 The FE model for the machining of titanium alloys
Fig. 2 Void nucleation and growth inside a shear band in machining of titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy: (a) nucleation of voids within a
shear band; (b) growth of voids; (c) elongation and rotation of voids; (d) coalescence. (Xue et al. [38])
Fig. 3 Stress-strain curve with progressive damage degradation [32]
d
Fig. 4 Forces and stresses acting on isolated chip segmentation during machining
ite
Fig. 5 Stress triaxiality in chip segmentation of titanium alloy during machining at the speed of 5m/s: (a) t=1.18810-4s with
ed
element information; (b) t=1.18810-4s without element information
py
Fig. 6 Stress triaxiality distribution in one cycle of chip segmentation during machining of titanium alloy at speed of 21.8m/s: (a)
Co
t=2.4010-5s with element information; (b) t=2.4410-5s with element information; (c) t=2.4010-5s; (d) t=2.4410-5s; (e)
t=2.4810-5s; (f) t=2.5210-5s; (g) t=2.5610-5s; (h) t=2.6010-5s

ot
tN
Fig. 7 Temperatures and beta phase fraction in chip segmentation during machining titanium alloy at speed of 21.8m/s at the
ip
instant of t=2.4010-5s: (a) temperature distribution; (b)beta phase fraction

r
sc
Fig. 8 Temperatures and beta phase fraction in chip segmentation during machining titanium alloy at speed of 5m/s at the instant
nu
of t=1.18810-4s: (a) temperature distribution; (b) beta phase fraction

Ma
Fig. 9 Strains in chip segmentation during machining titanium alloy at speed of 5m/s: (a) t=1.18810-4s with element information;
(b) t=1.18810-4s without element information

ed
Fig. 10 Strains in chip segmentation during machining titanium alloy at speed of 21.8m/s: (a) t=2.4010-5s with element
pt
ce
information; (b) t=2.4010-5s without element information

Ac
Fig. 11 Failure strain vs. stress triaxility under different loading conditions (Hammer [40])
Fig. 12 Temperature dependent mechanical state and phase transformation for titanium alloy: (a) tension reduction in area of
Ti-6Al-4V samples with a microstructure of A: equiaxed ; B: deformed, partially-globularized Widmanstattern ; C:-annealed
and water quenched acicular ; D: -annealed and air cooled Widmanstatten  with extensive grain-boundary  from Semiain

[49] and Matsumoto [50]; (b) temperature dependence  volume fraction and / microstructure for Ti-6Al-4V from Semiatin et
al. [45].
Fig. 13 Temperature dependence failure strain titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy: (a) failure strains of Ti-6Al-4V samples with a
microstructure of A: equiaxed ; B: deformed, partially-globularized Widmanstattern ; C: -annealed and water quenched
d
acicular ; D: -annealed and air cooled Widmanstatten  with extensive grain-boundary  at the temperature range of
ite
725~980C; (b) failure strains of Ti-6Al-4V samples with microstructures of A and D at temperature range of 725~825C
ed
Fig. 14 Fracture evolution process in chip segmentation in machining titanium alloy at speed of 21.8m/s, (a) t=0s; (b) t=3.510-7s;
py
(c) t=7.010-7s; (d) t=1.0510-6s; (e) t=1.410-6s; (f) t=1.7510-6s; (g)t=2.110-6s; (h) t=2.4510-6s; (i) t=2.810-6s; (j)
Co
t=3.1510-6s; (k) t=3.8510-6s; (l) the experimental chip at speed of 21.8m/s from Sutter and List [17]
ot
Fig. 15 Temperatures in chip segmentation during fracture evolution in the machining of titanium alloy at speed of 21.8m/s, (a)
tN
t=0s; (b) t=3.510-7s; (c) t=7.010-7s; (d) t=1.7510-6s; (e) t=2.110-6s; (f) t=2.4510-6s
r ip
sc
nu
Ma
ed
pt
ce
Ac

Table 1
ASB and fracture of chip segmentation in the machining of titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy
Reference ASB (highlighted by circle) Fracture (highlighted by circle)

Komanduri et al. [2, 27]: Case1 Case2
d
ite
ed
Molinari et al.[19]: Case1 Case2
py
Case2: v=1.2m/s;ap=0.12mm;ac=10mm
Co
Sutter and List [17]: Case1 Case2 Case3 Case4
Case1:v=5m/s;ap=0.1mm;ac=10mm
ot
tN
r ip
sc
Gente and Hoffmeister [28]: Case1 Case2 Case

nu
Ma
ed
pt
Ye et al. [29]: Case1 Case2

ce
Ac

Table 2
Physical and mechanical properties for titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy
Material properties Ti-6Al-4V
Expansion(  m  m C )
1 1
 (T )  3  109  T  7  106
 (T )  7.039e
1 1
Conductivity( Wm c )
d
0.0011. T
ite
Young’s modulus( MPa ) E(T)=-0.714T+113375
C (T )  505.64e
ed
0 0.0007 T
Heat capacity( J / Kg . C ) V
4.43
py
3
Density( g / cm )
Poisson’s ratio 0.34
Co
ot
tN
r ip
sc
nu
Ma
ed
pt
ce
Ac

Table 3
Constants of the JC fracture model determined from various tests in literature
Reference Testing apparatus The ranges of strain rate:  (s-1); Parameters

strain: ; and temperature T(C) d1 d2 d3 d4 d5
Johnson and Cook [39]:
Hopkinson bar  =10-2~104; <0.6; T=25 -0.09 0.25 -0.5 0.0014 3.87
Cylinder impact, Biaxial test
Kay [48]: Tension test Hopkinson bar  =10-2~104; <0.6; T=25 -0.09 0.27 0.48 0.014 3.87
d
Hammer [40]: Tension, Hydraulic load frame  =10-4~1.0; <0.7; T=-50~600
ite
-0.8 1.18 -0.15 -0.012 2.10
Torsion & Compression tests Kolsky bar  =5102~8103; <0.5; T=25
ed
py
Co
ot
tN
r ip
sc
nu
Ma
ed
pt
ce
Ac

2016 J MSE Chip Fracture Behavior in The High Speed Machining of Titanium Alloys

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2016 J MSE Chip Fracture Behavior in The High Speed Machining of Titanium Alloys

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering.

Received July 23, 2015;

Chip Fracture Behavior in the High Speed Machining of Titanium Alloys

1 Xueping Zhang MANU-15-1368

Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

2 Xueping Zhang MANU-15-1368

Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

with chip segmentation in the machining of titanium alloys.

3 Xueping Zhang MANU-15-1368

Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

4 Xueping Zhang MANU-15-1368

Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Reference ASB (highlighted by circle) Fracture (highlighted by circle)

Gente and Hoffmeister [28]: Case1 Case2 Case

Ye et al. [29]: Case1 Case2

Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

2. Process model for the machining of titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy

6 Xueping Zhang MANU-15-1368

Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Table 2 Physical and mechanical properties for titanium Ti-6Al-4V alloy

Material properties Ti-6Al-4V

Young’s modulus( MPa ) E(T)= -57.7T+111672

Poisson’s ratio 0.34

Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

     A    B   scm 1  Cscm ln  / 0 1  Thm scm

   A  B 1  C ln  / 0 1  Thm 

Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

3.1 Brief introduction of JC failure criterion ot

9 Xueping Zhang MANU-15-1368

Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

at element integration points. Damage parameter D is defined by

 fpl  d1  d2 exp d3   * 1  d4  ln  * 1  d5  Th  (4)

homologous temperature, given by

10 Xueping Zhang MANU-15-1368

Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

well as stress states.

3.2 Stress triaxiality in chip segmentation

11 Xueping Zhang MANU-15-1368

Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

non-uniform stress distribution.

Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

segmentation at machining speed of 21.8m/s are shown in Fig.6.

Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

secondary deformation zone.

in the high speed machining.

14 Xueping Zhang MANU-15-1368

Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

3.4 Strain intensity in chip segmentation

15 Xueping Zhang MANU-15-1368

Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

model denotes quasi-static parameters determined by the hydrostatic tension

is used to adjust D0 which is found from d4 and is given by

SF= 1 1  d  ln10   1/1  4.6d 

Therefore the parameter D0 is determined by

D0  SF   fpl  0.21 1  4.6d4  (13)

16 Xueping Zhang MANU-15-1368

Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Reference Testing apparatus The ranges of strain rate:  (s-1); Parameters

on strain to failure, the JC fracture model is expressed in Eq. (10). ot

strain, d5 can be expressed by

17 Xueping Zhang MANU-15-1368

Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

total elongation of facture, is defined by