This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
The dependency of material properties and process conditions on the cutting temperatures when drilling polymers
Klaus Weinert Æ Florian Brinkel Æ Christoph Kempmann Æ Klaus Pantke
Received: 13 February 2007 / Accepted: 9 March 2007 / Published online: 6 October 2007 Ó German Academic Society for Production Engineering (WGP) 2007
Abstract Construction parts consisting of modern polymer materials still need to be machined. Thereby special attention has to be paid to the machining quality. The machining quality implies dimensional accuracy as well as a defect-free peripheral zone. Machining defects often occur as a consequence of excessive mechanical loads, which are often caused by unfavorable process conditions. Besides mechanical loads, the thermal inﬂuence on the composite material, which is induced by the cutting process itself, has to be considered as crucial. According to the thermo physical material properties of polymer materials the boundary conditions differ from the machining of metals. Especially the drilling of polymer composites is introduced in this article and moreover the inﬂuences of the material properties and the process conditions on the process temperatures are presented. Keywords Production process Á Polymers Á Cutting temperatures
1 Introduction The placement of reinforcing ﬁbers into a polymer matrix in 1930 opened up great potential for lightweight
constructions. Since that time high performance ﬁber composites gain more and more importance for lightweight structures. This fact is founded in their immense ﬂexibility and innovative diversity for construction. Usually machining by drilling and milling follows after forming of ﬁberreinforced plastic parts [1, 2]. Therefore, the production quality and tool wear play a role especially when machining reinforced polymers . Numerous studies in the past have shown that tool wear and the development of measurement and form errors and also the surface quality are caused by mechanical stress during machining in combination with reinforcement-ﬁbers acting strongly abrasive. Even though thermal load seems to have signiﬁcant impact on the quality of the work piece, temperatures resulting while drilling polymers and their inﬂuence on plastics are still not analyzed in detail [4–7]. Because of their unfavorable thermo physical characteristics, knowledge about reducing thermal load while drilling plastics from this material group is important. Within this article measurements of tool temperatures while drilling reinforced and non reinforced thermoplastic polymers are introduced and effects of temperature on the production quality are analyzed.
2 Experimental set-up In the studies presented here tool temperatures while dry drilling four different thermo plastic polymers are studied. The tested materials are polyamide 6.6 (PA), polyetheretherketone (PEEK), polyoxymethylene (POM) and polyethyleneterephthalat (PET). Furthermore the temperature development while drilling glass- and carbon reinforced PEEK (PEEK GF 30 und PEEK CF 30) has been investigated. The ﬁber volume percentage of these materials is 30 vol.%. Table 1 lists the most important
The investigations presented in this paper are funded by the ‘‘Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG)’’ K. Weinert Á F. Brinkel Á C. Kempmann Á K. Pantke (&) Department of Machining Technology, University of Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany e-mail: email@example.com C. Kempmann e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
b in kJ m–2 h0. The cutting power is in turn direct proportional to the feed force and drilling torque. it is not possible to perform the experiments with a rotating tool. (2007) 1:381–387 Material Tensile strength Rm in MPa Therm.5 0.1 mm from the bore edge and 10 mm from the beginning of the borehole. Fig. The mechanical cutting power which is 123 .92 143 334 94 0. which are embedded into the clearance face of the drilling tools. Res. which is induced into the tool.43 143 334 63 81 20 1. is a result of the conversion of mechanical energy into heat. The tensile strength and hardness of the polymer materials as well as the friction conditions determine the height of the occurring feed forces as well as drilling torques. Micrographs of the studied materials are shown in Fig.23 0.32 143 334 19. With 400°C the tool temperature measured when drilling 20 mm deep blind holes into thermo plastic polymers is unexpectedly high and almost always reaches the melting temperatures of the tested polymer materials.6 90 70 1. cond. the mechanical material properties contribute to the generated heat quantity.31 –38 175 49 50–100 224 47 0. coeff. ak in 10–6 J/K m Heat capacity c in kJ/kg K Heat conductivity k in W/m K Glass trans. Tool temperatures are measured with thermo elements. Figure 2 shows the experimental set-up for measuring tool temperatures and the position of the thermo elements in the clearance faces of the drilling tools. temp.1 0. Eng. Ts in °C Therm.85 0.24 69 255 36 POM 65 110 1. The thermal load.5 K PA6. but moreover the main inﬂuence is given by the thermal material characteristics. coeff. It is remarkable that the tool temperatures while using a carbide drill are up to 50°C higher than while using a PCD-tool. intr.382 Table 1 Properties of the deployed polymer materials Prod.71 0. During a second test series temperature is measured inside the work piece with a distance of 0. The tests show that rising cutting speeds cause a higher tool temperature and on the other hand increasing the feed causes a smaller thermal load. Due to this fact the thermo elements are positioned with a deﬁned distance away from the cutting edge. Here. Tg in °C Melting temp. 1.5 4 1. Devel. Thermo elements need a cable joint for data transfer therefore. The measurement of temperature directly at the area of impact is almost impossible because of mechanical load and difﬁcult accessibility.7 78 255 40 PEEK PEEK CF 30 PEEK GF 30 PET 156 22 1. The tools have a diameter of d = 8 mm. For this reason an experimental set up with a rotating work piece have been used . The drills used for measuring tool temperature are straight ﬂuted tools made of carbide with K10/20 classiﬁcation and a straight ﬂuted tool with a polycrystalline diamond (PCD) cutting edge. 1 Microstructure of analyzed thermo plastics 3 Inﬂuence of matrix material on thermal development The following chapter deals with the tool temperatures measured during the ﬁrst test series.25 mechanical and thermal characteristics of the materials used.
This effect results from the lowest thermal intrusion coefﬁcient b = 19. Comparing the measured tool temperatures with the heat capacity and the heat conductivity no clear trend can be recognized. On the one hand. Devel. In previous tests the shear zone was identiﬁed as the location for heat development. higher temperatures are generated at the cutting edge as well as in the borehole wall.5 K for PEEK compared to the other tested materials. In the case of PEEK and PET more heat is accumulated at the drill edge and at the bore hole wall because their thermal material properties limit the transportation of heat to the inside of the work piece. Because of the higher thermal intrusion coefﬁcient b of the cutting material compared to the polymers. both having a high thermal intrusion coefﬁcient. As a result maximum tool temperatures when drilling the other materials develop in an opposite way compared to their thermal intrusion coefﬁcient b.6 Top view: Cemented-Carbide-Tool 0. since a higher amount of energy is converted. according to the higher thermal intrusion coefﬁcient b. this thermo plastic conducts more heat into the tool compared to all others.7 Top view: PCD-Tool (Dimensions in mm) Fig. the lowest work piece temperatures (35 and 29°C) are measured at a distance of 0. when taking into account the thermal intrusion coefﬁcient b. The reason for the lower work piece temperature of PEEK than PET seen in Fig. Thus. The measured temperatures display the opposite. heat distributes slower to the inside of the work piece material and consequently the measured work piece temperature is higher. 2 Experimental set-up and position of thermo elements in the tool necessary for the drilling process is converted into heat by internal friction and friction of the process counterparts. Res.Prod. the work piece and the chips as well as the environment. Eng. most of heat quantity developed during the machining process ﬂows directly into the tool.5 383 Spindle Collet with sample Boring tool with thermo couple Tool fitting 1. Figure 3 demonstrates the characteristics of tool and work piece temperatures when drilling non-reinforced thermo plastics with a cutting speed of vc = 120 m min–1 and a feed of f = 0. Thus. After dealing with tool temperatures. Accordingly. The quantity of heat distributed to the active components is controlled by the thermal properties of the tool and the polymer material.9 0. the thermal intrusion coefﬁcient is a measure of how much heat Q enters the work piece per time and area. The heat capacity c describes the quantitative amount of energy per temperature and mass. In polyamide PA and polyoxymethylene POM. Accordingly. On the other hand. Thus. Temporary effects are not considered by this physical value. a clear trend can be observed.5 K. the thermal intrusion coefﬁcient b is characteristic for the magnitude of tool temperatures. the heat conducted from the cutting edge of the tool is more slowly absorbed by the work piece. Consequently the work piece temperature of PEEK would be higher as the work piece 0. heat capacity c and density q and is deﬁned as b¼ pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ kqc in kJ=m2 s0:5 K: Accordingly. Thus. At 10 mm drill depth the tool temperature by drilling PEEK is clearly lower than it is by drilling PET.4 Load cell 1. the work piece temperatures in PEEK should be higher than in PET.8 0. the second test series focused on the work piece temperatures also shows a relation between the thermal intrusion coefﬁcient b and the temperature of the work piece. the rate of heating up is different. However. heat is distributed to the tool. the separating work as well as the kinetic energy of the chips is considered to be neglectable. 3 can be found by temporal effects.5 kJ m–2 h0. This value relates heat conductivity k. the tool heats up more when drilling PEEK and PET while passing the measurement point. which describes a correlation between the magnitude of temperatures inside the tool and the physical attributes of the matrix polymer.4 0. In contrast. Thereby.2 mm from the drill edge and at a drill depth of 10 mm. the quantity of heat is concentrated on a smaller amount of material at the tool tip and the borehole wall. After 20 mm drilling distance the PEEK material shows the highest tool temperature with 360°C compared to all other non-reinforced polymers. which has a thermal intrusion coefﬁcient of b = 49 kJ m–2 h0. By reaching 13 mm drill depth the tool temperature in PEEK exceeds that of PET. Thus. Regarding the lower thermal intrusion coefﬁcient b of PEEK it is expected to have higher work piece temperatures than PET.6 123 . which can be absorbed by a material. Consequently the lowest temperature of 190°C occurs when drilling POM. (2007) 1:381–387 Positions of embedded thermocouples 0. During the machining process.1 mm. the heat conductivity k speciﬁes which time is needed for a certain amount of energy to spread into the inside of the material.
5 K) than ﬁber-reinforced PEEK-materials. PEEK °C 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 0 2 4 6 PEEK PET PA 6. PET. Eng. b kJ·(m h·K)-1 kJ·(m²· 60 50 49 40 30 20 19. This causes detectable unevenness at the surface. In this temperature range polymers become more ductile and their static friction coefﬁcient rises. At a drill depth of 2 mm and a tool temperature of 120°C a relatively ﬂat surface is formed. Consequently. Due to these fact materials with high thermal intrusion coefﬁcients results in lowest temperatures measured in the borehole wall.: . Figure 4 visualizes temperatures measured in the tool and the work piece.1 mm F : Lubrication-concept: dry Therm. The ductile material is smeared over the surface of the borehole wall by the minor cutting edges of the rotating drilling tool.6 POM 8 10 12 14 16 mm 20 Drilling depth l d = 8. made by a scanning electron microscope of characteristic areas of the drill surface in non-reinforced PEEK. Local adhering and tearing of the tool causes a stick slip effect. (2007) 1:381–387 Material: Matrix: : Tool: Diameter: Cutting Material: l: Tool temperature TWZ PA 6. Here. This effect generates an uneven surface. 5 Surface development and tool temperatures Besides the analysis of the occurring temperatures in the cutting tool as well as in the work piece material the inﬂuence of the temperatures on the materials integrity was studied. Tool temperature when drilling PEEK CF with a thermal intrusion coefﬁcient of b = 94 kJ m–2 h0. the temperature is lower than the materials glass transition temperature (Tg = 143°C) and the polymer condition is deﬁned by high internal bond strength. Also the height of work piece temperatures directly results from the dependency on the thermal intrusion coefﬁcient of the material.5 10 0 PEEK PET PA POM 36 40 60 °C Component temperature TWS 40 30 20 10 0 PEEK PET PA POM 35 29 51 53 TWS 0.0 mm PCD Cutting Parameter: Cutting velocity.2 mm measured by the bore edge temperature of PET if the temperature was measured in a depth of more than 13 mm. Devel. An indication for this effect is given by the characteristic feed marks.2 mm WS 0. 123 .: vc = 120 m/min Feed rate: f = 0. intrusion coeff. maximum tool temperatures are measured in an opposite relation to the height of their thermal intrusion coefﬁcient when drilling ﬁber reinforced PEEK CF and PEEK GF materials. At a drilling depth of 10 mm the tool temperature of 280°C is situated between glass transition temperature (Tg = 143°C) and melting temperature (Ts = 335°C). This is a result of PEEK possessing a lower thermal intrusion coefﬁcient b (19.6.5 kJ m–2 h0. 3 Impact of polymer material on thermal development in tool and work piece Prod. POM. The corresponding tool temperatures can be read from the line chart. Res. 5 shows pictures at different drilling depths of the bore hole wall. At 18 mm drilling depth the tool exceeds the 4 Effect of reinforcement-ﬁbers on temperature development Tool and work piece temperatures also show a dependency on the thermal intrusion coefﬁcient when drilling ﬁberreinforced thermo plastics and thereby on thermo physical characteristics of the material. After a drilling distance of 20 mm non-reinforced PEEK causes the highest tool temperatures.384 Fig.5 K is the lowest at 290°C. In order to analyze the effect of the tool temperatures on the drilled surfaces Fig.
Prod.-% CF °C 300 Tool temperatureT WZ 250 200 150 100 50 0 0 Thermal intarusioncoefficientbkJ·(m²· h·K) -1 · 100 94 80 Component temperature TWS °C 40 30 20 10 0 PEEK PEEK GF PEEK CF PEEK PEEK GF PEEK CF 34 29 51 2 4 6 385 Tool: Diameter: Cutting Material: Cutting Parameter: Cutting velocity. 123 .1 mm dry PEEK PEEK GF PEEK CF 8 10 12 14 16 mm 20 Drilling depth l 60 TWS 0.2 mm measureded by the bore edge 60 63 40 20 0 19. Res.-% GF. 5 Effect of tool temperature on drill surface Beginning of the bore: l = 2 mm Middleof the b ore: l = 10 mm End of the bore: l = 18 mm 20 kV 75x 200 µm 20 kV 75x 200 µm 400 20 kV 75x 200 µm PEEK Tool: Diameter: d = 8. 4 Impact of ﬁber material on thermal development in tool and work piece 400 Material: : : Matrix: Fibre: PEEK not reinforced . In this temperature range the material partly adheres at the minor cutting edges. 30 Vol. 6 Peripheral zone and tool temperatures An important criterion to prove the thermal inﬂuence on the work piece is an analysis of the created peripheral zone.0 mm Cutting material: HM K10/20 Cutting parameters: Cutting velocity: vc = 120 m/min Feed rate: f = 0.1 mm Lubrication: dry Tool temperature TWZ Material: Matrix: °C Melting temperature PEEK: 334 °C 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 mm 20 Thermo couple 1 Thermo couple 2 Drilling depth l melting temperature of the polymer. 30 Vol. Eng.0 mm PCD vc = 120 m/min f = 0.5 Fig. (2007) 1:381–387 Fig. Subsequently. the material is pressed out between the lead chamfer and borehole surface. Devel.: Feed rate: Lubrication-concept: d = 8.
123 . High tool temperatures cause a great temperature difference between the material and drilling tool. (2007) 1:381–387 Beginning of the bore:l = 2 mm End of the bore: l = 18 mm PET b= 36 kJ/m2h0. This can be proven by a wider heat affected zone. Consequently more heat is formed in a small area. that the machined work piece is rendered defective. The thermal intrusion coefﬁcient b is the determining factor for the depth of heat impact. the heat affected zone.5K Tg = 78 °C PEEK GF 3 b= 63kJ/m2h0. 6).5K Tg= 143 °C medium thermal heat impact zone width WB: 47 µm medium thermal heat impact zone width 60 µm medium thermal heat impact zone width WB: 43 µm medium thermal heat impact zone width : 54 µm medium thermal heat impact zone width WB: 20 µm medium thermal heat impact zone width : 38 µm The generated microstructure exhibits the inﬂuence of high temperatures on the polymer material. The width of the heat-affected zone at the beginning of the drill hole is smaller than at the end of the drill hole. Since the mechanical characteristics of polymers are deﬁned by their level of crystallinity. that the material becomes thermally weak and the crystalline areas in the microstructure begin to melt. Destruction of the crystalline structures causes reduction of mechanical stability and lower temperature resistance during later application. PA and PEEK GF 30 at the beginning and the end of the drill hole. Light optical microscope pictures show that plastic at the peripheral zone has changed in color (Fig. Tests on PEEK  in the past have shown that these discolorations are amorphous areas. where tool temperatures reached their maximum. where crystalline areas are damaged by high temperatures.5K Tg= 69 °C PA 6. 6 Changes in the peripheral zone of PET. Tool temperature modiﬁes the microstructure of the material in such a manner. Devel.386 Fig.6 b= 40kJ/m2h0. Because of missing veriﬁcation methods this thesis could not be proved yet. It becomes apparent. Figure 6 shows light optical microscope made pictures of the peripheral zone of drills in PET. Eng. In a few cases it is possible. In plastic large heat quantities create critical temperatures deep within the work piece. which were created from crystalline areas through high temperatures. Res. PA and PEEK caused by heat Prod. is a signiﬁcant damage of the material. This immense gradient allows the exchange of a greater heat quantity Q between the drilling tool and work piece as the smaller gradient at the beginning of the drill allows. that materials with low thermal intrusion coefﬁcients like PET are thermally damaged in greater areas because of a smaller heat conduction into the material. Furthermore high process temperatures can lead to chemical disruption of the polymer in the peripheral zone. The research shows a direct connection between tool temperature and depth of damaged areas.
Each different case needs to be analyzed individually. A direct connection between the magnitude of the tool temperature. Devel. Kempmann C (2004) Thread manufacture in ﬁbrereinforced plastics. Graß P (1987) Zerspanarbeit und Schnitttemperatur beim Bohren ¨ faserverstarkter Kunststoffe. Stover ¨ E (2004) Manche mogen’s nicht so heiß. Gotsch F. PhD Thesis. Kunststoffe Plast Euro 7:44–48 2. RWTH Aachen ¨ 8. Eisenblatter G (2000) Trockenbohren mit Vollhartmetallwerkzeugen. Production engineering. Puschel A. Richard H. The higher the tool temperature is. Santos-Quiroz S. References 1.Prod. Technica 39(2):30–36 123 . Production engineering. Furthermore. no general conditions for cutting polymers can be given. Weinert K. Kempmann C (2004) Cutting temperatures and their effects on the machining behaviour in drilling reinforced plastic composites. Res. Low cutting speeds and high feeds are helpful to realize these favored tool temperatures. Due to the large amount of existing polymers with different material characteristics. Hintze W. Industrie-Anzeiger 51:37–38 ¨ 7. Davies P. Jar PJ. Weinert K. Annals of the German Academic Society for Production Engineering X/2:61–64 4. Kempmann C (2003) Wear development and drill hole quality when drilling textile reinforced polymer material. (2007) 1:381–387 387 7 Summary Drilling reinforced and non-reinforced thermo plastics causes high tool temperatures. High tool temperatures lead to melting and thermal damage of the material in the peripheral zone of the drill hole. the deeper is the thermal material damage and the weakened areas at the drill hole wall. the thermal intrusion coefﬁcient b and the depth of damaged areas in the borehole wall exists. Weinert K. Cantwell WJ. Weinert K. Graß P (1988) Bohren faserverstarkter Duromere. Thermische Wechselwirkungen beim Trockenbohren von Leichtbaustrukturen. low thermal intrusion coefﬁcients of the studied materials cause a concentration of heat within small areas. Kausch HH (1990) ¨ Carbonfaserverstarktes–PEEK: Verbundwerkstoffe der neuen Generation. Adv Eng Mater 6(8):684–689 ¨ ¨ ¨ 5. Moller C. PhD-Thesis. Kempmann C (2005) Comparing drilling and circular milling for the drill hole manufacture of ﬁber reinforced composites. which results in damages of the microstructure. Consequences of this effect are high temperatures at the drilling tool. MM–– Maschinenmarkt 37:78–83 6. In order to avoid thermally induced destruction of polymers at the bore hole wall tool temperatures have to be kept as low as possible during the process. Eng. Annals of the German Academic Society for Production Engineering XII/2:1–4 3. RWTH Aachen 9.