# Presentation: 706812

## Inception

- M. A. Davies, Robert Ivester (NIST); Ming Leu (NSF); Shounak Athavale, Richard Furness (Ford); Vivek Shandrasakkar (Caterpillar); Robin Stevenson (General Motors)

- Update: Assessment of Machining Models

- Goals
- Key Survey Results
- Detailed Plan
- Preliminary Timetable
- Respondents
- Details & Contacts

- Chip

- Thermal Contours in 316 Stainless Steel
-  from *Third Wave Systems*

## Talks were given by by industrial representatives from Ford, General Motors,  Boeing, Caterpillar & Sandvik at 1st CIRP modeling meeting in Atlanta
Prof. Taylan Altan challenged industrial representatives to devise an industrially relevant example problem for assessing machining models
 Meeting at GM tech center with Ming Leu, Richard Furness, Shounak Athavale, Vivek Shandrasakar & Robin Stevenson produced the Assessment of Machining Models (AMM) effort
Discussions continued at CIRP Athens where NIST agreed to participate 
Surveys distributed at ASME meeting in Anaheim
More specific plan is being developed

- Prof. Taylan Altan challenged industrial representatives to devise an _*industrially relevant example problem for assessing machining models*_
-  Meeting at GM tech center with Ming Leu, Richard Furness, Shounak Athavale, Vivek Shandrasakar & Robin Stevenson produced the Assessment of Machining Models (AMM) effort
- Discussions continued at CIRP Athens where NIST agreed to participate
- Surveys distributed at ASME meeting in Anaheim
- More specific plan is being developed

- Inception of the Effort

## Industrial Vision

**Notes:**
Currently, for process development, the process engineer in industry relies on empirical data and a large amount of past experience to develop new machining processes.  This procedure is expensive relies heavily on vendors.   

The goal of the AMM is to assess whether, at the current level of development, simulations and modeling can provide better insights and data than conventional empirical approaches.  The view adopted is that of the process engineer and the data that will be made available tot eh participants is the data that would be available on the shop floor. 

## To move toward the industrial vision by:
	(1) providing a consistent and complete set of machining data measured simultaneously at four industrial and government laboratories on a process of relevance to the industrial members; 
	(2) providing a mechanism for comparison of models to the measured machining data;
	(3) compiling a summary of the results to be used as a roadmap for future collaborative research.

Only data available on the typical modern industrial
shop floor will be provided: 
	process parameters; tool and material specifications; forces; average temperatures; tool wear.

- 	(1) providing a _*consistent and complete*_ set of machining data measured simultaneously at four industrial and government laboratories on a process of relevance to the industrial members;
- 	(2) providing a mechanism for comparison of models to the measured machining data;
- 	(3) compiling a summary of the results to be used as a roadmap for future collaborative research.
*Only data available on the typical modern industrial*
*shop floor will be provided: *
*	**process parameters; tool and material specifications; forces; average temperatures; ****tool wear.***

- Goals

## Number of Attendees at IMECE	30 
1. Interested in Participating? 		Yes 8   No 1
2. Worthwhile Exercise?			Yes 9   No 0
3. Is Workplan Clear?			Yes 5	  No 4
4. Model Types, Inputs and Outputs
	A. Types:  FEM Models (orthogonal, oblique), Analytical 	(orthogonal, turning), Empirical (tool life)
	B. Inputs: Material Properties, Material Failure Conditions, 	Cutting Conditions, Tool Geometry, Chip Groove Geometry
	C. Outputs: stresses, temperatures, strains and strain-rates 	and various derived quantities such as chip shape, 		cutting forces etc.

- 1. Interested in Participating? 		Yes 8   No 1
- 2. Worthwhile Exercise?			Yes 9   No 0
- 3. Is Workplan Clear?			Yes 5	  No 4
- 4. Model Types, Inputs and Outputs
- 	A. _Types:_  FEM Models (orthogonal, oblique), Analytical 	(orthogonal, turning), Empirical (tool life)
- 	B. _Inputs:_ Material Properties, Material Failure Conditions, 	Cutting Conditions, Tool Geometry, Chip Groove Geometry
- 	C. _Outputs:_ stresses, temperatures, strains and strain-rates 	and various derived quantities such as chip shape, 		cutting forces etc.

- Key Survey Results & Feedback

## 5. Summary of Technical Comments/Criticisms
Tool wear/life must be defined
Tool life may not be repeatable
Tool edge radius plays a key role in tool life
Must define how model success will be assessed
It must be recognized that predictive models of tool wear do not yet exist even for orthogonal cutting
Empirical models exist for simple turning operations, but the failure modes for cutting with grooved chip breaker tools are not known
6. Other Concerns
Funding Sources ???

- Tool wear/life must be defined
- Tool life may not be repeatable
- Tool edge radius plays a key role in tool life
- Must define how model success will be assessed
- It must be recognized that predictive models of tool wear do not yet exist even for orthogonal cutting
- Empirical models exist for simple turning operations, but the failure modes for cutting with grooved chip breaker tools are not known
- 6. Other Concerns
- Funding Sources ???

- Key Survey Results & Feedback

**Notes:**
Most of the technical concerns are addressed or are being addressed in the development of the technical plan which will now be described. 

As of yet, funding sources are not available to participate in this effort, however proposals with the participants that address the issues that arise from this effort are encouraged?? 

## Types of Experiments
Orthogonal Cutting
OD Turning of a Bar
Equipment
CNC Lathe TBD by Each Lab
Static & Dynamic Characterization
Workpiece					
Workpiece Material: Pearlitic low carbon steel
     e.g. 1008, 1020 or 1045		 
Tube for Orthogonal Cutting
Bar for Turning Tests
Tools
Uncoated WC, ISO Grade P20-30
Orthogonal Wedge, No Chip Breaker, Chip Breaker
Nose radius: 800 micrometers 	

- Orthogonal Cutting
- OD Turning of a Bar
- _Equipment_
- CNC Lathe TBD by Each Lab
- Static & Dynamic Characterization
- _Workpiece__	__	__	__	__	_
- Workpiece Material: Pearlitic low carbon steel
-      e.g. 1008, 1020 or 1045
- Tube for Orthogonal Cutting
- Bar for Turning Tests
- _Tools_
- Uncoated WC, ISO Grade P20-30
- Orthogonal Wedge, No Chip Breaker, Chip Breaker
- Nose radius: 800 micrometers _	_

- Detailed Plan - Experimental Set-up

- _Coolant_
-  None

## Cutting Test 1 - Orthogonal
Width: 6 mm
Feed per Revolution: 150 and 300 micrometers
Cutting Speed: 210 m/min and 300 m/min

Cutting Test 2 - Turning
Depth of Cut: 3 mm
Feed per Revolution: 150 and 300 micrometers
Cutting Speed: 150 m/min and 300 m/min

Cutting Tests 3 and 4 - Different Steel of the 1000 Series & Chip Breaker ?

- Cutting Test 1 - Orthogonal
- Width: 6 mm
- Feed per Revolution: 150 and 300 micrometers
- Cutting Speed: 210 m/min and 300 m/min
- Cutting Test 2 - Turning
- Depth of Cut: 3 mm
- Feed per Revolution: 150 and 300 micrometers
- Cutting Speed: 150 m/min and 300 m/min
- Cutting Tests 3 and 4 - Different Steel of the 1000 Series & Chip Breaker ?

## Detailed Plan - Choice of Parameters

- Wear Chart for Steel Cutting Grade
- Carbide After Trent, 1991

## Measurements to Ensure Lab to Lab Consistency -disclosed in final report

	1. Initial and Final Surface Finish 
Provides a check on cutting parameters and wear
	2. Material Chemical Composition and Microstructure 
Single batch will be used for all tests to be tested and distributed to test labs
	3. Tool composition and initial geometry
Single set of tool inserts will be obtained, checked and distributed to test labs
	4. Rudimentary static and dynamic characterization of CNC lathes	B5.54 or ISO ?? Characterization of Static errors & Tool Tip FRF’s with Dynamometer
	5. Chip form and morphology 
		Macroscopic digital photographs & rudimentary metallurgical examination

- _Measurements to Ensure Lab to Lab Consistency -disclosed in final report_
- 	1. Initial and Final Surface Finish
*Provides a check on cutting parameters and wear*
- 	2. Material Chemical Composition and Microstructure
*Single batch will be used for all tests to be tested and distributed to test labs*
*	*3. Tool composition and initial geometry
*Single set of tool inserts will be obtained, checked and distributed to test labs*
- 	4. Rudimentary static and dynamic characterization of CNC lathes	*B5.54 or ISO ?? Characterization of Static errors & Tool Tip FRF’s with Dynamometer*
- 	5. Chip form and morphology* *
*	**	**Macroscopic digital photographs & rudimentary metallurgical examination*

## Measurements Available to Participants
Approximately10 reports per test at predetermined cutting distances up to a predetermined force (3x increase proposed) and flank wear level

	1. Forces 
 Two or Three components measured at low sample rate (100 Hz) with long time constant piezoelectric dynamometers
Periodic reporting of average forces
	2. Tool Wear - turning tests only
Flank wear reported with forces as VBmax measured optically
Qualitative SEM measurements of final tool condition
(Potential) White light interferometer or stylus measurements of final tool geometry
(Potential) Sample tool sections
	3. Temperatures
Two labs will report intrinsic thermocouple data
(Potential) NIST is developing new micro-pyrometry system 

- _Measurements Available to Participants_
*Approximately10 reports per test at predetermined cutting distances up to a predetermined force (3x increase proposed) and flank wear level*
- 	1. Forces
* **Two or Three components measured at low sample rate (100 Hz) with long time constant piezoelectric dynamometers*
*Periodic reporting of average forces*
- 	2. Tool Wear - turning tests only
*Flank wear reported with forces as VB**max **measured optically*
*Qualitative SEM measurements of final tool condition*
*(Potential) White light interferometer or stylus measurements of final tool geometry*
*(Potential) Sample tool sections*
*	*3. Temperatures
*Two labs will report intrinsic thermocouple data*
*(Potential) NIST is developing new micro-pyrometry system *

## Availability of Data
Web site is the desired method
Numerical data available as ASCII or Microsoft Excel
Visual data available as digital photo downloads
Fall-back plan is paper report and ZIP disk
Participation
Obtain data on cutting experiments & make predictions by whatever means desired
Report results potentially broken into: (1) Forces (2) Temperatures and (3) Wear/Tool Life
Reports collected evaluated and data made available on Web Site

- Availability of Data
- Web site is the desired method
- Numerical data available as ASCII or Microsoft Excel
- Visual data available as digital photo downloads
- Fall-back plan is paper report and ZIP disk
- Participation
- Obtain data on cutting experiments & make predictions by whatever means desired
- Report results potentially broken into: (1) Forces (2) Temperatures and (3) Wear/Tool Life
- Reports collected evaluated and data made available on Web Site

## Preliminary Time Table

## 1. T. Altan, Ohio State University
2. Y. Altintas, University of British Columbia
3. S. Bukkapatnam, USC 
4. I. S. Jawahir, O. Dillon, University of Kentucky 
5. Tien-Chien Jen, University of Wisconsin
6. S. Kapoor, D. Devor, Univeristy of Illinois, IC 
7. Y. Koren, University of Michigan
8. J. Leopold, Society for Production Engineering and Development 
9. X. Li, National, University of Singapore 
10. V. Madhavan, Witchita State
11. T. Marusich, Third Wave Systems
12. P. Oxely, University of NSW Australia 
13. A. Srinivasta, IAMS
14. P. Wright, University of California

- 1. T. Altan, Ohio State University
- 2. Y. Altintas, University of British Columbia
- 3. S. Bukkapatnam, USC
- 4. I. S. Jawahir, O. Dillon, University of Kentucky
- 5. Tien-Chien Jen, University of Wisconsin
- 6. S. Kapoor, D. Devor, Univeristy of Illinois, IC
- 7. Y. Koren, University of Michigan
- 8. J. Leopold, Society for Production Engineering and Development
- 9. X. Li, National, University of Singapore
- 10. V. Madhavan, Witchita State
- 11. T. Marusich, Third Wave Systems
- 12. P. Oxely, University of NSW Australia
- 13. A. Srinivasta, IAMS
- 14. P. Wright, University of California

## For More Information Contact...

- Dr. Matthew A. Davies		Dr. Ming Leu
- NIST				NSF, Directorate for Engineering
- 100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8220	Director
- Gaithersburg MD 20899-8220	Manufacturing Machines & Equipment
- USA				4201 Wilson Boulevard, Rm 550
- (301) 975-3521			Arlington VA 22230
- 					USA
- 					(703) 306-1328

- Details & Contacts