Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Available online
Procedia CIRP at www.sciencedirect.com
00 (2022) 000–000
Procedia CIRP 00 (2022) 000–000
ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

Procedia CIRP 00 (2017)

Procedia 000–000
CIRP 108 (2022) 19–24
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

6th CIRP Conference on Surface Integrity

6th CIRP Conference on Surface Integrity
Innovative Additive Manufacturing Cutting Tool Design Methodology for
Innovative Additive
Automotive Manufacturing
28th CIRP
Large Design Conference,
Boring Cutting
Operations May 2018, Tool
such Design
Nantes,
as FranceMethodology for
E-Motor housing
Automotive Large Boring Operations such as E-Motor housing
A newMASSARD
Quentin methodology
a*
, Jordan to analyze
MUNOZ a
, Marcthe functional
RAFFESTIN a andURVILLE
, Cyrille physical
a architecture
, Pierre FAVERJONaof
existing
Quentin products
MASSARD a*
forMUNOZ
, Jordan anPCIassembly
a
oriented
, Marc RAFFESTIN
SCEMM, rue copernic,a
a
product
France family identification
, Cyrille
Saint-Étienne 42030,
URVILLE , Pierre FAVERJONa
a

a
PCI SCEMM, rue copernic, Saint-Étienne 42030, France
Paul Stief *, Jean-Yves Dantan, Alain Etienne, Ali Siadat
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +33-662-678-250; E-mail address: quentin.massard@pci.fr
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +33-662-678-250; E-mail address: quentin.massard@pci.fr
École Nationale Supérieure d’Arts et Métiers, Arts et Métiers ParisTech, LCFC EA 4495, 4 Rue Augustin Fresnel, Metz 57078, France

Abstract
*Abstract
Corresponding author. Tel.: +33 3 87 37 54 30; E-mail address: paul.stief@ensam.eu
The machining of automotive parts with large dimension diameters requires specific process conditions and cutting tool engineering. In the
following
The article,ofwe
machining will expose
automotive thewith
parts details of dimension
large an innovative cutting requires
diameters tool design methodology
specific for large boring
process conditions operations,
and cutting involving additive
tool engineering. In the
manufacturing.
following article,The wetool
willdesign
expose approach and of
the details thean
numerical simulation
innovative cutting method are now
tool design fully developed,
methodology enabling
for large boringmachining
operations,operation
involvingsimulation
additive
Abstract
to predict process
manufacturing. The behavior and approach
tool design the associated
and themachined
numerical surface condition.
simulation method Finally,
are nowanfully
experimental
developed,campaign
enabling based on the
machining previoussimulation
operation results is
performed to validate
to predict process the predictive
behavior character ofmachined
and the associated the approach.
surface condition. Finally, an experimental campaign based on the previous results is
In today’s business environment, the trend towards more product variety and customization is unbroken. Due to this development, the need of
performed to validate the predictive character of the approach.
agile and reconfigurable production systems emerged to cope with various products and product families. To design and optimize production
© 2022 The Authors. Published by ELSEVIER B.V.
© 2022 as
systems The Authors.
well Published
as to choose theby Elsevier
optimal B.V. matches, product analysis methods are needed. Indeed, most of the known methods aim to
product
This
© is
is aan
2022
This open
The
an access
Authors.
open access article under
Published the CC
by ELSEVIER BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0)
B.V. license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0)
analyze product or onearticle
productunder the on
family CCtheBY-NC-ND
physical level. Different product families, however, may differ largely in terms of the number and
Peer
This review
is an open
Peer review under the
access
under responsibility
article underof
the responsibility of the
thetheCC scientific
BY-NC-ND
scientific committee
license
committee of the
6th6th CIRP CSI 2022
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0)
of the CIRP CSI
nature of components. This fact impedes an efficient comparison and choice of2022
appropriate product family combinations for the production
Peer review under the responsibility of the scientific committee of the 6th CIRP CSI 2022
system.
Keywords: Additive manufacturing, Boring tool, Numerical simulation, Automotive, Machiningfunctional
A new methodology is proposed to analyze existing products in view of their simulation,and
tool physical
design architecture. The aim is to cluster
these products in new assembly oriented product families for the optimization of existing assembly lines and the creation of future reconfigurable
Keywords: Additive manufacturing, Boring tool, Numerical simulation, Automotive, Machining simulation, tool design
assembly systems. Based on Datum Flow Chain, the physical structure of the products is analyzed. Functional subassemblies are identified, and
a functional analysis is performed. Moreover, a hybrid functional and physical architecture graph (HyFPAG) is the output which depicts the
similarity between product families by providing design support to both, production
1. Introduction In order to system
meet planners
those new andrequirements,
product designers.
severalAncutting
illustrative
tool
example of a nail-clipper is used to explain the proposed methodology. Anproviders industrial case study onlarge
two product families of steering columns of
1. Introduction In orderdeveloped
to meet those newdimension boring
requirements, tool cutting
several with multi
tool
thyssenkrupp Presta France is then carried out to give a first industrial evaluation of the proposed approach.
We are currently living a major ecological transition, which stages
providersanddeveloped
cutting edges.
large Current
dimensiontechnology
boring tooloffered
withonmulti
the
© 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
will not
We spare
are the
currently automotive
living a industry.
major Indeed,
ecological the upbringing
transition, which market
stages
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 28th CIRP Design Conference 2018.
involves
and a
cutting machined
edges. body,
Current directly mounted
technology on
offered the
on tool
the
of electric
will vehicles
not spare comes along
the automotive with new
industry. parts which
Indeed, were not
the upbringing holder, see Figure
market involves 2. The manufacturing
a machined body, directlyof such tools
mounted on thecomes
tool
common
of electricwith ICE
vehicles powered
comes vehicles,
along with such
new as
parts battery
Keywords: Assembly; Design method; Family identificationwhich traysnot
were or with
holder,a see
fair Figure
share of issues:
2. The meet high precision
manufacturing of such toolsmachining
comes
electric
commonmotor housings.
with ICE Onvehicles,
powered this typesuch
of housing,
as batterythe main
trays or quality
with a criterions,
fair share facilitate
of issues:themeetassembly
high of each components,
precision machining
challenge resides
electric motor in machining
housings. of the
On this large
type of dimension
housing, thebore, see
main and minimize
quality the overall
criterions, facilitateweight of the tool.
the assembly ofThe
eachweight criteria
components,
Figure 1. resides in machining of the large dimension bore, see
challenge should definitely
and minimize the not be ignored
overall weight ofsince
the ittool.
mayTheaffect the spindle
weight criteria
1.Figure
Introduction
1. of the product
performances
should definitely range andignored
(Therefore
not be characteristics
machining
since it maymanufactured
conditions), and/or
make
affect the spindle
assembled in this(Therefore
handling difficult,
performances system.
affect theIn machine
this context,
machining and the main challenge
process
conditions),dynamics,
makein
Due to the fast development in the domain of modelling and
as well asdifficult,
handling analysis
jeopardize is
thenow
automatic
affect not
toolonly
machine change
and to process
the cope with
and storage. single
dynamics,The
communication and an ongoing trend of digitization and products,
factwell
as thatas a jeopardize
all limited
the above product
appliesrange
automatic or existing
(intool
our case) toproduct
change families,
automotive
and storage. high
The
digitalization, manufacturing enterprises are facing important but also
thattoallbethe
performance
fact able to analyze
machining,
above and
makes
applies (into compare
dynamics
our case) to products
one of thetobiggest
automotive define
high
challenges in today’s market environments: a continuing new product
issues [1]. families.
performance Amachining,
steppedIt can be observed
boring
makes thatone
classical
tool manufactured
dynamics of theexisting
through
biggest
tendency towards reduction of product development times and product
issues families
conventional are
[1]. Amachining regrouped
stepped in function
typically
boring weighs
tool of clients
25-30 kg,orsee
manufactured features.
Figure
through
shortened product lifecycles. In addition, there is an increasing However,
2.
conventional assembly
machiningoriented product
typically families
weighs are hardly
25-30 kg, seetoFigure
find.
demand of customization, being at the same time in a global 2. On the product family level, products differ mainly in two
competition with competitors all over the world. This trend, main Incharacteristics:
order to reduce (i) the number
global of components
weight, some cutting tooland (ii) the
providers
which is inducing the development from
Figure 1. Exemple of E-engine housing macro to micro type of
decided
In components
to
order use
to (e.g.
additive
reduce mechanical,
manufacturing,
global weight, electrical,
some and electronical).
more
cutting specifically
tool providers
markets, resultsFigurein diminished
1. Exemple oflot sizeshousing
E-engine due to augmenting Classical
decided to usemethodologies considering mainly
additive manufacturing, and moresingle products
specifically
product varieties (high-volume to low-volume production) [1]. or solitary, already existing product families analyze the
2212-8271
To cope with© 2022 Theaugmenting
this Authors. Published by ELSEVIER
variety as well asB.V.to be able to product structure on a physical level (components level) which
This is an open access
Thearticle under the CC BY-NC-ND license
identify
2212-8271 possible
© 2022 optimization
Authors. Published potentials
by ELSEVIER the(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0)
in B.V. existing causes difficulties regarding an efficient definition and
Peer review
This under
is an open the responsibility
access article of the
under the CCtoscientific
BY-NC-ND committee
license of the 6th CIRP CSI 2022
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0)
production system, it is important have a precise knowledge comparison of different product families. Addressing this
Peer review under the responsibility of the scientific committee of the 6th CIRP CSI 2022
2212-8271 © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
This is an©open
2212-8271 2017access article Published
The Authors. under theby CC BY-NC-ND
Elsevier B.V. license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0)
Peer reviewunder
Peer-review under the responsibility
responsibility of the scientific
of the scientific committee
committee of CIRP
of the 28th the 6th CIRPConference
Design CSI 2022 2018.
10.1016/j.procir.2022.03.009
20 Quentin MASSARD et al. / Procedia CIRP 108 (2022) 19–24
2 Author name / Procedia CIRP 00 (2022) 000–000
Laser-Powder Bed Fusion, see [2][3]. It also allows them to
reduce the number of parts in the assembly and optimize the
tool geometry, see Figure 2. This kind of topologic optimization
generally leads to improved rigidity of the tool and thus,
enhanced machining quality, see [4]. Additive manufacturing
allows weight reduction an average weight of 10kg, twice
lighter compared to non-additive manufacture tools.
Figure 2. Exemple of large boring tools and the manufacturing technology
associated
A fair share of cutting tools providers clearly demonstrated
the challenges that additive manufacturing brings when it
comes to cutting tools. Indeed, tool prototyping costs, inner
structure and material quality (cracking, porosity, residual
stress), material availability or time necessary for new material
development are the most important problematics associated
with these new direct additive manufacturing technologies.
However, it has been proven that there are other solutions
available to produce 3D metal parts. Lost wax casting, also
called investment casting, is a very old process used to produce
metal parts. This is a technology commonly employed for
jewelry and small parts manufacturing. On the other hand,
Fused Filament Fabrication; better known as 3D printing, is
promising polymer additive manufacturing technology
presenting many advantages such as equipment price or
simplicity of implementation and utilization. Combination of
these two technologies led to a more recent Metal Indirect
Additive Manufacturing technology called Lost PLA casting
[5]. It consists in producing a 3D polymer model of the metal
part to produce. This model is then used to make a ceramic
mold. It disappears when the mold is placed in the oven,
leaving an empty space shaped like the part that will later be
manufactured. This empty space is then filled with metal in a
standard casting operation. In the following article, we will
present the design methodology developed to produce large
dimension, multi-stage boring cutting tools with Lost PLA
Casting.
2. Material & Methods
2.1. Automotive raw part
The selected part, which presents large diameter bores, is the
ZF 8HP51 gearbox housing. This part has three main diameters
to machine which are Ø282 H9 mm, Ø191 H7 mm (ref A) and
Ø63 R6 mm (ref B) (highlighted in orange in Figure 3). The
Ø282 is located at Ø0.1 from A-B axis.
Figure 3. ZF 8HP51 gearbox housing
2.2. Tool design strategy
This boring tool, see Figure 4, has been designed on Catia
V5. The static analysis was carried out using Siemens NX. The
input forces used for this simulation were based on the
following expected cutting conditions N = 500 rpm, f = 0.2
mm/rev. It allowed to check the tool rigity through maximum
deformation and stress level, see [6]. The tool dynamic
behavior was also analyzed by numerical simulation, see
Section 2.4.
2.3. Tool prototyping method
Tool main body was 3D printed using PLA with Fused
Filament Fabrication technology. We then used the resulting
model in a lost PLA casting operation to produce the 42CD4
steel raw part. The resulting product underwent a series of
machining operations, before proceeding with assembly of
several SECO cutting elements and machine attachment.
Inserts used are SECO CCGT120408F-ALKX for Ø282 and
Ø191, SECO CCGT09T308F-ALKX for Ø63. Tool balance set
to be G6.3.
2.4. Machining simulation
Finite elements models of the part and the tool were, using VPS
software [7] with T10 meshes of 5 mm size, to perform
numerical modal analysis. These dynamics models are used to
simulate machining process using developments exposed in
document [8] and included in the Visual Machining solution.
The tool interaction model used is a Kienzle type cutting law
[9]. Cutting forces activate dynamic behavior of both the part
and the tool during simulation. The simulation allows
extraction of the history of cutting forces, evolution of tool and
part vibration amplitude as well as required machining power.
The final state of the machined surface is then extracted from
the dexel models, post treatments are processed to extract
measures equivalent to experimental metrological controls.
2.5. Machining experiments
The machining process is performed on a Meteor Series GL-
XL machining center with high torque HSK 100 spindle (Water
based coolant) both manufactured by PCI SCEMM. The raw
 Quentin MASSARD et al. / Procedia CIRP 108 (2022) 19–24 21
Author name / Procedia CIRP 00 (2022) 000–000 3

part is balanced using an Heidenhain probe. DigitalWay 3.1.3. Cutting Tool Topology optimization
WattPilote package is also used to measure machining power.
The heaviest part of the tool body is the main shaft, which also
3. Results makes it the centrepiece, on which we decided to perform a
topological and weight optimisation. Figure 5 shows the
3.1. Design Methodology influence of diameter and thickness of the main shaft function
of weight. While using Lost PLA casting, it is preferable to
3.1.1. Part analysis and tool geometry avoid thin walls. To avoid casting issues, 6 mm walls and 100
mm main shaft diameter were selected as the best process-
Although the part is of large dimension, it is also locally thin- weight compromise.
walled, see Figure 3. Part flexibility under machining
solicitations or the first set of vibration modes of such a
cylinder-shaped part could highly affect machined surfaces
geometrical accuracy. Thus, the choice was made to design a
multi-step tool to maximize concentricity on the two bigger
diameters, see Figure 4. To prevent bending under radial forces,
it was proposed to integrate two teeth per stage. Radial forces
are well balanced which greatly improves the tool stability and
therefore the machining quality.

Figure 5. Main shaft diameter influence on weight and thickness at iso

rigidity of 5 daN/µm

Siemens NX offers parametric setup over main characteristics

Figure 4. Multi-steps boring tool. A) ISO view B) Main functional areas
3.1.2. Mechanical dimensioning
Initial machining conditions were as follow: feed rate
0.1mm/rev, spindle speed 500 rpm. Cutting depth depends on
the part’s geometry after casting process. It represents a radius
extra-thickness of approximatively 0.8 mm. This data lead to
cutting forces estimation, to which we then apply a security
factor of 2, see Table 1. The behaviour of the tool during a
boring operation is presented in the later Section.
Table. 1 Machining forces. With Fc the cutting force (tangential) in [N], Ff
the feed force (axial) in [N], Fr the radial force in [N], Kc the specific cutting
pressure of 933 [N/mm²] (internal reference based on [BAGUR Consulting
database]), 𝑎𝑎𝑝𝑝 the cutting depth in [mm], 𝑓𝑓𝑛𝑛 the feeding rate [mm/round], 𝑘𝑘𝑟𝑟
the cutting angle of 90[°].
of the tool design, see Figure 6 As an example. Machining
forces, including safety factor, were used in the numerical
simulation. The analysis resulted on a maximum Von Mises
Stress of 30 MPa, and maximum displacement of 42 µm.
According to resistance criteria, the hardened 42CD4 tensile
strength is 1400 MPa, which is highly accepTable. According
to rigidity criteria, the machining tolerances are 130 µm for the
282 H9 diameter and 46 µm for the 197 H7 diameter. Once
again, with the safety margin taken into account, those results
are accepTable. It is important to highlight that this specific
tool only serves for rough boring of the diameters, which leaves
us to believe that a slightly higher displacement level could still
be accepTable. The maximum 1085N resulting force
associated with the maximum 42µm displacement gives a 2.58
daN/µm overall tool rigidity. Experience shows that large
diameter boring issues might appear with tool rigidity lower
than 1.5 daN/µm.

Formulas\Diameter Ø282 x 2 (SF) Ø191 x 2 (SF)

Fc=Kc*𝒂𝒂𝒑𝒑 *𝒇𝒇𝒏𝒏 [N] 186 372 338 675
Ff=0.5*Kc* 𝒂𝒂𝒑𝒑 * 𝒇𝒇𝒏𝒏 *sin( 𝒌𝒌𝒓𝒓 ) 234 469 419 839
[N]
Fr=(2/5)*Fc [N] (internal 37 74 68 136
source; approximation)
Figure 6. Numerical static simulation. A) Forces and boundary conditions
Resultant [N] 301 603 543 1085
modelisation B) Stress analysis C) Displacement observation.

This cutting tool topology optimisation lead to a 15kg boring

tool (HSK 100 taped include). According to security factors
22 Quentin MASSARD et al. / Procedia CIRP 108 (2022) 19–24
4 Author name / Procedia CIRP 00 (2022) 000–000
this global weight could be minimize but already represents a
50% weight loss in comparison with a standard tool, see Table
2.
Tablef 2. Boring tool weight comparison by provider and technology
LMT Belin Kennametal PCI (Lost PLA
(traditional) (SLM) casting)
30 kg 10 kg 15 kg
3.1.4. Clamping fixture design
Locators and clamps were also manufactured using Lost PLA
process. Fixturing equipment described in Figure 7.
Figure 7 – clamping fixture design.
3.2. Process simulation
Surface quality is highly impacted by dynamics and the choice
of settings influencing interaction between the part and the
cutting tool, specifically in terms of flexibility. In order to
anticipate and predict the above-mentioned phenomenon,
numerical simulation can be used to check if the considered
machining conditions would generate undesired system
flexibility or vibrations such as regenerative chatter for
example. The machining conditions impact on process
behavior is numerically studied using each case presented in
Table 3.
Table 3. Design of experiment
Case name feed rate [mm/rev] spindle speed [rpm]
VIB01 0,2 500
VIB02 0,4 950
3.2.1. Machining process data extracted from simulation
Figure 11 exposes the equivalent power, extracted form
simulations for each scenario. Maximum power obtained is
compared to the power limit of the spindle to ensure CNC
machine’s capability. Axial cutting torque is detailed in Figure
8. The maximum tangential force deduced from axial torque
could be re-injected in the static simulation to validate tool
design in term of mechanical resistance.
3.2.2. Machined surface data extracted from simulation
Stability aspects observed on cutting forces are correlated with
post treatment made on simulated surface final state. For each
configuration, turning marks are present onto the surface, see
Figure 12. Data is post processed to extract circularity and
concentricity of each machining step of the part, see Table 4.
One could notice the same tendency between each step of the
part: Ø282 and Ø191. In correlation with machining simulation
behaviour, conclusion could be bring on the dynamic behaviour
of the machining process. Machining is sTable and only
flexibility of the part, activated by cutting forces, impact the
results without vibrations aspects as chatter.
Figure 8. Numerical spindle torque
3.3. Experiments
Following tool design completion and numerical validation,
next steps include prototyping and experiments to validate both
the capabilities of the tool and the global design methodology.
After numerical validation of the process behaviour and
machine capability for each of the scenarios presented in Table
3, decision was made to experiment all of it.
3.4. Cutting tool manufacturing
Once all the design and simulation steps have been validated,
the production of our polymer additive manufacturing tool
model could start. Choices were made on PLA process
parameters and position of the part to generate the print file.
The 3D printed model obtained is then used as Lost PLA model
to generate the sand mold and then proceed to casting, see [6].
The casted tool underwent several machining operations on
functional surfaces, to ensure accurate balancing at G6.3 and
coaxiality between stages.
 Quentin MASSARD et al. / Procedia CIRP 108 (2022) 19–24 23
Author name / Procedia CIRP 00 (2022) 000–000 5

The Figure 10 analyse the Ø191 stage of the machined part. It

could be notice that there is splines that will be machined by
the tool. This geometrical specification explain the oscillatory
behaviour observed on curves extracted from numerical
simulation. The Figure 11 presented the active stages of the tool
during machining operation. Furthermore, the smooth aspect of
the experimental curve is explained by the inertia of the rotor
of the spindle, which smoothen the experimental measure
based on the spindle current.

Figure 9. Measurements of the part orientation Table 4. Parts specifications comparison between numerical and experimental
machining

3.4.1. Raw part balancing Experimental Numerical

Parameters
VIB 01 VIB 02 VIB 01 VIB 02
In an effort to avoid misalignment, each part is measured and Pmax machining [W] 2592 7318 1662 5015
reoriented facing the machine z-axis, see Figure 9. The
Circularity Ø282 [µm] 33,5 32,0 57,5 93,2
repositioning of the part suppresses misalignment and
minimizes cutting depth disparity, which could lead to visible Circularity Ø191 [µm] 23,3 27,0 51,5 79,0
chatter. Circularity Ø63 [µm] 5,0 11,5 - -
Concentricity Ø282 [µm] 29,0 22,0 2,0 2,0
4. Discussion
Ra Ø191 [µm] 0,5 1,6 - -
R Sm Ø191 [µm] 100,5 197,7 - -
4.1. Numerical design validation
W Ø191 [µm] 1,2 6,3 - -
The machining process simulation allows forces, torques and
power created by the material cutting to be predicted, see Despite the use of non-specific recalibration for numerical
Section 3.2.1. Results are compared to the initial dimensioning models, simulations results give identical tendencies as
to ensure the mechanical resistance of the tool. experiments. The metrological results, presented in Table 4,
presents metrological controls of experimental machined parts.
4.2. Experimental design validation

Machining power evolution is presented in Figure 11 and Table

5. Showing both simulation and experimental cases.
Differences can easily be explained by the predictive strategy:
numerical models are built based on non-specific data (material
properties, limits conditions or cutting laws) and thus without
recalibration on these parameters. [1] shows that model
parameters optimisation leads to highly predictive simulations
related to resulting chatter. Small geometrical dispersion upon
the machined zones could lead to dispersion between both
graphs curves. Another point of interest is the smooth aspect of
the experiment curve compared to the numerical one.
Explanations are based on sampling of the signal: 10ms for Figure 11 Experimental and numerical power
experiments and 0.3ms for numerical simulation leading to a
better analysis of machining splines with simulation results.

Figure 12. Numerical and experimental surfaces

Numerical results tendencies, (Table 4), are aligned with

experimental ones. Differences between numerical and
Figure 10. Numerical and experimental surfaces experimental values in regards to circularity are supposed to
24 Quentin MASSARD et al. / Procedia CIRP 108 (2022) 19–24
6 Author name / Procedia CIRP 00 (2022) 000–000
came from disparity in the part static flexibility. Gap between
model and reality could be reduced by recalibration of these
values which could be experimentally assessed through modal
analysis of the system. Further experimental updating could be
considered as presented by [1]. Dedicated cutting law
experiments would enable more accurate cutting forces
prediction. Thus finite element models of the part and the tool
behaviour would be more representative of experiments.
Concentricity values are biased because of the assumption that
the Ø63 step is “perfect”, which was not simulated. This
parameter is sensitive to distance between metrological
references A and B.
Perfect-like values of numerical concentricity presented in the
Table 4 demonstrate great stability of the tool. The analysis
shows that flexibility of the part is radially positioned at the
same location on both Ø282 and Ø191 leading to theoretical
misalignment. This phenomenon is traduced by a more
pronounced part deflection at a particular angular position of
the tool. This localized deflection of the part under cutting
forces leads to low values of concentricity between these two
diameters.
Table. 5. Machining power comparison for VIB01 case
Diameter \ Standard Numerical DigitalWay
maximum calculation simulation [kW]
Power [kW] [kW]
Ø191 only 1.37 1.5 1.25
Ø191+ Ø282 3 2.25 2.6
(simultaneous
machining)
5. Conclusion
The tool design methodology presented in this study allows
creating a tool with a controlled weight. Its inner performances
are validated with machining simulations influenced by cutting
forces, torques, power and vibratory behaviour. These results
also lead to numerical analysis of machined surface quality.
Experiments conducted all along show good tendency and
similarity with numerical simulation and will allow a
substantial reduction of machining time. Tool engineering
methodology is numerically and experimentally validated.
The simulated evolution of cutting forces and torques, (see
Section 3.2.1), could be looped back into the tool dimensioning
process allowing several iterations on the designing process.
Safety margin for mechanical resistance could be adapted to go
further in the overall weight optimization of the tool. Further
improvement would also include the integration of the load
profile obtained though cutting efforts simulation. It can be
considered more representative of cutting forces evolution, and
could be applied on the active faces of the tool during tool
mechanical resistance simulation, see Section 3.1.3. On a final
note, flexibility of the tool extended ends, lifetime, and fatigue
could all be further investigated using predictive simulation.
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge M. Gilles CROISSONIER (ESI
France) for his support finite elements models preparation
using VPS software.
References
[1] Moussavi, S., Guskov, M., Duchemin, J., & Lorong, P. (2021). Clamping
Modeling in Automotive Flexible Workpieces Machining. Procedia
CIRP, 101, 134-137.
[2] Semnisky LM, Bookheimer AJ, Frota de souza Filho R, Penkert W,
Grillenberger I, Schmid D. US10940551B1 Lightweight cutting tool.
Published online 2021.
[3] Enzenbach A. Bell tool for external machining from MAPAL. Published
online 2020.
[4] HÄUSLER, Andreas, WERKLE, Kim Torben, MAIER, Walther, et al.
Design of lightweight cutting tools. International Journal of Automation
Technology, 2020, vol. 14, no 2, p. 326-335.
[5] Fowler SFI. Study on the Viability of Preparing Plaster Molds for Rapid
Prototyping of Complex Ceramic Parts using the Lost PLA Method.
Published online 2020.
[6] PCI MACHINING. “Innovative Large Diameter Machining with Additive
Manufacturing Tool.” YouTube, YouTube, 2 Sept. 2021,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpPMmxD
[7] Virtual Performance Solution, www.esi-group.com/software-
solutions/virtual-performance/virtual-performance-solution.
[8] Gérard COFFIGNAL, Philippe LORONG, Lounes ILLOUL - A general
method to accurately simulate material removal in virtual machining of
flexible workpieces - 2015
[9] O. Kienzle and H. Victor. Spezifische Schnittkräfte bei der Metallbear-
beitung. Werkstattstechnik und Maschinenbau, Vol. 47, pp. 224–225,
1957